Any guesses on who might be the Republican presidential candidate currently in the top three in the first three major contests, according to polls in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina?
The answer to today's Trail Mix Challenge is Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts governor is the only GOP hopeful who consistently places in the top three in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. (He also places in the top three in Michigan and Nevada, which vote between NH and SC.)

Comments
Huckabee
Posted by: EdVB
| December 19, 2007 6:19 AM
John McCain
Posted by: Jerry | December 19, 2007 6:47 AM
We have a chart for the first two states and now a way to make you talk.
Jamie Huckabee McCain
KGC Huckabee McCain
Mad Mustard Huckabee Romney
Sturgeone McCain McCain
Posted by: Jamie | December 19, 2007 7:13 AM
oh.....ok.....
I'll play the game......
my nominee for the Republicans is.......
I don't care...... they're all losers.....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 7:23 AM
per statement on Morning Joe, Huckabee will follow the advice of Josh Bolton ... Nothing like another nail in the coffin. Of course it is everyone else's coffin.
Posted by: Jamie | December 19, 2007 7:24 AM
BTW..... Craig...
it was nice to see your smiling face on Countdown last night.....
yup... the Repugs are in disarray.....
it's fun to watch....
oh yeah..... I prefer ties with some color..... but that's just me...... :0)
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 7:40 AM
Ron Paul!
Oh wait. The question was the top three.
John McCain!
Oh never mind...
Posted by: dnd | December 19, 2007 7:45 AM
the plunger is really over..wait til you see his Christmas ad...he is wearing a red sweater vest
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 8:13 AM
it looks like Senator Clinton has stopped her slide in NH and Iowa and whether by accident or design it looks like timing is on her side.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 8:30 AM
Well, it looks like Huckabee, according to all the polls, but we Iowans do love to make a big fuss over Caucuses, so you might be in for a surprise. We are not all ultra conservatives you know. And of course, there is a lot of annoyance here to clam up or just not say what is really on our mind when we have been bombarded with so much hype and so many ads. Even though my candidate doesn't realistically have a chance in Iowa, I am returning from my vacation early just so I can participate. It's wonderful just to have the opportunity! My hope is all Iowans that are eligible will participate. Seize the Day!
Posted by: Clemmieo
| December 19, 2007 8:37 AM
I certainy hope Hucksterbee is the gooper nominee it would be worth it just to see the look on the faces of such dc 'ho tessess as Mrs Bradlee and Mrs. Russert
not to mention the coke head
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 8:45 AM
I don't get the conservative hatred for McCain.
On the real issues of conservatism he is the guy
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 8:54 AM
president of cnn
In his newsroom talk, Mr. Klein addressed the biggest challenge facing his channel—namely, its long underperforming 8 p.m. slot, which regularly gets trounced by FNC’s Bill O’Reilly and MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann.
Mr. Klein suggested that Campbell Brown’s new 8 p.m. show, set to debut in February, would compete by being “more talk-oriented,” by featuring fewer “formal pieces,” and by on occasion capitalizing on Ms. Brown’s sometimes-comic sensibility towards the news, à la Comedy’s Central The Daily Show. “Jon Stewart should not corner the market on innovative uses of tape,” said Mr. Klein. “He wishes he had access to the amount of material we get in every day.”
yes campfollower brown is a joke and married to a gooper who is a romney supporter...and they never mention her conflict or that of Mr Annis Kurtz another cnn gooper spouse.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 8:57 AM
kgc,
I agree with you on McCain and conservative issues. My boss, Mr. Conservative Libertarian, doesn't trust McCain. The only issue he ever brings up against him though is Campaign Finance Reform. My boss clings to the money equals speech mentality.
Posted by: EdVB
| December 19, 2007 8:58 AM
I believe the feeling towards McCain is a reaction to his being screwed in SC 2000 and then his rolling over and hugging those guys.....people dont like that.....and it was plain for all to see.....
Posted by: sturgeone | December 19, 2007 9:04 AM
Good morning-
Yesterday I went to see John Edwards with Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne. There were few few hundred, definitely to capacity. Raitt and Browne performed about four songs at the outset and were pretty well received- Bonnie spoke about Edwards' views and being electable, and how she has not campaigned for candidates before.
They were joined by Peter Coyote, and Granny D (who is from the next town over) unexpectedly appeared and gave the intro. That was a surprise to me as I thought she was with Kucinich.
Elizabeth and Cate Edwards were also on the stage.
Edwards spoke for about 20 minutes, focusing on taking power away from corporations and standing up for Americans- that he loved his country, but we are a country better than arguign about what kind of torture is acceptable, and having people who have served our country live on the streets.
I have seen Edwards four times this year, and there were no surprises- it was pretty standard Edwards. He allowed questions and took about six- tort reform, nuclear energy, Kucinich and 9/11 commission, who he would want in his cabinet.
I was struck by the fact that Hillary has only been here two times, and only in February did she take questions. Obama has been around two times also, and only took questions in April.
A good amount of the attendees were there for the singers of course, but almost everyone stayed to listen to Edwards. From the applause and the comments I heard upon leaving, he was well received. My own opinion, and I know that of others too, is that when you see a candidate in person you can be swayed, but then you see another, and you can be swayed again. It is much more of an impression to see and hear people in person-
Elizabeth- who is always well loved by all- jumped into the fray a few times to offer who two cents.
Posted by: Kathy | December 19, 2007 9:11 AM
If any of the NH'ers are around....
It's generally accepted that some 40% of the voters in NH are unaffiliated. Are the libertarians part of that 40% and where are the greens(if there are any)
In Cal, open primaries were ended because in sense it became more about the game and you voted in the other party's primary to try to make sure they have the weakest candidate, Why doesn't that happen in NH
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 9:30 AM
ps
Kathy
thanks for the post. I really enjoy hearing from people who are involved in NH and Iowa. When you juxtapose the comments of people against the news coverage -- it is pretty astonishing.
And they seem to get it wrong from all sides. It does seem to me the media does lean right (business) but it mostly incompetent and corrupt.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 9:37 AM
KGR-
I'll give my take.
Yes, most voters are unaffliated, and many call themselves independents. But, of those, most have a very clear tendency to take a republican or a democratic ballot. I think sometimes it is portrayed that the unaffiliated bounced equally back and forth.
Many in NH have a libertarian streak- that cuts strangely enough across parties. I know of no one officially in the libertarian party. In my area there are quite a few who call themselves libertarians, and these people this time around are expected to vote for Ron Paul (and it is true- you see his signs often).
As for Greens, the environment here is a big issue across parties, but I know of no organized Green party members. Of those I know who lean that way, they are democrats.
For your concern about voters skipping parties, sure that happens but I think the amount is so low that no one cares that it would influence anything.
One thing for the general election, is that we had for years straight ticket voting which the Ds always wanted to do away with. Lo and behold, in 2006 dems won at every office level resulting in the state legislature to be in dem hands for the first time in a century. But the dems kept their promise and did away with the straight ticket, so the survival of the low ticket dems is in question next November.
Posted by: kathy | December 19, 2007 9:44 AM
thanks
the pundits like to paint the 40% as this blob that can swing from the far right to the far left so they can influence the election.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 9:50 AM
wonder what kind of stuff is being destroyed in that office bldg fire.......probably lots of papers in there to fuel the flames.......
Posted by: sturgeone | December 19, 2007 9:59 AM
Fire in the Eisenhower Exec. Office (Is that part of the wedding cake building?) ... Need to check the waste baskets for burning tapes and documents.
Posted by: Jamie | December 19, 2007 9:59 AM
KCG....
Kathy's take is pretty accurate, IMO.....
there is no official libertarian or green party in NH...... you are either a Republican, a Democrat, or undeclared......
Kathy.....
one reason you may be seeing more of Edwards in this state is because at the moment, his only job is running for president..... Clinton and Obama are still Senators.....
I'm basing my decision of whom to vote for by reading the candidates positions and looking at their past experiences and then deciding what are the most important issues to me......
if I based it on how often I've seen someone...... well I'd have to write in Arlo Guthrie's name..... ;0)
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 10:00 AM
One other point-
ok, this is just based upon what I hear, but I know on no one who wants to take a republican ballot for the first time. On the other hand , one of the county co-chairs for Edwards is a lifelong repub who became unaffiliated for Edwards, and a very out front Obama supporter is a veteran, and former cop, lifelong repub who is now a dem- both are in their 40's.
I know of few republicans who are passionate about any of the bunch- except for the Ron Paul guys (and Tancredo- the equivalent of Kucinich on the right).
Lastly, I thought the Ann Romney ads were atrocious, but I cannot stand the Hillary ads on the local radio! Hitting ourselves over the head with the vote for a woman theme, there is the solitary piano strain slowly in the background with a mom talking about her daughter with cancer losing insurance coverage and Hillary will fight for it. God help me- I want to scream- do they think that this will influence anyone? It tells me nothing. I find it so simplistic and patronizing.
Posted by: Kathy | December 19, 2007 10:01 AM
Hey Renee-
One other point about senators vs. formers running-
it seems like everyone has missed some votes but last week Chris Dodd impressed everyone.
One big difference between Edwards and Obama/Hillary is that the latter were only appearing at huge megaevents, so the numbers of the events were smaller. But they are not the best vehicle for reaching people.
Renee, do you know of anyone who has been undecided breaking for Hillary? I don't.
Posted by: Kathy | December 19, 2007 10:05 AM
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:15 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, New Hampshire
A new CNN/WMUR poll shows Clinton boosting her lead in New Hampshire. The numbers: Clinton 38%, Obama 26%, Edwards 14%, and Richardson 8%.
Clinton also gets some more good news with the endorsement from New Hampshire’s Foster’s Daily Democrat.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 10:14 AM
Kathy....
you talk to a lot more voters than I do...... but no, I don't know any undecideds breaking for Hillary..... I do know quite a few older people.... both men and women.... who are saying they will vote for her because it's time for a woman to be president of this country......
and I just want to reiterate what you said about most undeclareds leaning one way or the other...... I'm sure my town isn't any different from any other town here in NH..... it didn't take working too many elections to know which indies were mostly Repubs and which were mostly Dems.....
I myself lean Dem...... I've lived here for 30 yrs and have voted in every election..... and I took a Repub ballot only once... in 2000.....
but like most good NHerites..... I don't like anyone putting labels on me....
the MSM is clueless......
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 10:15 AM
So are we now going to hear how the dirty Iranians set the fire in the offices on White House grounds.
Is this the new Reichstags fire or were they destroying more evidence of High Crimes and Misdemeanors along with War Crimes evidence against them?
Are we now going to attack Iran for burning White House Records as Hitler blamed the Jews for torching the Reichstag?
There all Nazi's every single last one of them.
God Bless.
Posted by: anon-paranoid
| December 19, 2007 10:16 AM
KRG-
I consider those UNH polls to be pretty accurate. If you read it through, you will find two important pieces of info
1. NH voters break very late-
and
2. 65% say they have not made a definite decision on their vote. Things are very fluid here.
Posted by: kathy | December 19, 2007 10:19 AM
Kathy
I saw the 65% undecided but I think it indicates a trend line which is good for Clinton.
I think if I were Edwards I would put Eliz in Iowa and he should spend his time in NH so when he does well in Iowa he still has a chance in NH.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 10:22 AM
Anon p
When I heard about the fire...I thought exactly the same thing.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 10:30 AM
About Edwards and his current tack --
I work with hedge funds to get projects financed.
So I know a bit about them. What I know is that the overwhelming majority of them are awful.
I know the one with which Edwards was associated made what is for American hedge funds a huge step towards normal business responsibility by ending its practice of reinvesting profits in off-shore funds to avoid paying taxes. (As the first hedge fund to go public, it had to.)
But that still leaves Fortress paying far, far less in taxes than other American businesses.
There is an argument to be made for Edwards potentially having reformed a hedge fund (and, in time, possibly an industry) from within.
But I know hedge funds well enough to say... it still makes keeps my fingers at least a foot away from the John Edwards lever.
Why of all the financial businesses in this country would the man who ran first on "two Americas" and now runs on a rage against corporate power join... a hedge fund -- the pirates of the American main?
With the surprising exception of Joe Biden there is a disturbing tendency among all candidates of both parties to not listen to what they are saying or observe what they are doing.
Edwards ain't Rudy -- that's for certain. But I haven't heard him speak of Fortress to which he remains closely connected in terms of fundraising.
And while that isn't the same as Rudy.... it certainly is within ethical spitting distance of him. Which is just a couple of feet away.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 10:32 AM
anon,
You said it, brother.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 10:32 AM
Kathy,
Senator Dodd put his serving the Constitution above his candidacy.
That should make every other candidate walk around as nekkid before the press and the world as the title character in The Emperor's New Clothes.
So did it?
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 10:39 AM
9/11.....
here, here.....
thanks for the post on hedge funds..... admit I don't know much about them.... except I've heard they are evil incarnate for the middle class......
fire..... at the Eisenhower building..... oh yes..... lots and lots of documents (especially concerning the VP) going up in smoke right now......
and of course the MSM will say it's all an "accident"......
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 10:43 AM
Cheney the lizard king is at an undisclosed location, shirtless and in leather pants, writhing out Light My Fire....
Somehow this reminds me that Huckabee -- the candidate of Godverment -- actually blocked storm, flood and fire emergency funding legislation because he protested that such horrid things should be called "acts of God".
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 10:48 AM
I picture Cheney acting just like Charley Steiner in that old ESPN commercial. The sprinkler system is on , papers are up in smoke , people are running around screaming and there's Cheney standing there shirtless with his tie wrapped around his head yelling "FOLLOW ME TO FREEDOM!"
Posted by: Corey
| December 19, 2007 11:09 AM
And the answer to today's Trail Mix challenge (see main post) . . . Mitt Romney
He is the only Republican who places in the top three in the first three major contests, according to polls in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
(He also places in the top three in Michigan and Nevada, which vote between NH and SC.)
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| December 19, 2007 11:11 AM
speaking of sleazy corrupt people, today Trent Lott resigned from the senate.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 11:15 AM
Craig,
Steve Benen of TCM disagreed with you this weekend about the nature of Bush's and Obama's "indiscretions" in 2000 and now. (The real nature of Bush's problem was that he denied ever having been accused or convicted of any criminal act -- and then the DUI thing resurfaced. No such claim or issue by Obama.)
However... today TCM-MC Josh Marshall couldn't agree with you more in both the short AND the long run about Romney.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 11:16 AM
kgc,
Did you see the parade of weepy GOP senators crying over how Lott had been right about Strom Thurmond?
(Either in truthful content or in just making a sweet centenarian feel GOOD about hisself -- your pick.)
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 11:17 AM
9/11
Yes Gordon Smith was especially icky.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 11:27 AM
It doesn't matter who it is, the Repug is going to lose and lose big. America is finding its brain again.
Posted by: Thomas Freeman
| December 19, 2007 11:27 AM
KKKarl gets a pity publish
yesterday there was a story about Karl Rove's memoir languishing at auction (3 million min apparently.)
today there is a story that Mary Matalin will publish the memoir.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 11:29 AM
and Time's Man of the Year is Putin?
WTF?
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 11:33 AM
About Romney....I have a sneaking suspicion that he's already been annointed by somebody behind the scenes. Wall Street powers. And if he has, then goodbye Huckabee.
Back in 1980 I worked on a Republican Senate campaign in Colorado (I know, I know). But the candidate was a good friend, then Sec. of State Mary Estill Buchanan, a very liberal Republican (when they still existed), divorced mother of five...and many right wing Repubs hated her.
I say this only to explain how I came to see the Reagan/Bush primaries up close and personal. I got to know Maureen Reagan during the times she came to town...really liked her despite differences in politics. (She knew I wasn't going to vote for her dad and shrugged it off...)
Maureen despised many of the men that eventually made up Reagan's "kitchen cabinet" and told me flat out that she knew they supported her father because they were convinced they could control him. She swore they couldn't. Indeed, they sometimes couldn't. But he still delivered damn near anything they wanted. Her conversations always alluded to a group of business leaders who really made decisions for the Republicans. They had their minions out there of course....you seldom heard from them directly. And that's why I think the Stepford candidate, Darling of Wall Street, Mitt Romney, will be the candidate....
By the way, after Reagon got the nod, the Bush supporters all had bumper stickers that said: Reagan '80, Bush '81. The Bushes have always had a bit of a sick streak.
PS: Interesting examination of Obama/Clinton foreign policy here --
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002589.php
Posted by: Patsi | December 19, 2007 11:37 AM
Wasn't HITLER once Time's Man of the Year?
BUSH also? I mean the Bush dynasty made all their money in collusion with the Nazis in the World War II era. Considering the dirty deeds of Prescott Bush, should any of us be surprised by what we got now?
Posted by: Thomas Freeman
| December 19, 2007 11:38 AM
Don't you guys think Romney is irresponsible for spawning all those kids? If every family had as many children as he has the world's resources would dry up even faster than they are already. But I've heard that the Mormon doctrine (like the Catholics) says sex is only for procreation. If that's so he's -- what -- had it only about 6 times?
Posted by: Thomas Freeman
| December 19, 2007 11:40 AM
Patsi,
on a local level, here in Ft Worth there is definitely a "Good Ole Boy's Network consisting of "movers and shakers" in the downtown business district. To be the mayor you have to have their nod of approval. Same with the councilmen. Used to be worse that it is now but it still exists.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: horsedooty | December 19, 2007 12:17 PM
TFreeman....
I don't have a problem with Hitler or Bush having been Time's Man of the Year at one time..... they were both the biggest newsmakers of their year.....
it just seems like Time went out of it's way to not name Gore..... who was clearly THE biggest newsmaker this past year.....
yeah, Putin was in the news..... but not that much.....
I'm sure they did as a surprise in hopes of selling more magazines....
but it just serves to remind everyone how irrelevant a mag like Time (or Newsweek) have become, IMO.....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | December 19, 2007 12:21 PM
wow
12.19.07 -- 11:30AM // link
You're Kidding Me, Right?
I really hope the Obama camp is kidding when they say Barack is the most scrutinized candidate in the race. If they're not, they're living in a fantasy world that makes me question whether they're up to the rigors of a national campaign.
Let me be clear: there's legitimate scrutiny of legislative records, policy positions, personal finances, history of decisions made in tough, pressure-filled situations (the only really legitimate meaning of character), etc. There's been some of that and should probably be more.
Then there's the collective assault that constitutes modern press 'scrutiny', especially for a Democrat who generally has to deal with the tag team of the national political press and the regrettably much more able and ruthless GOP oppo research cadre, which has an established feeding operation mainlined to most national political reporters.
It ain't fair; it ain't right; but it's the reality. And if he thinks he's already gotten that, well ... what's he been smoking?
--Josh Marshall
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 12:30 PM
breaking news
Tweety calls Josh Marshall a castrato
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 12:31 PM
sez more about Tweety than me
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 12:43 PM
and Josh Marshall made a drug reference which in tweetyt's eyes makes you a member of the Clinton Chorus..
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 12:45 PM
still on the front page of huffpo and not in a good way for tweety
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 12:47 PM
Craig-
I think it is a pretty sure thing that Romney will win NH. McCain won the unaffiliateds last time- they will not be taking a repub ballot. Huckerbee is not the type that does well here.
Romney has been developing grassroots repub activists for years- he has an enormous summer house in the Lakes Region and is from the next state. He is a sure thing to lock up the repubs here. Also, I would not be surprised to see Ron Paul do a lot better than expected.
Posted by: Kathy | December 19, 2007 12:53 PM
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2007/12/ixnay_onway_ethay_asxmay_adswa.html
rudee's campaign has two versions of his christmas ad
and the romney negative ads will work. negative ads always do. it will hurt huckabee but I don't hear anyone discussing murder sucide here..
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | December 19, 2007 12:54 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| December 19, 2007 1:23 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: Jamie | December 19, 2007 2:46 PM
TIME also named Krauthammer and Kristol as men of LAST year.
Both were fired.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| December 19, 2007 3:54 PM
Post A Comment