Washington Post-ABC News Poll (Fred Thompson surging in Iowa!)

The Washington Post ^ | Tuesday, November 20, 2007

[2ndDivisionVet]

This Washington Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone November 14-18, 2007, among a random sample of 400 Iowans likely to vote in the Republican caucus. The results have a five percentage point margin of sampling error. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Pa. *= less than 0.5 percent --snip--

4. (FOR SCREENING PURPOSES) If the caucuses were being held today, would you attend the (Democratic Party caucus) or the (Republican Party caucus) in your precinct? Democratic caucus Republican caucus 11/18/07 0 100 7/31/07 0 100

5. If the Republican caucus were being held today, and the candidates were: (Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, and Fred Thompson), who would you support? NET LEANED VOTE: (Continued)

[snarkybob]

“It’s all about perception. If Mr. Thompson places third in Iowa, when he isn’t expected to, he will “surge” in South Carolina, Florida and Nevada.”

Let me start by stating that I don’t have a candidate yet.
But, if it’s all about perception, then I don’t see how a 3rd place finish helps FDT. The rap on him before he announced was “Just wait till Fred gets in.” He was touted as the 2nd coming, and widely seen as the Saviour for the GOP in 2008. He seems to be trending his expectations down, and the most dedicated FredHead has to have noticed that he hasn’t really been on fire. I’m not saying that he won’t catch on fire, but so far he’s been trending down, and the last week he picked up a key endorsement, and he’s still in 3rd with a couple of point bump. At the same time Huckabee has been gaining. At what point does FDT have to get to the front and stay there, or at least be alone in 2nd place?

[kevkrom]

At "Subtitles 'R' Us" of course.

That should be: "Subtitles 'R' Us (Come Get Your Subtitles!)"

[richmwill]

So, if Hunter goes from 1% to 2% we can call it a “100% surge”?

[codercpc]

This poll is compared to one taken in July (before he even entered into the race). At that time he was in SECOND place now he is in THIRD, with his percentage only going up 2% (within the margin of error). I hardly call that "surging".

If the endorsements and ads are doing their job, their job must be to give support to Mike Huckabee (who is truly surging)

Cheerleading for ones candidate is one thing, and very admirable. Lying in headlines is quite another.

[skinkinthegrass]

but, but...FDT, is *insert complaint here*and *insert complaint here*
fwiw, FDT said, *insert complaint here* /sarcasm

GO! FRed GO!

[traviskicks]

I thought this was interesting, pretty amazing 19% of voters claim to have met Mitt Romney:

11/18/07
Have met candidate NET 19
Mitt Romney 6
Mike Huckabee 5
John McCain 4
Rudy Giuliani 3
Tom Tancredo 3
Tommy Thompson 2
Duncan Hunter 2
Sam Brownback 2
Ron Paul 1
Fred Thompson 1
Newt Gingrich *
Other 1
No opinion *
Have not met candidate 81
No opinion 0

[traviskicks]

ah, never mind, i take it back, that was ‘net’ total 19% have met someone... whoops.

[Reagan Man]

Call it a miracle!

[traditional1]

"So, if Hunter goes from 1% to 2% we can call it a “100% surge”?

You would more likely be correct calling it a typo....but, yes, that would be a 100% surge.

For that to occur, the "support" for a candidate who can't win Nationally would not make any difference in the National election, even where he went from the 100,000 in Iowa that favored him, to 200,000, in that case. (Probably more like if 400 here on FR in the poll suddenly went to 800 overnight).

[Dog Gone]

If your "candidate" had a 15% increase in his poll numbers, would you consider that significant?

I dunno. Is that 2% increase in total support within the 5% stated margin of error for the poll?

Pretty sure it is.

[codercpc]

OOPS, sorry, he was in third place in July, just behind Rudy instead of Mike Huckabee.

[jellybean]

If the Republican caucus were being held today, and the candidates were: (Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, and Fred Thompson), who would you support?
NET LEANED VOTE:
	11/18/07	7/31/07
Mitt Romney	28	26
Mike Huckabee	24	8
Fred Thompson	15	13
Rudy Giuliani	13	14
John McCain	6	8

[2ndDivisionVet]

"Let me start by stating that I don’t have a candidate yet.

But, if it’s all about perception, then I don’t see how a 3rd place finish helps FDT. The rap on him before he announced was “Just wait till Fred gets in.” He was touted as the 2nd coming, and widely seen as the Saviour for the GOP in 2008. He seems to be trending his expectations down, and the most dedicated FredHead has to have noticed that he hasn’t really been on fire. I’m not saying that he won’t catch on fire, but so far he’s been trending down, and the last week he picked up a key endorsement, and he’s still in 3rd with a couple of point bump. At the same time Huckabee has been gaining. At what point does FDT have to get to the front and stay there, or at least be alone in 2nd place?"

I lived in Iowa most of my life and was involved in republican politics. The Iowa GOP is probably more heavily tilted towards evangelicals than many Southern parties, so it is no big surprise that a Baptist Preacher would be gaining on a Mormon Elder there. Since Mike Huckabee was little more than an asterisk a couple of months ago, voters know very little about his left-leaning track record in Arkansas. Most probably only know that he is pro-life and an ordained minister with an "Aw, shucks" genial manner. The voters of South Carolina and Florida, on the other hand, will be bombarded with negative facts about Huckabee, as the weeks go by.

[stephenjohnbanker]

BUMP

[traditional1]

It very well could be. I believe the purpose of the post was just to pull the chains of the dead-horse-beaters here, who won't let go of their dreams on their favored candidate, who has zero recognition or chance of winning in real life.

Also, the purpose of the poll is working as you can see here.

[W04Man]

I GOT A BETTER ONE:

FRED IS DEAD!

FRED VETS, SIGN UP TODAY AT:

TODAY IS FREDGIVING DAY

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Since Mike Huckabee was little more than an asterisk a couple of months ago, voters know very little about his left-leaning track record in Arkansas. Most probably only know that he is pro-life and an ordained minister with an “Aw, shucks” genial manner. “

“Aw shucks con man”

Wake up America! Huckabee is a turd!

[JohnnyZ]

19% have met someone. 6% have met Mitt.

[snarkybob]

“The Iowa GOP is probably more heavily tilted towards evangelicals than many Southern parties, so it is no big surprise that a Baptist Preacher would be gaining on a Mormon Elder there.”

Thanks for the reply, except I wasn’t asking about Huckabee. I’ve seen your posts before and know you to be behind FDT.
My question was how is a 3rd place finish in Iowa perceived to be a plus for FDT? Fred was trending upward before he officially entered the race, in the past month he’s mostly trended down, and the endorsement hasn’t as yet provided a major bump. At what point does FDT have to either take frontrunner status, or at the very least be alone in 2nd place?

[Bobbisox]

Fred surging in Iowa ping!!

Happy Thanksgiving to all!