Posted on 05/11/2015 11:36:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Keep in mind that polls this early in a presidential cycle measure mostly name recognition rather than solid voter choice. Even with that caveat in mind — or perhaps because of it — the Bloomberg/St. Anselm poll released last night delivers bad news to Hillary Clinton and Democrats for 2016. Instead of a commanding lead over a field of emerging names, Hillary barely edges out most of the GOP field:
There’s no clear Republican front-runner in the New Hampshire presidential nominating contest, while Hillary Clinton retains an overwhelming advantage among Democrats in the Granite State’s first-in-the-nation primary.
Clinton’s advantage over her potential Republican rivals has narrowed, however, and the general election in the battleground state looks increasingly competitive, according to a new Bloomberg Politics/Saint Anselm New Hampshire Poll.
The poll also shows that Senator Marco Rubio is rising while support for his fellow Floridian, former Governor Jeb Bush, has fallen off. Rubio and Bush both were the first choice of 11 percent of likely Republican primary voters in the poll, while Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky each scored 12 percent.
The primary numbers are far less interesting than the general election match-ups. Hillary Clinton has far superior name recognition in other polls, and understandably so. Most of the GOP field work at the state level rather than federal, and even the Senators have only been on the national stage for the past four or five years. The Clintons have played on the national and international levels of politics and celebrity for twenty-three years.
Unfortunately for Hillary, familiarity breeds a certain level of contempt — and specifically for her. While her husband gets a 53/42 favorability rating from general-election voters, Hillary only gets 46/49 — slightly better than Barack Obama’s 44/53, but not by much. Like Obama, the high level of voter familiarity means that she can’t expect to see much upside in a campaign, since voters already know her well. In comparison, former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley only gets a 14/16, showing at least a lot of potential for positive outcomes in a campaign.
Not surprisingly, 46% is about her ceiling when compared with the other GOP candidates for head-to-head questions:
That’s a bad sign for a candidate who is both this well known and who will also be seen as a continuity candidate for the Obama presidency, whether Hillary campaigns that way or not. The three Republicans with a longer history on the national level score within the margin of error, and Walker almost does as well despite only having operated on a national level since January.
The primary polling has some interesting aspects to it, but the overall impression is that voters in New Hampshire aren’t terribly committed to any Republican at the moment. The four Republicans in the head-to-head match-ups are the only candidates to get into double digits, but they range from 11-12%. Only Walker and Bush score double digits in the second-choice category, and Walker emerges as a leader when those choices are combined. If Walker can grab a lead in New Hampshire and in Iowa, he may end up attracting a lot of attention from activists and donors who want to narrow down the field quickly, as well as finding an option to Bush that grassroots voters will adopt.
In order for that to happen, Walker will have to keep building momentum early. If it does, our friends at RedState sense a sweep coming.
What's with these people in New Hampshire anyway?
Do they really want Hillary?
I would expect with all these foundation and e-mail scandals and Benghazi going on, it would be a huge lead for ANY Republican.
What happened to the "Live Free or Die" state? Are they choosing the latter?
“What’s with these people in New Hampshire anyway?”
The Commie “leakage” from MA continues.
Run, Bernie, Run!
Herself, Madame Benghazi, the Cold & Joyless, is vulnerable on MANY fronts, and at least Bernie has the advantage of not carrying the tons and tons of baggage. Even Fauxahontas, Elizabeth Warren, seems to be a good and pure example of femininity in comparison. Martin O’Malley has issues of his own, but the list of infractions is STILL a lot shorter.
Polls at this point mean nothing, other than to employ pollsters and give political reporters something to write about to make their daily deadline. At this point eight years ago, Clinton was within the margin of error with McCain, and we know how that worked out.
No. They don't. She's the weakest candidate the Dems have run since Carter's second term attempt.
What they don't want is another odious Republican grifter who starts wars to keep Lockheed in business, tells us how wonderful life will be when China makes everything and we end up wiping their butts when they come here on vacation, and waxes poetic about how great it is to see Saudi Princes jetting around the planet with their harems on their French built private airplanes paid for with our money.
Did I forget about how great the Southwest will be when it's populated in the main by angry Orks from Mexico pulling weeds and paving driveways for the Splendid homes of the politically connected few?
That's why they reluctantly vote for Shrillary. What did Bush II do in Term 2? Spend like mad, ignored the border where his in-laws live on the other side, and grew the government by another trillion or so while doing nothing to prevent what happened with the derivatives collapse.
'Member all that?
Just like now. We gave them a majority and...nothing. They lick the guys butt for a signature so they can deliver more of Other People's Money to their donor class.
The hagg is falling like a lead pant-suit.
lol. That was funny. Yeah, get rid of that slogan if you elected Obama by six points.
or maybe most of them see it as a multiple choice questions like you said and not a slogan :)
This is the prime example our LARGE field of distinguished and accomplished opponents to Hillary Clinton is a Godsend.
They are all firing at her, Carly best of all, and the media can’t hammer all of them at the same time. It’s wonderful.
If we supporters don’t muck it up by prematurely eviscerating each other and the candidates.
The media has to be in a frenzy that we are still able to field so many candidates without fracturing and all aligned against their anointed one. We are learning the game.
Surely, we can hold our crossfire while they try to raise the money needed to go up against the largest machine since Obama 2008, and each other next year.
Always adjust any published poll against their inevitable 5-10 point bias in favor of the Democrats.
So IMHO that means Hillary doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in Miami of winning New Hampshire!
That was a good question in 2012, too.
Obama beat Romney by 5.6%.
Another so- called “ poll” which completely ignores the fact that Ted Cruz exists. I wonder why that is?
“...Republicans within the margin of error with Hillary”
I gather this means she has to be “in jail” before it gets “past the margin of error”.
Maybe, maybe just maybe, a really big maybe!!! if we had a good solid conservative president, the legislators on the hill would grow a pair.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.