PDA

View Full Version : PPP Poll - Iowa GOP Caucus




tsai3904
10-11-2011, 11:12 AM
Iowa (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/10/cain-leads-in-iowa.html)
10/7 - 10/10
311 probable caucusgoers
+/-5.6%

Results in parenthesis are from the last Iowa (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/08/perry-debuts-in-lead-in-iowa-caucus-race.html) poll conducted between 8/19 - 8/21.

Cain - 30% (7%)
Romney - 22% (19%)
Paul - 10% (16%)
Perry - 9% (22%)
Bachmann - 8% (18%)
Gingrich - 8% (5%)
Santorum - 5% (5%)
Huntsman - 1% (3%)
Johnson - 1%

Ron Paul Crosstabs:

18 to 29 - 36% (38%)
30 to 45 - 12% (15%)
46 to 65 - 7% (14%)
Older than 65 - 5% (10%)


Man - 8% (21%)
Woman - 12% (9%)

rp08orbust
10-11-2011, 11:14 AM
Ouch. (I called it--10%, only because it's PPP.)

D.A.S.
10-11-2011, 11:15 AM
18 to 29 - 36% (38%)
30 to 45 - 12% (15%)
46 to 65 - 7% (14%)
Older than 65 - 5% (10%)


Man 8% (21%)
Woman 12% (9%)


What the... Are men now going for Cain? Are we experiencing Cookbook Bump with women? ;-)

braane
10-11-2011, 11:16 AM
What really strikes me here is how much of a loss Ron seems to have had among men, from 21% to 8%? A rise in woman voters is a positive sign!

69360
10-11-2011, 11:16 AM
Why is Cain gaining so much in places like Iowa? I'm at a loss.

PaulConventionWV
10-11-2011, 11:17 AM
Ouch. (I called it--10%, only because it's PPP.)

This is crazy. What is making Ron Paul lose support? There is absolutely nothing to suggest this should be happening.

Also, did anyone notice that women are 12% and men are at 8%? Talk about turning the tables... how is this possible? This has never happened.

tsai3904
10-11-2011, 11:20 AM
In the last Iowa poll, PPP surveyed usual Republican primary voters. In this poll, PPP surveyed probable caucusgoers.

I'm not sure what if any impact this had on the poll but it is a change in methodology.

RonPaulCult
10-11-2011, 11:20 AM
Why is Cain gaining so much in places like Iowa? I'm at a loss.

This is great - we have gone past Bachmann. People are done with her. We have gone past Perry. People are done with him. When they learn that Cain's 9-9-9 plan is HORRIBLE for the country - they will have nowhere left to go but to us.

samsung1
10-11-2011, 11:23 AM
We need to double and triple the phone calling into Iowa and NH asap

D.A.S.
10-11-2011, 11:23 AM
This is crazy. What is making Ron Paul lose support? There is absolutely nothing to suggest this should be happening.


Well, first of all the sampling for this poll is quite small, the margin of error is 5%, and Ron's support in Iowa is very much non-uniform, unlike South Carolina where he pretty much consistently polls low.

Still, we took a lot of ripping and media spin over the last month, and the Campaign has done unfortunately VERY LITTLE to come out with TV ads or newspaper ads to dispel the media myths. For some reason, the campaign has been pretty quiet over the last month. I hope it's because they got something major lined up. But if not, then they have no excuse.

KingNothing
10-11-2011, 11:24 AM
Anyone notice this??

18 to 29 - 36% (38%)

Wow. We REALLY kill with young voters. It's a shame that the most mis-informed demographic also happens to be comprised of the most prolific voters.

69360
10-11-2011, 11:27 AM
This is great - we have gone past Bachmann. People are done with her. We have gone past Perry. People are done with him. When they learn that Cain's 9-9-9 plan is HORRIBLE for the country - they will have nowhere left to go but to us.

I'm hoping the 999 myth gets debunked tonight.

As soon as I explain to people here in PA that they would be paying 15% tax on purchases, they immediately say screw Cain.

TheTexan
10-11-2011, 11:34 AM
Ron Paul should get a bump from tonight. 2hr economics debate? Hell yes. PBS means he should get his fair amount of talking time. (it also means fewer people will be watching, but I'll take that tradeoff any day of the week)

(It is PBS right?)

tsai3904
10-11-2011, 11:37 AM
It is PBS right?

Only in Iowa. Outside of Iowa, it's on Bloomberg Television.

rp4prez
10-11-2011, 11:41 AM
Only in Iowa. Outside of Iowa, it's on Bloomberg Television.

Damnit.. means I won't be able to get it. Hope there is a live stream somewhere!

tsai3904
10-11-2011, 11:42 AM
\Hope there is a live stream somewhere!

It will be streamed at washingtonpost.com/debate and possibly bloomberg.com/tv

Brett85
10-11-2011, 12:21 PM
This is crazy. What is making Ron Paul lose support? There is absolutely nothing to suggest this should be happening.

Also, did anyone notice that women are 12% and men are at 8%? Talk about turning the tables... how is this possible? This has never happened.

I think a lot of it is probably the fact that many of Ron's supporters have involvement in left wing causes like Occupy Wallstreet. I hope Ron distances himself from these big government advocates.

Brett85
10-11-2011, 12:23 PM
Ron Paul should get a bump from tonight. 2hr economics debate? Hell yes. PBS means he should get his fair amount of talking time. (it also means fewer people will be watching, but I'll take that tradeoff any day of the week)

(It is PBS right?)

It's Bloomberg. And for the love of God, Ron's debate coach needs to advise him not to bring up foreign policy issues when he's asked a question about economic issues. He does that all the time in debates, and he needs to focus on answering the question at hand and focusing on how to restore the economy.

Uriah
10-11-2011, 12:35 PM
This is crazy. What is making Ron Paul lose support? There is absolutely nothing to suggest this should be happening.

Also, did anyone notice that women are 12% and men are at 8%? Talk about turning the tables... how is this possible? This has never happened.

This is a poll. This is a sample of the population of probable caucus goers. Samples can be bad and can be good. Don't think that this is what has happened. This sample is only 311 people. In 2008, 119,188 people attended the Republican party caucus in Iowa.

Also, the margin of error is 5.6%, this is pretty high for polls.

cdc482
10-11-2011, 12:38 PM
So why does this energy not reflect in polls?

Sounds like loads of fun

Simple. The polls ALWAYS deal with regular voters: registered republicans who vote every election or registered independents who have often voted Republican.

Dr. Paul's stronghold is among people who have never voted (and will therefore never be polled).

Feeding the Abscess
10-11-2011, 12:38 PM
It's Bloomberg. And for the love of God, Ron's debate coach needs to advise him not to bring up foreign policy issues when he's asked a question about economic issues. He does that all the time in debates, and he needs to focus on answering the question at hand and focusing on how to restore the economy.

Can't fix the economy without fixing the $1.5 trillion black hole the military/foreign policy eats up.

Brett85
10-11-2011, 12:58 PM
Can't fix the economy without fixing the $1.5 trillion black hole the military/foreign policy eats up.

Fine. Then he should just keep it vague and talk about the need to cut trillions of dollars of "foreign spending." Don't call it "military spending."

sailingaway
10-11-2011, 01:00 PM
I wonder if they ASKED 'are you likely to caucus' or just picked from 2010 caucus goers, when liberty voters in Iowa may or may not have had anyone they cared about.

bluesc
10-11-2011, 01:02 PM
I wonder if they ASKED 'are you likely to caucus' or just picked from 2010 caucus goers, when liberty voters in Iowa may or may not have had anyone they cared about.

Now this is a good question. PPP pull this kind of stuff all the time.

realtonygoodwin
10-11-2011, 01:05 PM
Simple. The polls ALWAYS deal with regular voters: registered republicans who vote every election or registered independents who have often voted Republican.

Dr. Paul's stronghold is among people who have never voted (and will therefore never be polled).

That's what was said last time, too.

malkusm
10-11-2011, 01:11 PM
This is great - we have gone past Bachmann. People are done with her. We have gone past Perry. People are done with him. When they learn that Cain's 9-9-9 plan is HORRIBLE for the country - they will have nowhere left to go but to us.

The same thing was said when Bachmann trailed. "They will have nowhere left to go but to us!" Then they went to Perry. But just wait until Perry falls!

Let's face it, there's a good cross-section of the GOP who wouldn't vote for Ron if the only alternative was a turd sandwich. That doesn't mean we can't win the election, but we shouldn't delude ourselves into thinking that we can just sit back and wait for Cain to implode. We need to be pushing Ron positively as hard as possible.

michaelkellenger
10-11-2011, 01:15 PM
Cain is going to start to run away with this.

sadam
10-11-2011, 01:20 PM
On a positive note I've seen so much Ron Paul paraphernalia here in S.E. Iowa it's unreal. I have yet to see any other campaigns stuff yet. Any other Iowan's have a field report as to how much more avid Ron Paul support there seems to be here than last go around?

sailingaway
10-11-2011, 01:22 PM
Cain is going to start to run away with this.

Then we have to advertise that he was a cheerleader for TARP and thought the Fed didn't need an audit, you could just look on their web page. Which might just sound like he wasn't up to speed on the issue, until you realize that he was on the Board of Governors of the Kanses City Federal Reserve Branch.

RedLightning
10-11-2011, 01:28 PM
The campaign needs to go all out in Iowa and NH. Because if we can't do well there, won't do well anywhere.

djruden
10-11-2011, 01:31 PM
Don't get worked up, these polls are as fake as the ones that had Rick Perry winning. Cain is not polling that well ANYWHERE... Iowa is going to be a Romney/Paul race for first.

sadam
10-11-2011, 01:35 PM
I don't think Romney will do good at all in Iowa he has done no work here this cycle and last go around he spent a lot of money trying to win Iowa and still lost to Huckabee. I still think Bachmann will do good here, just her saying she was born in Waterloo snags a lot of uninformed voters.

pauliticalfan
10-11-2011, 01:39 PM
I'm thinking RevPac needs to start coming up with a Cain ad.

djruden
10-11-2011, 01:41 PM
I don't think Romney will do good at all in Iowa he has done no work here this cycle and last go around he spent a lot of money trying to win Iowa and still lost to Huckabee. I still think Bachmann will do good here, just her saying she was born in Waterloo snags a lot of uninformed voters.
This is true, nice to see another Iowan on here ;). Although I know people that still like Romney, but the christian conservative vote is strong in Iowa and that may easily overrule Romney if at the caucuses we can sway people to get behind Paul.

I've talked to Bachmann supporters around CR and I know they are easily swayed when you start comparing resumes. We already got a President with no experience. The parts of Iowa that worry me are the precincts mostly made up of farms and very small towns... No telling what those people are thinking.

sadam
10-11-2011, 01:48 PM
Yeah I agree it always makes my day seeing a fellow Iowan on here. And I wouldn't worry about the small farm communities I'd say they are our best shot. Just look at Jefferson County last caucus. Ron Paul won that county in the last caucus and the biggest community in the county is around 8,000 people. I think Ron got 2nd place in Van Buren County last go around which is even smaller yet than Jefferson. The big cities are what worry me. It's much easier to sway 10 people to vote for Ron in a rural area than a 1,000 in a metropolitan. Keep up the good fight!

Birdlady
10-11-2011, 02:20 PM
Don't get worked up, these polls are as fake as the ones that had Rick Perry winning. Cain is not polling that well ANYWHERE... Iowa is going to be a Romney/Paul race for first.

But people said this in 07/08 and it wasn't true.

djruden
10-11-2011, 02:26 PM
But people said this in 07/08 and it wasn't true.

It was when the polls had Guiliani winning, or Fred Thompson winning... Those candidates went NO WHERE. Cain and Perry and this years Guiliani and Thompson. Plus look at history, most GOP candidates don't win the nomination their first time running. Bush jr was the only exception in recent history because his dad paved the way. Most candidates run for the GOP for over a decade. Nixon ran for multiple decades. Bush Sr tried many times. Even Reagan needed a few campaigns to establish himself. McCain couldn't even beat Bush Jr. Romney or Paul is likely to get the nomination based on history.

realtonygoodwin
10-11-2011, 02:59 PM
This is Cain's second Presidential election...

Birdlady
10-11-2011, 03:00 PM
It was when the polls had Guiliani winning, or Fred Thompson winning... Those candidates went NO WHERE. Cain and Perry and this years Guiliani and Thompson. Plus look at history, most GOP candidates don't win the nomination their first time running. Bush jr was the only exception in recent history because his dad paved the way. Most candidates run for the GOP for over a decade. Nixon ran for multiple decades. Bush Sr tried many times. Even Reagan needed a few campaigns to establish himself. McCain couldn't even beat Bush Jr. Romney or Paul is likely to get the nomination based on history.

I understand. I just think we need to continue to work in Iowa rather than assume the polls are a fraud. I wish I lived in one of these early states at times. :( I feel like in PA, by the time our primary comes around it is really meaningless.

devil21
10-11-2011, 03:08 PM
Meaningless poll. Cain doesnt really have 30% support and he's just the flavor of the week (again). Ron benefits from the caucus process because his supporters actually show up and won't switch at the drop of a hat. These polls really don't concern me at all. Just keep doing what you're doing and continue to let the other candidates implode on themselves, which they will invariably do, Cain included.

Meiun
10-11-2011, 03:18 PM
It says to me, first of all that it's PPP (the dude that has it out for RP), and secondly that this field is still very fluid. Media Impressions (face and name combos) are still having an impact. Informed voters may have made their choice but there is still a lot of time to make impressions. Debates like tonight's are the answer, and the ads of course.

Liberty74
10-11-2011, 03:19 PM
I'm hoping the 999 myth gets debunked tonight.

As soon as I explain to people here in PA that they would be paying 15% tax on purchases, they immediately say screw Cain.

You're not being intellectually honest.

If a person is told they no longer have to pay payroll taxes (15.3%), only 9% comes out of their check instead of 20% to 30% total on the federal side, and a person can make more money without being punished into a higher income bracket, most will tend to think that's much fairer.

You are using a trick that anti-Fair Tax crowd uses which is to assume that a national sales tax is on top of the current income tax structure/taxes. It's simply not the case regardless of what side you stand on 9-9-9 or the Fair Tax.

At least a national sales tax cannot be used to divide Americans into groups where greedy, power hungry politicians then use such to expand government even more. By placing the tax at the end user, consumption, people will finally realize how much in taxes they are paying and hopefully get mad like your people in PA. Half of Americans are not mad about federal income taxes because guess what?... they don't pay SHIT and are on some form(s) of welfare sucking the system dry. Ben Franklin said, "Once people realize they can vote themselves money, it will be the end of the Republic." We are there!!!

djruden
10-11-2011, 03:33 PM
I understand. I just think we need to continue to work in Iowa rather than assume the polls are a fraud. I wish I lived in one of these early states at times. :( I feel like in PA, by the time our primary comes around it is really meaningless.

In no way am I trying to say that the campaign shouldn't still focus on Iowa. Quite the contrary, I think Ron has a good chance in Iowa and he needs to concentrate here. It's just that as an Iowan, I KNOW that Herman Cain (or rick perry a month or so ago) actually has that kind of support in Iowa. I live here and have driven across the state and around and have seen NO signs, NO bumper stickers, nothing with those guys. It's fictitious support. I think the polling itself is probably skewed to make people more likely to answer a certain way because Cain's support isn't that wide in Iowa.

And I didn't know Cain ran in 2000 until just now... Glad to see he supported Forbes (like me!) instead of Bush when he dropped.

michaelkellenger
10-11-2011, 03:36 PM
It was when the polls had Guiliani winning, or Fred Thompson winning... Those candidates went NO WHERE. Cain and Perry and this years Guiliani and Thompson. Plus look at history, most GOP candidates don't win the nomination their first time running. Bush jr was the only exception in recent history because his dad paved the way. Most candidates run for the GOP for over a decade. Nixon ran for multiple decades. Bush Sr tried many times. Even Reagan needed a few campaigns to establish himself. McCain couldn't even beat Bush Jr. Romney or Paul is likely to get the nomination based on history.

That doesn't make them fake. They are represenative of a sample at a given time. The last polls going into caucus night did NOT Have thompson or rudy g. on top. It had Huckabee on top...and what happened? Huckabee won. Every time last year people claimed the polls were lying, every time the final result was pretty close to the poll number.

RCP average got the exact order for the top six in Iowa last time, as well as New Hampshire.

bolidew
10-11-2011, 04:03 PM
Besides Ron's decline, the other danger is Romney actually gaining in Iowa!

AJ187
10-11-2011, 04:16 PM
You're not being intellectually honest.

If a person is told they no longer have to pay payroll taxes (15.3%), only 9% comes out of their check instead of 20% to 30% total on the federal side, and a person can make more money without being punished into a higher income bracket, most will tend to think that's much fairer.

You are using a trick that anti-Fair Tax crowd uses which is to assume that a national sales tax is on top of the current income tax structure/taxes. It's simply not the case regardless of what side you stand on 9-9-9 or the Fair Tax.

At least a national sales tax cannot be used to divide Americans into groups where greedy, power hungry politicians then use such to expand government even more. By placing the tax at the end user, consumption, people will finally realize how much in taxes they are paying and hopefully get mad like your people in PA. Half of Americans are not mad about federal income taxes because guess what?... they don't pay SHIT and are on some form(s) of welfare sucking the system dry. Ben Franklin said, "Once people realize they can vote themselves money, it will be the end of the Republic." We are there!!!

I read that and I assumed he was talking about PA's 6 percent state sales tax on top of Cain's 9 percent federal sales tax, equaling 15 percent. This has me most worried and I agree it would sway voters if valid.

parocks
10-11-2011, 04:35 PM
Anyone notice this??

18 to 29 - 36% (38%)

Wow. We REALLY kill with young voters. It's a shame that the most mis-informed demographic also happens to be comprised of the most prolific voters.

This is happening all over the place. One recent state poll (I don't have the state) had Ron Paul at 50% with 18-29.

We need to register that age group, and then get them out to vote.

nyrgoal99
10-11-2011, 04:42 PM
This is crazy. What is making Ron Paul lose support? There is absolutely nothing to suggest this should be happening.

Also, did anyone notice that women are 12% and men are at 8%? Talk about turning the tables... how is this possible? This has never happened.


That just shows how big the margin for error is in these polls. Women have never prefered ron over men in terms of polling

cero
10-11-2011, 05:22 PM
What the... Are men now going for Cain? Are we experiencing Cookbook Bump with women? ;-)
lulz read that as cockbump.... if that makes any sense (no ****)

but srsly... this doesn't make any sense we have always had a greater % with men that women...

Badger Paul
10-11-2011, 09:11 PM
Caucuses are notoriously hard to poll for because a caucus is about intensity of support, not broad appeal. Cain's problem he hasn't been to Iowa much, doesn't have much of a staff or organization there, doesn't have a lot of money and is going off the campaign trail for a month. All it takes is one bad debate performance and he's toast.