Ron Paul polling at 4% in New Hampshire

[HankScorpio]

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_republican_primary




Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has opened a bigger lead in the New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that Romney holds a fifteen-point advantage over Rudy Giuliani in the Granite State (see toplines and crosstabs). That’s up from a nine-point lead in October and a three-point lead in September.

Most of the other candidates have seen little change in their poll position.

Romney now has support from 32% of Likely Primary Voters. That figure matches his highest level of support of the season and is up from 28% a month ago. While he has struggled in national polls, Romney has consistently remained on top in the early voting states of New Hampshire and Iowa.

Rudy Giuliani attracts 17% of those voters, down a couple of points from the last survey. Giuliani’s support has ranged from 17% to 22% in five Rasmussen Reports polls of this race.

John McCain at 16% and Mike Huckabee at 10% are the only other Republicans in double digits. Their totals have not changed since the October survey.

Fred Thompson now attracts just 7% of the vote and is trailed by Ron Paul (4%) Tom Tancredo (3%), and Duncan Hunter (2%). Ten percent (10%) remain undecided.

While the general dynamic of the race appears similar to earlier polling, it is hard to overstate the potential fluidity of the GOP race. A solid majority of the state’s Primary Voters acknowledge that something could come up to change their mind before voting. Just 40% of those who support Giuliani and Romney are certain that’s how they will ultimately vote. Forty-five percent (45%) of McCain’s supporters are certain that he’s their man while 53% of Huckabee backers are that certain.

Giuliani is viewed favorably by 73% of Likely Primary voters, Romney by 80%. Positive reviews for McCain come from 66% while only 55% say the same about Thompson. Forty-five percent (48%) have a positive impression of Huckabee who remains an unknown to 17% of the state’s voters. Ron Paul who brings a surprisingly large campaign bank account to the state is viewed favorably by 33% and unfavorably by 51%.

Unlike Democrats in the state, Republican Primary voters are fairly united on the topic of illegal immigration. Eighty percent (80%) believe that when police pull someone over for a traffic violation, they should routinely check to see if that person is in the country legally. If the person is discovered to be an illegal immigrant, 73% believe that person should be deported. Only 20% believe that this policy would invite discrimination.

As for giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, 92% of Republican Primary Voters in New Hampshire are opposed. Just 5% support that policy. These figures are similar to national levels of support within the GOP. Overall, 77% of adults nationwide oppose drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.

Just 58% of Republican Primary voters in the state say that President Bush is doing a good or an excellent job.

A recent Rasmussen Reports analysis noted that Hillary Clinton’s performance in the Iowa caucuses may have a significant impact on the Republican Primary in New Hampshire… and on determining the Republican Presidential nominee. That’s because independent voters in New Hampshire are currently more interested in the Democratic Primary than in the GOP field. A Clinton victory in Iowa could cause many of those independents to change their mind and participate in the Republican Primary instead. Clinton remains the Democratic frontrunner nationally and leads in Iowa. However polling released yesterday shows that her lead is getting smaller in New Hampshire.

See survey questions and top-line results. Crosstabs available for Premium Members only.

[KewlRonduderules]

uuhhh... no.

;)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

this can't be new.... seems like this troll wants to demoralize people

[Marceline88]

The "likely Republican voters" are just going to have to learn to be surprised by the droves of "unlikely Republican voters" this time around.

[Chester Copperpot]

The "likely Republican voters" are just going to have to learn to be surprised by the droves of "unlikely Republican voters" this time around.

thats right.

[margomaps]

Thanks for the post, and welcome to the forums!

I still want Rasmussen to detail what they mean by "likely GOP primary voters." If they randomly called numbers and asked people "are you likely to vote in the GOP primary?", then I think this poll has a lot more weight than people will give it credit for. Everyone will claim "They only polled people who voted Republican in the last election!!!" -- without any basis for that claim whatsoever.

[Adamsa]

I tend to ignore all polls, even the ones in favor of Ron.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Thanks for the post, and welcome to the forums!

I still want Rasmussen to detail what they mean by "likely GOP primary voters." If they randomly called numbers and asked people "are you likely to vote in the GOP primary?", then I think this poll has a lot more weight than people will give it credit for. Everyone will claim "They only polled people who voted Republican in the last election!!!" -- without any basis for that claim whatsoever.

thanks for this garbage?

[HankScorpio]

this can't be new.... seems like this troll wants to demoralize people

It looks like they polling happened on the 5th so it was just before the record fund raising news got out.

[dsentell]

I tend to ignore all polls, even the ones in favor of Ron.

Where do you see those! :D :D :D

[JosephTheLibertarian]

It looks like they polling happened on the 5th so it was just before the record fund raising news got out.

RIGHT.

[margomaps]

The "likely Republican voters" are just going to have to learn to be surprised by the droves of "unlikely Republican voters" this time around.

Do you know that Rasmussen did not randomly call people and ask whether they were likely to vote in the GOP primary? If they did so, then the only methodological error I can see in this poll is relying on land-lines. And it's an oft-repeated claim that cell phones are not included in these telephone polls -- are we sure that's true?

[skiingff]

Do you know that Rasmussen did not randomly call people and ask whether they were likely to vote in the GOP primary? If they did so, then the only methodological error I can see in this poll is relying on land-lines. And it's an oft-repeated claim that cell phones are not included in these telephone polls -- are we sure that's true?
Yes. It's not legal to call cell phones.

[mavtek]

I'm pretty sure they called past GOP voters as this poll only included 628 respondents. Most of the people they surveyed are apparently chicken hawks. As you can see from the unfavorable rating. The GOP in New Hampshire is pretty insignificant, it's the independents who lean toward the GOP we must get.

[ronpaulyourmom]

Rasmussen uses the tightest controls on who they call out of any of the polling companies. They consistently have Ron Paul at lower numbers than other polls.

What is most noteworthy here is that Ron Paul was at 2% in the last Rasmussen NH poll a month ago. He has essentially gained 2% in this very hardcore group of Bush supporters, but it represents very little in the grand scheme of NH.

And yes, this was conducted on the 5th, prior to the major coverage of the 6th.

[Chester Copperpot]

Likely Gop Voters Mean People Who Voted In The Primary In 2004 Which Was A Horriffic Turnout Of 6 %.... The Neocon Of The Neocon

[margomaps]

Yes. It's not legal to call cell phones.

I keep seeing this repeated. I'm not claiming you're wrong -- I'd just like to see a source that verifies this claim.

[margomaps]

I'm pretty sure they called past GOP voters as this poll only included 628 respondents. Most of the people they surveyed are apparently chicken hawks. As you can see from the unfavorable rating. The GOP in New Hampshire is pretty insignificant, it's the independents who lean toward the GOP we must get.

Rasmussen did not divulge its methodology, so I see no reason to assume that they only called past GOP voters. I'm also not claiming I know who they called.

But polling companies are interested in getting the right answer. If their answers are continually wrong, they will lose business. The best way to get the right answer is to ensure that the sample is representative of the population. For telephone polls, the best way to do that is to guess the non-response rate, and compensate for it. For example, if they wanted the sample size to be 600, they probably called 2-3 times that many people, since more than half aren't Republicans, and a minority of Republicans are likely to vote in a primary.

This is how polling works in the real world. It is not just some hacks calling up numbers from a GOP-party phone list.

[brumans]

Apparently there is a new poll coming out soon that shows ron paul beating a front runner.

[HankScorpio]

But polling companies are interested in getting the right answer.

I agree with this part of your statement. However, the right answer does not mean the most accurate answer. The right answer is what the organization paying for the poll wants to hear.

I wonder what Paul would poll at if a group of his supporters commissioned a poll?

[speciallyblend]

Welcome Hankscorpio;) tell your friends,time to get involved and change this country for the good

[margomaps]

I agree with this part of your statement. However, the right answer does not mean the most accurate answer. The right answer is what the organization paying for the poll wants to hear.

I wonder what Paul would poll at if a group of his supporters commissioned a poll?

Unless his supporters consisted of people who actually knew what they were doing with survey design and statistical analysis, then it really doesn't matter. I don't think people realize that there's a lot of research and math that goes into designing a survey and presenting the results in a statistically valid context.

[Liberty]

These polling companies will have egg on their face after the NH primary. How many young people do you think they've contacted? I believe these polling companies are a real danger to our election process. Like MSM they can promote their candidates of choice through craftily structured questions. It would be interesting to do a study to see where their sources of income are.

[jacmicwag]

We'll know the answer soon whether or not their statistical methods are valid. The proof is in the voter pudding.

[RevolutionSD]

That's the old lady sitting by the land line phone at home poll, which means almost nothing.

[steph3n]

That's the old lady sitting by the land line phone at home poll, which means almost nothing.

But her vote counts, we need to knock on the door :D

[LFOD]

I'm not an expert by any means on the statistical validity and methods of these polls, but my working theory is that the turnout percentage of Ron Paul supporters is going to be WAY higher than the typical turnout level for the typical candidate. So perhaps a 5% Ron Paul number might be worth a 15% Giuliani number, say, if practically ALL Ron Paul supporters actually show up to vote.

Perhaps they've found ways to take turnout into consideration, I don't know. But if not, my prediction is that the much greater turnout level for RP supporters is going to be the MAJOR flaw in the predictive power of these polls. We already know there's a HUGE difference between the turnout for primaries versus the general election. A relatively small number of voters actually determine the primaries.

[schmeisser]

I'm not an expert by any means on the statistical validity and methods of these polls, but my working theory is that the turnout percentage of Ron Paul supporters is going to be WAY higher than the typical turnout level for the typical candidate. So perhaps a 5% Ron Paul number might be worth a 15% Giuliani number, say, if practically ALL Ron Paul supporters actually show up to vote.

Perhaps they've found ways to take turnout into consideration, I don't know. But if not, my prediction is that the much greater turnout level for RP supporters is going to be the MAJOR flaw in the predictive power of these polls. We already know there's a HUGE difference between the turnout for primaries versus the general election. A relatively small number of voters actually determine the primaries.

I agree and think that any poll times a factor of 3 is probably the true level of support. We still need to work the GOP base very hard and refrain from alienating them.