That's right, in the latest Zogby poll, Not sure has a commanding lead in South Carolina.
Candidate SC Sept 2003 Edwards 10% Dean 9 Kerry 8 Lieberman 8 Sharpton 5 Gephardt 4 Graham 2 Clark 2 Mosley Braun 1 Kucinich 0.5 Someone Else 6 Not Sure 46
What's truly amazing is that Lieberman was 5 points up(a whopping 13 percent) two months ago and that Edwards, while doing nothing of note nationally, surged from a 4th place tie to first. Also: how the hell did Sharpton get to 5th place?
Zogby: “This campaign is not even on the radar screen in South Carolina. While Edwards and Dean have made gains since our last poll, it is more like a bump on a carpet than a surge. No candidate has the edge, and it looks like South Carolina will be shaped by Iowa and New Hampshire. In this kind of vacuum, Clark may seize the moderate mantle. Once a hope for Lieberman, this looks like an early fizzle. Gephardt’s support is reduced to half of what it had been. Graham is nowhere. If Kerry’s announcement this week helped him, could he actually have been lower than 8% before? And Sharpton is only getting single-digit support among African Americans. This is wide open.”
EDIT: It'll be interesting to watch the debate tonight to see what happens...
(edited by Grimis on 4.9.03 1249) "If this cruel, loudmouth extremist is the cream of the Democratic crop, next November's going to make the 1984 election look like a squeaker." --House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) on Howard Dean
I can explain how Sharpton's in 5th place in South Carolina (and actually I'm shocked he's that low): 40-45% of the primary voters will be black, thus that has been the state Sharpton has been focusing on, while understanding he's in a hopeless demographic position in regards to Iowa and New Hampshire. This does show that the Dean surge in New Hampshire hasn't become a tidal wave in the Democratic Party nationally, at least not yet.
Time to do a Red Sox pennant chase supply list: Arsenic: check. Cyanide: check. Booze: check. Fully loaded gun for full chamber Russian Roulette: check. Ok, I'm prepared, let the pennant race commence.
Originally posted by redsoxnationThis does show that the Dean surge in New Hampshire hasn't become a tidal wave in the Democratic Party nationally, at least not yet.
True, though Deanies aren't in panic mode over SC either. He's gained more than anyone else since the March Zogby, he still has a huge 56% unfamiliar rating, neighbor-boy Edwards isn't exactly running away with the state, and Lieberman (whose recent campaign has essentially been "Vote for me, because I'm not that radical Dean" repeated at intervals) is dropping.
Time will tell.
"When WCW tries to be racy, it's generally about as light-heartedly entertaining as watching a man rape a woman in a chicken yard." -- Dark Cheetah
DISCLAIMER: I am a democrat and I hate George Bush. That being said, I'm a little lost here and I hope my next question doesnt come off as too dumb. But why would one senator's dumbass screw-up (and a possible cover-up by another senator's office)