NJ-Rutgers: Romney barely ahead in primary

[Tender Branson]

Now, thinking ahead to the 2012 Presidential Election, which Republican would prefer as the
nominee to run against President Obama? Just tell me the name. [Do Not Read List; Code to list]

Mitt Romney 13%
Chris Christie 12%
Sarah Palin 11%
Mike Huckabee 6%
Ron Paul 3%
Michael Bloomberg 1%
Newt Gingrich 1%
Tim Pawlenty 1%
David Petraeus 0%
Michelle Bachman 0%
Scott Brown 0%
Jeb Bush 0%
Others 9%
Don’t Know 42%

Obama re-election favored

Nearly half (48 percent) New Jersey’s registered voters believe President Obama deserves to be re-elected in 2012, while 39 percent say one term is enough, the poll finds.

Thirteen percent are unsure. Today, 81 percent of Democrats support a second term, while only 14 percent of Republicans agree. Among independents, opinion is split: 40 percent say Obama deserves re-election, 42 percent say he does not. Eighteen percent are unsure.

“The president is strongly supported by the state’s Democrats and given their edge in
voter registration, Obama can be in good shape, even if independents split down the middle,”
said Redlawsk. “Still, for a ‘blue’ state, these numbers seem pretty tight.”

Women, by 53 percent to 43 percent, are more likely than men to support a second term
for Obama. Members of public employee unions also are strongly in favor of re-election, with 57 percent saying Obama deserves a second term.

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2011/FirstLook20112012Elect.pdf

[Tender Branson]

Map:



Huckabee -> Light Blue
Romney -> Red
Palin -> Pink
Pawlenty -> Green
DeMint -> Yellow

[Ben Romney]

This poll is trash

why poll Christie in it?? He wont run! 49%unsure?SURE!!!

[Likely Voter]

This poll is trash

why poll Christie in it?? He wont run! 49%unsure?SURE!!!

Actually the opposite. The poll is very interesting as they didn't prompt people with candidate names but asked them to name their fave (so if someone said "Christie" they noted it, but they didn't ask "Christie?".

Here is the text from release:

More than four-in-10 registered Republicans and independents leaning Republican could
not name a preferred challenger to Obama. Among those who could, Romney (13 percent) edges
Christie (12 percent) and Palin (11 percent), while only 6 percent name former Arkansas Gov.
Mike Huckabee. Texas Congressman Ron Paul, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg
former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty all
receive minimal support

So the 49% indicates that half of the voters arent paying attention.

I think all other polls that prompt people are exaggerating support for candidates. I would like to see unprompted polling from IA, NH, and SC.

[Ben Romney]

Sorry Likely Voter but it doesnt make sense to me to poll candidates who wont run next year but to forget other candidates like Fred Karger Herman Cain or Mitch Daniels or Haley Barbour

[Likely Voter]

Again they didn't poll specific candidates, they asked thosed polled if they could name someone they would support and 12% said Christie.

Are you saying they should have said sorry name someone else. It is interesting data to see how many said Christie unprompted, are you asking them to throw that data out?

[Fmr. Emperor PiT]

Again they didn't poll specific candidates, they asked thosed polled if they could name someone they would support and 12% said Christie.

Are you saying they should have said sorry name someone else. It is interesting data to see how many said Christie unprompted, are you asking them to throw that data out?

     It is interesting, though given how clear Christie has made it that he's not running, I would like them to ask Christie supporters for their second preferences & also release a set of numbers without Christie. PPP did that with Paul Ryan in their recent poll of Wisconsin.

[A-Bob]

This poll is trash

1) Christie is in it
2) They test everyone against Obama, only republicans should be allowed to vote for the republican (they don't allow indies right?)

[Likely Voter]

guys again I think you are missing the point of the poll. It was a wide ranging poll on various issues, but with regards to the GOP 2012 they were testing if people could name someone they support. The real result is that only half of them could. I think that is interesting. I would like to see a national poll that did the same. I think other polls are overstating the 'support' for these candidates based mostly on name recognition.

[Mr. Morden]

guys again I think you are missing the point of the poll. It was a wide ranging poll on various issues, but with regards to the GOP 2012 they were testing if people could name someone they support. The real result is that only half of them could. I think that is interesting. I would like to see a national poll that did the same.

Gallup did do a poll with this format last year:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=110654.0

Though, yeah, that was over a year ago, and it'd be interesting to see something like that done again.

[The Mikado]

guys again I think you are missing the point of the poll. It was a wide ranging poll on various issues, but with regards to the GOP 2012 they were testing if people could name someone they support. The real result is that only half of them could. I think that is interesting. I would like to see a national poll that did the same. I think other polls are overstating the 'support' for these candidates based mostly on name recognition.

^^^

This isn't a hard concept, guys.  They asked an open-ended question, "Who would you vote for?" and let the people submit names themselves.  It's a really interesting idea in that it shows how closely or not people are following the race (note the 9% for "Others").

[A dog on every car, a car in every elevator]

guys again I think you are missing the point of the poll. It was a wide ranging poll on various issues, but with regards to the GOP 2012 they were testing if people could name someone they support. The real result is that only half of them could. I think that is interesting. I would like to see a national poll that did the same. I think other polls are overstating the 'support' for these candidates based mostly on name recognition.

^^^

This isn't a hard concept, guys.  They asked an open-ended question, "Who would you vote for?" and let the people submit names themselves.  It's a really interesting idea in that it shows how closely or not people are following the race (note the 9% for "Others").

I hear you but why would they poll Petraeus instead of Huntsman?

[Likely Voter]

guys again I think you are missing the point of the poll. It was a wide ranging poll on various issues, but with regards to the GOP 2012 they were testing if people could name someone they support. The real result is that only half of them could. I think that is interesting. I would like to see a national poll that did the same.

Gallup did do a poll with this format last year:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=110654.0

Though, yeah, that was over a year ago, and it'd be interesting to see something like that done again.

Gallup should totally do that again. Are we sure they havent? I looked around and couldn't find any but maybe someone knows more.

I think more polls should ask it this way. It is interesting in this case if you take out Christie, Palin and Huckabee, and assuming they all dont run, then only 1 in 4 named a real candidate they support. I bet that is similar in other states (except maybe IA and NH) That shows how wide open this race is and why someone like Pawlenty, Barbour or even Huntsman has a good chance...assuming they can get the money together to buy enough air time.