Gingrich: 41%California:
Romney: 15
Perry: 8
Bachmann: 8
Santorum: 6
Paul: 6
Huntsman: 3
Newt: 33%Pennsylvania:
Romney: 25
Paul: 9
Bachmann: 7
Perry: 4
Santorum: 4
Huntsman: 2
Newt: 35
Romney: 18
Santorum (his home state): 18
Paul: 8
Bachmann: 6
Perry: 2
Every time, and I mean every time, I bring up the fact that the Iowa Caucuses are closed [meaning only Republicans can vote in the GOP Caucuses], the reply is that “You can register up to the day of the caucuses to participate.” That’s true. But if Paul is not able to motivate his supporters to register, and if his people aren’t actually committed to caucus for Paul, then his support is soft, and isn’t going to show up.So while these independents and Democrats are telling a pollster they would support Paul, they have to be considered pretty unlikely to turn out on January 3rd and vote for Paul.
Former Rep. Greg Ganske, who was elected to Congress in 1994 and served under Gingrich when he was speaker of the House, suggested Romney only wanted to use the caucuses to tear down Gingrich ahead of the New Hampshire primary.
"Maybe he doesn't care. Maybe he doesn't care about winning Iowa. He just wants to tear down the speaker here and then focus on New Hampshire," Ganske said.
18-29: 53-18%He gets the most support from each age group.
30-45: 54-28
46-65: 65-27
65 and older: 76-13
Do you think people who have immigrated to the United States illegally but have lived here 25 years, have paid taxes, and have obeyed the law should be deported or not?Only 29% answered they should be deported. 44% said they should not. So it doesn't appear Newt's position is going to hurt him much.
Smith said in his endorsement, “It is not enough to simply defeat President Obama. We must replace him with an inspirational, experienced, conservative leader, with the guts to challenge and change the establishment. Newt Gingrich is that leader.”Here's the full story.
"Gingrich, on the other hand, is well known to many conservative leaders who recognize that, despite his self-acknowledged errors and flaws, he is the one candidate who has a real record of implementing conservative government.
Balancing the budget, welfare reform and a host of other conservative initiatives that Gingrich championed as Speaker are not mere campaign rhetoric -- they actually happened."
Watching the crowds, one saw that Gingrich’s substance on regional issues was crucial to his success. During stops in Charleston and Bluffton, for example, Gingrich’s command on seaport policy, an arcane topic within the Beltway, was largely ignored by campaign reporters. But South Carolina Republicans noticed.The whole article is well worth reading.
The Newt Gingrich surge has moved him to the top of the polls in Iowa, big gains in New Hampshire and now a two-point edge over President Obama in a hypothetical general election match-up.
“If Rick Perry can’t do better than fourth place in a neighboring state that has a popular Republican governor supporting him, then where can he do well? So this isn’t a good sign for Rick Perry at all,” Faucheux said.Link to story.
“I have not seen a lead this large, this late in a Republican presidential primary season since I have been polling,” said [Matt] Towery, who notes that his firm has never missed identifying the winner in Florida’s statewide contests.
InsiderAdvantage also reporting brand new poll in Iowa tonight. Shows Gingrich on top with 28, Ron Paul is closest to him with 13. (link)New Hampshire:
New InsiderAdvantage poll to be released tomorrow shows Romney and Gingrich in a statistical dead heat in New Hampshire. (link)South Carolina:
New InsiderAdvantage poll from SC tonight! Gingrich 38, Romney 15, Cain 13, Paul 7, Perry 4, Bachman 3, Santorum 2, Someone else 5, undec 13 (link)Florida:
Newt with big lead on 1st night of our FL poll...he and Romney may be only ones over 10% and he's uniting anti-Mitt vote (link)
Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich picked up the endorsement of former South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer on Monday, giving him his most prominent surrogate to date in a state that Gingrich's campaign has billed as its "southern firewall."
"Speaker Newt Gingrich offers the best and most comprehensive plan to get America moving forward and that is why today I am announcing my full support for Speaker Gingrich ... a true conservative, a true patriot, and true leader," Bauer said in a statement.
Following his Sunday endorsement by the New Hampshire Union Leader, GOP presidential candidate and former U.S. House speaker Newt Gingrich on Monday picked up the backing of eight New Hampshire House members.
Backing Gingrich were Reps. Laurie Pettengill of Glen, who backed Mitt Romney in 2008, as well as Glen Hill of Northfield, Don McClarren of Nashua, Joe Pitre of Farmington, Kathy Lauer-Rago of Franklin, Joe Osgood of Claremont, Brandon Giuda of Chichester and Ken Sheffert of Hampton.
Pettengill said that although she backed Romney in 2008, “I have chosen to be with Newt this time because I feel he is the most conservative candidate today. He not only has the political know-how, but he will immediately put in to place actions that will renew America.”
Maryland Congressman Andy Harris will endorse Newt Gingrich today. The freshman Republican, who was not in the House during Gingrich’s tenure as Speaker, will be the first of several federal and state legislators to announce their support for the surging presidential candidate, according to a source familiar with the rollout plan.Harris is very conservative, and he is another sign that the conservative vote is coalescing behind Newt.
If the presidential election was held today and Redlands could swing the vote, Newt Gingrich might well want to start packing for the White House.Here's the full story.
It was the former Speaker of the House who came out on top in the eyes of those who attended the Redlands Tea Party Patriots debate viewing and live radio broadcast Tuesday.
Recent polls have shown the former house speaker at or near the top of the Republican presidential field, along with Mitt Romney. During a televised debate Tuesday, some Republicans and pundits thought Gingrich may have risked that status when he said he favored pathways to legal status for illegal immigrants who have lived peaceful, law-abiding, taxpaying lives in the United States for many years.From another:
Other Republican candidates were quick to condemn his remarks. But his ideas didn't seem to alienate the folks in Naples — the crowd was enthusiastic with his appearance and wildly applauded many of his remarks, including his outline on how to handle illegal immigration in the U.S.
"It's an extremely difficult question," said Patrick Moody, a 57-year-old Baptist minister from West Palm Beach who said he will likely vote for him in the important Florida primary. "He's got a measured, realistic view of the situation. His views make sense."
Is Newt Gingrich the latest flavor of the month among the candidates pursuing the Republican nomination for president? Or is he a real candidate who can beat early favorite Mitt Romney?As the first story makes clear, and as Newt has made clear, nothing happens until the border is secure.
If the reaction from his appearance Friday in Naples is even the slightest indication, then the former Speaker of the House will indeed challenge Romney for a spot on the ticket to face President Barack Obama next November.
And if those judges refuse to apply the law objectively as written, and instead engage in judicial activism making up their own law based on their own liberal/left values, then they are applauded by the liberal/left media and academia. The rest of us can go pound sand.And another:
At least that is the view of the New York Times, the Washington Post, the bar association, and the law schools. They are the ultimate authority and rulers in America under this doctrine of judicial supremacy. Any other view is dangerous to our most fundamental liberties, they tell us (at least while the judges reflect their liberal/left views).
But not according to Newt Gingrich, the Founding Fathers, and American history. To these authorities, it is judicial supremacy that is dangerous to our most fundamental liberties.
Gingrich recalls the actual checks and balances on the judiciary established by our Founding Fathers, who recognized the dangers of judicial supremacy. Jefferson wrote in challenging such judicial supremacy in 1820, "You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy." Jefferson further wrote later that year, "The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine our Constitution from a co-ordinate of a general and special government to a general supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet."Please read the full thing here.
Asked why Gingrich was the only major Republican candidate to opt out of the Missouri's non-binding primary [Hammond] said: "Their lawyers bill them by the hour."
[M]y view is that the markets probably overreacted in this case and that Mr. Gingrich’s answer will not be all that harmful to him.And:
One reason is simply that Mr. Gingrich’s views on immigration are not all that far out of step with those of Republican voters. Although I can’t find a survey that catalogs Republican responses to Mr. Gingrich’s proposal exactly, a New York Times/CBS News poll from May 2010 on a broad range of immigration-related issues provides some evidence about an analogous proposal.
...
Among Republican respondents to the survey, 42 percent said the immigrants should be required to leave. But 31 percent said they should be able to stay and apply for citizenship. An additional 23 percent picked the middle option: the immigrants should be allowed to stay, but as guest workers rather than citizens.
I suspect that commentators take too literal-minded an approach when predicting how a candidate’s position on the issues will play with primary voters. Yes, there are a few issues like abortion that are threshold tests in a Republican primary, but others like immigration are more complex. Voters may tolerate a fairly wide range of responses provided that the candidate’s head and heart seem to be in the right place. Alternatively, issues that do not seem all that salient may become much more so if the candidate cannot explain them adequately or if his position seems insincere.
One thing that Mr. Gingrich has going for him is that conservatives feel that both his head and his heart are indeed in the right place. The heart part is easy: after the time he spent as speaker of the House feuding with President Clinton on the welfare state and most everything else, there are few doubts about his conservative team spirit. By contrast, many influential Republican commentators say point-blank that Mitt Romney is not a real conservative at heart and is instead a Northeastern (i.e. moderate) Republican. One significant piece of evidence for this, of course, is that Mr. Romney’s only elected office was the governor of Massachusetts, and that he took generally moderate positions there.
18-45: 60-29
46-65: 70-23
66 and older: 68-23
18-45: 56-25
46-65: 64-26
Older than 65: 73-20
Newt: 20
Cain: 14
Romney: 11
Santorum: 6
Perry: 2
Paul: 2
Bachmann: 1
Huntsman: -2
Currently, employees and employers pay into the Social Security system through the payroll tax. Under Gingrich’s proposal, the employer-funded portion would go toward keeping the current Social Security system sustainable. But part of the employee-funded portion could be invested in a personal savings account. People would be given the option of putting money into a range of investments administered by private companies, similar to a 401-k plan. The person would own his account, which would be passed on to his estate when the person dies.The plan can be found on Newt.org here.
Gingrich said in addition to giving people more ownership over their retirement benefits, it would help the economy by spurring investment through the private savings accounts. “The amount of savings builds up rapidly and creates a level of capital which accelerates economic growth,” Gingrich said.
Gingrich adviser Peter Ferrara, a conservative lawyer who served in the administrations of President Reagan and President George H.W. Bush, said Gingrich has not yet determined what portion of a person’s payroll tax they could contribute, or for what ages the program would be phased in. But Gingrich said current beneficiaries would not be impacted.
To pay for the transition period, Gingrich would take 185 federal programs that help the poor and give the money – including Medicaid money - as block grants to the states. Gingrich said that would eliminate federal bureaucracy and let states come up with training programs to get people off social programs. “We want to challenge the states not to figure out how you can take this federal block grant to subsidize the poor being poor, we want them to take this amount and use it to figure out how you can help the poor learn to be non-poor,” Gingrich said.
In a report posted on Gingrich’s website, Ferrara estimated that switching to block grants could save the federal government $3.25 trillion over 10 years and the states $1.4 trillion.
"The number of Republicans who would be pleased or enthusiastic if he won the party's nomination has grown from 51% in May to 70% now - not the kind of numbers you would expect if voters were 'settling' for Gingrich."In fact, a plurarity say they are most enthusiastic about Newt being the nominee.
Saturday evening's Family Leader forum in Des Moines was widely viewed as a key test for Republican presidential candidates trying to win the support of still-undecided Iowa social conservatives. And after an extraordinary and sometimes soul-baring discussion between six candidates gathered at First Federated Church, there are signs Newt Gingrich has come out ahead in the race to become the candidate behind whom social conservatives unite behind in their drive to stop Mitt Romney.York concludes:
Discussions with some social conservative leaders after the forum brought praise for all of the participants, particularly Gingrich and Rick Santorum. But it turns out that pollster/strategist Frank Luntz, who conducted the forum, also ran a focus group after the session, and it appears Gingrich scored very well with the group. "I think the focus group that Luntz did afterward would bear out that Newt Gingrich came a long way Saturday night," says Family Leader president Bob vander Plaats. "I think it would bear out that Gingrich won the forum."
"When you watch it, you'll say, 'Wow,'" vander Plaats continued. "It also looked very good for Santorum, but primarily for Gingrich." The focus group was taped for later showing on Fox News.
What is happening now is that social conservatives are working their way through his liabilities, particularly his three marriages, and trying to decide if they can support the Gingrich of today -- not the Gingrich of 15 or 20 years ago -- without compromising social conservative principles. In the Family Leader forum Saturday, it appears that all involved made a big step toward doing that.
They will do whatever it takes to destroy Newt Gingrich because Barack Obama can't stand up to Mr. Gingrich's "Vision for America" or his brain. But for me personally, Mr. Gingrich recognizes Israel's importance as America's greatest ally in a region where most people there just don't like us. As an added benefit, we won't have to worry about the NLRB or any more apologies coming from our President.
Daughter Jackie Cushman told UnionLeader.com that while she could not specifically recall what her mother said in that story, her mother has told her often, and as recently as last week, “‘My words have been misconstrued,' and she feels that she was so misquoted that the reason she will never talk to the media again is that she was done such a disservice.
Those oddities aside, Gingrich is likely catching on in Iowa because he’s usually one of the most eloquent Republican critics of Obama-style liberalism—within both government and the media. The audience in Jefferson groans in angry disbelief when he relates a familiar story about a dentist in New York defrauding Medicaid by filing 991 procedures a day. “[This] dental office in Brooklyn,” Gingrich says, “had somebody who stood out front and said, ‘If you loan us your Medicaid card, we’ll give you a free DVD player.’ ”Warren quotes Newt:
Voters across the largely agricultural state cheer when Gingrich takes on the regulatory regime of the Environmental Protection Agency, particularly a recent, widely reported proposed rule on dust. Gingrich says he guesses the regulation was written by “some person who lived in a high-rise air-conditioned apartment, who went down to ride in an air-conditioned subway to go to a high-rise air-conditioned office building [and who] sat in his windowless office and imagined dust.” In a part of the country where farming the dry prairie is a way of life and everyone regularly stirs up a cloud of dust while driving down a dirt road, that’s steak-tartare-quality red meat.
“The real pedigree of this campaign is Goldwater in ’62 to ’64, and then Reagan from ’75 to ’80 in that they were idea-generated movements which evolved into a campaign,” he tells me. “They weren’t campaigns in the traditional Republican meaning of the word. And I think that’s essentially what we’re trying to do.”
Before you dismiss Newt Gingrich for having too much “baggage” to win the Republican presidential nomination, much less the presidency, consider this:Jonathan Martin of Politico tweeted: "Btw, it was about this time 4 yrs ago that Barnes put his finger on McCain surge."
In 1980, when Ronald Reagan emerged as the likely Republican presidential nominee, President Carter’s advisers were thrilled. They’d done extensive opposition research. By pointing to what Reagan had said in speeches, radio commentaries, newspaper columns, and conversations, they assumed it would be easy to characterize him as a right-wing extremist. And enough voters would reject him and reelect Carter.
They were wrong. It wasn’t that voters ignored Reagan’s offbeat comments. They just didn’t think eccentric statements he’d made over the years were important. Bigger things were at stake, like Soviet aggression and a stagnant economy. And Reagan had better answers than Carter.
[Gingrich] views the tea-party revolt as the dawn of an enduring movement, and he has spent more time courting tea-party activists than forging ties to Republican party leaders. Mr. Gingrich has recast his American Solutions group, launched in 2007 to press for expanded oil drilling and other policy initiatives, into a tea-party clearinghouse of sorts -- creating a curriculum to teach activists, small business owners and first-time candidates how to run campaigns. He is keeping in touch with this potential army of volunteers.So when it comes to building a base of support for a 2012 run, Governor Romney has courted a lot of party leaders. And Newt "is traveling the country to build alliances with local tea-party activists in key presidential primary and caucus states....assign[ing] a full-time staffer at American Solutions to recruit and work with local activists across the country. Many of those now in his database live in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina -- key early-voting states in the presidential primaries, where Mr. Gingrich has devoted time to meeting them in small groups."
Elisabet Wilson, a tea-party activist who lives near Greenville, S.C., said she received a call from a Gingrich aide last spring seeking her attendance at a May roundtable with the former speaker at a local hotel. When she arrived, she found a group of nearly 30 fellow activists.Wallsten continues, "Mr. Gingrich said American Solutions was intended to boost the conservative movement whether or not he runs."
"He went around the room and asked each of us, why did you get involved?" Ms. Wilson said.
Ms. Wilson later agreed to serve as a state coordinator for American Solutions.
First night in AZ and PA: Cain really fading, big leads for Newt. Makes sense bc Newt was always 2nd choice of Cain voters
As to Newt’s conservatism, one needs to view his almost 35 years in the public eye as a whole. There are few politicians who have fought as hard over so sustained a period against the false narrative in which an ever-expanding central state is seen as necessary and the decline of the United States is deemed inevitable.The whole post is outstanding, and you can read it here.
While any of the Republican candidates running can argue against a particular policy or piece of legislation, only Newt has shown the ability to see the historical forest for the trees, to argue for American exceptionalism and greatness founded in history and constitutional principles, not sound bites.
...
Newt is uniquely capable of communicating a winning conservative vision in a persuasive and forceful manner, as the positive reaction to his debate performances demonstrates. Obama versus Newt on stage before an audience of tens of millions of voters could lead to a catastrophic defeat for Obama, while Obama versus any other current candidate could have the opposite effect.
Newt has a political history which fits very well with the current political and economic conditions. While Newt was a combative Speaker of the House, he also was someone who fought successfully to balance the budget, reform welfare, and implement an economic growth agenda with a Democratic President in office. An electorate sick and tired of Washington politics and deficits will welcome this narrative.
When asked why people felt Gingrich was moving up in the polls, 44% of respondents cited his depth of knowledge on the issues. Ten percent referred to his strong debate performances while another 6% said they liked that he was challenging the media in those debates. Ten percent referenced his past experience as Speaker of the House.The one quibble I have with the story: they say Romney remains "the most popular candidate in the field." They back that up by writing that Romney's favorability rating is 60/32.
A close look at the data shows Gingrich is actually leading Romney among certain important subgroups of the electorate. Among self-identified conservative voters, Gingrich beats Romney 34%-27%. Among self-identified tea party voters, he leads Romney 38%-21%.
In the crosstabs, Gingrich is winning across most of the demos now. He leads Romney by double digits among men and women, wins every age and income demo, and leads both Republicans and independents. Romney only bests Gingrich among ideological “others,” those who do not identify as “very conservative” or “somewhat conservative.” Interestingly, Gingrich leads among Tea Party adherents by a wide margin, 43% to 17% for Cain and only 9% for Romney. Gingrich leads most of the religious demos, too, with 33% of evangelicals (Cain second at 14%), 31% of Protestants (Romney close at 28%), and Catholics (39% to Romney’s 21%). Only among “others” does Gingrich trail, 22%, to 24% for … Ron Paul.
Of course, several candidates have grabbed this kind of momentum in this race, only to come up empty within a few weeks. Can Gingrich maintain this momentum? As the media and other candidates step up their scrutiny of the former Speaker, we will certainly find out. One thing is almost certain: unlike the previous bubble candidates, it won’t be a debate that trips Gingrich.
Koberg is an exceptional hire for Gingrich. With so many of Iowa’s political operatives now working in state government since the state has a Republican governor for the first time in over a decade, there are not that many operatives with a resume like Koberg’s out there for presidential candidates to choose from.The same writer, Craig Robinson, said this of Schoenfeld:
Over a span of almost six years, Koberg has developed contacts and relationships with legislative candidates across the state through here work at Iowans for Tax Relief. Those relationships, and her knowledge of the political landscape across the state, will be an asset for the Gingrich campaign.
Schoenfeld is a long-time veteran of local and statewide Iowa political campaigns. In 2004, he ran the Iowa Victory effort for President Bush, in addition to working on President Bush’s successful caucus effort in 2000.
...
Schoenfeld provides Gingrich with an understanding of how Iowa caucus campaigns operate.
Among GOP primary voters who are part of the Tea Party movement, Gingrich is the top pick (35 percent), followed by Cain (20 percent). Romney (15 percent) comes in third -- receiving less than half Gingrich’s support among this group.
When asked who they would trust most with nuclear weapons, nearly twice as many primary voters say Gingrich than Romney (30 percent and 17 percent respectively). Those voters would least trust Paul (13 percent), Bachmann (11 percent) and Cain (10 percent) with nukes.
On July 24th of 1939, a sign suddenly appeared on the Strand in London reading simply:Lord concludes with:
What Price Churchill?
What do all these polls showing Newt Gingrich on the rise actually mean? What is it that a growing number of Republican voters are asking after each of these debates?
They appear to be asking the American 2011 version of what the British people abruptly found themselves asking in that long ago summer of 1939.
What price Gingrich?
As I said, all those reasons are valid and true. However, the media is missing (or failing to mention) one key reason why Newt Gingrich is getting a new look from the base of the GOP and independents.
It all started back in the beginning of October, when we heard rumblings that Newt would be releasing a new and improved Contract with America—but now to be called “The 21st Century Contract with America.” I’ll admit, I scoffed bit at first . . . until I was able to get a sneak peak at just one section about curtailing judicial supremacy and returning us to the rule of law. After reading it I knew it was going to be a game-changer.
Then came Newt’s Value voters speech which he gave at the Value Voter’s Summit in D.C. on October 7. Here’s the link to the entire speech—if you watch it I think you can sense the shift in the mood of the room as Gingrich keeps talking. Here’s a paragraph from fairly early on in the speech and where the audience really started getting on board:
“Let me be clear. Judicial supremacy is factually wrong, it is morally wrong, and it is an affront to the American system of self-government. (Cheers, applause.) One of the major reasons that I am running for president of the United States is the 9th Circuit Court decision in 2002 that one nation under God, in the Pledge of Allegiance, was unconstitutional. That decision to me had the same effect that the Dred Scott decision extending slavery to the whole country had on Abraham Lincoln, because I thought, if an American appeals court could be so radically out of touch with America that it could seek to block children from saying one nation under God as part of their description of America, that we had come to a point when we needed a constitutional crisis to reassert the legislative and executive branches’ legitimate prerogatives to teach the judiciary that they cannot be anti-American and expect us to tolerate them radically changing our society by judicial dictate.”Just two weeks later, Newt gave a similar speech at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition event. But, more importantly, during the question and answer section he once again gave an overview of what America must do to rein in the runaway judicial system in response to what he would do to protect life and marriage. Folks at the event responded heartily. Newt’s rise has been steady since then.
Coincidence? I think not. Christians and Conservatives around this country understand that no matter what we may want to do to get our country back to exceptionalism, we have to curb judicial supremacy and the lawyer class. Newt Gingrich became the only person to articulate that in his Value Voters Speech on October 7, again on October 23, and he’s been mentioning it in speeches across the country ever since.
His rise in the polls comes now that he’s given us a compelling reason to consider him as our Commander-in-chief: restoring the Rule of Law to our country.
“Of all the things that man said, it was simply, ‘I don’t want you to be for me, I want you to be with me',” Taylor said. “That’s a whole shift in the mindset. That’s a JFK moment. It’s getting us back to the core, getting citizens engaged in government, getting them out to vote.”
“After very careful consideration and lengthy discussions with many key supporters, I am leaving the Perry camp, effective immediately. I no longer see a path to victory for him and have had great difficulties dealing with his staff.
“I still like many of his policies and would have no problem voting for him if he is our nominee. Now I am endorsing Newt Gingrich for President and will spend time in the near future explaining that move. Suffice it to say tonight that Newt champions the culture war I believe in fighting and he is a brilliant, very well-spoken man. I am pleased to endorse him for President.”
Following a surge in national polls, Newt Gingrich's distinctive name peppered news headlines frequently over the weekend with gems like "Newtmentum" and "Newtvember."
Today, in a move that no other candidate can replicate, the campaign has told NBC News it is joining in the fun, rolling out "Newt Hampshire!", a social media volunteer platform wholly dedicated to Granite State volunteers.
Communications director Matt LeDuc said the site's content and mobilization strategy will "utterly blow your mind." The site will fully debut next Monday, the same day the former Speaker of the House will return to New Hampshire. Gingrich will participate in an editorial board meeting with the Union Leader newspaper and participate in a couple of campaign stops.
This comes as Gingrich rapidly expands his political operation in New Hampshire, a state in which his staff hopes will be the second stop of a sustained "surge" through the primary season.
The Gingrich campaign has also hired a new senior advisor with a name well known in the Granite State: Jim Wieczorek, an ex-staffer for former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and son of sitting executive councilor Ray Wieczorek. He is also vice president of an insurance company bearing the family name.
Wieczorek will be joined by newly-minted captains of all 10 New Hampshire counties, according to Gingrich's New Hampshire state director, Andrew Hemingway.
One thing the California numbers really point to is that if Cain's support continues declining Gingrich has the potential to benefit in a major way. Among Cain voters 42% say Gingrich would be their second choice compared to 14% for Bachmann, 12% for Romney, and only 8% for Perry. Cain voters are fond of Gingrich, giving him a 60/30 favorability rating. Meanwhile they're not too keen on either Romney (30/56) or Perry (32/54). Neither of those guys is very well positioned to benefit if the bottom falls out on Cain.Newt's overall favorability rating is 68/26.
Somewhat liberal voters: 54-37%Among women: 69-23%. Among men: 66-28%. Newt leads among both genders. He's also the top second choice of both men and women.
Moderate: 48-41
Somewhat conservative: 63-28
Very conservative: 79-18
18-45: 63-30
46-65: 65-28
65+: 78-16
Newt: 68 favorable/23 unfavorableRomney's favorability numbers is at a six-month low.
Cain: 57/31
Romney: 48/39
Bachmann: 40/41
Perry: 35/49
18 to 29: 64-36%No other candidate is above water with all age groups.
30-45: 60-30%
46-65: 73-18%
65 and older: 69-23%
The great polling news continued today:
Public Policy Polling has the race looking like this:
Newt: 28%CNN:
Cain: 25%
Romney: 18%
Romney: 24%
Newt: 22%
Cain: 14%
Perry: 12%
Paul: 8%
Bachmann: 6%
Poll Position asked who people would vote for in a one-on-one matchup:
Newt 56/ Cain - 30%
Newt 57/Romney 24%
Cain: 20%
Gingrich: 19%
Romney: 14%
“I definitely think it ends up Newt versus [former Massachusetts Gov.] Mitt Romney at some point after the caucuses and primaries are under way,” said Iowa House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer, a Republican who has endorsed the Georgian in her state’s key January caucuses.
“Newt will become the major challenger to Romney,” said Polk County, Iowa, GOP Chairman Daryl Kearney. “All national polls now have Newt with a solid hold on third place.”
“Evangelicals will definitely go for Newt if he is the nominee,” insisted Jim Garlow, credited with organizing the evangelicals in the drive to pass a same-sex marriage ban in California. “I used to hear them say, ‘He’s the smartest one in the room, but he has personal issues.’ I’ve seen an enormous shift in the past four or five months. They no longer talk about personal issues, but about intelligence and capability of being president.”On the primary calendar and the new RNC rules:
Mr. Garlow, senior pastor of the Skyline Wesleyan Church in San Diego, said if the nomination fight came down to Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich, “I’m guessing 80 [percent] to 90 percent of the evangelical vote in America would go to Newt. Romney’s Mormonism may be a factor, but the reason I hear most is they don’t trust Romney on abortion, marriage, economics and health care.”
“I think, no question, evangelicals will go for Newt if it comes down to him and Romney,” said Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition Director Steve Scheffler, credited with organizing support for Pat Robertson’s stunning second-place finish in the 1988 Iowa caucuses. “Evangelicals are concerned with personal conduct, but most will judge people on their present conduct, and they have concluded Newt’s present lifestyle is exemplary.”
Under the Republican nominating calendar, no candidate can mathematically accumulate the 1,143 delegates required to win at the August presidential nominating convention until March 24 at the earliest, according to an analysis by The Washington Times.
Even that date is unlikely because before April 3, no state can have a winner-take-all primary or caucuses — they must all award delegates proportionately by congressional districts. Sweeping even one state’s delegates, much less the 30 contests scheduled through March 24, is practically impossible in a fully contested race.
© Blogger template Webnolia by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009
Back to TOP
