Posted on 11/02/2015 1:47:01 PM PST by Isara
PPP's newest Iowa poll finds a tight race on the Republican side in the state with Donald Trump at 22%, Ben Carson at 21%, Ted Cruz at 14%, Marco Rubio at 10%, Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal each at 6%, and Jeb Bush and Carly Fiorina each at 5%. Polling further back are Chris Christie at 3%, John Kasich, Rand Paul, and Rick Santorum each at 2%, Lindsey Graham with less than 1%, and Jim Gilmore and George Pataki each with no supporters.
Compared to our last Iowa poll in mid-September Trump's support is down 2 points (from 24% to 22%), while Carson's support is up 4 points (from 17% to 21%) putting them in the deadlock. The big gainer from a month ago is Ted Cruz though. He's gone from 8% to 14%, and also seen his favorability rating improve from 51/23 to 62/16. Cruz is now leading the field in Iowa among Tea Party voters (34% to 24% for Trump and 22% for Carson), and voters who identify themselves as 'very conservative' (24% to 22% for Carson and 21% for Trump.)
Carson continues to be easily the most popular of the Republican candidates in Iowa with 74% of GOP primary voters viewing him favorably to only 13% with a negative opinion. He's also the most frequent second choice in the state with 19% picking him on that front to 12% for Rubio, and 10% each for Cruz and Trump. When you combine first and second choices Carson leads the way with 40% to 32% for Trump, 24% for Cruz, and 22% for Rubio. Carson is leading the field among evangelicals with 22% to 19% for Trump, and 16% for Cruz, and also has the advantage among women with 22% to 19% for Trump, and 11% each for Cruz and Rubio.
Besides Cruz and Carson the gainers compared to our last Iowa poll, each of whom went up 2 points, are Rubio (from 8% to 10%), Jindal (from 4% to 6%), and Christie (from 1% to 3%). Jindal (60/18) and Rubio (60/20) have the highest favorability ratings of any candidate in Iowa other than Carson and Cruz. Even though he's still lagging pretty far back in the polls Christie's had an amazing transformation in his image over the last two and a half months. When we polled Iowa in August right after the first Republican debate, only 34% of Republicans in the state had a favorable opinion of him to 44% who held a negative one. Now 48% see him favorably to 28% with an unfavorable opinion of him, for an overall net 30 point gain. It's been quite a turn around.
Heading the wrong way in Iowa as she is elsewhere is Carly Fiorina. We found her at 13% and with a 62/15 favorability rating right after the September GOP debate. Now she's at just 5% and although her favorability rating is still good at 55/20, it has dipped some. The only person besides Fiorina and Trump to have seen a decline in their support of 2 points or more is Rand Paul who's gone from 4% to 2%.
Jeb Bush is having a rough time in Iowa. Only 30% of GOP voters see him favorably to 43% with a negative opinion, giving him the highest unfavorable rating of any of the candidates in Iowa. Among those who describe themselves as 'very conservative,' just 25% see Bush favorably to 53% who have a negative view. One measure of how Bush-resistant GOP voters are is that in a head to head with Trump he trails 55/37. By comparison Trump loses by double digits when matched up directly with Rubi0 (51/40), Cruz (53/36), or Carson (55/35).
Also struggling in Iowa among the candidates who were included in the main debate last week is John Kasich. Beyond his 2% standing for the nomination his 22/37 favorability rating is basically the same as Lindsey Graham's 20/38 spread, even though Kasich is generally taken seriously as a candidate and Graham is not.
As for Trump his 53/34 favorability rating is actually a little better than the 48/38 spread it came in at in September. He's winning among GOP voters most concerned about electability (26% to 22% for Carson and 14% for Rubio), among men (25% to 20% for Carson and 17% for Cruz), and younger voters (26% to 22% for Carson and 12% for Cruz.) His strongest group though is moderates- with them he gets 38% to 12% for Carson and 11% for Rubio, and that's what's allowing him to have his small overall advantage.
Iowa Republicans have generally been getting less interested in watching the debates. 62% said they watched the August one, 56% said they watched in September, and that went down to 44% for last week's debate. Even if not as many voters watched this time though it didn't stop them from joining in the anger at CNBC. Only 9% of Iowa GOPers say they have a favorable opinion of CNBC, to 74% with a negative one. Of course those numbers aren't that distinguishable from the 8/83 favorability the media has overall with Republicans in the state.
On the Democratic side in Iowa Hillary Clinton has really reestablished her dominance, getting 57% to 25% for Bernie Sanders, 7% for Martin O'Malley, and 1% for the now departed Lawrence Lessig. Clinton's seen a 15 point improvement in her net favorability rating over the last six weeks, from +42 at 65/23 in mid-September to now +57 at 74/17. Sanders has continued to become more popular too, going from 56/20 to 62/20.
Clinton is really dominating with several key groups in Iowa. Among seniors she's up 74/13 and with women she's up 61/21. She leads across the board with the various constituencies we track but it is tighter with younger voters (43/40), men (51/31), and voters who identify themselves as 'very liberal' (48/30).
Full results here
Apparently Iowa got off their asses.
I guess you are not aware of how things stack up?
Just look at the numbers. The scales are almost tipped. Certain states that matter greatly are all but given for the dims. New York, California, Illinois are examples of forget it states for pubbies to campaign in. If pubbies can’t win certain tipping states like Florida or Ohio they can win every other state other than the given dim states and it will not matter.
The presidency can be won with significantly less than a majority of the popular vote if certain key states electorial college votes are carried.
It may be wrong but it is so.
Were you politically aware in 2000 when we went through the whole hanging chad mess? That can’t be now, the vote is almost all electronic and I don’t think it is honest AT ALL. The vote can now be made anything the party in power wants it to be so far as I am concerned.
I tend to believe the same. The feds will be going house to house looking for guns after Hillary gets in.
During the summer Hillary was slipping in the polls while Trump was rising.
Now we have the opposite, Hillary rising in the polls and Trump slipping.
Coinencidence ?
Cross overs who supported TRUMP going back to Hillary ?
I would think that Cruz doesn't come across as very inspirational or charismatic. I would think he would come across as a smarty professor giving a lecture. The Low-Info's can't deal with that.
“...Ted Cruz, for instance, as you well know, is horrible on immigration...”
What if we aren’t a single issue voter? If viewed overall, Trump would make your average Romney voter throw up a little bit. But the popularity of Trump/Carson in the early states is a tremendous clue into how the country keeps getting stuck with Boehners, McConnells, Pelosis and Reids. They will vote for *anyone* the TV tells them to vote for.
Voters who put forth a bit of effort gain an opinion based on a bit more info, typically commensurate with the effort they put into it. I’ve done that and Cruz is the obvious choice, head and shoulders above the rest of the field.
So, Cruz gets my vote in the primaries. In the general, I will vote to deny “Shrillary” a win.
Note: I’m not seeking anyone’s approval of my opinion; I’m just sharing my opinion (which I personally believe is the absolute best opinion) and opinions *will* vary.
Good luck with whichever candidate you are propping-up!
If immigration isn't at the top of your list, then you're a fool. Once they have the right to vote-- which is inevitable with any kind of amnesty, whether just giving them "legal status" or a full blown path to citizenship-- the Democrats will change the south.
If viewed overall, Trump would make your average Romney voter throw up a little bit.
That's completely false. Trump gets even better overall. Only Trump really cares about TPP, NAFTA, and the entire farce of so-called "free trade." Cruz loves that stuff. He voted for fast track. He's a globalist. His wife worked with the CFR, and her only complaint about the whole globalist scheme of open borders and creating a North American Union was that she thought the market should have a bigger role in saving Mexico's economy!
On the other hand, if YOU are the single issues voter, you might question Trump on his sincerity on abortion or on healthcare. That's fine. But free trade, government incompetence, and immigration, will kill us.
I’ve done that and Cruz is the obvious choice,
Cruz is the obvious choice if you're a shallow thinker completely unaware of what's coming to this country!
“...If immigration isn’t at the top of your list, then you’re a fool...”
Opinions vary.
“...Trump gets even better overall...”
Opinions vary, especially among conservatives.
“...Cruz is the obvious choice if you’re a shallow thinker completely unaware of what’s coming to this country!...”
Opinions vary *drastically*.
Everyone I know — *everyone* — firmly believes Trump can only be relied upon to stroke his own ego. As to which parts of the constitution he will *negotiate* away (policy-wise) just so he can claim to be “winner” of whatever deal(s) he makes remains to be seen. I’d rather not give him the chance and I know of no-one else who wants to either.
We’ve made our evaluation and Cruz overwhelmingly gets our vote at this stage of the campaign. But you keep your chin up and praise Trump for all you can! I mean, there are certainly worse candidates than Trump (Clinton, Sanders, Carson, Graham, Christie, Bush...) so we aren’t saying he’s *all* bad. Best of luck to you!
What this really translates to is that you're surrounded by imbeciles who fancy themselves constitutional scholars while voting for candidates who will inevitably destroy the constitution and the country because enforcing the law on immigration or selling us out to the corporatists and the globalists was their idea of saving the country.
“...What this really translates to is that you’re surrounded by imbeciles who fancy themselves constitutional scholars...”
Not at all — it’s people who have looked into Trump, read some of his books and have no reason to believe he’s changed in the slightest to think there’s something he *won’t* put on the table to be seen as the “winner” of a deal. We like the constitution and don’t want either Trump or 0bama fiddling with it extralegally via policy negotiations.
Not saying Trump is a complete bozo, just that he’s not our first choice. Does it frustrate you so severely that folks don’t fall into lockstep with your opinion that you feel the need to attack with baseless, unfounded generalizations? Good luck winning voters with your attitude - note that you are not doing a very good job representing Trump...
When your first choice is an incompetent, mumbling doctor or a used car salesmen like Teddy, whom you depict as a constitutionalist but is really an enemy to the law, you should put as much of your alleged research skills into them as you supposedly did into Trump!
Here's some help on Cruz:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/ted_cruz_vs_donald_trump_whos_stronger_on_immigration.html
http://www.kausfiles.com/2015/05/21/cruz-and-amnesty-round-ii-the-telltale-video/
"And I'd like to make a final point to those advocacy groups that are very engaged in this issue and rightly concerned about addressing our immigration system, and in particular about addressing the situation for the 11 million who are currently in the shadows. If this amendment is adopted to the current bill the effect would be that those 11 million under this current bill would still be eligible for RPI status.** They would still be eligible for legal status and indeed under the terms of the bill they would be eligible for LPR status as well, so that they are out of the shadows, which the proponents of this bill repeatedly point to as their principle objective to provide a legal status for those who are here illlegally to be out of the shadows. This amendment would allow that to happen
And a second point to those advocacy groups that are so passionately engaged. In my view if this committee rejects this amendment, and I think everyone here views it as quite likely this committee will choose to reject this amendment, in my view that decision will make it much, much more likely that this entire bill will fail in the House of Representantives. I don't want immigration reform to fail. I want immigration reform to pass, and so I would urge people of good faith on both sides of the aisle, if the objective is to pass common sense immigration reform that secures the borders, that improves legal immigration, and that allows those who are here illegally to come in out of the shadows, then we should look for areas of bipartisan agreement and compromise to come together and this amendment I believe if this amendment were to pass the chances of this bill passing into law would increase dramatically, and so I would urge the committee to give it full consideration and to adopt the amendment."
No sale. Trump still does not get my vote in the primary. Go pester someone else who hasn’t looked into Trump and may not have a good idea of the man. Perhaps you can sell them on Trump. Good Luck!
I've yet to see any evidence that you have!
Evidence of what? What claim have I made that I should prove? That we prefer a different candidate than Trump? How do you propose I “prove” my preference, other than stating that: “We prefer Cruz in the primaries - Trump will not get our primary vote”.
You keep peddling Trump as hard as you like - that’s your cross to bear and I wish you luck. You’ll need it with your personality. Seriously. Or based on your sour-grapes attitude when someone doesn’t agree with you and you “lose the sale” — you might actually *be* Trump using an alias! You both should work on that. Good luck!
Yes, dims make sure they have in place lots of tricks that benefit them.
Others may have figured out this way of vote fraud ..
During the recent election in Georgia, they were supposed be registering folks to vote, but instead, they were having them fill out absentee ballots ... And of course they submitted the votes after they selected the “right” candidate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.