Monday, November 15, 2010

PPP 2012 Presidential Preference Survey (AK, KY, NV, NC, OH, WA 11-15-10)

Cross tabs can be found HERE.
PPP surveyed 1,539 likely 2010 Alaska voters, including 743 typical Republican primary voters, from October 30th to 31st, for a +/- 2.5% margin of error for the entire sample, and +/- 3.6% for the GOP primary sample.

PPP surveyed 1,021 likely 2010 Kentucky voters, including 320 typical Republican primary voters, from October 28th to 30th, for a +/- 3.1% margin of error for the entire sample, and +/- 5.5% for the GOP primary sample.
PPP surveyed 682 likely 2010 Nevada voters, including 272 typical Republican primary voters, from October 30th to 31st, for a +/- 3.8% margin of error for the entire sample, and +/- 5.9% for the GOP primary sample.

PPP surveyed 847 likely 2010 North Carolina voters, including 307 typical Republican primary voters, from October 30th to 31st, for a +/- 3.4% margin of error for the entire sample, and +/- 5.6% for the GOP primary sample.
PPP surveyed 1,356 likely 2010 Ohio voters, including 500 typical Republican primary voters, from October 28th to 30th, for a +/- 2.7% margin of error for the entire sample, and +/- 4.4% for the GOP primary sample.
PPP surveyed 2,055 likely 2010 Washington voters, including 712 typical Republican primary voters, from October 29th to 31st, for a +/- 2.2% margin of error for the entire sample, and +/- 3.7% for the GOP primary sample.
Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.

10 comments:

kelly said...

Romney is way ahead in the state that counts.

Anonymous said...

Nevada was the only state out of the group that had no one in 2nd place that was within the moe.

zeke

phil said...

Nevada is an early state. It will be all over by the time the others roll out.

Anonymous said...

"Romney is way ahead in the state that counts." No, the state that counts is the great Buckeye State where Mrs. Palin leads.

OHIO JOE

COREP said...

actually OJ is right in the general Ohio is a big one, but the problem is that in the primary Ohio isnt up front so the biggies are IA, NH, NV, SC, FL look who is winning those and you will see who is positioned best

Right Wingnut said...

From Techno, C4Ps resident poll expert...


4) But I don't think you will get this anywhere else here is the main reason that Mitt should be shaking in boots now:

Comparison between the previous poll in Maine, Wisconsin, and Ohio with the most recent poll and difference in the polls of Palin and Romney:

ROMNEY PALIN
ME
9/27 27 21
11/11 18 23

SWING OF 11 NET POINTS with Palin now in the lead.

WISC
3/25* 32 27
11/11 12 18

*without Newt in the mix
Romney drops 20 points from first to 4th spot while Palin only drops 9 points with Newt in the mix and finishes first.

OHIO
3/25* 32 26
11/15 14 20

Romney drops 18 points and from first to 4th while Palin drops only 6 points with Newt in the mix and rises from 3rd to first.

Conclusion:

It is one thing for Mitt to fall behind in "red states" like KY, Texas, W Virginia but when Romney loses amazing ground in two "blue states" (Maine and Wisconsin) and one purple state (Ohio) that only can presage "bad things" for the father of Romneycare.

Imho, for Mitt to win the GOP nomination he basically has to thread the needle with his "blue state/purple state" strategy and cannot afford to lose the 3 above states to Palin if he wants to prevail.

And of course if Mitt ends up relinquishing his lead to Palin in Florida (only up by 6 points) for good you basically can write his political obituary. Even Mittbots are of the opinion that if Romney cannot win Florida he cannot win the nomination.

Anonymous said...

Well said RW, in all seriousness, I am aware that my state is not quite as influencial in the primary system as it is in the general. However, if the contest does remain close, the race not be all but, finished by the time Ohio votes and beyond.

I am aware that we do not have a national primary, on the other hand, NH is not the only state that counts. Yes, the fact that NH votes early makes it influencial, but there is also an expectation game. Michigan, Wyoming and Nevada did not give Mr. Romney the momentum that his camp thought it would last time in part because the rest of us discounted the results to a point. To be sure, NH will keep Mr. Romney in the game, but unless it is a wipeout, it won't win it. While it is true Mr. Romney can still become our leader without Ohio and Wisconsin, it start to become a lot more difficult if he cannot win Maine and Illinois, not to mention his trouble in other states. In short, the one state strategy does not quite cut it.

OHIO JOE

Right Wingnut said...

More brilliance from Techno....

PPP back to their bias on Palin:

Poll of Virginia F/UF of 2012 GOP contenders:

AMONG CONSERVATIVES:

GINGRICH: 59/21
HUCKABEE: 73/12
PALIN 70/22
ROMNEY 56/25

AMONG REPUBLICANS:

GINGRICH 67/20
HUCKABEE 74/14
PALIN 72/22
ROMNEY 57/28

AMONG WHITE VOTERS:

GINGRICH 38/50
HUCKABEE 47/35
PALIN 42/52
ROMNEY 40/41

18-29

GINGRICH 39/51
HUCKABEE 56/30
PALIN 41/59
ROMNEY 23/61

65+
GINGRICH 44/43
HUCKABEE 52/28
PALIN 47/45
ROMNEY 37/40

Another sign the Obama war room and the Dems are desperate to stop Palin.

Does anybody with half a brain believe that Huckabee has this type of net advantage over Palin in Virginia:

Among conservatives: +13

Among Republicans: +10

Among 18-29: +44

Among 65+ +22

And we're supposed to forget that Palin won 6 of the 18 state polls released over the last few days.

Obviously the "big" move now by PPP is to present Huck as the greatest thing since sliced bread to hope to convince evangelicals or conservatives that previously supported Huck not to bleed over to Palin, especially in the South which is Huck's stronghold.

Palin taking the lead in Texas is the worst possible news; and taking the lead ahead of Huck in West Virginia certainly was not what the anti-Palin forces had in mind.

And again the anti-Palin forces cannot allow Palin to take the lead in Florida over Romney.

Corep said...

for the record i will say this now 2 years out from 2012 election. If the GOP as a group is dumb enough to nominate Palin then we LOSE in 2012.
She is too alienating to the middle of the country and too much of a lightning rod to the left.

In CO this last go around she did a late endorsement for Tancredo and that caused the Lefties in Boulder to get out and vote for Hick. Now Hick would have won anyway, but the down ticket cost was Buck who without the extra motivation from the Left probably would have been the new senator from CO.

I'm sorry OJ and RW but thats the truth of the situation. her negatives are way way way too high and no amount of TLC, facebook musings, and FOX news bias will overcome that.

also for the record were she the nominee I would vote for her

Corep said...

hey and one other thing, lets quote a C4P poster and the ultimate source for poll interpretation. Really ?

come on, thats like quoting IG for unbias Romney poll news. :)

although I will say the one that matters most is 533 to 362 or something like that. which is the supposed delegate count based on these 18 states.



a better