Posted on 03/03/2007 2:38:10 PM PST by Pyro7480
Romney wins narrowly while Rudy Giuliani (a client) finishes a strong second:
Romney 21%
Giuliani 17%
Brownback 15%
Gingrich 14%
McCain 12%
On combined first and second place choices, it's a win for Rudy:
Giuliani 34%
Gingrich 30%
Romney 30%
That's not too shabby. Romney's people spent thousands of dollars getting their folks to CPAC. It seemed like every other person in line for Romney's speech yesterday had an official Mitt t-shirt on -- and he certainly was being attacked as though he was the man to beat. Even so, Rudy manages to pull off a near-win by just showing up and has the most first and second place votes.
The question of whether conservatives can support Rudy Giuliani was answered pretty decisively this week.
They're joining the distinguished list with Ted Olson, Peggy Noonan, William Bennett, Pat Roberson, William Buckley, Michael Medved, and George Will.
why do we care about global warming polls?
LOL
Say what? Which candidate's sons are you saying are "playing college"?
Hunter's a pretty old guy to have no recognition. He's been in public office for decades.
Romney is the only one of the candidates that paid thousands to bring in his people. The rest of the candidates did not.
Yeah, but at least by saying girly man or metrosexual, it would just be a bad joke instead of a Democrat talking point for the next 20 years.
I think most people are very aware that a South Carolina conservative could not be elected mayor of NYC. But they are also aware that Giuliani is a leader and an executive of rare abilities.
I have been excoriated for months here for pointing out that Hunter has no chance. This showing confirms this in spades since it was a conservative conference. I expect he will drop out within the next couple of months which is sooner than I had previously thought.
And, the problem is? Looks like only one candidate was smart, well-organized, planned ahead and was prepared for victory. Maybe it's that executive experience and know-how paying off? I like smart and savvy in a president.
I tried to explain straw polls the other night and it seemed to go over some heads. I am getting the feeling that a lot of people on here have never been very involved in local politics. Let me give a try but I bet it is a failure too!
Scientific polls use specified parameters as to the number of voters (registered or likely), party affiliation so that the poll is not oversampling, questions they want answered, etc. and then take all their data and come out with a poll based on actual calling and talking to people.
Straw Polls are done to make money for County/State parties and ballots are sold for a fee to raise money. Some Straw Polls candidates can buy unlimited ballots and in others it is one ballot per person -- depends on how much money you want to raise. Sometimes a candidate will buy the ballots and distribute them to supporters. Sometimes a straw poll is taken for fun at events to gauge support and even then you will get candidates buying tickets to the event so they can win the poll.
An Internet poll is the biggest joke because you can turn off your cookies and vote and vote and vote. There is absolutely no scientific methodology used and is worthless for the most part IMO. Any candidate that relies on internet polls, we don't want in office if they are that naive.
How is that? Tried to put it as simply as possible. Please feel free to add.
I think some of her brightest fans might have still gotten it. Then it would have come off as smart, witty and clever rather than childish, crude and mean.
You ought to think before you hit the enter key.
I can read you post below... and that's snarky...
Many there are college kids who don't want to be reminded that there is a war vet running and his son Iraqie war vet. They don't want to be reminded they arn't doing their part in the war so dismiss Hunter.
That's the best explaination I know of.
Duncan who?
It is not a problem -- each candidate to his own but it would be disingenuous not to report that fact when other candidates did not. Makes a difference in the polls but then you already knew that! Why do you think he paid -- to win the poll outright by a large margin but it didn't work and his regular poll numbers continue to tank especially after going negative.
Guess you do know that all those paid people were standing around monitors when Rudy spoke some cheering. When you hire CR's to do your work, you don't get loyality like you do when they volunteer.
Been around political campaigns for years and know how the game is played. If you come in close and had little ground game it is a much bigger deal then if you pay to have people there and don't win by that much and in fact don't win if you put 1st and 2nd place together.
I am dissapointed to see so many people criticisizing Romney for his efforts to win the straw poll. Here we have a guy that knows a vote is going to occur and uses all of his available talents/resources/and orginization to win that vote. Here is a guy who is able to mobilize hundreds of young people to work fanatically for his campaign. Republicans at all levels should be emulating this not critisizing it. God know in Nov of 2006 a little of this kind of orginization could have done wonders for the GOP.
I expect he will drop out within the next couple of months which is sooner than I had previously thought.
Hope that helps some to understand.
It should, but then again there is some willful ignorance around.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.