New LAT Poll: The also-rans are also running

Much of the attention focused on new polls, like today's Times/Bloomberg poll, centers on the front-runners as people try to read into their numbers predictions about the ultimate winners come Jan. 3 in Iowa and Jan. 8 in New Hampshire.

Those new front-runner numbers can be found here. Basically, they show among Democrats that Barack Obama has erased Hillary Clinton's once commanding lead in New Hampshire and the two of them plus John Edwards are in a three-way statistical tie in Iowa. Among Republicans, the new numbers show that Mike Huckabee has erased Mitt Romney's long-running, hard-bought lead in Iowa and opened his own 14-point advantage.

But in New Hampshire, where evangelicals are much fewer, Huckabee is way back at 9% while Romney leads with 34%, a surging John McCain is second at 21%, up from 12% in September, and Rudy Giuliani in third with 15%.

Though usually overlooked, the polling question is not, "Who will you vote for on Jan. X?" It's something like, "If the voting was today, who would you vote for?" So today's poll (actually Dec. 20-23 and 26 with more than 3,400 people in both states) is a current snapshot, which offers at least some hope to also-rans way back in the pack. How are they doing?

Among Iowa Democrats, Sen. Joe Biden got 6% among likely Democratic voters and 4% among Democrats. Bill Richardson got 7% among likely voters and 6% among Democrats. Dennis Kucinich got  2% among likely voters and Democrats and Chris Dodd received half that support -- 1% -- in both categories.

In New Hampshire, Biden and Kucinich both got 2% among Democrats and 1% among likely voters while Richardson received 5% among Democrats and 4% among likely voters. Dodd, who's focused entirely on Iowa by literally moving there, got 0% in both categories.

Among Iowa Republicans, Fred Thompson got 11% among Republicans and 10% among likely voters. Ron Paul received 2% among Republicans and 1% among likely voters while Duncan Hunter got 1% among Republicans and 2% among likely voters. Don't Know scored 9% among Republicans and 7% among likely voters.

In New Hampshire, Dr. Paul did best of this sub-group scoring 4% among Republicans and 6% among likely voters, better than the better-known Thompson at 4% and 4%. Hunter got 1% and 1% while Don't Know was 11% among Republicans and 8% among likely voters. Paul's fervent supporters, who've donated nearly $19 million this quarter alone, are counting on under-reporting of their numbers to produce a primary surprise, possibly in New Hampshire.

One other set of interesting numbers, the voters' decisions seem to be hardening with more than 71% of Iowa Republicans and 57% of New Hampshire Republicans certain of their vote now. Among Iowa Democrats, 71% are now certain of their vote while in New Hampshire the certainty factor is 65%. The new poll's complete data base is here.

One other statistical certainty: All of these numbers will change before the votes get counted.

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[Doug]

And if you believe Duncan Hunter has one-tenth of Ron Paul's support (let alone one-half), I've got some ocean front property in Des Moines you might be interested in.

[CNN]

Based on this http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2007-12/34457997.pdf you only allowed "likely Republican voters" to vote for Ron Paul which means many of his supporters were excluded. Just for kicks.. and to squash the doubt that Ron Paul supporters have on your poll - do another and include people:
- who do not have land lines
- who haven't voted in recent elections
- who might switch parties for this primary

(Yeh, right. Will get right on it.)
- who are registered as independents

[Theo]

Third or better. Watch.

Nothing you can do about it, Andrew.

(Oh, but I can write about it if it happens.)

[AK]

OK, when is the last time you had a machine call you, and you actually did *not* hang up? Or how was this 'poll' done? Live people calling?

While I know it is not bullet-proof (or stuffing-proof), I kinda like the AoL Straw Poll - over 300k votes, Hillary 1st w/66k, Dr Paul 2nd w/51k, Barack 3rd w/40k
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/12/21/straw-poll-dec-21-jan-4/

As far as the Republican vote (163k votes), currently only NY & NJ are Giuliani, all others Paul - looks like a discrepancy to me. Only 51k for Ron Paul? And how many of these are 15y olds?

Tell us more about the LAT poll, and how was it done, please!

Ciao,
AK

BTW, I came here in 1984 from central Europe for reasons that are now commonplace here. So I'm looking for a place to live in the 'old country'. :-|

(The item has a link straight to all the poll data. click on it.)

[ryan rabalais]

ron paul will be the next president of the united states
and you are a moron

[Tim]

Paul and Kucinich must be splitting the abducted by aliens vote.

[Rex Y]

I'm a bit dismayed at the apparent lack of support that Dr Paul draws. I would have thought that this late in the game he would draw a larger support base among more traditional voters. In fact, the poll shows less support for Dr. Paul than some other recent polls. Odd, I think, given the fund-raising success that Dr Paul has enjoyed.

I'm frankly amazed that Fred Thompson still has any support at all, and my eyes popped at the double digits that he's still pulling in Iowa. Is there still some possibility of another actor as president? Perhaps he's still supported because he's viewed as an outsider; a misplaced viewpoint if true. He does have something in his favor: Nixon disliked him.

McCain and Obama must both be dancing about the room given their respective New Hampshire surges. Neither fellow is my ideal, but I might be able to live with either as president.

Huckabee, though, scares the pants off of me. His comment, "we are one nation" in one of the debates worries me a bit and seems to suggest a fundamental misunderstanding that this is a constitutional republic of semi-independent states. But, then, our current president seems to forget that, too. Is it possible that we err in electing states' governors as president? I guess I'm rather sick of presidents and their administrations reaching to expand presidential authority. I really don't want so much to ride on one personality or opinion.

oh well. Back to the poll . . .

Did anybody notice how different NH independents were from the respective republicans in their reason for supporting a particular candidate? The economy was apparently quite important to this particular group. I'm not really surprised that the economy was so important, just that this particular group deviated so much from other republican voters.

On that question, the Democrats answered "other" fairly often. Want to bet that the answer to that is "Because I'm tired of what the republicans are doing?"

Here's a question I can't find an answer to: Why is there no listing for independent in the Iowa republican results? I skimmed through the document, but didn't see any mention of this. Was it because the sample size was small?

One more thing and I'll end this wordy comment: In your post you link to the "complete data base." What you linked to is no such thing, but instead the computed results. You really got my hopes up when I thought that I was going to get to play with the raw numbers. harrumph!

I've come to enjoy reading your posts. Thanks.

-rex

[David Kaftal]

How stupid do you think we are? No wait, the garbage you keep trying to make us believe shows how much contempt you have for us.

Everybody knows that Ron Paul is the people's choice, and that the LA Times and the rest of the Bilderberg-controlled media is lying to us about him. You've become so comfortable helping to engineer stolen elections that you morons aren't even bothering to cover your tracks or wipe off your fingerprints any longer.

Does the word "treason" appear anywhere in your AP Stylebook and Libel Manual?

[John Soppes]

You have got to love these reports...the "news" is never about the policy debates. Its always about who is doing better in the polls. It is hard to tell if the results are because of biased media coverage or biased polling. Someone should do a poll of likely voters and ask them to name as many presidential candidates as possible. What is interesting is that Fred Thompson a former "top tier" candidate is being lumped in with Paul now. I find that hysterical because the media was pushing this guy so hard and he has fallen flat on his face.

What will the story be when Dr. Paul gets 15% or more of the votes in Iowa?

It appears the author of this story is already preparing for such an event. "One other statistical certainty: All of these numbers will change before the votes get counted." Register republican and vote for Ron

[Matt]

Andrew,

You are quickly gaining credibility!!!! NOT!!!!!! Keep it going with the Ron Paul Bashing. Do you actually believe that Ron Paul is going to get 4% of the vote.

What kind of poll is the LA TImes running? POLLS FOR IDIOTS

Wake up and smell the coffee. You are part of the solution, not the problem.

GO RON PAUL.