Not liking these numbers from new ABC News/Washington Post poll

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

I can't find a link to the full poll results yet, but here are quotes from the article:


Overall, 21 percent of leaned Republicans support Romney for the nomination, 17 percent Palin, with all others in single digits.


OBAMA/ROMNEY -- With Romney matched against Obama, most Republicans and conservative groups rally. Romney hauls in 87 percent of Republicans, 71 percent of conservatives and evangelical white Protestants alike, and two-thirds of "very conservative" Americans. No candidate does better against Obama among any of these groups.

Romney gains 72 percent support from the 46 percent of Americans who describe themselves as supporters of the Tea Party political movement. But, showing breadth, he also draws in 48 percent of independents, the key swing voters.


CONSIDER? -- As suggested above, Romney's position far from shuts down other potential GOP runners. Majorities of leaned Republicans say they'd consider each of a dozen potential candidates tested, or at least haven't decided yet. Those garnering the most flat objections include Palin -- 38 percent say they definitely would not support her for the nomination; Ron Paul, 36 percent; and Newt Gingrich, 34 percent. Still, just 18 percent, by contrast, say there's no way they'd consider Romney.


Methodology -- This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone June 2-5, 2011, among a random national sample of 1,002 adults, including landline and cell-phone-only respondents.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/abc-news-poll-romney-pulls-obama-head-head/story?id=13776546

[Aldanga]

I don't trust the poll as it stands. The methodology (http://langerresearch.com/uploads/1124a2_2012_Politics.pdf) is not very good for determining a Republican primary. Totally random sample with no implication that they adjusted the sample group for known percentages of registered voters/age/race/party/etc. within the population. Not to mention that they don't record any breakdown (at least as far as I can see while skimming) of the members of the sample.

This is statistical manipulation. Or, as Penn and Teller would say, bullshit. Fuck you, Frank!

[PaulConventionWV]

Has the Tea Party been raped that badly? I shudder to think...

How is it possible that Romney has 72 PERCENT SUPPORT from the Tea Party? Unbelievable...

[eleganz]

Tea Party started out with hardcore liberty lovers and started to attract bandwagon hoppers, people who are definitely more concerned about what fast food they will eat for their next meal rather than policies that govern their very livelihood. It isn't a surprise Romney and Palin are able to poll so high, America is stupid and can only relate to equally stupid politicians.

[itsnobody]

So more say they would not support Palin than Ron Paul but Palin has 17%?

This polling data is obviously insignificant then...

[Crystallas]

The data is off, they didn't even include Ron in most of the side polls.

[Sola_Fide]

The "tea party" is a nebulous term nowadays. You have all shades of Republicans calling themselves Tea Partiers now.

[speciallyblend]

the gop is its own worse nightmare!!

[sailingaway]

I posted this comment:



8:36 AM EDT
Jun 07, 2011
I don't find your poll for GOP candidates at either of the links you give for it, so without cross tabs they seem pretty worthless. I note that no one has found a way to poll 'the tea party' with any accuracy, and I would like to see whether all the side poll indexes even included Ron Paul since you don't discuss him in a number of discussions. There was incredible attack spin against him in the last election and until near the end he really didn't have funding to get his own message out except through supporters -- some of whom were better than others about how they did that. So the negatives at this stage don't surprise me so much (although I don't like them) what I would like to see is his positives, or where in this poll he was included.It would be nice if EITHER of your links that are supposed to go to this poll actually worked.

[sailingaway]

OK, just saw the link to the actual poll in this thread, and went back to ABC and posted this:


Here is the poll in case others couldn't find it either: http://langerresearch.com/uploads/1124a2_2012_Politics.pdfRon Paul was NOT included in MOST of the 'positive' polls, and as I said, his negatives at this stage are unfortunately to be expected when his last national exposure as a lower funded candidate was largely through supporters not always skilled at presenting his message. But the absence of discussion in the many POSITIVE sections where he wasn't even included in the polls, and discussion only in negatives, gives a very false impression, and you should clear it up.

Man, the many means of marginalization they have at their disposal!

They know Ron will always poll to the top end in two numbers -- how well he does against Obama compared to the rest, and the negatives, from all the spin thrown at him in the last election when he didn't have the money, early enough, to get his message out to counter media. So they don't poll him on the one where it would be PERSUASIVE to getting people to vote for him!

We really need to find a way to do outreach or something so we can get new donors in. He needs to be able to get his own message out there. This is frustrating. (And, yeah, I knew it was coming, but I don't like it)

by the way, he generally came in fourth or tied for fourth or fifth. I've never considered their polls very accurate (unfortunately, PPPs are more so, once you correct for a House effect that shows up more in their polling against Dems than between GOP candidates.)

[Johncjackson]

You are upset because you think a higher % of Tea Partiers should support Obama?

[Johncjackson]

Has the Tea Party been raped that badly? I shudder to think...

How is it possible that Romney has 72 PERCENT SUPPORT from the Tea Party? Unbelievable...

I dont understand why people think the Tea Party should support Obama. They are going to mostly support the Republican candidate.

[Aldanga]

People, seriously don't freak out over this. It's not a representative sample. There's no indication that they limited their sample in any way. It seems to be a truly random sample and not accurate for the indications regarding the Republican primary.

[James Madison]

Has the Tea Party been raped that badly? I shudder to think...

How is it possible that Romney has 72 PERCENT SUPPORT from the Tea Party? Unbelievable...

Fox News happened.

[Travlyr]

the gop is its own worse nightmare!!

And our nightmare. For years upon years they've hidden their true agenda. Now it should be obvious to everyone that the Republican party is simply a tool of the globalist empire... just like the Democrats.

[Paul4Prez]

ABC News and the Washington Post should be charged with journalistic incompetence for commissioning this poll. Their objective credibility is seriously threatened when they show head-to-head results vs. Obama for 6 Republican candidates and potential candidates, and leave out Ron Paul.

Romney, sure. Gingrich, I guess. Palin is popular, but not running yet. Bachmann? Pawlenty? Huntsman? Really? By what objective measure do the last three warrant inclusion over Ron Paul? THEIR OWN POLL, on page 17, when they finally get around to asking (without even naming anyone), shows Ron Paul even with Newt and ahead of Bachmann, Pawlenty, and Huntsman. Pawlenty was at 4 percent, Bachmann at 3 percent, and Huntsman at 1 percent, as he usually is.

[Akus]

Has the Tea Party been raped that badly? I shudder to think...

How is it possible that Romney has 72 PERCENT SUPPORT from the Tea Party? Unbelievable...
McCain got giant support, even though everyone I know hated him. That happened, why not Romney this time

[Teaser Rate]

ABC News and the Washington Post should be charged with journalistic incompetence for commissioning this poll. Their objective credibility is seriously threatened when they show head-to-head results vs. Obama for 6 Republican candidates and potential candidates, and leave out Ron Paul.

Romney, sure. Gingrich, I guess. Palin is popular, but not running yet. Bachmann? Pawlenty? Huntsman? Really? By what objective measure do the last three warrant inclusion over Ron Paul? THEIR OWN POLL, on page 17, when they finally get around to asking (without even naming anyone), shows Ron Paul even with Newt and ahead of Bachmann, Pawlenty, and Huntsman. Pawlenty was at 4 percent, Bachmann at 3 percent, and Huntsman at 1 percent, as he usually is.

The pollster included them over Ron Paul because they probably believe that he has no chance of winning the Republican nomination.