Donald Trump has boasted that he’s “leading every poll and in most cases big.” Not anymore. The latest IBD/TIPP Poll shows him in second place, seven points behind Ben Carson.
The nationwide survey found that 24% of Republicans back Carson, compared with 17% who say they support Trump.
Marco Rubio came in third with 11% and Carly Fiorina fourth at 9%. Jeb Bush, once considered a prohibitive favorite, ranked fifth with just 8% support, which was a point lower than those who say they are still undecided.
The IBD/TIPP Poll has a proven track record for accuracy, based on its performance in the past three presidential elections. In a comparison of the final results of various pollsters for the 2004 and 2008 elections, IBD/TIPP was the most accurate. And the New York Times concluded that IBD/TIPP was the most accurate among 23 polls over the three weeks leading up to the 2012 election.
The October poll, conducted from Sept. 26 to Oct. 1, included 377 registered voters who are Republican or registered independents who lean toward the Republican Party, with a margin of error of +/- 5 percentage points.
Other polls show Trump’s support slipping in recent weeks. The Real Clear Politics average of six national polls shows him falling from 30.5% in mid-September to 23.3% by the end of the month. That average does not include the IBD/TIPP findings.
“Things appear to be catching up with Trump on multiple fronts,” said Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, which conducts IBD’s monthly poll. “In addition to facing increasing attacks from other candidates, Trump’s boycott of Fox News may have set him back,” Mayur said, noting that the poll was being conducted during Trump’s self-imposed hiatus.
When asked on CNBC about his slipping poll numbers, Trump said that “if I fell behind badly, I would certainly get out.”
Carson’s gain comes after his controversial remarks on “Meet the Press” that he couldn’t support a Muslim for president.
Rubio’s third-place standing shows he has gained considerable ground since the second GOP debate. But Fiorina, who was widely seen as having won that debate, has been unable to capitalize on it with Republicans.
Hillary Clinton Leads Dems
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is the top pick of 42% of 344 registered Democrats or those leaning Democratic. Vice President Joe Biden is second at 22%, even though he has yet to announce whether he plans to run.
Bernie Sanders is backed by 18% of Democrats. Sanders’ strongest support is among those 18-24, of whom 48% back the self-identified socialist, while only 14% back Clinton.
Other October poll findings:
57% of those following the Hillary Clinton email scandal say she should drop out of the presidential race if the FBI determines that she sent or received classified emails on her private email server while secretary of state. Among Democrats, 75% say she should stay in.
53% of those following the refugee crisis oppose bringing 185,000 refugees fleeing the Middle East into the U.S., and 63% say Congress should first OK any plans to admit the refugees.
Ben Carson’s campaign has done what few political insiders thought was possible when the former neurosurgeon launched his candidacy last spring: become a fundraising juggernaut.
The political outsider, now running only one point behind Donald Trump in recent polling, raised over $20 million dollars in the third quarter only. To date, the campaign has raised over $31 million.
“You know, the pundits all said that we would never be able to mount a national campaign for financial reasons, but here we are approaching 600,000 donations,” Carson told the Associated Press while campaigning in New Hampshire. “The people have gotten involved, and that’s something I think they probably never anticipated.”
The fundraising haul is not being fueled by mainly major donors, but by smaller donations and volunteers stepping up to be “bundlers” for the campaign.
CBS News reports that Jacquelyn Monroe, 45, is one example. The Georgian plays piano for a living and had never given a significant amount to politicians in the past, but decided to raise $100,000 for Carson’s campaign.
“‘It’s not something that I would normally set out to do,’ Monroe [told CBS News], who added she was moved by Carson’s authenticity and Christian faith and coaxed into collecting money from friends and business associates by his ambitious campaign staff. ‘$100,000-plus is a big deal for me.’”
Carson’s campaign reported raising $12 million in September alone, and a significant portion of that came in after the candidate indicated he would not support a Muslim who did not renounce Sharia Law for president.
The campaign brought in $700,000 in the 36 hours after he made that comment less than two weeks ago, according to campaign manager Barry Bennett.
“I would guess that we’ve outraised the Republican National Committee and many of our opponents maybe combined,” the campaign manager added.
Now flush with cash, Bennett said the campaign has begun implementing plans to buy television ad space across the South for the Super Tuesday primaries on March 1, 2016.
“Sooner or later, they’ll have to realize there’s a new reality or they’ll pay the price,” Bennett said of the Republican establishment. “The outsiders are not going away.”
Now who’s being the child?
Conservative YouTube sensation CJ Pearson, a 13-year-old black middle schooler from Georgia, revealed on Wednesday that he’s been blocked from following President Obama on Twitter. He’s also unable to view the president’s tweets.
11,040 Likes – 4,948 Comments – 5,410 Shares
“It’s an honor,” Pearson tells The American Mirror, insisting he did nothing to warrant being blocked, except his most recent video released last week.
In the video, he accuses the president of playing politics with the Texas student who was suspended for bringing a clock to school that appeared to be a bomb.
“He’s used this child as a political prop,” Pearson said. “This president has used this child to push his radical, leftward agenda. And I think it’s disgusting, and I think many, many people agree.”
Pearson’s video has been viewed over 1.8 million times on YouTube.
UPDATE – 10:23 p.m.:
CJ says the White House issued a statement saying the president didn’t block him on Twitter. CJ responds here:
H/T Right Scoop
It looks like the thousands of protesters outside the U.S. Capitol may have persuaded at least one Congressman to rethink Obama’s nuclear deal.
Speaker John Boehner reportedly has agreed to vote on a resolution introduced by Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL). The resolution will state that Obama has not complied with the law by not submitting the full Iranian nuclear deal to Congress.
Looks like pressure from the House conservative Freedom Caucus membership has forced House Speaker John Boehner to agree the House will not pass a resolution disapproving of President Obama’s Iran deal. Instead, the House will apparently vote Friday on the resolution introduced by Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL), which will state that Obama has not complied with the Corker-Cardin law because he has not submitted the full Iranian nuclear “agreement,” which that law explicitly defines to include all “side deals,” between third parties (including the Iran-IAEA side deals).
The House is also anticipated to now vote on a second resolution, which would state that because the President has failed to submit the “agreement” defined by Corker-Cardin, the President has no corresponding authority to lift any existing Iranian sanctions.
The move by Boehner came after Freedom Caucus members threatened to vote down a planned resolution disapproving of the Iran deal, leaving the House on record as approving the deal. This threat was designed to leverage Boehner via potential political embarrassment, and encourage GOP leadership to consider the Roskam alternative, which will both delay congressional action on the Iran deal, as well as provide a stronger legal basis upon which to challenge any presidential action lifting sanctions.
Conservatives in the House Freedom Caucus have a strategy to actually kill President Barack Obama’s nuclear arms deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran – rather than “play fight” against it, as GOP leadership wants to do.
“House Freedom Caucus members are poised to demand Wednesday that Republican leaders delay a vote on an Iran disapproval resolution until the White House has revealed all ‘side deals’ with Iran,” Roll Call’s Matt Fuller wrote late Tuesday. “And if GOP leaders don’t delay the Iran disapproval resolution, HFC members are discussing voting down the rule for the resolution on Wednesday.”
Fuller quotes Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) detailing the newly emerging strategy.
Meadows is the House Freedom Caucus member who has put forward a resolution containing a motion to vacate the chair – a fancy term for throwing House Speaker Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) out. The strategy centers around the fact that President Obama has not followed the law with regard to the Iran deal, specifically a bill that was signed into law from Sens. Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Ben Cardin (D-MD) and therefore the deal is no good.
“I think the plan is just to say that there’s a law on Corker-Cardin, it hasn’t been followed, we can’t ignore it, so to continue on with a vote in light of the administration not adhering to the law would be erroneous and really usurp the authority of Congress,” Meadows told Roll Call.
Fuller wrote that it’s expected, according to one member he spoke with, that the House Freedom Caucus members would band together to vote down a rule to bring the Iran deal disapproval resolution to the floor of the House this week if Boehner and his leadership team insist on moving this through Congress as quickly as seems to be happening.
“An HFC member who spoke on the condition of anonymity later told CQ Roll Call that, while the Freedom Caucus did not come to an official position on voting down the rule for the Iran nuclear resolution, he believes HFC members would band together to do so if leadership does not heed member advice during Wednesday morning’s weekly conference meeting,” Fuller wrote.
Voting down a rule is one of the most significant acts against one’s own party’s leadership that members can make. It’s normally expected that members of a majority vote for rules, and then cast their consequential votes on the legislation.
But voting against the rule is seen as a public protest of leadership’s strategy – in this case, not really fighting against the Obama-Iran deal – and if they’re successful in taking the rule down or forcing Democrats to vote for the rule, Boehner’s authority as Speaker of the House will be severely weakened. Conservatives tried, almost successfully, a similar strategy when it came to Obamatrade votes earlier in the year, but this time they will likely have a better shot at success because there’s even more of a national anti-political class mood now and the Iran deal is extremely unpopular.
Members are furious that Boehner is considering desecrating the 14-year-anniversary of the Al Qaeda-led terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 11 as the day the House would vote to “play fight,” as National Review’s Andy McCarthy calls it, against the Iran deal rather than really trying to stop it.
“Overall, members reported the majority of the discussion Tuesday night during the HFC meeting was dedicated to Iran and whether it was appropriate to start debate Wednesday and hold a vote Friday, which is Sept. 11,” Fuller wrote about the meeting, noting that Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) was furious. “You gotta be kidding me!” Gosar told him.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), another conservative, previously told Breitbart News that Boehner’s move to hold the Iran “play fight” vote on Sept. 11 made the House GOP leadership worse than Neville Chamberlain, the late 1930s British Prime Minister who infamously declared he had reached a deal with German dictator Adolf Hitler that would deliver “peace for our time.”
More importantly, however, Fuller noted that members are upset that the Obama administration has not provided Congress with the full details of “side deals” between “Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency.”
“Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL), offered a privileged motion Tuesday for a vote on a resolution that states the House should not act on the Iran nuclear legislation until it receives all ‘side deals,’” Fuller wrote. “Under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, the president is obligated to send Congress ‘all related materials and annexes,’ and until the president does that, the 60-day clock for a vote on Iran does not start.”
National Review’s McCarthy laid out in two recent columns how the GOP could actually stop the Iran deal from going through, by asserting its authority in Congress, something Boehner seems hell-bent on avoiding.
“It is an easy one, because all that the Republican-controlled Congress has to do, if it really wants to derail this thing, is follow the law that they wrote and Obama signed, the Corker law – the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, sometimes also known as ‘Corker-Cardin,’ after Senate sponsors Bob Corker (R-TN.) and Ben Cardin (D-MD.),” McCarthy writes of his strategy in one of the columns. “Sadly, in another iteration of the anger that is the wind beneath Donald Trump’s wings, many readers insist that GOP leadership has no intention to block Obama on Iran. If that is so, it is passing strange. The national-security threat here is grave. Plus, how much credibility can Republicans have (maybe I should just end the sentence there) in complaining about Obama’s disregard of federal law if they won’t even follow the law they themselves enacted just four months ago?”
McCarthy specified in the other first column exactly how Republicans can kill Obama’s deal with Iran.
“While maddening, the Corker bill is not an abject congressional surrender to Obama and Tehran,” McCarthy wrote.
It is a conditional surrender. It would grant Obama grudging congressional endorsement of the deal in the absence of a now unattainable veto-proof resolution of disapproval, but only if Obama fulfills certain basic terms. Obama has not complied with the most basic one: the mandate that he provide the complete Iran deal for Congress’s consideration. Therefore, notwithstanding Washington’s frenzied assumption that the 60-day period for a congressional vote is winding down, the clock has never actually started to run. Congress’s obligations under Corker have never been triggered; the Corker process is moot.
McCarthy argues that Republicans who are just going through the motions of the Corker-Cardin bill by pushing a disapproval resolution under it, rather than fighting Obama to comply with the law, are “play fighting” against the Iran deal.
‘“Surrender… Then Play-Fight’ is Republican leadership’s shameful approach to ‘governing,’” McCarthy wrote in the second column. “The quotes around ‘governing’ are intentional. After voters, having trusted the GOP’s 2014 campaign promises to block Obama’s agenda, gave Republicans control of both houses of Congress, Senate majority leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) notoriously said that the party’s primary objective was to show the public that it could ‘govern.’”
This example with regard to Iran is no different, he argues.
And for now, according to Fuller’s report in Roll Call, it looks like Boehner’s leadership team is moving forward with their plans to “play fight” against the Iran deal while actually surrendering and not really fighting against it.
“On the same day that Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) hold a Capitol Hill rally urging Congress to reject this deal, it will be pretty hard to argue that we should let Democrats off the hook and not take a stand at all,” a “senior GOP aide” – code for someone from the offices of Boehner, House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) or House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) – told Roll Call on Tuesday evening.
No wonder why Boehner doesn’t have enough GOP votes to survive Meadows’ motion to vacate the chair should it come up this fall, according to Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC).
Mulvaney told Breitbart News on Tuesday that Boehner would need Democrats to survive if there were a speakership election held now. Those people coming out to the rally against the Iran deal can see right through congressional leadership’s “play fight.” What happens next, of course, is not entirely clear – but Congress is in for a bumpy ride for the rest of September.