October 31, 2011

Why is Perry but not Romney or Cain beating Obama in the Rasmussen poll of Wisconsin voters?

Perry beats Obama, 46%/54%, but Obama beats Romney, 45%/41%, and Cain, 47%/42%.

I just don't get it. What's getting Perry those extra 4 or 5 percentage points here? Something about the empathy toward immigrants? The HPV vaccine? Is Wisconsin harboring some anti-Mormon or anti-black folks?

I genuinely don't know, and I also wonder what it might say about the recall effort against Scott Walker.

ADDED: Rasmussen has a new poll about Walker:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Wisconsin Voters shows that 38% Strongly Approve of the job Walker is doing, while the same number (38%) Strongly Disapproves. Overall, the Republican governor earns positive reviews from 49% and negative grades from 49%....

Walker’s overall ratings have improved since March, when 43% approved of his performance and 57% disapproved.  At that time, 34% Strongly Approved of the job he was doing and 48% Strongly Disapproved....

While 55% of male voters in the state like the job the governor's doing, 55% of female voters disapprove of his performance. 
What's with the sex divide? Well, that's not special to Wisconsin, is it? The Perry thing... that's what's puzzling.
Most voters under 40 disapprove of Walker, while the majority of their elders approve. Married voters and those with children in the home are more likely to approve of the governor's performance than are unmarrieds and those without children. 
These kids today!

Now, here is the most interesting statistic:
Just four percent (4%) of Wisconsin voters rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, while 60% describe it as poor. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of those who think the economy is poor give Walker favorable marks.

37 comments:

q12345q6789 said...

Um, maybe Madison, et al.
really, really misses Bush-Bashing.
And Perry is like, Super-Bush,
or something.

Good times are here again!

BarryD said...

Maybe people aren't all paying attention to the GOP primary debates. I know I'm not, and I'm more politically aware than the average person, I think.

Bottom line? Texas is succeeding, economically, where most states, especially Blue ones, are failing.

That might be all they're thinking about.

mesquito said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mesquito said...

That's just freaky. I doubt it can be replicated.

YoungHegelian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
YoungHegelian said...

The chattering classes have written Perry off because, well, he made a botch of it, and they have to have something to talk about. I'm not sure that the great unwashed lumpen-Republican masses see things that way.

In every poll of Repubs, Romney gets never gets more than a third of the total. That means that, even now, most Repubs aren't sold on Romney. They may end up being stuck with him, or the two thirds NOT ROMNEY vote may coalesce behind another candidate. That most likely candidate is still Perry, which is why Perry is second in the amount of money raised to Romney.

Remember 2008? The chattering classes thought that the R. Man to beat was Giuliani. Yeah, right.

IggyRules said...

People have the names confused. Their getting Perry mixed up with Cain.

Shouting Thomas said...

Woman are very much in favor of nice-ness.

That's the explanation for the gender gap.

Doing nice things for people is very important to a large percentage of women. The government should be nice to people.

Walker is not nice.

madAsHell said...

I dunno.

I think sometimes the pollsters have their own agenda....like Jounolist, the NYT, and global warming.

traditionalguy said...

My guess is that Perry is such a nice man who has been suffering for educating illegal's kids and preventing young women's cancer, that even Garage has begun to feel sorry for him. It's called the Compassion Gap.

Thorley Winston said...

Maybe people aren't all paying attention to the GOP primary debates. I know I'm not, and I'm more politically aware than the average person, I think.

Same here. Our precinct caucuses aren’t until the first Tuesday in February so we’re more than four months before we even get a chance to cast a (non-binding) vote on the issue. I’ve talked with a lot of my politically active friends and even the Ron Paul supporters are pretty “meh.” I suppose if I lived in a State that actually mattered (we haven’t gone Republican since 1972) or had a more active and earlier role in the presidential primary, I might find myself getting excited about it. As it stands, having moved to a new county, I’m not sure I can work up the enthusiasm to even register to vote.

Coketown said...

I suspect it's because voter sentiment on Perry crystallized quickly--within a week of his entrance into the primary debates most people had made up their minds on him--while people are waffling on the other two because Cain is still a relatively unknown candidate and Romney is a squishy moderate. There's less urgency to make up your mind on them.

It seems notable that Obama's number is consistent for each pairing--45, 46, 47--but the one instance in which he loses is the one instance where undecideds actually decided. To me, the Perry result suggests undecideds are breaking heavily for the Republicans.

Carol_Herman said...

None of them are "hot."

And, believe it or not, people are spoiled. They want politicians who make them feel excited.

Let alone actually deal with issues!

Worse, Romney for sure sounds "canned."

As to not liking Cain, believe it or not, it has nothing to do with his skin color! His skin color, however, is there for those who can't understand Obama's appeal. So they think they found a "substitute. Nobody's ever heard of! Even though lots of people can name favorite pizza joints.

In the old, old days, every state had a "favorite son."

Lincoln understood this walking into the Wigwam in Chicago, back in 1860.

Hey. Maybe, we could use a Hawaiian "favorite son" who can wiggle in a hula skirt?

We're sure missing something from the current group.

(Does this mean Donald Trump will come out of nowhere to run as an Independent?)

We need gypsies.

TosaGuy said...

More people will like Walker when they get their property tax bills in a few weeks and they will question the 58-year old retired gov't employee about what all the hubbub was about....when that retired guy gets back to Wisconsin from their winter home in the sunbelt state without income taxes.

Canuck said...

Is the difference within the statistical error?


If not, my best bet would be that Perry is getting an evangelical vote that won't go to Romney or Cain. Not sure why it wouldn't go to Cain unless his recent comments on abortion upset people.

Matt said...

BarryD

Bottom line? Texas is succeeding, economically, where most states, especially Blue ones, are failing.

Yeah, but the number of government jobs in Texas has grown at more than double the rate of private-sector employment during Perry’s tenure.

From 2007 to 2011 private-sector employment in Texas declined by 0.6 percent while public-sector jobs [government] increased by 6.4 percent, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.

So, yes, growth because of government jobs. I can get behind that but Perry has to admit it.

Sayyid said...

"I just don't get it. What's getting Perry those extra 4 or 5 percentage points here?"

Statistically insignificant. Based on those poll numbers, you can't say with sufficient certainty that Perry actually has 4 or 5 extra percentage points.

Hoosier Daddy said...

No offense but if Madison is indicative of the rest of the state, most of ya'll are nuts so there is no figuring that out.

edutcher said...

I have to agree with Barry D, which doesn't happen much, on the idea of TX successes.

It may also have something to do with a kinship with Walker's initiatives.

There may also be something to the idea that Perry is seen as more of an idea guy - flat tax, energy policy, $10,000 college degree.

Except for Newt, you don't see that much on a variety of subjects and certainly nothing on the Demo side.

Hoosier Daddy said...

So, yes, growth because of government jobs. I can get behind that but Perry has to admit it.

So Matt are you saying you approve of goverment job growth over private?

David said...

"Is Wisconsin harboring some anti-Mormon or anti-black folks?"

Quite possible.

Maybe they are making a judgment on experience and beliefs.

Or maybe they think he's Katie Perry's dad.

m stone said...

I think when you get down to it, real, homespun people in the Midwest, are probably emblematic of the nation as a whole where you find Perry to be the candidate of choice and the most impressive.

The media has distorted this fact and the White House has been using Cain as a deflection.

The deflection works, because Perry's winsomeness gets lost in the noise.

Mitochondri-Allie said...

Becuse Wisconsin Republicans are strange. They voted for Walker after all.

MadisonMan said...

Obama's numbers are pretty constant. The question should be: Why are Perry's numbers so high.

I checked the actual wording of the questions: If the 2012 election for President were held today would you vote for Republican Rick Perry or Democrat Barack Obama? That sounds good. But then there's this one: If the 2012 election for President were held today would you vote for that uppity Republican Herman Cain or Democrat Barack Obama? And this one: If the election were held today would you vote for Fake Republican Mitt Romney or Democrat Barack Obama?

That explains it. Always go to the source.

If they asked me the question, I'd immediately say: But the election is not being held today, so what does it matter?

(In reality: what Sayyid said)

DADvocate said...

Is Wisconsin harboring some anti-Mormon or anti-black folks?

Probably. Liberals view Romney as belonging to a conservative Christian sect and have a religious bias against that. Some conservative Christians distrust Mormonism and consider it a cult. Thus, Romney loses votes on both sides.

Liberals view Cain with disgust as he's a black man who refuses to be a slave to the liberal cause as all good liberals believe all blacks should be. And, there's a smattering of racism mixed in there somewhere. Lily white Wisconsin probably isn't comfortable with a 100% American, 100% black man as opposed to a half black man with an Ivy League education (although that black man is most assuredly less intelligent than Cain).

wv - terds (no shit)

Jon said...

"Why is Perry but not Romney or Cain beating Obama in the Rasmussen poll of Wisconsin voters?"

Because the poll is obviously garbage, an outlier like the PPP poll that had Obama beating Perry in Texas. The RCP polling average has Obama beating Perry by an average of 10 points nationwide. Another Rasmussen poll just days ago had Obama beating Perry by 7 points nationwide. There is no way in hell that Perry is winning Wisconsin while losing the country by 7 points or more, that's absurd.

edutcher said...

Mitochondri-Allie said...

Becuse Wisconsin Republicans are strange. They voted for Walker after all.

Clearly smarter than Democrats.

DADvocate said...

Intelligence is strange to liberals.

motionview said...

The Rasmussen methodology is compromised by a failure to sample cell phone users. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel
SurveyUSA has put up some incredible numbers showing the difference between land-line and cell only. If you are relying on Rasmussen because they use a realistic party demographic breakdown, they lose it on cell phone participation.

Carol_Herman said...

None of the 8 republican "contendahs" really has what it takes to make it in the general election.

Perhaps conservatives believed that if they just stayed enthusiastic ... their collective pick would win?

When Sarah was out there, the contest was much more entertaining. Even if you didn't like her, much. She managed to stay on track. And, she sounded like someone who had plenty of clues on what went wrong with our economy.

Then, she got picked apart.

And, like contestants on an amateur night, we're actually watching all the candidates flailing about ... but not catching on with lots of people.

Yes. Reagan fought an uphill battle. But pretty early on, he had lots of people on his side. And, he was fighting the GOP establishment.

Here?

Romney's your "establishment candidate?" You think he can win?

Perry just seems less canned.

But none of them seem like condendahs who could actually win a general election.

frank said...

Carol_Herman, aka, the 'thread killer'.

cokaygne said...

It is a relatively small sample. The differences are not statistically significant because the 95% confidence level is reported as plus or minus 4.5%. Apply 4.5% points to each candidate in a two candidate race and a spread of 9 percentage points could be a dead heat.

cokaygne said...

Matt,
Do not compare percentage growth of a relatively small number of public jobs wtih percentage growth of private sector jobs.

I don't have exact figures here, but let us say that public sector jobs are 20% of all jobs and there are 100 jobs in the economy. So, public sector jobs grow by 10%, which equals 2 jobs. Private sector jobs grow by 5%, which equals 4 jobs. Thus total employment grows by 6 jobs or 6%. The rate of growth in the private sector is less than the rate of growth in the public sector, but the private sector is responsible for two-thirds of total employment growth.

Joe Schmoe said...

To me, the reason Perry is still popular despite his lackluster debate performances is that he is the most unapologetic about conservative values. Couple that with his being a long-time governor of a conservative state. End of story.

Romney, not just by his words but moreso by his actions, has shown himself to be a lot more malleable. Cain is still pretty unknown at this point.

paminwi said...

"...55% of female voters disapprove of his performance. What's with the sex divide? Well, that's not special to Wisconsin, is it?"

I have a sincere question - what is it about women? Do they support Democrats because they think they will be taken care of by them and the programs they support? Or did they have wimpy fathers who taught them they needed to have someone take care of them? Or, did the women's movement not really work?

Really, I want to know why women vote for democrats because no matter what poll you see that is what shows up!

All I can say is, every day of my life I thank my father for showing me how to take care of myself, fend for myself, but still know you can give of yourself completely in a loving relationship but not lose yourself while doing that. Thanks dad!

wildswan said...

Maybe it is very clear to more people in Wisconsin than elsewhere that you can't trust the lame stream media. Maybe more people in Wisconsin know that the public sector unions will bankrupt the rest of us and not care. Maybe Wisconsin people watched OWS-type antics in Madison last year and more Wisconsin people see through them now. Maybe this part of flyover is somewhat ahead of the coasts and more people here know that drum circles cannot replace elections. Result - somewhat different thinking. Perry has shown he is not a debater-so what? Has he shown can he govern within budget, within the law? Yes, he has and he still has my support.

JackOfClubs said...

"Is Wisconsin harboring some anti-Mormon or anti-black folks?"

Eh? I can see how "anti-Mormon" might explain Obama > Romney, but how does "anti-black" explain Obama > Cain?