Lion of the Blogosphere

Trump surges in CNN telephone poll

Latest CNN poll, and this is a poll conducted by human telephone interviewers, the kind of poll where Trump always had lower poll numbers.

Based on 278 registered voters who describe themselves as Republican and 167 who describe themselves as independents who lean Republican (4.5% margin of error), Trump now has 36% support, and Cruz is in second place with 16%, Carson 14%, Rubio 12%. We don’t see the Bush surge that we saw in the Reuters internet poll. Bush is down there at only 3%.

Even more significantly, among the same subgroup of respondents, 52% think that Trump has the best chance of winning the general election in November. Also notable that 46% think Trump can best handle ISIS, and this poll was conducted during the three days right before the jihadist shooting in San Bernardino. More voters think Trump is the competent candidate than actually support him right now.

Once again, let me bring up the 2008 election in which Rudy Giuliani slipping away after leading in the polls for a long time has always been considered by the Republican and MSM establishment as proof that the same thing would happen to Trump. Rudy faded away in December. Here, we have the first telephone poll conducted during one day of December, and Trump is actually surging. Furthermore, the San Bernardino attack is going to cause Trump’s popularity to rise during the next week because voters think he’s the best at handling ISIS.

* * *

Meanwhile, on the same day this new poll is released, David Brooks at the NY Times insists that Trump won’t win. Read the polls David.

* * *

In Vigo County, Indiana, which has voted for the winning presidential candidate in every election since 1952 (in which they voted for Adlai Stevenson instead of Eisenhower), the most popular candidate is Donald Trump.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 4, 2015 at 9:03 am

Posted in Politics

18 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I looked up the 2008 numbers, Rudy didn’t really fade that bad in December. Of course by then it was already over because he was polling so terribly in IA and NH. The 2008 polls were actually right because after NH, Guiliani’s support simply migrated to McCain.

    The real analogy to Trump is Dean, as I’ve said before. Dean was winning nationally, although not as big as Trump is now AND he was winning Iowa. It was after coming in 3rd in Iowa that his campaign imploded.

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 4, 2015 at 10:00 am

  2. ” More voters think Trump is the competent candidate than actually support him right now.”

    Some people would rather vote for a bad candidate who behaves well than a good candidate who behaves badly. But I’ve never had much respect for people who put style over substance.


    December 4, 2015 at 10:01 am

    • Trump’s bombast is the only way a nationalist political figure can push his message through the ubiquitous leftist filter of the mass media and make it stick. If Trump behaved like George Washington his message would be swallowed up by the press and spat back in his face. Trump could not win any other way than the way he is doing it now.

      Andrew E.

      December 4, 2015 at 10:21 am

    • I guess what I’m saying is that Trump’s number one job as a candidate is not to win over voters to his side but to fight against the media constantly and without mercy. The voters will have to see for themselves that Trump is the most substantive. Many noticed it right away, hence is quick rise to 25%. More have been seeing it along the way, now 36%. Most of the rest, who are honest and really care about the country, will come around before it’s all over.

      Andrew E.

      December 4, 2015 at 10:37 am

  3. Giuliani and Dean are both bad comparisons to what Trump has done so far. A better fit is Romney in 2012. The story of the 2012 primary race was one loser after another rising in the polls, peaking, and then sinking back down to insignificance as the anti-Romney vote danced around, trying vainly to find some candidate who would catch fire. Meanwhile, Romney trucked along at a steady 20-25% of the vote, outlasting all contenders. He tended not to poll as high as Trump has this year, so one of the peaking losers sometimes surpassed him, but the real takeaway of 2012 was that the resilience of his support cut through the disunited opposition.

    That’s the same thing happening this year, except that Trump is in an even better position than Romney because his lead over his opponents has been larger and much more consistent. Pundits like Brooks have a hard time seeing this because they wanted Romney to win, while they desperately want Trump to lose.


    December 4, 2015 at 11:48 am

  4. How is Dean a bad comparison? He is an almost perfect comparison:

    -hits on a hot button issue the establishment is afraid to touch
    -tons of grassroots/internet support
    -although seen as too radical for the general, nevertheless demonstrated some crossover appeal
    -leading in the national and early state polls all the way up until the last month
    -extremely passionate supporters
    -anti establishment
    -leader of a giant, fractured field
    -loud, abrasive personality

    Trump’s campaign has nothing in common with Guiliani’s, but a ton in common with Dean’s.

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 4, 2015 at 12:43 pm

    • Dean dropped in the polls in January. But he never had 30%+ support like Trump has.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 4, 2015 at 12:48 pm

    • Big difference. Dean was not a completely financially independent billionaire with a genius level ability to manipulate the mass media to his pruposes.

      Trump is sui generis, a one-off.

      Andrew E.

      December 4, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    • You’re focusing on the uniforms they’re wearing (anti-establishment), not what’s actually happening on the battlefield (polling). Dean never steadily led. For most of the year he was in a close match with Dick Gephardt, but they pummeled each other out of the race through negative advertising, allowing sleeper candidates Kerry and Edwards to surge ahead of them into the top tier. A comparison would make sense if all year it had been a two-man race between Trump and Jeb with The Donald enjoying only a narrow margin.


      December 4, 2015 at 1:46 pm

      • Dean steadily led national polls with about the same numbers as Trp and NH polls by more. It is IA where both have struggled to keep a steady lead but Dean led there pretty often, too.

        The key is that the Establishment had the MSM crying about unelectable extremism while Gephardt was attacking Dean as a covert Republican. Gephardt was never more than an attack dog and his campaign was never viable nor did it poll well. But he had lots of money — like Jeb! and some others. So Gephardt took one for the team — at Hillary’s request, probably, since she wanted Bush to win and clear her 2008 field. Gephardt threw in everything to drive down Dean.

        Dean, like Trump, is more centrist than his party. Dean was attacked for cutting spending, balancing budgets, winning straight A+ from the NRA, having a successful market oriented health reform, and all the rest of the issues that would have been so good in the general. Meanwhile they all called him a far left radical and unelectable.

        It’s the same way they’ll attack Trump. Like Dean, Trump is a moderate vulnerable on attacks on abortion, entitlements, working successfully with Democrats, and more. All that will sink him even though they’re his best virtues. Meanwhile the immigration issue where 80% of Rs and a majority of Ds agree with him will prove in MSM that Trump is an unelectable radical.

        They’ll run exactly the same game plan they ran against Dean and it will take Trump down as well. I’m proudly planning to vote Hillary over Rubio because she’s much, much better. I’d sure like to be able to vote Dean or Trump though, because I love my country.


        December 4, 2015 at 4:20 pm

      • Dean didn’t have a steady lead in national polling like Trump. For most of 2003, there was a tight clump of several candidates around 15% with one guy or another trading places. It wasn’t until December ’03 that Dean surged ahead with about 25%, but this was a flimsy lead, since if you look at the link I’ll add, the “Don’t know” vote often equaled or exceeded Dean’s numbers in polling. Nothing like Trump this year.

        As for Iowa, Dean’s people knew his national lead was chimerical and his fate depended entirely on his performance there. Dean and Gephardt attacked each other because until very late, they were the two main contenders; it’s in error to say Gephardt didn’t poll well when polling all year consistently put him first or second until the very last week. Though Trump isn’t as reliant on Iowa as Dean was, his lead in state polling has been longer and more consistent.


        December 4, 2015 at 5:59 pm

    • Dean isn’t a billionaire. When his funding dried up, he had to quit.


      December 4, 2015 at 3:38 pm

      • Dean had enough money to continue indefinitely. We were sending him piles on the internet every week. He had more than the leaders long after the race was decided.


        December 4, 2015 at 4:29 pm

  5. No one is comparable to Trump. Giuliani is a good comparison in one way (loud, brash New Yorker) but a terrible comparison in another: Giuliani was a short, dark-skinned Catholic ethnic. No way would a Rudy Giuliani be elected to the WH. Kennedy was a near WASP and very handsome. Obama is an exotic with a black American wife.

    Trump is blond and Presbyterian, half-Scottish and half-German, and very tall. (He’s about 6’2″, he only looks short next to Jeb, who is a gangly oaf.) He can get away with a lot more than Giuliani.

    The poll is interesting. The two times that county didn’t go with the majority, they went further to the left in conventional terms. I think they went more populist – as they are doing this time.

    I still think that GOP-e will steal the nomination from them. They loathe him.


    December 4, 2015 at 3:37 pm

  6. “Giuliani was a short, dark-skinned Catholic ethnic. No way would a Rudy Giuliani be elected to the WH.”

    You seem to be discounting the fact that this isn’t what was being said in November of 2007. Everyone was taking the polls seriously – even people who had said all year long that Rudy had no chance. And it’s doubtful that the Kerik scandal is really what caused him to tank. In the internet age information is too easily accessible to claim that people only found out damaging evidence because the mainstream media decided to make it an issue. The likely answer is that the voters were simply using him. Whether they are using Trump in a similar way is something we’ll find out within two months.


    December 4, 2015 at 5:35 pm

    • Again, Giuliani’s support cratered AFTER he did not compete in the first 3 states. He never had a chance in Iowa, NH or SC. His support naturally migrated to McCain who was extremely similar politically to him.

      The Dean comparison is solid but there is zero comparison with Giuliani.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 4, 2015 at 7:09 pm

  7. And the reason he didn’t compete in the first three states is because the more he ran commercials there, the lower his support in that state fell. He had to create the illusion of the firewall in Florida in order to avoid looking like a loser. But the biggest problem I have with of all this Trump support being real is that I don’t see why if there’s a genuine constituency for deporting illegals, the other candidates would not exploit it by taking a bolder stand. There really is no reason to believe that a big gap exists between the people and their leaders in either party. Often when the public claims they support a policy it really means they would support it in an ideal world. Example, everyone says they want government spending to decrease, but people always want their pet projects/subsidies funded. Similarly, people often claim that American schools are in need of improvement but will claim that their own children’s schools are fine. The public can say what it wants to pollsters because it isn’t held accountable. Whereas politicans individually are held accountable for what they say.


    December 4, 2015 at 8:11 pm

    • The other candidates don’t talk about getting rid of immigrants because they themselves are part of the DC bubble and support mass immigration.

      Keep in mind, 1/3 of the Republican party rank and file also support mass immigration, along with the donors. So it makes perfect sense that candidates fighting for the establishment mantle would go all in on open borders, they aren’t going to appeal to the other 2/3 on immigration regardless and they need the donor money and support that only comes with supporting open borders.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 4, 2015 at 11:45 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: