NBC/ WSJ / Marist Poll, early 2016 primary states: lots of info

Statistikhengst

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
45,564
Reaction score
11,747
Points
2,070
Location
deep within the statistical brain!!
NBC / WSJ / Marist Polling just put out poll-results from the first three primary/caucus states of 2016:

New Hampshire
Iowa
South Carolina

(the above links are to .pdf-data)

Marist polled the prospective GOP and DEM fields for all three states, plus 2 Presidential matchups per state: Hillary vs. Jeb Bush / Hillary vs. Scott Walker


First, the GOP field, Iowa:

Huckabee 17%
Bush, J 16%
Walker 15%

undecided 14%
Christie 9%
Paul 7%
Rubio 6%
Carson 6%
Santorum 5%
Perry 4%
Cruz 2%
Graham 1%


Essentially, a three-way tie in Iowa between Huckabee, Bush and Walker.


The GOP field in New Hampshire:

Bush, J 18%
Walker 15%
Paul 14%
Christie 13%
undecided 13%
Huckabee 7%
Carson 7%
Cruz 6%
Rubio 6%
Perry 1%
Graham 1%


Essentially, a four-way tie between Bush, Walker, Paul and Christie.

And the GOP field in South Carolina:

Graham 17%
Bush, J 15%
Walker 12%
undecided 11%
Huckabee 10%
Carson 10%
Paul 7%
Christie 6%
Rubio 4%
Perry 4%
Santorum 3%
Cruz 1%


Essentially, a two-way tie between Graham and Bush, with Walker, Huckabee and Carson very competitive in relation to the field en toto.


Democratic nomination figures:

Iowa:
Clinton 68%
Biden 12%
undecided 12%
Sanders 7%
Webb 1%
O'Malley 1%


margin: Clinton +56 over Joe Biden

New Hampshire:
Clinton 69%
Sanders 13%
Biden 7%
undecided 7%
Webb 2%
O'Malley 1%


margin: Clinton +56 over Bernie Sanders

South Carolina:
Clinton 68%
Biden 20%
undecided 8%
Sanders 3%
Webb 2%
O'Malley 2%


margin: Clinton +48 over Joe Biden

The Democratic field is not even remotely competitive


And now, Presidential Matchups in all three of the first primary states

Iowa: Clinton 48 / Bush, J 40 - margin: Clinton +8
Iowa: Clinton 49 / Walker 38 - margin: Clinton +11

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Hampshire: Clinton 48 / Bush, J 42 - margin: Clinton +6
New Hampshire: Clinton 49 / Walker 42 - margin: Clinton +7

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

South Carolina: Clinton 45 / Bush, J 48 - margin: Bush, J +3
South Carolina: Clinton 46 / Walker 46 - margin: mathematical tie


Now, this makes for some interesting comparisons:

Iowa 2008: Obama +9.53 (+10)
Iowa 2012: Obama +5.81 (+6)

New Hampshire 2008: Obama +9.61 (+10)
New Hampshire 2012: Obama +5.58 (+6)

(notice how similar the margins were to each other, Iowa vs. New Hampshire, in both 2008 and 2012)

South Carolina 2008: McCain +8.98 (+9)
South Carolina 2012: Romney +10.47 (+10)

So, according to this poll, Clinton's margins in both New Hampshire and Iowa are between the margins from Obama's 2008 and 2012 wins in those states, respectively.

In South Carolina, a state that is barely, if ever, polled for Presidential matchups, Clinton's numbers are CONSIDERABLY better than a Democrat is supposed to be doing in the South. In 2012, there was exactly ONE poll from South Carolina, in January of 2012, from IPSOS/Reuters. But in 2008, there were 14 SC polls. So, for the first time, we have some Hillary data from the Palmetto State. The last time a Democrat won this state? Jimmy Carter, 1976, soon to be 40 years ago.

You might want to click on the .pdf-links at the top of this OP to see how FEMALE respondents have, well, responded. :D

For instance, in Iowa, in the matchup against Jeb Bush, in the female vote, Hillary is beating him by +21.

Also, there are a number of social issues questions in the three polls, all worded identically, and in the results is information that should please both Democrats and Republicans, including isses like:

Job Creation
Deficit
ISIS
Health Care (ACA)
income equality
womens' issues

+ targeted questions about:

common core
immigration reform
ACA
climate change
same sex marriage
raising taxes on the wealthy
boots on the ground against ISIS


Critical to realize here is that these questions came AFTER the matchups, both for the primaries and for the GE Hillary vs. Bush or Walker matchups.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Facit: this is just one poll, and surely, many more are to come, but the Hillary values in New Hampshire are similar to the other values over the last 2 years, and the values in Iowa are better than she has been doing. And finally, we have some South Carolina data. On the GOP primary side, it is pretty mixed up and no candidate is close to Mitt Romney's steady 22-23% throughout most of 2011, because, I suppose, the field is larger and will probably get even larger than this. On the Democratic side, the numbers are crystal clear: Hillary. The one negative I find here is that Warren was not polled.

PPP (D) is also putting out a South Carolina poll this coming week, so it will be interesting to get to compare figures between the two pollsters.

Those are the current numbers from Marist, nothing less and nothing more.
 

Derideo_Te

Je Suis Charlie
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
20,461
Reaction score
7,961
Points
360
Too bad they didn't do any match ups between Hilary and Undecided because he was polling quite strongly amongst the clown car contingent! ;)
 
OP
Statistikhengst

Statistikhengst

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
45,564
Reaction score
11,747
Points
2,070
Location
deep within the statistical brain!!
Too bad they didn't do any match ups between Hilary and Undecided because he was polling quite strongly amongst the clown car contingent! ;)

Lol.

Actually, that figure for undecideds, around 9 to 13%, is pretty standard.

The figure is lower in Democratic primary polling, yet another sign that, barring an unforseen catastrophe, the DEM field is pretty much settled.
 
OP
Statistikhengst

Statistikhengst

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
45,564
Reaction score
11,747
Points
2,070
Location
deep within the statistical brain!!
Update from the OP:

PPP (D) is also putting out a South Carolina poll this coming week, so it will be interesting to get to compare figures between the two pollsters.
And so it was. PPP (D) released it's South Carolina poll yesterday, pitting Hillary Clinton against NINE prospective GOP candidates:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_SC_21815.pdf

868 RV, MoE = +/-3.3

Hillary fav/unfav = 41 / 51 = -13. Hillary is underwater in South Carolina.

Clinton 41 / Christie 43, margin = Christie +2
Clinton 43 / Paul 45, margin = Paul +2
Clinton 43 / Graham 45, margin = Graham +2
Clinton 43 / Cruz 46, margin = Cruz +3
Clinton 42 / Walker 46, margin = Walker +4
Clinton 43 / Perry 48, margin = Perry +5
Clinton 41 / Carson 48, margin = Carson +7
Clinton 42 / Bush, J 49, margin = Bush, J +7
Clinton 41 / Huckabee 49, margin = Huckabee +8

So, the margins range from GOP +2 to GOP +8, with Huckabee, Jeb Bush and Carson doing the best.

That give us two GOP candidates with which to compare this poll to the poll in the OP:

Marist, South Carolina: Clinton 45 / Bush, J 48 - margin: Bush, J +3
Marist, South Carolina: Clinton 46 / Walker 46 - margin: mathematical tie


Side by side:

Marist, South Carolina: Clinton 46 / Walker 46 - margin: mathematical tie
PPP (D), South Carolina: Clinton 42 / Walker 46, margin = Walker +4
average: Walker +2

Marist, South Carolina: Clinton 45 / Bush, J 48 - margin: Bush, J +3
PPP (D), South Carolina: Clinton 42 / Bush, J 49, margin = Bush, J +7
average: Bush +5


Now, let's compare that to South Carolina's electoral history, the last 10 cycles or so:

1976:
Carter +13.04%
1980: Reagan +1.53%
1984: Reagan +27.99%
1988: Bush 41 +23.92%
1992: Bush 41 +8.15%
1996: Dole +6.04%
2000: Bush 43 +15.93%
2004: Bush 43 +17.08%
2008: McCain +8.98%
2012: Romney +10.47%

We see that, as of 2016, it will be fourty years since a Democrat won the Palmetto State, and it is unlikely that a Democrat is going to win the state in 2016.

But once again, the MARGINS are interesting. In cycles where the GOP won nationally, since 1984, it won SC with +15 or more (1984, 1988, 2000, 2004). In 1980, Ronald Reagan "flipped" the state from Jimmy Carter, and since then, it has not looked back. But in cycles where the GOP lost nationally, it only won SC in single digits or right at +10.

So, a +8 for Huckabee, a Southerner or +7 for Jeb Bush, also a Southernor, in SC, looks solid, and it is. But it really needs to be about +15 to indicate a national landscape where the Republican is actually winning the country as a whole.

It should be noted that the PPP (D) values for Bush and Walker are more to the RIGHT than the Marist values.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I personally see a certain comparison SC to NC as IN to OH.

In other cases, the two states have very similar demographics and culture (SC and NC / IN and OH), but the smaller state is much more conservative. What is lacking in SC is the same thing that is lacking in IN: just one more large metropolis. With one more large metropolis in SC, it would probably be a more competitive state, ditto Indiana. Why? Because, imo, large metropolises tend to be bastions of Liberal thought.
 
Last edited:

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
57,206
Reaction score
13,682
Points
2,190
Too bad they didn't do any match ups between Hilary and Undecided because he was polling quite strongly amongst the clown car contingent! ;)
Another content free post from derido-douche.
 

Derideo_Te

Je Suis Charlie
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
20,461
Reaction score
7,961
Points
360

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
57,206
Reaction score
13,682
Points
2,190
Too bad they didn't do any match ups between Hilary and Undecided because he was polling quite strongly amongst the clown car contingent! ;)
Another content free post from derido-douche.
Ironic!
No, my content is my conclusion that you are an oxygen thief.
Your lack of intelligence explains your lack of any vestige of a sense of humor.
I put my IQ and intelligence against yours any day of the week skippy.
 

Derideo_Te

Je Suis Charlie
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
20,461
Reaction score
7,961
Points
360
Too bad they didn't do any match ups between Hilary and Undecided because he was polling quite strongly amongst the clown car contingent! ;)
Another content free post from derido-douche.
Ironic!
No, my content is my conclusion that you are an oxygen thief.
Your lack of intelligence explains your lack of any vestige of a sense of humor.
I put my IQ and intelligence against yours any day of the week skippy.
I notice you failed to include your sense of humor? Why is that? Because it takes intelligence to have one perhaps?
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
57,206
Reaction score
13,682
Points
2,190
Another content free post from derido-douche.
Ironic!
No, my content is my conclusion that you are an oxygen thief.
Your lack of intelligence explains your lack of any vestige of a sense of humor.
I put my IQ and intelligence against yours any day of the week skippy.
I notice you failed to include your sense of humor? Why is that? Because it takes intelligence to have one perhaps?
I appreciate humor, not "humor," i.e. the condescending vindictive snarkyness that passes for "humor" among progressives.
 
OP
Statistikhengst

Statistikhengst

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
45,564
Reaction score
11,747
Points
2,070
Location
deep within the statistical brain!!
No, my content is my conclusion that you are an oxygen thief.
Your lack of intelligence explains your lack of any vestige of a sense of humor.
I put my IQ and intelligence against yours any day of the week skippy.
I notice you failed to include your sense of humor? Why is that? Because it takes intelligence to have one perhaps?
I appreciate humor, not "humor," i.e. the condescending vindictive snarkyness that passes for "humor" among progressives.

Is that like varying shades of "prissy", all of which you have thusly shown on this grand thread?
 

Derideo_Te

Je Suis Charlie
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
20,461
Reaction score
7,961
Points
360
So, a +8 for Huckabee, a Southerner or +7 for Jeb Bush, also a Southernor, in SC, looks solid, and it is. But it really needs to be about +15 to indicate a national landscape where the Republican is actually winning the country as a whole.
Right now I am not seeing a great deal of grass roots enthusiasm for yet another establishment GOP candidate. I suspect that they are going to have to compromise with someone like Rand Paul. He doesn't stand a hope against Hillary IMO so the GOP money will be focused on trying to retain control of the Senate instead hoping that will "handicap" Hillary.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
57,206
Reaction score
13,682
Points
2,190
No, my content is my conclusion that you are an oxygen thief.
Your lack of intelligence explains your lack of any vestige of a sense of humor.
I put my IQ and intelligence against yours any day of the week skippy.
I notice you failed to include your sense of humor? Why is that? Because it takes intelligence to have one perhaps?
I appreciate humor, not "humor," i.e. the condescending vindictive snarkyness that passes for "humor" among progressives.

Is that like varying shades of "prissy", all of which you have thusly shown on this grand thread?
It's called "calling out your bullshit." The only prissyness being displayed is among this message board's Klown Kollege. You must feel all warm and fuzzy in that group.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top