Posted on 10/27/2015 4:59:47 AM PDT by jimbo123
Ben Carson has edged out fellow GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump in a new national poll, taking the top spot from the real estate mogul for the first time in months.
Carson is supported by 26 percent of GOP primary voters, followed by Trump at 22 percent, according to the CBS News/New York Times poll released early Tuesday. All other candidates follow in the single digits, with Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) at 8 percent and businesswoman Carly Fiorina and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 7 percent each.
The poll represents growing momentum for Carson, who surpassed Trump in several polls in the early voting state of Iowa over the past week ahead of the next GOP debate on Wednesday.
"Ben Carson is now doing well," Trump acknowledged on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" after the poll came out, adding that he believed Carson would see more scrutiny as a front-runner.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Funny how Trump supporters will endlessly point to the polls that show Trump in the lead as proof that he is the only one that can win, yet immediately discount any poll that does not show Trump in the lead...
This is only one national poll, but if we start to see more that agree with this one, Trumpkins should begin to worry. If the national polls start to mirror the Iowa polls, then Trump mania may be coming to an end...
Polls according to many:
If I like the results = legit
If I hate the results = not legit
If I am a statistical scientist = all results are not legit
The GOP doesn’t want a self-funded candidate. He would owe nobody anything, and certainly not them.
Ben Carson cannot self-fund and compete, not even if he took the ‘campaign’ dollars that are part of the national presidential election fund. It would be so much less than the democrats bring to the table that it would be unilateral disarmament.
Ben Carson MUST go to the big dollar donors eventually and beg for money. They WILL get assurances that he’ll live up to his word to push their agenda. They will want his soul.
You're right. We don't.
The guy is a bore. The guy is for illegal immigration. The guy has said that his "social justice" goals are the same as Al Sharpton's. The guy doesn't even care enough about the voters to campaign to them, but just runs around the country on a book tour (suggesting that his vanity candidacy is more about selling books than anything else). The guy is...questionable...at best on the 2nd amendment. He's got no leadership experience whatsoever.
You're right. We DON'T understand the appear of Ben Carson.
> Something tells me the establishment is pulling out all the stops to put the skids on Trump’s bid for the nomination, and Carson is their last opportunity.
I think you nailed it!
I think they want Donald to take Ben out so they can paint him as a racist. Any attack on his record or what his “advisers” do will be painted as racist. Put him in second place, no longer center stage and let Donald be Donald. That is the strategy, I think.
This is what came out of Texas. This goes right to Bushes and the GOPe. The long knives are coming out.
Some results are better mathematically than are others.
The math doesn’t lie; the people do.
Bible thumpers love his shy school-girl demeanor.
“What is Carson saying that is drawing more people to him in the polling?”
I’d be interested in the answer to that myself.
Obviously he’s an intelligent man. And a man of conviction.
But it will take more than intellect and right thinking to release this country from the grip of the Communists.
I understand why you would say that. I am not voting for either Trump or Carson. I have no motive other than to point out that the media and their pollsters use polling to manipulate the public. I really do not care which of those two is on top. Nothing against them. I just have my hopes on a couple of others.
When Carson overtakes Trump in NH and SC take him serious. It ain’t happening. And guess what? SC has more “evangelical” voters than Iowa. But patriotic Americans want a president with a backbone that will fix the country not a black Neville Chamberlain.
When you see similar results in multiple places, it is likely that they mean more than threir individual results might suggest. First, we saw movement in Iowa, and folks dismissed the results with, “Yeah, but, what about the national polls?”
And then one national poll appears that goes against trump. And we hear about margins of error. Then there is a second poll, and partisans focus on its margin of error.
I’m sure I’ll be reading about trump denial after the convention is over and the party ships him back to NY, defeated and broken.
But will the deniers ever ask the question, “Why?”
The question right now is, what is Carson’s appeal?
They will portray him as a nut...and that might even cause some of the Christian vote to stay home (one's that don't understand where we are as a nation and that we can't have HIllary...NO MATTER WHAT).
The liars and the math they use are one and the same.
I suspect the GOPe is behind it.
That comment is almost as repulsive as it is idiotic.
One poll can be manipulated as you all suggest. Many, simultaneously, cannot. Do partisan groups infect polling? Of course. In WW II, as Mahl's book "Desperate Deception" shows, the British infiltrated the Gallup and Harris organizations and did selective polling to get us into war, only reported the results they wanted, and so forth (to absolutely no effect). But overall---especially when you have (as of now) nearly 500 (!!!) state and national polls since May showing essentially the same things (i.e., Trump almost always #1, Carson usually #2, Bush around 5-8%, Cruz around 5-10%)---then no, the polls aren't rigged. And, yes, they do take into account cell phones. Regardless of what laws you think they are breaking, all major polls now have a cell phone component.
We have NOT seen a "Wilder effect" in two national elections. So I do not think Carson is the beneficiary of a "Wilder effect." I do not think the polls are "building Trump up to tear him down."
The fact is campaigns have cycles. People frequently get on fire for someone, then as their positions or personal quirks settle in, stay with them or play the field.
Where I think we are in the campaign (and, BTW, the national media, including most of the "conservative" pundits, is way behind the curve on this) is that Trump is transitioning from bombastic headline-grabber to slogging campaigner, and his group is starting to do the strategic work to ensure he has the nomination. He has said they budgeted $20m for this part of the campaign (I took that to mean the primary). So far he spent $5m, but only $1.9m of that was his own money. He has said in GA that he "had ads. We may run them. We may not run them. But they were in the budget."
So I'm guessing that while publicly Trump may claim the polls are bogus in IA, he isn't troubled. Lewandowski likely told him IA would be a stretch, but that he would wrap up everything else by Super Tuesday. You see his strength in the polls in SC, NH, NV, GA, FL, and all the other primaries on or near Super Tuesday. I'm guessing he will act like he deeply cares about IA---and certainly will campaign hard there---but I'm betting his campaign map already has that colored for Cruz or Carson and it won't bother Trump a bit as he walks away with everything else.
Bottom line, don't get too conspiratorial on the polls. I think they are right.
Now, speaking to this particular poll, what I don't understand is the 6% MoE. By that I mean that I don't understand where this is coming from, because with a sample size of 575 voters, the MoE should be more like 4.1%, which is perfectly acceptable because to push it much lower, you have to start polling a LOT more voters (costs $$$) for diminishing accuracy returns. To be getting an MoE of 6%, they should have only polled maybe 250-275 voters, which I agree would be ridiculously small.
Now, I don't dismiss this poll because it doesn't say what I would like for it to have said. However, it IS an outlier from the other national polling, which has had Trump up by a pretty comfortable 10-15% margin. Likewise, it is CBS/NYT - and my experience suggests that polls put out by the MSM tend to systematically lean left, while those from professional houses tend to be more accurate.
While I wouldn't necessarily say 100% that this is a push-poll, there are enough...questionable...things about it that makes me at least suspicious that it is.
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.