Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Poll puts Giuliani, Clinton in lead in SC
WISTV ^ | 4/12/07

Posted on 04/12/2007 5:24:19 AM PDT by areafiftyone

STATEWIDE (WIS) - A new poll has some good news for Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton in South Carolina.

The SCIndex has Giuiliani leading among likely Republican voters, with 29 percent, followed by John McCain at 16 percent and Mitt Romney with eight percent.

Giuliani's current lead is built primarily on support from women. Thirty-seven percent of all female Republican presidential primary voters indicate that they support the former New York Mayor. Fifteen percent of women who plan to vote in the Republican presidential primary support John McCain. McCain and Giuliani split support among male voters with each candidate getting 20 percent of their vote.

Among the likely Democratic voters, Hillary Clinton is on top, with 32 percent. Barack Obama is second with 23 percent and John Edwards has 21 percent.

Clinton is leading Obama among African American females, 41 percent to 29 percent. Obama is leading Clinton among African American males 34 percent to 28 percent. Among all women Clinton receives 38 percent to Edwards' 19 percent and Obama's 22 percent. Clinton has a slight edge on Edwards with white females 35 percent to 33 percent. Edwards has the lead among white males with 45 percent to Obama's 10 percent and Clinton's 10 percent. 

That poll was conducted April third and fourth and had a margin of error of 4.9 percent.

The SC Index is done quarterly by groups not affiliated with any of the candidates.



TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-132 next last
To: justshutupandtakeit; Flightdeck
While Fred would win some of the Southern state primaries I do not see him winning NY, NJ, MI, Il, WS, MN,CA, WS, PA

Rudy is not going to win pro-life, pro-gun primaries like MI, IL, MN, PA -- and no one knows what this "WS" place is you listed twice.

81 posted on 04/12/2007 7:55:46 AM PDT by JohnnyZ ("I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose" -- Mitt Romney, April 2002)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

If you are not a Democrat you certainly are willing enough to help them win. Third parties (and there are MANY) do nothing but distract people from achieving anything real. They will not affect one electoral vote.

The “party” doesn’t go in any direction. That decision is made by the members who vote. If you cannot convince enough of the voters you will lose and joining a smaller more extreme group will only ensure that you do NOT convince the voters. This will not hurt the party at all just your ability to achieve your claimed goals.


82 posted on 04/12/2007 7:55:57 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Defeat Hillary's V'assed Left Wing Conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

“That has been a constant refrain since Nov. Yet, in spite of all the negative attacks on Rudy his numbers have remained firm.”

It is only after the nomination occurs that the democrats would even START doing this. Until then, they WANT the candidate with the most baggage to win. Oh, and what do the liberals control with great effectiveness? That’s right, media. And why is this liberal the front-runner again? Oh, all the media? You people need to take a step back and think about what you are doing.


83 posted on 04/12/2007 7:57:27 AM PDT by Flightdeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ

Santorum, arguably the MOST conservative Senator, lost to a MODERATE. Move left.

Allen’s loss was a move left.

I am not interested in the excuses in Mo. they do not change the fact that it moved Left.

Far from pinning anything in 06 on conservatives I have argued often that conservatives were NOT responsible for the loss in Nov. They did NOT desert the party. It was the ELECTORATE which moved left and deserted the GOP not conservatives.


84 posted on 04/12/2007 8:00:19 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Defeat Hillary's V'assed Left Wing Conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ
Conservatism did NOT win in ‘06. Santorum, Allen, and many good conservatives lost their seats to Democrats. Not because the conservatives were not conservative enough (Rinos) but because there was a stronger showing on independent/swing voter who showed up unexpectedly at the polls. They usually lean moderate-left and are now the deciding factor in American politics.

The Republican base as well as the Democrats, showed up in their traditional numbers, actually, the Republicans showed up slightly ahead of the Democrats in number, but the new force, the moderate/centrist independent/swing voters are who decided the election.

It’s a fact. Supported by actual post election research by a legitimate, non partisan research group.

85 posted on 04/12/2007 8:02:59 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ

You do know we have a state which has a capitol in Madison and where the Green Bay Packers play?

Pro-life, Pro-gun primaries in Il, Mi, Pa, Mn exist only in your fantasies. Did you look at the results of the last election in IL? Are you really laboring under the misimpression that there is some monolithic conservative bloc there capable of getting out of its own way?


86 posted on 04/12/2007 8:04:44 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Defeat Hillary's V'assed Left Wing Conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

Sorry, no cigar. I don’t vote for liberals from either party.

If the Republicans want my vote and the votes of other conservatives, Rudy won’t cut it.

I have been told we are not needed anyway, from Rudy supporters. I beleve them, because they make this claim. If this claim isn’t true, then they must be liars. Another reason not to vote for Rudy. Character.


87 posted on 04/12/2007 8:07:39 AM PDT by dforest (Fighting the new liberal Conservatism. The Left foot in the GOP door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck

If you believe Rudy is only leading because of the media you have not been paying much attention to its REAL relation to him. It hates the man and did all it could to tear him down while he was Mayor. Including calling him a Nazi, printing pictures of him with a Hitler moustace, etc.

Actually the ideal GOP candidate is a hard right conservative who can be put into its template of “extremist” then the campaign against him runs itself and punching a few buttons with the voters ensures his defeat. The LAST thing it wants is a GOP candidate which cannot be put into the “extremist” catagory. THAT is its true nightmare. Thus, a Rudy candidacy takes away much of its reflexive anti-GOP arsenal. And dirt with a Hillary candidacy will not do the job by itself.


88 posted on 04/12/2007 8:10:46 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Defeat Hillary's V'assed Left Wing Conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

Extremists don’t win American elections so the defection of their supporters is on little consequence.

At FR we have seen these threats and blusters for at least eight years generally from the same people. If these folks were any indication of a major problem they claim to demonstrate the GOP convention could be held in a phone booth.


89 posted on 04/12/2007 8:14:00 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Defeat Hillary's V'assed Left Wing Conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob; Condor51
“So, if Hillary leads Rudy in New York, that is to be expected. What is important in the national scheme of things is whether Rudy has more support in NY than Democrat registration and prior voting would predict. If so, it is Hillary who is in trouble.”

I second that. With NY being competitive with Rudy in it, Hillary will not be able to take it for granted. She’ll have to spend tons on money in the NY media that she could have used elsewhere. Also, without Rudy at the top of the ticket, no Republican will be competitive in NY no matter who the dems choose.

90 posted on 04/12/2007 8:17:10 AM PDT by Gop1040
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
You do know we have a state which has a capitol in Madison and where the Green Bay Packers play?

You mean at Lambert Field?

It's 'WI', moron.

Pro-life, Pro-gun primaries in Il, Mi, Pa, Mn exist only in your fantasies. Did you look at the results of the last election in IL?

What part of Republican Primary don't you understand? Sure, there are the Judy Baar Topinko types around, but all the evidence from recent primaries in those states gives a massive advantage to pro-life, pro-gun conservatives.

Michiganders kicked out one of your liberal Republicans in the 2006 primary and replaced him with a pro-life, pro-gun Republican.

Minnesota Republicans are split behind pro-life, pro-gun Tim Pawlenty and the faction which doesn't think he's conservative ENOUGH.

How many times are you going to demonstrate that you have absolutely no clue about politics?

91 posted on 04/12/2007 8:18:56 AM PDT by JohnnyZ ("I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose" -- Mitt Romney, April 2002)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Grand Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11 by Wayne Barrett (Author), Dan Collins (Author)

Rudy Giuliani is a private citizen now. And he'll remain one if this book gets any traction. Grand Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11 contains the kind of data that could bring St. Rudy earthward. It's a pretty damning portrait of a lame-duck mayor crippled by petty ideological battles, misplaced priorities, cronyism, plain old incompetence, and a city that dawdled as the signs of an impending terrorist attack grew clearer every day. While crediting Giuliani for his ability to rally the city, the authors zero in on the policies and practices they say created more heroes than survivors on September 11. You can be sure that Hillary has highlighted her copy until it's dripping bright pink.

92 posted on 04/12/2007 8:19:35 AM PDT by KDD (A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: kabar
I seriously doubt that we will have two NYers running against one another for the Presidency and Hillary already has the Dem nomination locked up.

Don't be too sure about Senator Fat Ankles, there is no guarantee that she's going to be the nominee, just like the coronation of Rudy Reagan (as he would portray himself) isn't a sure bet for the GOP either.

When a Harris poll indicates that FIFTY percent of all adults would vote AGAINST Hillary, that proves that broken glass Republicans are alive and well, and that even the 'Rats of her own party are not convinced that she is their best hope of winning the White House.

The mantra of the RudyBots is 'only RUDY can save us from HILLARY!' but not only does that make the presumption that Mrs Bill Clinton WILL be the 'Rat nominee, it presumes that we KNOW that Rudy Guiliani can beat her, when in fact he bugged out in 2000 when his prostate conveniently started acting up, and told Rick Lazio to 'get in there and start punchin' kid!', and we all know how that ended up. In a national campaign, let alone a campaign for a U.S. Senate seat, Rudy is an unknown quality because he's never even run the race to the finish line, with the exception of his election as mayor.
93 posted on 04/12/2007 8:20:25 AM PDT by mkjessup ('President Rudy!!! = an aborted fetus in every pot, and no guns in any garage!!!')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

Exactly. I think this race will be 2000 all over again!


94 posted on 04/12/2007 8:22:31 AM PDT by areafiftyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Look old buddy justshutupandtakeit. I don't feel bad, I feel good deciding I am not going to take it.

I don't have to vote for any candidate I cannot support.

I am fine with that. Republicans are going to keep losing if this is the path they take. If losing doesn't tell you something then nothing will.

I voted in 2006, we lost, and we still have a bunch of pansy a$$ed weenies in office that get a paycheck for being useless. Ugh

Rudy is a mistake and I will have no part of it.

95 posted on 04/12/2007 8:26:37 AM PDT by dforest (Fighting the new liberal Conservatism. The Left foot in the GOP door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Don't be too sure about Senator Fat Ankles, there is no guarantee that she's going to be the nominee, just like the coronation of Rudy Reagan (as he would portray himself) isn't a sure bet for the GOP either.

I am about 99% certain Hillary will be the nominee as long as she doesn't suffer a fatal accident. Obama, Edwards, Biden, Richardson, and Dodd are no threat to her nomination. Hillary's money, political organization, name recognition, and Bill will make short work of any of the current challengers. Only Gore represents a potential threat to her nomination.

When a Harris poll indicates that FIFTY percent of all adults would vote AGAINST Hillary, that proves that broken glass Republicans are alive and well, and that even the 'Rats of her own party are not convinced that she is their best hope of winning the White House.

Hillary has plenty of negatives, but she is not running against herself. Which Dem challenger can beat her? There are concerns by the Dem, but when push comes to shove, she is the candidate by default.

In a national campaign, let alone a campaign for a U.S. Senate seat, Rudy is an unknown quality because he's never even run the race to the finish line, with the exception of his election as mayor.

I agree. Rudy is an unkown quantity for many Rep voters. His name recognition and claim to fame are related to his performance during 9/11. Once you get to other issues near and dear to most Reps, Rudy is going to lose his luster. His positions [and actual history] on issues like abortion, immigration, gay marriage, gun control, etc. will remove him from the picture as a Presidential canditate. He also has the baggage of Kierk and two messy divorces plus the insinuation of alleged Mafia ties by his father.

96 posted on 04/12/2007 8:48:36 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: kabar
In order to run the board so far as primaries and delegates are concerned, Hillary MUST create an aura of absolute inevitability about her nomination and she quite frankly may have all the money in the world, but she doesn't have the political skill to take her where she wants to go. She is shrill, irritating, condescending, she is like fingernails on the blackboard, not to mention that she has a political tin ear. And worst of all? Her VOICE.

Another fly in the ointment which isn't getting much attention is the Howard Dean factor, there is no love lost between Dean and the Clintons and remember that Dean was (and remains) the lovable squeaky toy of the moonbat/Moron.Org left, because he ran on an anti-war position and has not deviated, Hillary is reviled by the far left, and if she can't get them on board, her hopes of a smooth ride to Denver are shattered. Picture Chicago '68 in Denver next year when the Sheehanites and the Moron.Org-types show up to demand a seat at the table, they don't like Hillary and she knows it. THAT is the great big 500 lb gorilla in the room that nobody wants to talk about.

And remember that it was late in the primary game before John F'in Traitor managed to pull out in front of his rivals, so if candidates or their supporters are buying into this whole 'inevitability' gambit, they're ALL going to end up disappointed IMHO.
97 posted on 04/12/2007 9:01:05 AM PDT by mkjessup ('President Rudy!!! = an aborted fetus in every pot, and no guns in any garage!!!')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone

I’m thinking of an Amendment that should be repealed.

And having 29% of the vote is nothing to crow about anyway.
Its afr too early and there are far too many better qulaified fish swimming around out there.


98 posted on 04/12/2007 9:08:27 AM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck

I happen to disagree. If Rudy gets nominated, I’d bet he’d demolish hillary - and I’m not asking for any more than that. The”base” - any base, be it moveon, ours, sharptonite or any other “base” - is only good at foaming at the mouth and at scaring everyone else away, thus the secret of a winning candidate [again, on either side] is to keep one’s “base” in its proper place and to subsume it. Election are won in the middle, and of that middle FR is manifestly not representative.


99 posted on 04/12/2007 9:15:12 AM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
In order to run the board so far as primaries and delegates are concerned, Hillary MUST create an aura of absolute inevitability about her nomination and she quite frankly may have all the money in the world, but she doesn't have the political skill to take her where she wants to go. She is shrill, irritating, condescending, she is like fingernails on the blackboard, not to mention that she has a political tin ear. And worst of all? Her VOICE.

Rather thin reeds to base her defeat. Begala, Carville, Grunwald, and hubby will make sure she doesn't stumble. She had no problem with her VOICE when easily winning twice in NY. You underestimate her political skills.

Another fly in the ointment which isn't getting much attention is the Howard Dean factor, there is no love lost between Dean and the Clintons and remember that Dean was (and remains) the lovable squeaky toy of the moonbat/Moron.Org left, because he ran on an anti-war position and has not deviated, Hillary is reviled by the far left, and if she can't get them on board, her hopes of a smooth ride to Denver are shattered.

The Moveon.org crowd got their comeuppance with the Lieberman debacle. Dean was a MSM media manufactured candidate who didn't come close to winning even one primary, except for Vermont, his home state, which he won.

And remember that it was late in the primary game before John F'in Traitor managed to pull out in front of his rivals, so if candidates or their supporters are buying into this whole 'inevitability' gambit, they're ALL going to end up disappointed IMHO.

Late in the game? Kerry won in Iowa and NH, the first two contests. Dean came in third in Iowa [18%] and second in NH [26%]. The polls were wrong. Kerry wound up winning every primary except for Vermont, South Carolina, and Oklahoma. It will become painfully obvious that this will be a coronation for Hillary. The MSM is trying to create some interest by suggesting that Obama and Edwards are serious challengers. They aren't.

100 posted on 04/12/2007 9:29:53 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-132 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson