McCain Leads Nationally

John McCain hasn't so far been able to translate his New Hampshire victory into momentum in Michigan, but Republicans watching the race from afar have snapped to attention.

A new CBS News / New York Times poll suggests he's the choice for 33% of likely Republican primary voters, followed by Mike Huckabee at 17% and Rudy Giuliani barely cracking double digits.

More good news for McCain: he leads among conservatives and moderates and is seen as the most electable. Only 12% of those surveyed think that Rudy Giuliani is the most electable, down from 43% in October.

Thank you, John Weaver: Six in 10 Republican primary voters think McCain shares their values.

And yes -- the economy is the top issue among Republican voters.

Still, 72% of Republicans say they might change their minds.

Comments

Marc,

You have left Mitt's number off of the poll numbers.

Posted by Joel | January 13, 2008 8:11 PM

Joel,

He left Mitt's numbers off because they are embarrassing. He gets destroyed by any Democrat not named Kucinich, and is proving to be the truly unelectable GOP. Apparently most of America is tired of Mitt trying to buy and pander his way into the White House. Real shocker.

Posted by Publius | January 13, 2008 8:31 PM

This is unbelievably good news for McCain. Finally Americans have come around to support the only man who can maintain the Reagan coalition and bring it new life for the 21st century.

Romney needs to be knocked out asap. He is an embarassemnt to conservatives and a disgrace to American democracy.

Posted by John | January 13, 2008 8:38 PM

Hello, Marc, commenters-

The meteoric rise of McCain after his win in NH has been astonishing, particularly given the position he was in around Thanksgiving. The one lesson, however, that we all have learned is that the national numbers can be extraordinarily volatile.

Should McCain pull out another victory in Michigan on Tuesday, he would effectively end Mitt Romney's candidacy. Mitt has already withdrawn his advertising in SC and FL. Although he has a large enough personal fortune to continue, it would seem likely that the free-media coverage would dry up. (The initial signs of this came from the fact that he was virtually ignored at the SC debate on Thursday, after being the target of the whole field in NH before the primary.)

However, if McCain does not win in Michigan on Tuesday, it is far from certain that the momentum would continue. So this has been a great ride for a few days... let's see what happens...

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com (McCain site) Publisher | January 13, 2008 10:03 PM

No matter how often polls get it wrong, no matter how many times we see big swings in the polls, people just wanna believe, eh?

Reminds me of stock analysts.

The obsession with polls is maddening. Theya re unscientific and easily manipulated, therefore of litlle to no value.

Clearly, John McCain is the choice of the NYT and CBS. No surprise there.

Still waiting for that 10 point Obama win in NH...

Posted by slick | January 13, 2008 11:08 PM

I think the real story here is how fluid support for the Repub candidates are. The results are almost like a windsock blowing a new direction with the latest development: Giuliani with a strong wind for a long time, immediately changing with a Huckabee wind in Iowa, then changing again with McCain's win in New Hampshire. What's interesting to me is how virtually no wind blew in response to Romney's win in Wyoming--a state with only one fewere electoral vote than New Hampshire. Perhaps this shows how much news coverage affects results?

Posted by Dwayne Johnson | January 13, 2008 11:34 PM

The truth is that polls have value and always will. They occasionally get it wrong, but we always knew that. So while the knee-jerk impulse to dismiss all polls after what happened in NH is strong, it would be the wrong thing to do.

Posted by Mike | January 13, 2008 11:36 PM

"The truth is that polls have value and always will. "

Well as long as it's *THE TRUTH*.
You've completely convinced me.

I've been dismissive of polls for about 40 years. Knee-jerk?

1) What value do they have, especially in a race as fluid as the GOP's? Please be specific.

2) They are easily manipulated. I notice you don't address that "truth".

The recent polls showing McCain with a commadning lead are as meaningless as the polls that showed Rudy with a commanding lead not too long ago.

I just hope every nominee gets their turn at leading the polls. :) Whee - so much fun.

A great many voters are undecided or willing to change their vote anywhere from a day to a minute before voting. Extremely reliable - you're right.

But at least it gives people something to write and talk about.

Posted by slick | January 14, 2008 12:03 AM

Mitt will win Michigan and leap to the top of national polls when it matters most. This is state by state nomination and Romney is in the lead and will remain to do so up until the end. I believe, (and have spoken with family members of the Romneys) that Mitt loves this democracy, this country, and wants to help. I'd guess it motivations consist of only about 5% desire to become president solely for the name, fame, and prestige. Everybody has that in their system. I think McCain's is probably 45%. Guiliani maybe 35-40. Huckabee, around 45-55. This is all from my own personal interpretation obviously, except for Mitts, which is based on perceptions from his family.

Posted by joe | January 14, 2008 12:47 AM

It is hard for me to believe that the media take the national polls seriously other than as a way they see to manipulate stupid Americans.

McCain was the "insurmoutable" front-runner a year ago, then he imploded on illegal's amnesty, a misrun campaign, and years of betrayal of Republicans. Then Rudy rose and became the object of eager lust of Chris Matthews and other vapid media whores who saw the "All-New York race" as Rudy battled Hillary who was still inevitable and maybe Boomberg could come in so that the Center of the Universe was entertained. Then of course the Great Fred, also know as the Tennessee ToadFace, announced and Fred Rose above Giuliani by last October, then fell 20 points as people saw he wasn't into it as much as they hoped. Then the National polls restored Rudy - until he began slipping down on scandal. Then the Nation got "Huck-a-Mania" - supposedly on the immense authority of the votes of 20,000 activists in a small state.

Until of course McCain captured the non-Republican votes in NH of Independents, and Matthews and his fellow band of moron sluts blanketed the media with stories of adulation on how the "Great Man, Our National Hero - was back".

In the lead.

And Obama rose with Iowa until he was - already the beneficiary of absolutely uncritical media and the "articulate, clean Black Messiah to guilty liberal whites" - rose more until he was comparing himself to JFK and Martin Luther King - whereupon he lost ground in the national polls as Hillary the Inevitable disrupted his coronation.

Yeah, we are supposed to believe national polls with 7 leadership swaps in the last 7 months and with 20 point swings from week to week and even 20 point differences in what the candidates receive the same week.

Just as stupid are the head to head polls that get touted like Edwards did when he warned that he had better results in head to head with frontrunner Rudy last September, therefore other candidates should drop out once he one Iowa so he could prep to win against Mr 9/11.

It's all crap now, Ambinder. The only national polls of significance will be before Super Tuesday and even they don't reflect who will win in the states in play.

Posted by chris ford | January 14, 2008 9:49 AM

Marc,

Your first sentence is misleading.

John McCain has in fact translated his NH win into a MI momentum. Remember, he was polling in the 3-6pts range in MI 2 weeks ago.

Posted by RothNRA | January 14, 2008 10:45 AM

Taken from "The America Thinker":

The five issues that I consider most important for determining who our next president should be: the war on terror, immigration, the economy, health care reform, and Supreme Court appointments.

On the war on terror, Giuliani is the best candidate; McCain is a distant second.

On immigration, Giuliani is the best candidate; Romney is a close second.

On the economy, Giuliani and Romney are equally strong; McCain is a distant third.

On health care reform, Giuliani is the best candidate; Romney is a distant second.

On Supreme Court appointments, all three candidates are equally strong.

In sum, Rudy Giuliani is the best choice among the three leading GOP candidates. He is not a "perfect" choice. His liberal social views and his messy personal life are hardly what we would like to see in a Republican president. Nevertheless, on the issues that matter most, he offers the most conservative policies and the most effective leadership.

Rudy Giuliani should be the GOP nominee for 2008.

See the Web site for more information about why Rudy comes out on top.

Posted by Tim | January 14, 2008 12:27 PM