ChrisWeigant.com

GOP Polling Ups And Downs

[ Posted Thursday, September 24th, 2015 – 17:11 UTC ]

It's been a week since the second Republican presidential debates, and the polling data is finally in from multiple sources. So it's time once again to look at who is up and who is down in the horserace numbers (all polling data comes from the Real Clear Politics Republican nomination poll-tracking page).

First, a quick overview: the biggest winner of the second debate was easily Carly Fiorina, both in position and in raw poll numbers. The biggest loser depends on how you measure it -- by position, I'd have to say Ted Cruz was the biggest loser, but measured by actual poll numbers Donald Trump lost the most.

Fiorina was judged the winner of the first debate as well, but it never really translated into much of a bump in the polls for her. She did rise, but only slightly -- however, in the crowded bottom of the field, even this modest rise was significant. This time around, though, her bump was dramatic and noticeable no matter how you look at it. Fiorina jumped from seventh place before the debate all the way up to third place -- a monumental leap. Before the debate, her polling average was only 3.3 percent. It has now rocketed up to 11.8 percent -- a boost of 8.5 points, far and away the largest absolute gain of any candidate in the field.

Only three candidates in the top ten moved upwards in position, making Carly's rise even more dramatic. Kasich moved up one place, from tenth to ninth, but this was probably largely due to the collapse of Scott Walker's campaign more than anything else (before the debate, Walker occupied ninth place). Chris Christie made a dramatic step upwards, from 11th place to being tied for seventh, but his actual numbers didn't go up much at all. Even so, for both Kasich and Christie, this might guarantee them a spot on the stage of the next Republican debate (depending on whatever entry criteria they use).

There were four candidates who moved down in position after the debate, but the most significant is probably Jeb Bush, who used to be leading the race but is now only managing to hold on to fourth place (down from third before the second debate). Ted Cruz slipped two places, from fourth down to sixth. Mike Huckabee slid down one slot, from sixth to being tied for seventh with Christie, and Rand Paul continued his downward trajectory, falling from eighth down to tenth.

Here is the new list of the top ten, with their current polling averages:

(1)  Donald Trump -- 24.0
(2)  Ben Carson -- 16.3
(3)  Carly Fiorina -- 11.8
(4)  Jeb Bush -- 9.8
(5)  Marco Rubio -- 9.3
(6)  Ted Cruz -- 6.5
(7)  Mike Huckabee -- 3.5 (tie)
(7)  Chris Christie -- 3.5 (tie)
(9)  John Kasich -- 3.0
(10)  Rand Paul -- 2.3

Everyone else still in the race (Rick Santorum, George Pataki, Bobby Jindal, Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore) is still polling around or below one percent, and thus can easily be ignored in this analysis.

As you can see, just the jockeying for position in the race doesn't tell the whole story of what is happening. The three biggest winners, percentage-wise, were actually Carly Fiorina (up 8.5 percent), Marco Rubio (up 4.0 percent) and Jeb Bush (up 2.0 percent). The biggest losers were Ben Carson (down 3.7 percent) and Donald Trump (down 6.5 percent). All the rest -- Christie, Kasich, Cruz, Paul, Huckabee -- either lost or gained a single percent (or less).

So, by the numbers, Fiorina, Rubio, and Bush won support after the debate, and Carson and Trump lost support. While Fiorina leapt upward in the rankings and Bush fell one spot to accommodate her rise, the other three -- Trump, Carson, and Rubio -- all held their relative positions, even with the shift in their polling numbers.

The media has already proclaimed the beginning of the end of the Trump dominance of the race, but I wouldn't be too sure of that yet. Sure, he's fallen back a bit, but even the level he's at now is far better than anyone else in the race has yet managed. Ben Carson, however, might be the one who is about to fade away -- but that's just a gut feeling of my own, I should state, and not based on any hard data.

Fiorina is clearly the biggest beneficiary of the latest debate, but it remains to be seen how high she'll go. She'll likely hold onto one of (at the least) the top four positions heading into next month's debate, which will put her close to center stage. This might lead some of the other candidates to start scrutinizing her record a bit closer, so we'll have to see how that goes.

Jeb Bush, although he did slip from third to fourth place overall, actually improved his poll numbers at the same time, from 7.8 percent up to 9.8 percent. This ends a long downward slide for Bush's polling, which he's got to see as a good sign. Marco Rubio didn't budge from fifth place, but his polling dramatically improved, from 5.3 up to 9.3 percent. Ted Cruz held pretty even in the polling, and still occupies what might be called the bottom of the frontrunner pack. All the candidates below Cruz are polling lower than four percent, and none of their numbers seem to be dramatically changing (at least, for those left in the race -- Walker's numbers did spectacularly fall, which no doubt helped him decide to halt his campaign).

This might lead to the conclusion that only the top six -- those with more than four percent support -- really should be included in the next debate. They're the only ones who have shown the ability to garner any meaningful amount of interest from the voters, so they should be given the opportunity to make their case at greater length. However, this ignores the fact that one great debate performance can indeed vault a candidate into the front ranks -- as Fiorina just proved. Fiorina jumped from the sub-four-percent crowd all the way into double digits, after all. Every single one of the candidates still in that below-four group are all mightily hoping to follow in her footsteps in upcoming debates. After all, Carly even began at the "kids' table" debate, and look at her now!

Fiorina's dramatic rise certainly does disprove one piece of Washington conventional wisdom -- the assertion that "debates never matter." Looking at the polls before and after the second televised debate, it's pretty clear that debate performances -- good or bad -- do actually matter, at least at this stage in the race. Candidates can indeed dramatically rise or fall depending on how they do during debates -- perhaps even more so with so many people watching (the second debate also pulled in more than 20 million viewers, when early debates in a normal, non-Trump cycle usually only manage a few million, at most). Whatever happens next, it's impossible to say with a straight face that the second Republican debate "didn't matter," that's for sure.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

29 Comments on “GOP Polling Ups And Downs”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    How was it that Fiorina was judged the winner of the two GOP debates?

    Was it the veracity of her assessments? Perhaps, it was the depth of her policy prescriptions. Or, was it something else?

  2. [2] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CW-

    Various portents are telling me to walk a little further out on my limb:

    I think Trump's poll numbers are going to fade even more over the next week to 10 days, as new polls report in, and old polls are chucked out of the running averages. Ditto Carson. Fiorina's poll numbers looked very good this week, but I think it's likely she's peaked, and I wouldn't be surprised if she starts to fall back a bit...maybe more than a bit. All the talk about the Republican contest will focus on Rubio, who's polling and rank in the polls will rocket up. There will be serious concern (polite term for near panic) in the Bush camp.

    Over at THE DEMS, I see Biden trending up, Sanders trending down, Clinton retains top ranking.

    It should be a fun week to 10 days if I'm right!

  3. [3] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Liz: Something else - she basically punched Trump in the face. Now he doesn't look so tough.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That's right TS! If she can handle Trump, she can handle any world leader, let alone a Democratic congress. I mean, seriously.

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Wait a second ... NOW he doesn't look so tough? Whew, I was really worried that he looked pretty tough, there for a while ...

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's right TS! If she can handle Trump, she can handle any world leader, let alone a Democratic congress. I mean, seriously.

    You sound like a Fiorina fan, Liz... :D

    Michale

  7. [7] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "How was it that Fiorina was judged the winner of the two GOP debates?"

    Well, the bar is set pretty low, isn't it?

    She has a very angry and hostile demeanor that is appealing to angry, hostile baggers, too. She trolled Hillary the Email Anti-christ incessantly in the first pity debate and she lied passionately about a non-existent fetus video in the second debate. Mission accomplished!

    Getting a 40 million dollar golden parachute for firing 30,000 people and tanking a company won't wear well. She looks worse than Rmoney. Good luck to her.

  8. [8] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    First, a quick overview: the biggest winner of the second debate was easily Carly Fiorina, both in position and in raw poll numbers. The biggest loser depends on how you measure it --

    The bar is set so low, JFC, that there is no bar. The biggest winner depends on one measures it, too.

    The problem is that NO ONE seems to be measuring it in any way that counts. :(

  9. [9] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "The problem is that NO ONE seems to be measuring it in any way that counts."

    Trump says they're all losers and, at this point anyway, he seems to be right on the mark. None of them are out-polling the reality TV game show host.

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Gods, what I wouldn't give for a little objectivity around here... :D

    JFC goes on an on about money & Fiorina even though I have proven his claims are utter bullshit...

    Yet he completely ignores the greedy money hungry Hillary Clinton who made millions selling favors as SecState...

    As far as JFC's BS claims about Fiorina lying about the horror videos??

    In the video in question, a technician is talking about harvesting the brain of an alive, fully formed fetus. While she tells her story, there is footage of another baby of roughly the same gestational age as the one whose brain she harvested. This baby is seen still kicking and its heart still beating.
    http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/18/whos-really-lying-about-the-planned-parenthood-videos-carly-fiorina-or-the-factcheckers/

    It's funny how JFC attacks Fiorina for hyperbole, yet doesn't say word one in condemnation of the horrible practice of harvesting baby body parts for fun and profit..

    For someone who CHOOSES to ignore these horrible disgusting videos in favor of TRYING to score cheap political points??

    Reprehensible... Completely and utterly reprehensible...

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    The problem is that NO ONE seems to be measuring it in any way that counts. :(

    Let's be accurate Liz..

    No one seems to be measuring it in a way that YOU believe it counts...

    Let's keep our facts and our opinions straight, eh? :D

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Re #10...

    Don't forget to "ignore" me again, JFC. :D

    A million quatloos says you can't.. :D

    Michale

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wonder why no one asked the poop what he thought of those Planned Parenthood AKA Baby Parts For Sale videos....

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    TheStig wrote:

    As of 7:45 am Friday, the Betfair prediction market
    has a new Republican order:

    Bush, still number 1 but trending slightly down
    Rubio, a solid second trending up
    Fiorina, stalled, but stalled in third place
    Trump, Stuka dive to 4th
    Carson, what the hell happened 5th, wobbling

    Da Dems:

    Clinton, first, trending level
    Biden, zoom climb
    Sanders, opposite of zoom climb

    I expect the pollsters will start to show a similar pattern in a week to 10 days.

    TheStig is disconnecting for a few days to battle fish on a big lake....don't know if anything much is biting, but the weather looks dee-lightful.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    TheStig is disconnecting for a few days to battle fish on a big lake....don't know if anything much is biting, but the weather looks dee-lightful.

    Lucky you...

    I am sitting at home with the grand-babies awaiting the arrival of a NEW grand-baby...

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    Whooaaaa.....

    John Boehner Will Resign From Congress
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/26/us/john-boehner-to-resign-from-congress.html

  17. [17] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    No one seems to be measuring it in a way that YOU believe it counts...Let's keep our facts and our opinions straight, eh? :D

    I would be happy to be proven wrong about this.

    Can you enlighten me as to who has measured this presidential race in terms of what really matters by measuring the candidates' leadership ability and vision for the future? Who are winners and losers in those terms?

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Can you enlighten me as to who has measured this presidential race in terms of what really matters by measuring the candidates' leadership ability and vision for the future? Who are winners and losers in those terms?

    No I cannot.. But just because I can't name them doesn't mean they don't exist...

    Michale

    Michale

  19. [19] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    MIchale,

    Why don't you be the first, Michale ... you are the objective agnostic around here and so it would be fitting for you to be the judge of the candidates' leadership ability and vision for the future and, based on that, evaluate the winners and losers, so far, in this always consequential presidential race.

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am flattered that you have so much faith in me.. :D

    But it really is pointless to do so, so early in the race...

    Having said that I have already mentioned my picks... If one ignores Party dogma, each candidate has qualities to admire and qualities of leadership that would serve them well as POTUS...

    Michale

  21. [21] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    What I see beginning is the flavor-of-the-month pattern that we had in the 2012 election cycle (Cain, Bachman, Perry, et al).

    The one key point that challenges that potential pattern is whether there is a base support that Mr. Trump won't fall below, a floor if you will for his support (maybe 20%?). If that's the case, Trump will stay at the top until the field consolidates enough for someone to rise above his floor of support.

    Still, I sense a general dynamic in these very early months where leading polls tends to follow momentum -- kinda like sports teams where the fans start paying more attention to their team when its winning.

    Reminds me a bit of watching young children playing soccer -- the bumblebee swarm around the ball wherever it goes. Whoever's rising in the poll tends to attract even more momentum just because they're rising for now.

    That's not to say that the same dynamic doesn't exist on the Democratic side. I'm sure it's there too, just not as obvious or pronounced (couldn't see in 2012 because, as the incumbent, Pres. Obama was the presumed nominee throughout).

    Today it's Ms. Fiorina (R) and perhaps Mr. Sanders (D).
    Tomorrow?

    All meaningless until the first primaries in February. But fun to watch, like playing fantasy sports or the prediction markets.

    (Indeed, much of American national politics is like sports fandom with everyone wearing their blue or red jerseys and treating the opposing team as some kind of evil rival. The news stories read either like play-by-play sports announcers or obviously biased cheerleaders.)

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    In other words, rdnewman, the American political process, driven by a dysfunctional media and political culture, is largely a waste of time and money that ultimately discourages visionary leaders from entering a presidential race in the first place and encourages the kinds of clown shows we seem destined to endure.

    I do agree with you, though, that the GOP race is feeling a lot like the flavour-of-the-month that characterized the game in 2012. This time around, one might be excused for hoping for something more enlightening with the stakes for the GOP and for the rest of us being as high as they are.

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    In other words, rdnewman, the American political process, driven by a dysfunctional media and political culture, is largely a waste of time and money that ultimately discourages visionary leaders from entering a presidential race in the first place and encourages the kinds of clown shows we seem destined to endure.

    At THIS point in time...

    I am also constrained to point out that the Democrat Party Primary wasn't all smooth sailing during 2008...

    Ya'all seem to forget that in your haste to attack the GOP with anything and everything...

    I do agree with you, though, that the GOP race is feeling a lot like the flavour-of-the-month that characterized the game in 2012. This time around, one might be excused for hoping for something more enlightening with the stakes for the GOP and for the rest of us being as high as they are.

    Of course, you could look to the Democrat Party Primary for sanity and enlightenment...

    Oh... wait..... :^/

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    But if ya'all REALLY want to delve into the dynamic this early in the race...

    Hillary loses to EVERY possible GOP candidate... :D

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    After much delay and stubborness....

    Carter Jacob Worley has made his appearance, weighing in at 10lbs, 7oz..

    CJ tried to come out Superman-style (IE Hands First) which necessitated an emergency c-section...

    Mother and Superbaby are doing fine... :D

    Now we have 5 grandsons... Just enough for a basketball team! :D

    Michale

  26. [26] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    Congrats, Michale! I presume the superhero genetics are from your side... ;)

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Thanx, RD... :D

    I presume the superhero genetics are from your side... ;)

    There are no Hero-Complex genes anywhere in my family..

    I have them all... :D

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    my quatloos are still on another bush-clinton matchup.

    JL

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    my quatloos are still on another bush-clinton matchup.

    T-Shirt wager??? :D

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.