WMUR/CNN New Hampshire Poll -- Ron Paul at 8%, Giuliani slips to 16%

[csen]

http://www.wmur.com/download/2007/1119/14642031.pdf

Nov results (Sept results)

Romney 33% (25%)
McCain 18% (18%)
Giuliani 16% (24%)
Paul 8% (4%)
Huckabee 5% (3%)
Thompson 4% (13%)

The stomach punch, however:

Would not consider supporting under any circumstances:
Paul 61%

Ouch.

Overall, encouraging, but that part hurts.

[hard@work]

Just remember who they are polling. The "likely Republican voters" which are basically the smallest part of the Republican party now.

;-)

[Ethek]

http://www.wmur.com/download/2007/1119/14642031.pdf

Nov results (Sept results)

Romney 33% (25%)
McCain 18% (18%)
Giuliani 16% (24%)
Paul 8% (4%)
Huckabee 5% (3%)
Thompson 4% (13%)

The stomach punch, however:

Would not consider supporting under any circumstances:
Paul 61%

Ouch.

Overall, encouraging, but that part hurts.

Hmm, I wonder how that question was phrased.

[Cindy]

Isn't that poll just the results of registered republicans polled. We have still have the Independents in that state and I think most of them are voting for Paul.

It's bad that Romney is going up there. If he takes Iowa and NH, well.......

What's with his recent surge anyway? He was tanking in the polls after there last debate?

[Zydeco]

http://www.wmur.com/download/2007/1119/14642031.pdf

Nov results (Sept results)

Romney 33% (25%)
McCain 18% (18%)
Giuliani 16% (24%)
Paul 8% (4%)
Huckabee 5% (3%)
Thompson 4% (13%)

The stomach punch, however:

Would not consider supporting under any circumstances:
Paul 61%

Ouch.

Overall, encouraging, but that part hurts.

That 61% means our 8% is even better than it looks, since it indicates the sample group is heavily skewed towards the Fox News-brainwashed.

[jgmaynard]

It also means 39% WOULD vote for Ron, and that is FAR more than enough to win...

JM

[csen]

Isn't that poll just the results of registered republicans polled. We have still have the Independents in that state and I think most of them are voting for Paul.

It's bad that Romney is going up there. If he takes Iowa and NH, well.......

What's with his recent surge anyway? He was tanking in the polls after there last debate?

The Giuliani/Thompson vote has to go somewhere...

[Goldwater Conservative]

The stomach punch, however:

Would not consider supporting under any circumstances:
Paul 61%

Ouch.

Overall, encouraging, but that part hurts.

Those are mostly the warmongers, but probably also people who might agree with Paul on the war and other issues but who've based their opinion of Paul on biased sources.

[Dorfsmith]

Just remember who they are polling. The "likely Republican voters" which are basically the smallest part of the Republican party now.

;-)

Bingo!

[Blowback]

Isn't that poll just the results of registered republicans polled. We have still have the Independents in that state and I think most of them are voting for Paul.

It's bad that Romney is going up there. If he takes Iowa and NH, well.......

What's with his recent surge anyway? He was tanking in the polls after there last debate?

His recent "surge" is probably caused by $10M+ in brainwashing coming across your tv and radiowaves. I think the powers that be are rallying around him now instead of Guiliani and Huck (lol CHuck Norris are you serious? - although it was a good laugh).

We'll see what happens...

[Ibgamer]

Ouch 61%?

Maybe that will incline other people to give him a look?

[RPinSEAZ]

That 61% means our 8% is even better than it looks, since it indicates the sample group is heavily skewed towards the Fox News-brainwashed.

This is very true. It's highly unlikely that 61% is an accurate number given that his numbers are half of that in any other place at any given time. Statistically speaking, unless there's some weird anomaly that doesn't exist in any other location in the US, those numbers are way off. Given that, 8% is probably also much higher.

[kylejack]

I knew there'd be a strong pro war contingent in the party, even now, even with Bush approval at 20 percent. As long as they're all too proud to drop out, 30 percent can easily bag it for us.

[Primbs]

We just need to explain Ron Paul's position on defense better.

[llamabread]

Look on page 11. 27% of Independents are voting for Ron Paul.
That is where the vast majority of Paul's supporters are.

[adwads]

If you delve deeper into the polling data, you will find that 26% of independents who say that they will vote in the republican primary are currently supporting Paul, which I think is good.

[csen]

The key takeaway for me is we're definitely in the upper single digits in the NH landline polls, and Fred Thompson is definitely toast.

[Primbs]

Be prepared for a real fight, because they know Ron Paul can win New Hampshire now.

[foofighter20x]

[The stomach punch, however:

Would not consider supporting under any circumstances:
Paul 61%

Ouch.

Just shows how much the reliance of voting history factors into those that make it through the screen and influence the final number...

The fact that they screen out apathy is going to totally invalidate these polls for this election.

[Ron Paul Fan]

They are polling mostly neo-cons. Look at pages 11 and 16. Neo-cons don't like him, but independents/undeclareds do and they are the key to winning this primary!

[Dorfsmith]

Just shows how much the reliance of voting history factors into those that make it through the screen and influence the final number...

The fact that they screen out apathy is going to totally invalidate these polls for this election.

Very true.

[Paulitician]

That's interesting, Thompson is right behind us in who people would certainly never vote for under any circumstance: 50%. Man, he's really hurting in NH, huh? Still out of the likely Republicans, there are still 22% of those considering Ron Paul whom we can sway, as well as that 10% that has no opinion.

[Mark Rushmore]

I tend to agree with the outlook of the poster who pointed out that 39% would consider voting for Paul. Simply because of those who voted in the last Republican primary who are open minded enough to consider him, after comparing him to other candidates on the issues, I have a hard time believing that the majority of them could pull the lever for someone else. It seems, especially as the message gets out there, that it's going to become a more binary decision.

A) I've heard about Ron Paul and what he stands for, I can't possibly vote any other way.

B) Ron Paul is a girlie-man who doesn't support the endless wars that make me feel tough. I would rather vote for warmongering Hillary than that wimp.

Right now, we are still fighting against:

C) Ron Paul who?

[nbhadja]

Funny how 63% would not consider voting for RP when the other "legit" polls say more than 63% don't know who RP is.

[Dave Wood]

Lets just remember one thing....people can say anything they want to someone on the other end of the phone, it takes no energy.

This is all about WHO SHOWS UP AT THE POLLS. Whos inspired by a candidate out there other than RP? How many people are going to take for granted that their top tier guy will win so why bother showing up?

This aint over till the fat vote counters sing. (fat lady sings) get it. :-)

[saahmed]

A lot of that 61% may have to with the fact that people still don't know who he is or what he stands for. He also has the highest "no opinion" numbers. They may not support him because they fear that his lack of name recognition might mean that he could not beat Hillary, or maybe they just oppose him because they don't know him.

[LibertyEagle]

We just need to explain Ron Paul's position on defense better.

Yes, BADLY!!

[LibertyEagle]

Funny how 63% would not consider voting for RP when the other "legit" polls say more than 63% don't know who RP is.

I doubt that's true in New Hampshire.

[JMann]

It would be fantastic if Paul can beat McCain, Thompson and possibly Rudy in Iowa to help take away their support in NH.

I'm most afraid of the mainstream Republican party looking at the other candidates and deciding that if McCain acknowledges his sins on immigration they can get behind him.

[Nash]

Isn't that poll just the results of registered republicans polled. We have still have the Independents in that state and I think most of them are voting for Paul.

It's bad that Romney is going up there. If he takes Iowa and NH, well.......

What's with his recent surge anyway? He was tanking in the polls after there last debate?

It depends on the poll but I know that some polls don't call you based on your registration they just call you if you were a past voter and then ask you which way you lean "likely republican" etc...

Thus these results could potentially include independent voters who lean republican not just registered republicans.

[nathanmn]

http://elections.gmu.edu/Voter_Turnout_2004_Primaries.htm

Look, there are more eligible voters that don't vote in primaries than there are ones that do vote in primaries. Having a large percentage of "likely Republican voters" would sure be nice, but if we get the message out strong enough we can definitely win without them.

[kylejack]

That's interesting, Thompson is right behind us in who people would certainly never vote for under any circumstance: 50%. Man, he's really hurting in NH, huh? Still out of the likely Republicans, there are still 22% of those considering Ron Paul whom we can sway, as well as that 10% that has no opinion.

I've been trying to figure out why Thompson is doing so poorly there. Then I remember that he cancelled several appearances there and hasn't been campaigning much there. New Hampshire voters are VICIOUS about that stuff. They have been first in the nation for a long time and expect to talk to their candidates face to face. I think that's probably what's going on.

[foofighter20x]

Bleh... I wish Dr Paul would jsut go down and spend a week in SC though...

*sigh*

Also, we need to keep our peepers open for push polls... :mad:

[max]

http://www.wmur.com/download/2007/1119/14642031.pdf

Nov results (Sept results)

Romney 33% (25%)
McCain 18% (18%)
Giuliani 16% (24%)
Paul 8% (4%)
Huckabee 5% (3%)
Thompson 4% (13%)

The stomach punch, however:

Would not consider supporting under any circumstances:
Paul 61%

Ouch.

Overall, encouraging, but that part hurts.

"under any circumstances?????"


What braindead morons! all because of their g-d damn beloved war that they refuse to enlist for or have their kids enlist for....

PATHETIC!

[jpa]

Attention anyone from the campaign:

Ron Paul needs to clearly define what he will do about illegal immigration in NH!!

3rd post important issue. And look at page 8, Ron Paul has a lot of upside on this issue. Romney/Rudy are soft on this issue (they talk big, but they both have lousy records).

Get Ron Paul's immigration record out in NH!! Spend that money!

[Mark Rushmore]

Get Ron Paul's immigration record out in NH!! Spend that money!

And do it in a way that highlights the logic of his national defense positions, ie. bring the troops home and send them to the borders.

[jpa]

also, look at page 11. Romney has 44% of the 18-34 age group?
LOL He is going to have no idea what hit him in that age group. There is no way Romney has 44% of the youth vote.

[DjLoTi]

On average when the media is talking about Ron Paul, they say one or more of the following:

- He's a 'kook'
- He's a 'fringe' candidate
- He's a libertarian
- He's 'extreme'

[foofighter20x]

also, look at page 11. Romney has 44% of the 18-34 age group?
LOL He is going to have no idea what hit him in that age group. There is no way Romney has 44% of the youth vote.


Again... That's the age group that made it throught the screen/formula.

Probably the very active neo-con youth.

[adwads]

Again... That's the age group that made it throught the screen/formula.

Probably the very active neo-con youth.

Probably Romney's 5 sons. I'm sure we can convert them :)