Huckabee's Prospects

At The New Republic, Ed Kilgore writes:

Huckabee’s biggest advantage is a crystal clear path to victory in the Republican primary, based on the simple fact that two of the first four states in the nominating process, Iowa and South Carolina, are among his national strongholds.

...

But if Huckabee can chart a credible path to victory, he’s also got more than a few roadblocks he’ll have to contend with along the way. The biggest of such hurdles is the hostility he invariably arouses in elite Republican circles.

...

A second, and closely related obstacle, is Huckabee’s less-than stellar ability to raise money. His 2008 campaign ultimately raised a total of $16 million (compared to $113 million raised by Mitt Romney), with nearly half of that coming in after he won Iowa. By comparison, one of his main rivals for the affections of Iowa’s social conservatives, Michele Bachmann, raised $13 million in 2010 for a House race.

...

The final question dogging a potential Huckabee campaign is whether his love affair with the mainstream media—something that was absolutely crucial for him the last time around—will survive continued exposure to his world view...His poorly received remarks during a recent trip to Israel—in which he disparaged a two-state solution and highlighted his belief that there is actually no such thing as a Palestinian—could just be just the beginning of a rude awakening for a press corps that’s been thus far taken by the man’s considerable charm.

...

But who knows? The man is a true phenomenon, and in a contest of personalities between Huckabee and Romney—or really, between Huckabee and anyone in the field—it would really be no contest at all.

First Debate and the GOP Field

At the Washington Examiner, Byron York reports on the first GOP debate, in Greenville, SC. The event featured Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Gary Johnson. Pawlenty, the only one of the five who strikes most pundits as viable, did make some points. But York notes:

For all that, Pawlenty didn't deliver the sharp, clear statements that win debates. He praised President Obama for the killing of Osama bin Laden but didn't have a tightly-focused critique of Obama's foreign policy. He was gentlemanly with an absent possible opponent, Mike Huckabee -- "I love the Huck…he's been a colleague and friend" -- without making much of a case for why voters should prefer him over the former Arkansas governor. And he was equally gentlemanly in refusing to criticize the evening's most prominent no-show, Mitt Romney, for his Massachusetts health care mess -- "Governor Romney is not here to defend himself, so I'm not going to pick on him" -- but he didn't offer a sharply-defined statement on reforming entitlements.

York says that Cain produced the head-scratch of the night:

It started when moderator Bret Baier asked Cain about a statement Cain made in an interview in January in which Cain said that as president he would rely heavily on whatever his generals and the experts told him should be done in the war. "You're running for president," Baier said to Cain. "After almost ten years in Afghanistan, you don't have your own plan yet about what you would do in Afghanistan?"

"No," Cain answered. 'Because it's not clear what the mission is. That's the bigger problem. It's not clear what the mission is…"

Baier followed up: "How would you define winning in Afghanistan right now, as you're looking at it as a candidate?"

"My point is," Cain explained, "the experts and their advice and their input would be the basis for me making that decision. I'm not privy to a lot of confidential information."

Meanwhile, Andy Barr reports at Politico, Ron Paul scored outside the debate hall:

Ron Paul hauled more than $1 million just on Thursday via a debate-day money bomb.

Paul’s presidential exploratory committee alerted his supporters to the 24-hour online fundraising via email and social networks and were able to sit back and watch $1,028,436.56 roll in.

The successful money bomb capped off a big day for Paul’s camp, as he attended a tea party rally ahead of the presidential debate and was shown to run stronger against Barack Obama than any other candidate in an new CNN/Opinion Research poll.

And at Bloomberg, Lisa Lerer reports on another potential candidate who remains potential:

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels said he would announce within weeks whether he will seek the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

“I know I owe a lot of people an answer,” he said on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,”airing this weekend.

Daniels, 62, described his family as apprehensive about the prospect of a national campaign. Their concerns, he said, are“a very, very important factor” in his decision.

“I may be up for bungee-jumping, but this is one where you have to strap on some other people,” he said.

The bin Laden Bump: More Polling Analysis

From Gallup: (added at 12:13 pm)

Americans' approval of President Barack Obama is up six points after the death of Osama bin Laden in a U.S. raid on the al Qaeda leader's Pakistan compound. Obama averaged 46% approval in Gallup Daily tracking in the three days leading up to the military operation and has averaged 52% across the three days since.

Presidents' popular support often increases in response to major international events, commonly known as "rally events." Thus, a jump in Obama's approval after bin Laden's death is not unexpected.

The six-percentage-point increase in Obama's approval rating is fairly typical for a rally event. Gallup has compiled data on changes in presidential approval after 48 different international or domestic crises since 1950 and finds a median increase of seven percentage points.

The largest rally Gallup has ever measured was a 35-point increase for George W. Bush after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Other large rally effects include an 18-point increase for George H.W. Bush at the beginning of the 1991 Persian Gulf War; a 16-point jump for Richard Nixon after the Vietnam War peace accords were signed; and 14-point increases for George H.W. Bush after the U.S. sent troops to Kuwait following Iraq's invasion of the country, and for Lyndon Johnson after he announced he was halting bombing in North Vietnam.

When the U.S. in December 2003 found and captured another "high-value target" -- former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein -- George W. Bush's approval rating rose seven points.

From Quinnipiac:

American voters approve 52 - 40 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing, his highest score in almost two years and up from a 46 - 48 percent approval among voters surveyed before the president announced the death of Osama bin Laden, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This is President Obama's highest job approval since a 57 - 33 percent score in a July 2, 2009, survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. Men shift from a negative 39 - 54 percent before the bin Laden announcement to a positive 51 - 42 percent today. Women approve 53 - 39 percent today, compared to 52 - 43 percent as of Sunday.

Voter approval of Obama's handling of foreign issues also is up this week. But Obama's 20-point negative score for handling the economy is unchanged and voter attitudes on whether he deserves reelection are only slightly improved. Pre- and post-bin Laden approval ratings for the president's handling of issues are:

............................April 26-May 1     May 2-3 

Handling foreign policy   43 - 48 percent    51 - 39 percent 

Handling Afghanistan      41 - 50 percent    59 - 30 percent 

Handling Libya            41 - 48 percent    45 - 40 percent 

Handling the economy      37 - 57 percent    38 - 57 percent 

Voters surveyed after the bin Laden announcement say 46 - 42 percent that the president deserves to be reelected, compared to a negative 45 - 48 percent before bin Laden.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


HotAir looks at the 11-point bump in The New York Times:

That 11% boost is not much higher than the 9% reported yesterday by the WaPo/Pew poll. It is margin-of-error type stuff — given the historical pro-Obama house effect of the NYT/CBS poll, it is hardly noticeable. Yet there are two points worth noting.

First, there is the usual NYT/CBS sample weighting. The D/R/I party ID of the raw sample was 36/24/32, which was reweighted (pdf) only slightly to 36/24/40. That’s slightly more skewed to the Dems than the last NYT/CBS poll Ed Morrissey mocked in April. For comparison, Gallup recently reported that Democratic Party identification dropped to a 22-year low in 2010, for a D/R/I breakdown of 31/29/38. By that measure, the NYT/CBS Democratic skew is 10%.

However, the skewed sample is standard operating procedure for the NYT/CBS combine. The truly strange thing about this particular poll is tucked away in the paper’s separate explanation of how it was conducted:

The latest New York Times/CBS News poll is based on telephone interviews conducted May 2 and 3 with 532 adults throughout the United States.

The poll’s respondents had also been interviewed in a separate poll conducted April 28 to May 1 by CBS News, before President Obama’s announcement of Osama bin Laden’s death.

The 11% bounce reported in this poll is measured from the NYT/CBS poll taken April 15-20, 2011, not the poll taken taken just before bin Laden was killed. The 9% bounce reported by WaPo/Pew was by comparison to a poll taken March 30 – April 3. Looking at the RCP poll average for Obama’s job approval reveals that Obama was in a downward trend at the start of April that bottomed on April 20th and had been heading fairly steadily upward ever since. Indeed, Obama hit a low of 41% in the Gallup poll on April 15 but stood at 46% in that poll last weekend. Measured from April 15, Obama’s current Gallup number of 50% (and it’s likely to be a couple of points higher tomorrow, given the rolling 3-day average) would give him a bounce just below the average historical 13% bounce (which can be found at the first link in this post), but the modern news/polling cycle now tells us the actual bounce is maybe five or six percent or — per the CNN and NewsBeast polls in the field last weekend — even less.

More on the bin Laden Bump

The New York Times reports:

Support for President Obama has risen sharply following the killing of Osama bin Laden by American military forces in Pakistan, with a majority now approving of his overall job performance, as well as his handling of foreign policy, the war in Afghanistan and the threat of terrorism, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The glow of national pride seemed to rise above partisan politics, as support for the president rose significantly among both Republicans and independents. In all, 57 percent said they now approved of the president’s job performance, up from 46 percent last month.

This survey shows a larger bump than others, but even this one suggests that the effect does not reach across the board:

But in an indication that anxieties about unemployment, gas prices and the national debt have not withered with Bin Laden’s death, good will toward Mr. Obama did not extend to his economic policies. More than half said they disapproved of his handling of the economy, similar to the result last month, the poll found.

With a second day of post-mission polling, Gallup reports that the president's approval rating is up to 50 percent, up 4 points from pre-mission polling. As for confidence, Gallup adds:

As details about the Navy SEAL raid that killed bin Laden and the role President Obama played continue to emerge, Americans at this stage report feeling somewhat more positive about Obama's leadership of the military as a result. A third say the death of bin Laden makes them feel a lot more confident in Obama as commander in chief and another 21% say it makes them a little more confident. Fewer than half, 43%, are no more confident.

Most Democrats are now more confident in Obama on this measure -- either a lot or a little more -- while most Republicans say they are not more confident. Independents are closely divided, at 51% more confident and 44% not more confident.

First Polls on the bin Laden Bump

The Washington Post reports:

In the immediate aftermath of the targeted killing of Osama bin Laden, President Obama’s approval rating has jumped higher, with big increases in the number of Americans giving him high marks on dealing with terrorism and the situation in Afghanistan.

But the new poll, conducted Monday evening by The Washington Post and the Pew Research Center, also finds virtually no movement in Obama’s numbers when it comes to handling the economy. That suggests that success on one front — even one as important as the death of the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks — might not translate easily to other areas.

Overall, 56 percent of those polled say they approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president, an increase of nine percentage points over April polls by Post-ABC News and Pew. That is the highest approval rating for the president in either poll since 2009.

Newsweek/Daily Beast finds no overall bump at all:

How much overall boost did President Obama get from the capture of Osama Bin Laden? None, according to an exclusive Newsweek / Daily Beast poll encompassing 1,200 American adults, conducted in the two days immediately before the president’s Sunday announcement about the terrorist leader, and then the two days immediately after.

Specifically, Americans like the way he handled the situation, giving him strong results in strength and decision-making (55 percent now term him a strong leader overall, and 63 percent do so in the area of terrorism). Yet he did not get any overall bump in terms of approval rating, or electoral support. His approval rate was unchanged—48 approve, 49 disapprove, both before and after. There was also no statistical change in whether Obama deserves reelection—40/48 before, 39/49 after.

Reuters reports on a Reuters/Ipsos poll:

In the poll, 39 percent of Americans said their image of Obama's leadership had improved, while 52 percent said it had not changed and 10 percent said it had worsened.

Forty-two percent said they had a higher opinion of Obama's handling of anti-terrorism efforts, with 50 percent saying it was unchanged and 7 percent that it had worsened.

Thirty-two percent of Americans think Obama deserves the most credit for the U.S. special forces' assault on Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan, while 13 percent gave credit to former President George W. Bush.

Gallup finds that 93% of Americans approve of the action. But other findings suggest a reason why the president's approval bump is not bigger:

When Americans are asked how much credit they would give to Barack Obama, George W. Bush, the CIA, and the U.S. military for finding and killing bin Laden, the U.S. military and the CIA emerge as the big winners in the public's eyes. Nearly 9 of 10 (89%) say the military deserves "a great deal of credit," while 62% say the same about the CIA.

Americans are more reserved in giving credit to President Obama. Thirty-five percent say he deserves a great deal of credit and another 36% say he deserves "a moderate amount" of credit. More than a quarter say he does not deserve much or any credit at all.

Some observers have argued that the Bush administration laid the groundwork for Sunday's actions and that as a result, former President Bush deserves a share of the credit. Slightly more than half of Americans agree, saying Bush deserves a great deal or a moderate amount of credit, considerably less than that given to Obama. Almost half of Americans say Bush deserves little credit or none at all.

"A City Upon a Hill"

Gingrich Productions has premiered a new documentary, A City Upon a Hill:

Hosted by Newt and Callista Gingrich, the documentary reminds us that America is a unique nation founded on the truth that our rights come from God, not a king or government. This freedom has allowed Americans to accomplish some of history's greatest achievements, developing into a model community for the rest of the world, or as John Winthrop described it in 1630, a "city upon a hill."

Featuring interviews with historians, politicians, and experts, including Donald Trump, Rep. Michele Bachmann, Rep. Allen West, Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Buzz Aldrin, Douglas Brinkley, Edwin Meese III, Allen Guelzo, Fred Barnes, Michael Barone, Andrew Breitbart, S.E. Cupp, Victor Davis Hanson, Dana Loesch, Phyllis Schlafly, and many more, "A City Upon A Hill" reminds us that America is indeed an exceptional nation.

"A City Upon A Hill" is Gingrich Productions' seventh documentary. Other films include the award-winning "Nine Days that Changed the World," "Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny," and "Rediscovering God in America." Gingrich Productions is a performance and production company featuring the work of Newt and Callista Gingrich.

Writer/Director/Producer, Kevin Knoblock (Peace River Company), Producer/Executive Producer, David Bossie (Citizens United Productions), Executive Producers/Hosts, Newt and Callista Gingrich (Gingrich Productions).

>

Pawlenty Inches Along

In the Washington Post, Michael Leahy writes:

Pawlenty’s wooing of Iowans is a classic approach for a politician in his position — an established contender but without the national profile of Sarah Palin or the money of Mitt Romney. Jimmy Carter was the first to win Iowa this way, and seemingly every four years since, someone tries it anew, some to great effect and some to hardly any at all. The question this time is whether it will pay off for Pawlenty, with a win in the state’s February caucus or with a strong-enough second- or third-place showing to catapult a relative unknown to the nomination.

In the early going, Pawlenty has started to win over a number of influential officials. Local college professor Tim Rylaarsdam, a former Sioux County Republican chairman, says he feels closer to supporting Pawlenty than to anyone else. Another past county party chairman says several influential local Republicans are leaning toward Pawlenty. The current county party chair says that if forced to choose today, no one would rank above Pawlenty.

But all this qualified praise for Pawlenty betrays a muted leeriness: Few in Sioux have been deeply turned on by anyone, including him. Potential backers are “leaning” his way, or “getting close.” In a largely empty field, Pawlenty has made an impression, but that’s all for now.

A couple of weeks ago, he did a Tea Party rally in Des Moines:

He recently spoke in New Hampshire: