HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » New PPP 2016 poll: Clinto...

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:20 PM

New PPP 2016 poll: Clinton leads Democrats (61%), Rubio leads GOP (18%)

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/looking-ahead-to-2016.html

PPP's newest national poll finds Marco Rubio as the early choice of Republicans for 2016. 18% would like him to be their nominee to 14% for Chris Christie, 12% for Jeb Bush and Paul Ryan, 11% for Mike Huckabee, 8% for Condoleezza Rice, 7% each for Sarah Palin and Rand Paul, and 4% for Rick Santorum.

Rubio's ahead because of his strength with the most conservative wing of the party. Among 'very conservative' voters he's at 23% to 17% for Paul Ryan and 13% for Mike Huckabee. He also had the advantage with folks describing themselves as 'somewhat conservative' at 22% to 14% for Chris Christie and 13% for Jeb Bush. Christie has a big lead with moderates at 35% to 20% for Bush and 11% for Huckabee with Rubio all the way back at 5%. But there just aren't that many moderates left in the Republican Party.

... On the Democratic side it continues to be no contest. Hillary Clinton leads the way at 61% to 12% for Joe Biden, 5% for Andrew Cuomo, 4% for Elizabeth Warren, 2% for Martin O'Malley, and 1% each for Deval Patrick, Brian Schweitzer, and Mark Warner.

If neither Clinton nor Biden runs the big winner is 'undecided.' 45% of voters aren't sure who they would support with Cuomo leading at 21% to 16% for Warren, 8% for Patrick, 5% for O'Malley, 3% for Warner, and 2% for Schweitzer.

9 replies, 779 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:22 PM

1. Who are they polling? Elizabeth Warren would get my support but no one asked me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:23 PM

2. Wow. With numbers like that for Hillary...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 08:29 PM

3. Kind of surprised at the Republican results...

Chris Christie is in 2nd place, even after so many right-wingers jumped on him and tried to pin Romney's loss on him. I am also surprised that Santorum and Palin don't poll in the top 3 among "most conservative"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:24 PM

4. Hillary at 61%!!! Wow! Is this kind of domination unprecdented? Yes it is!

 

An Ipsos Poll in the middle of December, 2004, right after Kerry's loss, Hillary led - with 33%.

From then on through 2005, 2006 and 2007, she led - but never above the high 40s percent-wise. Of course in late 2007, Barack Obama came out of nowhere and cobbled together a coalition of voting groups that denied Mrs. Clinton the nomination. But even when she led, it was in the 30s or 40s -- never at 61%! (Not with broad-field polling, never.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_candidates

Wow. When you're polling comes in at 61%, you just might be...

Madame Inevitable!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to downandoutnow (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:26 PM

5. "a coalition of voting groups that denied Mrs. Clinton the nomination"


Was she entitled to it or something?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:37 PM

6. LOL no she wasn't entitled to it, just that she had been the frontrunner, and had broad support

 

throughout the party. Obama and his people, to their credit, were able to harness extra-enthusiastic support from three disparate groups - African-Americans, young people, and upper-middle class "iPad radicals" - to overwhelm Hillary's wider but more shallow support.

But back then, Hillary was never at 61% against the rest of the field, nowhere near it. The only way she could be beat is if someone else out there can put together a version of Obama's coalition again -- the candidate has to be African American (or possibly Hispanic) as well as young and cool. Is there anyone out there like that now? I can think of the Castros in Texas or even Corey Booker in New Jersey maybe, but considering their generally mayoral-level status, they are going to have to match Obama's meteoric rise in the 2004-2008 period - which looks to be impossible: this time eight years ago, after the 2004 election, Obama was a Senator-Elect!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:54 PM

7. Re Clinton poll

http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/11/29/hillary-clinton-vs-rudy-giuliani/

The Quinnipiac poll on October 3, 2007 had Hillary beating Giuliani by 11 points (52% to 41%). Obama however merely ties with Giuliani at 45%-45%. Democrats cannot afford to lose New York in a general election.

SurveyUSA’s New York poll on November 28, 2007 has Hillary beating Giuliani 56% to 37%. Obama once again merely ties Giuliani 46% to 46%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoCalDem (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:07 PM

8. Or in other words, polls four years before the election don't mean a whole lot.

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:11 PM

9. It will be either Cuomo or Clinton, versus Rubio, Christie or Jeb Bush.

My money is On Cuomo/Clinton versus Christie/Warren.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread