Texas Gov. George W. Bush’s double-digit victory in South Carolina over the weekend might be a sign that Arizona Sen. John McCain is not gaining the momentum that many political pundits thought he was.

In a turnout doubling that of 1996, Bush defeated McCain by a margin of 53 percent to 42 percent. Ambassador Alan Keyes took only 5 percent of the vote.

Steffen Schmidt, ISU professor of political science, said South Carolina proved that the political polls can be pretty inaccurate. The numbers leading up to Saturday’s primary had Bush and McCain virtually in a dead heat.

“I’ve been looking at Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and what really amazes me is that the polls have been wrong on all three,” he said. “The real story is that the polls have been wrong, that we seem to have lost our ability [to predict what people want].”

Schmidt cited some pundits as saying that if the turnout in South Carolina was high, McCain would be the winner, when in fact the opposite held true.

Some activists believe that Bush proved much more appealing for South Carolina’s traditionally conservative electorate.

David Williams, adviser for Campus Christian Fellowship and professor of agricultural education and studies, said he thought Bush’s win proves a candidate’s religious beliefs are important.

“I think there are certain basic things we need [from a president], and one of those is a belief in an almighty God,” Williams said.

But despite Bush’s win in South Carolina, Williams said he has yet to make up his mind on whom he will endorse.

“I would still be open,” he said. “Every person has to make up their own mind.”

However, Schmidt said the Christian-conservative vote didn’t necessarily carry Bush; he did well in almost all of the categories.

“McCain did very poorly among registered Republicans, retirees and the military,” he said. “The polls got it really wrong.”

Of the registered GOP voters who did turn out on Saturday, 69 percent supported Bush, while only 26 percent favored McCain.

Schmidt also said he doesn’t believe that Bush’s defeat of McCain was that substantial.

“McCain did well for someone who came from nowhere,” he said. “McCain did extremely well given the fact that he’s a dark-horse, come-from-behind candidate. I think it’s surprising he did as well as he did.”

Charles Johnson, vice-chair for the ISU College Republicans, said he was surprised by McCain’s lack of support from conservative Republicans.

Johnson said he thought the endorsement of former presidential hopeful Gary Bauer would have helped McCain more in South Carolina because of Bauer’s strong emphasis on religion during the campaign.

“I really don’t know why [McCain] didn’t draw more Republican voters,” said Johnson, sophomore in political science.

In the next leg of the campaign, voters will head to the polls in Michigan and Arizona Tuesday. And while McCain is favored to win in his home state of Arizona, the race in Michigan is a statistical dead heat in most polls.

Johnson said Michigan would be an important test of McCain’s viability as a candidate.

“Whoever Michigan supports seems to get the nomination,” he said.

But Schmidt said he’s reluctant to say that Michigan is a “make-or-break scenario,” as some people were saying that South Carolina was. He did predict that Bush would probably win, since he has the endorsement of many prominent Republicans there.

“We constantly keep moving the target, and I don’t understand where we get the rules of the game,” he said, adding that he thinks McCain can probably stay in the race until the round of primaries on March 7, or Super Tuesday.