SC-PPP: All Republicans ahead of Hillary and the other Dems

[Tender Branson]

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 42%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 49%

Joe Biden........................................................ 36%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 53%

Elizabeth Warren ............................................ 34%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 50%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 41%
Ben Carson..................................................... 48%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 41%
Chris Christie .................................................. 43%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 43%
Ted Cruz ......................................................... 46%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 43%
Lindsey Graham ............................................. 45%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 41%
Mike Huckabee ............................................... 49%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 43%
Rand Paul ....................................................... 45%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 43%
Rick Perry ....................................................... 48%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 42%
Scott Walker ................................................... 46%

...

PPP surveyed 868 registered South Carolina voters, including 525 Republican primary voters and 252 Democratic primary voters, from February 12th to 15th. The margin of error for the overall survey is +/- 3.3%, it’s +/- 4.3% for the GOP sample, and it’s +/-6.2% for the Democratic sample. 80% of interviews for the poll were conducted over the phone with 20% interviewed over the internet to reach respondents who don’t have landline telephones.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_SC_21815.pdf

[pbrower2a]

As PPP finds Republican voters in South Carolina, conservative may be a euphemism:

Republican primary voters in South Carolina are exceedingly conservative on a host of issues. Only 31% believe in global warming, just 34% believe in evolution, and 62% support establishing Christianity as the national religion.

Authoritarian and anti-science.

[pbrower2a]

As PPP finds Republican voters in South Carolina, conservative may be a euphemism:

Republican primary voters in South Carolina are exceedingly conservative on a host of issues. Only 31% believe in global warming, just 34% believe in evolution, and 62% support establishing Christianity as the national religion.

Authoritarian and anti-science.

Wrong board, don't change the subject . By the way: Weren't you suggesting Hillary was competitive in SC?

It shows insight into a state and into a party.

By the way -- the conclusion that South Carolina might be competitive was based upon another poll (Marist). Average the Marist and PPP polls, and South Carolina will not be a 'runaway' state that goes 60-40 R for President in 2016.

[King]

What Hillary expand the map narrative includes South Carolina, a state that did not even vote for Bill in 1992 when Perot was splitting votes?

[pbrower2a]

As PPP finds Republican voters in South Carolina, conservative may be a euphemism:

Republican primary voters in South Carolina are exceedingly conservative on a host of issues. Only 31% believe in global warming, just 34% believe in evolution, and 62% support establishing Christianity as the national religion.

Authoritarian and anti-science.

Wrong board, don't change the subject . By the way: Weren't you suggesting Hillary was competitive in SC?

It shows insight into a state and into a party.

By the way -- the conclusion that South Carolina might be competitive was based upon another poll (Marist). Average the Marist and PPP polls, and South Carolina will not be a 'runaway' state that goes 60-40 R for President in 2016.

Yes, but SC is NEVER a 60-40 state. And Marist polls are obviously junk polls (especially when they poll Southern states). Hillary has a bigger chance of winning Indiana and Arizona altogether than she has winning SC. SC is a state that is never called for the GOP at poll closing time but always ends up in their column.

DeMint got 61% of the vote for the US Senate in 2010. Bush got 61% of the vote for President in 1988.  

I doubt that the Perfect Storm of 2008 (credit crunch, economic meltdown, and exorbitant gas prices) will hit Indiana -- and if that happens in 2016, that would hit the Democrats in states that just do not vote for Republican nominees for President. Indiana closes its polls at 7PM, which favors the farm vote over industrial workers in voting.

The last time other than 2008 in which the nominee of the Republican Party lost Indiana was 1964, when the Democrats successfully characterized the Republican nominee as a dangerous radical who would risk a nuclear war with the Soviet Union and completely dismantle the New Deal.

[pbrower2a]

So the Republican Party in Minnesota might be less primitive.

Endorsing a "national religion" is a denial of a liberal idea of the 1780s.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

Everyone knows South Carolina will go 55-45 for the Republican, no matter who the candidates on both sides are.

Move along.

[retromike22]

So the Republican Party in Minnesota might be less primitive.

Endorsing a "national religion" is a denial of a liberal idea of the 1780s.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I wonder why the SC GOP hates the Constitution so much

[IceSpear]

These numbers look more realistic than Marist's. Dems have no chance of carrying SC, not that that's news to anyone.

[IceSpear]

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 42%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 49%

Joe Biden........................................................ 36%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 53%

Elizabeth Warren ............................................ 34%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 50%

#Hillaryweakcandidate
#Hillaryunelectable

[IceSpear]

What Hillary expand the map narrative includes South Carolina, a state that did not even vote for Bill in 1992 when Perot was splitting votes?

Well, to be fair to them, SC was not (at least not officially) target of the "Expand-The-Map" strategy. However, AR, MO, WV (to a certain extent), AZ, GA and IN were and still are. Battleground Texas also wanted to make TX Hillaryland in 2016.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There we go again...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/17/the-ridiculousness-of-hillary-clintons-expand-the-map-strategy-in-2016/

Battleground Texas speaks for nobody but themselves. I doubt Hillary's team will be foolish enough to try to contest it. I don't believe they ever spoke of making WV/SC competitive either. AR probably isn't possible, I imagine they'll notice that soon enough (Pryor's landslide defeat was the canary in the coal mine). MO/AZ/GA/IN are all possible in a good year for Dems.

[Devils30]

Super Bold prediction: Rs get between 53-56% of the vote in South Carolina..yawn.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

The only poll out of WV since 2012 has been PPP's 2013 one which showed her losing to all GOP candidates...

[IceSpear]

A couple things I noticed after glancing at the crosstabs:

1) Jeb beats Hillary by 7 points, but he beats Biden by 17 points. Ds and Rs are basically the same in both matchups, what explains the difference is that Hillary wins Indies by 6 points, but Biden loses them by 25 points. A massive 31 point swing. But muh Hillary weak candidate! Muh Biden populism so he'd be stronger than Hillary! Muh name recognition!

2) Christie manages the extremely impressive feat of being disliked across the entire political spectrum:

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As PPP finds Republican voters in South Carolina, conservative may be a euphemism:

Republican primary voters in South Carolina are exceedingly conservative on a host of issues. Only 31% believe in global warming, just 34% believe in evolution, and 62% support establishing Christianity as the national religion.

Authoritarian and anti-science.

Wrong board, don't change the subject . By the way: Weren't you suggesting Hillary was competitive in SC?

It shows insight into a state and into a party.

By the way -- the conclusion that South Carolina might be competitive was based upon another poll (Marist). Average the Marist and PPP polls, and South Carolina will not be a 'runaway' state that goes 60-40 R for President in 2016.

Yes, but SC is NEVER a 60-40 state. And Marist polls are obviously junk polls (especially when they poll Southern states). Hillary has a bigger chance of winning Indiana and Arizona altogether than she has winning SC. SC is a state that is never called for the GOP at poll closing time but always ends up in their column.

DeMint got 61% of the vote for the US Senate in 2010. Bush got 61% of the vote for President in 1988.  

I doubt that the Perfect Storm of 2008 (credit crunch, economic meltdown, and exorbitant gas prices) will hit Indiana -- and if that happens in 2016, that would hit the Democrats in states that just do not vote for Republican nominees for President. Indiana closes its polls at 7PM, which favors the farm vote over industrial workers in voting.

The last time other than 2008 in which the nominee of the Republican Party lost Indiana was 1964, when the Democrats successfully characterized the Republican nominee as a dangerous radical who would risk a nuclear war with the Soviet Union and completely dismantle the New Deal.

I know I'm late to the thread, but the only reason DeMint did that well in 2010 was because his Democratic opponent was Alvin Greene.  It says a lot about how inelastic this state is that he just barely got 60% running against Greene.