Talk Elections

New Poll: California President by Datamar on 2007-06-11 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008R/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=6200706110)

Summary: Giuliani: 15%, McCain: 5%, Romney: 32%, Other: 31%, Undecided: 17%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.datamar.net/pdf/CRPP061407.pdf)

Insert Carlhayden remark here.

lol. I see him arguing that McCains 5% are due to his immigrant stance and CA is THE immigrant nation ... :P

Here are the full results:

Romney 32
Giuliani 15
Hunter 11
Tancredo 6
McCain 5
F. Thompson 5
T. Thompson 3
Huckabee 3
Paul 3
Brownback 2
Gilmore 1
"other" 4
undecided 14

Suffice it to say, these are....ummm...."interesting" results.

In contrast, the last CA poll before this one was a couple of weeks ago by SUSA.  Results of that poll:

Giuliani 28
McCain 21
F. Thompson 21
Romney 11
Gingrich 8

And before that, there was an ARG poll in May:

Giuliani 27
McCain 24
F. Thompson 12
Romney 11
Gingrich 5
everyone else at 1 or less

Suffice it to say, this is the first poll of CA to show such a groundswell of support for Romney, Hunter, and Tancredo.

...and probably the last one. I think this poll is bullsh*t.

Yes....well, I was being generous in my comments.  :)

First, Datamar has a terrible record in survey research.

Second, things are currently so confused in California I doubt if anyone knows who is leading there.

Third, there is no doubt that McCain has dropped drastically in California, but is probably doing a little better than 5 per cent.

Fourth, no one has support of more than a quarter of California Republican like presidential preference primary voters at this time, including Romney.

Fifth,  the Datamar "poll" badly underestimates Fred Thompson's support.

Haha, Tancredo is beating Fred

Romney will lead in California when the moon crashes into the sun.

To you Romney haters out there, Romney could be elected President and you still wouldn't believe the result.

Bitterness and non belief in what is happening does not change the facts.

Some of your comments border on hysteria.

Is California a take-all system or proportional for delegates?

No offense, Winfield, but you occasionally pop your head into certain threads and declare your unwavering support for Mitt Romney, neglecting to respond to the frequent (and usually valid) criticisms of him, and then disappear.

Can't you at least acknowledge Romney's perceived lack of core principles, as evidenced by his backflips on the issues over the years in order to appear electable?

Thank you for your observations, Joe, but someone has to at least say something when Romney is being bitterly and unjustly denounced by posters on this forum.

I do not view Romney as doing backflips, rather, that he has honestly changed or modified his views on some issues, and at least has the courage to admit that he has made mistakes.

Romney is a politician, yes, and I recognize that, and as well recognize that politicians say certain things at certain times in certain places. 

I still view Romney, however, as one of the most gifted leaders in public life today, and that is why I believe he has the qualities necessary to be an effective President.

Where a politician can plausibly explain changing positions based on something other than expidency, then yes, I agree, he should be given the benefit of the doubt.

You are also correct in that Romney has shown considerable talent in fundraising, organization and public speaking.

Romney is not my favorite candidate, but, unlike McVain or Giuiliani, he seems to be qualified.

Not to mention he opposes your favorite bill currently being fought over in the Senate.

Do you Romney fans on here seriously believe he is leading in California though? I seriously doubt it and there are no other polls to back this up. All of the other polls of the state have had Giuliani and McCain way ahead of him. I certainly hope this poll is right (Romney for the GOP in '08!) but I'm about 99% sure it is way, way off.

The reason I cannot support Romney was his leadership qualities as displayed in Massachusetts, or lack of them. I know the whole Democrats outnumber Republicans, but so what? He was elected Governor and once he realized that the legislature would not support him, he threw a year-long temper tantrum and gave up on running the state. If he becomes President and in the next midterms the Democrats get big majorities in Congress, what's he going to do, vacation to Malta? That is inexcusable in my opinion.