Gallup: Mitt crumbles?
posted at 10:28 am on September 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s tempting to read that as McCain cutting into Rudy in the center and Fred cutting into Mitt on the right, but Fred’s only up three points since he announced and Mitt’s down seven. Clearly McCain’s cutting into him too. Also, follow the link and scroll down to see Mitt’s favorable/unfavorables. That should be largely independent of the other candidates but even that shows a crumble: 27/35 now when it was 22/18 six months ago and 33/24 after his straw poll win at Ames just last month. He’s hit a few potholes, like when he misspoke by suggesting that his sons serve the country by working for his campaign, but I can’t think of anything that would explain this. Unless his faith is starting to become an issue for people. Is it?
Note well: it’s not just the national trend, either. Romney led Rudy by 12 in his backyard last month. Now he leads by three, with Fred having gained eight points in the same period. Exit question: What’s happening to Mitt?
Update: Then again, is anyone not crumbling right now? Except Fred, maybe?
Sen. John McCain’s troubled presidential campaign organization is imploding in Michigan, senior Republicans in the state say.
Attorney General Mike Cox has told state party officials he is resigning, possibly tomorrow,TUE as Michigan chairman of McCain campaign, several top Michigan Republicans told The Washington Times…
A meltdown in Michigan could presage the early demise of the McCain effort nationally, since Michigan was the one big state the Arizona senator won, with independents’ help, in his 2000 GOP nomination contest with George W. Bush…
A McCain insider told The Times today that the McCain campaign’s financial woes nationwide are so deep that “John isn’t going to make it without taking [federal] matching funds. He’s just not raising the money.”
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: « Previous 1 2 3
That scenario still gives power to who?
Slublog on September 18, 2007 at 6:20 PM
Actually, no. It means the party isn’t as conservative as you may wish it to be, and your decision to stay home is petulant narcissism disguised as principled action.
Slublog on September 18, 2007 at 6:22 PM
A final question:
Isn’t the end result of a no-vote vote, or a third candidate protest vote a net gain of +1 for the opposition?
If not, please explain why not.
P.S. Wop bob baloo bop bam bam boom.—-Confucius
hillbillyjim on September 18, 2007 at 6:23 PM
Man who fly plane upside-down have crack-up.—Confucius
hillbillyjim on September 18, 2007 at 6:01 PM
Man who insists on flying very defective plane because it is better than an even more defective plane, will always fly defective plane.
- Confucius’s nephew
MB4 on September 18, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Creeping sense of doom….
I wish Newt weren’t right, yet again. I think he may have been too conservative in his estimate, though. Chances of Hillary’s election are looking way better than 80% right now. Sigh.
Hope you’re packing your camping gear, folks. We’re going to be in the wilderness a looooong time. Hope we get a little power back within my lifetime.
aero on September 18, 2007 at 6:24 PM
But man is still flying.
Slublog on September 18, 2007 at 6:32 PM
But man is still flying.
Slublog on September 18, 2007 at 6:32 PM
But not for long!
And the food has run out and he is getting very air sick!
Fuel is running low and no land anywhere in sight!
He should have waited for a better plane.
MB4 on September 18, 2007 at 6:36 PM
For those of you who figure we can “survive” another bad Dem presidency for the sake of holding out on principle, think about the damage just one socialist president can do. The best example is FDR, “beloved savior of the nation.” The programs and policies FDR put in place saved the economy for the short term, but they will ultimately kill it. It will have taken almost a century to do it, but by the 100th anniversary of the New Deal (about 30 years from now), the entitlement programs that started with FDR will finally sink the greatest economy the world has ever known. We see the train wreck coming. We know we can’t possibly afford to sustain these entitlements through the Baby Boomers’ retirement. We know entitlements will exceed 100% of the federal budget in less than 20 years. We know taxes will rise dramatically for the working generations to even partially sustain it. But no one has the courage or the fortitude or the political chutzpah to try to undo what FDR started 70 years ago. Once started, socialist entitlement programs cannot be undone.
What will socialist Hillary bequeath to our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren? What will she add to the already-unsustainable entitlement burden? Universal health care? What else? I guarantee there’s more. I say again, once a socialist program is in place, it can’t be undone. Not without a revolution. Is that what we want for our descendants? Perhaps I’m being overly dramatic. But unfortunately, the lessons of history indicate I’m not.
Rudy is a proven tax-cutter. He won’t enact more socialist programs. After the War on Terror, the looming entitlement crisis is my next highest priority for the president to tackle–those are simply the two issues that most clearly threaten the survival of our culture. Hillary will, of an absolute certainty, make the entitlement crisis worse. Rudy will try to make it better. He has me on the war, he has me on the economy. The social issues simply have to take a back seat this time.
aero on September 18, 2007 at 6:45 PM
No, it means the Republican party shifted far enough to the left that I no longer feel any loyalty to the party or it’s candidates. I won’t have left the party, they will have left me.
The RINO Congressmen (and President) who’ve been increasing spending, increasing the size of the government and refusing to secure the border stay in office for one reason and one reason only- because of voters who decided that being at least a little more electable and the lesser of two evils meant they deserved a vote no matter how they governed. I ain’t one of those people. Not this time.
Hollowpoint on September 18, 2007 at 6:52 PM
No, it’s not. It’s a net gain of +0 to either the Democratic or Republican candidate- that’s why.
Hollowpoint on September 18, 2007 at 7:02 PM
Who convinced you goofballs that the Republicans lost in ‘06 because they weren’t conservative enough? You’re starting to sound like the Kos kidz, claiming that you’re sure you’re in the majority, and would win automatically if only you could get your message out. It’s nuts! People have turned away from the (R) party, partially due to the policies they put forward. Nominating “Generic Conservative” as a candidate will not get it done in ‘08. People need convincing again.
Big S on September 18, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Ridiculous. If you refrain from voting for a candidate, that candidate will have one less vote than if you had voted for said candidate.
That was a rather hollow point, so to speak.
hillbillyjim on September 18, 2007 at 7:28 PM
If I refrain for voting for a candidate I wasn’t going to vote for anyways, it’s a gain for the other candidate that I also wasn’t going to vote for? By that logic the Republican would also get a net vote gain because I didn’t vote for the Democrat either.
I don’t owe any candidate my vote, and they’re going to have to try harder than usual to get it this time.
Hollowpoint on September 18, 2007 at 7:54 PM
Conservatives are very good at getting out the vote when they have a candidate that they can get 100% behind. From what I remember reading (I’m sure you will correct me if I’m wrong) the reason Pres. Bush got Florida so strongly the second time was because the conservatives were able to get voters in the suburbs out to vote. If it comes down to Rudy, habitual conservative voters may very well still support him in the voting booth but these voters are not likely to go all out for a candidate they really don’t care for. The get out the vote campaigns will suffer. No one will be pushing the people who don’t habitually vote to vote.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 7:57 PM
How do you demand something that doesn’t exist? The painful truth is that we do not have an electable conservative in the vein the single issue voters demand. They are whining like little children because they don’t get what they want. I have a relative who used to hold her breath until she turned blue and passed out. It never accomplished a dang thing and neither will this temper tantrum these people are throwing. Well, it will accomplish getting Hillary elected.
Remember this you folks, in 1992 the voters “taught” the republican party a lesson by voting Perot and giving the election to the Clenis. Yeah BABY! They showed them alright! And you know what happened after those shorted sighted ridged conservatives got their way? The republicans learned their lesson so thoroughly that after 8 years of the painfully left leaning Clenis (and the liberal supreme court justices he nominated), they give us 8 years of GW Bush! Hardly the staunch conservative that they demanded the reps give them in 92.
And here we are again, 15 years later ready to give this country over to Hillary for 8 years and goodness knows how many liberal justices just WAITING to take your guns and re-affirm Roe V Wade.
You single issue 2nd amendment and abortion voters will get what you want. You’ll teach the conservatives a lesson, and then you’ll lose your guns and your taxes will be paying for abortions.
Then you’ll be blaming the reps for not giving you a conservative candidate to vote for in 08, and the rest of us will be spewing venomous accusations at you for giving us 8 years of Hillary because you were too dense to see the light.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 7:58 PM
I haven’t decided yet.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 8:00 PM
So, we all need to vote for the one we support. That’s what a democracy is all about.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 8:06 PM
Sorry, I mean a Republic.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 8:07 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15614139/
Aside from the Foley scandal, most of the problems were related to corruption that bred from earmark spending.
Yes, Iraq was a major factor as well, but bad behavior that was the result of abandoning conservative principles cost the Republican party. Many of the Dems who defeated Republican incumbents were “blue dog” Democrats who were nearly as conservative as (and in some cases campaigned to the right of) the Republicans they beat.
Hollowpoint on September 18, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Well, apparently you’ve decided to be a liar. You’ve been in the tank for Mitt for the past 6 months.
Just admit it- you’re a Mormon and you want the Mormon candidate to win. There’s nothing wrong with that- own it.
Or just continue to be a troll who’s lost all shred of credibility. Up to you.
Hollowpoint on September 18, 2007 at 8:19 PM
Hollowpoint,
If by some chance McCain does get the nomination. I am going to have such fun with you.
You will stay and play, right?
;-)
Rightwingsparkle on September 18, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Everyone knows I admire McCain, but I am not picking one candidate over another now. I blog about all of them. Good and Bad. I even did a postive one on Rudy. Like just about everyone else here, I will support whoever the nominee is. Picking one now is useless. We just don’t have the power to do anything about it beyond contributing money. Even if your a voter in one of the key primary states, you are just one vote.
We have seen upsets during primaries before. The Dean explosion and then implosion. The Bush run over McCain. Things change. One thing can get blown up and cost a primary state. Like I said, it should be interesting.
Rightwingsparkle on September 18, 2007 at 8:25 PM
Hollowpoint,
I don’t know- I might be too busy ice skating in Hades since it’ll be the only place safe from the flying pigs :p
But sure, you go ahead and make fun… just be aware that you’re now making it a lot easier for me to tease you relentlessly when McCain drops out.
Hollowpoint on September 18, 2007 at 8:58 PM
It’s simple really:
Hillary can’t be elected. Her only merit is being someone’s wife. That doesn’t happen in America. People are elected to the highest office for a reason.
Obama won’t be elected. His name is Barack.
Edwards won’t be elected: he’s too down in the polls and too much to the left.
That means the Presidential is up for the Republicans to lose, despite the fact that the Congress will still be controlled by Democrats – the country does lean that way. They just have too problematic candidates.
So, what about those Republican candidates?
Fred Thompson is unelectable. He has never accomplished anything of substance. He’s no Reagan, because he’s lazy, boring and because Ronnie was actually the Governor of the most important state of the union.
McCain is my favorite candidate. However, his immigration meltdown, his lack of money and other problemas put his nomination in heavy jeopardy.
That leaves Rudy and Mitt. Personally, I think Rudy has more defects:
*Leftist positions, particularly on infanticide
*Complicated persona: three wives, estranged children, pictures of him in drag, etc.
*The capacity of making a blunder
None of those apply to Mitt Romney, so it’s just a matter of time before Rudy makes a mistake. Romney, on the other hand, is a slick operator. He’s not wrong on any issue, speaks coherently, looks the part, etc. Americans want to lurch left on some issues -by electing Democrats to Congress. However, they want steady and real leadership. Romney can provide that. That’s why he’ll be the nominee and the next President.
Baphomet on September 18, 2007 at 11:03 PM
Hillary can’t be elected.
Baphomet on September 18, 2007 at 11:03 PM
Hillary plus Iraq tied around the Republican nominees legs = She can most certainly be elected.
MB4 on September 18, 2007 at 11:29 PM
“other problemas” that you obviously felt too minor to mention: i.e., McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, and Shamnesty, just to name a few off the top of my head.
Not to mention those 3 or 4 years of the Bush Admin. where he was alpha-RINO of the pack of ‘moderate’ Republicans who frequently voted with the Dem’s to torpedo Republican initiatives.
You say “other problemas”, I say “big farking roadblocks”. McCain doesn’t seem to care about the 1st Amendment or national sovereignty, so why again should I vote for him?
Harpazo on September 18, 2007 at 11:35 PM
No. You have had your head up your a$$ for months. You still have your head up your a$$. Your choice of candidates confirms this also. You’d rather vote for a guy who lobbied for a dictator and gave legal advice to terrorists than for an electable candidate in Rudy or Mitt.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 11:43 PM
I am troubled by the absolute silence coming from the Mitt campaign over this Moveon.org nonsense. While I don’t just want Mitt to jump on the bandwagon, he could have used this to reconcile his idiotic comment regarding his sons.
Rudy is certainly making hay, but that crossdressing clip was disturbing as hell. Give me Hunter or Huckabee or Mitt for VP, someone who will keep Guiliani to his word on strict constructionist judges.
Not Fred though, when the man running as the second coming of federalism doesn’t have an opinion on the Terri Shiavo case, you’re looking at a shyster. Was Fred in a coma for the two weeks that was playing out? I don’t trust him as far as I can throw his 6′6 slimy washington insider frame. Talk about a man who just wants to be president for being president.
BKennedy on September 19, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Bottom line, once again folks…
No matter who gets the Republican nomination, we can not afford to sit out the general election. Hold your nose when you vote, go to vote for your candidate, or vote against HER. But please vote. The country is at risk. We can not afford another klintonin the WH.
Texas Nick 77 on September 19, 2007 at 8:21 AM
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
EXACTLY!
dominigan on September 19, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3