Colbert catches conservative support?

Sure, Stephen Colbert is a comedian who has never held elected office. And sure, he’s running for president as a fictional, bombastic character. And sure, he said he’s limiting his campaign to just one state, in part because the whole “presidential campaign” is just an amusing little stunt for entertainment purposes.

But it’s probably worth noting that the Colbert character may actually win some votes.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that Colbert is preferred by 13% of voters as an independent candidate challenging Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rudy Giuliani. The survey was conducted shortly after Colbert’s surprise announcement that he is lusting for the Oval Office.

The result is similar when Fred Thompson is the Republican in the three-way race. With Thompson as the GOP candidate, Colbert earns 12% of the vote.

Here’s the kicker: In a three-way contest, among voters aged 18-29, Colbert does better than the Republican candidate.

Among all voters, in a three-way race, Rasmussen shows Hillary Clinton leading with 45%, followed by Giuliani at 35%, and Colbert third with 13%. The numbers are nearly identical with Fred Thompson in the mix instead of Giuliani.

To be sure, this is silly. Colbert is a fictional character, and he’s not really a candidate. But the poll is actually illuminating anyway. Colbert’s support in the Rasmussen data comes almost exclusively from the right, which as Matt Yglesias suggested, is “evidence that an anti-Giuliani spoiler candidate (Tancredo? Paul? Buchanan?) could find an audience,” because “there’s an evident disaffection with the Republican options.”

Either that, or as Eric Kleefeld notes, “conservatives who have watched his show really don’t get the joke.”

Of course, it’s also worth noting that the FEC isn’t amused.

ABC News reported that the Federal Election Commission may have to decide whether Colbert’s campaign is real.

If his campaign plays out the way he’s indicated that it will, Comedy Central and Colbert’s sponsor, Doritos, could be violating federal laws that bar corporations from backing political campaigns, election law experts say.

“How serious can you get about running as a joke?” said Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group that tracks campaign finances. “The Federal Election Commission doesn’t have a great sense of humor.”

Federal law bars corporations from contributing to candidates, either through donations or in-kind contributions such as free use of goods or services.

Media organizations are permitted to feature presidential candidates in covering campaigns. But no precedent exists for a television network promoting and fostering a candidacy of one of its own talk-show hosts, said Lawrence M. Noble, a former general counsel for the Federal Election Commission. And comedian Pat Paulsen’s 1968 candidacy predated current campaign finance regulations.

“The real problem comes in the fact that he actually has his own show, talking about his campaign, paid for by a network,” Noble said. “These are the kind of things on slow days you’d debate until the late afternoon at the FEC, but there are serious questions that come up. In theory, he could end up having some campaign finance problems.”

While he has talked about his candidacy publicly only in character — as the combative faux-talk-show host who favors “truthiness” on “The Colbert Report” — Colbert is taking formal steps that are consistent with an actual presidential candidacy.

He has begun collecting signatures to get himself placed on both the Democratic and Republican presidential primary ballots in South Carolina.

I think the lawyers at Comedy Central have picked up on this. They’ve already dropped plans for Comedy Central’s website to post signature forms to put Colbert on the ballot.

And if, by chance, Colbert continues to run and secures a spot on the ballot, The Atlantic’s Joshua Green has done a serious piece weighing the likely political consequences.

Stay tuned.

NOW the fcc wants to get involved?

  • I want to see him included in the debates. They are short on substance, heavy on posturing as it is. To have him included will at least make them amusing and reduce the “gotcha” quality of news reporting on candidates in the debates.

  • There actually ARE a surprising number of conservatives who don’t realize that Colbert is a character and is making fun of them.

    And by surprising number I mean “more than one” – I’ve run into three different “Young Republicans” on my midwestern college campus who think/thought before I laughed at them and pointed out how wrong they were that Colbert is a serious conservative counterpart to the liberal Jon Stewart. And these folks vote, people.

    I think they’re “libertarians” – or, more accurately, “college-aged conservatives who want pot legalized”. I suspect its the pot that is leading to their confusion, but who knows?

  • As long as we have the possibility of being able to vote for “non-serious” candidates for president . . .

    I support Jimmy Neutron for president.

    At least he is smart enough to find a way to get us out of the messes he creates, unlike a Certain Person Who Shall Remain Nameless.

  • Comedian Pat Paulsen “ran” for President in 1968. His shtick wasn’t all that different from Steven Colbert’s – Paulsen read pompous, moronic editorials on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour.

    Paulsen had “equal time” problems with the FCC, since he was using a comedy show to promote his candidacy. (Remember “equal time?” How quaint!) Television couldn’t show Ronald Reagan’s movies while he was running. We might be seeing less “Law and Order” while Fred Thompson is a candidate.

    Times have changed. In 1968, everyone knew that Pat Paulsen was a joke. Today, as noted, conservatives don’t get the joke.

  • From the West Wing:

    President Josiah Bartlet: I was watching a television program before, with a kind of roving moderator who spoke to a seated panel of young women who were having some sort of problem with their boyfriends – apparently, because the boyfriends had all slept with the girlfriends’ mothers. And they brought the boyfriends out, and they fought, right there on television.

    Toby, tell me: these people don’t vote, do they?

    ==

    Yeah, they do… Sic Semper inteligencia

  • I love Colbert’s “candidacy.” I wish we had a celebrity “favorite son” (or daughter) candidate in every state, all running on the same non-platform… the only way to expose the absurdity and insufficiency of the process is to hold up to it a giant mirror.

    That’s what I think Colbert is doing, and I wish him all the luck in the world with it.

  • Jimmy Neutron is too stiff on camera, overweight, and looks silly with a beard. Even if he won the election Hilary would pull some strings and get sworn in.

  • […] he could end up having some campaign finance problems.”

    What campaign finance? He’s only collecting signatures. He’s only running in one state. There’s no “click to donate” button on the website… The FEC is out of its cotton-pickin’ mind…

  • The FEC may want to look closely at his GOP application, if the one he completed on the air is the one he actually submitted. I believe he pulled out a heavy black pen (and put down his big white GOP one, which was shaped like a d*ck) and redacted the part that states he will not violate Federal election laws.

  • Here’s the kicker: In a three-way contest, among voters aged 18-29, Colbert does better than the Republican candidate.

    this gives me faith in our future. The young clearly have their priorities right in this case.

  • My soldier nephew keeps telling me that Colbert is a Republican and is NOT making fun of polititians at all. He believes that Stephen and Jon Stewart are being serious!!

  • Comments are closed.