PPP: Romney the strong favorite in New Hampshire GOP Primary

[Tender Branson]

Romney: 39%
Palin: 13%
Huckabee: 11%
Gingrich: 11%
Paul: 7%
Pawlenty: 3%
Santorum: 1%
Barbour: 1%
Undecided: 13%

PPP surveyed 642 New Hampshire Republican primary voters from April 17th to 18th. The survey’s margin of error is +/-3.9%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NH_421.pdf

[ej2mm15]

Hopefully PPP, will poll all of these candidates in the rest of their polls.

[The Mikado]

Paul: 7%

New Hampshire sure is libertarian, eh guys? 

[memphis]

Paul: 7%

New Hampshire sure is libertarian, eh guys? 

More that Paul is not a remotely viable candidate, but yeah, no state is truely libertarian.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Paul: 7%

New Hampshire sure is libertarian, eh guys? 

Only in the most general sense, but it is a misappropriation of the term but considering that the people who use it as such are the same ones who use the word "neocon" in a million inappropriate ways, we really shouldn't be surprised.

New Hampshire is Middle Class suburbanite state. Contrary to the misinformation the wave of people fleeing Massachusetts, atleast in the 1960's and 1970's were generally conservative on economics and  somewhat on social issues, and that is why the state isn't like Vermont and Maine but more like the outersuburbs of Boston which, in fact, nortern NH basically is outersuburban and exurban Boston. A guy like Scott Brown is a perfect fit for New Hampshire and would probably win 60%+ running there. Its also why Hillary uphended Obama in NH just like in Massachusetts and the results in NH could have foretold Massachusetts to some extent. The elements of social liberalism of the Vermont like areas and lack of concern for Gays and Abortion among those northern New Hampshirites gives the impression of it being Libertarian when combined with the economic conservativism and the strong Anti-War sentiments in 2006 and 2008. However the anti-War streak died with Obama's swearing in, though if Afghanistan gets worse it could roar against the Dems (Its largely due to the large number of indies in the state, combined with those Vermont style liberals that creates that, the later is liberal on everything and not going to be Paul type voters)

[Eraserhead]

Paul: 7%

New Hampshire sure is libertarian, eh guys? 

Actually one thing that New Hampshire and Ron Paul have in common is that neither of them are really "libertarian".

Interestingly, this is very close to what he got there in 2008 (unless I'm misremembering).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Paul: 7%

New Hampshire sure is libertarian, eh guys? 

Actually one thing that New Hampshire and Ron Paul have in common is that neither of them are really "libertarian".

Interestingly, this is very close to what he got there in 2008 (unless I'm misremembering).

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2008&fips=33&f=0&off=0&elect=2

7.65% to be exact.

[Mr. Morden]

7.65% to be exact.

Yep, he actually did better in Iowa.  Of course, he pretty much did better in caucus states than primary states across the board.

[TheGreatOne]

7.65% to be exact.

Yep, he actually did better in Iowa.  Of course, he pretty much did better in caucus states than primary states across the board.

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Caucuses favor the younger voters.  I remember hearing on CNN that older voters leave or don't show up because its crowded.  That would certainly favor Ron Paul.  But I could be wrong.

[Mr. Morden]

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Caucuses favor the younger voters.  I remember hearing on CNN that older voters leave or don't show up because its crowded.  That would certainly favor Ron Paul.  But I could be wrong.

Probably the reverse actually.  Caucuses would favor those who are the most engaged in the political process and have the highest motivation to vote, as caucusing is more time consuming than voting.  As a rule, the under-30 crowd is the least politically engaged age group, so I would think that they'd be least likely to caucus.

Paul-ites are an exception though.  They're highly motivated voters, even though they're predominantly young.  Any contest that's low turnout will tend to favor Paul.