Head-to-head matchups between Republican candidates and Democratic candidates, courtesy of Rasmussen Reports.
Maryland (as if we expect surprises here)
Obama 48%, McCain 42%
McCain 45%, Clinton 43%
Obama 55%, Romney 34%
Clinton 52%, Romney 39%
There is a surprise in Maryland...McCain has a lead over Clinton. Maryland is one of the "bluest" states in the nation, so for McCain to make a crack in the Dem foundation here is encouraging.
Oh yeah, and Martin O'Malley has a 33% approval rating as Governor, which is lower than President Bush's 36% approval rating amongst Marylanders...HA! Bring back Bob Ehrlich, Maryland, he was good for you. Moving on...
Pennsylvania
McCain 48%, Clinton 42%
McCain 46%, Obama 38%
Clinton 49%, Romney 39%
Obama 43%, Romney 38%
Clinton 46%, Huckabee 44%
Pennsylvania is a very odd state. They like their Democrats conservative and their Republicans liberal (well, to an extent). That would explain Huckabee's ability to hang with Hillary. Romney isn't doing well here, either...but his gap between himself and Obama is half of what it is with Hillary. Once again, that's The Keystone State's tendency to buck the trends, as Romney tends to match up better with Clinton than Obama.
I previously examined the battleground states, and I did not include Pennsylvania because of recent trends. However, given that McCain and Huckabee are doing so well up there, I may soon include Pennsylvania as a swing state if this trend continues.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Fred's Debate Domination
Jim Geraghty dishes out his winner from last night's debate...
Winner: Thompson. This performance was so commanding, I wanted his last answer to echo back to the lights in the back of the auditorium, blow out all the lamps and spotlights, for the theme to “the Natural” to play, and for him to trot around the stage in slow motion while sparks showered down in the background.
Commanding...such a great adjective. According to Geraghty, even the infamous Frank Luntz focus group is coming around
For once I’m in total agreement with Frank Luntz’s focus group – they loved Fred. They’re saying he showed passion.
First he dominated the last Iowa debate with his leadership skills and firm stance, then he won the New Hampshire debates by being deep and solid on the issues, and now he won the South Carolina debate by displaying his passion.
Most of the liveblogging of the debate that I've seen has noted Fred's dominance, and it couldn't have come at a better time. Other sentiments echo the opinion that Fred really took it to Huckabee and had him reeling badly from it.
In other Fred news, the "big, big" conservative endorsement came from the periodical Human Events. While a great endorsement from one of Ronald Reagan's favorite magazines, not quite as "big" as some of us thought it was. Still, it's another solid endorsement from the conservative flank of the GOP.
Winner: Thompson. This performance was so commanding, I wanted his last answer to echo back to the lights in the back of the auditorium, blow out all the lamps and spotlights, for the theme to “the Natural” to play, and for him to trot around the stage in slow motion while sparks showered down in the background.
Commanding...such a great adjective. According to Geraghty, even the infamous Frank Luntz focus group is coming around
For once I’m in total agreement with Frank Luntz’s focus group – they loved Fred. They’re saying he showed passion.
First he dominated the last Iowa debate with his leadership skills and firm stance, then he won the New Hampshire debates by being deep and solid on the issues, and now he won the South Carolina debate by displaying his passion.
Most of the liveblogging of the debate that I've seen has noted Fred's dominance, and it couldn't have come at a better time. Other sentiments echo the opinion that Fred really took it to Huckabee and had him reeling badly from it.
In other Fred news, the "big, big" conservative endorsement came from the periodical Human Events. While a great endorsement from one of Ronald Reagan's favorite magazines, not quite as "big" as some of us thought it was. Still, it's another solid endorsement from the conservative flank of the GOP.
U.S. At Risk of Losing Triple-A Credit Rating Within a Decade
And guess why? It's the fact that our government is spending way to much on health care, social security, and welfare.
These are the programs the Democrats are looking to spend more money on. This is also some of Fred Thompson's best issues in terms of how we should tackle these problems.
- Create a free-market approach towards health care.
- Individualize and optionally-privatize social security.
- Increase welfare effectiveness so only those that need it get it.
- Decrease number of people on welfare through stimulating economic and employment growth.
That, in itself, would save our credit rating...which is the same rating we have held since the rating was first applied in 1917. In other words, can literally cannot afford to have a tax-and-spend, social-program increasing Democrat in office.
Fiscal prudence is key, and Fred Thompson knows it.
These are the programs the Democrats are looking to spend more money on. This is also some of Fred Thompson's best issues in terms of how we should tackle these problems.
- Create a free-market approach towards health care.
- Individualize and optionally-privatize social security.
- Increase welfare effectiveness so only those that need it get it.
- Decrease number of people on welfare through stimulating economic and employment growth.
That, in itself, would save our credit rating...which is the same rating we have held since the rating was first applied in 1917. In other words, can literally cannot afford to have a tax-and-spend, social-program increasing Democrat in office.
Fiscal prudence is key, and Fred Thompson knows it.
Snow Falls in Baghdad
For the first time that anyone can remember, snow is falling on the streets of Baghdad. This seems to be causing a serious lift in spirits amongst the citizens within the city.
"It is the first time we've seen snow in Baghdad," said 60-year-old Hassan Zahar. "We've seen sleet before, but never snow. I looked at the faces of all the people, they were astonished," he said.
"A few minutes ago, I was covered with snowflakes. In my hair, on my shoulders. I invite all the people to enjoy peace, because the snow means peace," he said.
Traffic policeman Murtadha Fadhil, huddling under a balcony to keep dry, declared the snow "a new sign of the new Iraq."
It's a sign of hope. We hope Iraqis will purify their hearts and politicians will work for the prosperity of all Iraqis."
That seems to be the general feeling, that snow is an omen of peace. Maybe this omen will mean that the Iraqi government will finally start to get itself straightened out, and we can finally end the rebuilding process and our soldiers can come back home, proud of the work they've accomplished.
Also...anyone else find it odd that, during this period of supposed global warming, it's snowing in Baghdad...
"It is the first time we've seen snow in Baghdad," said 60-year-old Hassan Zahar. "We've seen sleet before, but never snow. I looked at the faces of all the people, they were astonished," he said.
"A few minutes ago, I was covered with snowflakes. In my hair, on my shoulders. I invite all the people to enjoy peace, because the snow means peace," he said.
Traffic policeman Murtadha Fadhil, huddling under a balcony to keep dry, declared the snow "a new sign of the new Iraq."
It's a sign of hope. We hope Iraqis will purify their hearts and politicians will work for the prosperity of all Iraqis."
That seems to be the general feeling, that snow is an omen of peace. Maybe this omen will mean that the Iraqi government will finally start to get itself straightened out, and we can finally end the rebuilding process and our soldiers can come back home, proud of the work they've accomplished.
Also...anyone else find it odd that, during this period of supposed global warming, it's snowing in Baghdad...
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Warner Waffling on Immigration
Adam Sharp has a great post up at Daily Whackjob where he talks about Mark Warner's incredibly vague and contradicting positions on illegal immigration.
Warner basically is trying to play both sides of the fence. Sharp's post states...
Knowing there were conservative Democrats as well as business leaders in the room, he didn’t quite waffle but he did express support for just about everything short of mass deportation and amnesty. He’s for a stronger border, he thinks the law should be enforced to send illegals back, he doesn’t want to automatically deport all illegals, he wants a path to citizenship, he is both in favor and opposed to expanding the guest worker program, he wants stricter rules on employers, he wants a national ID card with biometrics.
Democrats just cannot grasp that in periods of economic uncertainty, immigration is always an issue and they need to have an answer. They can’t even take a position! Governor Kaine won’t do anything that will upset well-connected Northern Virginia minorities, and he also hasn’t answered the concerns of localities about deporting criminals and zoning violations. I guess he thinks inaction is a policy. That won’t get Creigh Deeds or Brian Moran elected (though it might get them nominated), and it certainly won’t win the House of Delegates.
It's true, the Democrats really are attempting to straddle both sides of the fence on this issue, both at the state level and on a national level. The Democratic flip-flopping on this is bad enough to make Sharp, who has worked on several Dem campaigns in Virginia, say this...
I haven’t found an immigration proposal I like completely, but I must say I prefer John McCain’s “straight talk” to Democratic avoidance and indecision. He and Mike Huckabee have made principled arguments in response to real voter concerns. That’s more than I can say about a lot of Democrats, including a senate candidate who thinks he’s already begun his victory lap.
If Warner's confidence/overconfidence turns into arrogance, he may find himself on the losing end of the election come November.
Warner basically is trying to play both sides of the fence. Sharp's post states...
Knowing there were conservative Democrats as well as business leaders in the room, he didn’t quite waffle but he did express support for just about everything short of mass deportation and amnesty. He’s for a stronger border, he thinks the law should be enforced to send illegals back, he doesn’t want to automatically deport all illegals, he wants a path to citizenship, he is both in favor and opposed to expanding the guest worker program, he wants stricter rules on employers, he wants a national ID card with biometrics.
Democrats just cannot grasp that in periods of economic uncertainty, immigration is always an issue and they need to have an answer. They can’t even take a position! Governor Kaine won’t do anything that will upset well-connected Northern Virginia minorities, and he also hasn’t answered the concerns of localities about deporting criminals and zoning violations. I guess he thinks inaction is a policy. That won’t get Creigh Deeds or Brian Moran elected (though it might get them nominated), and it certainly won’t win the House of Delegates.
It's true, the Democrats really are attempting to straddle both sides of the fence on this issue, both at the state level and on a national level. The Democratic flip-flopping on this is bad enough to make Sharp, who has worked on several Dem campaigns in Virginia, say this...
I haven’t found an immigration proposal I like completely, but I must say I prefer John McCain’s “straight talk” to Democratic avoidance and indecision. He and Mike Huckabee have made principled arguments in response to real voter concerns. That’s more than I can say about a lot of Democrats, including a senate candidate who thinks he’s already begun his victory lap.
If Warner's confidence/overconfidence turns into arrogance, he may find himself on the losing end of the election come November.
Something Is A-Brewin' for Fred Thompson...
According to the American Spectator, Fred Thompson is set to receive a "big, big conservative endorsement." The question is...who?
Virginia Virtucon speculates it could be the NRA. Being a frequent visitor to the AR-15 forums (143,508 active accounts as I type this) and marvelling at the simply massive size of the membership of those forums, an NRA endorsement would have quite a bit of sway in states such as, oh, South Carolina (and Michigan, too).
Virginia Virtucon speculates it could be the NRA. Being a frequent visitor to the AR-15 forums (143,508 active accounts as I type this) and marvelling at the simply massive size of the membership of those forums, an NRA endorsement would have quite a bit of sway in states such as, oh, South Carolina (and Michigan, too).
Democratic Presidential Race - News and Notes
A lot going on in the sphere of the Democratic Presidential race today...
- John Kerry has endorsed Barack Obama for President. Interesting, but not interesting at the same time. Interesting, because he didn't endorse former running mate John Edwards (of course, there is a bit of bitterness there between them). Not interesting because it was Obama, who delivered his famous keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, that brought some attention to Kerry's campaign when the Massachusetts Senator ran for President.
- Bill Richardson is going to withdraw from the race. A bit sorry to see him go, as he was actually qualified (resume-wise) for the job. However, the "big 3" just have too much star power and gravitas for him to compete with. He did have a couple of the best campaign commercials, and is rumored to be one of the top VP choices for all candidates.
- Latest South Carolina polls...
Rasmussen Reports
Obama 42%, Clinton 30%, Edwards 15%
InsiderAdvantage
Obama 40%, Clinton 33%, Edwards 15%
SurveyUSA
Obama 50%, Clinton 30%, Edwards 16%
While these were all done prior to, or on the day of, the New Hampshire primary...Clinton has some serious ground to cover here. Michigan appears, as of now, to be safely in Clinton's hands...however, I can't find a survey from up there that is any more recent than mid-November.
- John Kerry has endorsed Barack Obama for President. Interesting, but not interesting at the same time. Interesting, because he didn't endorse former running mate John Edwards (of course, there is a bit of bitterness there between them). Not interesting because it was Obama, who delivered his famous keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, that brought some attention to Kerry's campaign when the Massachusetts Senator ran for President.
- Bill Richardson is going to withdraw from the race. A bit sorry to see him go, as he was actually qualified (resume-wise) for the job. However, the "big 3" just have too much star power and gravitas for him to compete with. He did have a couple of the best campaign commercials, and is rumored to be one of the top VP choices for all candidates.
- Latest South Carolina polls...
Rasmussen Reports
Obama 42%, Clinton 30%, Edwards 15%
InsiderAdvantage
Obama 40%, Clinton 33%, Edwards 15%
SurveyUSA
Obama 50%, Clinton 30%, Edwards 16%
While these were all done prior to, or on the day of, the New Hampshire primary...Clinton has some serious ground to cover here. Michigan appears, as of now, to be safely in Clinton's hands...however, I can't find a survey from up there that is any more recent than mid-November.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
N.H. Exit Polls: McCain Carries Anti-War Republican Vote...Huh?
I kid you not, this is straight from CNN's exit polling in New Hampshire...
Exit polls found 64 percent of Tuesday's Republican voters still support the conflict -- and Romney, whose criticism of Bush's management of the war has been muted, led McCain among those voters. But among the 34 percent who said they disapproved of the war, McCain had a wide advantage over the GOP field -- even over Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the sole advocate of a U.S. withdrawal in the Republican field.
A big h/t to The Campaign Spot for that link and the quote, but there's more strange happenings in New Hampshire. For instance, the evangelical vote...
Compared with the Iowa caucuses, where 60 percent of Republicans described themselves as evangelicals, exit polls in New Hampshire put evangelical turnout at about 21 percent.
Among those evangelical voters, Huckabee got only 32 percent, while McCain got 31 percent.
There is also a lot of "Bush hate" in the state...
Almost two-thirds of Democrats polled (65 percent) said they were "angry" with the Bush administration. And almost half of Republicans, (49 percent) said they were angry or dissatisfied with the Bush administration.
I imagine New Hampshire Republicans are mad, New Hampshire was the state that tried to get McCain elected in 2000. I guess they feel a bit mad that the rest of the nation didn't quite go along with them. As for the angry Democrats...well, they're always angry. What else can you say?
Exit polls found 64 percent of Tuesday's Republican voters still support the conflict -- and Romney, whose criticism of Bush's management of the war has been muted, led McCain among those voters. But among the 34 percent who said they disapproved of the war, McCain had a wide advantage over the GOP field -- even over Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the sole advocate of a U.S. withdrawal in the Republican field.
A big h/t to The Campaign Spot for that link and the quote, but there's more strange happenings in New Hampshire. For instance, the evangelical vote...
Compared with the Iowa caucuses, where 60 percent of Republicans described themselves as evangelicals, exit polls in New Hampshire put evangelical turnout at about 21 percent.
Among those evangelical voters, Huckabee got only 32 percent, while McCain got 31 percent.
There is also a lot of "Bush hate" in the state...
Almost two-thirds of Democrats polled (65 percent) said they were "angry" with the Bush administration. And almost half of Republicans, (49 percent) said they were angry or dissatisfied with the Bush administration.
I imagine New Hampshire Republicans are mad, New Hampshire was the state that tried to get McCain elected in 2000. I guess they feel a bit mad that the rest of the nation didn't quite go along with them. As for the angry Democrats...well, they're always angry. What else can you say?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
