Tuesday, June 06, 2006
New Corker Poll Shows Hilleary Third
The Kingsport Times-News' Hank Hayes has an article out today that focuses on the reports that broke yesterday of Bob Corker's involvement with illegal aliens in direct contradiction to his recent statements that he had never done so.
The story is well done, as one would expect. Of course, there doesn't appear to be too much in the way of earth shattering material - the allegations are laid out, Corker lies and attempts to spin his way out of danger, and Ed Bryant proposes real immigration reform. On its face, this appears to be the same situation as yesterday.
However, there is a tidbit that many of us have been expecting and finally surfaced with little fanfare in the Hayes article.
Internal Corker polling is showing Van Hilleary running third in a three-horse race.
From the Hayes article:
"Corker told his Johnson City volunteers that a newly released internal poll shows him having a 20-point lead over Bryant and a 26-point edge over Hilleary."
Why is this important? Well, Hilleary Campaign Manager Jennifer Coxe has repeatedly said that the reason Hilleary won't get out of the race is because he was running second. That obstacle is now defeated. Also, TeamGOP's Jeff Ward has stated that he would call for Hilleary to exit the race if we reached this point. Jeff wrote:
"If Van was consistently running third, I would ask him to drop out...if Van was in third place, I believe he would."
Jay Bush chronicled the quote and said we were going to hold Ward to his statements. Of course, all we can do is remind Ward of them. If you think that Jeff Ward is going to hold up to his end of the bargain instead of finding a way to weasel his way out by spinning the results or attacking the poll or calling for an analysis of the data by NASA, I have some oceanfront property in Oklahoma that you might be interested in.
As I wrote, several political pundits have been expecting this for a while now. How can a candidate in a three-way race run third in the GOP centers of Shelby, Williamson, Sullivan, Washington, and Knox Counties and expect to win this race? I suspect that someone over at the Hilleary campaign has crunched these numbers and sees the handwriting on the wall.
It's time to hold up to your word, Van Hilleary. It's time that you weren't a candidate for the U.S. Senate.
The story is well done, as one would expect. Of course, there doesn't appear to be too much in the way of earth shattering material - the allegations are laid out, Corker lies and attempts to spin his way out of danger, and Ed Bryant proposes real immigration reform. On its face, this appears to be the same situation as yesterday.
However, there is a tidbit that many of us have been expecting and finally surfaced with little fanfare in the Hayes article.
Internal Corker polling is showing Van Hilleary running third in a three-horse race.
From the Hayes article:
"Corker told his Johnson City volunteers that a newly released internal poll shows him having a 20-point lead over Bryant and a 26-point edge over Hilleary."
Why is this important? Well, Hilleary Campaign Manager Jennifer Coxe has repeatedly said that the reason Hilleary won't get out of the race is because he was running second. That obstacle is now defeated. Also, TeamGOP's Jeff Ward has stated that he would call for Hilleary to exit the race if we reached this point. Jeff wrote:
"If Van was consistently running third, I would ask him to drop out...if Van was in third place, I believe he would."
Jay Bush chronicled the quote and said we were going to hold Ward to his statements. Of course, all we can do is remind Ward of them. If you think that Jeff Ward is going to hold up to his end of the bargain instead of finding a way to weasel his way out by spinning the results or attacking the poll or calling for an analysis of the data by NASA, I have some oceanfront property in Oklahoma that you might be interested in.
As I wrote, several political pundits have been expecting this for a while now. How can a candidate in a three-way race run third in the GOP centers of Shelby, Williamson, Sullivan, Washington, and Knox Counties and expect to win this race? I suspect that someone over at the Hilleary campaign has crunched these numbers and sees the handwriting on the wall.
It's time to hold up to your word, Van Hilleary. It's time that you weren't a candidate for the U.S. Senate.
Permalink posted by Rob Huddleston @ 7:51 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
This is insane! You Bryant people affording any legitimacy to these polls that are bought and paid for by the Bob Corker campaign wreaks of desperation. Your guy is living in a glass house and in no position to be throwing stones at any other candidate.
Corker's first poll that told us he was leading was an utterly asinine proposition. But to suggest that Van is in third trailing 26-points behind Bob Corker is just patently absurd. You Bryant people are so desperate that you'll tout a Bob Corker poll to bolster your own case. Pathetic.
Corker's first poll that told us he was leading was an utterly asinine proposition. But to suggest that Van is in third trailing 26-points behind Bob Corker is just patently absurd. You Bryant people are so desperate that you'll tout a Bob Corker poll to bolster your own case. Pathetic.
I seem to recall that Hilleary people were trying to use the results of a Corker poll last week to try and get Ed Bryant out of the race.
Charles, I hope there will be a sit-down soon. Very soon. Van can't win this. He needs to get out and help defeat Corker.
to donna--
With all due respect, your call for Van to drop out is rather transparent. You're an avowed Ed Bryant supporter. Your organization has endorsed him have you not? There is an issue of impartiality there.
Besides, as several political commentators in the MSM and blogosphere have noted, Ed Bryant's call for Van to drop out is absurd. Am I the only one that finds it rather incongruous that the guy in 3rd place calls for the guy in 2nd place to drop out and not the other way around? Those figures are from Corker's poll--which is bogus.
So, look to reputable polling. There hasn't been a single poll yet, during the entire race, that has shown Ed Bryant leading the race. Not ONE! On the contrary, the Tennessee Journal said that Van was leading with 30%. And just last month, Rasmussen and The Nashville City Paper/Supertalk poll showed Van leading. How do you explain that, Donna?
to david--
You said:
"I seem to recall that Hilleary people were trying to use the results of a Corker poll last week to try and get Ed Bryant out of the race."
What on Earth are you talking about?! Ed Bryant is the one that issued a press release calling on Van to drop out of the race. You got your facts mixed up on that one.
to all--
I'd like to note that a wise poster on my blog (vanwagon.blogspot.com) who was in attendence when Corker made these statements, points out that it was a mistake--a slip of the tongue. The poll Corker has already released shows him with a 20 point lead over Van and 26 points over Ed. Rob Huddleston quotes him as getting it exactly backward. It was a mere verbal gaffe on Corker's part. He wasn't referring to some new poll; he was talking about the one he has already released. So as usual Mr. Huddleston doesn't know what he's talking about. He twisted Bob Corker's words to make a baseless argument. As I said--this wreaks of desperation.
Cheers!
With all due respect, your call for Van to drop out is rather transparent. You're an avowed Ed Bryant supporter. Your organization has endorsed him have you not? There is an issue of impartiality there.
Besides, as several political commentators in the MSM and blogosphere have noted, Ed Bryant's call for Van to drop out is absurd. Am I the only one that finds it rather incongruous that the guy in 3rd place calls for the guy in 2nd place to drop out and not the other way around? Those figures are from Corker's poll--which is bogus.
So, look to reputable polling. There hasn't been a single poll yet, during the entire race, that has shown Ed Bryant leading the race. Not ONE! On the contrary, the Tennessee Journal said that Van was leading with 30%. And just last month, Rasmussen and The Nashville City Paper/Supertalk poll showed Van leading. How do you explain that, Donna?
to david--
You said:
"I seem to recall that Hilleary people were trying to use the results of a Corker poll last week to try and get Ed Bryant out of the race."
What on Earth are you talking about?! Ed Bryant is the one that issued a press release calling on Van to drop out of the race. You got your facts mixed up on that one.
to all--
I'd like to note that a wise poster on my blog (vanwagon.blogspot.com) who was in attendence when Corker made these statements, points out that it was a mistake--a slip of the tongue. The poll Corker has already released shows him with a 20 point lead over Van and 26 points over Ed. Rob Huddleston quotes him as getting it exactly backward. It was a mere verbal gaffe on Corker's part. He wasn't referring to some new poll; he was talking about the one he has already released. So as usual Mr. Huddleston doesn't know what he's talking about. He twisted Bob Corker's words to make a baseless argument. As I said--this wreaks of desperation.
Cheers!
Charles;
Van also called on Bryant to exit the race. Indeed, he has done so on several occasions throughout this race, including on Knoxville radio. Perhaps you need a refresher of the facts.
Van also called on Bryant to exit the race. Indeed, he has done so on several occasions throughout this race, including on Knoxville radio. Perhaps you need a refresher of the facts.
I don't need a "refresher on the facts."
You have it backward. Ed Bryant has repeatedly called on Van to drop out of this race. I have failed to see one place where Van has done that.
You have it backward. Ed Bryant has repeatedly called on Van to drop out of this race. I have failed to see one place where Van has done that.
Charles -
As I stated on Oatney's blog, you had better learn a few definitions, such as "misquoted" and "libel" during your next year at school. Perhaps you should learn them sooner, for your own sake.
It's difficult to misquote someone when you cut and paste from the site. Hank Hayes is a vet political reporter, and I trust that he got the quote right. Plus, there is a difference between an internal poll and one for public release. (You may not know this, being a political neophyte.)
If Corker made a mistake with his citation of the poll, it would be a surprise. After all, he's not Van Hilleary and is quite intelligent, even if I disagree with his pro-abortion, pro-tax record.
Cheers,
Rob
Post a Comment
As I stated on Oatney's blog, you had better learn a few definitions, such as "misquoted" and "libel" during your next year at school. Perhaps you should learn them sooner, for your own sake.
It's difficult to misquote someone when you cut and paste from the site. Hank Hayes is a vet political reporter, and I trust that he got the quote right. Plus, there is a difference between an internal poll and one for public release. (You may not know this, being a political neophyte.)
If Corker made a mistake with his citation of the poll, it would be a surprise. After all, he's not Van Hilleary and is quite intelligent, even if I disagree with his pro-abortion, pro-tax record.
Cheers,
Rob
<< Home
