SC Poll: Fred up, Huck down

Byline: | Category: 2008 Presidential Election | Posted at: Monday, 14 January 2008

A Public Policy poll released yesterday shows Fred Thompson gaining supporters in South Carolina while Mike Huckabee is losing his. In a poll taken January 11 and 12, Fred increased his support from the Real Clear average of 9.3% to 14%, while Huckabee fell from 27.8% to 21%.

I don’t know anything about this polling organization, but this is the first poll taken after the Myrtle Beach debate where Fred emptied both barrels on Huck. It is a weekend poll, which is notoriously unreliable. Still, it looks like one candidate is moving up and another is moving down.

Maybe that’s why Huckabee reneged on his promise to stay positive and tried to make an issue of something that happened 30 years ago.

UPDATE: It’s a trend!

Rasmussen’s latest poll taken Sunday night has Huckabee up only three on Fred, a result which puts Huckabee and Thompson within the margin of error.

The three latest polls as of a week ago today showed Huckabee up an average of 23 points over Fred (Insider Advantage +28, Rasmussen +17, and Survey USA +25). Today, the latest two polls show Huckabee’s lead over Fred has diminished to +5 and +3. In just five days since the Myrtle Beach debate Fred Thompson has gained an astounding 20 points on Mike Huckabee. No wonder Huckabee is lashing out at him.

(ht:GR and JA)


Rightwing Nuthouse who echoes what I said last week.

Lorie at Wizbang thinks Fred is “Hot”. I’m not going that far.

Jawa graphs it.

Share this post:

15 Responses to “SC Poll: Fred up, Huck down”

  1. Sean Braisted Says:

    His strategy of bringing down Huckabee in order to build up McCain is certainly taking roots. You think there will be backlash against Clinton by African Americans if she wins…do you think there will be an Evangelical backlash against John McThompson if they win?

  2. bob Says:

    No. Because the Republican Party hasn’t spent 40 years stoking Evangelical resentment so that they’ll stay on the Republican plantation.

  3. Sean Braisted Says:


    Gay Rights, Abortion? Noooooo…that harp wasn’t played to keep the poor voters who don’t have an ideological hatred of economic intervention.

    Maybe you’re right, its only been the past 28 years….

  4. bob Says:

    You’re confusing pandering–which admittedly some Republicans have been guilty of with regard to Evangelical issues–with stoking resentment. “James Byrd” ring a bell? If not, how about the canard that “Black churches will burn” if President Bush is elected?

    I will say this for your guy Obama: so far, he hasn’t been playing that game. But I’ll tell you this, even while Hillary is quietly making an appeal to racism now, if she ends up with the Democratic nomination you know damn well that she’s going to be right back this fall stoking black resentment against Republicans.

  5. Sean Braisted Says:


    Eh, on the national level, it really hasn’t been that much of an issue anymore. Certainly Democrats play up the notion that our party is better representative of the black populace, but racial issues weren’t really that prominent in the 2004 election.

    As for stoking resentment, don’t the Republicans stoke resentment between secularists and Conservative Christians? The “War on Christmas,” the ACLU, etc…

  6. bob Says:

    Now come on, Sean. I know that you’re younger than me. So perhaps you weren’t as aware of what was happening in 2000. Which I’d like to think was not really that long ago. I

    n addition to the two items I mentioned above, one of which was a prevalent enough theme that it became the subject of a debate question to Bush, there was (and still is) the oft-made claims that Republicans turned lawfully-registered black voters away from the polls. Not one single case has been shown to be true, but still that race card is played. And you can bet that it will be again.

    Heh, but at least my party hasn’t ever kept a black man off the ballot. Good luck trying to explain that away in Michigan tomorrow.

  7. Sean Braisted Says:


    Barack Obama withdrew his name from the ballot, he wasn’t forced off, or not allowed on. That Hillary Clinton didn’t follow he and Edwards’ suit may speak somewhat ill of her, but really, it isn’t a big deal.

    As for black voters, in Florida many voters were purged from voter rolls in an over-aggressive attempt to expunge convicted felons, which meant that legally eligible voters weren’t allowed.

    Was this racist? Eh, you’d have to ask Cruella.

  8. bob Says:

    Name a single case. Produce the name of just one voter who was denied access to the ballot. You know damn well that if there had been a single victim that her name would be trumpeted far and wide by a sympathetic press.

    Oh wait, there is such an example: Faye Ewing. But she’s probably not the example that you had in mind.

  9. Sean Braisted Says:

    Clarence Maryville

  10. Sean Braisted Says:

    Kelvin King and Sandylynn Williams

  11. bob Says:

    Sean, Okay. I concede that you’ve produced evidence that Florida officials made mistakes in purging voter rolls. However, both stories also point out that they made mistakes in both directions–felons who were wrongly allowed to vote along with non-felons prevented from voting. Humans make errors. Unfortunately.

    Fortunately, the magnitude of the errors across the entire of the fourth-largest state in the nation appears to be less than in just one state senate district in Memphis.

  12. Lee Says:

    Congrats Sean, you can name three individuals. I can, however, name the employees of eight casinos that the Clinton team is, at this very moment, trying to disenfranchise.

    They must feel like soldiers voting absentee must have felt in 2000.

  13. Sean Braisted Says:


    I won’t bother trying to defend HRC.


    I’d rather 50 felons be allowed to vote than one non-felon be disenfranchised.

  14. bob Says:

    It just occurred to me that in cases like these–like when your ex-con sister engages in identity theft and steals away your right to vote, or when you fail to respond to a notification giving you 60 days to respond because the election commissioin has confused you with a felon with the same name and birthdate–having to produce a state-issued ID at the polling place is a great way to clear up potential confusion!

  15. Fred Thompson » SC Poll: Fred up, Huck down Says:

    [...] GOP Bloggers :: Blogging For The Majority wrote an interesting post today on SC Poll: Fred up, Huck downHere’s a quick excerptA Public Policy poll released yesterday shows Fred Thompson gaining supporters in South Carolina while Mike Huckabee is losing his. [...]