The Candidates
Featured Archives
After reading some comments, I decided to do a little research on how Rasmussen screened their poll for the Iowa Caucus. Luckily, they have an editorial doing just that:
At Rasmussen Reports, we begin in the same way that we poll for general elections by calling a randomly-selected group of households in a manner that includes all geographic regions of the state. For the Iowa caucus poll, we then asked three screening questions.
First, we ask about voting history and only include those who say they vote all of the time or most of the time.
Second, we ask how closely the respondent has followed the Presidential debates and other campaign activities. Those following the campaign Very or Somewhat Closely are included..
Third, we ask specifically about how likely each person was to participate in the caucus. Those who are Very or Somewhat Likely to participate are included in the final sample.
While these three questions established the overall sample, we reviewed the data with a variety of alternative screening assumptions. For example, we looked at data only for those who are following the Campaign Very Closely and are Very Likely to participate in the Caucuses.
We also looked at an even tighter screen by including by asking the following question… Many times, things come up that make it impossible for someone to participate in the caucuses. This year, the event will be held much closer to the holidays and winter weather is also a possibility. Are you certain that you will participate in the Iowa caucuses or is it possible that something might come up to prevent you from attending?
As we examined each scenario, the results shifted modestly but the overall results remained quite consistent. Clinton was ahead in every Likely Caucus Participant model of the Democratic race with Obama and Edwards close to each other in second. On the Republican side, Romney was ahead in every Likely Caucus Participant model of the Republican race with Thompson and Huckabee close to each other.
Overall, the sample for Democrats represents approximately 15% of Iowa’s voting age population. The tightest screening model we used represents approximately 7% of the voting age population.
For Republicans, the sample included 11% of the state’s voting age population. The tightest screening model represented just under 5% of the voting age population.
For both the Democratic and the Republican samples, the very tightest screening model showed the frontrunner with a modestly smaller lead than in the overall sample.
As part of the overall study, we also asked some people who were screened out of the final sample their preference. When looking at a slightly larger pool of voters, we again saw the same overall dynamic in both the Republican and Democratic campaigns.
The final sample of 1007 Likely Democratic Caucus Participants was 51% female and 49% male. Sixty-eight percent (68%) were over 50 and 8% under 30. Forty-nine percent (49%) say they are politically liberal while 31% describe themselves as moderate. Ten percent (10%) describe themselves as Evangelical Christians. Sixty-six percent (66%) are married and 22% have children living at home.
For Republicans, the sample of 650 Likely Caucus Participants was 64% male and 36% female. Fifty-seven percent (57%) were over 50, 9% under 30. Eighty-one percent (81%) were politically conservative. Thirty-five percent (35%) 35% identified themselves as Evangelical Christians while another 35% said they were Protestant. Seventy-seven percent (77%) were married and 32% have children living at home with them.
AS a premium member of Rasmussen, I have access to their breakdowns. Here they are (I only included candidates level of support if it reaches 4% in each breakdown):
Among Men
Mitt Romney 24% Fred Thompson 23% Mike Huckabee 19% Rudy Giuliani 11% John McCain 6%
Among Women
Mitt Romney 28% Rudy Giuliani 16% Mike Huckabee 16% Fred Thompson 10% John McCain 7% Sam Brownback 4%
Among 18-29 year olds
Fred Thompson 24% Mitt Romney 22% Rudy Giuliani 9% Mike Huckabee 9% John McCain 9% Ron Paul 5%
Among 30-39 year olds
Mike Huckabee 23% Mitt Romney 23% Fred Thompson 18% Rudy Giuliani 10% John McCain 5% Sam Brownback 4%
Among 40-49 year olds
Fred Thompson 23% Mike Huckabee 22% Rudy Giuliani 15% Mitt Romney 13% John McCain 7% Sam Brownback 6%
Among 50-64 year olds
Mitt Romney 28% Fred Thompson 19% Mike Huckabee 18% Rudy Giuliani 14% John McCain 5%
Among 65+
Mitt Romney 34% Rudy Giuliani 14% Fred Thompson 13% Mike Huckabee 13% John McCain 7%
October 17th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Tommy, Great Info….Thanks
October 17th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Hey, no problem.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Looks like Mitt’s supporters are all old women.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
I imagine there is some virtue in having Iowa, a State totally unrepresentative of the rest of the country, have a large say in the nominating process, but for the life of me I can’t figure out what it might be.
Iowa being important started with Jimmy Carter’s win and we all know how lucky the country was to have that POS as President.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
must be the hair
October 17th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
dblagent007 – Hey, thanks a lot! (I’m 53 and consider myself to still be very cool!
And I remember when the t.v. show, that your user i.d. comes from, was a popular series!
Be respectful now — I’m your elder!
P.S. Next time double agent, just for courtesy sake, say “older” women, not “old” women.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Anyone read Maureen Dowd today? She attacks Giuliani because “Rudy Roughs Up Arabs”
Should be a campaign slogan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/opinion/17dowd.html?ref=opinion
October 17th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
The fact that Mitt does so well among older voters bodes well for him in the caucuses. First, older voters are the most reliable caucus attendees. Second, older voters are the most politically active, and thus most likely to have actually met some of the candidates.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
If I know anything about politics, it’s that old(er) people vote.
Not sure if it holds true for caucuses in January.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
The Romney campaign follows the strict code of what has worked before combined with what will work now.
Before: Early Primary victories typically lead to unmeasurable free press and momentum
Now: demographics in Iowa are growing older as the Baby Boomers start to retire. Play to this audience, win their support, and you win the race.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
when I was in Iowa going from Romey event to Romney event, I went to one in a basement of some agroculture building the size fo a small church. It had about 30 people in it, and half were old ladies. Actually nearly every event I went to outside of Cedar Rapids was nearly all old women. I don’t know if that’s Romney or the cross section of those who are politically active.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
That’s funny. I do recall watching a Romney event at a VFW hall and there were a bunch of older women there. But that is the best demographic for the caucus so I would say Romney is in good stead in Iowa. I wonder, though, why he has such a huge lead in the 65+ group.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
It just goes to show the older people get, the wiser they are. GO ROMNEY!!!
October 17th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
I think this bodes well for Mitt, I believe that Mitts support with the “older” women is rock solid. When older people decide on something they usually stick to it. Anyone ever try to change an older persons mind? This tells me that Mitts support in Iowa is very strong.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
Has Mitt been wearing cologne at these town hall meetings? That would explain a lot.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
I didn’t smell any cologne on him at an Arizona stop he made last week.
Seeing Huckabee at the top of any list made me pause. He certainly is one to watch as we go forward.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
“I wonder, though, why he has such a huge lead in the 65+ group.”
This is just a guess, but I would say it is because of his campaign style – townhall meetings, Q&A’s, smaller, more localized events. Older voters are less concerned or interested in the mass-media style of campaigning, and like to actally meet the candidates and get a personal assesment of them. Since Romney is the only major candidate conducting that kind of campaign on a large scale, he leads in those groups.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
I’m still utterly baffled as to why people keep polling solid Rudy states like New York and New Jersey over and over, and yet not one single Wyoming poll has been taken.
Wtf?
October 17th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
#15 – Has Mitt been wearing cologne at these town hall meetings? That would explain a lot.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
He doesn’t have to wear cologne!
October 17th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Mitt does so well among the old folks because we have good memories
of Reagan, and he reminds us of him.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
“He doesn’t have to wear cologne!”
No kidding, if cologne had anything to do with it, Rudy would corner the market.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
The biggest question I have about the poll pertains to Huck’s strength. What’s the appeal? It can’t be viability, because his campaign doesn’t have any. Don’t Iowans realize that he was a lousy governor? If they want a future filled with tax increases, they can have it as effectively by voting for Dems. I hope it’s because that many people in the state have become converts to the idea of a Fair Tax, but I don’t really believe that’s the reason either. It’s enigmatic.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Opinionated:
“I imagine there is some virtue in having Iowa, a State totally unrepresentative of the rest of the country,”
Where do you live? San Francisco or in one of the liberal arm-pit states?
In case you have not observed, all areas participate within the nomination process.
First there is IA – Midwest,
Followed by NH – New England,
Next comes NV – West,
Followed then by MI and SC which is the first in the South.
That pretty much gets at least one state from each major US demographic. What is the complaint? Would you prefer a big state so as to not allow most the candidates opportunity to organize & fund raise?
October 17th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
I think the appeal of Huck is that he comes off as a local Minister. Although, his tax plan might have something to do with it as well (fair tax).
October 17th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
I am dissapointed to see my age group (18-29) voting most for Fred. Bleh. I can’t stand him. I’m for Romney all the way.
Oh, and BTW any guy out there that makes fun of Romney’s good looks and sneers at his lead with women is obviously an unattractive political nerd who is a big loser with the ladies and is just JEALOUS
October 17th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Ray, Mitt’s numbers in the RCP poll on Iowa are falling.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
I find it weird that Romney’s support is lowest among 40 year olds. Don’t know why it’s weird, it just is. And Fred’s support is backwards from national polls – better numbers among the young, worse with the old. I assume this has to do with older caucus-goers being the most stubbornly insulted at Fred’s late entry perhaps.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Dave:
“The biggest question I have about the poll pertains to Huck’s strength. What’s the appeal? It can’t be viability, because his campaign doesn’t have any. Don’t Iowans realize that he was a lousy governor? If they want a future filled with tax increases, they can have it as effectively by voting for Dems. I hope it’s because that many people in the state have become converts to the idea of a Fair Tax, but I don’t really believe that’s the reason either. It’s enigmatic.”
I live in Arkansas, so I can tell you first hand that Huckabee was a great governor. He cut taxes more than 90 times. By the end of his second term, there was over a $500 million surplus. I like the idea of the Fair Tax. I think many Americans know that our current tax system is not working. Now whether or not Huckabee will gain enough support to be a “front runner” remains to be seen. He is running out of time though.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
UA Razorbacks,
I support the Fair Tax. My comment about tax increases was a reference to the new welfare state spending that Huck has argued for. I was aware that he had lowered taxes during the first part of his tenure, but if I had known he had lowered taxes more than 90 times, I would have used different rhetoric. The reason why he won’t become a front-runner is his lack of money. I take it that he has some sort of organization in Iowa, but given the amount of money he’s raised, it can’t amount to much outside of that state. Money and organization at this point are the twin sine qua nons for primary success.
October 17th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
Huckabee, though probably a Great Republicans, is going to have to reconcile himself with accusations of being soft on immigration and a nanny-stater.
October 17th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Joe M. No thye are not. they are rising. Just take a look at the graph.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national-primary.html
October 18th, 2007 at 9:18 am
There is only one demographic that Mitt did not do well in and that is the 40-49 year old crowd. And I’m very surprised on that one.
October 24th, 2007 at 11:36 am
Huckabee is not soft on immigration. That is misinformation. Check out his official website, where his stand on all the issues is clearly stated. His numbers in polls are rising.
Yes, Huckabee does not have the big bucks like Romney and others. But his message and communication skills must be working, because he has done so well even with much less spent. Anyway I think it is pretty bad that money is what gives the candidates name recognition. Is the presidency up for sale? It should not be, or we might as well put it on Ebay.
But Huckabee does have money coming in from grassroots. It is inspiring to see how it’s growing, and gaining ground. Check out his website and see for yourself what everyone there is so excited about.