According to CNN, Mike Huckabee won the Kansas GOP caucus. He won BIG:
With 76 percent of precincts reporting, Huckabee had 62 percent of the vote, compared with 22 percent for Arizona Sen. John McCain and 11 percent for Texas. Rep. Ron Paul.
Big loss for McCain in the first contest after he became the GOP nominee. Dana Bash just told us the Huckster is going to get at least 33 of the 36 delegates from Kansas.
UPDATE from CNN's results page is that Huck got all the delegates in Kansas.
Okay, up til now, I have discounted national polls on the presidential race. The specific state polls were what mattered. And, the nomination will be decided based on state outcomes so I still prefer state polls. However, on the eve of the voting in almost half the states this coming Tuesday, national polls can give a sense of where the candidates stand. Tonight, we get the results of the latest The Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted from January 30 through February 1 (Wed. thru Fri):
Two days before voters in 24 states go to their polling places, 47 percent of likely Democratic voters said they back Clinton and 43 percent said they support Obama, with neither candidate decisively benefiting from the departure of former senator John Edwards (N.C.) from the race. By contrast, McCain's wins in primaries in South Carolina and Florida and the winnowing of the Republican field have had a dramatic result: The senator from Arizona is now the clear front-runner for his party's nomination.
McCain leads former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney 48 percent to 24 percent among probable GOP voters as he continues to rapidly consolidate support, particularly among moderates and liberals. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee runs third in the new poll with 16 percent, and Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) is fourth at 7 percent.
Ugh. Another GOP debate. This one hosted by CNN, the Politico and the Los Angeles Times. There are no rules tonight according to Anderson Cooper. John and I will be liveblogging.
AC's first question is are we better off than four years ago? Mitt wouldn't answer for the nation, just for Massachusetts. But then seemed to criticize the state of the nation under Bush.
McCain thinks we are better off. But gave a litany of problems...when AC challenged him, he said we're better off over all. Then he went back to the litany of problems. The rest of the liveblog is after the break. Once again, this was brutally painful to watch.
8:08 PM: Huck doesn't think we are better off. He blamed Bush -- and Congress (Huck does know the GOP controlled Congress for most of the past eight years, right?) It's not better and it's not going to get better without new leadership in DC.
8:09 PM: Ron Paul says we're not better off, too. He also blamed Bush and Congress (and he's in Congress). Then he went off in that Ron Paul way of his. Talking about empires, etc...the standard of living is going down. Monetary policy, etc.
8:10 PM: Mitt gets a question about whether McCain is indeed a liberal as Mitt has charged recently. Mitt goes off on McCain's record: ANWR, campaign finance, McCain/Kennedy on immigration. McCain/Lieberman on energy. "Those views are outside the mainstream of Republican conservative thought." Slams McCain for the NY Times endorsement.
McCain notes he got the endorsement of Mitt's hometown papers who know him so well. McCain defended himself then lit into Mitt's record of raising taxes. The takeaway is that Mitt and McCain really don't like each other. It's palpable.
8:17 PM: Huck says Rush isn't infallible.
I just realized that the backdrop is Air Force One. Maybe they just should be sitting in Reagan's little office on that plane and pretend they are him.
8:25 PM: McCain admits that global warming exists -- and he chose Arnold over Bush. That surely violates GOP/right wing orthodoxy.
8:31 PM: Huck says we're borrowing the $150 billion stimulus package from China...and we've ignored our infrastructure, which is where we should be investing. Huck keeps making digs at Bush.
Romney used the Big Dig in Boston, which he oversaw, as an example of an infrastructure project. Then he proceeded to mock the Big Dig (which he oversaw) for being something of a failure. Mitt seems really rattled tonight.
8:37 PM: McCain: I was part of the Reagan Revolution. Republicans are out of control on spending now. I was a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution, too. Reagan! Reagan! Reagan!
8:39 PM: Mitt says Reagan would have wanted the Bush tax cuts. He is trying to take that Reagan mantle tonight. Don't be surprised if he ends up in Reagan's model Oval Office at the library tonight.
8:41 PM: On immigration, Mitt explains how he is going to deport illegal immigrants within 90 days. NO AMNESTY. Mitt wants everyone to know he hates immigrants more than the other Republicans. NO AMNESTY. NO SPECIAL DEAL. That's offensive says Mitt.
8:49 PM: AC is too nervous to touch Reagan's diary as he asks Huck if Sandra Day O'Connor was the right choice for Supreme Court. Huck won't diss Reagan...but he is pro-life and wants everyone to know. Ron Paul wouldn't have appointed her. McCain won't diss Sandra, won't second guess Reagan. McCain wants Justices like Roberts and Alito. Romney wants Justices like Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas.
And a break, phew. This is painful. Okay, all GOP debates are painful. I just can't envision any of these clowns being President.
8:56 PM: Citing Peggy Noonan, AC asks Mitt if the Republican Party is better off than it was eight years ago. Mitt says No. But, it's not Bush's fault. It's Washington's fault. Huh? Republicans have run Washington for most of the Bush term. Then Mitt invoked Reagan.
9:00 PM: Mitt is hopping mad at McCain for lying about his position on Iraq. He didn't quite say McCain was lying but referred to others who said McCain was lying. McCain is sitting there smirking as Mitt goes on and on. Mitt really hates McCain -- and Reagan would've thought it was reprehensible.
9:02 PM: McCain goes right back at Mitt. Mocks him for saying he was a governor while McCain was trying to single-handedly trying to save the world.
These two are going at it. Mitt asks McCain: How is it that your the expert on my position?
They're just talking over each other. It's great. McCain is quite smug and smirky.
Mitt is quite upset that McCain sprung this on him right before the Florida primary. He seems to think McCain violated some kind of rule or protocol. It's old-style Washington politics according to Mitt.
9:09 PM: McCain to Mitt: You started it with all those millions in negative ads against the Huck and me. You've been spending a lot of your money on negative ads. Spend it all, says McCain.
9:11 PM: Ron Paul to Mitt & McCain: You agree on Iraq...how many men are you willing to let die.
9:18 PM: McCain is asked what makes him a better leader on the economy then Mitt. McCain says I'm a leader, that's how.
9:20 PM: Mitt is asked if McCain is a better leader on the econony. "NO." I was a governor. I'm an executive not a legislator who sits on committees. Mitt: I'm a LEADER, LEADER, LEADER -- so, basically, McCain hasn't done any real work. McCain sits on committees.
9:24 PM: Would Mitt be an okay commander-in-chief? McCain: I'm sure Mitt was a good manager -- bought and sold companies where some people lost jobs. But can't have on the job training. So, we can infer that McCain doesn't think Mitt would be a good commander. These guys really, really don't like each other. And, McCain is smirking a lot.
Last question: Would Ronald Reagan support you? Duh, like they're going to say No. Mitt and McCain try to explain why Reagan would support them over the each other.
It's over. And, it was awful. Again, I can't see any of these guys as President.
36% McCain 32% Romney 15% Giuliani 13% Huckabee 3% Ron Paul
The Democratic race doesn't matter, or count. Florida lost its delegates to the Democratic convention for violating DNC rules about when it could hold its primary. All the candidates agreed not to campaign in Florida as a result, but now Hillary is trying to get the delegates reinstated because she's winning. Imagine if she succeeds and those delegates are enough to push her over the top. Florida would again steal the election. And I suspect all hell would break loose. (8:39 PM: Hillary is having a "victory rally" in Florida tonight. Keith Olbermann read the official statement from NBC that no delegates are being awarded and that the campaigns pledged not to campaign in Florida. Watching the nicely printed "Hillary" signs being waved at the Clinton event, Keith said, "Everybody just happened to have those signs at home." No campaigning there.)
TIME is reporting that Giuliani is expected to endorse McCain as early as tomorrow.
Pat Buchanan on John McCain: "Here's a guy, basically, what does he say: 'The jobs are never coming back, the illegals are never going home, but we're gonna have a lot more wars.' "
Joe Scarborough: "John McCain's platform, and it certainly looks inviting for the fall, he's promised less jobs and more wars. Now that's something we can all rally behind."
UPDATE @ 8:16 PM: Florida being Florida, there were, of course, voting problems according to the Miami Herald. Be great if this screws up the GOP race:
Mysterious glitches cost some voters in Miami-Dade and Broward counties the opportunity Tuesday to vote for their candidates in the presidential primaries.
In some cases, it might have been voter error -- people who failed to register properly as a Democrat or Republican.
In others, the problem might be attributed to mistakes in registration rolls, though county election officials disputed that.
In several cases, however, the failure involved poorly trained election workers who apparently activated machines with the wrong ballots and, in some cases, were utterly confounded by the election.
Today's New York Times has a front page article about the ruthless reign of Rudy. He was a real, vindictive bastard as mayor of New York. Worth a read to see how Rudy and his team harassed and victimized any one who criticized the Mayor.
Not much love for Rudy these days in his home state. His string of sixth place finishes has had an impact. Rudy is losing NY now:
"If these numbers are truly reflective of the electorate, then Rudy's dead," said Doug Muzzio, professor of public affairs at Baruch College in Manhattan. He blamed the slippage on the fact that "Rudy has been virtually invisible" nationally while focusing all his attention on winning Florida.
The WNBC/Marist Poll in New York shows McCain beating Giuliani 32 to 22 percent, followed by Mitt Romney at 14 percent and Mike Huckabee at 11 percent, with Fred Thompson trailing at 4 percent. Fifteen percent of 401 Republicans polled last week were undecided. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percent.
A second poll, by Siena College Research Institute, found the former New York mayor trailing the Arizona senator by 12 points for the New York primary Feb. 5. Siena put Giuliani second, with 24 percent of support among Republicans, behind McCain's 36 percent. Romney had 10 percent, Huckabee 7 percent, and Thompson 6 percent. That poll has a margin of error of 7.4 percent.
At least he's beating Ron Paul in NY. That's a change.
So, a win for McCain. Who is the GOP front runner now?
8:21pm: Well we're off for dinner, so feel free to post South Carolina updates in the comments. Latest results, 22% of returns in, Huckabee 28%, McCain 36%, Thompson and Romney both with 15%.
Polls closed at 7:00 PM. The networks have been exit polling and according to Wolf Blitzer, it's a very close race between Huckabee and McCain. Close for third between Thompson and Romney.
One quick thing: Ron Paul came in second today in Nevada beating former GOP presumptive front runners McCain, Huckabee, Thompson and Giuliani. And, it's not like Nevadans don't know McCain. He's from a neighboring state as my friend JA pointed out.
UPDATE 7:37 PM: Duncan Hunter has dropped out of the GOP race. Rudy Giuliani now has last place to himself.
Results are coming in slow tonight from South Carolina. Only 12% reporting as of 8:00 PM.
No big surprise. Romney was the only one of the GOP front runners to take Nevada seriously. AP already made the call:
Republican Mitt Romney won Nevada's caucuses Saturday while John McCain and Mike Huckabee dueled in the South Carolina primary, a campaign doubleheader likely to winnow the crowded field of presidential rivals.
CNN hasn't called Nevada in the Republican race yet. According to Wolf, AP made its projection "on the basis of the entrance polls." CNN will wait for the official numbers to come in.
UPDATE 2:10 PM: CNN just called Nevada for Romney. McCain and Ron Paul are fighting over second place. Rudy is in sixth place.
Despite the changing story with the "incident" in the Strait of Hormuz, the Republican candidates are all doing their best to out-macho one another with the exception of Ron Paul, who suggested caution and further review. The others are ready to throw fire and brimstone to kill 'em all and ask questions later. Great. Just what the country is demanding after WMD in Iraq and too-many-to-count "terrorism" threats in the US conveniently announced during troubled times for the Bush administration. (Think, Miami Seven, for example.)
The Guardian picked up the faltering story today and we will probably hear an update after 4PM on Friday or over the weekend to make sure the story is as buried as possible when it contradicts the war-lust of Dear Leader. Are Americans really begging for another war in the Middle East? Do the Republican candidates honestly think that's what the people are screaming for? Out of touch and out of office.
An article in the Politico sums up the state of affairs for Republicans. They may end up with McCain as their nominee not because they like him. In fact, many key factions of the Republican base can't stand McCain -- it's just that there's really no one else. Basically, there are no good alternatives:
Now that John McCain has come back from the dead, the question is whether those Republicans who buried him initially are willing to tolerate his maverick ways because they have no one they like better.
So Republicans may end up with a nominee who voted against the Bush tax cuts, pushed gun control, wanted immigration reform which his fellow Repubs. call amnesty and was the main sponsor of campaign finance reform. That's a grand slam for the GOP base.
Don't get me wrong here. McCain is an extreme right winger. He's just strayed from the hard core GOP orthodoxy slightly on a couple issues, which means the hard core GOPers don't like and don't trust him.
Peter Brown's article examined the GOP's other options. As we've all known for awhile, it's slim pickings. Read that analysis after the break.
There really is no candidate that works for the Republicans this year:
They can go with one of the other candidates or, upon reflection, decide that perhaps McCain isn't that unacceptable after all — especially given polling data suggesting he might be a stronger candidate in November than many of his competitors would be.
Given that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's inability to win either Iowa or New Hampshire has badly damaged his candidacy, to which many conservatives had flocked, those Republicans may not have many more palatable choices.
They can hope former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson — perhaps the most conservative of the remaining candidates — mounts a comeback that would make McCain's look like a piker. But that hardly seems in the cards.
Or they can go to former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, whose record and rhetoric on taxes and terrorism makes many economic and foreign policy conservatives very nervous, perhaps even more so than does McCain.
Their other alternative is throwing in their lot with former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who, on a host of issues, is far to the left of McCain and whose messy personal life makes many conservatives uncomfortable. Besides, after the candidate finished just ahead of quasi-fringe candidate Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) in New Hampshire and lost to Paul 3-to-1 in Iowa, Giuliani's chances for the nomination don't look very good.
Basically, some major faction of the Republican party has serious with every one of their potential nominees. That's usually a problem on the Democratic side, but not this year.
65% Reporting - Clinton ahead by 5092 Clinton 39% Obama 36% Edwards 17%
UPDATE: 10:27PM. Hotline reports that the exit polls today showed a 39%-39% tie between Hillary and Obama.
UPDATE: 10:00 PM. Joe and I were discussing this, and a reader wrote in with the same analysis: If Hillary wins this, first, it's a huge victory for her. But. And the but is important. The debate will be as to how Obama had a double-digit lead coming into today and suddenly lost in a matter of hours? We suspect there will be two schools of thought - either Hillary won because New Hampshire is racist, or she won because she cried. Either way, not a great message. Having said that, if she wins, she wins, and it's a win she desperately needed, so it's still a good thing.
All polling places are closed. McCain wins the Republican race. Still too close to call on the Democratic side. Univ of NH and Dartmouth have yet to report in. Being university areas, Obama could do well.
New Hampshire Primary -- Republican President - GOP Primary New Hampshire - 61 of 301 Precincts Reporting - 20% Name Party Votes Vote % McCain , John GOP 13,347 37% Romney , Mitt GOP 9,985 28% Huckabee , Mike GOP 4,362 12% Giuliani , Rudy GOP 3,280 9% Paul , Ron GOP 3,074 9% Total Write-ins GOP 878 2% Thompson , Fred GOP 487 1% Hunter , Duncan GOP 206 1% Keyes , Alan GOP 30 0% Marchuk , Stephen GOP 18 0% Tancredo , Tom GOP 12 0%
Got an email from AMERICAblog reader CS in New Hampshire:
All at Americablog,
My wife and I are NH residents and registered independents (or undeclared as the state calls it) and went to vote at 7am in Nashua. There was no line per-say, but there was a lot of activity. People going in and out...exit pollster (complete with media logos) handing out clipboards with surveys...Obama and Hillary supporters with signs at the school parking lot entrance. There were lots of Edwards signs out on the street. The only evidence of republicans was a single Ron Paul sign across the street.
When I want to pick up my ballot, I saw a lot of names in the book with "UND" crossed out and "DEM" written in its place. Anecdotally, this indicated a lot of independents breaking for the dems, probably for Obama. McCain just held a big rally here yesterday, but there was no evidence of it now.
Just thought you might want this piece of info.
CS
Joe has already noted that both Obama and McCain are counting on independents. If more independents move to Obama then they won't be able to vote for McCain, which could hurt his chances. That's why this is important.
Wow. Hannity must have been wetting himself (earlier I said this was NYC, it's actually probably NH). Seriously, check out this video. You'll recall that FOX News cut Ron Paul out of the NH debate. His supporters are a bit teeved at FOX because of it, and it shows. (Hat tip, Crooks and Liars.)
One of the most fun -- and perhaps the most gratifying -- things about the 2008 elections is the mess that's evolving on the GOP side. They have very flawed candidates -- flawed by the standards of their fellow Republicans. And, the negativity on their side is intense.
Let's do a quick review. Watching the ABC debate one thing was abundantly clear: The other candidates loathe Mitt Romney. For the past couple weeks, it's been obvious that the GOP "establishment" (the Weekly Standard, National Review types and their moneyed friends) hate and fear Mike Huckabee. John McCain is too much of a maverick and unpredictable. Thompson's campaign was a dud. And, Rudy "9/11" Giuliani seems like he's dropped off the face of the earth. The only candidate with any intensity is Ron Paul and he's got no shot.
What do the Republicans do? New Hampshire will provide some direction. If Romney wins, he may be on a roll. If McCain wins, he may become the default candidate. However this plays out, GOPers aren't going to be happy with their nominee.
On the GOP side, it's tight in NH, with a slight edge to McCain. The polls on the GOP side are closer and more volatile. GOP poll results after the break.
McCain's problem in NH is that he needs to win NH independents. But NH independents are leaning Democratic this year. In the CNN/WMUR poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire, McCain is up by six:
On the Republican side, Sen. John McCain leads former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney by a narrower margin -- 32 percent to 26 percent, the survey found. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee -- whose upset win in Iowa came after being outspent by millions of dollars by Romney -- passed former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani to gain third place.
In Saturday's poll, Giuliani had 14 percent and Huckabee had 11 percent; those numbers were reversed on Sunday.
In the Reuters/Zogby tracking poll, McCain is also in the lead:
McCain sailed past Romney in the new poll to open a five-point lead at 34 percent to 29 percent. Huckabee, a Baptist minister and former Arkansas governor, dropped back slightly to 10 percent, barely holding third place over former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani at 9 percent.
"It was a big day for McCain," Zogby said. "He maintains a very big lead among independents, but his problem is that he won't draw as many independents as he did in 2000."
McCain won the state's primary that year with help from a surge of independent support, but eventually lost the Republican nomination to Bush.
About 6 percent in each party remain undecided, according to the New Hampshire poll.
Rasmussen Reports gives McCain a one-point lead over Romney at 32 - 31.
I'll admit to having a bias towards the poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire. Back in 1980, when I was a sophomore at UNH, political science students actually made the calls for the poll back in its early days. One of my favorite professors, Robert Craig, helped start the UNH poll with his colleague, David Moore. Now, according to Mark Blumenthal's rating of the pollsters, the UNH poll is one of the mostly highly respected.
As you can imagine, it's almost all presidential candidates this weekend -- and it's almost exclusively GOPers. We get Huckabee three times, McCain twice, Romney twice, Ron Paul once and even Fred Thompson makes an appearance. No Rudy anywhere. Edwards and Richardson each get one show.
After the debates last night, we've seen enough of the Republicans. Seriously. And, from that debate last night, it's pretty clear that the other Republican candidates have had enough of Mitt Romney. Their disdain for him was blatantly obvious.
ABC's "This Week" — Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, R-Ark.; former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass.; former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.
___
CBS' "Face the Nation" — Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
___
NBC's "Meet the Press" — McCain.
___
CNN's "Late Edition" — Huckabee; Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas; Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M.; former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn.; Mahmud Ali Durrani, Pakistan's Ambassador to the U.S.
No one loves FOX these days. The New Hampshire Republican Party dumped its sponsorship of the FOX presidential debate:
In protest of Fox News’ excluding Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter from its GOP presidential candidates forum Sunday, the New Hampshire state Republican Party has withdrawn its sponsorship of the forum.
The forum is the last chance for voters to see the Republican candidates face-off before New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary Tuesday. And party Chairman Fergus Cullen said Fox’s decision to limit participation runs counter to the primary’s “national purpose.”
One of the biggest stories from Iowa was the massive turnout for Democrats -- especially when compared to Republicans. John did some math and showed that even Clinton's third place numbers nearly doubled Huckabee's winning totals. Looks like we'll see a similar outcome in NH. New Hampshire's Secretary of State is predicting a higher Democratic turnout -- and that NH's independents will break by a wide margin to Democrats: 90,000 to 60,000.
That lack of enthusiasm among Repubs. seems to be contagious. NH Democrats held a pre-primary dinner last night. It sounded wild. Over 3,000 people attended including leading Democrats. The Caucus has a couple posts on the reactions to Clinton and Obama. But, James Pindell who writes the Boston Globe's Primary Source blog (a great primary resource for the next couple days, btw) reports that the GOP's efforts at a similar dinner were hapless, just like the GOP. More after the break. While the major Democrats showed up for the NH Democratic Party, none of the major Republican candidates were on hand to help their struggling NH operation. It wasn't so long ago that New Hampshire was a rock-ribbed GOP bastion. Those days are so over:
The state Republican Party wanted to have a blow out fund-raiser themselves. They do need the money. Until its current chairman the party was in debt and hardly could hire more than a few staff.
At this blow-out fund-raiser John McCain is not scheduled to attend. Nor are Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee or Rudy Giuliani. Nope. Just Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter.
At a time when many in the national media are focusing on the difference in caucus turnout in the parties in Iowa, there are differences in New Hampshire as well.
A pair of stories caught my eye today, and I'm not sure I care about either one.
The first bit of news is that conservative pundit and writer Bill Kristol is going to be a weekly op ed columnist at the NYT. The second story is that some Barack Obama ads popped up on the conservative Drudge Report Web site (though it's not clear that Obama actually ordered the ads - lots of times, ads just pop up because they're running on thousands and thousands of sites, and Drudge's just happens to be one buried in the mix).
So the question looms: Is it wrong for the Times to hire Kristol, and for Obama to (maybe) advertise on Drudge?
First, Kristol. Unlike FOX News, an arm of the Republican part that only hires liberals who don't come across as fierce as their conservative counterparts, the real "media" in America tries (or thinks it's trying) to be objective, even when it ends up skewing too far to the right (but that's for another day). So why shouldn't the NYT hire both conservative and liberal op ed columnists? And in fact, it always has. Some say that Kristol is particularly bad (and wrong about everything, including the war) and thus doesn't deserve a slot at the greatest of newspapers. Really? He's worse than Novakula? Than Krauthammer? Than George Will? Than Coulter, who is syndicated around the country? Than the LA Tim
