Share This Article with a Friend!

Presidential Horse Race 2016: Planned Parenthood president calls Carly Fiorina a liar

We start today with more bad polling news for Donald Trump, as it appears his lead in the early states has shrunk considerably.

Elena Schneider of Politico reports on the NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll released Sunday. “In Iowa, Trump holds a 5-point edge over retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, 24 percent to 19 percent, among potential Carly FiorinaRepublican caucus-goers. Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina is third at 8 percent, followed by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 7 percent. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal are all tied at 6 percent.

“In New Hampshire, Trump also leads Fiorina by 5 points, 21 percent to 16 percent. Bush is third at 11 percent, followed by Rubio and Carson, tied at 10 percent.”

The results are similar to other recent national polls which show Trump’s lead is narrowing considerably. The Real Clear Politics average still has him up by over five points, but the margin was much larger prior to last month’s CNN Republican debate.

Do you trust all these poll results? If you don’t, you’re not alone. Even the pollsters themselves admit there’s a lot of guesswork involved with the business these days.

Steven Shepherd of Politico reports on the pollsters’ uncertainty. “Indeed, the unprecedented reliance on polls to winnow the Republican field is coming at a time when many pollsters feel they’re blinder than ever to trends in public thinking — and that using polls to keep out candidates who are otherwise well qualified could seriously alter the race.”

What, you mean some of the candidates have a legitimate beef about being excluded unfairly? Or are the pollsters just copping out? Maybe on the first point, definitely not on the second.

According to one expert quoted in the story (Professor Cliff Zukin), polling is more unreliable because it’s harder to get a real sample. Nearly half of adults are unreachable on a landline phone, and of those they are able to reach, roughly nine in ten won’t participate.

I bet they get really excited when someone actually says, “I’ll do it.”

Because of the difficulty in compiling a good sample, the pollsters say we should pay particular attention to each survey’s margin of error. Seeing as all of the candidates in the middle and lower tiers technically fit within the margin, that means it’s a real toss-up in terms of who’s polling better or worse.

As far as the candidates are concerned, several are worried (Rand Paul, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee in particular) they won’t meet CNBC’s 3% threshold for qualifying for the primetime October 28 debate.

(Contrary to earlier reports, there will be another “Happy Hour” version at 6 p.m. EDT for candidates earning at least 1% support.)

Shepherd highlights the dilemma in relying on polls alone to determine the participants. “The types of national surveys being considered by TV networks typically have as few as 200 respondents for the Republican primary — there were 230 in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll that pegged Bush at 7 percent.

“A single respondent can make a big difference when networks are averaging as few as four polls together and a tenth of a percent could make the difference between appearing onstage with the front-runners — and standing next to George Pataki in the undercard.”

One person could be the difference between making the stage and being left out? If you’re chosen to take part in a poll… you better take that call.

(Note: Bobby Jindal polls at 6% in Iowa (which ties him for fourth place) in the poll referenced above… doesn’t he have a good argument for being included?)

Again, in dealing with a large field of credible candidates, some kind of criteria must be used to make debates manageable. But with the pollsters themselves being uneasy about the way inclusion versus exclusion is being handled, there’s got to be a better way.

This week’s Rand Paul fold the tent rumor

As of right now, Rand Paul is the candidate in the most danger of being demoted to the undercard debate on October 28. His poor polling numbers together with reports of strife within his campaign and horrible fundraising tally are only fueling already hot rumors that the Kentucky Senator will be the next to capitulate.

Not true, insists the Paul campaign. Caitlin Huey-Burns of Real Clear Politics reports, “The campaign insists there will be no shakeups or changes in strategy, that Paul will continue his campaign schedule in the early states and regions off the beaten track, and that it has enough resources to carry the candidate through at least the first four primaries. This week, the campaign rolled out a list of caucus state endorsements.”

Huey-Burns goes on to highlight Paul’s struggles, which even fans of his father must admit are many. Rand has at times appeared to abandon his libertarian leanings in favor of trying to engender more mainstream appeal. He’s also taken the side of Republican leaders in the Senate budget battles, opposite to the anti-establishment campaign of Ted Cruz.

These are not positions that get people excited.

And his “outsider” appeal has been exceeded by Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. Trump regularly hits Paul on Twitter and Rand’s attempts to respond seem amateurish and wimpy in comparison.

Whether he wins or not – and it’s certainly not looking promising now – Paul should stay in the race, assuming he has enough money to continue. The Republican Party needs his alternative view of foreign policy, which serves as a counter-balance to the “all hubris all the time” rest of the field.

There is room in the Republican Party for a more restrained view of America’s role in the world – and Rand Paul should deliver it.

Donald Trump doesn’t need advertising when he’s got Twitter

I just mentioned that Donald Trump often jabs at Rand Paul on Twitter. Paul’s not the only one to suffer Trump’s social media wrath, as The Donald has perfected the art of the quick Tweet.

Michael Barbaro of The New York Times reports, “Mr. Trump has mastered Twitter in a way no candidate for president ever has, unleashing and redefining its power as a tool of political promotion, distraction, score-settling and attack — and turning a 140-character task that other candidates farm out to young staff members into a centerpiece of his campaign.

“In the process, he has managed to fulfill a vision, long predicted but slow to materialize, sketched out a decade ago by a handful of digital campaign strategists: a White House candidacy that forgoes costly, conventional methods of political communication and relies instead on the free, urgent and visceral platforms of social media.”

Trump is second only to Hillary Clinton in the number of followers at 4.35 million and Barbaro says he’ll be #1 soon enough. Trump Tweets from just about anywhere he feels like it and his organized army retweets his messages and provokes conversations without being directed.

In other words, he doesn’t need a public relations agency to respond to his critics – Trump’s got hundreds of thousands of dedicated citizens doing it for him. Even more importantly, it keeps him in the news.

Having a mob advancing your message carries with it some risk – but The Donald’s understanding of media and messaging allows him to effectively deflect anything potentially damaging that might stick to other candidates.

Jeb Bush could learn from The Donald in this regard. But that would put all his big money establishment consultants out of business, wouldn’t it?

Planned Parenthood president calls Carly a liar

The pro-abortion lobby has been going out of its way to discredit the recently released unedited videos depicting Planned Parenthood officials literally bargaining over body parts of aborted babies.

Their main line of defense has been that the videos are “highly edited” and they’re all part of a grand conspiracy to deny women healthcare as part of the “war on women.”

Or something like that. It all blends together after a while.

Carly Fiorina made a particularly poignant point about the need to protect human life in the second debate by challenging Hillary Clinton and President Obama to actually watch the videos – and the Left can’t get enough of saying Fiorina made it up…

 Barbara Boland of the Washington Examiner reports Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards told NBC’s Chuck Todd, “It is extraordinary that someone running for president would lie in that way. That has been completely discredited by every reputable news source, and yet Carly Fiorina seems to continue to repeat the same lie."

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! What are these ‘reputable news sources?’ But I digress.

"I think it also shows how using distortive and deceptive videos, as the ones that have been used against Planned Parenthood, they're not credible," said Richards. "And it's not a basis upon which to make decisions about an organization or a public policy."

Richards’ outrageously false claims went unrebutted by Todd. Talk about quality journalism.

This particular article isn’t as much about Fiorina as it is a shocking expose into the thinking of the radical Left. Public opinion is moving away from these folks and they’re getting increasingly desperate.

Carly Fiorina should carry being called a “liar” by a leftist wacko like Cecile Richards as a badge of honor.

And by all means, keep up the fight. It’s a winner for you, Carly.

George W. to stump for Jeb in South Carolina?

Finally today is news that George W. Bush may be called to campaign on behalf of brother Jeb in South Carolina.

Allahpundit at Hot Air says with Jeb’s poll numbers in the dumps and George W.’s popularity on the rise, it may not be altogether a horrible concept.

But it certainly looks desperate.

So much for Jeb’s countless denials of a dynasty justification for his candidacy. Anyone who thinks this is a good idea should ask, “How many of the other candidates would have George W. Bush speak for them?”

Share this

Carly Fiorina "Liar"

I wouldn't necessarily say Fiorina is an outright liar, but she is very proficient at half truths. She was fired from HP as CEO after only five years, for "lack of leadership ability", her experience is in Technology, Sales, Marketing and Public Speaking. Her only meetings with foreign "leaders", that she touts, was with foreign "business leaders" she met during speaking engagements on technology and her outsourcing of over 30,000 jobs to foreign countries including Iran. She has served as a technology "advisor" to some federal government departments. She is a very well prepared professional public speaker, and has obviously done an excellent job at selling and marketing her self described "qualifications" for POTUS. The only difference in Fiorina and Obama is that she does not require a teleprompter. She also served on John McCain's presidential campaign committee. A research of her background does not support her claims of being "conservative"

Here is a fairly extensive list of Fiorina's professional SPEECHES