Margins, Obama vs. Cain, Gingrich, and Romney

[pbrower2a]

Friday, November 11, 2011

So goes Missouri, so goes the nation. No state has supported the winner in more presidential elections than the Show Me State, and right now Mitt Romney is the only Republican presidential hopeful who leads President Obama among Missouri voters.

The first Rasmussen Reports Election 2012 survey of Likely Missouri Voters finds Romney with 45% support to the president’s 42%.

47% Obama
43% Gingrich

47% Obama
39% Cain

Missouri narrowly went for Republican John McCain in the 2008 presidential election, and now 47% of voters in the state at least somewhat approve of the job Obama is doing as president. Fifty-two percent (52%) disapprove. This includes 27% who Strongly Approve of the president’s performance and 43% who Strongly Disapprove. This is in line with findings nationally in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

Romney runs stronger against the president among both male and female voters than Gingrich and Cain do. As is the case nationally, voters under 40 tend to favor Obama, while older voters lean toward the Republicans.

Among voters not affiliated with either major party, Romney leads the president by 21 points. Gingrich runs even with Obama among these voters, while Cain trails the incumbent by 10.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/missouri/missouri_2012_romney_45_obama_42

The Republican nominee will have to pick up Missouri by about 5% to have a real chance of winning in the general election. This is before the campaign begins in earnest, this is with an R-leaning pollster, and this is a state that the President hasn't visited often recently. He will because it has a vulnerable Democratic Senator.

This looks like a legitimate tossup again, and the Senator probably means more to the President than do the ten electoral votes.

I think that the allegations against Herman Cain are beginning to hurt his standing in the Missouri poll, and the margin of the Obama-Cain divide may be exaggerated, especially if those allegations prove unfounded. 

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

I can now add Missouri to that list.

[Yelnoc]

You should start an Obama vs. Gingrich.

[pbrower2a]

You should start an Obama vs. Gingrich.

I just might add him. That political cat has probably used seven of his nine political lives... but if one is a mouse, the cat that has expended seven or eight of its lives is still a mortal peril. I can see Gingrich becoming the main challenger to Mitt Romney in the event that the allegations against Herman Cain prove true... or if he responds to those accusations ineptly. Any President is going to face some calumnies, and if he falls to pieces due to a libel, he's probably going to fall to pieces for something else far more damaging to people other than the President.

Perry has lost it; Huntsman had no chance; Bachmann is so clearly on the lunatic fringe that she would lose in a Goldwater-style landslide. That leaves Gingrich.

[pbrower2a]

You should start an Obama vs. Gingrich.

I just might add him. I am adding Newt. That political cat has probably used seven of his nine political lives... but if one is a mouse, the cat that has expended seven or eight of its lives is still a mortal peril. I can see Gingrich becoming the main challenger to Mitt Romney in the event that the allegations against Herman Cain prove true... or if he responds to those accusations ineptly. Any President is going to face some calumnies, and if he falls to pieces due to a libel, he's probably going to fall to pieces for something else far more damaging to people other than the President.

Perry has lost it; Huntsman had no chance; Bachmann is so clearly on the lunatic fringe that she would lose in a Goldwater-style landslide. That leaves Gingrich in the event of a collapse of any kind by Herman Cain because he is in the best position in which to pick up the pieces from the failures of others.





under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain




A blank map for a start of Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

Working in existing polls involving Obama vs. Gingrich -- the easiest ones to incorporate:





under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain




A blank map for a start of Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

Now, some that I get with some more difficulty:

Wisconsin, PPP  Obama 52-Gingrich 34
Maine, PPP Obama 55 - Gingrich 35
Nevada, PPP Obama 49-Gingrich 46
North Carolina, PPP Obama 50-Gingrich 43
Hawaii, Illinois, PPP -- huge Obama blowouts
South Carolina, PPP -- Gingrich 45. Obama 44
Texas, PPP --  Gingrich 45, Obama 44
West Virginia,  PPP  -- Gingrich up by 15




under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

Now, some that I get with some more difficulty:

Wisconsin, PPP  Obama 52-Gingrich 34
Maine, PPP Obama 55 - Gingrich 35
Nevada, PPP Obama 49-Gingrich 46
North Carolina, PPP Obama 50-Gingrich 43
Hawaii, Illinois, PPP -- huge Obama blowouts
South Carolina, PPP -- Gingrich 45. Obama 44
Texas, PPP --  Gingrich 45, Obama 44
Iowa, PPP -- Obama 50, Gingrich 39




under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[SirNick]

Excellent, I like the compilations of the latest polling data that you throw together. If its not difficult, would you care to throw in the current EV count for each map including outstanding states?

[pbrower2a]

Excellent, I like the compilations of the latest polling data that you throw together. If its not difficult, would you care to throw in the current EV count for each map including outstanding states?

I had EV counts in a different thread, and they got messy. I was making all sorts of errors. It just wasn't worth the effort.


 Maybe the idea is to see what states flip and what states don't with certain nominees. It's abundantly clear that Mitt Romney picks up New Hampshire, might flip Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, or Virginia (within the margin of error) -- but still loses Ohio and President Obama apparently picks up Arizona (within the margin of error). Sure, he seems to bring such states as Connecticut, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin within reach if everything goes right for him or if everything goes wrong for President Obama. He has not sealed the deal on the Obama wins of 2008 in Florida, North Carolina, or Virginia -- or even the close-call in Missouri.

So far an Obama-Romney contest looks like a close analogue to 2008.

If you can accept an August poll for Colorado from PPP -- and I am tempted to add it because Colorado is critical --  Romney loses it about as badly as McCain did, and that is outside the margin of error. Ohio clinches victory for President Obama a year from now, but so do Arizona, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, and Virginia. This is close to the scenario that existed in the early autumn of 2008 between Senators Obama and McCain; one state of several (Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia) had to go right for President Obama and everyone of them had to go right for McCain. When they were all 50-50 propositions for Barack Obama, that left practically one chance in 128 for John McCain, which implies a sucker bet.

Against Mitt Romney you can take the scenario of roughly September 2008, drop Colorado (because it looks out of reach for any Republican nominee as things are now, but because Romney would likely win New Hampshire it no longer decides anything) and replace Indiana with Arizona, and if I were putting odds on an Obama-vs-Romney election, I would estimate 60-1 based on random chance alone. At this stage, random chance based on what exists is all that one has. Should either Arizona or Ohio leave the margin of error, then odds go prohibitive.

With Herman Cain it isn't even that good. He has stood up well to the allegations of sexual harassment well, but the polls still showed him in a situation when absolutely everything has to go right for him even if he wins the Republican nomination. The most recent polls show him losing Arizona, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia. He needs a new message. I see him on the brink of losing in a landslide because he has yet to seal the deal in South Carolina, a state that no Democratic nominee for President has won since Jimmy Carter did so in 1976.  Much must go right for him or bad for President Obama for things to get as good as they are for Romney. He has no chance in New Hampshire, so much unlike the case for Romney, Colorado clinches the election for the President.   An Obama-Cain matchup looks at best for Cain like a replay of 2008 and at worst a landslide for Obama that looks much like Eisenhower in the 1950s should Cain lose Texas.   

With Gingrich I have far fewer states but I see something even more ominous for him than for Cain -- he can't even seal the deal on Texas. Texas and some combination of states with 15 electoral votes is the difference between Clinton 1996 and Eisenhower 1952.

 

[pbrower2a]

Kentucky? In early September there was nothing for Cain, but Romney led 48-40  but Obama led Gingrich 47-44.

I am going to add the Colorado poll from PPP in August 

Obama 48 - Romney 40
Obama 51 - Cain 35

because  (1) Colorado is important, and (2) the political scene has changed little since August, anyway.




under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

Kentucky? In early September there was nothing for Cain, but Romney led 48-40  but Obama led Gingrich 47-44.

I am going to add the Colorado poll from PPP in August  

Obama 48 - Romney 40
Obama 51 - Cain 35

because  (1) Colorado is important, and (2) the political scene has changed little since August, anyway.

SurveyUSA is the only entity to ever poll Kansas, and it shows blowouts for both Romney and Gingrich and nothing for Cain.  




under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

Nebraska is messy because of its Congressional districts. I have it for Romney but nothing for Cain. Gingrich wins the state 48-40 against President Obama, but loses the new First Congressional District by 48-40 and wins the new Second district by 48-45. He wins the third by nearly 30%.



under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

There's no political gold in California for any potential GOP nominee for President; Cain isn't shown, but both Romney and Gingrich are down by double digits.  (SUSA)



under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

There's no political gold in California for any potential GOP nominee for President; Cain isn't shown, but both Romney and Gingrich are down by double digits.  (SUSA)

... or New York (Siena), where all potential GOP nominees are clobbered.


59-34 Obama/Romney
63-27 Obama/Cain
63-28 Obama/Gingrich
64-27 Obama/Bachmann
60-31 Obama/Paul
63-28 Obama/Perry

The gap between Obama and Romney is close to the 2008 gap between Obama and McCain in the election. 



under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

Quinnipiac shows a wipe-out awaiting any Republican nominee in New Jersey against the President.

Matched one-on-one against Republican contenders Obama has solid leads:

    49 - 40 percent over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney;
    54 - 31 percent over Texas Gov. Rick Perry;
    55 - 32 percent over former Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain;
    53 - 34 percent over former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1299.xml?ReleaseID=1673

And in real surfing country (California)  the LA Times uses a Democratic and a Republican pollster to show a real wipe-out:

Obama 52 - Romney 35
Obama 54 - Cain 31
Obama 55 - Perry 31

Gingrich is not shown in that polling composite.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-poll-presidential.eps-20111116,0,3085961.graphic

Selzer shows Romney up by 10% in New Hampshire.

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[pbrower2a]

PPP. California:

Obama/Gingrich: 60-34
Obama/Romney: 57-36
Obama/Bachmann: 60-31
Obama/Perry: 60-31
Obama/Cain: 61-32
Obama/Paul: 57-32

or as margins:

Obama/Gingrich: 26       
Obama/Romney: 21
Obama/Bachmann: 29
Obama/Perry: 29
Obama/Cain: 29
Obama/Paul: 25

and against Obama/McCain in 2008 (61-37, rounding)


Obama/Gingrich:    +2     
Obama/Romney:   -3
Obama/Bachmann: +5
Obama/Perry: +5
Obama/Cain: +5
Obama/Paul: +1


Barack Obama won the state roughly 61-37. At this stage the President has a margin of 24% or higher against every potential GOP nominee except against Mitt Romney. If the 2012 election shapes much like 2012 with California margins indicating what goes elsewhere nationwide as an across-the-board shift, then split the margin change in half, subtracting half the margin  (1.5%) against 2008 from Obama's 2008 national vote and add half that margin (same amount) to the nationwide vote for McCain in 2008 to get a predicted percentage for Romney.

Thus

Obama 2008 52.9% -- McCain 2008  45.6%  yields

Obama 2012 50.4% -- Romney 2012  47.1%

which suggests that (without statewide alterations for personal effects on one state as opposed to another) that the Republicans would flip NE-02, North Carolina, Indiana, Florida, and perhaps one of Virginia and Ohio -- but not both. The President still wins about 285-290  electoral votes.

Now try the other side. With a 1% change of margin to the favor of the President against Ron Paul one gets

Obama 2008 52.9% -- McCain 2008  45.6% becoming

Obama 2008 53.4% -- Paul     2008  45.1%

The President might effectively trade Indiana for Arizona and pick up Missouri, but I have no cause to believe that any Republican other than Romney has a real chance to pick up Indiana.
That said, I would expect the President to win roughly 360 or 370 electoral votes. (At that, I think that the Republican Party in California is heavily libertarian as opposed to theocratic or corporatist in contrast to the rest of America, so Paul would probably do worse nationwide. But rules are rules in a model.

Now try an unmitigated disaster -- someone who could conceivably lose California 64-34: 

Obama 2008 52.9% -- McCain 2008  45.6%  yields

Obama 2012 55.4% -- -------* 2012  43.1%

*name withheld to prevent angry responses

At this point the raw percentages look like Eisenhower vs. Stevenson in 1952, the last election to have such raw percentages. Figuring that the states remain as polarized as ever, then the Republican nominee has no chance of picking up anything from President Obama while losing Arizona, Missouri, Georgia, Montana, and maybe two Congressional districts in Nebraska. The news media call the Presidential election before the results come in on the West Coast.

If you figure that the President has maxed out in a bunch of states, then the votes pop up more heavily in some other states -- the Dakotas? Kentucky? South Carolina? Texas could be interesting.     





           

[pbrower2a]

Florida, Rasmussen:

42-46 Obama/Romney
45-43 Obama/Gingrich
46-37 Obama/Cain

Herman Cain seems to be disappearing from relevance.


under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney



Any Republican nominee absolutely must win all of the following states:

Arizona
Florida
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio
Virginia

to have a chance to win the election.

[¡Cuatro años más!]

Very insightful thread as usual pbrower,  are you like a political science major or something ?

[pbrower2a]

Very insightful thread as usual pbrower,  are you like a political science major or something ?

Economics in 1978. BA.

What I know about history, probability, and statistics -- much of it not learned in any college course -- is more useful here. I can make simple mathematical models using only some of the crudest operations of mathematics with available data. As things look now, if nothing big  changes before November 6 except that the Republicans have a nominee, and at this stage I lack the arrogance with which to predict who will be the nominee and how effective a campaigner President Obama will be this time... I can predict that the President will win with popular and electoral votes adequate for winning -- if barely, but decisively -- against Mitt Romney. It would be a mirror image of 2000 or 2004. Romney would flip North Carolina, Indiana, Florida, and Virginia, take New Hampshire because he seems to be spending a lot of time there and probably will until election day (ha! ha!)... and make Nevada a nail-biter but still lose Colorado and Ohio. Because the Republican nominee will not be from Arizona, Arizona goes into play. Missouri, Georgia, and Montana do not go into play.

If President Obama and Mitt Romney do average or equal jobs as campaigners and as administrators of their campaigns, then President Obama has many ways in which to win and few in which to lose. Romney must win both Arizona and Ohio, but he has ways of losing Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. If I guess that that Mitt Romney's  chances of winning any one of those states is one in two and every one of them (that is, AZ, FL, NC, OH, and VA) is the difference between winning and losing, then with 32 possible scenarios   based on random chance, then President Obama has 31 ways in which to win and Mitt Romney has one in which to win. That gives the President roughly 97% chance of winning and Mitt Romney only a 3% chance of winning.

To that I can say... at this stage Mitt Romney would have a far better chance of taking high-risk chances that shift the odds altogether. Is he able to do that? Ask me only if he is nominated, and only then on November 7.  John McCain was in much that position in September 2008, he took some great chances to change the great realities of the election, and such did not work.

OK -- sports teams often overcome odds such as 30-1. Just think of this year's Baseball champion St. Louis Cardinals.

With Cain and Gingrich, things get more ominous. Both project to lose Ohio by even bigger margins than the inside-the-margin-of-error level by which President Obama leads Mitt Romney. There is plenty of time in which to cut down the appeal of the President or his image of competence to erode...  but that also applies to Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia, wherein both Cain and Gingrich are behind. Because neither is in a good position in which to win New Hampshire, Nevada becomes critical as it isn't with Romney.   Heck, they are also both behind in Missouri. If the chance of winning any one of those states for Cain or Gingrich is even half, then each has seven states that they absolutely must win. (OK, Gingrich can't be doing better than Romney in Arizona, and if he can't make a sure thing of Kentucky, then he loses Virginia anyway). The chance of a Cain or Gingrich win becomes one in 128... and even that is charitable. Against either President Obama has as his median chance roughly a win in popular and electoral votes slightly bigger than that of 2008 and an outside possibility of a landslide similar to that of Eisenhower in 1952.

...................

In one respect the pattern of states and their votes resembles the norms of 2000, 2004, and 2008: President Obama is making insignificant headway in the states that he lost in 2008 (except perhaps Arizona) but has lost nothing in some of the states that he won by gigantic margins.  This reflects the political cultures of the states. If you have yet to read Albion's Seed (David Hackett Fisher) you will notice that political cultures in America were set early and have huge regional differences. President Obama did extremely well in areas settled from New England  and New York except for Mormon Country.   Follow Interstate 80 from San Francisco to the George Washington Bridge and find your way to the Long Island Expressway; north of that line President Obama won all but 29 electoral votes in states or districts wholly or in part north of those roads for 266 electoral votes. Add either Hawaii for a total of 270 (as its American settlers came from New England and established what sorts of American institutions would be the norm), and the President wins.  Most of this is Puritan America even if the population is  Catholic (New England and New York City) or Lutheran.

He did reasonably well in the American midlands settled heavily by Quakers and German Pietists (largely Mennonites whose religious values were close to those of the Quakers) and their descendants. That is places from roughly I-80 to northern Virginia with a glaring gap in central Pennsylvania and then roughly everything between I-70 and I-80 from the Pittsburgh to Denver metro areas. Fischer makes distinctions between those two meta-regions that I lack space to describe well here and that aren't particularly relevant here, but both meta-regions are comparatively tolerant of ethnic and religious differences, urban, well-educated, and highly-organized. Neither shows much love for economic hierarchy, superstition, or violence.

Except among blacks, President Obama did badly in the Deep South, an area long known for economic inequality, social hierarchy, and political conservatism. He did even worse in the mountainous areas of the Ozarks and  central (as far north as the New York-Pennsylvania state line) and southern Appalachians settled heavily by wild Scots-Irish and northern English settlers who believe in their guns, their bibles, their hard liquor, and their personal honor and that was slow to catch onto formal education and feminism. This is where religious fundamentalism is strongest and 'exotic' types -- even German-Americans, let alone blacks or Hispanics. As it went west it brought its wildness with it into Arizona and much of Texas.   If you remember the old Lil' Abner cartoon strips and the Dukes of Hazzard TV show-- those catch the spirit. Those might seem like ugly stereotypes outside the Ozarks and Appalachians, but they were popular in those areas in their time.

The heavily-Hispanic areas of New Mexico, southern California, southern Colorado, and south Texas fit their own norms. Florida has become Yankee country. 

[pbrower2a]

Pennsylvania Survey Results (PPP)

Q1 Do you approve or disapprove of President
Barack Obama’s job performance?
Approve .......................................................... 42%
Disapprove...................................................... 53%
Not sure .......................................................... 5%

Q8 If the candidates for President next year were
Democrat Barack Obama and Republican
Herman Cain, who would you vote for?
Barack Obama................................................ 53%
Herman Cain................................................... 35%
Undecided....................................................... 12%

Q9 If the candidates for President next year were
Democrat Barack Obama and Republican
Newt Gingrich, who would you vote for?
Barack Obama................................................ 49%
Newt Gingrich ................................................. 43%
Undecided....................................................... 9%

Q12 If the candidates for President next year were
Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt
Romney, who would you vote for?
Barack Obama................................................ 45%
Mitt Romney.................................................... 45%
Undecided....................................................... 11%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_PA_11221023.pdf

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney

[pbrower2a]

SurveyUSA, Oregon

* Obama 48%
* Romney 40%.

* Obama 51%
* Gingrich 37%

Nothing shown for Cain.  Probably out of reach for Republicans.

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney

[pbrower2a]

New Hampshire, WMUR, University of New Hampshire:

In possible head-to-head matchups with President Barack Obama, the poll shows Romney leading, 47 to 44 percent. Gingrich trails the president by 12 points, and Perry falls short by 19 points.

Read more: http://www.wmur.com/new-hampshire-primary-extended-coverage/29846953/detail.html#ixzz1ea7qbFKW

Nothing shown for Cain in a prospect of the general election but it showed him fading in the primaries. A recent poll of New Hampshire showed Mitt Romney up by about 10% in what might be his adopted 'home state' for electoral purposes.  Could it be that the more people get to know Mitt Romney the less they like him?

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney





[/quote]

[pbrower2a]

Huh?

"Red State" Kansas Poll Results: Romney 9 Points Atop Obama But ... Hold Everything ... Obama 5 Points Atop Gingrich:

Sure, it's early, and yes, a lot will change, but in an preview of the 2012 Presidential election, cell phone voters (those without a home telephone, typically undercounted in opinion polls), vote sufficiently Democrat to keep Mitt Romney to just a single-digit lead over Barack Obama, and, for the moment, cause Obama to defeat Newt Gingrich.

Kansas' 6 electoral votes will almost certainly stay in the Republican column (John McCain carried the state by 15 points in 2008), but in hypothetical head-to-head match-ups between the two Republican front-runners today, 11/22/11, it's:

* Romney 48%.
* Obama 39%.
* Obama 45%.
* Gingrich 40%
* Among respondents who use a home phone, Romney leads Obama by 14. But among respondents who do not use a home phone (the cell-phone respondents), Obama leads Romney by 4, an 18-point difference.

* Among respondents who use a home phone, Gingrich leads Obama by 3 points. But among respondents who do not use a home phone, Obama leads Gingrich by 24 points, a 27-point difference.

* Romney has a Minus 9 favorability rating: 25% see him favorably, 34% see him unfavorably.
* Gingrich has a Minus 22 favorability rating: 25% see him favorably, 45% see him unfavorably.

Cell-phone and home-phone respondents included in this research: 600 state of Kansas adults were interviewed by SurveyUSA 11/18/11 through 11/21/11. Of the adults, 510 were registered to vote and were asked the substantive questions. This research was conducted multi-mode. Respondents who use a home telephone (70% of adults, 73% of registered voters) were interviewed on their home telephone in the recorded voice of a professional announcer. Respondents who do not use a home telephone (30% of adults, 27% of registered voters), were shown a questionnaire on their smartphone, laptop, tablet, or other electronic device. In this survey, cell-phone and home-phone respondents vote similarly.

(Cain is not shown, but that may not matter).

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney

[豚FLY]

Huh?

"Red State" Kansas Poll Results: Romney 9 Points Atop Obama But ... Hold Everything ... Obama 5 Points Atop Gingrich:

Sure, it's early, and yes, a lot will change, but in an preview of the 2012 Presidential election, cell phone voters (those without a home telephone, typically undercounted in opinion polls), vote sufficiently Democrat to keep Mitt Romney to just a single-digit lead over Barack Obama, and, for the moment, cause Obama to defeat Newt Gingrich.

Kansas' 6 electoral votes will almost certainly stay in the Republican column (John McCain carried the state by 15 points in 2008), but in hypothetical head-to-head match-ups between the two Republican front-runners today, 11/22/11, it's:

* Romney 48%.
* Obama 39%.
* Obama 45%.
* Gingrich 40%
* Among respondents who use a home phone, Romney leads Obama by 14. But among respondents who do not use a home phone (the cell-phone respondents), Obama leads Romney by 4, an 18-point difference.

* Among respondents who use a home phone, Gingrich leads Obama by 3 points. But among respondents who do not use a home phone, Obama leads Gingrich by 24 points, a 27-point difference.

* Romney has a Minus 9 favorability rating: 25% see him favorably, 34% see him unfavorably.
* Gingrich has a Minus 22 favorability rating: 25% see him favorably, 45% see him unfavorably.

Cell-phone and home-phone respondents included in this research: 600 state of Kansas adults were interviewed by SurveyUSA 11/18/11 through 11/21/11. Of the adults, 510 were registered to vote and were asked the substantive questions. This research was conducted multi-mode. Respondents who use a home telephone (70% of adults, 73% of registered voters) were interviewed on their home telephone in the recorded voice of a professional announcer. Respondents who do not use a home telephone (30% of adults, 27% of registered voters), were shown a questionnaire on their smartphone, laptop, tablet, or other electronic device. In this survey, cell-phone and home-phone respondents vote similarly.

(Cain is not shown, but that may not matter).

under 1% white
1-2% shade 20%
3-4% shade 30%
5-7% shade 40%
8-9% shade 60%
10% or greater shade 80%


Above 10% the distinctions are effectively moot in a winner-take-all statewide election.

Obama vs. Cain



Obama vs. Gingrich:



 
Obama vs. Romney

WTF, SUSA?

[pbrower2a]

SUSA is the only pollster, so far as I know, that does Kansas. I find it hard to believe that any Republican short of David Duke could lose Kansas to President Obama.

The Obama vs. Gingrich result could be a transposition error, and I don't believe that Obama could ever lead Gingrich in Kentucky, for what that is worth.