’)Here are the results. I wonder how much Romney, once again, paid per vote? And to only squeeze out a win over Mike Huckabee of less than 1%! Also, Ron Paul outpolled Fred Thompson.
UPDATE: Jonathan Martin of the Politico has some details on this. It looks even worse for Romney because of people who were actually there, he did horribly. Ron Paul’s numbers are more internet noise. Most intriguing to me is that something like 28% of the attendees at the right-wing “values” voter summit didn’t rank Hillary Clinton as an unacceptable candidate. Outside of Rush Limbaugh, that’s Hillary Hate Central, and yet… not so horrible.
The main problem with this whole thing about the religious right is that their impact on the ‘04 election was overstated, even by amateur pundits like me. They’re a force at the polls, but their positions are a significant minority in America compared to some who you would count as their liberal counterparts.
I heard Huckabee won by 40%, if you only count the people who were actually there.
So the people support Huckabee while the money supports Romney.
That’s a combination I don’t want to see on the Republican ticket.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/10/20/17222/095
The results the TPM have include the online poll, which explains Ron Paul’s strong showing.
The physical poll only had 1000 people, which is high enough to be somewhat, but not completely useful gage. That said, getting 50% is still worth noting.
————————-
Personally, I still don’t think these people support Romney, but I think they see him as the best chance to stop Giuliani.
They will vote for him, but they won’t volunteer for him and that will hurt his GOTV machine.
I find myself wondering why Republican spending is analyzed on a “per-vote” basis, while Democratic fundraising is touted as a great triumph. I’d hate to think that this is some sort of double standard…
J.
“I find myself wondering why Republican spending is analyzed on a “per-vote” basis, ”
I find myself wondering how stupid you can get.
It’s not Republican, it’s Romney. Since the beginning of the year, his fund raising as outperformed his poll numbers. The meme is that is is trying to buy votes and the more evidence we have, the more this particular meme is backed up.
(Although, it is important to note that the burn rate of the Republicans is much higher than the Democrats.)
“while Democratic fundraising is touted as a great triumph.”
Fund raising and spending are two different numbers:
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2007/Pres/Maps/Oct18.html
Hillary Clinton has out raised Mitt Romney by nearly $30 million, but Romney has outspent Clinton by more than $13 million.
Which is why he is viewed by many as trying to buy votes.
“I’d hate to think…”
If you ended your sentence there, it would have been more accurate.
I find myself wondering why Republican spending is analyzed on a “per-vote” basis
I find myself wondering how someone so stupid manages to dress himself (of course, I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt; maybe you can’t actually dress yourself).
ROMNEY’s spending is analyzed on a per-vote basis because, as CS points out, he spends so much for so little result AND because he is spending so much of his own money as opposed to a guy like Ron Paul who is relying on the netroots.
“I’d hate to think…”
If you ended your sentence there, it would have been more accurate.
Haha. Pwned.
I’m getting a little disappointed in how unimaginative and one-dimensional the right-wing trolls are getting around here. All they’ve got left these days is “I don’t like your blog titles” and their double-standard about double-standards.
C’mon, wingnuts. A little red meat, please.
Yeah, that was a stupid statement even for you Jaytea. Cost per vote is an interesting metric for any campaign, but only Mitt Romney to date seems to be spending an insane amount of money for these straw polls and the like while his Republican rivals, especially Huckabee pay almost nothing to be competitive with him.
Anyone else think that Jay’s already ran form this debate and isn’t planning on coming back?
These wingnust talk a lot about personal responsibility and honesty, but catch them in their lies and mistakes, and they disappear or try to change the subject. They are cowards and hypocrites.
“These wingnust talk a lot about personal responsibility and honesty, but catch them in their lies and mistakes, and they disappear or try to change the subject. They are cowards and hypocrites.”
Well, they are just emulating their leadership. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard, “the blame game” spoken by Republicans when they are clearly to blame.
Actually, I was wondering if anyone would bring up how much money Romney’s loaned his own campaign… and I was a smidgen disappointed that no one did.
Likewise, I was disappointed (but not surprised) that no one is bringing up the latest Hillary fund-raising scandals. Not surprised, that is, because Hillary was (by her own boast) instrumental in the founding of Media Matters…
J.
Let me change the subject. Did you hear what Michelle Malkin was talking about?
LOL. OMG look over here: Hillary! Media Matters! Puppies! Please God change the subject because I’m having my ass handed to me!
Actually, I was wondering if anyone would bring up how much money Romney’s loaned his own campaign… and I was a smidgen disappointed that no one did
Actually, I DID bring it up:
“ROMNEY’s spending is analyzed on a per-vote basis because, as CS points out, he spends so much for so little result AND because he is spending so much of his own money as opposed to a guy like Ron Paul who is relying on the netroots.”
Wow, the wingnut troll doesn’t bother to read. Shockers!
I also said this in a follow up comment:
“and they disappear or try to change the subject.”
And Jay Tea responded with:
I was disappointed (but not surprised) that no one is bringing up the latest Hillary fund-raising scandals.
Can I read these douche bags like a book or what?
“Can I read these douche bags like a book or what?”
I’ll be glad when their party is such a small minority that we won’t have to pay attention to them at all.
There is a good summary of the “Value Voters” summit here as well: http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/004033.html