New Hampshire poll: Rubio drops from 25% of GOP primary voters in April to … 7% now

posted at 8:01 pm on September 18, 2013 by Allahpundit

I wonder why.

PPP’s newest look ahead to the 2016 Presidential race in New Hampshire finds no clear leader. Rand Paul’s at 20% to 19% for Chris Christie, 14% for Jeb Bush, 12% for Kelly Ayotte, 10% for Ted Cruz, 7% for Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan, 3% for Bobby Jindal, and 2% for Rick Santorum.

The field we used for this poll is not exactly the same as April- Ayotte and Cruz replaced Susana Martinez and Rick Perry, who had received little support. But at any rate it’s clear Marco Rubio has fallen precipitously, from 25% then to his current 7% standing. Paul’s dropped by 8 points as well, perhaps because the kind of voters who are attracted to him might also be attracted to Cruz. The potential candidates on the rise are Christie (from 14% to 19%) and Bush (from 7% to 14%).

The more you see polls showing Jeb Bush gobbling up moderate votes from Christie and Cruz gobbling up conservative votes from Paul, the easier it is to believe that the nomination might end up being decided by who chooses not to run. If Paul can convince Cruz to pass and endorse him, maybe with the offer of a plum appointment from President Paul in return, he’s positioned to clean up on the right. I still think righties who distrust Paul on foreign policy might opt for Rubio or some other conservative if Paul’s the only alternative, but Cruz is obviously the main threat. Meanwhile, Christie needs Bush out (or vice versa) so that he’s left alone to consolidate the center while conservatives are busy carving up righties. It’s fascinating to me that both he and Jeb seemed to benefit here as Rubio declined after April over amnesty. That means, presumably, that a lot of Rubio’s prior support was fairly moderate in its own right, but not so moderate that they’d be willing to tolerate a big sellout on amnesty.

Theory, then: Even though the centrists seemingly benefited, ultimately Rubio’s decline is better for conservatives for the simple reason that it’s more likely to keep Jeb Bush in the presidential picture. One of the key questions of the primary is whether Bush and Rubio would or could both run given how their bases in Florida overlap. The more Rubio fades, the more inclined he’ll be to pass on 2016 and retrench for a future run. He’s got time. Bush has less, so if Rubio begs off, Jeb might be inclined to go for it. Whether the GOP establishment will tolerate both him and Christie being in the race is unclear since, the more formidable Paul and/or Cruz look, the more centrists will want to unite early behind one champion. But Rubio flailing makes it more likely to happen, especially if Jeb decides he’s going to try to replace Rubio as some sort of middle-ground option between Christie and Paul. Do righties suspicious of Paul hate Christie so much that they’d consider Bush as a possible compromise candidate? I’m skeptical, but there’s a lot of Christie-hate out there.

By the way, according to the same poll, Hillary leads Christie by four, Bush by nine, and Paul by 10 points even. Exit quotation from Vogue’s profile of Rand Paul:

While her husband jokes that his “gut feeling” that Hillary Clinton will not run for president is a good thing since “all the polls show her trouncing any opponents,” Kelley practically cuts him off to say that Bill Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky should complicate his return to the White House, even as First Spouse. “I would say his behavior was predatory, offensive to women,” she tells me.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Illegal alien amnesty-pushing Rubio is a disgrace and a traitor. Can’t stand the fraud.

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Is it 2016 already?

fogw on September 18, 2013 at 8:06 PM

“I would say his behavior was predatory, offensive to women,” she tells me.

Something I didn’t know about Rand Paul: the troll is strong with his wife.

Impressive. Most impressive.

HitNRun on September 18, 2013 at 8:07 PM

The Rubio Crater, the latest feature of the NH landscape.

ajacksonian on September 18, 2013 at 8:08 PM

What difference does it make now?

Hillary & MSM will defeat GOP candidates A, B, C, D, E, F and G.

fogw on September 18, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Hispandering fail.

JimLennon on September 18, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Maybes its the Immigration Fall-Out!!

canopfor on September 18, 2013 at 8:15 PM

A conservative will win in 2016.

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Yeah, you keep hitching your wagon to Schumer-Durbin-McCain-Graham.

SouthernGent on September 18, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Über Leftist tabloid “Parade” had a fluff piece on Rubio a couple Sundays ago which now puts him squarely in the realm of washed-up actresses seeking new s(h)itcom roles like Sarah Jessica Parker or low talent political “comedians” like Tina Fey and Alec “I can go psycho on my daughter if I want to” Baldwin….

viking01 on September 18, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Who are these 7%?

faraway on September 18, 2013 at 8:23 PM

If Paul can convince Cruz to pass and endorse him, maybe with the offer of a plum appointment from President Paul in return, he’s positioned to clean up on the right. I still think righties who distrust Paul on foreign policy might opt for Rubio or some other conservative if Paul’s the only alternative, but Cruz is obviously the main threat.

This is exactly the type of situation game theory was developed for.

At some point, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul will have to sit down, separately or together, and figure out which one has the best chances of getting the nomination, and the other one must bow out. Cruz has a better resume, and a bit more polished of a style. Rand has the old man’s backers, lists and talent at his disposal, and just happens to do eye surgeries in his down time. For free.

But if it becomes a battle for the right wing of the party, Christie will laugh all the way to the nomination…

JohnGalt23 on September 18, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Nobody gives a rats ass right now about this.

TX-96 on September 18, 2013 at 8:25 PM

OT: Transfer a secret audio message by poking someone with your finger – Wow. Weird.

faraway on September 18, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Oh, c’mon… this is lily-white New Hampshire!

Wait until he gets to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and then to California and Texas and New York…. And South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan, and then we’re going to Washington, D.C. and yeeeaaaaarrrrrggggghhhhh!

de rigueur on September 18, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Marco Wormio should be at zero.

VorDaj on September 18, 2013 at 8:31 PM

Who are these 7%?

faraway on September 18, 2013 at 8:23 PM

Illegal aliens?

ShainS on September 18, 2013 at 8:32 PM

Oh! I certainly hope New Hampshire gives us Christie! And then goes blue in the end. Again.

Marcus on September 18, 2013 at 8:32 PM

…it’s an appropriate picture!

KOOLAID2 on September 18, 2013 at 8:32 PM

1. Sooner or later Republicans — who claim to represent conservatives — will learn that you can’t tell conservatives one thing, and then do another.

Bush 41 learned this lesson; unfortunately the Republican House and Bush 43 learned this lesson in 2006.

And now Mr. Rubio. He told us he would not embrace that fool in the WH as Crist had done. He told us he would stand for conservative principles. He told us “earned citizenship” was amnesty.

And then he walked away from it. He aligned himself with the very worst of the Democratic party and the worst of the Republican party. He was worse than a midway carnie, lying to the very people who put him in office. He deserves every bit of ignominy that comes his way.

For whatever reason, low information voters and liberals forgive Democrats who lie. (I suspect it’s because at bottom they are unprincipled and only care about power.)

Conservatives have mush longer memories…like elephants.

2. I’m not sure which “righties” will be willing to trade Rubio for Paul. Paul may not be the “interventionist” some conservatives prefer. But if I had to choose between that view of foreign policy and letting Rubio shape immigration policy, I wouldn’t hesitate.

3. I hope Cruz is too principled to be bought off by an offer of some presidential appointment. If he decides he has something too offer that no other conservative does, he should run. He too has time though.

EastofEden on September 18, 2013 at 8:34 PM

New Hampshire poll

…the Heartland of America!

KOOLAID2 on September 18, 2013 at 8:35 PM

Which of you maroons want to vote for these trolls?:
The potential candidates on the rise are Christie (from 14% to 19%) and Bush (from 7% to 14%).

Good grief.

paulsur on September 18, 2013 at 8:35 PM

I’ve explained the Paul/Cruz thing before and the Vogue piece touches on it.

Paul and Cruz are working as a tag-team. If one gets taken out in the lead towards the nomination, they move back to support the other.

Rand got this from watching Ron be isolated on the floor and in debates. If Rand has a partner to tag in, it keeps the neocons/corporate welfarers at bay.

Rand shores up Southern. Cruz has a foot in with Cuban Florida and some latino groups.

This puts Jeb in the shadows to use Rubio as the stalking horse.

But that’s beginning to collapse, so they’re worried about having to throw in with Christie who will sell everybody out if he thinks that’s what it will take to be depicted as the “centrist”.

The question isn’t whose going to run, it’s what state is the country going to be in by that time.

When big 0Care players like the Cleveland Clinic liquidate thousands of jobs and say the cost of healthcare is “shifting”, we’re all in deep shite by 2016.

budfox on September 18, 2013 at 8:35 PM

OT: Transfer a secret audio message by poking someone with your finger – Wow. Weird.

faraway on September 18, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Wild.

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if someone could convince Zero to give up the TOTUS and instead give speeches while someone stands next to him the whole time pressing their finger into his ear?

ShainS on September 18, 2013 at 8:36 PM

Come se dice “racismo” en ingles? Los thugs tienen muchas problemas con eso.

anchorchick on September 18, 2013 at 8:40 PM

Rand Paul will be made to come off as a total kook by the msm/fake debates. The RNC will pull out the stops to stop him as they see he will lead the party to total distruction.

Better to re-run McCain or Romney and lose that way than to throw the fight with a Paul not from from the root of the PaulTree.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on September 18, 2013 at 8:40 PM

Marco Rubio is the Progressive product that the Ruling Class are trotting out for us to “buy” if we don’t like the Bush Brand and it’s latest rollout, Crown Prince Jeb.

Storm the gates of the gop fellow limited government Conservatives. Tell Rubio and Jeb, and Christie and McCain, Graham, Corker, McConnell, Hoeven, and anyone other traitor to our sovereign borders and law that we’ve had freaking enough.

No more pastel Progressives in leadership in the gop.


We want Reagan Limited government, BOLD COLORS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OznoFCZdS8

PappyD61 on September 18, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Who are these 7%?

More importantly who are these 33%? Democrats?
The potential candidates on the rise are Christie (from 14% to 19%) and Bush (from 7% to 14%).

paulsur on September 18, 2013 at 8:44 PM

A conservative will win in 2016.

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 8:15 PM

And he will make an awesome Dog Catcher.

anchorchick on September 18, 2013 at 8:44 PM

we must identify these RINO supporters for Christie and Bush. Its imperative.

paulsur on September 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM

budfox on September 18, 2013 at 8:35 PM

…good take!

KOOLAID2 on September 18, 2013 at 8:46 PM

If it’s Bush vs Clinton it will be the lowest voting election in history.

txhsmom on September 18, 2013 at 8:47 PM

OT: Transfer a secret audio message by poking someone with your finger – Wow. Weird.

faraway on September 18, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Be prepared for the copyright holders to start sending pokers out so they can collect royalties from the unsuspecting.

ajacksonian on September 18, 2013 at 8:48 PM

If it’s Bush vs Clinton it will be the lowest voting election in history.

txhsmom on September 18, 2013 at 8:47 PM

Then conservatives will vote for the libertarian candidate.

paulsur on September 18, 2013 at 8:49 PM

Better to re-run McCain or Romney and lose that way than to throw the fight with a Paul not from from the root of the PaulTree.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on September 18, 2013 at 8:40 PM

If ever there was a better example of Loserspeak, I’ve yet to see it…

JohnGalt23 on September 18, 2013 at 8:49 PM

While her husband jokes that his “gut feeling” that Hillary Clinton will not run for president is a good thing since “all the polls show her trouncing any opponents,” Kelley practically cuts him off to say that Bill Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky should complicate his return to the White House, even as First Spouse. “I would say his behavior was predatory, offensive to women,” she tells me.

Bill wants back into 1600 so badly he can taste it. Let’s face it; power is the only thing which makes a loser like him attractive to anybody, and he knows it.

My guess is that in private, after Hillary’s coronation, he’ll break into a freaky Pee Wee Herman grin and tell whoever’s within range,

“I’ll be f**kin’ interns in the West Wing ferevver! You’ll never be RIDDA MEEEE!!”

That alone should be a good enough reason not to vote for Lady Macbeth.

clear ether

eon

eon on September 18, 2013 at 8:51 PM

Rubio’s staff member calling people who opposed amnesty a bunch of racists — and Rubio not IMMEDIATELY firing the guy — was the nail in his coffin. You don’t drop the race card on your base, big boy, and expect to survive it. Homey don’t play that.

Rational Thought on September 18, 2013 at 8:51 PM

Rubio’s staff member calling people who opposed amnesty a bunch of racists — and Rubio not IMMEDIATELY firing the guy — was the nail in his coffin. You don’t drop the race card on your base, big boy, and expect to survive it. Homey don’t play that.
Rational Thought on September 18, 2013 at 8:51 PM

^THIS*1000

People better never forget what kind of slimy traitor Marco Rubio is.

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 8:53 PM

Reminder: Rubio is a liar.

Panther on September 18, 2013 at 8:54 PM

The only vote Rubio will get will be from illegals.

GarandFan on September 18, 2013 at 8:55 PM

McCain and Romney were never gonna happens too. I have no faith the GOP will have an acceptable candidate and Romney will have been the last Republican presidential candidate I will ever vote for.

Let the nation burn. Make sure the degenerates die along with it. Rebuild with a better people. Reinstate state sovereignty. Strip people of United States of America Citizenship and have them be citizens of their respective states.

astonerii on September 18, 2013 at 8:56 PM

March 1, 1975
2nd Annual CPAC Convention

http://reagan2020.us/speeches/Let_Them_Go_Their_Way.asp

Since our last meeting we have been through a disastrous election. It is easy for us to be discouraged, as pundits hail that election as a repudiation of our philosophy and even as a mandate of some kind or other. But the significance of the election was not registered by those who voted, but by those who stayed home. If there was anything like a mandate it will be found among almost two-thirds of the citizens who refused to participate.

Bitter as it is to accept the results of the November election, we should have reason for some optimism. For many years now we have preached “the gospel,” in opposition to the philosophy of so-called liberalism which was, in truth, a call to collectivism.

I know you are aware of the national polls which show that a greater (and increasing) number of Americans — Republicans, Democrats and independents — classify themselves as “conservatives” than ever before.

These polls give cause for some optimism, but at the same time reveal a confusion that exists and the need for a continued effort to “spread the word.”

In another recent survey, of 35,000 college and university students polled, three-fourths blame American business and industry for all of our economic and social ills. The same three-fourths think the answer is more (and virtually complete) regimentation and government control of all phases of business — including the imposition of wage and price controls. Yet, 80 percent in the same poll want less government interference in their own lives!

If you will permit me, I can recount my own experience in California.

When I went to Sacramento eight years ago, I had the belief that government was no deep, dark mystery, that it could be operated efficiently by using the same common sense practiced in our everyday life, in our homes, in business and private affairs.

The “lab test” of my theory – California — was pretty messed up after eight years of a road show version of the Great Society. Our first and only briefing came from the outgoing director of finance, who said: “We’re spending $1 million more a day than we’re taking in. I have a golf date. Good luck!” That was the most cheerful news we were to hear for quite some time.

California state government was increasing by about 5,000 new employees a year. We were the welfare capital of the world with 16 percent of the nation’s caseload. Soon, California’s caseload was increasing by 40,000 a month.

We turned to the people themselves for help. Two hundred and fifty experts in the various fields volunteered to serve on task forces at no cost to the taxpayers. They went into every department of state government and came back with 1,800 recommendations on how modern business practices could be used to make government more efficient. We adopted 1,600 of them.

We instituted a policy of “cut, squeeze and trim” and froze the hiring of employees as replacements for retiring employees or others leaving state service.

After a few years of struggling with the professional welfarists, we again turned to the people. First, we obtained another task force and, when the legislature refused to help implement its recommendations, we presented the recommendations to the electorate.

It still took some doing. The legislature insisted our reforms would not work; that the needy would starve in the streets; that the workload would be dumped on the counties; that property taxes would go up and that we’d run up a deficit the first year of $750 million.

That was four years ago. Today, the needy have had an average increase of 43 percent in welfare grants in California, but the taxpayers have saved $2 billion by the caseload not increasing that 40,000 a month. Instead, there are some 400,000 fewer on welfare today than then.

Forty of the state’s 58 counties have reduced property taxes for two years in a row (some for three). That $750-million deficit turned into an $850-million surplus which we returned to the people in a one-time tax rebate. That wasn’t easy. One state senator described that rebate as “an unnecessary expenditure of public funds.”

For more than two decades governments — federal, state, local — have been increasing in size two-and-a-half times faster than the population increase. In the last 10 years they have increased the cost in payroll seven times as fast as the increase in numbers.

We have just turned over to a new administration in Sacramento a government virtually the same size it was eight years ago. With the state’s growth rate, this means that government absorbed a workload increase, in some departments as much as 66 percent.

We also turned over — for the first time in almost a quarter of a century — a balanced budget and a surplus of $500 million. In these eight years just passed, we returned to the people in rebates, tax reductions and bridge toll reductions $5.7 billion. All of this is contrary to the will of those who deplore conservatism and profess to be liberals, yet all of it is pleasing to its citizenry.

Balancing the budget is like protecting your virtue: you have to learn to say “no.”

Our people are in a time of discontent. Our vital energy supplies are threatened by possibly the most powerful cartel in human history. Our traditional allies in Western Europe are experiencing political and economic instability bordering on chaos.

We seem to be increasingly alone in a world grown more hostile, but we let our defenses shrink to pre-Pearl Harbor levels.

We did not seek world leadership; it was thrust upon us. It has been our destiny almost from the first moment this land was settled. If we fail to keep our rendezvous with destiny or, as John Winthrop said in 1630, “Deal falsely with our God,” we shall be made “a story and byword throughout the world.”

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing — adjusting the brackets to the cost of living — so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

Go McCain….and other Progressives in the gop……JUST GO.

PappyD61 on September 18, 2013 at 8:58 PM

Hey RUBE-IO!

BJ* on September 18, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Como se dice “loser” en espanol?

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM

EastofEden on September 18, 2013 at 8:34 PM

Like your analysis.

Cleombrotus on September 18, 2013 at 9:03 PM

Good.

LCT688 on September 18, 2013 at 9:08 PM

Its actually too long for this to mean anything, but it fills me with delicious, delicious glee…

Valkyriepundit on September 18, 2013 at 9:09 PM

Como se dice “loser” en espanol?

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM

“Perdedor”, as the Beck song we heard over and over back in the 90s told us. LOL

ddrintn on September 18, 2013 at 9:09 PM

Awwww.
Meanwhile I’m listening to Ted Cruz. He sounds like Pavaratti to me.

katy the mean old lady on September 18, 2013 at 9:12 PM

“Perdedor”, as the Beck song we heard over and over back in the 90s told us. LOL

ddrintn on September 18, 2013 at 9:09 PM

Oh yeah!

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 9:14 PM

Paul may not be the “interventionist” some conservatives prefer.

EastofEden on September 18, 2013 at 8:34 PM

Name a conservative that is currently an “interventionist.” McCain, “Miss Lucy,” Marco Rubio and Bill Kristol are hardly conservatives. Sarah Palin has gone from being a hawk to “let Allah sort in out.”

bw222 on September 18, 2013 at 9:16 PM

Pavarotti.

katy the mean old lady on September 18, 2013 at 9:16 PM

EastofEden on September 18, 2013 at 8:34 PM

Like your analysis.

Cleombrotus on September 18, 2013 at 9:03 PM

…ditto that one too!

KOOLAID2 on September 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM

I fervently hope this serves as a cautionary tale to the other squishes in the Republican Party on amnesty…..if Rubio can fall from Mount Olympus…. You are most certainly going to be rolling off that dung heap you have been perched on if you go down the same path….

Caseoftheblues on September 18, 2013 at 9:24 PM

Should be 3% for the little traitor..

I’m guessing there’s a 4% +/- margin of error.

celt on September 18, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Let the nation burn. Make sure the degenerates die along with it. Rebuild with a better people. Reinstate state sovereignty. Strip people of United States of America Citizenship and have them be citizens of their respective states.
astonerii on September 18, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Blah, blah, blah. Defeatist, wimpy quitter talk. See ya, boo hoo baby.

Meanwhile those of us living in reality will be working to nominate and elect a conservative in 2016.

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Who is Rubio? I don’t know him. I thought I did but I don’t think I do.

JellyToast on September 18, 2013 at 9:42 PM

I live in NH. I had been a strong supporter of Kelley Ayotte our R senator. She had voted conservative or libertarian quite consistently and was an articulate espouser of said principals. Then she went all McCain/Rubio over immigration reform. She is dead in NH.

philw1776 on September 18, 2013 at 9:43 PM

Hilary got steamrolled by a community organizer no one had ever heard of, so I’m not worried about her. No charisma, Benghazi, disliked intensely by even many Democrats, I don’t think she has a prayer.

But the stipulated GOP field sure doesn’t excite any NH voters either. Rand Paul will never win, and neither will Santorum, Bush, or most others mentioned. What about Scott Walker? I love Cruz, so I’m disappointed in his numbers on the one hand, but happy to see he will probably stay in the Senate (where he can keep McConnell honest).

MTF on September 18, 2013 at 9:49 PM

Call him Lucy. And tell him don’t bother; he got no ‘splainin’ to do. ‘Cuz his a** is done.

M240H on September 18, 2013 at 10:04 PM

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Eat a hot bowl of p*** off soup.

M240H on September 18, 2013 at 10:06 PM

Blah, blah, blah. Defeatist, wimpy quitter talk. See ya, boo hoo baby.

Meanwhile those of us living in reality will be working to nominate and elect a conservative in 2016. We’re going to try to shove another “severely” conservative joke down your throats again.

(edited for accuracy)

bluegill on September 18, 2013 at 9:37 PM

katy the mean old lady on September 18, 2013 at 10:07 PM

Three out of four of the top contenders support comprehensive immigration reform…well, maybe four if Rand Paul’s next policy shift on this ends up back in the pro category. I don’t think that immigration has much to do with all this.And I doubt if Cruz will stay that high…if he does people will have to find a way to elect a Canadian to the White House. And I just do not see that happening.

Terrye on September 18, 2013 at 10:15 PM

Note to Marco Rubio:

If you’re feeling popular and celebrated by the MSM and the Democrats and Republicans in Congress, you are doing something wrong, ya dope!

ROCnPhilly on September 18, 2013 at 10:26 PM

This is a great result for Ted Cruz. New Hampshire might be one of the worst states in the country for him. The Bush brand is well known up there. Christie is a NE Governor. The state is very un religious and non evangelical. Its a fairly moderate state. It would like a libertarian type such as Paul. Its an open primary which hurts conservatives. It has almost no Hispanics. And it definitely ain’t Texas. Its early and more people know these other guys then they know Ted Cruz.

Everything I said above hurts Cruz in this poll. Yet he gets 10%, only 10% behind the leader. Great poll for Cruz.

KMav on September 18, 2013 at 10:26 PM

Not to mention Cruz has the issues on his side and is a great debator.

KMav on September 18, 2013 at 10:27 PM

Treachery will get you 7%.Cruz in 2016-a principled conservative!

redware on September 18, 2013 at 10:39 PM

bw222 on September 18, 2013 at 9:16 PM

Point taken. However, (he said, while reaching in to his bag that was almost empty), I take Michael Rubin of AEI to be a conservative.

Perhaps there are things that I don’t know about that would lead me to change my view of his being conservative. For right now, though, I take him as conservative.

He provided the best rationale for bombing Syria that I heard, and he was for doing it for that reason.

(I also think Victor Davis Hanson is conservative; I couldn’t tell from his columns…I took him to be saying at times, if there were a clear objective, then it would be worthwhile…but I’m not confident of that.)

(And there must to at least a couple of conservatives still at Weekly Standard who supported it.)

EastofEden on September 18, 2013 at 10:47 PM

Not to mention Cruz has the issues on his side and is a great debator.

KMav on September 18, 2013 at 10:27 PM

Not to mention his idol is a Jesse Helms, the most racist person on the Hill in the past 50 years.

anchorchick on September 18, 2013 at 10:56 PM

Not to mention his idol is a Jesse Helms, the most racist person on the Hill in the past 50 years.

What about your grand kleagle robert byrd? Or your first black president William Jefferson Clinton? You know the impeached, disbarred, serial rapist who sold missile tech to the Chines?

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 10:58 PM

How did Obama describe his grandmother?

Oh yeah. “Typical white person.”

Not racist, of course.

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:01 PM

Even Olde Byrd was prescient about Obama.

“Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.” –Democrat Senator Robert Byrd

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:04 PM

Hillary 2016!!!!!!!

Mahatma Gandhi “ran a gas station down in Saint Louis.” –Democrat Senator Hillary Clinton

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:05 PM

I think this is the current Democrat VP

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African American [Barack Obama] who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice looking guy.” – Democrat Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., (D., Del.), 2006-07

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:05 PM

“I want to go up to the closest white person and say: ‘You can’t understand this, it’s a black thing’ and then slap him, just for my mental health.” – Democrat Charles Barron, New York city councilman

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:06 PM

My favorite Clenis Cabinet member.

“The Medicaid system must have been developed by a white male slave owner. It pays for you to be pregnant and have a baby, but it won’t pay for much family planning.” – Democrat Jocelyn Elders

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:07 PM

“I hate white people, all of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate him. We didn’t come out here to play this game. There’s too much serious business going on in the black community to be out here sliding through South Street with white dirty cracker whore [ BLEEP ] on our arms. And we call ourselves black men with African garb on. What the hell is wrong with you, black man? You had a (unintelligible) with a white girl on your damn arm. You want freedom? You are going to have to kill some crackers. You might have to kill some of their babies.” — Democrat Malik Zulu Shabazz(Black Panther)

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:08 PM

Basically every retort that tries to equate singulre, bigoted outbursts with a lifetime of PURE HATRED is pathetic.

I say go for it. The more Republicans try and pretend Jesse Helms is an acceptable role model the lower you sink.

There is nobody comparable to Jesse Helms on the left. But the second you try and make the argument that there is you lose. Everybody knows you’re bigots. Nobody has to make that case. OTOH you have to try and convince even yourselves that racism on the right is not at an all time high.

I always wondered how you keep the white sheets clean and free of ash at your religious “picnics.”

anchorchick on September 18, 2013 at 11:13 PM

They are all yours.

Own it reprobate.

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:18 PM

The practice of kafkatrapping corrupts causes in many ways, some obvious and some more subtle. The most obvious way is that abusive and manipulative ways of controlling people tend to hollow out the causes for which they are employed, smothering whatever worthy goals they may have begun with and reducing them to vehicles for the attainment of power and privilege over others.

Murphy9 on September 18, 2013 at 11:33 PM

…ultimately Rubio’s decline is better for conservatives for the simple reason that it’s more likely to keep Jeb Bush in the presidential picture.

Why in God’s name would a Jeb Bush candidacy be ‘better for conservatives’?

FFS, wtf has happened to this site?

Midas on September 18, 2013 at 11:33 PM

anchorchick on September 18, 2013 at 11:13 PM

Ah, another f*ckwitted leftist troll.

I take it we just had an open registration of sorts?

That giant sucking sound you here is the global-HA-IQ quotient dropping precipitously with every enrollment and post of anchorchick-like sub-moronic quality.

Midas on September 18, 2013 at 11:35 PM

New Hampshire poll: Rubio drops from 25% of GOP primary voters in April to … 7% now

Rubio claimed that he wasn’t naive about being used or played by Chuck Schumer. I think Rubio’s education is now just about complete on the subject.

RJL on September 18, 2013 at 11:55 PM

What did Rubio expect?

Tasha on September 18, 2013 at 11:57 PM

Rubio lost support with his support of the Gang of 8 bill, but he lost even more and probably made regaining any a long term project by repeatedly lying about its provisions and their effects.

But the very idea that Paul and Cruz and Rubio should be Presidential contenders is a farking joke. They are first-term Senators with no administrative experience and you consider them qualified for the biggest administrative job in the world because you like the way they say some stuff?

Isn’t that exactly how we got into this mess?

Let the youngsters show us they can govern a state as well as they can make a speech, and then reapply.

Adjoran on September 19, 2013 at 12:18 AM

Midas on September 18, 2013 at 11:35 PM

I’ve been here since Vent. Now p*** off.

anchorchick on September 19, 2013 at 12:23 AM

I wonder why.

Allah’s snark aside, it’s really quite amazing how long it took conservatives to say “never again”. It has been a standard of American life and politics for 100 years that politicians are untrustworthy liars and not terribly bright. So…why have we suddenly become to quick to abandon someone who lies to us.

When Rubio made his amnesty play so soon after running for the Senate to the right of Tom Tancredo, we lost it. While the cynical, the establishment types, and the RINOs all laughed and said “politics ain’t beanbag” and “his numbers will rebound when everyone forgets”, we all said “never again” and I think these polls are not going to change. I think Marco Rubio cynically supported the McCain-Schumer Amnesty bill, thinking that McCain’s nomination proves that we are suckers and always forgive and forget.

It seems he was wrong.

Jaibones on September 19, 2013 at 12:30 AM

If the Republicans don’t go with one of their successful governors….it’s going to be another Dem victory in 2016. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz may fire up the base, but they have zero relevant experience for the top office in the land. That means the vast majority of independents will not feel comfortable backing them because they won’t know what they might be getting. Obama has been a complete failure and there’s no way to convince anyone other than the base that our inexperienced senators would be any different….because in all likelihood they wouldn’t be. The nominee has to have a track record of success with respect to cutting spending (or at least living within their means) and fostering business/job growth. If we pick the right person and they stay with a conservative message that focuses on the top issues…not all issues…just the top ones….we win. We nominate a senator or representative…we lose. We nominate someone who leads with social issues…we lose. We nominate someone who is just slightly conservative…we lose. We have to paint the Democrats as the party who have kept the economy in the pits, have presided over the worst recovery in history, have spent more money in 8 years than were spent by every administration prior to 2008 and have made the world hate us more today than when Bush was in office….and therefore have made the world less safe than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

ScottiesRule on September 19, 2013 at 12:53 AM

I always wondered how you keep the white sheets clean and free of ash at your religious “picnics.”

I’d tell you to ask Robert Byrd, former Dem senator from WV and former high-ranking member of the KKK, but he’s dead. You could always ask Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton about being a racist…they’ve got it down fairly well.

ScottiesRule on September 19, 2013 at 12:59 AM

Perhaps Rubio can introduce Spanish as an official language of government. Or declare all Haitians and Egyptians Americans. Or everyone. Why stop with ‘Hispanics’?

pat on September 19, 2013 at 1:22 AM

ScottiesRule on September 19, 2013 at 12:53 AM

If you are saying make this a race between Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin, with Walker playing the role of moderate and winning the nomination, I probably would be on board with that. You just have to convince the other Senators as well as Bush and Christie not to run.

KMav on September 19, 2013 at 2:54 AM

Virtuoso analysis of a single poll result.
Bravo, AP.

aquaviva on September 19, 2013 at 3:04 AM

Rubio lost it,
‘Cause we have alternatives
To McCain redux.

Haiku Guy on September 19, 2013 at 5:44 AM

I voted for him here in FL and will never vote for him again for ANY office. Not after the blatant reversal of his campaigning conservative positions. No “fool me twice”..

Coger on September 19, 2013 at 6:41 AM

If Amnesty, which Rubio pushed, goes through, there will never again be another Republican president-so Rubio not only screwed himself but the entire country as well.

MaiDee on September 19, 2013 at 7:13 AM

Cruz’ on-camera demeanor is very much a problem.

His shrill voice, even moreso.

Even if his politics is Reagan-esque, Cruz is not going to attract the way Reagan did.

I still hunt for a viable candidate that can WIN.

Carnac on September 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM

The fact that 33% of “Republicans” would vote for Christie or Bush is depressing beyond belief. Apparently 1/3 of republican are democrats…WTF.

Doomsday on September 19, 2013 at 9:22 AM

New Hampshire poll: Rubio drops from 25% of GOP primary voters in April to … 7% now

Lib propaganda machine still effective.

socalcon on September 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM