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.
Let me try to put this in basic language. If a candidate is going to pay the way to people to attend something like CPAC, pay them to hand out literature, etc., then he had better win by at least a 15-20% margin. Because if you have candidates that do not have a presence in large numbers and one of those candidates comes close for first and wins when you combine 1st and 2nd, that candidate that spent all the money just wasted it by not wiping out the field. That is not criticizing someone for paying money to send people to CPAC, that is posting reality and why it was a bad move if you don't win big.
I don't care if he wants to spend his whole campaign war chest to send people to CPAC, but I will stand on my theory that it was a bad move to pay when no one else did and not win big.
That's an understatement.
I wouldn't worry about it so much. Who cares?
So where was Hunter? Not too high on the list I see. Rudy #2 at CPAC. 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.
Bumpity bump.
So how many terrorists has Rudy killed or imprisoned since 9/11? Do you have a round number?
It is amazing to me how well he did with such short notice he was attending and basically no ground game. Speaks volumes about his support.
most campaigns do not spend money on votes that don't count...the vote that counts is on election day...the campaigns get votes in straw polls and at places like CPAC without spending money....
All things being equal, would you be MOST likely to support a Republican candidate for President who called themselves a…Ronald Reagan Republican: 79%
George Bush Republican: 3%
Not exactly a group of Bushbots.
lol...fer sure
Indeed it does. He did very well.
How many terrorists has your preferred candidate (or any candidate, Democrat or Republican, for that matter) killed or imprisoned since 9/11?
yes it was and same as it was in Spartanburg...
I think Romney and Giuliani can both pleased with their results from CPAC. Mitt because he won and Rudy because he did so well among what is the hardest group of people he will ever address short of a Pro-Life rally. Just because Romney spent money and "campaigned" for the poll doesn't mean he needs to get a huge margin to "really win." In 99 GWB was the clear front runner (Like Rudy today in scientific polls) but only beat Gary Bauer by 7 pts. In a crowded field no one is going to win big but the front runner and anyone else who pulls off a win has something to show for it. Mitt got his obvious win. Rudy got his as well but to see it you have to really understand what it means for a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro-gun control, candidate to get 17% at CPAC means. It's like Pat Buchannan polling 60% in San Francisco.
Smart conservatives know that Hunter has the proverbial snowball's chance in Hell of winning the general election.
well that's a really good excuse for them having their heads in the sands...reality is what it is so is politics...
"Hunter is getting blackballed by these clowns. They're gonna shut him out of the entire election process because he's new and doesn't have as much political capitol."
Gee, every previous candidate had to run the same guantlet.
Why should Hunter be trusted as smart enough to manage a big old country, if he can't get in with the big boys, learn the rules, and compete effectively?
He is underfunded, lacks national experience, is little known, etc. Thus far since he announced in Oct. he has done little to convince observers he has the skill and smarts to overcome his starting weaknesses.
It's like Pat Buchannan polling 60% in San Francisco.
LOL, that's funny.
I gotta agree with ya there...they just don't get it I've posted enough myself amazing isn't it...the only votes that count are on election day
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.