Pajamas Media calls Iowa race between Romney and Thompson
By jforFRED Posted in Archived — Comments (46) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
That's right Huckbots, while Brian Pickrell does not rule out a Huckabee win, he claims that the race is really between Fred and Mitt. As a supporter of Mr. Thompson, I'll live with Mitt as well.
According to Pickrell...
I find it hard to believe that Huckabee is actually leading in the polls here in Iowa. Every person I spoke with told me that they’re supporting Romney or Thompson and that everyone they knew or worked with (who are also Republicans) feels the same way. None of them have even considered Huckabee as a serious choice. It could be a fluke in the polling process or it could be a fluke in that I know people who are politically aligned with me and they, in turn, know and talk to others who think the way they do. Or it could be a little of both. I don’t really know for sure.
I've been saying this all along. After much phone calling to Iowa, I've yet to talk to anyone who cites Huckabee as their #1 Rudy and John fans should not be offended, we know they have ruled out that state, just like it comes of no offense to me when I see Fred has no shot in NH.
Pickrell goes on to say...
As I mentioned earlier, the people I have spoken with are supporting either Romney or Thompson, and everyone they know is doing the same thing. They have seen little support for Huckabee. Either it’s a flaw in the polls or a fluke in that like-minded conservatives tend to talk about these things with each other (“birds of a feather”, you know).
Insert Huckabee screaming in a Deanesque fashion here...
Yaaaaaaaah!
it will be the mother of all upsets.
Remember, these are IOWANS. They reward time spent in the state more than anything else.
Read Jay Cost's recent RCP article entitled "On the GOP Itenerary" if you want to know how many trips to Iowa each candidate has made.
Even with Fred's newfound focus on Iowa, he's still only been there 7 times since Halloween. Compared to Mitt Romney's 24 visits, Fred's time in Iowa is a drop in the bucket.
Fred doesn't have the ground team that Mitt does. Who will transport Fred's voters to the caucuses? Sure, Bush relied on his inevitable reputation more than volunteers. But, since no Republican has inevitable status this year, the candidate with the best ground team will win.
Go back to the August straw poll if you want to know what Mitt's ground team looks like in action.
Romney/Barbour 2008
....at least that's the conclusion one would draw from looking at the poll trends.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
yeah right. He's #4 close behind Romney in RCP.
although if it meant that Mitt become the nominee, I would be pleased if Fox was right.
I agree with the diarist that Huckabee will not win Iowa. I'm calling it now, and if I am wrong, I will take my medicine like a man. I base my prediction on the premise that the Huckaboom will collapse as fast as it has risen and will leave a vacuum of evangelical voters looking yet again for a home.
Fred's campaign, to its great credit, has seen the opportunity inherent in such a scenario and has mobilized to seize it. He is virtually taking up residence in the state and has rediscovered his groove as the no-nonsense Southern commentator, only now he has developed policy positions to match his rhetoric.
I predict that if Fred can be successful in his attempts to mobilize the ground troops, he will benefit from a huge bounce as people re-awaken to his campaign, his positions, and his meat and potatoes appeal.
When the Huckaboom hits, the disenchanted Huckabots will by and large get behind Romney or Thompson. It appears Thompson is going out to meet them and urge them into the fold. Some will say he is too late, and that he should have been there months ago. Others will heed the call.
The Romney campaign would do well to carefully consider Thompson's "surge" move and adjust accordingly.
Huckabee might not finish third. Within the last week, all of my politically savvy relatives who had become Huckabots during or shortly after the Values Voters conference have renounced him completely.
His record on crime, taxes, and social programs gave them pause, but they still staunchly defended him. The worm turned when his views on waterboarding, Guantanamo, and Iraq ("Pottery Barn rule" and harsh criticism of Bush) became public, he droppped from 1st to 5th.
I hope my small sample is indicative of a larger trend.
I do hope you are right, but I really doubt it. All the polls are wrong. The evangelical vote will get stronger, they think that when people attack their friends they have an agenda. Wait, I think that too. I really do hope Fred does well, he is a better choice.
But Fred has to repair his image among Iowans. He's shown a frightening disregard for retail politics thus far. He needs to change that.
Huck has inroads with the pastorazzi that Fred can only dream of. Fred will be lucky if he can muster up enough support in Iowa to get a delegate or two.
Romney/Barbour 2008
Perhaps its time to change the rules on wooing voters and instead of getting down on your knees and kissing *ss, making promises about everything...Perhaps likely voters in Iowa and elsewhere are ready for someone putting forth good ideas with a no-nonsense attitude.
Either way we'll know in a few weeks.
*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk
Those opposed to Huckabee are getting pretty desperate to be heralding anecdotal evidence over consistent polling data. Admittedly, the Iowa caucuses are highly fluid, but to think that Huckabee won't be first or second is just wishful thinking.
It is monarchical and aristocratical government only that requires ignorance for its support.
- Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1792
People were saying similar things about Dean.
To use a cliche' that probably belongs in the "kickoff here we come" diary:
"That's why they play the games."
Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire
The ammount of attacks leveled Huckabee (many which are fair - and to which he must answer for) is to be blunt - highly above average.
Any of the candidates, especially Romney and McCain, could recieve attacks equal to if not more intense.
The thing is with this case, establishment Republicans in the right places decided to unlesh whatever they had (at least to that point) on Huckabee.
Huckabee simply was not prepared or able to handle it. Much of it do to a) what the truth was b) no money or staff to respond.
Those seeking to harm know this (even with some of it being taken out of context).
The highly compressed primary season and the fact that there were few news cycles prior to the Iowa caucuses required this. When Huck launched from nowhere to first, people didn't have time to save things up or let this come out slowly. He had to be evaluated quickly.
Three months ago, it would have been a far more normal (and slower) process. But, at this stage, if people didn't get this info out and see how Huck would handle it, he could easily have just slid into the nomination. Then there would be no telling how he'd handle it when all of it came out later. At that point, if he politically crumbles, we're stuck with a dead candidate for the general.
I've never made any secret that I don't like Huck on the issues and don't support him. But even if you support him, he had to get vetted rather than rolling into the nomination. With Feb 5 looming, there simply wasn't time for the process to be kinder.
I've noticed this same exact thing with my co-workers, neighbors, etc. I knew a few people who were supporting Huck but quickly backed away. Right now I only know 2 people who openly support Huck.
Where are these people, seriously, does anyone (who supports someone besides Huck) actually know any Huck supporters?
But here in Connecticut, every Republican I know supports either Rudy or Huckabee, with a few McCain holdouts. The New England socially conservative Catholics love Huck, and the Defense Conservatives love Rudy. We all kind of like McCain, but only a few actively support him.
.....Annnnnd I just typed that response and realized you said "non-Huckabee supporter". Still, most of the people I know who like Huckabee didn't get it from me.
...except for that commanding plurality that support Romney in New Hampshire, right?
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
I believe in something like this, organization always trumps passion. People might like Huckabee and tell that to reporters and pollsters. But in this system, Romney's got the mechanism to actually get votes.
-------------------------------------
"As nations can not be rewarded or punished in the next world they must be in this."
- George Mason
Honest question. My recollection is fuzzy on the matter. Dean was polling high until just before the caucus, wasn't he?
Dean had already started to lose support in the polls weeks before the caucuses. Nevermind the fact that Dean and Gephardt were running much closer than Huckabee and Romney for first and second. Their bickering/nastiness landed them third and fourth, respectively. So, I don't think the situation is a good analogy, but we shall see.
It is monarchical and aristocratical government only that requires ignorance for its support.
- Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1792
Purity of Essence with Fred is the most important, but Peace on Earth with a strong Romney is acceptable [sorry for the Strangelove reference, but I just saw the movie again & it's still compulsively funny].
A lot of my East Coast friends are with Mitt, as he has been blooded in the Commonwealth of Taxation without Representation as its Guv.
Although Rudy cleaned up NYC back in the '90s, Mitt is a more recent veteran & would also know how to manage large organizations.
"Dated Fred, Married Mitt?"
They both need evangelicals to win. Fred dissed them early but they might come back to him. At least half will never support Romney. They think he is part of an evil cult. Now I don't think that, I believe it is just a cult, nothing evil.
might be right. Most Christian theolgians agree with me however. Mormonism is a cult...look it up. Did not say that was a reason not to vote for him. It has a way to go before it can be classified as a religion, but it is on it's way. But it is not Christian, as a matter of fact, it denounces orthodox Christianity, big time. And yes they believe Satan and Jesus were once spiritual brothers. I guess that is ok.
might be right. Most Christian theolgians agree with me however. Mormonism is a cult...look it up. Did not say that was a reason not to vote for him. It has a way to go before it can be classified as a religion, but it is on it's way. But it is not Christian, as a matter of fact, it denounces orthodox Christianity, big time. And yes they believe Satan and Jesus were once spiritual brothers. I guess that is ok.
Apologize for the cult remark. Now.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
I've been busy the last week or so, not really able to pay attention. Who told any of you that name-calling, personal attacks, profanity, and/or disruptive behavior was suddenly acceptable?
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Like I said I did not intend to insult anyone. My use of the word cult was descriptive. Look it up. Anyway, if I did insult anyone I am truly sorry. It will not happen again.
The early church was called a cult before it was became established as a religion. I am not a bigot. But he will have a really hard time with most evangelical Christians anyway. I did not intend to insult anyone. I am truly sorry if I did.
And this time, avoid the "sorry if anyone was offended" dodge.
Next post. Which will also demonstrate your ability to master Reply To This.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
I am sorry you do not take emails however. I just wanted to explain what I really meant by what I said. Doesn't matter, I am going to bed. Later
Do you know any Mormons, joedt7? I have known several very well over the years, and they were ethical and kind and quite normal. Although we were close friends, they never tried to recruit me to their religion (unlike the Moonies, a cult, who tried to kidnap me years ago in Santa Cruz). As a group they don't kidnap, or force-feed kool-aid or hold recruits in a room where they can't eat or pee. Just can't see how Mormons are anything other than what they profess to be: Christians.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
They are my friends and would not take offense in what I said. I understand others have, and I have said I am sorry. I do know a lot about theology however. I did not mean to imply their was anything wrong with Mormonism. They really are wonderful people. However, I do think that many evangelical Christians will not vote for Mitt because of it, they say that is the reason or not.
We don't vote twice like the Democrats. If we did, I could see a Romney/Thompson battle for the Rudy and McCain ballots. (I feel like Paulbots would go to the Federalist Thompson.)
As it stands, Huckabee's lead is too commanding and bourne out in too many polls for him to pull less than a close second. All the while, Thompson is behind Rudy for fourth in recent polls. However, people are writing off Romney's chances too early, to his benefit.
Huckabee is incredibly unpopular among politically savy Republicans. His lack of support on this board demonstrates that. The question is whether Huckabee's numerous liberal positions and his liberal record reaches enough Iowa voter's ears by January 3rd. I have a feeling that Romney's millions will make damn sure that it does. Romney's negatives have been talked about for 9 months. Huckabee's negatives have only been talked about for two weeks and people who don't watch cable news still probably haven't heard more than his illegal immigration scholarship policy.
...Fred is going all out to do well in Iowa. His chief rival is Huck, since that's where the bulk of Fred's support has gone. Mitt has been in the mid to upper 20s for months - his support is pretty solid. For Fred to do well, he is going after Huckabee. He has already sent out a direct mailer attacking Huckabee on immigration.
I'm a Mitt supporter, but I would gladly settle for Fred.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
albeit a distant. Only candidate in the race who actually takes a wide array of conservative positions. BUt, most of them are new to him and I think Fred can articulate them better. However, if Fred wins, Romney wouldn't be a bad VP or Cabinet head.
GOPaisano , does it concern you, as a Huck supporter, that he is highly unpopular among everyday Republicans? That most of us just can't support him, financially or otherwise, should he win the nomination?
I thought I was the only one that could see no support for Huckabee in Iowa.
It is a relief to see that I was not wrong.
Go Fred Go.