Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 15, 2019, 06:08:23 pm
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: AndrewTX, Likely Voter)
  MN-PPP: Minnesota could be a swing state with Christie
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: MN-PPP: Minnesota could be a swing state with Christie  (Read 2364 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,036
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 24, 2013, 03:05:09 pm »

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 44%
Chris Christie .................................................. 38%

Amy Klobuchar ............................................... 42%
Chris Christie .................................................. 39%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 50%
Marco Rubio ................................................... 37%

Amy Klobuchar ............................................... 48%
Marco Rubio ................................................... 36%

Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Amy Klobucharís job performance?

Approve ................. .65%
Disapprove............. .25%

Do you think Amy Klobuchar should run for President in 2016, or not?

She should............. .27%
She should not....... .55%

PPP surveyed 1,065 Minnesota voters and 373 usual Democratic primary voters from
January 18th to 20th. The margin of error for the overall sample is +/-3.0% and +/-5.1%
for the Democratic portion. This poll was not paid for or authorized by any campaign or
political organization. PPP surveys are conducted through automated telephone
interviews.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MN_012413.pdf
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28,617
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2013, 05:16:36 pm »

Can't say I'm too surprised.
Logged
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16,005


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2013, 05:21:21 pm »

Greater than 40% of MN voters are going to vote for any GOP candidate. Doesn't mean the state is competitive. There's not much elasticity.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,462
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2013, 06:01:07 pm »

Greater than 40% of MN voters are going to vote for any GOP candidate. Doesn't mean the state is competitive. There's not much elasticity.

Minnesota is not a swing state. The last Republican nominees for President to win the state were Nixon in 1972 and Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. Nixon won 49 states and Eisenhower swept the Northern and Western states.
Logged
Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,641


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2013, 08:42:46 pm »

I'm sorry but the thread title is misleading.  There's nothing in those numbers that makes me think swing state.
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,290
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2013, 08:56:44 pm »

I'm once again intrigued by the interesting age breakdown.  As I said in the "age polarization reversal" thread:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=167977.0

the 2016 polling we've seen so far seems to show that while people under 30 are Hillary Clinton's strongest demo in the general election matchups, she also does very well with those over 65, while the GOP does best among those aged 30-45 (in contrast to the Obama elections, where the GOP's strongest group was olds).  Well, in this poll, we see that the same phenomenon exists when Klobuchar is the Dem. nominee.  It's not just Clinton.  It might just be a consequence of not having Obama on the ticket.

In any case, in all of the matchups here, the GOP candidate's strongest age group is those aged 30-45:

Christie/Clinton:
18-29: Clinton +23
30-45: Christie +9
46-65: Clinton +7
over 65: Clinton +20

Christie/Klobuchar:
18-29: Klobuchar +14
30-45: Christie +11
46-64: Klobuchar +8
over 65: Klobuchar +13

Rubio/Clinton:
18-29: Clinton +40
30-45: Clinton +3
46-65: Clinton +12
over 65: Clinton +21

Rubio/Klobuchar:
18-29: Klobuchar +20
30-45: Klobuchar +4
46-65: Klobuchar +15
over 65: Kobuchar +19
Logged
Negusa Nagast 🚀
Nagas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,790
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2013, 09:19:06 pm »

Greater than 40% of MN voters are going to vote for any GOP candidate. Doesn't mean the state is competitive. There's not much elasticity.

Minnesota is not a swing state. The last Republican nominees for President to win the state were Nixon in 1972 and Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. Nixon won 49 states and Eisenhower swept the Northern and Western states.

Yes it is. Democrats just got lucky 1984 and 2000. Pawlenty survived the D-wave in 2006 and Franken ran way behind Obama in 2008. A good ground game will win them this state in the future, and it has been trending Republican for some time now.
Logged
King
intermoderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,472
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2013, 09:46:12 pm »

If Christie had higher than 38%, maybe.  Remember, Obama was down like 44-40 in Texas to the field in 2011.  All the undecided vote will break for the Democrats as always.
Logged
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16,005


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2013, 10:38:36 pm »

Greater than 40% of MN voters are going to vote for any GOP candidate. Doesn't mean the state is competitive. There's not much elasticity.

Minnesota is not a swing state. The last Republican nominees for President to win the state were Nixon in 1972 and Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. Nixon won 49 states and Eisenhower swept the Northern and Western states.

Yes it is. Democrats just got lucky 1984 and 2000. Pawlenty survived the D-wave in 2006 and Franken ran way behind Obama in 2008. A good ground game will win them this state in the future, and it has been trending Republican for some time now.
1984 was one of the greatest landslides in American history. If the GOP wins 49 states, they'll probably get MN. That doesn't make it a swing state. In 2000, you had a third party splintering the Dem vote. That doesn't make it a swing state either.
Logged
Snowstalker's Last Stand
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,308
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2013, 10:42:33 pm »

Minnesota is artificially close thanks to high floors for both parties, but outside of a landslide GOP win (or a left-wing third party that gets more than 1% or so nationally), it should go Democratic.
Logged
Negusa Nagast 🚀
Nagas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,790
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2013, 10:52:17 pm »

Greater than 40% of MN voters are going to vote for any GOP candidate. Doesn't mean the state is competitive. There's not much elasticity.

Minnesota is not a swing state. The last Republican nominees for President to win the state were Nixon in 1972 and Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. Nixon won 49 states and Eisenhower swept the Northern and Western states.

Yes it is. Democrats just got lucky 1984 and 2000. Pawlenty survived the D-wave in 2006 and Franken ran way behind Obama in 2008. A good ground game will win them this state in the future, and it has been trending Republican for some time now.
1984 was one of the greatest landslides in American history. If the GOP wins 49 states, they'll probably get MN. That doesn't make it a swing state. In 2000, you had a third party splintering the Dem vote. That doesn't make it a swing state either.

Um, were you around for 2004? Did you look at the polls pre-financial crisis in 2008? Kerry's victory was less than five points, and the GOP held their convention there because they believed they could make inroads.

In an even election, the GOP will dump millions into Minnesota and the winner will come within a few points. The only reason it has a light swing in 2012 was because Republicans never bothered to contest the state.

The state is slowly drifting to the right (as is the rest of the rust belt). It will likely go Republican at some point in the next few elections. It is in no way a safe state.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,036
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2013, 01:14:19 am »

I'm sorry but the thread title is misleading.  There's nothing in those numbers that makes me think swing state.

Klobuchar leads him by only 3. The MoE of this poll is 3. Therefore it could be a swing state.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,924
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2013, 02:00:28 am »

I'm sorry but the thread title is misleading.  There's nothing in those numbers that makes me think swing state.
Christie barely trails Klobuchar, the state's popular Senator and potential Presidential candidate. Take someone like Cuomo, Warner, or Gillibrand, who have reasonable chances of snagging the nomination (if Clinton doesn't run), and I'd expect Christie to be leading here, possibly even outside of the MoE. I certainly would consider it to be a swing state.
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,290
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2013, 02:11:02 am »

Of course, PPP has Christie with strong cross party appeal in its national polls, only trailing Clinton nationally by 2%.  He's presumably leading all of the non-Clinton 2016 Dems nationally, it's just that no one has actually conducted such polls to test this.

In that case, several states that are "lean Dem" in a 50/50 election become swing states.  Doesn't mean that those normally lean Dem states will still be in play in Nov. 2016.  It's just reflective of where things are now, when Christie is perhaps the most popular current officeholder in the GOP.  Where things go from here is anyone's guess.
Logged
The love that set me free
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 86,272
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2013, 02:15:26 am »

I'm sorry but the thread title is misleading.  There's nothing in those numbers that makes me think swing state.
Christie barely trails Klobuchar, the state's popular Senator and potential Presidential candidate.

Look at the numbers below. Voters like Klobuchar, but don't consider her Presidential material.

Christie with all his positive media coverage now is still pulling about the GOP floor in the state. I wonder what John McCain was pulling in 2005. As meaningless as all polls are at this point.
Logged
LiberalJunkie
LiberalJunkie99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 671
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 25, 2013, 05:00:06 am »

Fools gold for Republicans.
Logged
Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,641


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 25, 2013, 11:16:03 am »

I'm sorry but the thread title is misleading.  There's nothing in those numbers that makes me think swing state.

Klobuchar leads him by only 3. The MoE of this poll is 3. Therefore it could be a swing state.

She's still ahead by 3 with 20% of the voters undecided in a state where the undecided usually go with the Democrats in the end.  Doesn't sound like a swing state to me.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,036
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 25, 2013, 01:46:25 pm »

I'm sorry but the thread title is misleading.  There's nothing in those numbers that makes me think swing state.

Klobuchar leads him by only 3. The MoE of this poll is 3. Therefore it could be a swing state.

She's still ahead by 3 with 20% of the voters undecided in a state where the undecided usually go with the Democrats in the end.  Doesn't sound like a swing state to me.

But Christie leads Klobuchar by double-digits among Indies ...
Logged
BluegrassBlueVote
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,004
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 25, 2013, 03:18:27 pm »

Get back to me with some numbers after Chris Christie's post-primary makeover.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 25, 2013, 04:31:23 pm »

Greater than 40% of MN voters are going to vote for any GOP candidate. Doesn't mean the state is competitive. There's not much elasticity.

Minnesota is not a swing state. The last Republican nominees for President to win the state were Nixon in 1972 and Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. Nixon won 49 states and Eisenhower swept the Northern and Western states.

Yes it is. Democrats just got lucky 1984 and 2000. Pawlenty survived the D-wave in 2006 and Franken ran way behind Obama in 2008. A good ground game will win them this state in the future, and it has been trending Republican for some time now.
1984 was one of the greatest landslides in American history. If the GOP wins 49 states, they'll probably get MN. That doesn't make it a swing state. In 2000, you had a third party splintering the Dem vote. That doesn't make it a swing state either.

Um, were you around for 2004? Did you look at the polls pre-financial crisis in 2008? Kerry's victory was less than five points, and the GOP held their convention there because they believed they could make inroads.

In an even election, the GOP will dump millions into Minnesota and the winner will come within a few points. The only reason it has a light swing in 2012 was because Republicans never bothered to contest the state.

The state is slowly drifting to the right (as is the rest of the rust belt). It will likely go Republican at some point in the next few elections. It is in no way a safe state.

Minnesota drifted right during the 90s-early 00s, electing Grams and Coleman.  Since 2002, Republicans haven't won a 2-way statewide race in Minnesota or hit 50% of the vote in any race.  If anything Minnesota has drifted left in the past ten years.
Logged
The love that set me free
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 86,272
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2013, 01:31:03 am »

Any rightward trending in Minnesota stalled in 2007 when the housing bubble burst. The Republicans are no longer gaining in their key areas like they used to.

For example let's compare the numbers in Wright County, which now traditionally has the largest Republican raw vote majority in the state:

1996:
Clinton 15,542
Dole 13,224
Perot 5,550

2000:
Gore 16,762   
Bush 23,861   
Nader 1,977

2004:
Kerry 22,618   
Bush 36,176

2008:
Obama 26,343   
McCain 37,779   

2012:
Obama 25,741
Romney 40,466

Look at any other exurban/outer suburban counties and you'll see a similar trend. Most had barely more votes cast in 2008 than 2004, and the trend to Romney in 2012 just mirrored the rest of the state/country for the most part. While from 1996-2004 the Republican vote literally tripled and grew at more than twice the fast the rate of the increase in Democratic votes.

Meanwhile compare Hennepin and Ramsey Counties in 2000 and 2012. In Ramsey County Romney actually got less than votes than Bush 2000, while Obama received about 47k more votes for Gore (significant even if you add all all 15k of Nader's votes to the Democratic total). And in Hennepin County Obama picked up 116k votes over Gore (81k over Gore+Nader), while Romney picked up only 15k over Bush. The population shifts simply don't benefit the Republicans anymore.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15,866
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 28, 2013, 12:03:04 pm »

Any rightward trending in Minnesota stalled in 2007 when the housing bubble burst. The Republicans are no longer gaining in their key areas like they used to.

For example let's compare the numbers in Wright County, which now traditionally has the largest Republican raw vote majority in the state:

1996:
Clinton 15,542
Dole 13,224
Perot 5,550

2000:
Gore 16,762   
Bush 23,861   
Nader 1,977

2004:
Kerry 22,618   
Bush 36,176

2008:
Obama 26,343   
McCain 37,779   

2012:
Obama 25,741
Romney 40,466

Look at any other exurban/outer suburban counties and you'll see a similar trend. Most had barely more votes cast in 2008 than 2004, and the trend to Romney in 2012 just mirrored the rest of the state/country for the most part. While from 1996-2004 the Republican vote literally tripled and grew at more than twice the fast the rate of the increase in Democratic votes.

Meanwhile compare Hennepin and Ramsey Counties in 2000 and 2012. In Ramsey County Romney actually got less than votes than Bush 2000, while Obama received about 47k more votes for Gore (significant even if you add all all 15k of Nader's votes to the Democratic total). And in Hennepin County Obama picked up 116k votes over Gore (81k over Gore+Nader), while Romney picked up only 15k over Bush. The population shifts simply don't benefit the Republicans anymore.

Yeah, listen to BRTD on this one.  Anyone who thinks that MN is continuing to drift right (as, indeed, it did in the 90s) is wrong, particularly because Minnesota is emphatically not a rust belt state.  Gore's 2000 margin, Pawlenty's 2006 victory, and Franken's teensy-tiny 2008 victory are at least partially the result of Minnesota's entertaining political environment (an unusual fondness for third parties and concomitant reaction to Ventura's 1998 victory) moreso than any indication of "trends".
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: March 09, 2013, 07:22:19 pm »

Minnesota is artificially close thanks to high floors for both parties, but outside of a landslide GOP win (or a left-wing third party that gets more than 1% or so nationally), it should go Democratic.

^THIS.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC