Polling round-up, 01-15 September, 2015

[Statistikhengst]

The last polling round-up, here:

Polling round-up, 21-31 August, 2015 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

is now closed and part of the history books.

The next round of polls are already being recording, including some very enlightening internal data:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 polling round-up, 01-15.09.2015: GOP Nomination

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 polling round-up, 01-15.09.2015: DEM Nomination

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 polling round-up, 01-15.09.2015: Presidential matchups

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 polling round-up, 01-15.09.2015: Senatorial / Gubernatorial

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 polling round-up, 01-15.09.2015: fav/unfav, approve/disapprove, other issues

I try my best to get all the data for polling logged and dissected on the same day, but that's not always possible. Guarantee within 2 days, it's there to be found.

In the 2016 polling round-up, 01-15.09.2015: fav/unfav, approve/disapprove, other issues section, there is already a Gallup poll about GOP candidates' image among GOP voters that is interesting. I am no fan of Gallup after its miserable performance in both 2010 and 2012, but still hopeful that they will mend their record in 2016. Wait and see. But the poll in interesting because of the enormous size of the polling group, which is almost 14,000 RRV and IRV who are R-leaning. Trump's image has risen enormously among R's, but Carson has the highest favorability of all of them.

There is also a Monmouth poll out there for the GOP nomination that, for the first time, also does hypothetical 2-man matchups: Trump vs. someone else. He beats theothers handily in a two-man race, except Carson, to whom he loses badly in a two man race. I think we are all pretty sure that at last in February, 2016, it is going to be a far larger crowd than just a two-man race, but this data is just one more piece of statistical evidence that Dr. Ben Carson's stock among GOP voters has risen steeply. Also, Carly Fiorina is doing marginally to significantly better in polling (depending on the pollster), which is also statistical evidence that the GOP "clientele" is giving outsiders, people who have never before held elective office, a good, hard look.

The PPP (D) national matchups that were released yesterday have 17 head-to head matchups. Clinton wins 9 of her 10 matchups, Biden wins both of his, while Sanders wins two and loses three - but four of his five are statistically toss ups. So are 3 of Clinton's ten. Carson, however, beats Sanders by 6 points and ties Clinton, 44/44. This is yet another data point, from a third, independent-from-the-others pollster, that Carson's stock is rising, and quickly at that. But even more interesting are the PPP (D) internals, breakdown by gender. In almost all cases, the race between the Ds and the Rs is close by BOTH genders. There is no guarantee that this is going to stay this way, but the data, going into the Fall season, is indeed interesting.

That's just a small taste of what I keep my eyes on: more than just the toplines. Much more to come in this month, but my suspicion is that September will see the ascent of Ben Carson to a very solid 2nd place and closing in on Trump, who at the moment is the undisputed leader in all GOP polling. The big losers in GOP polling: Bush, Walker and above all others, Paul. If Paul's descent continues, he may not make the third GOP debate. Wait and see.

-Stat

 

[Swagger]

No-one cares about your statistical analysis or election round-ups, so do yourself and us a favour by getting a life.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

I was wondering the same thing.

Same with Fiorina. She has never done anything except drive a big business under and send the jobs to India. That's why some RWs love her.

Thanks Stat and please, keep it coming. Just because its over the heads of some doesn't mean others don't appreciate it.

 

[pepperpot]

I think the GOP is railing against the establishment and tea party in a big way. Choosing favorites such as Trump, Carson and Fiorina just shows they want anybody but..kind of mentality. I think they would rather take a shot at someone with no experience whatsoever than rely on a Bush or a Walker..

 

[Nyvin]

I think the GOP is railing against the establishment and tea party in a big way. Choosing favorites such as Trump, Carson and Fiorina just shows they want anybody but..kind of mentality. I think they would rather take a shot at someone with no experience whatsoever than rely on a Bush or a Walker..

It seems like Walker has crashed big time....he's even polling behind Rubio now, let alone Bush and Cruz. I wonder what happened? He seemed pretty popular a few months ago.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

^ Racist

Did your KKK Sheet come back from the dry cleaner

 

[Derideo_Te]

I think the GOP is railing against the establishment and tea party in a big way. Choosing favorites such as Trump, Carson and Fiorina just shows they want anybody but..kind of mentality. I think they would rather take a shot at someone with no experience whatsoever than rely on a Bush or a Walker..

It seems like Walker has crashed big time....he's even polling behind Rubio now, let alone Bush and Cruz. I wonder what happened? He seemed pretty popular a few months ago.

To quote T-Rump, Walker is a low energy candidate. Same for Paul, Perry, Jindal, Graham, etc, etc.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

I was wondering the same thing.

Same with Fiorina. She has never done anything except drive a big business under and send the jobs to India. That's why some RWs love her.

Thanks Stat and please, keep it coming. Just because its over the heads of some doesn't mean others don't appreciate it.

Thanks.

More data to come...

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[Mertex]

No-one cares about your statistical analysis or election round-ups, so do yourself and us a favour by getting a life.

Just because you're having a problem understanding them doesn't mean that no one cares.....or do they scare you?

 

[Mertex]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

Carson is black.....there are many Republicans that cannot bring themselves to vote for a "black" - he would never get the nomination.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

Carson is black.....there are many Republicans that cannot bring themselves to vote for a "black" - he would never get the nomination.

It never even occurred to me think of that as being a handicap that would prevent him winning enough delegates to become the GOP candidate. Instead I was just trying to figure out what it is that is generating so much enthusiasm for him now?

Is he just the "not T-Rump" alternative? Or is he the flavor-of-the-month choice that we had a succession of in 2012? Is he the 2016 equivalent of Herman Cain? Or is there something of actual substance there?



All I can say is that so far there is nothing that I have seen or heard that gives me reason to consider him. Even T-Rump has said some things that sound almost reasonable but Carson just sounds like a kid at the grownup's table trying not to act like a kid.

What am I missing here?

 

[Mertex]

Got to wonder what is the attraction for Carson? So far he has been unimpressive in pretty much everything I have seen of him so I must be missing something.

Hopefully the media will do some digging and we will get a little more background than that he used to be a surgeon.

Perhaps the attraction is that no one knows squat about him but what are his policy positions on the economy, foreign relations, healthcare, etc?

Carson is black.....there are many Republicans that cannot bring themselves to vote for a "black" - he would never get the nomination.

It never even occurred to me think of that as being a handicap that would prevent him winning enough delegates to become the GOP candidate. Instead I was just trying to figure out what it is that is generating so much enthusiasm for him now?

Is he just the "not T-Rump" alternative? Or is he the flavor-of-the-month choice that we had a succession of in 2012? Is he the 2016 equivalent of Herman Cain? Or is there something of actual substance there?



All I can say is that so far there is nothing that I have seen or heard that gives me reason to consider him. Even T-Rump has said some things that sound almost reasonable but Carson just sounds like a kid at the grownup's table trying not to act like a kid.

What am I missing here?

Well, maybe I forgot to add that even though there are many Republicans that cannot bring themselves to vote for a "black" - there are some who would like to prove that there is no racism in the Republican party and therefore they choose Carson to show that Republicans can support a black candidate. The number that would support a "black" would never outnumber the number that would never vote for a "black".

 

[Statistikhengst]

UPDATE:

at the links from the OP, you will see that a number of polls have come in all over the place.

National Polling:

PPP (D) - already covered in the OP
SUSA - four Trump (R) vs. D candidate matchups, he wins all of them by between +1 and +4.

GOP nomination, national:

PPP (D): Trump +14
Gravis (R): Trump +15.9
IPSOS / Reuters: Trump +18.9
The Economist / YouGov: Trump +25

In all four polls, Dr. Ben Carson in in 2nd place, but in the IPSOS/Reuters, Bush is making a comeback, almost a tie for 2nd place.

GOP nomination, state polling:

Iowa:

Loras College: Trump +6.4
Monmouth U: Trump +12
Gravis (R): Trump +4
Marist: Trump +7

New Hampshire:

Marist: Trump +7


Alabama:

Gravis (R): Trump + 21.3


Florida:

Opinion Savvy: Trump +4

Georgia:

Opinion: Trump +7.4

DEM nomination, national:

PPP (D): Clinton +35
Gravis (R): Clinton +28.2
Economist / You Gov: Clinton +19
IPSOS / Reuters: Clinton +21.3


DEM nomination, state polling:

Iowa:

Loras College: Clinton +25
Marist: Clinton +11

New Hampshire:

Marist: Sanders +9


Florida:

Opinion Savvy: Clinton +32

Georgia:

Opinion: Clinton +27.4

There are also some interesting numbers in the Louisiana Gubernatorial between Vitter and Edwards.

Those are the figures to date.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I pulled up the SUSA poll;

SurveyUSA Election Poll #22490

Cell-phone and home-phone respondents are included in this survey. SurveyUSA interviewed 1,000 USA adults 09/02/15 and 09/03/15. Of the adults, 900 were registered to vote. Of the registered voters, 58% (522) pay "a lot" of attention to politics. This survey was conducted using blended sample, mixed-mode. Respondents reachable on a home telephone (62% of registered voters) were interviewed on their home (landline) telephone in the recorded voice of a professional announcer. Respondents not reachable on a home telephone (38% of registered voters) were shown a question on their smartphone, tablet or other electronic device. Cell respondents, as is typically the case, vote more Democratic than do landline respondents. Among just the universe of cell-phone respondents, Clinton defeats Trump by 16 points; Sanders defeats Trump by 12 points; Biden defeats Trump by 17 points; and Gore defeats Trump by 17 points. The more cell-phone respondents a pollster includes in its "mix" of voters, the more Democratic the poll results will be.​

Given the comments above was the poll too heavily weighted towards older and rural voters who tend to have landlines as opposed to younger and suburban voters?

 

[Statistikhengst]

So, the time-frame of September 1-15, 2015 has come and gone and there was a BEVY of polls for both parties, both nationally and statewide. There were also some interesting poll results on issues, also worth a look.

Here is a recap. You can find the links to the categories in the OP.

GOP nomination polling:​

GOP nomination - national polling:

PPP (D), released 01.09.2015: Trump +14
Gravis (R), released 02.09.2015: Trump +15.9
The Economist/YouGov, released 03.09.2015: Trump +25
IPSOS/Reuters (5 day rolling), released 05.09.2015: Trump +18.9
Zogby Analytics, released 06.09.2015: Trump +16 ("Millenials" only)
Emerson College, released 09.09.2015: Trump +14
CNN/ORC, released 10.09.2015: Trump +13
Morning Consult (R), released 10.09.2015: Trump +13
IPSOS/Reuters (5 day rolling), released 11.09.2015: Trump +23
ABC/WAPO, released 13.09.2015: Trump +13
CBS/NYT, released 15.09.2015: Trump +4
IPSOS/Reuters (5 day rolling), released 15.09.2015: Trump +15

That makes for 12 national polls over 15 days, with ony pollster being a repeater (IPSOS/Reuters, 5 day rolling). Noticeably absent from this list of pollsters is Rasmussen Reports, which I thought would put out a national poll before the second debate. You can see the complete numbers at the R-nomination link in the OP, but two factors are very consistent: Trump is always on top and Carson is now firmly in second place. Bush and Cruz tend to be in 3rd place.

Now, some interesting math. If we move the two repeaters (IPSOS/Reuters from 05.09 and 11.09) and only use the latest IPSOS/Reuters numbers, without removing any upper or lower possible outliers, then the average for Trump over 14 days is: Trump +14.3. Remove the lowest and the highest margins (Trump +25, Trump +4), and with those 8 polls, the average is: Trump +14.2. Please notice that those two averages are pretty much identical to each other.


GOP nomination - state polling:

At the link from the OP, you will find polls from Iowa, New Hampshire, Alabama (rare), Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and California (also rare). Lots of internals are also to be found a the link.

DEM nomination polling:​

DEM nomination - national polling:

PPP (D), released 01.09.2015: Clinton +35
Gravis (R), released 02.09.2015: Clinton +28.2
The Economist/YouGov, released 03.09.2015: Clinton +19
IPSOS/Reuters (5 day rolling), released 05.09.2015: Clinton +21.3
Monmouth University, released 08.09.2015: Clinton +25
Emerson College, , released 09.09.2015: Clinton +27
CNN/ORC, released 10.09.2015: Clinton +10
Morning Consult (R), released 10.09.2015: Clinton +24
IPSOS/Reuters (5 day rolling), released 11.09.2015: Clinton +14
ABC/WAPO, released 13.09.2015: Clinton +18 (with Biden), Clinton +28 (without Biden)
CBS/NYT, released 15.09.2015: Clinton +20
IPSOS/Reuters (5 day rolling), released 15.09.2015: Clinton +19.5


Again, some interesting math. If we move the two repeaters (IPSOS/Reuters from 05.09 and 11.09) and only use the latest IPSOS/Reuters numbers, without removing any upper or lower possibl outliers, then the average for Clinton over 14 days is: Clinton +23.6. Remove the lowest and the highest margins (Clinton +35, Clinton +10), and with those 8 polls, the average is: Clinton +23.8. Please notice that those two averages are very, very close to each other. Welcome to my world of simple polling math. Experience has taught that there are, with large groups of polling, likely one or two outliers and at the end of the day, since they tend to appear on both the high and low end of the spectrum, keeping them in the averages or ditching them really makes no difference, for they tend to cancel each other out.

There are two major constants in the DEM nomination polling as well: Clinton is solidly in 1st place, Sanders is in 2nd place. And when you remove a possible Biden candidacy from the picture, Clinton profits from his absence in polling, he lead over Sanders expands quite demonstrably.

Two differences between the DEM and GOP polling (national):

1.) Clinton's margin average over the Democratic field is 10 points higher than Trump's margin average over the Republican field.

2.) The second place candidate in the GOP field (Carson) is rising fast. The second place candidate in the DEM field (Sanders) remains static.

Let's take a closer look at the 3 IPSOS/Reuters five day rolling polling values:

GOP: Trump +25, +23, 15
DEM: Clinton +21.3, +14, +19.5

The Trump numbers have shrunk, according to IPSOS/Reuters, whereas Clinton's numbers dipped and then rebounded. This can mean one of two things: since rolling polling tends to be a cyclical thing, then the GOP and the DEM values are occuring at different points in a so-called "sinus curve", or Carson really IS picking up steam and this is the first sign that September may end up being known as the month of Carson. Wait and see.


In DEM statewide polling, the same states that were polled for the Republicans were also polled for the Democrats. We see, generally, good movement for Sanders in IA and NH, but Clinton is still firmly ahead in SC and in all the other Southern states polled thus far this month, also in California.


Clinton / Biden / Sanders vs. GOP matchups: National and State polling:


There was a bevy of national polling, and you can see all the results at the corresponding links above, but in a nutshell:

PPP (D), released 03.09.2012: 10 Clinton matchups, she wins 9 of 10, one is a tie. 2 Biden matchups, he wins both. 5 Sanders matchups, he wins 2, loses 3. The margins range (in a two-man race) from Clinton +7 to Carson +6.

SUSA, released 04.09.2015: Trump against 4 DEMS (including, for some strange reason, Al Gore), Trump wins all 4, by between +3 to +5. The SUSA internals indicate Trump getting 25% of the black vote, which is extremely unlikely. I did a posting elsewhere in USMB where I showed that SUSA made this same mistake with Obama vs. Romney in November of 2011, especially in the state of Ohio.

Emerson college, released 09.09.2015: 5 Clinton vs. R matchups, 1 Sanders vs. R matchups. The GOP wins all 7 matchups, with between +2 to +8 (Trump over Sanders)

CNN/ORC, released 10.09.2015: 3 Clinton vs Trump, Bush and Carson matchups. Likewise for Biden against the three. There is one tie (Clinton and Trump, both at 48), Clinton loses the other two. Biden wins 2, loses 1. The margins range from Biden +10 to Carson +5. This is yet another poll where in GE matchups, Carson does better against the Democrats than Trump does.

Morning Consult (R), released 10.09.2015: 5 Clinton vs. GOP matchups, she wins 4 of 5. The exception is Trump +1 over Clinton. Again, Morning Consult is a REPUBLICAN pollster, yet shows better results for Clinton than CNN/ORC. Interesting.

NBC/Telemundo/Marist, released 11.09.2015: 8 matchups total 4 Clinton vs. GOP, 4 Biden vs. the same four GOPers (Bush, Cruz, Trump, Rubio). Both Clinton and Biden handily win all matchups, from +4 to +18. There is also a Latino vote sub-component of the poll, showing Clinton and Biden leading Trump among Latinos by +47 and +51, respectively. That may well be one of the most important data-points of September, 2015.

ABC/WAPO, released 13.09.2015: Clinton vs. Trump, Biden vs. Trump, both measured under the General Population and with RV only. All four matchups go to the Democratics, but it's a statistical tie Clinton (46) / Trump (43) among RV. There are also internals about the Latino vote here worth looking at.


In state matchup polling, there were some very interesting happenings.

First, we got a VERY rare poll from the impenetrably RED state of Utah, showing Trump only 10 points ahead of Clinton. I alread did a write up about this poll here in USMB.

One poll from IA, one from NH and one from Florida. The Florida polling numbers are very bad news for Clinton overall, but also bad news for Bush and Rubio. Take a look at it at the link.

The first 15 days of September were very sparse in terms of state D-vs-R presidential matchups.

ISSUES POLLING:​

I was behind the 8-ball in getting all of the issues polling in, but there is an interesting set of results from Gallup about Trump's image, a CNN poll about the Iran Deal and possible government shutdown over Planned Parenthood, Immigration, Birthright citizenship and Abortion. Interesting stuff.

So, that now wraps-up the polling from 01-15 September, 2015.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Bush will be the nom in the end.

polls don't mean that much this far our, when it gets closer to being a vote, then you will see the moderates leave for another moderate and Bush will be the one to lose the WH.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Bush will be the nom in the end.

polls don't mean that much this far our, when it gets closer to being a vote, then you will see the moderates leave for another moderate and Bush will be the one to lose the WH.

Your opinion, which I respect. But there is a reason for why I keep such a detailed stream of all polling data, even in the early phase of a GE cycle, and I have listed that reason more than once. If Bush ends up being your nominee, then so be it. I am following the numbers, impassionately, as always.

 

[Mertex]

Quite a bit to take in, but quite interesting. In spite of all the hashing and re-hashing from the right on the e-mail non-issue, Clinton doesn't seem to be suffering from it......must drive the right to distraction!

 

[Statistikhengst]

Quite a bit to take in, but quite interesting. In spite of all the hashing and re-hashing from the right on the e-mail non-issue, Clinton doesn't seem to be suffering from it......must drive the right to distraction!

Her numbers have suffered some, but she is, on the whole, not tanking.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk