I read this on another site, posted in a generally conservative forum.
CPAC results:
31% Rand Paul, Senator from Kentucky
11% Ted Cruz, Senator from Texas
9% Dr. Ben Carson
7% Scott Walker, Governor of Wisconsin
7% Rick Santorum, Former Senator from Pennsylvania
3% Rick Perry, Governor of Texas
3% Paul Ryan, Congressman from Wisconsin
2% Condoleeza Rice, Former Secretary of State
2% Mike Huckabee, Former Governor of Arkansas
2% Sarah Palin, Former Governor of Alaska
So, who from this list will rise to the top?
No one on that list has a chance at becoming POTUS. No one.
ETA: If the Democratic nominee was Satan himself, none of those GOP candidates would have a chance of becoming POTUS. Just thought maybe that needed clarification.
No vote when Dr Carson comes in #3 can be taken seriously.
Really, the obsession with straw poll results is merely a sign of lazy media. It’s meaningless, they KNOW it’s meaningless and they print it anyway. Damn shame, what’s happened to that journalism.
Either Christie is seen as a RINO or the scandals are more seriously looked at by the conservatives.
Because the last time Mitt Romney won it, I think what at least that new list shows that the Republican Leadership that is trying to keep them a little bit moderate really has a big problem in their hands and a lot of effort and money will have to be applied if they do want to become more appealing to the independents, the young and the minorities.
Good luck with that, I’ll pass the popcorn and wait for the fireworks and the waste that is coming from the Republican inter fighting.
As **Zoid **said, that list will essentially hand the POTUS to Hillary.
Eh, its a mildly interesting measure of where the Conservative Id is at, even if its predictive value over who will win the actual nomination is pretty low. (interesting Rubio is doing worse then Cristie for example).
It isn’t exactly meaningless, in that the CPAC poll isn’t meant to foretell the GOP nominee–good journalists address that point when they report on it. Rather, the poll is a demonstration for the base.
(Or what Simplicio slipped in while I was typing.)
We need that guy to come in now, and tell us how this is totally excellent news for the Republican Party, a harbinger of certain and crushing victory to come. That guy, what’s-his-face…
The crackpots at WND give somewhat different figures:
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. (29 percent)
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas (17 percent)
Dr. Ben Carson (10 percent)
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. (10 percent)
Gov. Chris Christie, N.J. (10 percent)
Gov. Scott Walker, Wisc. (7 percent)
Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc. (2 percent)
Former Gov. Jeb Bush, Fla. (2 percent)
Former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa. (2 percent)
Gov. Mike Pence, Ind. (1 percent)
Viguerie noted that former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal did not receive enough votes to remain on the leader board. Viguerie is the junk mail king: it wouldn’t surprise me if he did some manipulation on his own. Note that his figures sum up to 90%, while the OP’s figures some up to 77%.
What we’ve learned from this is that 31% of the 21% of the Republicans who make up the ‘base’ prefer Rand Paul. But CPAC itself is a a subset of the ‘base’, so the overall number is probably even lower.
You’d have made a ton of money over the years if you just bet that the winner of the CPAC poll would not be the Republican nominee.
Be careful what you wish for. Suppose Rand Paul is nominated and a serious scandal about the Democratic nominee breaks about a week before the election, resulting in Paul actually winning. Because of possibilities like this, a safer strategy would be to root for a nominee that you could tolerate should he win it all.
