Republicans weak in General Election Poll

A poll released yesterday by CNN/Opinion Research Corp. shows that Republican will have a "tough general election." To simlify the results:

Clinton and Obama have more than 50% of the votes if they're matched up head-to-head with either Romney, Giuliani, or Huckabee. If they're matched up with McCain, they're basically even.

Results:---- Will vote(if nominated) -------Will consider--------Will not vote for
Clinton --------------37%-------------------------19%
Obama --------------30%
McCain--------------22%-------------------------35%
Romney-------------13% --------------------------------------------------62%
Giuliani --------------------------------------------------------------------55%
Huckabee------------------------------------------------------------------52%

-----------------Favorable----------Unfavorable
McCain------------54%----------------29%
Giuliani------------46%----------------39%
Huckabee--------- 38%----------------30%
-Mccain is the only candidate close to Obama in the Favorable/Unfavorable numbers. Obama's number weren't given in this poll. McCain is also only Republican with more than 50% approval.

Notes: Telephone survey of about 1000 Americans, 850 of whom were registered voters, the results have a margin of error of plus/minus about 3%.

This poll doesn't provide a lot of new information, except that even though Romney's leading the GOP in number of delegates, he'll need a pretty big comeback to not only win the nomination, but the general election as well. McCain appears to have a significant advantage over Huckabee. This poll once again shows the Democrats advantage in the general election. I'd be interested to see the results of this same poll after South Carolina.

Bill Richardson is Out

In a surprise move, Bill Richardson decided to bow out of the race for the Democratic nomination for president of the U.S. This came after he placed fourth in both the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary. Richardson had hopes for beating out Edwards for 3rd in the Democratic primaries, but he had terrrible percentage counts. This means that his voters will likely to go Obama, giving him another slight edge, with the already mentioned Kerry endorsement. However, if Richardson decides to back another candidate, it can give them another major boost.

'Change' in the air, once again

NEW YORK - Make no mistake: "Change" is in the air, the undisputed buzzword of the turbulent 2008 campaign. Lodged squarely at the intersection of politics and marketing, the word has had an almost spellbinding power over voters in election after election.

"We're obsessed with it. We can't let it go, can we?" says Marian Salzman, chief marketing officer for advertising titan J. Walter Thompson. "It's the word of the day, minute and hour, and I don't even know what it means."

Mitt Romney insisted to voters in Iowa that he was the candidate to bring "change to Washington." Banners behind Barack Obama promised "Change We Can Believe In." John Edwards offered "the change we need" to combat corporate greed.

Unfortunately we've heard all this before. During the 2006 mid-term elections many Democratic hopefulas ran "Change" based campaigns and won, though have yet to get much done. I do realize that its tough to get anything done with George Bush at the helm, but I still am skeptical of any candidates who run a purely "change" based campaign just because of how hard it is to get any serious reform passed. Would you vote for the candidate who promised more change, or the candidate with the more realistic agenda? Based on the democrats' past failure to get anything done, would you expect that a candidate promising serious change would actually be able to get anything done if he or she was elected?

Kerry endorses... Obama?

John Kerry lost the '04 Presidential Election, but maybe he will turn out to be a big infuence in this race. Not only did Kerry chose Obama over his '04 running mate, but he did so in South Carolina, home of the next primary, and also the birthplace of John Edwards. However, this might not have been a shock to Edwards, who criticized Kerry's campaign in '04. Naturally, this should give Obama some more support, but how does this affect the Clinton campaign? Can this be seen as Kerry insulting both Edwards and Clinton? CNN's article about this story, found here, says Kerry's email will send out notices to millions of Kerry supporters. Maybe this will even hurt McCain, and move more Independant voters into Obama's camp. Although I doubt it, if Edwards does feel bitter about this, he might choose Clinton over Obama, likely giving her the nomination. Any way you look at it, this can have a lot of different effects on the race.

McCain ahead in South Carolina

John McCain: 25 percent
Mike Huckabee: 18 percent
Mitt Romney: 17 percent
Fred Thompson: 9 percent
Rudy Giuliani: 5 percent
Ron Paul: 5 percent

Undecided: 20 percent

If Romney were to finish 3rd, and Guiliani 5th, would it be the virtual end for their hopes of the nomination? Or, is this another small and therefore meaningless primary, and would we have to wait until Super Tuesday for any meaningful results?

Bomb threat snags Giuliani campaign stop in Florida

MELBOURNE, Florida (Reuters) - Republican Rudy Giuliani, who regularly touts his leadership of New York City during the September 11 attacks, saw his plan to jump-start his presidential campaign tripped up by a bomb threat in Florida on Wednesday.

The threat threw off his schedule and reduced the turnout for the former New York mayor's speech in Melbourne from what his campaign manager Bill McCollum said was initially expected to be "several hundred" people to about 50.

The anonymous threat was called into the headquarters of communications equipment maker Harris Corp at about the same time Giuliani's plane landed at the airport for his scheduled appearance at the company, according to Melbourne Police Commander Ron Bell.

All 500 Harris employees were evacuated and sent home while the presidential hopeful waited at the airport for police to secure a hangar as an alternative site for the event and check reporters and supporters with bomb-sniffing dogs.

From his poor showing in Iowa and New Hampshire, to the serious reduction in Florida's republican delegates, and now this; has Giuliani's campaign hit rock bottom?

Should criminals be out early?

This is an interesting article I found about criminals, Michael Vick, being allowing out of prison early if they complete a rehab program. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AgF6nBE50EmxFfTG5ShQ2hD.uLYF?slug=cr-earlyvick010408&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

I find this very interesting because the main part of his sentence had nothing to do with drugs, although the article does say the length did have something to do with drugs, but I don't think a program should be able to eliminate almost 50% of his sentence. Although, as the article said, "It's just another example of big money allowing someone to get away with something the rest of society couldn't." Is this fair? Should someone be able to take a rehab course to cut out 50% of their prison sentence?