Unimportant yet perplexing poll data of the day; Update: McCain receiving pity donations
posted at 12:17 pm on August 24, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Just scrolling through the new Pew data and this brought me up short. We know that St. John’s taken a beating lately among Republicans for his shamnesty shilling; he’s admitted as much, in fact. The latest proof, from yesterday’s Fox News poll:
How to explain this from Pew, though?
He’s only lost two points among Republicans in the past two years? Granted, we’ve always known he was soft on immigration, but public interest in that problem tends to disappear when it’s not front and center in the House or Senate, and it’s been front and center twice in the past two years. Clearly it’s hurt his candidacy; it’s also hurt his chances for re-election to the Senate in 2010. So how has his approval rating held steady? All I can think is that he’s gotten a burst of goodwill for his Iraq support that’s (almost) offset the hit he’s taken on immigration. But in that case, why hasn’t it materialized in his presidential numbers? Any theories?
Update: Almost quote of the day worthy:
PITY PITCH: McCain finance chairman Bob Mosbacher says “people feel badly” for the Arizona senator after campaign meltdown, boosting online fund raising. “It’s doing very well,” he says. Cindy McCain asks supporters to sign an e-card for her husband’s birthday on Wednesday — and donate $142, two dollars a year.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
i think there’s a difference between “favorable” and “would you vote for him as president”
lorien1973 on August 24, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Indeed, but not that much difference. He’s essentially paid no price for his amnesty support in terms of approval ratings?
Allahpundit on August 24, 2007 at 12:22 PM
I view him favorably. He’s a genuine war hero. I’d just rather sit home than vote for him for POTUS.
jaime on August 24, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Oh, the price was paid; wasn’t it? He dropped like a rock in presidential polls, right? It cost him any real chance at being a top tier candidate for the race.
But, I wouldn’t want to lose him in the senate when you combine everything he believes. That’s different.
lorien1973 on August 24, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Let’s see here. He lost 28% on the Democratic side which means he lost any flattering headlines from fawning press who are the liberals mouthpiece and he is down 15 among Independents. I wonder how many of those Independents used to claim themselves Republicans?
LakeRuins on August 24, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Look how shamnesty was treated here at Hot Air. McCain’s and Kennedy’s roles in it received a fraction of the jeering directed at the President.
RushBaby on August 24, 2007 at 12:32 PM
The only thing the Pew poll proves is the Dems looked favorably upon McCain when he was “there boy” ridiculing Bush’s policies, but now that he’s a threat, a candidate and a stay the course advocate, they are no longer infatuated by the republican they once deemed as “The Maverick”.
fogw on August 24, 2007 at 12:37 PM
They obviously hit the wrong speedial and called the Republican Guard in Iran.
That’s the reason that immigration isn’t much of an issue.
It’s also the reason they call these polls Pew!
Keith_Z on August 24, 2007 at 12:38 PM
That picture of him always freaks me out….
Tru2my2 on August 24, 2007 at 12:38 PM
I think you are hitting on something here. Me, I hate to criticize a war hero who suffered years and years of torture in a North Vietnamese prison.
So, me and others, are quick to say, “Yeah, we respect him,” but we would NEVER ever vote for him either as a RHINO Senator or as a RHINO President.
Why hasn’t that directly affected his approval ratings? I do not know.
ColtsFan on August 24, 2007 at 12:41 PM
The truth may be that although Republicans are against Amnesty, most aren’t as volatil on the subject as those in the blogosphere. We aren’t the whole cake, you know?
And since there is such respect for him as a hero and because he does have a good personality, he still draws in pretty good numbers.
Rightwingsparkle on August 24, 2007 at 12:47 PM
I think your theory is right. The reason it hasn’t materialized in presidential numbers is because the Republican candidates he’s running against are also just as hawkish on the war as he is, but they have swung around to the base’s thinking on illegal immigration/amnesty. Simple math, those candidates have the base’s support on two hot issues, McCain only has the base’s support on one and contempt on the other.
If McCain was running for the nomination in a two-way race against Chuck Hagel, I’m guessing these numbers would be quite different.
thirteen28 on August 24, 2007 at 12:52 PM
I think it means that the MSM must have actually been right all this time in saying that McCain’s popularity is suffering primarily because of his support for the war. Every time I heard them say that, I rolled my eyes, thinking they didn’t get it about amnesty and McCain-Feingold and the Gang of 14 and so on. But since his popularity is suffering worst among Democrats, I guess it probably is his staunch support for the war that’s doing most of the damage with the general public.
Of course, that’s just in general. The reasons he’s lost all chance of getting the Republican nomination are clearly the ones I stated earlier–not his support for the war. As far as the Republican base is concerned, his support for the war is about all he has going for him.
aero on August 24, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Here’s a conspiracy theory for ya.
In all my 5.4 decades of U.S. citizenry, I have never been polled….True
People that I have asked, during my lifetime, have never been polled…True
How many here have participated in one of these polls?
How about a “Have you ever been polled”, poll.
captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 12:54 PM
I like the man. I have a favorable opinion of him. He’s strong on terrorism, for the most part Conservative…But I wouldn’t vote him as President. He doesn’t just not stop amnesty, he promotes it.
amerpundit on August 24, 2007 at 12:54 PM
I’ve never been polled. Been of voting age since 1988–almost 20 years. And I’ve been working at home for the last 12 years, so I’ve been available to answer my phone and answer questions. I don’t know anyone who has ever been polled.
I did, however, participate in a viewer feedback survey thing for a TV show that was in development at the time. That was actually sorta fun.
aero on August 24, 2007 at 1:00 PM
I agree that the lack of a sharp decline among Republicans reflects goodwill among conservatives for his staunch support on Iraq, but that for many it is not a good enough reason to vote for him. His drop among Dems is likewise probably due to not getting any goodwill from liberals for his staunch support on Iraq.
SWLiP on August 24, 2007 at 1:00 PM
I agree with many of the above. I like John McCain. I just wouldn’t vote for him for president, at least not this time. I hated Mitt a few months back, but I seem to be gravitating toward him.
RW Wacko on August 24, 2007 at 1:00 PM
He also still gets a lot of credit (in my book, and many others) for his war record. But Shamnesty and his notoriously prickly persona make him an unsuitable candidate for POTUS, imo.
SWLiP on August 24, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Yeah, a few years ago when I lived in another State and had a phone connected to the copper network. I got a prerecorded call out of the blue. It lasted about 3 minutes.
There was a midterm coming up, and the poll was about the incumbent.
jaime on August 24, 2007 at 1:05 PM
Um… I have, on multiple occasions, which is strange in and of itself.
I mean, I’m about as vanilla as an American as you can get…
White Male, 48, Vet, Divorced, two kids, Registered Independant, middle class income, self employed.
Yet I’ve been polled at least 5 times that I can distinctly remember… usually local stuff.
Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 1:06 PM
aero on August 24, 2007 at 1:00 PM
I know anecdotal evidence doesn’t prove anything, I just think it’s funny. I have a guilty pleasure of causing consumer product surveyors to hang up on me. ;^)
captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 1:12 PM
Yup, like others have said – I have hoards of respect for him for being a war hero and former POW, for a lot of what he’s done in the Senate, and his staunch support for Iraq and the larger GWOT. Heck, I was a huge McCainiac in 2000. But a lot of his other actions, specifically since the 2000 campaign – campaign finance reform, shamnesty, cozying up to the left (the potential of him being Kerry’s running mate, remember?) etc., have left a sour taste in my mouth. So I’m ambivelant towards him. Yes, I have a generally favorable opinion of him. But I wouldn’t want him as President.
crazy_legs on August 24, 2007 at 1:12 PM
I forget where, but I saw a poll in the last few days indicating that he has high numbers as primary voters’ second choice (trailing only Giuliani in that category, IIRC.) He’s a known quantity, and Republicans respect him and agree with him on most things, but they’re flirting with other candidates right now, looking for someone newer and purer. I suspect some of those voters who put him as their second choice will end up voting for him in the primaries, for one reason or another.
Big S on August 24, 2007 at 1:18 PM
If respect because of his war hero status plays into it, it is even more confounding that his UNFAVORABLE rating is actually 2% HIGHER among Veterans than Non-Veterans according to the Gallup poll Fellow war heros like him less than the general public? To me, that truly defies explanation.
NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 1:20 PM
So many people already had a bad opinion of him because of McCain-Feingold. I dislike his position on the Shamnesty nonsense, but he couldn’t go any lower than the already-zero chance of getting my vote.
Tanya on August 24, 2007 at 1:23 PM
Those guys are fighting for this country. They don’t want it to lose its sovereignty. Maybe.
jaime on August 24, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Or, perhaps polls are all just meaningless crap.
aero on August 24, 2007 at 1:25 PM
“Have you ever been polled?” Poll results: 1/3 of those polled, have never been polled.
captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Does anyone know, is there any way to be polled if you don’t have a land line?
Tanya on August 24, 2007 at 1:28 PM
Polls are uncannily accurate. Like the early results from PA in ‘04. /s
jaime on August 24, 2007 at 1:29 PM
He needs to get out of the race before he embarrasses his crack head wife.
TheSitRep on August 24, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Good point.
ColtsFan on August 24, 2007 at 1:33 PM
It isn’t an approval rating. It’s a favorable rating. I think lots of people still view him favorably even though there’s great disagreement over immigration and they would not support him for President.
I wouldn’t say I view him unfavorably simply due to immigration just as I wouldn’t say that of Bush.
He paid a heavy price in his support for the presidency.
As for polling, I get polled at least once a month or so by Harris for business issues. Never been polled for politics that I can recall. My phone is blocked to anonymous CID and if it’s a long distance or toll free number I don’t recognize I don’t answer the phone.
TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 1:34 PM
2% has got to be within the margin of error so therefore, 2% means there’s no real difference.
TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 1:38 PM
Since incoming minutes are a cost to the called party, no one’s in a hurry to publish wireless phone directories. In fact, it might be against FCC rules.
I suppose you could call PEW and volunteer your opinion. Heh.
jaime on August 24, 2007 at 1:41 PM
I agree. He has lost his media pedestal. Funny how the big were tripping over themselves to cover McCain when he was directly challenging Bush’s policies.
Your point about ex-Republicans is spot on IMHO.
The Race Card on August 24, 2007 at 1:49 PM
“Have you ever been polled for politics?” New Poll results: 50% of those polled, have never been polled.
Gotta be an easier way of doing this…. Hey, Allah!
captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 2:07 PM
This entire thread’s subject is asking why hasn’t McCain lost more than 2% among Republicans? So, according to you, uh Allah is wasting everyone’s time here, I guess.
My husband wants to join us in wasting time by offering his theory about the Vets unfavorable rating. He thinks it is because of McCain’s stance against our government torturing prisoners. I’m not sure if I want to waste any more time on this so I’m not offering my opinion… ;oP
NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Huh? Where did you get that from what you quoted? Sorry if you’re offended by my pointing out a 2% difference means vets view him just like non-vets, because, that’s exactly what it means.
TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 2:24 PM
I’d gladly lose him if Hayworth ran against him in the primary.
Wingo on August 24, 2007 at 3:22 PM
Haha. Pass. I was just thinking about the kinds of people who do and don’t have land lines (age, children, technophobe/phile, etc), and wondering if that would make a difference in political polls.
Tanya on August 24, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Lamest. Insult. Ever.
Nonfactor on August 24, 2007 at 3:37 PM
As a man, a vet, and a former POW, I duly respect him.
As a politician…he’s arrogant, flippant, inconstant, untrustworthy, and harder to nail down than nailing jello to a tree. I trust what Hillary says more than I do, McVain.
tickleddragon on August 24, 2007 at 4:35 PM
I don’t get offended, online, that is. I was referring to the subject of this thread (which is also 2%, which is also within Pew’s ±2 margin of error: )
BigOldDog, when you said, “2% has got to be within the margin of error so therefore, 2% means there’s no real difference”, I just applied your conclusion “2% means there’s no real difference” to the original question posed here.
Allah’s Question: Why has McCain only lost 2%?
BigDog’s Answer: 2% = no real difference/change..
I’m just sayin, “Then what’s the point of this thread? The End.
AND The Beginning of a great weekend, even for big old dogs, I hope. No harm. No
fowlfoul. *extended olive branch*God, I luuv this preview button! ;o]
NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 4:56 PM
Allahpundit:
Did your own opinion of McCain change from favorable to unfavorable because of his stance on immigration? I’ve never liked him as a presidential candidate, so shamnesty didn’t change that picture for me. At the same time, in the broader political spectrum, I wouldn’t give him an unfavorable rating either. He’s always been a mixed bag for Republicans. What’s remarkable is just how highly regarded he actually was among Democrats two years ago. It’s definitely worth noting, however, that the 2005 poll was taken in October.
(P.S. Why have a preview window if you can’t use it to check your links?)
JM Hanes on August 24, 2007 at 8:55 PM
Nevermind the P.S. You can check your links — if you actually supply the URL! October 2005
JM Hanes on August 24, 2007 at 8:58 PM
No I’ve been and will be much more lame.
TheSitRep on August 24, 2007 at 9:03 PM
There are many many genuine war hero’s that you never ever even hear about, and go on in life to make an HONEST living, MY FRIEND. HONEST being the key word here. McCain sided with the Kennedy’s and the Osama’s the Hillary’s to sell us out, as long as they and all their brood have their(gov.paid healthcare gov.paid pensions gov.paid is their favorite word). Most of them already have everyone down to their 2nd and 3rd cousins already in LIFETIME gov. jobs, with FREE FREE FREE stuff being the key word here. MY FRIEND.
Legions on August 24, 2007 at 9:44 PM
Time to retire and go build the Fence, John.
If he did that, I might vote for him in 2012.
profitsbeard on August 24, 2007 at 11:18 PM
Comment pages: