Category Archives: Public opinion

Do you really think Obama’s that much ahead?

I don’t. And even if he is, it’s a long way until the election. But I’m curious what y’all think of the Bloomberg survey everybody’s talking about:

Barack Obama has opened a significant lead over Mitt Romney in a Bloomberg National Poll that reflects the presumed Republican nominee’s weaknesses more than the president’s strengths.

Obama leads Romney 53 percent to 40 percent among likely voters, even as the public gives him low marks on handling the economy and the deficit, and six in 10 say the nation is headed down the wrong track, according to the poll conducted June 15- 18.

The survey shows Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, has yet to repair the damage done to his image during the Republican primary. Thirty-nine percent of Americans view him favorably, about the same as when he announced his presidential candidacy last June, while 48 percent see him unfavorably — a 17-percentage point jump during a nomination fight dominated by attacks ads. A majority of likely voters, 55 percent, view him as more out of touch with average Americans compared with 36 percent who say the president is more out of touch.

I haven’t seen anything happen out there that suggests we’ve moved away from our dead-heat impasse in American politics. But maybe it looks different from outside SC…

All I can think is that Congress just hasn’t been in the news all that much lately

Gallup finds that Congress is slightly less wildly unpopular than it was last time they checked:

PRINCETON, NJ — Americans’ approval of Congress is at 17% in June, similar to the 15% in May, and continuing the generally low levels seen since last June.

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job? Recend trend, 2011-2012

Congress’ latest job approval reading, based on Gallup interviewing conducted June 7-10, is modestly higher than the all-time low of 10% recorded in February. Similarly, disapproval of Congress, now at 79%, is the same as in May, and not far below the record-low 86% recorded in February, and in December 2011.

Congressional job approval has generally been low for years, with readings as low as 18% in the summer of 2007 and 14% in July 2008. It did improve in 2009, as Barack Obama entered his initial “honeymoon” phase as president, with his own job approval ratings in the 60% range. In March 2009, Congress’ job approval reached 39%, the highest it had been since February 2005. But that period of relative positivity did not last, and in 2010, 2011, and so far this year, Congress’ approval ratings have routinely been below 20%. Approval of Congress has averaged 14% so far in 2012.

The only explanation I can think of is that we haven’t heard much from Congress lately. That would tend to reduce the level of utter contempt in which most of us hold the institution.

But watch — the Midlands’ two members, Joe Wilson and Jim Clyburn — will be re-elected, practically by acclamation.

Gallup: Veterans are cause of the gender gap

Here’s an interesting fact I didn’t know before.

Turns out that the “gender gap” that has Mitt Romney doing better among men and Barack Obama doing better among women (the usual pattern for a generation, at least) is less a gender thing, and more a matter of whether men have served in the military or not. According to Gallup:

PRINCETON, NJ — U.S. veterans, about 13% of the adult population and consisting mostly of older men, support Mitt Romney over Barack Obama for president by 58% to 34%, while nonveterans give Obama a four-percentage-point edge.

These data, from an analysis of Gallup Daily tracking interviews conducted April 11-May 24, show that 24% of all adult men are veterans, compared with 2% of adult women.

Obama and Romney are tied overall at 46% apiece among all registered voters in this sample. Men give Romney an eight-point edge, while women opt for Obama over Romney by seven points. It turns out that the male skew for Romney is driven almost entirely by veterans. Romney leads by one point among nonveteran men, contrasted with the 28-point edge Romney receives among male veterans.

The small percentage of female veterans in the U.S., in contrast to their male counterparts, do not differ significantly in their presidential vote choice from the vast majority of women who are not veterans…

Here’s a graph:

Interesting. I wonder what the long-term implications of this will be. Most of the men who have served in the military are older than I am. Twenty years from now, will much of the gender gap have disappeared, in favor of Democrats? I don’t know. I’d need to understand better why this veteran gap exists to be able to answer that.

Are women fed up with Democratic pandering?

Tom Edsall makes some interesting observations in this piece in The New York Times from over the weekend. If you haven’t read it, you should.

His topic is the impact of Barack Obama’s rather overt bids for the renewed affections for key Democratic constituencies and interest groups defined by demographic identity. Unsurprisingly, Edsall finds that the voting public at large is suspicious of such moves. For instance, while the public is evenly split on the subject of gay “marriage,” there is widespread cynicism toward the president’s embrace of the notion:

Some evidence that Obama must walk a fine line as he seeks majority backing can be found in the May 15 CBS News/New York Times poll, which showed that 67 percent of respondents said Obama came out for same-sex marriage “mostly for political reasons,” while just 24 percent said he made the decision “mostly because he thinks it is right.”

But the really surprising thing he finds is the way, after all the gyrations Democrats have gone through in recent months, including the “war on women” and other absurd rhetoric, the president has lost ground among women:

In an equally troublesome finding for Obama, the Times poll recorded a dramatic drop in the level of support for Obama among women, with Romney actually pulling ahead, 46-44. Obama’s support among female voters has fallen from 49 to 44 percent over the past two months, while Romney’s rose three points.

Stephanie Cutter, deputy manager of the Obama campaign, has challenged the accuracy of the Times poll, arguing that the methodology – calling people who have been previously surveyed,  known as a “panel back” — resulted in “a biased sample.”

But even if the poll findings can be reasonably disputed, they still suggest that Obama’s aggressive bid to strengthen his support among women may be backfiring. Separate polling by Marquette Law School in Wisconsin shows Obama holding a strong, but declining advantage among women voters. In February, Obama had a 21 percentage point lead among women, 56-35; by mid-May, his margin among women had fallen to 9 points, 49-40….

Could it be that you just can’t go past a certain point in pandering to women without insulting their collective intelligence? It would appear so…

Turns out America likes Edwards less than I do

If y’all will recall, I experienced an unexpected, and not entirely pleasant, moment in the national spotlight back in 2007 when I wrote a column headlined, “Why I see John Edwards as a big phony.”

I caught a lot of heat about it at the time. I later had the gratification of having many people tell me I’d been right all along, even though what was learned about him later was somewhat different from what I was accusing him of. Nevertheless, all of it spoke to his general failure to be what he represented himself to be.

But even I, who first started raising questions about the guy in 2003, was slightly started to read this this morning, as Edwards’ trial started:

(CBS News) With opening arguments in the trial of former U.S. senator and presidential candidate John Edwards set to begin on on Monday, a CBS News/New York Times poll shows that public opinion of him has plummeted since he was a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2007. Now, he is now most known for cheating on his wife.

The CBS/NYT poll reveals that only 3 percent of those polled hold a favorable view of Edwards, who has been charged with misusing campaign funds. That is down from 30 percent in 2007 when he was running for the Democratic nomination, which is also the last time the question was asked among registered voters.

Since 2007, Edwards’ unfavorable ratings have risen eleven points, from 30 percent to 41 percent today. However, half of those polled are undecided or don’t have an opinion of Edwards.

Women, however, especially dislike Edwards, with just 2 percent holding a favorable view of him compared to 45 percent who view him unfavorably…

And who can blame them?

But 2 percent? It almost makes me feel sorry for the guy. Almost.

Gas prices pull GOP hopefuls even with Obama

Put this in the “maybe Democracy isn’t such a good idea after all” department…

This from The Washington Post:

Disapproval of President Obama’s handling of the economy is heading higher — alongside gasoline prices — as a record number of Americans now give the president “strongly” negative reviews on the 2012 presidential campaign’s most important issue, according to anew Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Increasingly pessimistic views of Obama’s performance on the economy — and on the federal budget deficit — come despite a steadily brightening employment picture and other signs of economic improvement, and they highlight the political sensitivity of rising gas prices.

The potential political con­sequences are clear, with the ­rising public disapproval reversing some of the gains the president had made in hypothetical general-election matchups against possible Republican rivals for the White House. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former senator Rick Santorum (Pa.) now both run about evenly with Obama. The findings come just five weeks after Obama appeared to be getting a boost from the improving economy.

Gas prices are a main culprit: Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they disapprove of the way the president is handling the situation at the pump, where rising prices have already hit hard. Just 26 percent approve of his work on the issue, his lowest rating in the poll. Most Americans say higher prices are already taking a toll on family finances, and nearly half say they think that prices will continue to rise, and stay high…

So basically, when gasoline prices head back down, suddenly Obama will be a great president and get credit for the improving economy? Yes, probably. Which shows how ridiculous this stuff gets.

And then, if the president’s new best friend Israel goes ahead and attacks Iran, and that leads to even higher gas prices, suddenly he’ll be a loser again, right? Yep, and the GOP candidates will probably be criticizing him for not being supportive enough of Israel’s actions, while at the same time they will pound him over the natural economic effect of Israel’s action. And the voters will probably swallow that, too.

Democracy is the worst system, except for all the others. Democracy is the worst system, except for all the others. Democracy is the worst system, except for all the others…

I’m just going to keep saying it, until I feel better…

Santorum catching up to Romney in national poll

OK, so now it’s hard to dismiss Rick Santorum’s victories as just isolated anomalies here and there.

A new New York Times/CBS News poll has him catching up to the erstwhile front-runner nationally:

After his surprise triple victories in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri, Rick Santorum has begun soaring among Republican primary voters, erasing Mitt Romney’s lead in the race for the party’s presidential nomination.

A New York Times/CBS News poll released Tuesday morning showed Mr. Santorum surging among Republican primary voters nationwide, lifted by support among conservatives, evangelical Christians and Tea Party supporters.

In the new poll, 30 percent of Republican primary voters say they support Mr. Santorum, compared with 27 percent for Mr. Romney. While Mr. Santorum’s lead is essentially a tie with Mr. Romney because it is within the margin of sampling error, it reflects a significant jump for him from earlier polls.

The two other major candidates are further behind, at 12 percent for Ron Paul and 10 percent for Newt Gingrich. Mr. Gingrich’s numbers have fallen sharply since his win in South Carolina on Jan. 21…

Newt who?

And of course, therein lies the cautionary tale for Santorum. Several weeks back (starting the week before the SC primary), we saw Gingrich catching up to Romney in national polls.

All Romney can say in defense of his status is that he is always the guy the other people are talking about catching.

So what do you think? Is this real, or just another one of these whack-a-mole upsurges of the “not-Romney” flavor of the week?

Post poll shows Obama pulling ahead of Romney

The matchup shows President Obama being favored over Mitt Romney, 52 percent to 43 percent. Most troublesome for Republicans, I would think, is this passage from the WashPost story:

Overall, 55 percent of those who are closely following the campaign say they disapprove of what the GOP candidates have been saying. By better than 2 to 1, Americans say the more they learn about Romney, the less they like him. Even among Republicans, as many offer negative as positive assessments of him on this question. Judgments about former House speaker Newt Gingrich, who denounced Romney on Saturday night in Nevada, are about 3 to 1 negative.

Meanwhile, the president’s recent remarks are better reviewed. Among the roughly 6 in 10 Americans who heard or read about the president’s State of the Union address, 57 percent say they approve of most of what he laid out….

Take a look at that Gingrich upturn, will ya?

This image was Tweeted out today by PollingReport.com, and I was really struck at what support for Gingrich looks like when you represent it on a fever chart.

See the red line? That’s Gingrich. And it all happened in less than a week.

Just when we’d all been debated to death, all of a sudden a couple of them make all the difference.

OK, maybe it wasn’t entirely the debates — there had been movement along about Jan. 12-13. But most of this was last week.

I don’t know when I’ve seen a surge like that…

It’s not just SC; Gingrich surges ahead in Florida

This morning I was on Tom Finneran’s radio show in Boston for the third time in a week, and the subject turned to Florida, and I said something like it was unclear what would happen there — Romney was supposed to be strong. But then, he was supposed to be strong in South Carolina the week before last.

Well, it’s not unclear now. A Tweet from Rasmussen brought this to my attention exactly an hour later:

Less than two weeks ago, Mitt Romney had a 22-point lead in Florida, but that’s ancient history in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. Following his big win in South Carolina on Saturday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich now is on top in Florida by nine.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Florida Republican Primary Voters, taken Sunday evening, finds Gingrich earning 41% of the vote with Romney in second at 32%. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum runs third with 11%, while Texas Congressman Ron Paul attracts support from eight percent (8%). Nine percent (9%) remain undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here).

So the trend Gallup was picking up on late last week has accelerated. As the country watched those two debates last week, something crystallized in the minds of angry Republicans and Tea Partiers all over the country: Their anger had found its voice, and it belonged to Newt Gingrich.

That’s all right, just as long as Nikki is enjoying herself

And she is. She is having a high old time stumping for Mitt Romney. That’s because there are national news TV cameras on him all the time. And when she’s on the podium with him, guess what — she’s on national TV, too! Which is the end-all and be-all for her.

So let’s be happy for her.

Of course, it’s not doing Mitt Romney a bit of good. I wonder if he knows that? I wonder if he’s thinking, Here I am, stuck on the stage with her again, and she’s introducing me and introducing me and introducing me, and how much longer do I have to keep this phony grin on my face, the one I’ve patented, the one in which my teeth are smiling but my eyes look like I’m frightened?

Or, is he thinking, She’s the governor! Of this critical state! Her standing up with me here is good, right? Right!

Well, he doesn’t have to trust his gut any more, because the numbers are in:

The poll found 89 percent of likely primary voters knew Haley had endorsed Romney. Of those who did know of Haley’s endorsement, the overwhelming majority — 71 percent — said it made no difference in who they support. Of the rest, 21 percent said Haley’s endorsement made them less likely to vote for Romney; only 8 percent said it made them more likely to vote for the former Massachusetts governor…

So what’re you gonna do, Mitt? You’re kinda stuck, huh?

Here’s what he’s gonna do: Keep grinning that ungrin or his, and keep telling himself he’s far enough ahead in the polls that it doesn’t matter.

Historic national milestone: Americans more disgusted with Congress than ever

This just in:

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that a record 84 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing, with almost two-thirds saying they “disapprove strongly.” Just 13 percent of Americans approve of how things are going after the 112th Congress’s first year of action, solidifying an unprecedented level of public disgust that has both sides worried about their positions less than 10 months before voters decide their fates.

It has been nearly four years since even 30 percent expressed approval of Congress, according to the Post-ABC survey, and support hasn’t recovered from the historic low it reached last fall.

In the face of the public dismay, House Republicans and Senate Democrats are fashioning less far-reaching agendas for the year ahead, in part to avoid the bitter political showdowns of 2011 and also to best position themselves for the fall elections…

So basically they’ve decided, “The country is right where we want it. No need to do anything else. Let’s sit back and let the voters reward us by re-electing us.”

Some of y’all were urging me to run for office earlier today, although perhaps ironically. Is this the moment for the UnParty to make its move, at long last? That “unprecedented level of public disgust” sounds like a call to arms for somebody, anyway.

Apparently there’s ennui in Iowa, as well

Over the last couple of months, I’ve mentioned on numerous occasions that I’m perceiving a certain… lack of enthusiasm… over the GOP presidential nominating process in South Carolina this year.

Today, at the very height of hoopla in that neck of the woods, I see an indication that there is a similar dearth of excitement in Iowa (thanks to Andrew Sullivan for bringing this Philip Klein piece to my attention):

Those following the Iowa caucuses from home, hearing a steady stream of reports such as this about “packed rooms” that are “standing room only” with people still waiting outside, may be getting the impression that there’s a groundswell of enthusiasm for this year’s candidates that will drive turnout for the caucuses to stratospheric levels.

But don’t be fooled. The truth is that the venues candidates are holding events at this year are much smaller than in 2008, back when some candidates were filling large ballrooms or even small arenas. When going into a Barack Obama event in 2008, it wouldn’t be unusual have to get there early and still park a five or 10 minute walk away from the actual rally site, only to come into a massive venue where crowds in the thousands were going wild. Even on the Republican side, Mike Huckabee was filling larger venues.

Yet yesterday, reporters, photograhers and a few actual patrons were packed into a tiny diner at a Mitt Romney event in Atlantic, Iowa. True, later that evening, he attracted hundreds to a town hall-style building in Council Bluffs, but it was still a relatively small venue.

On Saturday, Newt Gingrich squeezed people into a diner in Council Bluffs and a small corner of a Coca Cola bottling factory in Atlantic.

At the same time, the audiences seem a lot more subdued than in 2008 — less shouting and sign waving….

Clever of the candidates’ handlers to make it look like they’re in demand by shrinking the venues. But I’m grateful to hear that this certain lack of vitality is not just a South Carolina phenomenon — and even more importantly, not in my imagination.

The causes? I haven’t sorted that out entirely, but among the causes I suspect are lack of enchantment with the field, an ongoing identity crisis in the GOP (are they about fiscal libertarianism? or is it values? and what happened to a muscular foreign policy?) and a general gut feeling, fairly broadly held, that the incumbent will win in the end.

The table is open to entertain other theories — as well as evidence to the contrary regarding this diminution of enthusiasm.

THAT’S why so many liberals call themselves ‘progressives’

I could tell right away that this Pew research wasn’t done in South Carolina: 50 percent having a positive impression of the word “liberal,” as opposed to only 39 percent negative?

Not around here, where it’s the most common epithet hurled — so common that it seems inconceivable to me that it has any sort of force any more. I mean, in communications from such people as, say, Joe Wilson, it’s used more or less as often as commas.

Of course, even nationally, “conservative” is viewed as positive by a larger margin — 62 to 30 percent.

What struck me was that “progressive” — which is used synonymously in this country with “liberal” — is viewed positively by an even larger margin, 67-22 percent. (Again, I suspect “conservative” would poll better in SC than “progressive.”)

No wonder it’s so popular among liberals. Oh, and get this — the major difference in attitude between “liberal” and “progressive” is among Republicans. For years, I’ve wondered why Democrats think the other side is dumb enough to fall for such a minor semantic change. I guess it’s because of surveys such as this one.

Oh, and in a development that Pew apparently thought was significant, “socialism” remains unpopular…

What will happen in Iowa? And do we care?

So now it’s Mitt Romney (the guy who, over the holidays, was spoken of increasingly as inevitable), Ron Paul (the guy everyone knows will never be the nominee, much less president) and Rick Santorum (the guy from the back of the pack who lost his last election in his home state) running neck-and-neck in Iowa:

Months of campaigning came down to a few final hours Monday as GOP hopefuls made their final argument to an unpredictable Iowa electorate, with polls showing tightly bunched leaders on the eve of the all-important caucuses.

In a two-day tracking poll from Public Policy Polling released late Sunday night, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum were in a virtual dead heat. The numbers: Paul is at 20 percent, Romney at 19 percent, Santorum at 18 percent, Newt Gingrich at 14 percent, Rick Perry at 10 percent and Michele Bachmann at 8 percent…

And again, I find myself wondering, to what extent should we even care what happens in Iowa? Remember, Mike Huckabee won here last time.

What fools the calendar doth make of us, even when we know better.

Huntsman passes Ron Paul, climbs to 3rd in N.H.

Jon Huntsman, back when he was spending more time in SC.

What does “bumped” mean to you? When I saw this Tweet this morning:

Huntsman bumped to third place with 13 percent in New Hampshire poll http://bit.ly/tChRZR

… I thought they were saying he had been higher than 3rd, and had been “bumped” down — like getting bumped from a flight or something. Which would have been news to me that he had been doing that well.

But what they meant was that he was “bumped up,” and is now behind only Romney and Gingrich. Which, actually, was also news to me:

A new poll found Jon Huntsman with 13 percent support from likely Republican and independent voters surveyed in New Hampshire.

The 7News/Suffolk University poll released late Wednesday found Huntsman in third place among likely Republican and New Hampshire voters, trailing Mitt Romney (with 38 percent) and Newt Gingrich (with 20). The survey’s findings are the best yet for Huntsman in the Granite State. Previously, his best poll in New Hampshire showed him in fourth place at 11 percent, behind Romney, Gingrich and Ron Paul….

The modest gains in the 7News/Suffolk University poll reflect Huntsman’s near-exclusive focus on performing well in the early primary state. Huntsman had previously polled at 9 percent when 7News/Suffolk University surveyed the GOP primary field with the same questions last month.

Huntsman is staking his presidential campaign’s future on New Hampshire. He hopes that if he can perform well there, he can use the momentum to help him win successive victories in later states….

So now you know what Huntsman’s been up to. I was wondering, since I hadn’t seen him around here lately.

It seems to be paying off for him. Although it seems late for him to make such a move.

Wouldn’t it be something if, at the last minute, Republican voters said, “Hey, why don’t we nominate somebody who has a chance to win?” That would be one for the books, given the way they’ve been acting lately.

It’s particularly interesting given how well Ron Paul is doing in Iowa. Paul, of course, represents a trend whereby Republicans are running even farther away from electability. Huntsman represents the opposite.

Tell Her Majesty that I just don’t KNOW…

Yesterday, two representatives from Her Majesty’s Government came to see me to talk politics, as they periodically do.

It can be fun to play the local expert, whether for national or foreign media, or in service of the Special Relationship — especially if you’re an Anglophile like me. Maybe I can’t see “Tinker, Tailor” where I live (yet), but I can contribute to a report that might, just might, cross a latter-day George Smiley’s desk. OK, so it’s not very likely, but hey, I can dream…

The temptation is to sound like you really know what’s going on, even if you don’t — like The Tailor of Panama, or Our Man in Havana. But I’m not the type to mislead HMG. Perish the thought.

So yesterday, I had to tell my visitors that I just can’t explain what’s happening in the South Carolina primary, and therefore can’t predict anything. And that’s the unfortunate truth.

I don’t know why Newt Gingrich is suddenly leading by double digits in polls in South Carolina, other than it’s his turn. I don’t know whether that trend will continue, because I don’t understand the dynamics that led her to this point.

And one of the problems is this: I’m not hearing from people who are Gingrich fans. I have to acknowledge that maybe there are things I don’t hear, or am not exposed to, because I’m no longer the editorial page editor of the state’s largest newspaper. Maybe that’s why I feel like I understand what’s happening now less than I understood the situation four years ago.

But you know what? So much of what I was hearing and seeing then was through my blog. I wrote relatively little about national politics in the paper, so most of my interactions in that area were online. And to the extent that I was seen as someone engaged in writing about the presidential race, it was online. For instance, a number of the national and international media types who were interviewing me initially didn’t even know I worked at the newspaper; they had come to me as a widely-read blogger.

And I’m more widely read online now than I was then. My monthly page views are at least four times what they were then. And yet…

  • My traffic hasn’t been steadily climbing in the months leading up to the primary, the way it did four years ago. It hit a peak in August, then dropped a bit.
  • I  haven’t had a request for an interview from national or international sources since I spoke with E.J. Dionne at the start of November, which would be weird anytime, but especially with a primary coming up.
  • I just don’t run into people who are excited about the upcoming primary, either online or in person. Think about it — beyond Doug’s perpetual support for Ron Paul, who have you seen here who is pumped about a candidate? Well, it’s like that in the wider world. Quick — name five people you know who are eager to vote for Newt? You probably can’t. I know I can’t. People may be saying they’ll support Newt when a pollster asks, but they’re not going around bubbling with public excitement about it.
  • There were several national and international advocacy groups that had set up SC offices for the duration four years ago — and they had done it months before now. By the summer of 2007, they were up and running. This time, I know of one such group that has started a local office in recent months — One, the Bono group. I know a lot of nonprofits are far less flush with money than they were then, but it’s still remarkable.

Yes, I know that the buzz in SC should only be half of what it was four years ago, since only one party is having a primary. But it’s really much less than half. Things just feel dead by comparison.

I think one reason for that is expressed in that same Winthrop poll I referenced above. It also shows that 59 percent of those polled — and that includes Republicans — believe that Obama’s going to be elected. That, combined with a lower energy level (compared to last year) among Tea Partiers, has led to a really subdued campaign.

In a normal campaign, the fact that Newt is so far ahead, this late, would mean that he had it more or less locked up. This year, I don’t know. The polls give so easily this year, and can so easily take away. And this is Newt Gingrich — a guy with a well-known talent for self-destruction.

Normally, at this point, South Carolinians would be coalescing around the Republican most likely to with the nomination — usually, the establishment. A Bush. Bob Dole. John McCain. Now, the very definition of what it is to be a Republican — much less a South Carolina Republican — is more up in the air than at any time I remember.

So it seems to me there’s a better-than-even chance that SC won’t pick the eventual winner this time. The whole process is too wobbly, and less susceptible to steadying factors than in the past. And if that happens, there will be even less energy, and much less national attention, focused on the SC GOP primary four years from now.

But I just don’t know. When it’s hard to explain why what is already happening is happening, it’s very hard to predict what will happen next.

Today’s news haiku: Nikki’s poll numbers

Nikki Haley is now less popular in South Carolina than Barack Obama:

South Carolinians have soured on Nikki Haley, turning the relatively new governor from a national Tea Party favorite into a chief executive struggling to maintain support among members of her own party, the latest Winthrop University poll shows.

Only 34.6 percent of those surveyed — 1,073 registered S.C. Democrats, Republicans and independents — said they approved of Haley’s job performance, according to the poll. Far more — 43 percent — said they disapprove of the way the Republican is handling her job as governor. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus 2.9 percent percentage points.

Haley’s approval rating is lower than that of President Barack Obama, a Democrat, according to the poll. Obama has a 44.8 percent approval rating in strongly Republican South Carolina, according to the Winthrop poll….

This has to be a bitter pill for Nikki, since she ran against Barack Obama. That was her whole strategy. What’s she going to do next time? Will she be reduced to actually running against the Democratic nominee for governor? Stay tuned.

In the meantime, in a totally unrelated development, I was reading something about bad poetry over the weekend, and it inspired me to revive my “news haiku” feature.

Oh, stop yer bellyachin’! You don’t have to read it if you don’t want to. Even I admit this isn’t good haiku (where, for instance, is the nature reference?). But I thought it had a certain poignancy to it:

She’s Nikki Haley,
our shiny, national star!
Why don’t we love her?

Liberals like to laugh; conservatives dig cars (but here’s the kicker: both are big fans of PBS)

That, at least, is one conclusion to be drawn from research that supposedly delineates the TV preferences of “liberal Democrats” and “conservative Republicans.” You can see the top 25 of each here, but I’m more of a Top Five guy. Here are the Top Five for Democrats:

1. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (Comedy Central)
2. The Colbert Report (Comedy Central)
3. Masterpiece (PBS)
4. 30 Rock (NBC)
5. Parks and Recreation (NBC)

And here are the Top Five for Republicans:

1. Barrett-Jackson Collector Car Auction(Speed)
2. This Old House (PBS)
3. The 700 Club (syndicated)
4. Swamp Loggers (Discovery)
5. Top Shot (History)

“Swamp Loggers?” So now we see who is watching all that “Redneck TV,” huh? And on the other side, I know whom to blame for the fact that it’s increasingly hard to tell news from satire.

But if there is anything of significance here, anything with policy implications, it’s that both left and right depend on PBS for some of their favorites shows. (Meanwhile, the liberals are so busy pursuing laughs that they have time for only two PBS faves, “Masterpiece” and “American Masters.” Apparently, as long as it’s got “Master” in it, they like it.)

How about that?

Maybe next time Republican lawmakers go to reflexively deep-six public broadcasting, they’ll stop and think how they’re go to explain to their base what they’re doing to “This Old House,” “New Yankee Workshop,” and “Antiques Roadshow.”

Huntsman climbing out of the cellar in N.H.

Just got a release from Jon Huntsman that says he’s going to be in SC Saturday — in Goose Creek and Florence. But what grabbed me was this part of what he had to say:

By the way, we just heard some good news from New Hampshire this week.  A new poll shows our campaign is on the move. Just in the past few weeks we have risen from the bottom of the field to a virtual tie for third place.

This election is a lot like a NASCAR race.  The drivers who lead the early laps may attract attention.  But the lap that really counts is the last one.  As we get closer to January, I’m confident our campaign will be the one surging ahead.

But this race is not just about winning the Republican nomination.  It’s about electing a new President—a new leader who believes America’s greatest days are yet to come.

To do that, we need a candidate who can attract independents to our Party; a candidate who has experience being number one in job creation; and who has proven that conservative solutions like mandate-free health care are right for America.

Please take a moment to review my record, my vision, and my jobs plan, which has been praised by the Wall Street Journal.

In a world in which Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich have followed each other in rapid succession as front-runners, it’s not too late for anyone to climb out of the cellar in this pennant race.

Huntsman is right to be encouraged. Still, as this blog points out, if his national numbers don’t suddenly rise, he’s going to be left out of some key debates.

By the way, in that New Hampshire poll in which Huntsman came in third, Gingrich was first. And who was second? Ron Paul.

I’m beginning to think that if I announced for the GOP nomination, at some point I would rise, briefly, above water in the polls. Republican voters this year are like a kid in a nursery with too many new toys — they rush over and grab one, play with it for 30 seconds, throw it down, and grab another.