The latest Ayres McHenry & Associates poll of likely South Carolina Republican Primary voters shows Senator John McCain leading, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani regaining a bit to stay in second place, and former Senator Fred Thompson surging into third. The poll was taken over four days through last Tuesday, as reported by Ryan Sager at Latest Politics:
"If the Republican primary for president were being held today and the candidates were [see below], for which candidate would you vote?" If unsure: "Which way do you lean as of today, toward [see below]?"
%
John McCain 25
Rudy Giuliani 20
Fred Thompson 16
Newt Gingrich 12
Mitt Romney 8
Mike Huckabee 2
Sam Brownback 1
Jim Gilmore 1
Duncan Hunter 1
Ron Paul 1
Tom Tancredo 1
Tommy Thompson 1
Chuck Hagel -
Unsure 13
Read the whole post at the link above.
Note that the poll did push "leaners," too, so the actual "undecideds" could be higher. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney must be the most disappointed in this result, having spent millions in the state already, built a stronger name recognition than Thompson, a better favorability ratio than Gingrich, and lower negatives than anyone except Thompson, but still runs a poor fifth place trailing two men who haven't even entered the race and won't be on the ballot.
The rest of the field, from Huckabee on down, should do themselves, the Party, and the Nation a big favor and GET OUT NOW! All they are doing is distracting attention from those with a chance to win. They draw a level of support statistically equivalent to Chuck Hagel's - which is to say: negligible, only a quarter of the "margin of error" in most polls. Time to wake up and smell the coffee, folks!
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2008 Presidential Race, Polls, Primaries, Republican, South Carolina
Tags: McCain, poll, primaries, Republicans, South Carolina
Comments (3)
The comments are correct in... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Glenn Koons | May 15, 2007 3:34 PM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
The comments are correct in that we in the GOP really have either 3 running candidates with a chance and two who are not running with a chance. The field should be 5, or 3 if one is fair. When I see Fred and Newt get in, then we can really say 5 are the real field. The others should get out, give their dough to the 5 left and then help the RNC and the House and Senate GOP committees to help win back the Congress.
1. Posted by Glenn Koons | May 15, 2007 3:34 PM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on May 15, 2007 15:34
2. Posted by Adam Herman | May 17, 2007 3:40 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Bill Clinton was at 1% this time in 1991. Howard Dean was at 2% this time in 2003, behind seven other candidates.
While it is clear that some candidates are fringe candidates(Paul, Tancredo, Hunter), Huckabee, Thompson, and Gilmore all have a chance to improve their poll numbers and are well qualified to be President.
2. Posted by Adam Herman | May 17, 2007 3:40 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2007 15:40
3. Posted by Jim Addison | May 17, 2007 4:03 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
In 1991 the campaign hadn't begun, and the most prominent Democrats - Gore, Cuomo, and Gephardt - hadn't taken their names out of the picture yet, and Clinton hadn't even announced (he did in October), so his standing shouldn't have been surprising.
Dean, OTOH, was in fact the leader at this point in 2003. It was his online fundraising that sprung him to the front of the pack, as well as his appeal to the far left. He was able to come from so far behind (earlier) because the Democratic field was particularly undistinguished except for Lieberman, whom the base hated.
The difference here is the major GOP names are already "in" and have strong followings. These 1-percenters haven't gained any traction from the first two debates, and show no sign of doing so.
3. Posted by Jim Addison | May 17, 2007 4:03 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2007 16:03