« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

The candidates Iowa Republicans don’t want

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  August 22nd, 2011 at 09:30 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Bachmann Palin

By request, we have a somewhat unusual poll: We Ask America asked Iowa Republicans which candidate they don’t want as the Republican Presidential nominee in 2012.

As is usual this time of year, the poll is skewed by the inclusion of non-candidates. This time, overwhelmingly so.

The usual facts: It’s a poll of 649 Republican “Iowa Voters” (which I’m guessing is something in between RV and LV, but it might be just RVs) for the Primary questions, and 2342 Iowa Voters for Presidential approval questions. MoE 3.85 for Republicans and 2.02 overall. Automated poll, so no mobiles were likely included in the sample.

Sometimes the inclusion of non-candidates skews a poll. For the question of what candidate Iowa Republicans don’t want, one non-candidate is defining the poll. Sarah Palin wins a full 25% of the question, well ahead of Newt Gingrich’s 16%, and Jon Huntsman’s 14%. Michele Bachmann tied for fourth at 12%, Mitt Romney finished sixth at 7%, and Rick Perry tied for eighth at 3%.

We Ask America then went for the candidates Iowa Republicans prefer. Interestingly, the top three finished in a different order from their do-not-want finishes. Rick Perry did win convincingly at 29%, but Michele Bachmann jumped to second at 17%, with Mitt Romney third at 15%. Sarah Palin finishes at 7%, behind Ron Paul and Other.

This poll suggests to me that opposition research dumps against Rick Perry have yet to leave a mark on him. It will be interesting to see if he can maintain such a solid lead (I show a 94% chance Perry leads Bachmann if this poll is sound) as both Republicans and Democrats continue to target him.

This poll also suggests Sarah Palin’s paths to victory are limited, should she choose to enter the race. I can’t see her winning Iowa when she loses a quarter of the state party right off the top. If she wanted an early win, she’d have to look elsewhere.

In other results, the poll shows a possible pickup opportunity for Republicans in 2012, as only 39% of Iowa voters favor the President’s re-election, versus 54% who oppose a second term for Barack Obama.

Crossposted from Unlikely Voter

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • radicalrighty

    I love her to death, but her entry will only insure a Romney GOP nomination.

  • DerKrieger

    …and although it’s not a scientific poll, NRO readers don’t want her to run by a 73/27 margin http://www.nationalreview.com/

  • pineros

    I was following along with this poll until I came to the end and realized this was a joke on us… thanks for the prank.

    When did I realize this was a bull crap poll? When it says that 40% of Iowans want four more years of Obama.

    Are you fkg kidding? 40%? if we believe that, then he’s almost there, isn’t he…. even in the worst part of the economic mess the US is in and considering all the other crap Obama is responsible for, this poll shows 40% of the voters will vote him back in for four more years?

    How can you even post up this bull crap poll and pretend it is relevant?
    Is there some sort of agenda here, boys? you wouldn’t be favoring Perry over Palin. would you?

  • Aaron Gardner

    If you have a poll you would like to see analyzed let Neil know. He isn’t looking for just the ones favorable to Perry, I can assure you of that.

  • Bill S

    a 40% “re-elect Obama” number is pretty surprising on the down side.

    And watch the language.

  • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

    He’s top notch, and his analysis has been proven solid time and again.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Who had that one in the pool?

    Moe Lane

  • cwilson

    The people who get their news from the voice of the Establishment Republicans don’t like Palin.

  • Scope

    You are really in for it now Neil. I hope you put on your flak vest before you hit post. Maybe you should get down in the bunker, because it will be incoming from all sides. LOL

  • acat

    Numbers like this are hard to overcome. If her internal polling looks similar, then .. yeah. She’s out.

    Emotions run high around Palin, but .. I think Neil will be fine.

    Mew

  • Tbone

    to what Iowa wants.

  • onemovoter

    the Paulites out there. Although 43 minutes is pretty quick considering it’s a work day mid morning.

    I would have guessed a couple of hours so I was way off..lol.

  • earlgrey

    To raise chances of Obama’s re-election. Could that happen? Would it be significant enough that she could win the nomination.

  • onemovoter

    This morning. He didn’t do so well in this poll.

    I can just see it. “BUT BUT BUT he came in a close 2nd at the big straw poll Iowa just had!!!!” “They like him much more than this poll shows in Iowa!!!!” “The media is ignoring the big 2nd place winner of the Iowa straw poll!!!”

    posted in ..3..2..1..

  • acat

    and even then, I don’t really see it having much of an effect.

    Mew

  • acat

    and then the distinction should go to Wisconsin for 12 years….

    Mew

  • bachmannthe1

    Pollsters are ahead of the facts. Wait until voters learn Governor Perry is against requiring employers to use E verify to check legal status of people they hire and opposed the Arizona immigration law in Texas. Pundits should wait for the election
    http://www.keepconservativesunited.com/

  • drothgery

    If I were to guess, I’d bet around half of those who don’t want Palin nominated like her but believe she can’t win, and so not being fans of tilting at windmills and wanting Obama gone, don’t want her nominated. Which is pretty much my view right now (though I think she should run for congress in 2014 if not 2012 if she does intend to run for President at some time).

  • Whacker77

    Anyone who is against Sarah Palin is against American conservatism. She speaks for real conservatism. The left and the media are scared of her because she is redefining what political service requires and means.

    Just look at her time in Alaska. She accomplished everything anyone could have ever hoped for so it was time to quit. Nevermind she still had two years left on her first term, she had done what she wanted. Why waste time fulfilling the rest of the term?

    Palin rescued us in 2008 and we have rewarded her with high speaking fees and non stop media attention for her bus tour that only operates when others enter the race. She is redefining what it means to be a serious candidate and the establishment will do anything to stop her.

    This poll is full of liars and liberals. Palin is the answer to 2012.

  • pineros

    This the best you have… avoiding the question because I happen to support Palin?
    Its simple, so even you should be able to figure it out…
    In this poll, 40% of the voters sampled will vote for Obama again. Does that give even you slowpokes a clue? That means 40% of the voters sampled have their heads up their buttocks.
    And this is a poll you can rely on to give you an indication of what is going on out there?
    If you believe these numbers, then its all over. Obama will get re-elected. Because if he gets 40% when we are at the bottom and in the worst of it and things can only get better, what chance does any Republican have…. if you believe these numbers.
    So, give up now. You can’t win…. after all, you can’t argue with the poll numbers, can you.
    Keep it up… at this rate you will be the most informed group around.

  • gekster

    Show me what he said in full context.

  • romeg

    40% can’t elect anyone. That requires 50%+1.

    While a Republican split is certainly possible, I suspect that only the True Believers want Obama to be elected to a second term making a conservative split unlikely.

    But Neil would be in a better position to gauge that question than I.

  • romeg

    most “journalists” are lazy and lack imagination so they follow the path of least resistance. Hence we get recycled Barry Goldwater comparisons and scandals that end in “gate” and virtually meaningless polling to declare “frontrunners” etc.

  • Aaron Gardner

    54% to Obama, 44.7% to McCain.

    In other words, with this poll showing Obama only getting 40% of the vote that is a 14 point drop for him since 2008.

    Seems to me the you are ignorant on this matter.

  • Finrod

    I argued more with mbecker and achance regarding Palin than anyone, but this is just silly. This kind of cheerleading makes Palin look worse, not better.

    So what’s the opposite of concern troll? I’m thinking of the kind of troll that wants to discredit a candidate so poses as a naive overenthusiastic supporter.

  • Darin_H

    That just shows your ignorance.

    :D

  • Darin_H

    You’re saying that a candidate being skeptical of a federal government program officiated by the DHS and Social Security is a bad thing….?

  • Whacker77

    My post is pure sarcasm, not glowing praise.

  • Darin_H

    But my meter has been on the fritz lately :)

  • earlgrey

    is it really all that different from the Left’s perception of how us righties think?

    Thanks for the laugh.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    that it’s right on the money for a significant group of her “followers”. Stop by C4P and you’ll see commentary that makes this look pretty mild. They, and their ilk, are the Alex Jones of the Palin movement.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Zip up sonny.

  • Bill S

    There is a substantial population of Palinites who would have answered just like that, and been serious about it.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    none of that particular ilk have burned bandwidth in this diary.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Obama 50%, Palin 33%
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/obama_50_palin_33

  • J. Leg

    Rather than post posts like this trashing Sarah Palin?

  • Finrod

    My sarcasm meter is offline this morning, my apologies.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Which is to say, it isn’t.

  • Scope

    I guessed you just hit and run in order to advertise your Perry hit site.

  • runner12

    to be coming to a city near me anytime soon, acat. :)

  • http://theundergroundconservative.wordpress.com pdigaudio

    Water is wet, the sun rose in the east this morning, the Pope is Catholic and the bear took a dump in the woods.

  • perry4prez

    I like Palin’s views, BUT I don’t want the papparazzi press to turn our campaign into an endless cycle of “who is shacking up with who, is Levi Johnson gonna marry Bristol Palin” and so on, as if this were British royalty and not the future of the United States of America. We need to focus on solid conservative issues and not get our attention diverted into sideshows. Perry and Bachmann easily do this but Palin doesn’t. I agree, let her run for Congress or be Secretary of Energy. Drill baby drill was her finest substantive point in 2008 and it is one that the libs have no answer for.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    So let me be clearer: STOP THREADJACKING. This forum is not here to let you spambot your anti-Perry site in every Perry comment section.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    In Erick’s latest: The Palin Factor.

  • aeaeren

    Oh we have a BUNCH more pain coming, no where NEAR the bottom yet. If you think 9.1% unemployment is as high as it is going with Obama running the show then you are in for a shock. I can see 10+% EASY come Nov ’12.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    number that is easily manipulated by futzing with the size of the workforce. If they used the same workforce size as the day that BO took office the unemployment number would be very much closer to 10+ right now.

  • aeaeren

    Yet everytime Florida tries to push them out we get slapped down by the RNC.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I ran an analysis on which states will be at the pivot in 2012. They are CO, IA, and NH.

    What a coincidence. Not. IA and NH are swingy.

  • acat

    I don’t want it either, but .. this way, the whole country will get to see what a fraud the “early state” process has devolved into.

    Mew

    p.s. I intend no insult with the NIMBY thing.

  • aesthete

    but you are right: what is defined as the labor force by economists and the Bureau of Labor Statistics is smaller today than when Obama got in office, the reason being that someone who is not actively looking for a job is not counted as being part of the labor force. Lots of people have just given up on looking for a job in this economy, and are thus counted as not being participants in the labor force (rather than as unemployed). Employed + unemployed + gave up is a different number from employed + unemployed, and most regular folks consider the former to be more representative of the actual hurt of a recession than the latter number. (That said, there are good reasons for economists to use the latter number — just none that really apply to calculating how badly the economy has bled out since the end of Bush’s term.)

  • Tbone

    but too much weight is given to them just because they are early primary states.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    the BLS won’t jigger the numbers in Sep/Oct of ’12 and correct them in late November.

    Virtually every statistic this Administration publishes is revised unfavorably in 30 to 60 days. The first number is greeted with abandon and glee and the revision is ignored.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    They get away with being early primary states *because* they are swingy.

  • runner12

    But why did you have to start with Oklahoma? :) I can see it now, all of the media trucks and madness. We locals would be rolling our eyes and complaining of the traffic. Getting to work down the extension would be more of a pain then usual.

    I vote we take the alphabetical route and go from there…..

  • acat

    Figured a taste of the chaos woudl do him good.

    Mew

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    I’m still working on that sarcasm font for WordPress. It’s taking longer than I though, and going a few billion over budget, but I should have it ready any day now . . .

  • J. Leg

    but it’s designed to sway potential Palin supporters to Red State’s preferred candidate, Rick Perry.

    I like Rick Perry. I’ll probably support him should Palin not get in (and I’m not even committed to supporting Palin, I want to hear them debate), but why post stuff like this? Why not let Palin make up her mind before trying to sway her supporters?

  • JSobieski

    nt

  • Aaron Gardner

    If you can’t handle objective analysis of polling then you should probably just ignore RedState.

    Our intent is to cover the 2012 race. Neil does poll analysis for a living. The fact that you don’t like the results doesn’t say anything about Neil’s analysis or bias. What it does is show your bias and your thin skin.

    This is politics, not religion.

  • PGDeFreese

    are also probably at risk of contracting a dissociative disorder if faced with such questions as “less filling” or “tastes great” and are considering putting a contract out on that guy that got chocolate in their peanut butter.

  • J. Leg

    You can believe whatever you want about me, Aaron. What I’m saying is that the pattern of posts from front page writers at Red State since the Perry announcement seem to indicate an attempt to dissuade potential Palin voters away from her potential candidacy into Perry’s camp.

    And to be completely honest, I really don’t have a problem with it at all, but why not write articles supportive of Perry’s candidacy instead of writing about hypotheticals and the intentions of Governor Palin?

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    the republican establishment, but not the voice of establishment republicans. There is a difference. I see lots of variations of conservative views in National Review. I see lot’s of Tea Party views in National Review.

  • Aaron Gardner

    You don’t like the poll. Move on.

  • JSobieski

    When she was fighting to win the Republican nomination for governor of Alaska, National Review did a really good profile of her. It was the first time I had ever heard of her, and the article made me a big fan.

    So yeah, NR is just a bunch of establishment elitists! LOL