-
Recent Posts
- Kamala’s brother-in-law fleeced taxpayers for billions to give to left-wing groups and lawyers | New York Post | 8.24. 24
- Coming: Global Political Recalibration
- Clark Judge: FDR, Reagan, and European Nationalism | NatCon Rome 2020
- Lady Gaga Tells All
- Trial Lawyers Use COVID-19 to Prey on America’s Corporations | Real Clear Policy | 12.1.20
Categories
- Book Reviews (12)
- Communication Strategy (23)
- Constitution and Law (14)
- Economic Policy: General (33)
- Economic Policy: Health Care (30)
- Economic Policy: The Great Financial Crisis (15)
- Economic Policy: US Debt Crisis (32)
- Education Policy (1)
- Global Issues (57)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2008 (18)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2012 (43)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2020 (5)
- Political Commentary: General (122)
- Politics & Policy (6)
- Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Administration (11)
- Speeches/Lectures (9)
- Uncategorized (6)
Archives
- September 2024
- March 2023
- July 2022
- April 2022
- December 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- November 2019
- December 2018
- September 2017
- April 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- June 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- June 2006
- October 2005
- August 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- August 2004
- June 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- August 2003
- April 2003
- July 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- May 2001
- December 2000
- June 2000
- January 1995
- August 1994
- August 1992
- June 1991
- July 1990
- September 1989
- July 1989
- March 1989
Tags
2012 2012 election Benghazi campaign constitution debt debt crisis Democrats economy election 2012 Energy Financial Times fiscal cliff foreign policy Gingrich Global Warming GOP Hoover Digest hughhewitt HughHewitt.com Immigration IRS National Review New York Post New York Times Obama Obamacare Republicans Ricochet Ricochet.com Romney Russia Scandal Senate SOTU speech Supreme Court Syria Tea Party Trump U.S. News Ukraine Wall Street Journal war Washington Times
Two Polls Show What is Driving the GOP Presidential Race | HughHewitt.com | 11.29.11
The best poll for grasping the ups and downs of the Republican presidential contest ran in the National Journal magazine in late October (http://tinyurl.com/7nnvpw3) and has been updated several times since (http://tinyurl.com/d92zrqh).
In prior columns I have argued that GOP voters in this cycle are breaking differently than in 2008, when there were distinctly social, economic and national security voters.
In 2008, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee won the social issue voters but was unacceptable to Republicans in the other two camps. No candidate clearly captured the economic voters. Arizona senator John McCain won the national security vote and was acceptable to both social issue and economic conservatives. So McCain won the nomination.
This year GOP primary voters are dividing on a line that looks more like the divide between Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush Republicans in the 1980 primaries. The line of separation this year is no longer ideological. Republicans are broadly of a common mind on what the country will need after four years of catastrophically misguided Democratic rule, for the first two years both on Capitol Hill and in the White House. But they have different attitudes about tone, style and intensity.
To me it has seemed that those who look like the Bush voters of 1980 have gone to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. Those who look like the Reagan voters of almost thirty-two years ago have been searching. At first a few parked with Minnesota congresswoman Michelle Bachman. When Texas governor Rick Perry entered the race, they rushed to him. Then Perry fumbled in debate, all but announcing that he was unprepared to be president, and they rushed to business executive and radio talk host Herman Cain. When Cain’s made it clear that he, too lacked the background for the presidency, they looked around again.
By that time the buzz was building about former House speaker Newt Gingrich. In debates, he emerged again and again as the most knowledgeable, cool headed, and clear about policy of all the candidates on the stage. Soon the Reaganesque vote was moving his way.
All of this I inferred from everything I was seeing. But now the National Journal has attached numbers to the hunch. In a series of polls they have asked likely GOP primary voters their attitudes about the Tea Party. Nor surprisingly, half of GOP voters responded that they looked favorably on the Tea Party. Forty five percent were neutral, five percent hostile.
The NJ grouped neutrals and hostiles together and then tracked the candidate preferences of pro-Tea Party versus the neutral/hostile voters. As you can see from the first link above, the neutral/hostile group has gone to Romney. The pro-Tea Party voters have bounced around, usually giving overall GOP leader or number two status to their favorite of the moment. At the second link above you can see that their favorite now is Gingrich, and, of course, he is leading in the overall polls.
This is not to say that the game is up. To date Romney has failed to give a coherent rationale for his candidacy. His changing issue stances has left many Republicans worried that in office he won’t follow through on cutting spending, regulations and taxes. But, as columnist William McGurn notes in this morning’s Wall Street Journal, he could turn his standing as a dazzlingly successful businessman into a plus in this economy and his knowledge of finance into unchallengeable bona fides for putting the nation’s spending and balance sheet in order. He has not to date, but if he were to play to his strengths, he might reestablish himself as the frontrunner in short order. People are still listening.
Meanwhile, many continue to worry about Gingrich’s capacity for boneheaded moves. The significance of the debates is that they have given him a showcase to put what you might call the New Newt on display. He is more likeable than people remember. He has a manner on stage that fits well with the kind of personality we look for in presidents.
Here is a test. Think of all the general election match ups sine 1980: Reagan versus Carter, Reagan versus Mondale and so on through Obama versus McCain. Ask yourself, which candidate had the best temperament for the office? Not which did I agree with on issues? We are talking about temperament here. In almost all cases (Bush versus Clinton is the major exception), when I have asked this question of both Republicans and Democrats, the ultimate winner in each election has been the consensus pick.
It is fair to say that Romney long ago established that he passes the temperament test against Mr. Obama. In the debates of the past several months, Gingrich has established that, alone among the candidates who excite the Tea Party half of the party, he passes it, too.