Posted on 12/15/2015 9:51:08 AM PST by Red Steel
[Full title] Trump Edges Cruz in Iowa; His Supporters Think Japanese Internment Was Good; Clinton Still Well Ahead of Sanders In State
PPP’s newest Iowa poll finds Donald Trump and Ted Cruz at the top of the heap with 28% and 25% respectively. Marco Rubio at 14% and Ben Carson at 10% are also in double digits with Jeb Bush at 7% the only other candidate who clears even 3%. Chris Christie, Carly Fiorina, and Mike Huckabee all hit that level with John Kasich and Rand Paul each getting 2%, Lindsey Graham and Rick Santorum each getting 1%, and Jim Gilmore and George Pataki both having literally no support.
Trump, Cruz, Rubio, and Bush have all seen varying increases in their support in the six weeks since we last polled Iowa. Cruz obviously has the most momentum, picking up 11 points from his 14% standing in early November. Trump has gained 6 points, Rubio 4 points, and Bush 2 points.
As we’ve been finding across the country for the last month Carson has seen the most serious downward arc in his support, dropping 11 points from his previous 21% standing. Huckabee’s dropped 3 points and Fiorina by 2 points as well.
There are a lot of divisions between where Cruz and Trump’s support is coming from. Among voters whose biggest concern is having a candidate who’s conservative on the issues Cruz leads with 33% to 26% for Trump and 15% for Carson. But with voters whose biggest concern is being able to beat a Democrat in the general election, Trump wins out with 31% to 20% each for Cruz and Rubio. Cruz leads Trump 31/30 with men, but Trump more than makes up for that with a 26/17 lead among women. Cruz has a strong advantage with ‘very conservative’ voters at 37% to 25% for Trump and 14% for Carson but Trump leads based on his strength with moderates, with whom gets 42% to 14% each for Rubio and Bush.
It’s ironic that Trump leads with moderates, because the views of his supporters wouldn’t be considered moderate by most standards:
-78% support Trump’s call to bans Muslims from entering the United States, to only 13% who oppose it. Overall 54% of Republicans support him on that to 28% who are opposed. Supporters of Cruz (62/20) and Carson (54/25) also favor a Muslim ban while backers of Rubio (28/48) and Bush (28/49) are opposed.
-65% of Trump voters think thousands of Arabs in New Jersey cheered the collapse of the World Trade Center, to only 11% who don’t think that happened. Overall 43% of Republicans think that event occurred to 29% who don’t. Supporters of Carson (44/10) and Cruz (45/26) agree with Trump’s that it happened while those of Rubio (24/47) and Bush (12/62) say it didn’t.
-59% of Trump voters support a national database of Muslims, to 18% who are opposed. Republicans as a whole are evenly divided on that issue, 40/40. Carson supporters (42/38) join with Trump’s in wanting a Muslim database but those of Cruz (38/42), Rubio (32/48), and Bush (19/62) are all against it.
-45% of Trump voters want to shut down the mosques in the United States, to only 23% who are opposed to doing that. Overall just 27% of Republicans support that to 45% who are opposed though. Supporters of all the other major GOP candidates are opposed to shutting down mosques- it’s 32/48 with Carson backers, 25/44 with those of Cruz, 9/66 with Rubio voters, and 9/69 with Bush’s.
-Finally as long as we were at it we decided we’d ask people if they thought Japanese internment had been a good idea. Among Trump voters 48% say they support the use of internment during World War II, to only 21% who say they oppose it. Overall just 29% of Republicans support that to 39% opposed, and supporters of all the other candidates are against it- 29/33 with Cruz voters, 23/54 with Rubio’s, 12/48 with Carson’s, and 13/56 with Bush’s.
Trump’s positions aren’t hurting him for now but if he ever does falter Cruz is very well positioned to benefit. Besides his overall second place position Cruz is the most broadly popular of the candidates in Iowa, with a 68/20 favorability rating. He’s also the most frequent second choice of Iowa voters at 19% to 12% each for Carson and Rubio, and 11% for Trump. When you combine first and second choices Cruz leads with 44% to 39% for Trump, 26% for Rubio, and 22% for Carson. Cruz is specifically by far and away the second choice of Trump voters at 36% to 14% for Carson with no one else hitting double digits. Quick notes on some other hopefuls:
-Bush has the highest negatives of any of the candidates with 47% seeing him unfavorably to only 35% who have a positive view. He continues to particularly have a credibility issue on the right- with ‘very conservative’ voters his favorability is 24/61 and just 2% of voters within that group favor him for the nomination.
-What we’re continuing to find with Rubio right now is that he’s sort of in a holding pattern. When we polled Iowa last month he was in 4th place with a 60/20 favorability rating. Now thanks to the collapse of Carson he’s in 3rd place with a nearly identical 59/22 favorability. He’s not getting much momentum but he’s at least not falling apart either.
-Carson’s not just losing out on people saying he’s their first choice- he’s had a general decline in his image with GOP voters. Last month he had a +61 (74/13) favorability, that’s now dropped to +40 at 63/23. His combined first and second choice support has dropped from 40% down to 22%.
-John Kasich’s just really not making an impact. A plurality of GOP voters- 41%- don’t even have an opinion about him one way or the other. Among voters who do have one it’s quite negative with only 22% seeing him favorably to 37% with a negative view.
-Mike Huckabee on the other hand is very popular with the Republican base. 64% see him favorably to just 21% with a negative view, making him the most broadly liked hopeful other than Cruz. That goodwill just isn’t translating into support for the nomination for him though.
On the Democratic side Hillary Clinton continues to be the clear favorite in Iowa. She’s at 52% to 34% for Bernie Sanders and 7% for Martin O’Malley. Sanders leads 47/40 with younger voters, but that’s not enough to make up for Clinton holding a 64/20 advantage with seniors. She leads by pretty similar margins of 19 points with liberals at 56/37 and 22 points with moderates at 52/30. And she also has comparable leads with both women (21 points at 55/34) and men (15 points at 49/34). Clinton’s favorability rating is 73/19 while Sanders’ comes in at 65/23.
Full results here
“Not to mention, litmus testing based on religion is completely against our Constitution under any circumstances “
Islam isn’t a religion. It is a form of government masquerading as a religion.
Death to nonbelievers, takeover of countries, installing a caliphate, all in the Qur’an. Not to mention Sharia Law.
“religions” that are diametrically opposed to our Constitution are not given protection.
That would require Trump to walk back something he said, and he doesn't do that. Ever.
But regardless, even 90% raises the question of how? How do you identify them? How do you ensure they don't get in? Nobody can seem to answer that. You say you would need to spend an hour or so with every single person entering the country in order to identify the Muslims. Do you have any idea how many thousands of people enter the U.S. every day? Spending an hour with each of the hundreds of people entering on a jumbo jet from France or Japan or every country in between? Do you honestly think that's doable?
Banning folks from terrorist countries (heavily moslem) like Sen. Cruz had previously proposed, would probably work better.
That's not what Trump is proposing.
OK so let's look at that. "...until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." What exactly does that mean? And if you can define it then what constitutes a win and a chance to end the ban?
You say "...until we can figure out how to vet them..." Vet them how? Documentation? Background investigations? Police surveillance? You say, "If Muslim countries wants to help us by providing data, it can go quicker." What about the rest of the world? What are you expecting from those, especially those countries we don't require visas?
With trump, whatever percentage were reliably stopped would be the criterion for “victory.” And anyone who raised the issue of “it’s not 100% total and complete” would be shouted down, and bullied. trump’s acolytes would proceed to demonize the heretic.
I’m with you. I don’t think a religious test will work well. I would rather do it by country.
As I said, I don’t agree with trump on this issue. It’s just one reason why I’m for :
Cruz or lose. America.
Vet them the same way Cruz would of the Muslims from the designated countries.
I used Germans as an illustration because those were some folks I knew myself. But WWI abuses of foreign nationals by American “racists and bigots” were indeed more widespread. That’s what makes me wonder how bad the treatment of Japanese people would have been after Pearl Harbor had they not been interned. Actually, I don’t wonder at all; I’m sure lives were saved.
But again, I’m not defending it. Internment as practiced was unfair and un-American.
The fact we can’t even call it for what it really was proves bow unjust it was. They were Concentration Camps.
Internment makes the bitter pill tolerable. The fact that prisoners weren’t flagrantly abused or neglected doesn’t change the fact either.
The whole thing is a horrific violation of habeas corpus and a terrible precedent.
I agree that Islam is a political entity more than a religion, but it is classified by our government as a religion, as is many other groups that masquerade as religions, but are nothing more than cults. However, the Constitution still protects religion and speech even if you don’t like that religion or speech. Without those protections, many libs would condemn FR and most conservatives as terrorist and try to shut us up too.
Religions that contradict the Constitution and whose prime objective is to Infiltrate and take over our government need to be reclassified.
I don’t disagree, but that creates an extremely slippery slope and the President does not and should not have that sole authority.
You post that as a joke but the reality is they were safer there than on the street. There was plenty of hatred for the Japanese in the land that made it unsafe for them. Look at how many millions volunteered the next day and ask yourself whom were they volunteering to fight and kill.
Kill the whole family of a terrorist. What do i care?
This is war and the left doesn’t mind dying, that’s fine. But myself and my family aren’t going to die because of them.
We could have NEVER EVER won WWII today.
My people caught a little flack at the beginning of the war, but we had a huge docks presence and it was soon apparent Italy was no major threat lol.
Far cry from the Roman Empire.
There were a lot of spies. I stared a thread on this issue the day before Trump announced it.
Does he follow FR?
The Japanese that followed their national religion Shintoism believed the Emperor was god on Earth. That being the case, they all posed a potential threat to America. What if their ‘god’ told them to attack us?
Do you realize how many lives would be lost and troops required to fight a 5th column within our borders?
Here’s the thread on this topic a day or two before Trump announced his Muslim ban:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3369347/posts
Trump a FR member?
There are some who are better, and more equal, and of more noble character, and who know what was in the hearts and minds of Japanese some 75 years ago, and wish/want all wars to be fair.
I have wondered if Trump reads FR. He probably does.
That's probably THE stupidest thing that ANYONE could possibly say about WAR!
Since WHEN has ANY war been "FAIR"? Good grief....wars are about killing, beating the enemy, and winning!
Go back and read the posts on this thread, and wonder, how does one conduct a fair world war?
Simple, under current law the President has absolute authority to restrict immigration or refuge status to any country or group he chooses.
Those Trumpicopter rides are nuthin' when it comes to building up his ground game.
His campaign uses eventbrite to hand out tickets to his immense rallies. Through it, he automatically gains an electronic mailing list to people who went out of their way to attend his rallies. Imagine not just the value but the sheer volume of this growing list. No other campaign has this, not even the RNC itself.
Then at the rallies themselves, they have further recruitment and gotv efforts, especially in Iowa, where they instruct all that new fresh blood into navigating the caucuses.
No polling outfit seems to know how to measure all these things to gauge Trump's ground game. But his ground game exists, and it's growing.
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.