Rasmussen: Clinton vs. Giuliani and Thompson

[Venus de Smilo]

Read it and weep, my friends.


Election 2008: Clinton vs. Giuliani & Thompson
Clinton Increases Lead Over Giuliani, Pummels Thompson

Friday, October 12, 2007
Riding a crest in her political appeal, Senator Hillary Clinton now leads former New York Mayor Rudi Giuliani 48% to 41%. She also claims a stunning double-digit lead of 52% to 37% over former Senator Fred Thompson. Two weeks ago (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/surging_clinton_outpaces_giuliani_and_thompson), Clinton led Giuliani by five and Thompson by eight.
These results come at a time when 54% of Likely Voters express a favorable opinion of Clinton. That’s the highest level yet recorded for the former First Lady. For most of the year, the number with a favorable or unfavorable opinion of her has been essentially even (see history (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/premium_content/historical_data/democratic_candidate_historical_favorables)).
While opinions of Clinton have been improving, just 49% now offer a positive assessment of Rudy Giuliani. That marks the fourth straight week below 50% for the man who began the year as the most popular candidate in either party. At one point early in the season, Giuliani’s favorable ratings topped 70%.
Thompson has also been sliding lately. He is now viewed favorably by just 39% of voters after being above the 40% level for August and September. The man from Tennessee has also given up the lead in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/daily_presidential_tracking_poll__1). While his standing has declined steadily over the past few weeks (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/2008_republican_presidential_primary), it's too early to say whether we're witnessing the predicted Fred Fizzle or just a fading of his post-announcement bounce.
For both Giuliani and Thompson, the current poll reflects their weakest showing of the year against Clinton (see history (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/premium_content/match_ups/hillary_clinton_match_ups)).
Giuliani had a generally modest edge over Clinton in polling from 2006 through the first few months of 2007. During the summer months, the candidates were essentially even with an occasional edge for the former New York Mayor. However, Clinton has now had the edge in three straight Rasmussen Reports national telephone surveys. Her lead has grown from one-point in mid-September (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/clinton_giuliani_remain_close_as_thompson_trails_c linton_by_five)to five points in late-September (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/surging_clinton_outpaces_giuliani_and_thompson) to eight points today.
For Thompson, the current poll represents the first time he failed to attract 40% support when pitted against Clinton. Thompson and Clinton were essentially even in June (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mccain_falls_behind_clinton_giuliani_clinton_still _a_toss_up)and July (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008_clinton_virtually_tied_with_gop_fron trunners_giuliani_thompson). But Clinton’s lead over Thompson has grown ever since. The New York Senator had a three point advantage over Thompson in mid-August (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/in_surge_giuliani_now_tops_clinton_by_seven_points ), a four-point edge in late-August (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/giuliani_47_clinton_44_clinton_48_thompson_44),a five-point lead in mid-September (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/clinton_giuliani_remain_close_as_thompson_trails_c linton_by_five), an eight point advantage in late-September (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/surging_clinton_outpaces_giuliani_and_thompson), and a fifteen point lead today.


More here, click on Clinton: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/

[PaulRevere]

Poll numbers wax and wane. It's way to early to give in to worry about impending disaster.

Hillary is more worried that her fund raising scandals will cost her swing votes down the road than we should be worried about a pre-primary poll.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

When Rasmussen elects the next President, side-stepping the American public who are notorious for slapping the pollsters upside the head, THEN I'll be concerned. Ain't no weeping going on here. Of course, there will be plenty if people who CALL themselves Conservatives don't start demanding their candidates BE Conservatives, because they're going to end up in the same location as if the Demunists were driving the bus.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:unsmile: Venus, was there some personal reason you wanted to post this?

[Venus de Smilo]

:unsmile: Venus, was there some personal reason you wanted to post this?
No, no personal reason. My concern is that people understand where we stand politically in terms of the election and what we're up against this time. Things are not looking good and they're getting worse, not better. Right now, the election is Hillary's to lose.

Members post poll results on here frequently, usually only when it's good news, though. Do you object to getting a reality check from time to time? Or do you just object to ME posting a poll? You attack me almost every time I come onto this forum for a spell, so I could easily conclude your question is deliberately personal no matter what the subject matter is.

[Venus de Smilo]

When Rasmussen elects the next President, side-stepping the American public who are notorious for slapping the pollsters upside the head, THEN I'll be concerned. Ain't no weeping going on here. Of course, there will be plenty if people who CALL themselves Conservatives don't start demanding their candidates BE Conservatives, because they're going to end up in the same location as if the Demunists were driving the bus.

I agree, but having a run-of-the-mill 'rat driving the bus isn't the same thing as having Hillary driving the bus.

But if you see no cause for concern that our frontrunner has slipped below Hillary and Thompson isn't even in the running against her at this time during which she's shoring up the center in her column, fine. Feel free to pull your head out of the sand the day after the '08 election.

[Venus de Smilo]

Poll numbers wax and wane. It's way to early to give in to worry about impending disaster.

Hillary is more worried that her fund raising scandals will cost her swing votes down the road than we should be worried about a pre-primary poll.
The Clintons have skated over all their previous fund raising scandals in the past, so why would she be worried now? The Bush administration certainly didn't pursue, so what makes you think Hillary would be worried now?

The members of this board get all excited when they see a poll that shows voters trending our way, but when the news is bad, the response is , "It's too early", "What does one poll mean?", "What does this guy know anyway?", "Polls are usually wrong", and so on, ad infinitum. A little honesty and consistency would be a good thing to practice, instead of hypocrisy.

As for swing votes, Hillary is garnering them as we speak because she has moved into general election mode. She's no longer working the primary.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I agree, but having a run-of-the-mill 'rat driving the bus isn't the same thing as having Hillary driving the bus.

They both wind up at the same destination, just get there at different speeds.

But if you see no cause for concern that our frontrunner has slipped below Hillary and Thompson isn't even in the running against her at this time during which she's shoring up the center in her column, fine. Feel free to pull your head out of the sand the day after the '08 election.

Yeah, but at least I'm not throwing in the towel before the primary has even gotten here. I didn't make things personal, you did. Feel free to bash Fred all you want, but you leave me out of it.

[Venus de Smilo]

They both wind up at the same destination, just get there at different speeds.



Yeah, but at least I'm not throwing in the towel before the primary has even gotten here. I didn't make things personal, you did. Feel free to bash Fred all you want, but you leave me out of it.

You can read, can't you? Are you in some sort of weird denial? Since when is reporting the truth bashing? All you want to hear is that everything is a bed of roses for Thompson and that he's going to win, but it just isn't true, at least not now. The primaries aren't far away, and we'll be going into the holidays in a month, a time during which campaigning slows to a lull. If Thompson doesn't shore up support now, he's not going to gain enough to pull out a win in the primaries. If you knew the first thing about politics and election seasons and cycles, you'd realize that, but all you know is what you wish and, like a child, you think if you wish it hard enough it'll come true. THOMPSON IS GOING DOWN, NOT UP, IN MANY POLLS BESIDES THE ONE I POSTED. Wrap your mind around the truth.

Where have I bashed Fred? I like him, and he is currently my choice since Hunter is going nowhere. If the CA primary was held today, I'd be voting for him. But the truth is the truth.

As to your first statement, you either have no clue what Hillary is really about or you're just repeating the FC dogma. There is a world of difference between Hillary and Rudy. If Hillary wins, stick a fork in all of us. If Rudy wins, there's time to continue working to turn things around toward conservatism. Hillary will silence the conservative voice in this country by abusing her power and appointing Marxist judges who will vote her way when these abuses are brought to court. Do you not get that? Hillary is not the same breed of cat as most other 'rats. She is a dyed-in-the-wool Marxist, Homes. She will decimate individual rights in this country and her federal court plants will uphold her actions.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Venus de Smilo:
No, no personal reason. My concern is that people understand where we stand politically in terms of the election and what we're up against this time. Things are not looking good and they're getting worse, not better. Right now, the election is Hillary's to lose.

:moo: Stop wringing your hands, already. If the 1992 election had been held in January, the Republicans would have won handily. Four years ago, Dean had a commanding democrat lead in the polls. Things can change in the next year.

You attack me almost every time I come onto this forum for a spell, so I could easily conclude your question is deliberately personal no matter what the subject matter is.

:unsmile: Um, now that's just paranoid. But in this case, I had reason to be suspicious. You seem to be on a mission to undermine Thompson's candidacy, so you can get your choice of The Ghoul for the Republican nomination.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Venus de Smilo:
Where have I bashed Fred?

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l294/Longhorn_Platinum/uhh.gif Oh, my gosh! I simply don't have time to do a search on all the Fred-bashing you've done over the past six months, but you're the very one who has been making cracks like, oh, he's probably got skeletons in his closet, he'll turn out to be less conservative than we all hope, he came across blah on his last debate...

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l294/Longhorn_Platinum/rolleyes.gif You must think we all have a big red S tattooed on each of our foreheads.

[Etaoin]

I share Venus' concern. I do believe that if Hillary takes Obama as V.P., the ticket will be unbeatable, Hillary re-elected in 2112, and when Obama's turn comes up in 2116...there will be no further elections!

Oddly enough, Gore's awards just might strike enough fire that he'll make the run and could upset Hillary's plans and throw the '08 elections open again!

[Venus de Smilo]

I share Venus' concern. I do believe that if Hillary takes Obama as V.P., the ticket will be unbeatable, Hillary re-elected in 2112, and when Obama's turn comes up in 2116...there will be no further elections!

Oddly enough, Gore's awards just might strike enough fire that he'll make the run and could upset Hillary's plans and throw the '08 elections open again!

Hello, Et, always good to "see" you.

My fantasy is that Gore gets such a swelled head over his recent *cough* achievements that he runs as a Green Party candidate. It would be divine.....divine intervention.

[Venus de Smilo]

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l294/Longhorn_Platinum/uhh.gif Oh, my gosh! I simply don't have time to do a search on all the Fred-bashing you've done over the past six months, but you're the very one who has been making cracks like, oh, he's probably got skeletons in his closet, he'll turn out to be less conservative than we all hope, he came across blah on his last debate...

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l294/Longhorn_Platinum/rolleyes.gif You must think we all have a big red S tattooed on each of our foreheads.

Is the "S" in your case for Stupid or for Sarcastic?

Telling you the truth is not bashing. Through your reasoning, if I were to say it's going to rain here tomorrow you'd claim that I was bashing the weatherman.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:unsmile: If you were the weatherman, you'd only report the rain, never sunny weather. Do you walk around with a black cloud over your head?

[Wyatt_Junker]

Isn't Rassmussen one of those blocky Icelandic dudes in the strongman competitions who carries ship anchors around?

[Jack_Savage]

Isn't Rassmussen one of those blocky Icelandic dudes in the strongman competitions who carries ship anchors around?
Thats funny. Good one.

[Jack_Savage]

I share Venus' concern. I do believe that if Hillary takes Obama as V.P., the ticket will be unbeatable, Hillary re-elected in 2112, and when Obama's turn comes up in 2116...there will be no further elections!

Oddly enough, Gore's awards just might strike enough fire that he'll make the run and could upset Hillary's plans and throw the '08 elections open again!
What goal do you think iAmericans would be voting to produce if Hillary took Obama on that would be so compelling. Do you really think this country is that vacant, that shallow?

[Seabee]

What goal do you think iAmericans would be voting to produce if Hillary took Obama on that would be so compelling. Do you really think this country is that vacant, that shallow?


Yup!!

[Lubbock]

Where in the hell does all of this, "We can't beat Hillary," pessimism come from among you people?

Gloom and doom.

It's a damned sure fact that Hillary will win of everyone sits down on their collective ass, hangs their head, and declares the race over on October 13, 2007.

Good grief!!!

I know what the problem is.

We have too many One Issue voters.

There's a big picture out there, and you Johnny One Noters better get the blinders off.

[Jack_Savage]

Yup!!
Look we have a destiny. Throughout our history it has been the richotet of courage which created our freedoms and contributions to freeing people from tyranny. I lived in Africa for a while and even out in the jungle people knew of who we are and loved us for that very thing.

It is only the feed me and fearful who sell failure. I bet on Americans to continue blooming freedom and inventing contributions. We are not the enemy of the world, and the world knows it, even if the thugs need to sell that idea to take some small minded territory.

[Timberwolf]

Guiliani is a liberal who happens to be a hawk. He is on the record saying, "Illegal immigration isn't REALLY a crime, nor should it be." Wrong answer. He's willing to compromise his personal belief on abortion to quell the opposition to it by the base of the republican party. He's also willing to compromise his stance on gun-control, also to appease the base of the party. In short, he's a liberal who desperately wants to be President and will compromise his core beliefs to gain the nomination.

Sorry, not goin' there.

Romney can't decide on which side of many issues he wants to be. Thanks to his "conservative leadership", Massachusetts now embraces homosexual unions (I refuse to refer to it as marriage). He favors federally funded abortion, but he doesn't. And he's against privatizing Social Security (or maybe he isn't, I really don't know).

So sorry, Romney is just as "slick" as the Zipper. He's a (marginally) pretty face who, IMHO, is very gullible. Don't want a leader like that.

McCain shot himself in the head with his stance on immigration...and I'm not that positive about his stance on queer unions. Don't forget his success in using the 1st amendment as toilet paper.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why ANY conservative would consider voting for ANYONE other than Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo (not necessarily in that order).

The RNC can make ANYONE recognizable, and therefore viable, by spending the money to do so. It wouldn't be THAT expensive and would go a LONG way in repairing its credibility problems with the base.

If anyone is askeerd of Hitlery gaining the WH, they need to flood the inboxes of the party leaders and DEMAND that conservative candidates get on the ticket. Cuz, though I've entertained the thought, I'm NOT voting for a liberal nor am I voting for a flip-flopper, nor will I EVER AGAIN vote for the "lesser of 2 evils". Evil is evil....period.


I used to have a quote by Plato in my sig...here it is.The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs, is to be ruled by evil men.
Won't vote for the party unless the party gives me an acceptable candidate...not a perfect candidate, merely an acceptable one. Guiliani, Romney, and McCain don't fit the bill. Thompson, Hunter, Huckabee and Tancredo do.

[Timberwolf]

Republicans (I thought) were:
Pro-life
Pro-2nd amendment (pro-Constitution, actually)
Pro-family
Recognized the need to leave Iraq ONLY when the country was able to survive us doing so
Fiscally responsible
Pro-immigration, but
Against-ILLEGAL immigration
Supported national sovereignty
Pro-death penalty (when warranted)
For smaller, less intrusive government
For equal opportunity, NOT equal outcome
Colorblind
An incomplete list, to be sure. But, I think that covers more than just the basics.

Those who won't vote for Rudy are NOT "one issue voters". He's got far more than just ONE issue that has the base's panties in a knot.

[Suzie]

The day of the last presidential election Rassmussen had Kerry at 30% above Bush in the "polls".

[Etaoin]

What goal do you think iAmericans would be voting to produce if Hillary took Obama on that would be so compelling. Do you really think this country is that vacant, that shallow?

How is it possible that you would ask such a question??? Since Carter signed the Bill putting the Federal Gov't in charge of "education" the students have been dumbed down (indoctrinated) to the level that they are no longer capable of discriminating between facts and revisionist history. Instead of being taught logic, they are indoctrinated into politiical correctness, they are taught that morality is a personal thing. The idea that a person's morality should not bar him from occupying positions of power within the government is ludricous. Look at the democrats recent candidates for the presidency...Clinton, a sexual libertine, serial rapist, morally and ethically bankrupt and incapable of accepting responsibility for any of his failures or follies. Clinton never acquired as much as 40% of the vote..yet became the president. Al Gore, son of a prominent Senator who is convinced that he is owed the office, whose entire history was one of failure at anything he did except get elected on his father's name, came within a percentage point or 2 of getting elected and then damned near stole the election. John Kerry, another one who believed that he was entitled to the office, an arrogant brahman from Massachusetts who was/is a fraud, seditionist and professional liar. Then, too, there is James "peanut" Carter, who enabled both Clinton and Kerry to run for the office of Presidency by clearing their records of Clinton's draft dodging, and Kerry's phony military record.

Considering this record, how can you doubt that the electorate has been corrupted to the point that they would elect a Hillary and Obama? Obama should assure that the blacks (not African-Americans) Since they are not African, never having been there, remain on the democrat plantation, and it is questionable how many of them are truly American) as most are unaware of the fact that being an American, is a matter of spirit! There are many blacks who are patriots and understand that the current democrat party is actually, unamerican. Hillary has already lined up most of the Hollyweird elite, and the really big money boys like Soros.

In the meantime, Bush has done his best to alienate the conservative base thinking that they can be ignored as they have no place else to go.
With the RINOS in control of the party and the party already spent 7 years trying to out democrat the democrats, it is up to the democrats to lose this election as the GOP isn't really trying to win it!

The big question is, IS OUR REVULSION SUFFICIENT to impel us to the polls?

[Jack_Savage]

The big question is, IS OUR REVULSION SUFFICIENT to impel us to the polls? --etaoin

It better be. And I think the hunger for freedom in each of us will do the appropriate thing. In other words, get off the couch, go to the polls and vote not for who is popular, but who will get the job done. That being the person who will produce the results.

Everyone knows what the Clinton Clan is. They laugh on cue in every audience. To feign ignorance is a mortal sin. We all know inside what the ethical move is.

If we don't do our duty, we don't deserve to be free. It has never been an accident when a society allows itself to be overthrown. Its always been a set-up. People conveniently looked the other way.

I just don't see that happening here. Not now. Not after watching those brave firefighters on 9/11. Not when experiencing the honor our soldiers demonstrate every day fighting with all their might for our freedoms. No-no. Not now. Hillary is coning herself. Americans will never buy her evil take on the United States. This is no fools village of anarchy.

[Venus de Smilo]

The day of the last presidential election Rassmussen had Kerry at 30% above Bush in the "polls".

Well, not according to Rasmussen's website. They had Bush leading by a small margin, and their prediction was dead-on within a half point for both Bush and Kerry: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/state_by_state_actual_results_vs_rasmussen_reports _polls__1

Here's an article from Slate discussing Rasmussen and other leading pollsters involved in the '04 election: http://slate.com/id/2110860/ It appears that Rasmussen is at the top of the heap in general, and tied for closest in the Bush/Kerry contest.

Zogby is the one I've been suspicious of for a long time, as well as Pew.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

The big question is, IS OUR REVULSION SUFFICIENT to impel us to the polls?

And that IS the question, Etaoin. Your entire post is the epitome of what I've been saying all along. Is it even WORTH the lesser-of-two-evils at all? We've lost SO much ground under the Bushes, that I'm finding it almost impossible to believe we could ever regain anything. We have accepted such a watered down ideology, party, and candidate(s), and after such strides gained with the Republican revolution during Clinton! To continue on toward the same destination, only slower, makes absolutely no sense to me.

Need I remind, our forefathers refused to accept such? It took outright revolution to bring about the freedom we have squandered over such a short period of time (Carter-to-present). What gains have we made in changing the personal "heart" of this county? Have we regained any of the sense of country, duty, honor, integrity, HONESTY?? Nobody trusts ANY politician anymore ... they are barely above (and I'd dare say more closer to tied with) laywers on the ladder of digust.

For a man to claim he is a Conservative Republican, and yet be FOR abortion (right to life being one those KEY Constitutional issues and all), FOR the destruction of the sanctity of marriage (whether it be "civil unions" or an outright destruction through homosexual "marriage"), FOR taking our guns away, FOR amnesty of illegal aliens (i.e. criminals), for so very many things a CR is AGAINST, and THEN have the GALL to ask us to swallow our convictions, our principles, our values, and our morals to vote for him is appalling. That OTHERS would be championing him as the "star" of the Republican party is even MORE disgusting.

We should never have let it get this far. And the problem is, if we don't find a way to stop this snowball from rolling downhill to h-e-double-toothpicks, if we don't turn around and start heading in a different direction, we are going to find ourselves several years down the road AGAIN looking back saying we should have done something back then. We will AGAIN be faced with virtually no choice, and we will still be headed downward, only faster and with less room to turn around.

When faced with gangrene, sometimes the only way to stop the spread is to cut off an apendage. It's time we stop treating the symptoms and cure the patient. If we can't, if by nominating a real Conservative we STILL can't gain the Whitehouse, it doesn't matter that we lost ... we would never win anyway, because our ideology has been made obsolete.

[Venus de Smilo]

Bump for info for Suzie.

It turns out that it was Zogby who had the deeply erroneous polling on election day, not Rasmussen as you stated. I vaguely thought I remembered something about Zogby being hinky with his polling close to the election and election day, and it was bugging me so I looked around a bit and found this:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C2004 12%5CPOL20041209a.html

You'll notice that Zogby even went so far as to try to stir the pot AFTER the election as well as before. It's disgraceful. You do know that his brother, James Zogby, is a mucky-muck with CAIR, right?

Rasmussen was dead-on with his polling.

[The_Elucidator]

Rasmussen was dead-on with his polling.

Rasmussen was pretty close on many of the '04 and '06 calls. Of course you can't factor in the unknown scale of voter fraud committed by the 'Rats at any given election; but normally he is pretty close. I also like the Real Clear Politics running polls where they compile all the polls to get a general pulse on things and it too is fairly close.

I am not very optimistic about any GOP candidate at this point in the game, but like some have said we are a year out and anything is possible. I remember when GHWB was down 17 going into the final stretch and won hands down.

But we have been churning out a very unsophisticated breed of idiots from our Kollage Kampi over the last 20 years and this election will be a "horse" of a different color.

My gut feeling at this point is that this country is screwed; but with each day dawns new despair. :smirky:

[Jack_Savage]

Bush didn't do anything to the people, it was the phony Republicans fearing they would appear on the outs, because the phony soliders who Soros hires complained that he was being bad.

If we don't find our guts, we will lose, and this country will get what it deserves then. I don't think that will happen, but when I hear people complain about what Bush did to them it reminds me of how far we have slid.

Bush never said he would pander to the polls. This isn't Commander in Chief through referendum. He said he would do the best job he could. We voted for him to do that. When the times got tough, it wasn't Bush who ran from the problems, it was his former supporters. The very people who demanded he stick to his guns. Weakness like that is what the puke-left has been counting on from the Republicans.

[Rhino]

Rasmussen was accurate in 04. Zogby was not. For that matter, all of the other polls were pretty much off.

As far as this poll goes, I think it's too early to consider it significant.

[The_Elucidator]

As far as the Rasmussen Polls go, I do believe that he is the most accurate at whereever the snapshot in time happens to be. I kind of agree with Rhino when he says that it's too early to be significant. While he is pretty accurate for the here and now; this is in no way reflective of what will happen 4, 6, 8 months from now.

What I like about Scott Rasmussen's polls is that he lets us know where we stand right now, and where we stand right now is, there is much work to be done!

[Venus de Smilo]

Bush didn't do anything to the people, it was the phony Republicans fearing they would appear on the outs, because the phony soliders who Soros hires complained that he was being bad.

If we don't find our guts, we will lose, and this country will get what it deserves then. I don't think that will happen, but when I hear people complain about what Bush did to them it reminds me of how far we have slid.

Bush never said he would pander to the polls. This isn't Commander in Chief through referendum. He said he would do the best job he could. We voted for him to do that. When the times got tough, it wasn't Bush who ran from the problems, it was his former supporters. The very people who demanded he stick to his guns. Weakness like that is what the puke-left has been counting on from the Republicans.
Bush was elected to do the best job he can but he also has a constituency - us. His pandering to illegals is what did it for me. Standing up for a wetback who murdered two young girls and allowing two noble border agents to rot in isolated cells for shooting an illegal alien drug runner in the ass is more than we bargained for. This nation cannot be secure until the borders are sealed, no matter how many bombs we drop, no matter how many insurgents we kill, no matter how tough a fight we take to them on their own turf. Bush abandoned me, not the reverse. He's done a lot of good, but he's hugely mistaken on illegal immigration. Had he been really smart, he would have fortified the borders right after 9/11, and he'd have had his guest worker program several years ago and all would be well. Illegals are murdering, raping, molesting our kids and killing our citizens in drunk driving events and in gang activities at an alarming rate, and our prisons are being filled with them in very high numbers by comparison to their representation in the population. Bush is wrong, dead wrong in some cases, on this issue, and it's an extremely important issue, so please don't tell me about running from problems.

[Lubbock]

Always be suspicious of Zogby. Never trust him.

He has ties to CAIR, or the Holy Land Foundation, or one of those terror supporting entities.

Memory fails as to the exact ties. He's a brother to someone, I think.

Maybe I'll look it up later.

I remember seeing him interviewed waaaay back, and was surprised as to his ties to Muslim terror.

That he would admit to it.

[Politicalmom]

Well, if all the GOP candidates are "losing" against the Hildebeast, better pack it up and go home.

*Sigh*

I'm waiting to see the results of Fred unveiling his great illegal immigration plan.

[The_Elucidator]

Well, if all the GOP candidates are "losing" against the Hildebeast, better pack it up and go home.

*Sigh*

I'm waiting to see the results of Fred unveiling his great illegal immigration plan.

They are losing right now. These polls are just snapshots! Bush's approval rating after 9/11 was 90%... To have an approval rating that high even the kook fringe had to like him for just a short time.

When the match-up is head-to-head the results will tighten to the usual 50 - 50. And if the GOP candidate has any balls at all they will not let the Hildabeast off the hook for all her scandals.

[Lazarus]

Isn't Rassmussen one of those blocky Icelandic dudes in the strongman competitions who carries ship anchors around?Yep, that's the one, Bro... :biggrin:

As someone said at the beginning of this thread, its way too early to start hand-wringing... But its never too early to keep an eye on the trends...

Rassmussin has been singing the Dem victory song since before the Summer... This is nothing new...

It may be signs of our impending doom - or it may be just hwat Homes said: Another case of the Pollsters trying to skew the election, and thus they get their asses handed to them...

In either case, we should shrug it off and keep doing what we are doing...

And stay positive, for crissakes!

[Jack_Savage]

Bush was elected to do the best job he can but he also has a constituency - us. His pandering to illegals is what did it for me. Standing up for a wetback who murdered two young girls and allowing two noble border agents to rot in isolated cells for shooting an illegal alien drug runner in the ass is more than we bargained for. This nation cannot be secure until the borders are sealed, no matter how many bombs we drop, no matter how many insurgents we kill, no matter how tough a fight we take to them on their own turf. Bush abandoned me, not the reverse. He's done a lot of good, but he's hugely mistaken on illegal immigration. Had he been really smart, he would have fortified the borders right after 9/11, and he'd have had his guest worker program several years ago and all would be well. Illegals are murdering, raping, molesting our kids and killing our citizens in drunk driving events and in gang activities at an alarming rate, and our prisons are being filled with them in very high numbers by comparison to their representation in the population. Bush is wrong, dead wrong in some cases, on this issue, and it's an extremely important issue, so please don't tell me about running from problems.
He has everyone jumping on him now. He is doing what he said he would do. His term is ending. He has the same postition today on immigration he had when he ran the second time.

Want to crack down on Immigration. Fine anyone who hires an illegal severely. Why havent we done that. Really punished them. For one thing we don't have the prisons to put those in, to enforce it on those who refuse to pay the fines. Will Hillary build one new prison? I don't think so. How about a refinary, or drill for more oil. No. She won't do that either. Beating on Bush only supports Nancys smug stance. Only allows more evil to drip from Sen. Reids thin mean lips.

Beating on Bush is not going to do anything but tell those who jumped ship that they had justification. That the pukes on the left have some message even though they have no plan or ideas. We all have differences with all of them Venus.

Illegals are murdering, raping, molesting our kids and killing our citizens in drunk driving events and in gang activities at an alarming rate, and our prisons are being filled with them in very high numbers by comparison to their representation in the population. Bush is wrong, dead wrong in some cases, on this issue, and it's an extremely important issue, so please don't tell me about running from problems. --Venus

Bush didn't lose his support over anything but the Soros agenda. Those punks who New'ted him, and his former supporters who couldn't stand to walk around outside of that circle of agreement. Couldn't take the heat. It was so uncomfortable to raise their hand in support of him. Again, this was the worst time to be President. A majority of the nation booing him while a group of nations declared war on America. One shot after another day in day out. He is stupid, Cheany is Darth Vadar, its been one constant drum-beat of scorn and thats just from those who voted for him, the real mean low blows spun together at the Hillary-Soros hit-machine, Media Matters. Thats who I'm talking about.

Sure we have to address Immigration and a bunch of other things, but attacking bush isn't going to get any new prisions built cause Hillary has that money marked for social benefits for Illegals. How about severe peniltys for anyone who hires illegals? Build the fence too, but for the ones who will still be coming, severe penalitys for those who hire them. Or will campaigns contributions flood the other side if that happens because the owners need to hire illegals as Americans refuse to do it for the wage paid? And then there is the problem with costs going up? So my issue isn't with you its with those, with out any plan or idea, who jump on Bush because it is popular, not because of some difference on an issue. I disagree with him on a few, but he is the one who was sworn in.

[Politicalmom]

Just to be clear, I think we can win.

[Etaoin]

:unsmile: If you were the weatherman, you'd only report the rain, never sunny weather. Do you walk around with a black cloud over your head?

Longhorn, you must be older than sin. I thought I would be the only one who remembered Joe Blfstik and his little cloud!

[terri]

Is it even WORTH the lesser-of-two-evils at all? We've lost SO much ground under the Bushes, that I'm finding it almost impossible to believe we could ever regain anything. We have accepted such a watered down ideology, party, and candidate(s), and after such strides gained with the Republican revolution during Clinton! To continue on toward the same destination, only slower, makes absolutely no sense to me.


I hear what you are saying, I really do. Please then tell me the answer because I cannot honestly in good conscious cast a vote (or sit out an election) which I know will ultimately elect Hillary Clinton.

I plan to vote Fred Thompson in the primary and in the general election, the GOP candidate. As for losing our soul, we lost that when we lost the battle for term limits. Power corrupts, even conservatives.