Sunday, August 12, 2007


I will be the first to admit I'm not an expert on what the results in the Iowa Straw Poll really mean. I've scoured the internet looking for commentary on it and can't find much that is helpful. Overall, I can't muster much excitement about the outcome. Romney won which was predicted by all, but what does it really mean? He spent a ton of money and time there and Rudy, Fred and McCain didn't. His main competitors weren't even really a part of the competition.

The other excitement is over the fact that Huckabee came in 2nd. I guess this was a little of an upset but again, what does it really mean? Many have been talking recently that Huckabee is the best debater and people really seem to like him. I'll be honest, I don't. He is a Southern Baptist Preacher so I should love him but there is something about him that doesn't sit right with me. I have this uneasiness about him and creep factor, kind of like a dislike for a used car salesman, I can't really put my finger on it. It is just a gut feeling of dislike.

Here are the official results of the poll:
1. Mitt Romney - 4516 votes, 31%
2. Mike Huckabee - 2587 votes, 18.1%
3. Sam Brownback - 2192 votes, 15.3%
4. Tom Tancredo - 1961 votes, 13.7%
5. Ron Paul - 1305 votes, 9.1%
6. Tommy Thompson - 1,009 votes, 7.3%
7. Fred Thompson - 231 votes
8. Rudy Giuliani - 183 votes
9. Duncan Hunter - 174 votes
10. John McCain - 101 votes
11. John Cox - 41 votes
My first question is, who is John Cox? Second, Ron Paul had his nutjob cult workers out in full force and still only came in 5th. Third, the fact that Paul did better than Fred, Rudy and Duncan really shows that this poll was meaningless.

Bottom Line: Patrick Ruffini makes this point which I think says it all, "About 85% wouldn't have shown up without a campaign paying their way".

More reaction to the Straw poll:
Race 4 2008


Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

Funny how in every other presidential year, the Iowa Straw Poll was considered critical and the CW was that no one ever wins the nomination who did not win the Straw Poll in Iowa. Candidates spent oodles of time there and lots of money, but this year that same organizational ability, campaign strategy and overwhelming win is pooh poohed because it is a Romney win. I, for one, think it means that Mitt Romney is the best organized, the best at getting the Republican message out, and that it shows he was well received. Rudy didn't have the guts to put himself on the line, neither did McCain, so what does that say about them? I'm disappointed that Duncan Hunter did so poorly as next to Romney, I think he is the best candidate.

I'm not sure anyone knows who Cox is, I sure don't.

Reliapundit said...

i think u r right.

mitt is a good campaigner/organizer.

good qualities in a potus.

i still have more confidence in rudy's hawkishness,

and to me they're a wash on the social issues.

how's this for a ticket/WH:

rudy and fred as p&vp
and mitt as WH CoS
and mccain as SecDef

Dionne said...

Someone told me today that the Iowa Straw poll started in 1972 and every year it has picked the loser except when George W. Bush won it in 2000. I think that says volumes.

I obviously think Romney would be better than any of the Democrats but there is a lot about him that I don't like. But I agree with you on Duncan Hunter. Although, since I'm not putting much stock in this poll I don't think it means that Hunter is any worse off.

And yes, I've yet to find anyone who knows who Cox is.

I'm with you on all of that except to be honest I so distrust McCain I'm not sure I'd even be comfortable with him as SecDef. Look at his scary stance on the whole torture issue.