Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Presidential Power Rankings # 41

October 10, 2007


1. Hillary Clinton (1)
2. Barack Obama (2)
3. John Edwards (3)
4. Bill Richardson (4)
5. Chris Dodd (5)
6. Joe Biden (6)
7. Al Gore (7)
8. Dennis Kucinich (8)
9. Mike Gravel (9)

No changes. But if Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize, will he then jump in the race? Or will he just stuff himself silly at a Norwegian smorgasboard?


1. Mitt Romney (1)
2. Rudy Giuliani (2)
3. Fred Thompson (3)
4. John McCain (4)
5. Mike Huckabee (5)
6. Ron Paul (6)
7. Sam Brownback (7)
8. Tom Tancredo (8)
9. Alan Keyes (10)
10. Duncan Hunter (9)

While CNBC did not let Alan Keyes in the debate on Tuesday, based on name recognition alone, he probably deserves to move up a spot over Hunter. I mean, polls are going to show Keyes at 2% and Hunter at 1%.

Otherwise, no changes. The debate yielded good reviews for Giuliani, pretty good reviews for Romney, a sense that Thompson probably exceeded expectations, and not much in the way of movement for McCain or Huckabee. Everyone else is pretty irrelevant.

If campaign fundraising were the only thing I was considering, I would certainly put Ron Paul ahead of Mike Huckabee, to those who are wondering, but the new Des Moines Register poll puts Huckabee in third place, and pretty close to second actually. That is why he has to be ranked ahead of the cranky Texan.


At 5:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Corey, I'm shocked that you would make such a totally baseless statement in this posting. I mean, I often disagree with you, but I at least feel like you check your facts.

Everyone knows that smorgasbords are Swedish.

At 12:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pretty soon, I'm really going to have to take issue with your putting Romney as #1. His lead in NH is negligible, and in Iowa its still strong but diminishing. MI doesn't look good for him either, and Rudy or Thompson lead in most other states. Nationally, he fairs very badly. I don't think the same Iowa wisdom counts for the republicans. If Romney doesn't run away with Iowa, I don't see much hope for him. He is very low in all head-to-head polls, and his debate performance yesterday wasn't well-received, at least from what I've read (but I'm tending not to believe the news, since they say Rudy and Hillary win EVERY debate).

By your logic, you could have Obama or Edwards at #1, since you seem to value national polls so lightly.

I'm not saying Rudy is going to take it, I'm just saying that at THIS point, it seems a stretch to call Romney #1.


Post a Comment

<< Home