LA-University of New Orleans: Trump+12

[Tender Branson]

38% Trump
26% Cruz
11% Rubio
  5% Kasich
20% Undecided

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.uno.edu/cola/political-science/documents/2016-Pres-Primary-Analysis.pdf

[Vosem]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

[H. Ross Peron]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

Keep dreaming.

[Maxwell]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

[yankeesfan]

That's a huge number of undecideds

[Mehmentum]

Undecideds will break against Trump, but it won't be enough.

[ElectionsGuy]

With big loses in Louisiana, Michigan, and Mississippi, I think Rubio will be out right after Florida, especially if he loses it by double digits, and especially if Cruz keeps performing much better than him.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

DON'T VOTE FOR TRUMP, LOUISIANA!!!! YOU KNOW BETTER!!!!

[Vosem]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at _trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-_trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in _trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for _trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-_trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

[/]

Do we really need all these LA polls?

[Volrath50]

DON'T VOTE FOR TRUMP, LOUISIANA!!!! YOU KNOW BETTER!!!!

Remember that time Louisiana almost elected David Duke senator, and then almost elected him governor?

This is one place where Duke's endorsement might actually help Trump.

[Maxwell]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at _trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-_trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in _trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for _trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-_trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

Rubio is going down because HIS campaign stinks, not because Romney is some kind of god damn genius. Kasich's numbers aren't really up or down in Louisiana - he never really had a shot there anyway.

By the way, Romney got booed at the debate when his name was mention, and this was an audience that obviously did not favor Trump. Republicans, by and large, did not like Romney's speech.

[windjammer]

If Trump loses, that wouldn't be because of Romney lol lol

[Vosem]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at _trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-_trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in _trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for _trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-_trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

Rubio is going down because HIS campaign stinks, not because Romney is some kind of god damn genius. Kasich's numbers aren't really up or down in Louisiana - he never really had a shot there anyway.

By the way, Romney got booed at the debate when his name was mention, and this was an audience that obviously did not favor Trump. Republicans, by and large, did not like Romney's speech.

Rubio is only going down in the places where a different clear anti-_trump candidate exists. Where it doesn't, his support hasn't shifted (see the poll in Kentucky that showed him in second). Anybody who left because Rubio's not running the greatest of campaigns left a long time ago -- before NH, probably. Since then, his only losses have been tactical.

Romney got booed because the _trump supporters, libertarians, and evangelical types (Cruz supporters, for short) all don't like him, and they make up a fairly large majority of the party all together. Guess what: the latter two groups don't like _trump either. The election is not between him and Romney. Romney getting booed doesn't matter because the speech was not directed at the people who booed Romney. The point was to convince Rubio/Kasich voters to vote for the most plausible anti-_trump. We're about to see how well it works.

If Trump loses, that wouldn't be because of Romney lol lol

Not entirely, no. But Romney is playing his part.

[Maxwell]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at _trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-_trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in _trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for _trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-_trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

Rubio is going down because HIS campaign stinks, not because Romney is some kind of god damn genius. Kasich's numbers aren't really up or down in Louisiana - he never really had a shot there anyway.

By the way, Romney got booed at the debate when his name was mention, and this was an audience that obviously did not favor Trump. Republicans, by and large, did not like Romney's speech.

Rubio is only going down in the places where a different clear anti-_trump candidate exists. Where it doesn't, his support hasn't shifted (see the poll in Kentucky that showed him in second). Anybody who left because Rubio's not running the greatest of campaigns left a long time ago -- before NH, probably. Since then, his only losses have been tactical.

Romney got booed because the _trump supporters, libertarians, and evangelical types (Cruz supporters, for short) all don't like him, and they make up a fairly large majority of the party all together. Guess what: the latter two groups don't like _trump either. The election is not between him and Romney. Romney getting booed doesn't matter because the speech was not directed at the people who booed Romney. The point was to convince Rubio/Kasich voters to vote for the most plausible anti-_trump. We're about to see how well it works.

If Trump loses, that wouldn't be because of Romney lol lol

Not entirely, no. But Romney is playing his part.

That Kentucky poll was from before the Romney speech you ingrate, and before Super Tuesday, whose results were pretty brutal for Marco.

[Vosem]

Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at _trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-_trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in _trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for _trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-_trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

Rubio is going down because HIS campaign stinks, not because Romney is some kind of god damn genius. Kasich's numbers aren't really up or down in Louisiana - he never really had a shot there anyway.

By the way, Romney got booed at the debate when his name was mention, and this was an audience that obviously did not favor Trump. Republicans, by and large, did not like Romney's speech.

Rubio is only going down in the places where a different clear anti-_trump candidate exists. Where it doesn't, his support hasn't shifted (see the poll in Kentucky that showed him in second). Anybody who left because Rubio's not running the greatest of campaigns left a long time ago -- before NH, probably. Since then, his only losses have been tactical.

Romney got booed because the _trump supporters, libertarians, and evangelical types (Cruz supporters, for short) all don't like him, and they make up a fairly large majority of the party all together. Guess what: the latter two groups don't like _trump either. The election is not between him and Romney. Romney getting booed doesn't matter because the speech was not directed at the people who booed Romney. The point was to convince Rubio/Kasich voters to vote for the most plausible anti-_trump. We're about to see how well it works.

If Trump loses, that wouldn't be because of Romney lol lol

Not entirely, no. But Romney is playing his part.

That Kentucky poll was from before the Romney speech you ingrate, and before Super Tuesday, whose results were pretty brutal for Marco.

Breathe, Maxwell, breathe. You can do it. You can breathe. I know it's hard. But you can breathe.

Anyway, my point about the Kentucky poll is that there has been no decline in support for Rubio since before New Hampshire except in states where there is a clear alternative to _trump who is not Rubio (of which Kentucky is not one). Thus, the fact that it was conducted before Super Tuesday shouldn't matter, because in Kentucky there has not been appreciable movement since long before Super Tuesday.

Sure, the Super Tuesday results were pretty brutal for Marco, but so were New Hampshire and Nevada. What on earth would cause people to stick through those defeats but then decide Super Tuesday was too much? Super Tuesday could not have caused any significant depreciation in Rubio's support because anyone who would've been convinced by those results to leave had already left.

[ElectionAtlas]

New Poll: Louisiana President by University of New Orleans on 2016-03-02

Summary:

Trump:	38%
Cruz:	26%
Rubio:	11%
Other:	5%
Undecided:	20%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details