Posted on 05/20/2007 2:54:16 PM PDT by Reaganesque
The new Des Moines Register poll shows an AMAZING jump for Romney up to 30%!!! He has a double digit lead over Giuliani and McCain (17% and 18% respectively). This is among "Likely Republican Caucus-goers" and exclude unannounced possible candidates (F. Thompson and Newt namely).
However, these figures are far from "set in stone":
The race at this early stage could take many twists and turns before the Iowa finish line is reached in January.
Twelve percent of those polled are undecided or declare themselves uncommitted. Among those stating a preference, 87 percent say they could still be persuaded to support another candidate as their first choice.
Why is he surging? Some ideas below:
Romney’s front-runner status in the new Des Moines Register poll could stem in part from solid performances in the two national debates, his work in building a network of supporters in Iowa, his fundraising prowess and money spent on TV ads, said J. Ann Selzer, The Register’s pollster.
“His success raising money seems to have aroused caucusgoers’ interest, prompting them to take a serious look at the candidate,” Selzer said. “He’s helped by the top two qualifications Republican caucusgoers are looking for in a candidate — experience as a governor and as CEO.”
The poll shows Romney is regarded favorably by 74 percent of likely caucus participants and unfavorably by just 13 percent, with the rest unsure how they feel about him.
He does better in the poll among older Iowans, who tend to be more faithful in attending the caucuses, than he does among younger ones. Roughly one-third of those 55 or older make him their first choice, compared with support from about one-fifth of adults younger than 35.
Some opinions from participants:
Republican caucusgoers place a premium on a candidate who has experience as a governor, with 60 percent saying they are more likely to support a person with that experience on their resume.
“Just being elected out east, where the hard core of the Democrats are, speaks pretty highly of” Romney, said poll participant Edward Green, 57, of Davenport.
“He’s got a good family and his children are on the right track,” said Green, a minister who does missions work for Assemblies of God International.
Green wonders, however, whether Romney — a Mormon — can win the Republican nomination because of his religion. “People will poke and prod at his religion — a lot like they did with Kennedy in the ’60s.” John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, was the first Catholic elected president.
Most likely Republican caucus participants — 71 percent — say it makes no difference in their choice of a candidate if that person would be elected the first Mormon president. However, 22 percent say that would make their support for the candidate less likely.
Six percent say electing the first Mormon president would make them more apt to support that person and 1 percent are unsure.
-----
Iowa is a nice microcosm proving that those who get to know Romney . . . like Romney. His campaign is picking up steam and will be hard to derail. Full steam ahead to the Ames Straw Poll!!!
BTW, that's one of the worst posts I've ever seen on FR. It exposes you for what you are: A liberal. Not surprising you've jumped into the Mitt camp.
ENDA is not hate crimes legislation. It’s to add “sexual orientation” to the laws against employment discrimination.
The rest of your comments simply unmask you as the liberal judicial supremacist you are. Again, that is a good reason you’re a good fit for the Mitt-flopper.
I’d be careful about attacking me personally.
I know where you live.
Wow. That's two Romney supporters making physical threats in three days. Why am I not surprised?
Push liberals hard enough, and they always end up going there. There's always a brown shirt under whatever clothes they're wearing to try and fool people.
I simply answered the latest of his far left of center posts with facts.
It was unfortunate that Pinochet was put in a position to have to step up to have to save his nation from becoming a Castroite/Soviet beachhead that the dictator Allende was transforming it into. Those that died were those that championed turning Chile into an axis of evil, I shed no more a tear for them than I do for common terrorists and criminals. Absent a Pinochet, Chile would’ve been plunged into depths of bloodletting and destabilization unparalleled on the American continent in modern times.
Because of the overwhelming extreme leftist political leanings of the international media, they lament the deaths of a handful of either misguided/brainwashed or intentionally criminal individuals that were aiding and abetting that abomination to establish that state of evil as being WORSE than the tens to hundreds of millions murderered or oppressed by governments they find nary a problem with. Simply put, Pinochet was a freedom fighter.
I’m saying that we keep getting closer and closer to completely losing this country to our own homegrown axis of evil, and people of good conscience will have to ask themselves whether they have the courage to stop the insanity and save it before it’s too late. I know where Jefferson and Lincoln would stand.
It is unfortunate, to say the least, that one of Mitt’s supporters made physical threats to Eternal Vigilance. This kind of behavior is totally unacceptable and I am glad to see that Cold Heat was banned. I will email the rest of the list and point this situation out to them so we can prevent this from happening again. My apologies.
I have.
Thank you.
I see that freeplancer hasn’t been banned. It’s common FR courtesy to ping someone to a post where you talk about them. Since freeplancer is apparently in Iraq, I don’t know how often he has internet access. But it would be polite to let him know that he’s been accused of threatening someone with physical violence.
Okay. He’s unbanned. I see he’s removed the personal threat he had on his homepage.
FR etiquette doesn’t usually include pinging banned FReepers. Sorry. And he was banned, no matter how temporarily.
Maybe if y’all would learn what it means, I could quit repeating it.
By the way, the poster in question’s threatening posts have been removed. However, if you care to call me a liar again, I’ll produce copies for you or anyone else who cares.
Please do me the courtesy of quoting where I called you a liar.
I’ll say it again, it’s common FR courtesy to ping a FReeper to a post where he/she has been talked about. I would think it doubly important when the post in question accuses one of a bannable offense.
You heavily inferred it. Sneaky, but it is what it is.
Pinging banned FReepers is not required, as I said. And until you told me, I assumed he was still banned. I can’t think of a reason in the world that such a person should ever be allowed back here.
Are you demonstrating your approval of these kind of cowardly brown shirt tactics to try and intimidate political foes out of the political debate?
I inferred no such thing. You, on the other hand, directly accused me of calling you a liar, which wasn't true. Some people might even call that a lie.
Are you demonstrating your approval of these kind of cowardly brown shirt tactics to try and intimidate political foes out of the political debate?
I make it a policy to never attempt to have a reasonable debate with anyone whose opening salvo contains the words "brown shirt", "jackboots", or "Hitler". Have fun with yourself.
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.