NH - Monmouth poll

[Torie]

This poll was completed before the debate, and it shows Rubio stuck in the pack.

Donald Trump 30%
John Kasich (14%),
Marco Rubio (13%),
Jeb Bush (13%),
Ted Cruz (12%).
Chris Christie (6%),
Carly Fiorina (5%),
Ben Carson (4%).

Sanders 52% (-1% from last poll)
Clinton 42% (+3% from last poll)

[RI]

New Poll: New Hampshire President by Monmouth University on 2016-02-06

Summary:

Trump:	30%
Kasich:	14%
Bush:	13%
Rubio:	13%
Cruz:	12%
Christie:	6%
Other:	9%
Undecided:	3%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

[The Other Castro]

Only 49% of Republicans and 60% of Democrats say they are completely decided. The recent debates for both parties could have big impacts.

[Holmes]

Sanders is bombing.

[psychprofessor]

Sanders should win but he needs to be careful that a higher percentage of Independent men vote in the REP primary which swings the DEM electorate to having more DEM women. This could end up being a single digit race and I think the Clinton camp would call that a victory.

[The Other Castro]

Sanders is bombing.

Yeah losing 1% from the previous poll definitely means he's finished.

[A Perez]

A Clinton loss by 15% should be considered a success in this tiny, pasty-white state.

[Holmes]

Sanders is bombing.

Yeah losing 1% from the previous poll definitely means he's finished.

Did I say he's finished? He'll win New Hampshire. But the majority of New Hampshire polls aren't showing 25% leads anymore.

[Maxwell]

That's a brutal number for Rubio, and that's before this halts or sets him back depending on how impactful it is. Barely beating Jeb "Please Clap" Bush is not going to cut it in the long haul.

[mds32]

Sanders is bombing.

Yeah losing 1% from the previous poll definitely means he's finished.

Did I say he's finished? He'll win New Hampshire. But the majority of New Hampshire polls aren't showing 25% leads anymore.

You act as if the sky is falling because of 1% change. That is just statistical noise.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm curious to see what happens if Rubio finishes lower that third.

[Torie]

Sanders is bombing.

Yeah losing 1% from the previous poll definitely means he's finished.

Did I say he's finished? He'll win New Hampshire. But the majority of New Hampshire polls aren't showing 25% leads anymore.

You act as if the sky is falling because of 1% change. That is just statistical noise.

His point was not that Sanders is tanking, but rather that over time, Sanders has seen his lead erode down to around 10% more or less, depending on the poll, and that figure is not enough to generate more propulsion for Sanders, but rather is more of a yawn. A 20%+ margin would have given Sanders another kick start. That is all.

Oh, just for the record, if Bernie fails, unlike with Rubio, if and when he fails, and has more time, I have no interest in Bernie. Write that down Holmes for future reference.

[Shadows]

Sanders has lost only 1% & the MOE is 4.4%. Clinton gains 3%. O Malley had 5% which is 0 now. So Clinton gains half of Malley's votes.

And interesting things is 58% Women & only 13% people between 17-35 in this poll, can't be any better for Hillary.

in Iowa between 17-29, the voteshare vis-a-vis total vote share was 18% which was considered much lower than Obama's 23% in 2008. Now in 17-35 (not 29), noway it is only 11% & not way is 35%(more than 1/3rd the electorate) between 50-64.

The demographic is complete BS & has very little young voter representation. 11% from 17-35, really?


If young people vote anything higher than the deplorable numbers suggested, it will be a really good win for Bernie. Anyways I personally think 15% win is very satisfactory, 20% is huge & Bernie should target 15-20% win which is still achievable.

[This account no longer in use.]

Sanders is bombing.

Yeah losing 1% from the previous poll definitely means he's finished.

Did I say he's finished? He'll win New Hampshire. But the majority of New Hampshire polls aren't showing 25% leads anymore.

The majority of NH polls never showed a 25% lead for Sanders. Per RCP, Sanders' highest lead was 19.5%, on February 4. Per HuffPost Pollster, Sanders' highest lead is his current lead, at 17.7%.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Sanders has lost only 1% & the MOE is 4.4%. Clinton gains 3%. O Malley had 5% which is 0 now. So Clinton gains half of Malley's votes.

And interesting things is 58% Women & only 13% people between 17-35 in this poll, can't be any better for Hillary.

in Iowa between 17-29, the voteshare vis-a-vis total vote share was 18% which was considered much lower than Obama's 23% in 2008. Now in 17-35 (not 29), noway it is only 11% & not way is 35%(more than 1/3rd the electorate) between 50-64.

The demographic is complete BS & has very little young voter representation. 11% from 17-35, really?


If young people vote anything higher than the deplorable numbers suggested, it will be a really good win for Bernie. Anyways I personally think 15% win is very satisfactory, 20% is huge & Bernie should target 15-20% win which is still achievable.

Talk about a junk sample.  They think almost 90% of the primary is going to be people over 35?  Yikes!  What dumbs. 

[Shadows]

Sanders is bombing.

Yeah losing 1% from the previous poll definitely means he's finished.

Did I say he's finished? He'll win New Hampshire. But the majority of New Hampshire polls aren't showing 25% leads anymore.

You act as if the sky is falling because of 1% change. That is just statistical noise.

His point was not that Sanders is tanking, but rather that over time, Sanders has seen his lead erode down to around 10% more or less, depending on the poll, and that figure is not enough to generate more propulsion for Sanders, but rather is more of a yawn. A 20%+ margin would have given Sanders another kick start. That is all.

Oh, just for the record, if Bernie fails, unlike with Rubio, if and when he fails, and has more time, I have no interest in Bernie. Write that down Holmes for future reference.

Clinton gained 3% from O Malley's 5%. Sanders lost only 1%. MOE is 4.4% so he may not have lost any. And After seeing this demographic (which is a joke) - see my last post , I see nothing to worry.

And this 20%+ is IMO unrealistic & exaggerated given Clinton's ground game, name recognition, money & huge establishment support. It is a machine & a tremendous one.

 Clinton has 10K guys at NH. She has the entire Senate Team & all Women Senators. It is a machine with 100's of paid canvassers. I would be very happy with anything above 15% which is very big, anything near to 20% will be ofcourse amazing.

[Higgs]

I'm curious to see what happens if Rubio finishes lower that third.

I think he's staying in until Nevada regardless of how he does in New Hampshire. He needs at least third in New Hampshire to still remain viable, however.

[Shadows]

Sanders has lost only 1% & the MOE is 4.4%. Clinton gains 3%. O Malley had 5% which is 0 now. So Clinton gains half of Malley's votes.

And interesting things is 58% Women & only 13% people between 17-35 in this poll, can't be any better for Hillary.

in Iowa between 17-29, the voteshare vis-a-vis total vote share was 18% which was considered much lower than Obama's 23% in 2008. Now in 17-35 (not 29), noway it is only 11% & not way is 35%(more than 1/3rd the electorate) between 50-64.

The demographic is complete BS & has very little young voter representation. 11% from 17-35, really?


If young people vote anything higher than the deplorable numbers suggested, it will be a really good win for Bernie. Anyways I personally think 15% win is very satisfactory, 20% is huge & Bernie should target 15-20% win which is still achievable.

Talk about a junk sample.  They think almost 90% of the primary is going to be people over 35?  Yikes!  What dumbs. 

In Iowa it was 18% (17-29) so 17-35 should be like 27% odd? 1000's of unpaid passionate people have gone to NH to canvass to bring a higher turnout .

In this age group Bernie is getting 80-90% of the votes, so if this was 27% instead of 11% (considering same proportion of young voters as Iowa) , the lead could be 20-22% comfortably.

We should study the break-up & methodology of all polls before commenting

[Torie]

Sanders has lost only 1% & the MOE is 4.4%. Clinton gains 3%. O Malley had 5% which is 0 now. So Clinton gains half of Malley's votes.

And interesting things is 58% Women & only 13% people between 17-35 in this poll, can't be any better for Hillary.

in Iowa between 17-29, the voteshare vis-a-vis total vote share was 18% which was considered much lower than Obama's 23% in 2008. Now in 17-35 (not 29), noway it is only 11% & not way is 35%(more than 1/3rd the electorate) between 50-64.

The demographic is complete BS & has very little young voter representation. 11% from 17-35, really?


If young people vote anything higher than the deplorable numbers suggested, it will be a really good win for Bernie. Anyways I personally think 15% win is very satisfactory, 20% is huge & Bernie should target 15-20% win which is still achievable.

Talk about a junk sample.  They think almost 90% of the primary is going to be people over 35?  Yikes!  What dumbs. 

In Iowa it was 18% (17-29) so 17-35 should be like 27% odd? 1000's of unpaid passionate people have gone to NH to canvass to bring a higher turnout .

In this age group Bernie is getting 80-90% of the votes, so if this was 27% instead of 11% (considering same proportion of young voters as Iowa) , the lead could be 20-22% comfortably.

We should study the break-up & methodology of all polls before commenting

Are you sure that the poll did not re-weight to make up for the small sample of younger voters?

[Joe Biden 2020]

I'm curious to see what happens if Rubio finishes lower that third.

I think he's staying in until Nevada regardless of how he does in New Hampshire. He needs at least third in New Hampshire to still remain viable, however.

Rubio is staying in through at least March 15.

[Volrath50]

I'm curious to see what happens if Rubio finishes lower that third.

Looking at this, and other polls, there seems to be a real possibility that Rubio finishes fifth of even as low as sixth if he crashes and Christie surges following the debate.

[Shadows]

Sanders has lost only 1% & the MOE is 4.4%. Clinton gains 3%. O Malley had 5% which is 0 now. So Clinton gains half of Malley's votes.

And interesting things is 58% Women & only 13% people between 17-35 in this poll, can't be any better for Hillary.

in Iowa between 17-29, the voteshare vis-a-vis total vote share was 18% which was considered much lower than Obama's 23% in 2008. Now in 17-35 (not 29), noway it is only 11% & not way is 35%(more than 1/3rd the electorate) between 50-64.

The demographic is complete BS & has very little young voter representation. 11% from 17-35, really?


If young people vote anything higher than the deplorable numbers suggested, it will be a really good win for Bernie. Anyways I personally think 15% win is very satisfactory, 20% is huge & Bernie should target 15-20% win which is still achievable.

Talk about a junk sample.  They think almost 90% of the primary is going to be people over 35?  Yikes!  What dumbs.  

In Iowa it was 18% (17-29) so 17-35 should be like 27% odd? 1000's of unpaid passionate people have gone to NH to canvass to bring a higher turnout .

In this age group Bernie is getting 80-90% of the votes, so if this was 27% instead of 11% (considering same proportion of young voters as Iowa) , the lead could be 20-22% comfortably.

We should study the break-up & methodology of all polls before commenting

Are you sure that the poll did not re-weight to make up for the small sample of younger voters?

They re weighted it so that 11% fall from 17-35 age group & 62% fall above 54 (35+27).

[DrScholl]

Clinton is somewhat surging at the end here.

[IceSpear]

It's really annoying that we're getting 5000 NH polls per day, yet not a single person is bothering to poll SC or NV.

[YPestis25]

It's really annoying that we're getting 5000 NH polls per day, yet not a single person is bothering to poll SC or NV.

This. Especially since the only poll that's not Gravis or Overtime out of Nevada is from October.