Public Policy Polling is out with its first Iowa caucus survey since last May. Click here for full results or here for Tom Jensen’s polling memo. I enclose below highlights and my thoughts on the most interesting findings.
Any comments related to the Iowa caucus campaign are welcome in this thread.
Public Policy Polling surveyed 466 “Democratic primary voters” and 462 “Republican primary voters” between April 23 and 26, producing a statistical margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percent for the Democratic results and plus or minus 4.6 percent on the Republican side.
As has been the case in every poll of Iowa Democrats, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dominates the field. Among PPP’s Democratic respondents, she is the first choice for 62 percent, more than four times the level of support for Senator Bernie Sanders, in second place with 16 percent. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley received 6 percent and former Senators Jim Webb and Lincoln Chafee 3 percent and 2 percent, respectively. I was surprised to see that Sanders’ name recognition was 56 percent in this poll, way above O’Malley’s at 34 percent. O’Malley has spent far more time in Iowa over the past year and has been well-received by Democratic audiences.
Among PPP’s Republican respondents, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker leads the field by a relatively large margin, given how many candidates are in the mix. PPP’s robo-call format limits the number of candidates who can be tested against each other, so some likely contenders (such as Rick Santorum, Carly Fiorina, and Bobby Jindal) were not included in the questions about first and second choices.
Asked which of nine candidates they would “most like to see as the GOP candidate for President in 2016,” PPP’s respondents broke down as follows: 23 percent for Walker, 13 percent for Senator Marco Rubio, 12 for former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, 10 for both former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Senator Rand Paul, 8 percent for Senator Ted Cruz, 7 percent for Dr. Ben Carson, 5 percent for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and 4 percent for former Texas Governor Rick Perry.
Asked to give their second choice for the presidential nomination, 17 percent of GOP respondents were unsure, 13 percent each went for Walker and Rubio, 11 percent for Cruz, 9 percent each for Bush, Paul, and Huckabee, 8 percent for Carson, 7 percent for Perry, and 4 percent for Christie.
Walker also had better favorable/unfavorable ratings than any other potential presidential candidate PPP tested. Some 59 percent of GOP respondents view the Wisconsin governor favorably, just 13 percent unfavorably. A few other candidates scored over 50 percent for favorability, but all had slightly higher unfavorable numbers than Walker.
Quinnipiac’s poll of Iowa Republicans in February found Walker in a similarly strong position. He was first choice of 25 percent, well ahead of the second-placed Paul at 13 percent. Quinnipiac measured Walker’s favorable/unfavorable ratings at 57 percent to 7 percent.
PPP’s survey indicated Iowa Republicans are split down the middle on whether the GOP should nominate a candidate “who is the most conservative on the issues” or the one “who has the best chance of beating a Democrat in the general election.” 44 percent favor the most conservative candidate, while 45 percent lean toward the most electable one.
PPP’s Jensen observed,
The key to Walker’s success is that he’s winning both among voters who are most concerned about electability in the general election and among voters who are most concerned with having the most conservative candidate. Among voters who say being able to win in the general is their top priority, Walker gets 21% to edge out Marco Rubio (20%) and Jeb Bush (17%). His lead is much more emphatic among voters saying conservatism is their top priority- with them he gets 29% to 14% for Cruz, 12% for Paul, and 10% for Huckabee.
Since Bush has no chance among Republicans who prioritize conservatism, his path to improving his standing in Iowa is clear: punch holes in the electability narratives for Walker and Rubio.
Reading through the full results from PPP’s poll, a few other findings jumped out at me:
Christie has remarkably little to show for a dozen visits to Iowa over the past five years. He has drawn some large crowds and raised money for local GOP organizations, Governor Terry Branstad, and Representative Steve King, among others. Yet only 28 percent of respondents have a favorable view of him, compared to 50 percent who view him unfavorably. He’s near the bottom of the pack as the first choice of 5 percent and the second choice of 4 percent. In other words, Christie may as well give up on competing in Iowa. Bush’s ratings aren’t great at 38 percent favorable/37 percent unfavorable, but he’s doing a lot better than Christie is among less conservative Iowa Republicans.
Although Perry did relatively poorly in this poll’s ballot test, I see him as a candidate with room to grow in Iowa. By all accounts, his personal appearances have gone over well with GOP audiences this year. His favorable/unfavorable numbers are not bad at 50 percent/21 percent, and the cross-tabs in this document indicate that he has strong favorable ratings among those who currently pick Walker, Rubio, or Huckabee as a first choice. If one or more of those candidates crumble under attacks or underperform in debates, Perry could occupy the sweet spot Walker currently enjoys: not too moderate for conservative caucus-goers, but not seen as too “out there” for Republicans wanting an electable candidate.
The “tea party” brand has lost some luster, with only 19 percent of GOP respondents saying they consider themselves “a member of the Tea Party,” compared to 64 percent who did not.
Bob Vander Plaats’ endorsement is at best a wash for GOP candidates. Just 13 percent of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate Vander Plaats endorsed, while 17 percent said that endorsement would make them less likely to support the candidate, and 62 percent said it would make no difference.