politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Yes, Trump Lost the Debate
Source:
National Review
URL Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/corne ... 4/trump-lost-debate-rich-lowry
Published: Aug 12, 2015
Author: Rich Lowry
Post Date: 2015-08-12 09:37:23 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 15405
Comments: 132
Per this Suffolk University survey in Iowa that is not an online poll like many of the other post-debate surveys. Trump didn’t suffer a catastrophe (he still leads in the state), but the debate hurt him: The Suffolk survey has warning signs for Trump. By 2-1, 55%-23%, those surveyed say watching Trump in the debate made them feel less comfortable rather than more comfortable with him as a candidate for president. A 54% majority also reject Trump’s complaints that he was treated unfairly by the Fox News anchors who served as moderators; 41% agree with him. And a third of Iowa Republicans say Trump – enmeshed in a post-debate contretemps over his comments about Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly – “doesn’t show appropriate respect for women.” A larger number, 46%, side with the real-estate mogul and reality-TV star, saying criticism of his comments about women “are just examples of political correctness.” Then there’s this: Trump scores a big lead among those who didn’t watch the debate, at 21%, double the standing of retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who finishes second at 10%. But among those who watched the debate, Trump does less well, tied with Walker at 14%. Meanwhile, Trump still leads in New Hampshire, but is lower than he had been in prior surveys: BREAKING: NEW @FPUniversity /@bostonherald NH POLL @realDonaldTrump 18% @JebBush 13% @JohnKasich 12% @CarlyFiorina 9% pic.twitter.com/lXa1NZ6JAF— Boston Herald Radio (@HeraldRadio) August 11, 2015 And Rasmussen has Trump losing altitude nationally: The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds Trump with 17% support among Likely Republican Primary Voters, down from 26% in late July before the first GOP debate. Senator Marco Rubio and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush are in second place with 10% support each, in a near tie with Fiorina and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker who both earn nine percent (9%) of the likely primary vote. Next with eight percent (8%) come retired neurologist Dr. Ben Carson and Senator Ted Cruz at seven percent (7%). (To see survey question wording, click here.) Poster Comment: Trump's highest Suffolk poll standing in IA is among people who didn't watch the debate. So Trump polls best among Iowa's Know-Nothings. He could have advocated full-blown Soviet communism and still been their pick. You can't deny that NR is still a hotbed of Trump haters ("Witless Ape Rides Escalator") so take it all, like any these goofy August name-recognition polls, with a big grain of salt.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 80.
#69. To: All (#0)
(Edited)
More Trump related polling. Another new online poll here via HotAir. Alternate headline: “Blogger to start gaming out President Trump’s possible VP nominees.” On the one hand, as noted by my pal Karl, this poll was conducted using Google Consumer Surveys. If you’re wary of online polls, especially ones like this that attempt to “infer” important demographic data about respondents based on their browsing history and IP, then discount these results accordingly. On the other hand, Echelon Insights is operated by Kristen Soltis Anderson and Patrick Ruffini, two of the right’s brighter lights in political data crunching. They wouldn’t have published this poll if they didn’t have good statistical reasons to think it’s accurate, I’m sure. Pop the champagne, Trump fans. And make sure it’s only the finest champagne. The classiest. Footnote: Trump actually dropped three points since the debate. Echelon had him at 32 percent in their last poll. Still, good news on balance given his team’s fears that Megyn Kelly and the Fox crew had turned the public against him. And as many other polls have detected, his support isn’t limited to tea partiers or conservative Republicans. He’s at 26 percent or better here among “traditional conservatives,” “centrists,” and even “libertarians”(!). (Among that same group of libertarians, Rand Paul finished … eighth.) Another point in favor of thinking the poll’s broadly accurate is that it’s picking up major movement for Carly Fiorina, the one candidate more than anyone else whom everyone expected to move after her stellar performance last Thursday. She gained six points since last week overall; among people who actually watched the debate, of which there were many thanks to Trump, she leaped nine points to 12 percent. Rubio, another top debate performer, also hit 12 percent among people who watched. Among people who didn’t, he and Fiorina were stuck at four percent each. So where do we stand now that we’re halfway through the week, with a bunch of post-debate polls under our belts? Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight looked at the gains and losses across the various surveys that have come out since the debate was held and found that the “winner,” by consensus, is pretty much who everyone thought won on Thursday night. Fiorina’s improvement isn’t surprising. Scott Walker’s deterioration is, given that the consensus on social media was that he’d been low-key and a bit dull at the debate but hadn’t said anything that should damage him. Walker may be suffering here from high expectations: He’s one of the few candidates whom even low-information Republicans might have heard of going in, thanks to his war with labor in Wisconsin a few years ago and his big poll surge earlier this year. Some segment of Walker fans may have had him as their default “not Trump and not Bush either” choice and then dumped him when he underwhelmed at the debate. (The main beneficiaries from that, I assume, are Rubio and Cruz.) Trump, meanwhile, suffered a modest average loss of just 2.3 points, but that’s really only thanks to the surprising Morning Consult poll from a few days ago showing him gaining seven points after the debate. Five of the other six post-debate polls had him losing ground, and four of them had him sliding four points or more. That’s a bad sign, but when you’re sitting on a 20-point lead, you can slip a little without worry. I’ll bet he prepares for the CNN debate next month no matter what his staff is telling the media about Mr. Authentic refusing to rehearse.
It'll be Jeb. Which means it'll be Hillary or Biden.
It is not too late to stop Bush. In 2012, if the grassroots had united around a single candidate and stuck with him no matter what, Romney could not have been the nominee. The Tea folk do seem, in my reading, to understand this. I think they are flirting around for now but a lot of people will realize they need to pick one guy to stop Bush. And Scott Walker just happens to be almost everyone's second pick (if he isn't their first pick) and has held that position consistently since polling started on the GOP field. This would not be the first time that everyone's second pick overcame their first picks. It is true of presidents and often of electing popes as well and for the same very human reasons.
Yep. And Trump is your man, at least if you want my help. If not him, then Huckabee. No? Ok, then Carson. Not him either? Well, then, shucks, how about...Santorum? No. Can't win. Who's left then? Paul...eesh...ok. Then the rest of your party revolts. They won't have him. Fiorina? No. Pataki? No. Our list of options grows thin. Rubio? Is he really pro-life? Ok. But he'll lose the general. Walker? Is he really pro-life? Ok. But he'll lose the general. Meh. Too much work. I'll stick for the Donald. Not really interested in the seven dwarves.
One debate in August -- and with a volatile frontrunner like Trump -- and you're ready to award Trump the nomination by acclamation. How do you know if he has any idea (or intention) of assembling a real campaign? Recall the 1936 GOP candidacy of Alf Landon in 1936. Or the equally embarrassing GOP campaign of 1940. What's yer hurry? Don't you want to even see if Trump is going to campaign? BTW, Trump's entire campaign is just a couple of people and no one with experience running a national campaign. AFAIK, they haven't even worked on a national presidential campaign. Like Perot, Trump has thus far been incredibly tight with campaign money and is not spending like a real candidate who is preparing to run a political operation in multiple states and then nationwide. The only guy he had, the disreputable Roger Stone, quit him last weekend. I didn't like Stone but he had political experience going back to the Nixon era. You might at least argue he was semi-professional for a 50+ state campaign. I keep wondering if Trump really is willing to do all the travel and do all the events expected of a presidential candidate. It's a pretty grueling schedule for over a year.
You have no clue.
#83. To: A K A Stone (#80)
I do have a clue about Trump's ground operation, or rather the lack of it. All the other serious candidates are building ground operations with chairmen and renting offices and hiring staff. These things don't happen magically, done overnight by little elves. A few others like Pataki and Gillmore and Graham are the only ones who are not building up campaign organizations. You realize that the ground campaign organizations for the primary season are the basis for building up your ground operation for the general election campaign. AFAIK, Trump hasn't even opened a single campaign office yet, let alone hired real staff for them. As unfair as it is, you can't win IA or NH or SC just by flying in a few times on your private 757 and telling the press how lucky the voters are that you are willing to accept the nomination from the fine people of the state. Wait until Trump meets Iowa's corn and pig farmers. That should be fun. And campaigning 14-16 hours a day? Trump is really going to do that? I just can't quite imagine it. I keep wondering if Trump will be the Second Coming of Fred Thompson. Go out to the Iowa state fair, putt around on a golf cart and basically never get heard from again. Giuliani didn't fare so well either and was reduced to a Floriduh strategy but by then McCain had big momentum and deep party backing.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestEchelon Insights post-debate poll: Trump 29, Carson 10, Fiorina 9, Rubio 9, Bush 9
#70. To: TooConservative (#69)
Scott Walker’s deterioration is,
#73. To: Vicomte13 (#70)
It'll be Jeb. Which means it'll be Hillary or Biden.
#76. To: TooConservative (#73)
It is not too late to stop Bush.
#77. To: Vicomte13 (#76)
Meh. Too much work. I'll stick for the Donald. Not really interested in the seven dwarves.
Landon proved to be an ineffective campaigner who rarely traveled. Most of the attacks on FDR and Social Security were developed by Republican campaigners rather than Landon himself. In the two months after his nomination he made no campaign appearances. As columnist Westbrook Pegler lampooned, "Considerable mystery surrounds the disappearance of Alfred M. Landon of Topeka, Kansas.... The Missing Persons Bureau has sent out an alarm bulletin bearing Mr. Landon's photograph and other particulars, and anyone having information of his whereabouts is asked to communicate direct with the Republican National Committee."
#80. To: TooConservative (#77)
Replies to Comment # 80. You have no clue.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 80.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]