CfRES (R)/TargetPoint Consulting: IA, NH, SC & NV polls

[Tender Branson]

TargetPoint Consulting conducted a series of statewide surveys in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina on behalf of the Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions:

IOWA:

21% Walker
10% Bush
  9% Huckabee
  8% Paul
  7% Carson
  5% Christie

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NEW HAMPSHIRE:

15% Bush
11% Walker
10% Paul  
  9% Christie
  6% Huckabee

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NEVADA:

18% Walker
12% Bush
  9% Paul
  7% Carson
  7% Rubio

You must be logged in to read this quote.

SOUTH CAROLINA:

12% Walker
11% Graham
10% Huckabee
  9% Bush

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...

Methodology: The sample size for these surveys is 400 likely Republican caucus/primary voters in Iowa, Nevada, and South Carolina, and 3000 likely Republican primary voters in New Hampshire. All interviews were conducted using live operator phone technology and were conducted by TargetPoint Consulting between January 30th and February 3rd. Cell phone users made up the following percentages of interviews in each poll: 14% in Iowa, 2% in New Hampshire, 31% in Nevada, and 30% in South Carolina.

http://www.citizensfor.com/cres-presidential-topline-memo

[IceSpear]

SOUTH CAROLINA:

12% Walker
11% Graham
10% Huckabee
  9% Bush

#Lindseymentum

[Tender Branson]

3000 polled in NH and only 2% cell-phone ?

Is that most likely a typo ?

[Mr. Morden]

3000 polled in NH and only 2% cell-phone ?

Is that most likely a typo ?

I assume they wanted a really large sample in NH for some other reason (polling questions not related to the presidential primaries).  I guess landlines are easier to poll, because of a higher response rate?  If so, they just didn't need to bother calling that many cell phones in NH, because 2% of such a large sample is already enough that they can just upweight that group to account for any demographic skew.  Whereas with the smaller samples, you need to call more cellphones as a fraction of the total number of calls, in order to get a decent demographic sample.

No idea if that's the reason, but it's the most plausible explanation I can come up with.

[Tender Branson]

3000 polled in NH and only 2% cell-phone ?

Is that most likely a typo ?

I assume they wanted a really large sample in NH for some other reason (polling questions not related to the presidential primaries).  I guess landlines are easier to poll, because of a higher response rate?  If so, they just didn't need to bother calling that many cell phones in NH, because 2% of such a large sample is already enough that they can just upweight that group to account for any demographic skew.  Whereas with the smaller samples, you need to call more cellphones as a fraction of the total number of calls, in order to get a decent demographic sample.

No idea if that's the reason, but it's the most plausible explanation I can come up with.

Yeah, 2% of 3000 would yield 60 cell-phone respondents.

It then depends if the topline results here are based on the 3000 respondents or only on an undersample of 400 like in the other states.

Because 60/400 would yield a cell-phone %age of 15%, which would not be bad but probably still too low. Aren't cell phones already used by 40-80% of people these days ?

Which means the 3000er sample might heavily underrepresent young GOP primary voters.

[Mr. Morden]

It then depends if the topline results here are based on the 3000 respondents or only on an undersample of 400 like in the other states.

Because 60/400 would yield a cell-phone %age of 15%, which would not be bad but probably still too low. Aren't cell phones already used by 40-80% of people these days ?

Which means the 3000er sample might heavily underrepresent young GOP primary voters.

No, that's not how it works.  Regardless of how big or small the sample is, they do demographic weighting, including weighting to account for differences between the landline and cell phone only households.  So all 3000 respondents are represented in the poll, but if the 2% cell phone only sample turns out to be disproportionately young group, then they upweight the results from younger voters in the poll to make it more demographically realistic.

[King]

Walker's got this thing locked up.

[SPC]

Walker's got this thing locked up.

Romney was also ahead in 3 of the four early primaries as late as December 2007.

[King]

Walker's got this thing locked up.

Romney was also ahead in 3 of the four early primaries as late as December 2007.

Nobody wanted Romney in 2007.  When the money wants you, you win. The money wanted Romney 2012. The money will want Walker 2016.

It's been already noted Walker doesn't really have any attack bait for GOP primary candidates. My only thing with him is I didn't see how he could stand out a la Pawlenty syndrome. But if he's entering the debate season as frontrunner, which apparently he is, I don't see how he can lose.

[Flake]

Walker's going to bomb at the debates.

[IceSpear]

The lack of discussion on Lindseymentum in this thread greatly disturbs me.

[TomC]

The lack of discussion on Lindseymentum in this thread greatly disturbs me.

Can we call his following Graham crackers?

[Mr. Morden]

The lack of discussion on Lindseymentum in this thread greatly disturbs me.

Can we call his following Graham crackers?

Since Ben Carson will presumably siphon off the black Republican vote, I guess the answer is yes.

[Mr. Morden]

Graham-entum appears to be weak in PPP's poll:

https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/566277708284698624

You must be logged in to read this quote.