Presidential Primary poll numbers

N

Northern Sod Breaker

New member
I don't want politics I just want to find a poll conducted on who is leading in the primary. I should add it would be helpfull if it was current and not three weeks out of date like the one's the search engines are pulling up.

Thanks
Shotgun.
 
Here is a Fox News poll from Dec 18-19. It was the most recent I could find.

The leaders for the 2008 primaries if they were held at that time for Democrats are listed at the bottom of page five. The Republicans are listed on page 6.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/122007_release_web.pdf

for quick reference:
Hillary Clinton 49%
Barack Obama 20%
John Edwards 10%

Rudy Guiliani 20%
Mike Huckabee 19%
John McCain 19%
Mitt Romney 11%
Fred Thompson 10%
 
Polls are like fresh fish....know who your getting it from.
Gallup, Rasmussen, and Zogby depend on credibility to survive. The scent of spin will sink them. Polls by news agencies (CNN, FOX, USA Today, et al) are not reliable unless they enlist one of the standard bearers mentioned above.

Some sources compile results from many sources to get an 'average' result. Hit and miss but not unreliable unless you see alot of news agencies, web site polls, or DON'T see the standard bearers in the mix.

So remember.......polls = fish all trout are not the same.

This Rasmussen polling info is done daily and has State by State info too. There are also head to head polls. For example, John McCain consistently wins head to head polls with all Democrat candidates.http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...2/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history
 
It's my estimation, and that of others I trust, that polling as usual during the primary season at least, and possibly during the general election, will decline precipitously after this election year.

Unless they can figure out a more reliable way to capture a better sample than they've been able to this year.
 
The proper way to interpret a poll requires information you will never get throught the media. As such all results posted in our media are suspect.
 
The standard bearers reveal their methodology and Gallup especially discloses exhaustively how they came to their results. MEDIA polls make no such disclosure and by the mere fact your a viewer or not a viewer skews the results as their viewers are the participants and tend to be of a particular demographic right off the bat.
 
It's my estimation, and that of others I trust, that polling as usual during the primary season at least, and possibly during the general election, will decline precipitously after this election year.

Unless they can figure out a more reliable way to capture a better sample than they've been able to this year.
__________________
Click to expand...

Sounds like "shoot the messenger" to me.
 
John Zogby on polling, from 2004. " The reality is that polling on the telephone is becoming more difficult; caller id and the widespread use of cell phones are affecting response rates. " Zogby goes on to say that he (in 2004) thinks his results are reliable, but then again, that's his sole income source, so that might be seen as biased.

These problems are several magnitudes worse now than in 2004.
 
It's definitely an inexact science. But, not nearly inexact enough to make the hopeful of most on this forum competitive.
 
It seems you too have seen through the 'polling isn't reliable anymore' argument to the core of that argument which is 'they can't be right if my guy is doing so poorly'.

Polls are defiantly not decisive but, done correctly, do show trending well given a proper sampling. The probability that those that would answer one way but NOT another are predominantly without landlines is a fallacy given that the entire population is moving to cellular, not just supporters of a particular candidate or party.

To say more Republicans or Democrats or Liberals or Conservatives have landlines or don't have land lines isn't valid. The poor vs. middle class vs. wealthy is more valid but still not accurate. Affordability?, availability?, necessity?, what is the dynamic break that so skews the result that one particular candidate is severely disadvantaged? And is that the ONLY candidate disadvantaged? Hardly plausible.
 
what is the dynamic break that so skews the result that one particular candidate is severely disadvantaged? And is that the ONLY candidate disadvantaged?
Click to expand...

It is possible, but unlikely, that the cellular phone issue is real. Statistically, younger people are more likely to be totally cellular, and have no landline.

Therefore, if you look at who younger people are voting for, their candidate should do worse in a poll taken over landlines.

I don't know who young voters are going to vote for, but I suspect a higher percentage would vote for Ron Paul over, say, Huckabee. But I don't know what impact this will have. We only have to wait about 24 more hours before we know whether there is any validity to this hypothesis, and I certainly would not bet on it.
 
And what Democrat is experiencing the same disadvantage? Do you really think that Paul has such a majority among young voters (typically very Democrat leaning IF they vote) and that cellular only is so strongly young people that instead of polling at 10-15% he is only at 2-3%? Still not plausible.

But as GoSlash(codenumberoftheday) very correctly pointed out, the REAL info will be available in about 24 hours. You don't need a landline OR cellular phone to caucus.
 
Ahhh, yes. Problem is there is no fun associated with waiting for election results. Besides, how are all those "journalists" to be employed if we wait for the actual election? Who will entertain them?
 
Since some intellectual giants around here have claimed that the Huckabee vote "won't even register" tonight, things should be interesting for the next few days.
 
There's more to it than just the land-line/ cell phone thing. There's also the idea that they know who a likely caucusgoer is. Ron Paul's support is heavy among people who get rejected as "unlikely" caucusgoers.
Truth is (and this is why primary polling has such a dismal track record) nobody knows who's showing up.
But we'll all know tonight. ;)
 
Did anyone think to remind the Paul supporters that today was caucus day?

Oh, we didn't have their cell phone numbers?

Oh dear...
 
The Rasmussen poll seems to be the most reliable. In the primaries he counts likely primary voters based on past primary voting. The others seem to be opinion polls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top