Tag: polls

QotD, Presidential Candidates Take Note edition.

The Polling Company did a survey of Iowa Republican voters for Independent Women’s Voice* to determine what those voters are looking for.  Click the link for the actual numbers (although I will note that possibly the most eyebrow-raising one is that “[n]o GOP hopeful has locked up more than 9% of Iowa caucus-goers”), but here’s the executive summary:

At this point it’s impossible to predict who will top the field in Iowa come January. It’s clear, however, that Iowa Republican voters want a candidate to emerge who is committed to repealing ObamaCare, reforming financially unstable entitlement programs, and devolving Washington’s power. And they want that candidate to use Iowa’s presidential springboard to reach the White House and enact real change.

I will refrain from commentary on this, except to note that none of this is fundamentally beyond the reach of any of the current GOP candidates for President.  They just have to want to reach for it.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Continue reading QotD, Presidential Candidates Take Note edition.

46/29/4.

FORTY-SIX, TWENTY-NINE, FOUR.

If you’re wondering what that is, it’s the D/R/I breakdown of the AP poll of adults that ‘shows’ the President at a 60% approval level.  Hot Air doesn’t say, but I will: that’s roughly the same ratio that this AP poll was reporting in May of 2009… which is to say, before Barack Obama and the Democrats put on big hob-nailed boots and started jumping up and down on their collective reputation.

In other words: um.  No.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: And in the field of ‘burying the lede’… the actual headline of that AP article should have been “Former President George W Bush hits 50% approval rating in ridiculously Dem-heavy poll.”  Put another way:

Apparent-ly!

[UPDATE] Heh.  Jim Geraghty and I really do think somewhat alike.

#rsrh The surprisingly DOOMish Politico/GWU poll.

Like all good poison pills, this poll from Politico/GWU looks like good news to the Democrats on the surface.  Admittedly, ‘good news’ is a slippery concept – it shows +5 GOP on the generic ballot – but that’s better than the Democrats have been managing lately and is at least no worse than the last one.  But, as always, it’s the stuff below the lede that’s the killer.  Consider:

  • Never mind Obama’s 46/51 (underwater) favorable/unfavorable numbers; the real interesting numbers here are Pelosi’s (36/56) and Boehner’s (18/15).  It’s like the Democrats’ attempts to demonize Boehner have completely failed, while the Republicans’ attempts to link the Speaker to individual Democratic races has been remarkably successful.  Actually, it’s not ‘like’ that at all; that’s pretty much what happened.
  • Speaking of favorable numbers: according to this poll, it works out like this: Republicans 50(!)/41, Tea Party 41/38… and the Democrats underwater at 42/50. Continue reading #rsrh The surprisingly DOOMish Politico/GWU poll.

So, DSCC: which candidate will you abandon…

[UPDATE]: Welcome, Instapundit readers.

…to firewall Connecticut?

Propelled by Connecticut likely voters who say they are “angry” with government, former wrestling executive Linda McMahon, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate, is closing in on Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, the Democrat, and now trails just 49 – 46 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 51 – 45 percent Blumenthal lead in a September 14 likely voter survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll, conducted by live interviewers.

Personally, if I were still a Democrat I would recommend Kentucky and Missouri – actually, if I were still a Democrat I would recommend Nevada, but Reid’s still too powerful in his caucus to make that feasible. Of the other Republican-held Senate seats, New Hampshire’s probably not been dedicated enough money anyway, everybody knows that Ohio’s a lost cause, and the Democrats don’t dare dump Meek in Florida at this point.  This is not the year for Democratic gains.  Which is fine by me: the Democrats do not deserve gains.

One last note: isn’t it just hysterical that it’s the Democratic party that needs to make hard financial choices in the homestretch?  This is why I stopped looking at the cash-on-hand totals; it became irrelevant once it became clear that the Republicans would have enough money to fight on the battlefields of our choosing and that the Democrats wouldn’t have enough money to defend everywhere simultaneously.

Linda McMahon for Senate.

Moe Lane (Crosspost)

PS: The Democrats should also decide whether they’d rather risk losing Connecticut, or Delaware.

June Democracy Corps poll results: DOOM.

Jim, Stan?  You had me at ‘Grim.’

This is the sexiest title of a political poll survey that you’re going to read all year: “Democracy Corps June Survey: Grim Stability Will Require Race-by-Race Fight” …and the bad news continues for page after page. Six point gap on generic Congressional ballot, dissatisfaction with the way the country’s going now at 2006 levels and rising, Democrats now on the wrong side (or right side, from my point of view) of the ‘Who’s looking out for you?’ question… and that last one should probably worry Democrats the most, as it’s directly attacking the Left’s own self-image in a way that I couldn’t hope to duplicate. Carville and Greenberg’s conclusion is particularly… there may not be a word in English that conveys the sense of weary nihilism, coupled with an obligatory advocating of a cynical policy that you know isn’t going to work – but it’s either amputate the hand now or amputate the arm later:

Democratic candidates should run as outsiders and independents that battle to change Washington.

Jennifer Rubin had the same reaction to me to that nonsense (or perhaps, I had the same reaction as her):

What are they supposed to say to fellow Democrats – “Many of you are going to lose but life after public office isn’t so bad” ? That would at least have the advantage of candor.

Candor is an advantage for the Democratic party? Is this a new thing?

Moe Lane

(Via Instapundit)

Crossposted to RedState.

#rsrh What to do with R2000 polls?

The falling-out – and fallout – between Research 2000 and the Daily Kos has been entertaining, and promises to be much so in the future.   The counter-suing has already begun (by the way; every lawyer I know is goggle-eyed at the way that Moulitsas’ attorney has set himself and his client up for a defamation lawsuit, completely independent of the fraud lawsuit), and both sides seem determined to make me cheerfully root for injuries, so this is going to be fun.

But there is a serious question: what do we do about the polls out there now?

DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas is asking poll-trackers to remove from their sites what he calls the “bunk” Research 2000 polls he once sponsored, after he expressed doubt on the accuracy of the company’s numbers. And if poll-trackers comply, some Republicans could see a bump in their poll averages on those sites.

Continue reading #rsrh What to do with R2000 polls?

Obama underwater with Jewish voters. #rsrh

(Via Instapundit) I offer my sympathies in advance to the American Jewish community for the Left’s likely reaction to this, as I suspect that it is going to be at least moderately ugly:

United States President Barack Obama has lost nearly half of his support among American Jews, a poll by the McLaughlin Group has shown.

The US Jews polled were asked whether they would: (a) vote to re-elect Obama, or (b) consider voting for someone else. 42% said they would vote for Obama and 46%, a plurality, preferred the second answer. 12% said they did not know or refused to answer.

That’s down from almost 80% support in the 2008 election; essentially, the President tanked across the board, and I want to point out, particularly among American Jews with family in Israel (42 re-elect/50 somebody else).  It’s sort of funny, in its way.  The Right has been trying to figure out for decades how to get Jewish voters to peel themselves away from the Left; we tried everything, and nothing worked.  Turns out that all we needed to do all along was let the Democrats finally elect the elitist, ivory-tower academic of their dreams, and he’d do it for us.

Go figure.

Moe Lane

#rsrh Yeah, tomorrow’s the earliest that a #hcr bump…

…will show up.  The stuff that comes out today is going to be polling before the Democrats finally passed the health care debacle; and the signing of said debacle won’t be until tomorrow.  Working on the assumption that this will translate into at least a temporary boost in popularity (safe guess), we should see a bump tomorrow, probably a bigger one on Wednesday, and… well.  Guessing how long the White House can milk a party-line vote on health care rationing is going to be a popular sport for Beltway types over the next few days.

As you might have guessed, I’m not expecting the bump to last for very long.

Clinton in 2016?

That’s what the Telegraph thinks, at least. Hard to say whether the British paper’s distance from the situation help or hurts its judgment, but they’ve found an interesting poll:

A recent poll by the Clarus Research Group found that Hillary Clinton had a 75 per cent approval rating compared to 51 per cent for the man who defeated her in their epic battle for the Democratic nomination.

[snip]

The woman who was one of the most polarising figures in American politics now has a glowing 65 per cent approval rating among Independents and healthy 57 per cent among Republicans.

Even sworn enemies on the Right marvelled at her toughness in refusing to concede to Obama until the bitter end in the summer of 2008 and now view her as more hawkish than the president.

(Poll here: H/T Hot Air Headlines.) Just off the top of my head: being ‘more hawkish than the president’ isn’t exactly hard, and while the VRWC is sympathetic towards the way that her primary opponent’s campaign apparatus used a largely gender-based attack strategy against her last year I predict that said sympathy will evaporate like dew in August if she ever becomes the Democratic nominee for President*.  That may not matter, given that a 65% approval rating among independent voters (almost double that of her boss) is enough to make any thoughtful politician stop with her coffee cup halfway to her lips.

Lastly: man, aside from SecState Clinton and Bush appointee SecDef Gates, those are wretched numbers for independent voters across the board.  Although VP Biden’s are arguably just ‘awful.’

Moe Lane

*Nothing personal, Madame Secretary.  Strictly business.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.