Who really leads the Presidential race?

A little discussion here about news of a recent ARG poll of Presidential primary preference in South Carolina, on both sides of the party line. According to the respondents surveyed, if the Presidential primaries were held today, they'd vote for ...

REPUBLICANS

John McCain 35%
Rudy Giuliani 28%
Newt Gingrich 15%
Mitt Romney 5%
Mike Huckabee 1%
Undecided 12%

DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton 34%
John Edwards 31%
Barack Obama 10%
John Kerry 3%
Dennis Kucinich 2%
Joseph Biden 2%
Wesley Clark 2%
Bill Richardson 1%
Undecided 15%

Of course, a poll this early only reflects present standings, and it is very likely to change as many candidates still have yet to do the first serious marketing efforts, or to enter the mass media spotlights. However, it is interesting to note that McCain's numbers haven't lagged much from the percentage of the vote he earned in the Presidential primary here in February 2000 - six years ago.

Along with McCain, Rudy Guiliani, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, have enjoyed large advantages in terms of exposure that should normally be expected to boost their early numbers - McCain and Edwards from past campaigns that ran strongly here, and Clinton and Giuliani with years of media exposure.

In general, most political polling tends to get close to the actual numbers, so I tend to, more-or-less, believe what I see in terms of general trends.

As a graduate student, we're encouraged not to see findings of research as final, but rather as the first step to additional research. As such (and as somewhat of a political hack), I'm curious as to how deep this support goes. One way, and the race is already well on its way to over, and the other presents a world of opportunity for the right candidate who is willing to do what it takes to move the numbers.

I've been in politics long enough to know anything is possible, and not knowing the numbers myself, I'm not going to venture a guess. After two failed marriages, I've learned that, among other things, I'm not as good a mind-reader as I thought.

Having said my piece, I will now leave the floor open to those of you who'd like to share your opinion as to who leads the races, or if anyone really does ...

7 Response to "Who really leads the Presidential race?"

  1. Moye 10/1/07 09:14
    As part of our conversation several days ago went on my part Mr. McCain may not be my first choice but I do believe he is the candidate that can beat Hillary or whoever the democrats throw at us. The only other person I see that can win is Rudy and he will not make it out of the southern primaries. I reckon it is McCain. Being a Bush person sometimes it is hard to say that.
  2. Anonymous 10/1/07 10:13
    brownback is gonna kick the crap out of all of them, when all is said and done!
  3. west_rhino 10/1/07 10:28
    Ditto Moye, we've often been conned into the pragmatic choice of electability versus capacity and ability to do the job and to lead.

    I'd expound on James Bond Stockdale, Bob Smith, J Danforth Quayle and Dr. Alan Keyes as four that were and are (for the three living) able to take the helm of the ship of state, in some cases, even more than members fo the current field.
  4. Anonymous 10/1/07 12:04
    keyes and smith are wingnuts. look at how keyes lived off campaign donations, and how he's acted in his perennial Senate bids.

    he's a flake, and anyone who would back him either doesn't know what he is, or they are just as flaky
  5. west_rhino 10/1/07 12:27
    And Stockdale and Quayle were, despite IQs known to be higher than those of both Clintons and Gore, played as morons by a complicitious press. Add a left coast genius is nerdy mindset, flaunted in Real Genius and Weird Science, the pitch is not to give due credit to candidates.

    As recently as '04, John Kerry, "supergenius" (owner of a lower GPR from Yale than George Bush) was spun as the benevolent diletente, rather than the pragmatic gigilo...
  6. Minto McGill 10/1/07 19:31
    These polls are suspect. The same pollster published polls in Iowa that are way out of sync with every other Iowa poll.

    In SC, Hillary will get smoked - definitely by Edwards, and possibly by Obama as well. No way Hillary gets more than 25% of vote. Edwards gets at least 40%.

    On the GOP side, I suspect McCain is the leader at present. But, Romney is doing all the right things will probably end up at least in 2nd if he isn't there already. Rudy will get hammered in SC much worse than McCain did in 00. Rudy is too liberal for many SC DEMOCRATS. He doesn't have a prayer with SC Republicans.
  7. Earl Capps 11/1/07 00:39
    not to question your credibility, but if you run across any polling which differs greatly, please pass it along. it could certainly add some depth to this discussion.

    if you show me polling that challenges what that poll says, then so be it. right now, i'm neutral and unaffiliated. if i wasn't, then it wouldn't be right to post criticisms of some of the GOP presidential candidates. at least not without mentioning my interests.

    today's poll is no indicator of what to expect. it is simply a measure of where the candidates are at, and depending on how the poll was conducted and the results, it can point out directions for the various candidates to take.

    all polling is going to wobble, so if i see one poll showing joe smith has 40% and the other saying 44%, I figure they're both close.

    but if i see a poll that says 20 and others say 30, then i've gotta wonder.

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts!

To post a comment without having a Blogger account, select "Name/URL", put your name in, but leave the URL line blank. Email me if you'd like to comment, but need help making it work.