Romney up 25 in Nevada in new PPP poll

posted at 10:25 am on February 3, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Tomorrow’s Nevada caucuses may not hold much drama for Republicans in or out of the Silver State, according to the latest PPP poll of likely caucus-goers.  The only suspense will come from seeing whether Mitt Romney can win a majority:

Mitt Romney is headed for a dominant victory in Nevada on Saturday.  PPP finds him polling at 50% to 25% for Newt Gingrich, 15% for Ron Paul, and 8% for Rick Santorum.

Certainly in Nevada the Mormon vote will get a lot of attention and Romney leads Paul 78-14 with that group, which we project to account for 20% of the vote. But Romney’s dominance in Nevada goes well beyond that. He’s winning voters describing as ‘very conservative,’ a group he’s had huge amount of trouble with in other states, by a 43-34 margin over Gingrich. He’s also winning men, women, Hispanics, whites, and every age group that we track. This will be a pretty thorough victory for him.

Romney won Nevada by a wide margin in 2008, a cycle when he won caucuses but fell short in primaries.  Nevadans still like him, and not just the Mormons, who make up about 20% of the voters:

Romney hits the 70% favorability mark in Nevada, something we’ve seen for him in very few states. Just 25% see him unfavorably. That’s partially due to an 89/8 standing with Mormons, but he’s at a still very strong 64/30 with non-Mormons as well. One thing that’s contributing to Romney’s strength in Nevada is a strong advantage on the electability question. 56% think he would be the strongest candidate against Barack Obama this fall with no one else topping 21%.

The same cannot be said for Newt Gingrich.  Only Republicans can vote in the caucuses, and they had to have registered as such by January 20th to participate, but this doesn’t keep Gingrich from falling underwater on favorability.  He gets a 41/49 for a -8 compared to Romney’s +45.  Interestingly, Ron Paul is also underwater, 45/46, which is surprising in a state that had been a center of support for his campaign in 2008.  Rick Santorum scores high on favorability at 64/23 for a +41, nearly the same as Romney, and it comes as no surprise that Santorum wins the second-choice question with 30%.  Gingrich, Romney, and Paul all fall within a three-point range of 13-16% on being a second choice for Nevada voters.

Nevada will allocate delegates proportionally, so a 25% showing isn’t a disaster for Gingrich.  He can pick up a handful of delegates and look for a state where he can make a headline with a targeted effort.  However, Team Gingrich will have to do better than this if they expect to start making a dent in Romney’s momentum:

Newt Gingrich’s national advisers are feuding with his Nevada team over the candidate’s campaign here, sources said, highlighting the shortcomings of a hastily assembled local operation and toll of a long campaign.

Gingrich canceled a meeting with Gov. Brian Sandoval on Wednesday and has scaled back his schedule here, including nixing a rural tour, leading up to Saturday’s GOP caucuses.

It was the candidate’s national advisers who argued for Gingrich to skip the tour of Nevada’s heavily Republican rural counties, putting them at odds with in-state advisers, who wanted him to make more appearances, particularly outside Las Vegas.

“Their egos are out of control,” said a Nevada campaign adviser, who spoke only on condition of anonymity. “I’m not sure if they’ve ever looked at a map of the Nevada.”

February’s first two weeks is caucus-heavy, so it’s unclear how Gingrich plans to make an impact without doing the kind of rural tour that turns out caucus-goers.  The only primary in that period is the non-binding one in Missouri, for which Gingrich didn’t qualify for the ballot.  He may be putting all his February eggs in Arizona’s primary basket, but the latest Rasmussen poll shows him trailing Romney there by as much as he trails today in PPP’s poll in Nevada.  If that’s the strategy and rural tours are out, then maybe Gingrich would be best served by camping out in Arizona for the next three weeks.

So how will Nevada’s caucus work?  The Las Vegas Sun has a basic primer, but it’s the same as most other caucuses.  The caucuses will start in the morning on a county-by-county basis, and it will comprise lots of other party business.  During that time, qualified attendees can cast paper ballots for their presidential candidate, and at the end each caucus will count them up and communicate the results to the state GOP.  Without traveling and holding events, it seems unlikely that Gingrich will have any surprises tonight, except perhaps unpleasant ones.  Look for Paul to do better than the polling indicates.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

I didn’t think conservatives bought into the “I will vote for my kind and only my kind” type of mentality. Sadly, I was mistaken.

angryed on February 3, 2012 at 4:21 PM

I guess that was why I was backing Fred! in 2008 and not Romney.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Of course there is no archeological record for most if not all of people in the Bible either.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 3:52 PM

As a matter of fact, there is a huge repository of information, and artifacts, from dates much, much further back than what we are talking about.
The fact is, none to support, after many, many decades of almost unlimited funds from the LDS, and no, not one bit, of substantial evidence, evidence that is prevalent in cultures thousands of years older, and you have none. Along with every major archeologist making not one claim that it could even be true, let alone is even possible.
Now that lack of evidence is convincing…throw in the recent DNA that Jews were not part of that culture, and you have your walls slowly closing in…doesn’t mean that scholars don’t rally around and defend, the best they can.
Look, even such simple things, which was all but impossible 100 years ago, are being torn apart.
Just the word “Ego eimi” (along with “pros ton theon” and “monogenes theos”), was unheard of…until the advent of the computer and the exact greek/hebrew analysis.
There is not a Mormon theologian who can honestly explain 6 or 7 of the uses (out of a couple of dozen, where the term is followed by a predicate, and has a different meaning) without stumbling over the fact that Jesus is God,one and the same.
Joseph Smith could not have realized that, nor any theologian for that matter, they thought all the instances, old and new were the same…but they weren’t.
The words mean, in unequivocal terms, “I Am”, in the true sense, none before, none after, none other…Jesus was either a raving lunatic and liar, or He was Ego eimi…
You can’t find those words in the King James version…it didn’t have the vast knowledge base we have now.
And just those two words are enough…and it is just that simple.

right2bright on February 3, 2012 at 4:24 PM

I guess that was why I was backing Fred! in 2008 and not Romney.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:23 PM

I’m sure you were.

angryed on February 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM

rightNot2bright on February 3, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Your wrong, but I really don’t feel like wasting any more of my time bothering trying to address your ignorance… enjoy the links I’ve already sent you.

Not that I actually expect you to even click on them, after all, you seem to enjoy being as misinformed as you are.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:28 PM

I’m sure you were.

angryed on February 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Here

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:32 PM

I like Newt, and I think a Fred/Newt run would be great.

I think he’s dead on with this one.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 29, 2007 at 1:44 PM

Waits for angryed to come back and laugh at him for supporting a Fred!/Newt ticket in 2008…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I have word searched the bible dozens of times and have yet to find the word “Trinity”. Do you have a different bible that you don’t let outsiders see that has that word in it?

csdeven on February 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM
You’d rather play games and flaunt your prejudice than have an honest discussion. The concept of the Trinity can be shown in many Bible passages, even though the word Trinity isn’t there. You already knew that. You’re just a bigoted TROLL.

Gladtobehere on February 3, 2012 at 12:31 PM

But OF COURSE “csdeven” knew this! Apparently, this individual has nothing better to do with their time than to get on here and refer to people he/she doesn’t agree with as “bigot.” It’s a very convenient word. Perhaps “csdeven” needs to fax Obama their resume and see if there’s a job for them somewhere…. :)

jfs756 on February 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Your wrong, but I really don’t feel like wasting any more of my time bothering trying to address your ignorance… enjoy the links I’ve already sent you.

Not that I actually expect you to even click on them, after all, you seem to enjoy being as misinformed as you are.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:28 PM

I did click on them, and others. the olmec and maya are very controversial…you have to understand, it’s Mormon’s against scientists who have no interest one way or the other except to be accurate.
The Mormon’s are under extreme pressure to find something, anything, and they try hard, I don’t blame them…but mainstream archeology does not accept what they find as fact, or even close to it.

I am sorry you don’t believe the experts, it’s not me, I am reporting what actual experts, without any reason except to be accurate, find.

BTW, I don’t believe a lot of the experts who find “global warming” either, so it’s just me being a skeptic.

I would have no problem if you stated, “I believe in the Book of Mormon on faith alone”, but not on facts that don’t exist.

double btw, for the past six years about a dozen have changed the name like you did…I always find it amusing when someone is losing an argument they do that, it’s reassuring that they have lost their way.

right2bright on February 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

I’m George Soros And I Approve This Candidate!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAkKl3Y8xmQ

Go ahead elect Romney, prove there’s not much difference between Republicans and Democrats.

wtng2fish on February 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

I’m sure you were.

angryed on February 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Man up and apologize…

right2bright on February 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

I would have no problem if you stated, “I believe in the Book of Mormon on faith alone”, but not on facts that don’t exist.

right2bright on February 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Funny thing about facts, they exist even if you choose to ignore them.

You can claim that my arguments don’t hold weight, you can claim that I am misinterpreting the evidence, but they are still facts, and they do still exist.

I do “believe in the Book of Mormon on faith alone”, the facts that I sited just backup that belief.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Waits for angryed to come back and laugh at him for supporting a Fred!/Newt ticket in 2008…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:34 PM

It is odd that the man you despise so much in 2012 was your choice in 2007 for VP. But OK. Fine you win. Apologies to you.

angryed on February 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Your wrong, but I really don’t feel like wasting any more of my time bothering trying to address your ignorance… enjoy the links I’ve already sent you.

Not that I actually expect you to even click on them, after all, you seem to enjoy being as misinformed as you are.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Grin. And angryed? Unless you’re in the mood for a p*ssing contest, E.L. Frederick doesn’t want to address YOUR ignorance either.

This is how they debate. You, of course, are ignorant since they know stuff without a shadow of a doubt and FAIRS told ‘em so. Actually, I feel for them. It takes a lot of energy to twist facts into shadows. And the sad thing is, many of them are very, very bright–except for this one thing. Years ago, I had to meet with a group of Moonies. They were perfectly normal. Fine. And then I asked the question about the good reverend’s taxes. It was truly amazing. I watched their face and their eyes and it was like the pod people snatched them between one second and the next.

I’m hoping Romney is more like Huntsman in his “belief”.

Portia46 on February 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

It is odd that the man you despise so much in 2012 was your choice in 2007 for VP.

angryed on February 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

I agree.

I must be getting older or something.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Portia46 on February 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Only so long you can argue with a rock before you realize that it isn’t making any difference.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

I was just reading all these comments on Fred and it reminded me how I was thinking earlier today that Fred should be our President. I sure wish he would have ran again.

Decoski on February 3, 2012 at 5:26 PM

The Mormon cult is strong in Nevada – this was a foregone conclusion.

CorporatePiggy on February 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM

You are very correct is calling Mormonism what it is, which a cult.

jfs756 on February 3, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Let’s assume you are right.
Let’s assume that Romney wins the nomination?

Who is better for America? Obama’s Marxist Progressive cult, or Romney’s Mormon cult?

Give me Romney anyday.

kirkill on February 3, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Somebody please convince me why I should vote in the general!

Decoski on February 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Somebody please convince me why I should vote in the general!

Decoski on February 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

No Vote = No right to b!tch when it all goes to hell.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 5:38 PM

jfs756 on February 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Hanger or drawer bigot?

csdeven on February 3, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Has Fox called the NV primary for Mitt yet? What about AZ and MI? What’s taking them so long?

Gloat.

Annoy Sarah Palin, vote Mitt!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2012 at 5:45 PM

You are very correct is calling Mormonism what it is, which a cult.

jfs756 on February 3, 2012 at 11:31 AM

All religions are cults. So what?

Annoy Sarah Palin, vote Mitt!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Decoski on February 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

If you don’t know the answer to that by now then you are not smart enough to figure out how to cast a vote once you get thewre anyway.

UT Cowboy on February 3, 2012 at 6:03 PM

No Vote = No right to b!tch when it all goes to hell because both are Progressives anyway.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 3, 2012 at 5:38 PM

FIFY

Decoski on February 3, 2012 at 6:10 PM

The concept of the Trinity can be shown in many Bible passages, even though the word Trinity isn’t there.

Really?

“The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the 4th and 5th centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”

P Achtemeier, editor, Harper’s Bible Dictionary (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1985), 1099.

Eichendorff on February 3, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Eichendorff on February 3, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I never did understand what that “trinity” thing meant. I mean, I’ve heard of it as the father, the son and the holy ghost. But wasn’t the J-man supposed to be the son? Is he also the ghost? Does J get counted twice to make it a threesome? When they go golfing do they pay green fees for 2 or for 3?

Annoy Sarah Palin, vote Mitt!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Water can exist in all three states at once in a container under the right temperature and pressure. Look at the following link on triple points.

Gladtobehere on February 3, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Well, when God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost appeared at the same time during the baptism of Christ, there is no mention of containers, pressure, and the other variables you point to. Gods skin suit is made up of more than water and the data you provided does not work for all substances at the same temperature simultaneously. That doesn’t even mention how the pressure etc would affect the living souls in the proximity of the event.

I have seen that silly example the bigots use to justify their bigotry more than once. I don’t know why they just don’t admit their bigotry when it is so blatantly obvious to anyone reading it.

csdeven on February 3, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Does J get counted twice to make it a threesome?

MJBrutus on February 3, 2012 at 6:29 PM

I’m not sure about that, but I do know they get to use the HOV lane on the freeway. The HG doesn’t even have to wear a hat to make him visible because you only need two for that lane.

csdeven on February 3, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Mitt Romney is the best candidate, by far, and I am THRILLED that he is winning state after state.

Turns out that the Republican primary voters are smart and don’t blindly follow destructive advice from embarrassing clowns like the quitter Sarah Palin.

I’m tired of having nominees that embarrass us with their incompetence. Finally we have someone we can be proud to stand with!

Go Romney!

bluegill on February 3, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Mitt Romney can hug clouds. And clouds hug him back.

csdeven on February 3, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Mitt Romney can hug clouds. And clouds hug him back.

csdeven on February 3, 2012 at 7:35 PM

ah, how poetic :-)

jimver on February 3, 2012 at 7:38 PM

I never did understand what that “trinity” thing meant. I mean, I’ve heard of it as the father, the son and the holy ghost. But wasn’t the J-man supposed to be the son? Is he also the ghost? Does J get counted twice to make it a threesome? When they go golfing do they pay green fees for 2 or for 3?

Annoy Sarah Palin, vote Mitt!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2012 at 6:29 PM

That’s because it’s nothing more than gobbledygook. Trinitarians see it in the Bible because they project it onto the text that’s already there. Without the projection, there is no evidence for the Trinity in scripture whatsoever.

Eichendorff on February 3, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Gingrich’s national people probably expect to lose Nevada and would rather spend the time fundraising and working on Arizona, which he has his best chance to win before Super Tuesday. They are probably correct on the strategy, but openly bugging out of a state usually costs you a portion of the good will you had achieved, so his performance will be worse than if he had managed the public image of his schedule better.

But a guy who botched the Speaker job so badly as to get tossed by his own conservatives, and failed to qualify for the Virginia and Missouri ballots isn’t likely to be making brilliant and effective choices in his campaign, either.

~~~~~

As to the Mormon debate, I think the South Park episode conclusion said it best:

Gary: [to Stan] Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up, but I have a great life. and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don’t care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people. And even though people in this town might think that’s stupid, I still choose to believe in it. All I ever did was try to be your friend, Stan, but you’re so high and mighty you couldn’t look past my religion and just be my friend back. You’ve got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls.
[turns around and walks off]
Eric Cartman: Damn, that kid is cool, huh?

Adjoran on February 3, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Adjoran on February 3, 2012 at 11:45 PM

That was good! It more or less sums up may attitude towards most religions. If belief helps make you a better person and you don’t insist that others play along then it’s just fine with me.

Annoy Sarah Palin, vote Mitt!

MJBrutus on February 4, 2012 at 5:23 AM

Has it occurred yet to the Newt-Nuts that THE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO TELL YOU SOMETHING?!

Maybe it’s time to consider that THE PEOPLE are speaking up; and they’re saying Mitt Romney.

mountainaires on February 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Those folks who are saying “Mittens Romney” are just as assinine as the the captive constituency on the Left! RINO Romney (aka Obama-Lite) will, in fact, cause 4 MORE years pain and suffering under Obastard!!! Look, the very second Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name) LOOKS like he’s the nominee, George Soros, USING OWS, will go after the 1%er crap, Axelrod and the MSM will attack endlessly Racism In Mormonism/Mormon cultism, and the J@ck@ss-In-Chief will continuously thank Willard for his inspiring RomneyCare!?! TOAST even before his acceptance speech!?! THANK YOU SO MUCH, STUPID PARTY!?!?!

Colatteral Damage on February 4, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Those folks who are saying “Mittens Romney” are just as assinine as the the captive constituency on the Left! RINO Romney (aka Obama-Lite) will, in fact, cause 4 MORE years pain and suffering under Obastard!!! Look, the very second Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name) LOOKS like he’s the nominee, George Soros, USING OWS, will go after the 1%er crap, Axelrod and the MSM will attack endlessly Racism In Mormonism/Mormon cultism, and the J@ck@ss-In-Chief will continuously thank Willard for his inspiring RomneyCare!?! TOAST even before his acceptance speech!?! THANK YOU SO MUCH, STUPID PARTY!?!?!

Colatteral Damage on February 4, 2012 at 6:08 PM

This, ladies and gentlemen, is a prime example of unhinged hysteria.

Eichendorff on February 4, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Colatteral Damage on February 4, 2012 at 6:08 PM

And he/she can’t even spell “collateral”.

Eichendorff on February 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4