Shock PPP national poll: Trump 25, Cruz 21, Rubio 21

posted at 11:21 am on February 4, 2016 by Allahpundit

Cruz’s numbers here aren’t a shock — he’s been in the high teens and low twenties for awhile — but Trump hasn’t dipped as low as 25 percent in a national poll since November and Rubio hasn’t seen a number as high as 21 percent since … ever. That makes some righty poll-watchers nervous since PPP’s credibility has been attacked in the past. Not only are they liberal, they were the subject of a famous critique of their methodology by Nate Cohn in TNR a few years ago. If you’re looking to throw out this result, which no other pollster has captured, there you go. On the other hand, RCP finds them credible enough to include them in their poll average. Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight site also deems PPP worthy of being rated (a B- for accuracy). I’ve been writing up their polls all primary season long, including ones that showed Trump soaring. If you accepted their other polls at face value, why start ignoring them now?

It’s true, national polls are almost totally worthless — but that never stopped Trump from crowing about them at his rallies, and after a surprising result in Iowa they can be helpful in detecting whether there really has been a change in voter sentiment that might show up next week in New Hampshire. If you believe PPP, Marcomentum is real and Trump may well be on his way down the drain.

Trump’s 25% standing reflects a 9 point drop from our last national poll, which was taken the week before Christmas. It reflects an overall decline in Trump’s popularity with GOP voters. Trump’s favorability has dropped a net 17 points, from a previous +24 standing at 58/34 to now just +7 at 48/41.Trump is particularly starting to struggle on the right- he’s dropped to 3rd place with ‘very conservative’ voters at 19% with Cruz at 34% and Rubio at 22% outpacing him with that group. He does still lead with moderates and ‘somewhat conservative’ voters to give him the overall advantage.

Rubio is the candidate with the real momentum in the race. He’s up 8 points from his 13% standing in our poll right before Christmas. Beyond that he’s seen a large spike in his favorability rating- it’s improved a net 28 points from +15 at 49/34 to +43 at 64/21. That ties him with Ben Carson as being the most broadly popular candidate on the Republican side.

Things also bode well for Rubio as the field gets smaller in the coming weeks. In a four candidate field he gets 32% to 31% for Trump, 23% for Cruz, and 8% for Bush. In a three candidate field he gets 34% to 33% for Trump and 25% for Cruz. And in head to heads he leads both Trump (52/40) and Cruz (46/40). As other candidates drop out of the race Rubio is the most likely destination of their supporters.

All of those numbers will change yet again, of course, if Trump holds on in New Hampshire, which I think he will. The table below isn’t good for him, though. Bear in mind that Cruz and Rubio are both net favorable among nearly every other candidate’s supporters, meaning that if either one of them ends up in a two-man race with Trump, they’re looking good:

trumpfav

Rubio also does well as the second choice of supporters of Jeb Bush and John Kasich, both of whom are likely to be out soon:

2ndchoice

On the other hand, Cruz cleans up among fans of Ben Carson, who’s also likely to be out soon. Interestingly, Christie fans prefer Cruz to Rubio as a second choice, which may be the product of butthurt over his fade in New Hampshire or may be statistical noise due to a small subsample.

One more result for you. Here’s what happens when other candidates’ voters are forced to choose between Rubio and Cruz.

cruzrubio

I remind you again that national polls are useless, as Cruz will/would obviously do better than these numbers in his southern strongholds, which are coming up on March 1st. (Much better if Trump’s not in the race at that point.) Don’t forget, though, that Rubio’s playing a long game, eyeing the more moderate electorates that’ll show up for winner-take-all primaries when blue-state Republicans start voting later this spring. He may outperform these numbers in those strongholds, which will be trouble for Cruz.

But that’s all too far in the future. What about New Hampshire? Rubio inched up to 15 percent there in the latest poll, his best showing in weeks, but Trump’s still at 36 percent. Even if you allow for a “Trump effect” in the polls, where Trump’s support is systematically overstated by, say, five points, Rubio still has to make up more than 15 points in the next five days. And he has to do it with basically everyone in the field not only attacking him but forging alliances to attack him:

Members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt Mr. Rubio’s rise in the polls, according to Republican operatives familiar with the conversations.

While emails, texts and phone calls between operatives in rival campaigns are not uncommon in the tight-knit world of political strategists, the contact between senior aides in the two campaigns has drifted toward musings about what can be done to stop or at least slow Mr. Rubio, the operatives said.

In a sign of a budding alliance, the aides have, for example, exchanged news articles that raise potential areas of vulnerability for Mr. Rubio. There is no formal coordination, the operatives stressed, but rather a recognition of a shared agenda…

A division of labor seems to have taken hold. While a well-financed “super PAC” supporting Mr. Bush assails Mr. Rubio on television and in the mail (it will release a new batch of ads on Thursday), Mr. Christie has stepped up the critiques on the campaign trail.

The latest joint Bush/Christie production is to attack Rubio for being unelectable because he’s … too hardline on abortion. So Rubio’s not too establishment for a Republican primary? He’s actually … too conservative? Admittedly, any attack by Bush or Christie will seem feeble because they have the stench of death around them, but I don’t get Christie’s “boy in the bubble” takedown and I don’t see how abortion is the magic bullet that destroys Rubio’s vaunted electability. All Republican candidates will be attacked as “anti-woman,” whatever the nuances of their positions on exceptions for rape. If you want to stop Rubio, you’re best off hitting him for lacking experience — which Christie and Bush are both doing, wisely — and for his great heresy on immigration. But Jeb can’t do that because he’s knee-deep in amnesty too, and no one believes Christie when he pretends to be offended by the Gang of Eight. The dilemma for Bush, Kasich, and Christie is that, while Rubio may be establishment, he’s still less establishment than they are even with the immigration bill chained to his ankles. How do you beat him in New Hampshire from the left?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

If I want to host an immigrant on my own private property, why should the government get to decide whether I’m allowed to do that? Do I not own my own property, and have the right to decide who to have as a guest?

In a free country, nobody has to ask the government’s permission to host a guest on their own private property.

TBSchemer on February 4, 2016 at 3:28 PM

Cook some meth on your property then dare the government to come get you.

darwin on February 4, 2016 at 5:58 PM

A closer analogy would be to harbor a federal fugitive, and claim the government has no right to second-guess your grant of sanctuary. The other faulty assumption you have here is that they are immigrants, and they are not. Immigrants go through .. IMMIGRATION. Regardless of whether they’re on a park bench on your couch, the government has a constitutional power to regulate immigration. It has nothing to do with your private property; that’s a complete non-sequitur. They have a legitimate interest in knowing who is coming here and why.

When the Marshall comes for your federal fugitive, just tell him “the laws don’t apply to these people because they’re MY guests” and see how that goes.

CapnObvious on February 4, 2016 at 6:34 PM

CNN/WMUR Pre and Post Iowa poll, Trump steady at 29% Marco up to 18%(from 11).

kcewa on February 4, 2016 at 6:35 PM

Come on Lime, they ♥ you.

Schadenfreude on February 4, 2016 at 5:59 PM

I can tell you I love loud-mouthed Voxsplaining SJW-atheists who for some “unknown” reason believe they’re qualified to teach others about ‘proper’ Christianity!

ROFL! :D

Anti-ControI on February 4, 2016 at 6:40 PM

Pork-Chop on February 4, 2016 at 5:40 PM
Man, I really hate polling. So much unethical crap going on, I have to open my own blog to post on it all.(would not even get to the tip of THAT iceberg) PPP is well known for bending the curve to fit their preferred narrative. They usually fix the weights in the total number(2 DEM 1 GOP 4 IN for example) to give a false lean in GOP polls. Inside the profession PPP is considered to be a leaper. Considering that the polling outfits are mostly liberal these days, that tells you all you need to know bout PPP. Is there movement in the N.H. primary. Yes, of course there is. But the polls cycle, combine with the structural defects inherited in this president year, make it very hard to pick up.

flackcatcher on February 4, 2016 at 6:50 PM

..leper… about…(spell check your friend) Too much coffee, not enough sleep.

flackcatcher on February 4, 2016 at 6:54 PM

The incorrect assumption you make is our laws mean nothing. Your “guests” broke the law. They are not citizens. They are criminals and, therefore, your “guests” should be deported immediately!

Either we have laws or we don’t. Either we have a country or we don’t. This is the heart of our country’s problem: we are becoming a lawless nation and that is the reason Americans are arming up!

ChowHound on February 4, 2016 at 5:42 PM

Either we have a right to liberty, or we don’t. Laws can be changed. The right to liberty cannot.

TBSchemer on February 4, 2016 at 7:32 PM

A closer analogy would be to harbor a federal fugitive, and claim the government has no right to second-guess your grant of sanctuary. The other faulty assumption you have here is that they are immigrants, and they are not. Immigrants go through .. IMMIGRATION. Regardless of whether they’re on a park bench on your couch, the government has a constitutional power to regulate immigration. It has nothing to do with your private property; that’s a complete non-sequitur. They have a legitimate interest in knowing who is coming here and why.

When the Marshall comes for your federal fugitive, just tell him “the laws don’t apply to these people because they’re MY guests” and see how that goes.

CapnObvious on February 4, 2016 at 6:34 PM

The closeness of that analogy depend on the crime committed by that fugitive. So how about a fugitive slave running away from a plantation in the pre-Civil War South. That’s pretty similar to an immigrant whose only crime is exercising their own liberty, wouldn’t you say?

TBSchemer on February 4, 2016 at 7:34 PM

darwin on February 4, 2016 at 5:50 PM

I’m not going to repeat it just because you didn’t get it the first time around.

Misha on February 4, 2016 at 7:36 PM

Chances are good you would have beat the S&P 500 unlike trump and would have done that without 4 bankruptcies and needing to be bailed out by your sister.

voiceofreason on February 4, 2016 at 6:07 PM

Lol…yeah. With a few million bucks, especially after living like a normal person, I could do quite well.

Misha on February 4, 2016 at 7:41 PM

Chances are good you would have beat the S&P 500 unlike trump and would have done that without 4 bankruptcies and needing to be bailed out by your sister.

voiceofreason on February 4, 2016 at 6:07 PM

Beating the s&p 40 years straight is so easy to do.

Redstone on February 4, 2016 at 7:55 PM

TBSnitcher. Our “right to liberty” belongs to american citizens only. LEGAL american citizens, you stupid drip. Go complain to the UN, you legalized pot smoking, military degrading loser…..

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 8:51 PM

TBS. You are weapons grade stupid. You are truly dead to me…..

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 8:53 PM

Note to HA and TBS. No, thats not a threat. Thats a phrase that means TBS will be ignored by me from now on. So dont flatter yourself by snitching on me TDS. Youre not THAT important……

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 9:01 PM

Voicemails at Breitbart:

[inaudible]…from the Ted Cruz campaign, calling to get to a precinct captain, and it has just been announced that Ben Carson is taking a leave of absence from the campaign trail, so it is very important that you tell any Ben Carson voters that for tonight, uh, that they not waste a vote on Ben Carson, and vote for Ted Cruz. He is taking a leave of absence from his campaign. All right? Thank you. Bye.

The second voicemail was left at 7:29 p.m. from an Iowa phone number that Breitbart News traced back to a Cruz campaign volunteer hotline.

Hello, this is the Cruz campaign with breaking news: Dr. Ben Carson will be [garbled] suspending campaigning following tonight’s caucuses. Please inform any Carson caucus goers of this news and urge them to caucus for Ted instead. Thank you. Good night.

Ted Cruz’s campaign knew that Carson was not dropping out and went ahead anyways.

NWConservative on February 4, 2016 at 9:21 PM

You failed to mentioned that Daddy gave him a massive kick-start. lol

Misha on February 4, 2016 at 5:10 PM

So what’s your point?

darwin on February 4, 2016 at 5:19 PM

Remember when criticizing the 1% for their money was an occupy wall street slogan?

Apparently now Hot Air is full of Cruzers And Rubio superfans attacking the horrible wealth inequality we have in the United States.

NWConservative on February 4, 2016 at 9:31 PM

NWC. Its so easy to understand. Dont you see? The rich dont hold up their end when it comes to paying taxes…..its the drug dealers and welfare recipients that truly pull the apple cart. Until eventually, you run out of other peoples money to spend……

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 9:37 PM

When have you ever NOT supported the GOPe candidate? You supported McCain (2008), Romney (2012), and now Rubio.

You told us over and over that those candidates were the most electable against the Democrats and so we “TruCons” should shut up and support them.

Your candidates lost. But third time is the charm, right?

You are only infatuated with Rubio because he is a donor puppet and a completely owned GOPe candidate. At least McCain and Romney had some originality. Rubio has none.

If Rubio had not swung to the GOPe side after getting elected as a Tea Partier, you would most likely be shilling for Jeb! or Kasich against him.

The above all lends credence to the notion that you are a GOPe staffer. How much do you get paid for blogging here?

TheRightMan on February 4, 2016 at 2:32 PM

Why do people think they can remember who I supported?

In 2008, I supported Huckbee first. Then I swiched to Romney. AFter being very very angry for months… listening to Obama for a few speeches, I then reluctanly went to the polls and voted for McCain. Obama was scary.

In 2012, I started hoping Pawlenty would take off… I even tried to email Romney asking him not to run. T-Paw did not have any decernable personality and dropped out. Romney got in… I researched each in turn. I discovered none of the possible candidates was a serious choice, I then supported Romney. When Hot Air got toxic, I stopped coming here until after the election. Because I then got sick of the people who were destroying Romney and giving us Obama again.

This year. I think we have the strongest best group ever. I mean ever, they are truly well qualified proven conservative poeple. I waited to see who would catch on, no one really did. Trump took over and sucked all the air out of the room.

A few months ago, I decided it looked like it was down to Trump, Cruz, Carson and Rubio. And since Cruz, Carson, Rubio, and even Trump seem to have absolutely no differences in policies… I could support who I liked best. Rubio fit that bill. But so did Dr. Ben Carson. So I tried to support Ben, but he just didn’t know anything about foreign policy and he was a surgeon how could he be it.

So then Rubio for sure. But then he lagged behind the others… So I was just depressed.

Out of that great field no one good was getting traction.

Every single debate I started out trying to figure out what people liked about Cruz because Trump is Trump and he had to be third choice… then no, I just can’t like Cruz he is too awful.

Then it’s Rubio, Trump, Cruz. Then Trump ran away from Megyn Kelly spewing vile words, and I decided Rubio, Cruz Trump.

Then Cruz cheated and Rubio surged and yay! I have a candidate I can support!

But if Christie or maybe Kashish gets the nod out of New Hampshire… second look.

Never Bush. I hope I never have to vote for Bush he is worse than Trump or Cruz.

petunia on February 4, 2016 at 10:45 PM

NWC. Its so easy to understand. Dont you see? The rich dont hold up their end when it comes to paying taxes…..its the drug dealers and welfare recipients that truly pull the apple cart. Until eventually, you run out of other peoples money to spend……

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 9:37 PM

I am waiting for Cruzers and the Rubio superfans to initiate Occupy Hot Air to air their grievances against the 1% and the horrible wealth inequality present in the US and start flinging poo. Nevermind they have already done that last bit…

NWConservative on February 5, 2016 at 12:01 AM

Remember when criticizing the 1% for their money was an occupy wall street slogan?

Apparently now Hot Air is full of Cruzers And Rubio superfans attacking the horrible wealth inequality we have in the United States.

NWConservative on February 4, 2016 at 9:31 PM

Trump’s money is about the only thing there is to like about Trump, but you shouldn’t pretend he got it without that million dollar “loan” from his dad.

It’s hard to think anyone who starts out with the million (what year was that? So equalvilent to multi-millions today.) most people never see in one place their entire lives is actually a self made man.

Daddy Trump made Donald Trump.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, a legacy can be smart and capable. But, lying about it seems a bit defensive.

petunia on February 5, 2016 at 1:35 AM

Trump’s money is about the only thing there is to like about Trump, but you shouldn’t pretend he got it without that million dollar “loan” from his dad.

It’s hard to think anyone who starts out with the million (what year was that? So equalvilent to multi-millions today.) most people never see in one place their entire lives is actually a self made man.

BS. That is more wealth inequality covetousness crap.

He turned that “million dollar loan” into billions of dollars.

That is the very definition of a self made man.

Daddy Trump made Donald Trump.

More jealousy.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, a legacy can be smart and capable. But, lying about it seems a bit defensive.

petunia on February 5, 2016 at 1:35 AM

WHO’S LYING?

I am attacking the sudden urge for “conservatives” here to morph into occupy wall street democrats and start freaking out about the wealth of others.

He got help from his parents and it is frankly none of your business that they helped him. He took a million and multiplied it ten thousand times over to get 10 billion dollars from it. Quit freaking out about other people’s wealth.

Or do you want to start talking about YOUR last candidate you backed for president?

NWConservative on February 5, 2016 at 1:54 AM

The closeness of that analogy depend on the crime committed by that fugitive. So how about a fugitive slave running away from a plantation in the pre-Civil War South. That’s pretty similar to an immigrant whose only crime is exercising their own liberty, wouldn’t you say?

TBSchemer on February 4, 2016 at 7:34 PM

No, it doesn’t “depend” at all. You don’t get away with breaking laws “depending” how much you as an individual agree with them or not. And it doesn’t “depend” that your opinion of some illegal invaders is that they are nicer than other illegal invaders. You are being patently ridiculous; anyone working illegally in the U.S. is also committing social security fraud, forgery, perjury, wage violations, human trafficking or some combination thereof in addition to a laundry list of other misdemeanors. So no, this is not some “victimless crime” no one would ever know about. You are aiding and abetting criminals, and you should be prosecuted as well. Period.

CapnObvious on February 5, 2016 at 2:40 AM