Just got this release from the McCain campaign:
Exciting news: fresh polling numbers are just out from American Research Group, a national independent polling firm, for the three key primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
John McCain has surged ahead in all three states, posting his largest lead right here in the Palmetto State. Here are the new numbers:
- South Carolina: McCain 32%, Giuliani 23%, F. Thompson 13%, Romney 10%
- Iowa: McCain 25%, Giuliani 23%, Romney 16%
- New Hampshire: McCain 30%, Romney 23%, Giuliani 21%
First numbers I’ve seen since the debate here. Has anybody seen any others?
Related Posts
Here’s the national polls released today by Rasmussen. McCain has slid into third place with the analysis stating his immigration bill being the cause:
Election Polls 2008: Republican Presidential Primary Contenders
Date 5/29
Giul. 25%
Romn. 16%
McCain 15%
Thom. 12%
American Research Group also shows Bush’s approval rating at an abysmal 31% which will make it even more difficult for McCain as he continues to march in lockstep with Bush on immigration and Iraq. At some point, Bush may have to declare a personal favorite. That will be the death blow for whomever he chooses.
Brad,
I wonder if Sen. McCain will rethink his position on the flying of the Confederate flag from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds. Frankly it’s hard to set a flying flag to rest. If it’s flying it’s making political statements. Let’s keep going with our political action and debate to take down the flag from the flagpole. It will be great to get an exhibit in the State Museum. What’s next?
Thanks for all.
Regards,
Michael Rodgers
Columbia, SC
Why do people keep saying that about McCain and Iraq? McCain is not “in lockstep” (my personal nomination for one of the most overused phrases in politics) with Bush on the war.
Bush FINALLY started moving in McCain’s position — send more troops. It took him way too long, and it’s not as many as it should be, but what’s McCain supposed to do — change his position just because it now synchs with Bush’s? Come on…
As for immigration, both McCain and Bush apparently want to get something done on that. I think Bush just wants to be seeing as getting SOMETHING done on ANYTHING, but there is nothing in this for McCain but the fact that he believes it’s the right thing to do. It’s not going to help him get the nomination, and he knows that.
Oh, please, Brad. Both you and McCain are enablers of Bush.
At least the Dems tried to legislatively put a time limit on the meat grinder.
You and McCain simply want to increase the flow of American blood down the Iraq drain.
Here’s a link to an L A Times article which details just how perversely counter-productive our Iraq Occupation is to the defeat of Al Qaeda. Our occupation of Iraq has actually made that country a great source of funding for Al Qaeda.
Are you really so dense as to believe that the flow of money will stop as long as we’re in Iraq?
Stop. That was a rhetorical question. I know that the answer already.
People who call the present war a “meat grinder” apparently are fairly recent products of the public school system and therefore have absolutely no historical perspective on what real wars have cost this country in times past. The losses we’ve taken in Iraq, while horrible, pale in comparison to the number of lives lost in World War Two or Korea. While the threat we face today is as dark and evil as it was then, we sadly don’t have the will to win today that we had then, and the mischaracterization of our losses in Iraq are symptomatic of that lack of will. Todays’ “cut-and-runners” seem to think that history began when they were born, and that any loss of life in a just struggle means that we ought to immediately rethink our position with an eye towards ‘making nice” with evil people who cut off the heads of others. We are right to fight terrorism wherever we find it, because its’ forces have vowed to come after us. And they’ve demonstrated that they will do so in New York and other places. Ed
Ed, your comments remind me of the bizarre ending sentence of Maureen Dowd’s latest column. After a reasonable erudite and calm discussion of Thucydides and what his writings might have to tell us today, she ends with this:
What on Earth is a sane person supposed to say in response to that? How about, "Not to Athens?" But there’s no point in answering, because none of this is about reason.
Brad, you talk about reason. Yet you never, in a reasonable way, support the Iraq war with anything factual. It’s all about “feelings” with you war supporters. You “feel” like it’s the right thing to continue with stay-the-course (which is exactly what the so-called “surge” really is). You “feel” like Petraeus is the right man to get the job done. You “feel” like the region will deteriorate if we leave. No evidence. No facts. Just feelings.
I’m sick to death of any criticism from war-mongers (and that’s what you are) that do not, can not, will not ever show some evidence that continued military intervention in Iraq can achieve a “reasonable” outcome. Show me the evidence. Produce it or shut the hell up! You have none of course but that doesn’t stop the whole bunch of you from sending more troops to slaughter based on feelings. All the evidence, history, studies suggest staying in Iraq makes Al-Qaeda stronger. Yet you persist. Why? It makes no sense. None.
The dems of course are now co-conspirators in this whole mess. The are now in lock-step with the president on this disaster. But at least now we have a clear deadline to show progress: September 30. Unless sectarian violence and American troop deaths are way down for the month of September the political tide will be irresistable. Congress WILL cut funding. Four years too late. And that’s a tragedy. For those people who base their political thinking on feelings alone, Brad and John McCain for instance, they will never get it.
Well, that’s an interesting way of turning things around.
What sorts of “facts” are you seeking? I mean, let’s say this was a battle you supported. What sorts of facts would you present? I’m just trying to figure out what it is I’m not telling you so that I can tell you — assuming that’s humanly possible. We’re talking about the future, and extrapolating what will happen from things we’ve seen in history. You work it out one way; I work it out another.
The only way to give you hard facts about future events is to get my hands on a newspaper from 10 years from now. I confess I don’t know how to do that.
Well, gosh-golly-gee, that’s a great counter-argument: Brad can’t tell the future so it’s unreasonable to expect him to justify Americans dying in an Iraqi civil war.
How about some demonstrable progress, Brad, after four years? The neo-cons are so fond of WWII comparisons– how long did it take the Allies to decisively defeat two of the major military powers in the world?
What a silly dodge.
BTW, did you catch this McClatchy article about your pal, Loserman?
IRAQ
Lieberman talks to troops in Baghdad
BAGHDAD, Iraq – Spc. David Williams, 22, of Boston, Mass., had two note cards in his pocket Wednesday afternoon as he waited for Sen. Joseph Lieberman. Williams serves in the 82nd Airborne Division from Fort Bragg, N.C., the first of the five “surge” brigades to arrive in Iraq, and he was chosen to join the Independent from Connecticut for lunch at a U.S. field base in Baghdad.
The night before, 30 other soldiers crowded around him with questions for the senator.
He wrote them all down. At the top of his note card was the question he got from nearly every one of his fellow soldiers:
“When are we going to get out of here?”
[Interestingly, Holy Joe’s answer wasn’t reported.]
The rest was a laundry list. When would they have upgraded Humvees that could withstand the armor-penetrating weapons that U.S. officials claim are from Iran? When could they have body armor that was better in hot weather?
Williams missed six months of his girlfriend’s pregnancy when he was given six days’ notice to return to Iraq for his second tour. He also missed his baby boy’s birth. Three weeks ago, he went home and saw his first child.
“He looks just like me,” he said. “I didn’t want to come back. . . . We’re waiting to get blown up.”
Williams wasn’t sure if he’d say how he really felt. But if he could, he’d ask about body armor.
“I don’t want him to snap his fingers to get things fixed,” Williams said, referring to Lieberman. “But he has influence.”
Next to him, Spc. Will Hedin, 21, of Chester, Conn., thought about what he was going to say.
“We’re not making any progress,” Hedin said, as he recalled a comrade who was shot by a sniper last week. “It just seems like we drive around and wait to get shot at.”
“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
James Madison
I read Baker’s Iraq study report that suggests descussions with Iran and Syria along with timetables. Seems reasonable to me. The stay-the-coursers, including Mr. Lock-Stop McCain, reject it, insisting instead that chaos will erupt in the middle-east if we withdraw. This, in spite of the fact that our Vietnam experience (also Isreal in Lebanon, USSR in Afghanistan, Britain in Iraq circa 1920) suggests nothing of the sort will happen. Facts Brad, not dodges. Supporting this war can only be viewed as an irrational “religion” based on faith and nothing more.
You’re wrong, Brad.
There IS something in it for McCain by supporting Bush’s immigration plan – $$ and support from Bush backers and the national level of the GOP.
At a function in AZ I overheard I conversation I’m sure I wasn’t supposed to hear. I was standing outside the building, around the corner, when 2 people stepped outside for a conversation. They didn’t know I was there.
I won’t name names, but from what I heard, it’s quite clear that who gets support and how much they get depends on how well their positions mesh with GWB.
All,
Regarding facts about Iraq, I think that the This American Life program (333: The Center for Lessons Learned) from this week is extremely interesting.
http://www.thisamericanlife.com/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=333
We’re trying to perform reconstruction, since “major combat operations are over.” And how are we doing it? Do we know what works? It would be great if George Bush (or John McCain or anyone) would explain clearly what the surge is all about — more of the same or a new approach based on lessons learned?
We hear over and over — and in The State today (http://www.thestate.com/426/story/80587.html) — about people who are against the War In Iraq. What we’re desperately in need of now is a thorough discussion of what to do now, not a thumbs up / thumbs down about Bush or any candidate.
We don’t know what the plan is, and we should and must know. We must know whether similar plans have been successful in the past, and we must estimate what the appropriate chances are for success and what the cost of the plan is likely to be. Otherwise how can we truly judge appropriately?
Regards,
Michael Rodgers
Columbia, SC