Thursday, December 10, 2015

Trump Expands Lead in Latest CBS-NY Times Poll While Cruz Quadruples His Support

A CBS/New York Times Poll released today shows New York businessman Donald Trump greatly expanding his lead while Texas Senator Ted Cruz quadrupled his support.  In the poll, Trump leads with 35% of the vote followed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz at 16%, physician Ben Carson at 13%, and Florida Senator Marco Rubio fourth at 9%. 

Comparing apples to apples, the last CBS-New York Times poll, which was taken between October 21-25, had Carson in the lead with 26%, Trump at 22%, Rubio 8%, and former Florida Governor Jeb
Donald Trump
Bush and businesswoman Carly Fiorina at 7%.   Cruz had only 4% in that poll, tied with Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, Ohio Governor John Kasich and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. 

In the most recent poll, Paul has 4%, while Bush, Kasich, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Huckabee are at 3%.

One of the things I'm looking at is the total anti-establishment sentiment expressed in the polls.  If you look at the outsiders (Trump, Carson, Cruz, Fiorina and Paul) in the CBS-NY Times Poll, they are totaling 69% of the vote, a figure that's consistent with other recent polls..  Unless Rubio can successfully portray himself as anti-Establishment, I don't see a path to his victory.   I stand by my assertion that it appears that Ted Cruz is the only candidate positioned to defeat Trump for the nomination.

The nomination of Trump would be a disaster for conservatives. With the unpopular Hillary Clinton the almost certain Democratic presidential nominee, the Republicans are on the precipice of dominating all three branches of government as well as state legislatures and governorships.   The only missing piece is the White House. By nominating Trump, who consistently polls as the worst general election candidate against Clinton and exceeds the former Secretary of State in untrustworthiness, Republicans could well lose all 50 states.

But in the extremely unlike scenario that Trump won the general election, it is unclear what conservatives actually win.  Pre-candidate Trump held consistently liberal political opinions which didn't magically change 180 degrees until he decided to run as a Republican.  Trump has declared himself to be for socialized medicine, gun control, the use of eminent domain to acquire land for developers, and said he was "very pro choice," including supporting partial birth abortion.  Despite having changed several of his views (including his opinion on immigration and Muslims), Trump often appears to forget he is running as a Republican, reverting to pronouncing liberal positions on the campaign trail.  On the stump, Trump has expressed support higher taxes, an expansion of Obamacare, higher taxes and the continued funding of Planned Parenthood.  He also continues to stand by his support of the use of use eminent domain to take away a woman's house for parking for limos at his casino in Atlantic City.

One thing is certain.  If Trump is the nominee, conservatives lose before even the first shot of the general election is fired.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

What a sad state of affairs -- it increasingly appears that the choice for GOP voters is between the biggest demagogue and blowhard (that would be Trump) and the second biggest one, the Canadian Cruz....Paul, you rightly point out how much anti-establishment sentiment there is out there among the base, but you should also focus on the favorable/unfavorable numbers for both Trump and Cruz....they are not good. And I think you being too pessimistic when it comes to Trump's chances against Hilary -- I don't think she wins all 50 states -- I'd give her 40 states as the deep south will swing strong for the Trumpster -- same holds true for Cruz. This is not good for the GOP -- their lack of a deep bench and their idiotic and lunatic policy recommendations (my favorite one to date is Carly Fiorina's 3 page tax code) do not pose well for the long term viability of the party.

Paul K. Ogden said...

Anon, actually the GOP is doing very well at all levels and branches of gov't except for the federal executive. They have a much deeper bench that the D's.

You're right that Cruz has negatives too that are substantial, but they still don't yet rival Trumps which are off the chart.

Anonymous said...

Paul, yes the GOP does well in state and local races -- it's well documented how their base turns out well in all elections while Democratic-leaning voters apparently turn out in greater numbers for presidential races....but I also think that the GOP has benefited largely from gerrymandering the last decade or so -- I think the GOP would not be doing as well (control of state legislative chambers) if the districts were drawn more fairly....

Anonymous said...

Paul -- I don't necessarily agree with you about the GOP deep bench...Of the 14 or so left in the race, I'd say the only one who has any chance of a break through and is credible would be Rubio. Maybe Kasich. Christie killed himself with the bridge scandal and his overall bully demeanor. Huckabee? What a joke. Ben Carson? You have got to be kidding: the man is a dunce. Carly Fiorina? Yes, Zero based budgeting will solve all of our fiscal woes. W killed any chance for Jeb Bush. The others don't even deserve mentioning....

I think the GOP, in pandering to their base, has dumbed down the notion of a political party. And then in addition to the presidential panderers, you have got these embarrassing collection of fools throughout the country -- like Goemert, Steve King, Mike Pence, Bobby Jindal, and about 2/3 of the GOP caucuses in the Indiana General Assembly --

The D's may not have any one behind Hilary, but at least they congressional/gubernatorial ranks don't contain the number of embarrassments as the Grand Old Party

Paul K. Ogden said...

Anon 5:13,

Gerrymandering has been around for over 200 years. Both parties have benefited from and it and have been hurt by it. I don't remember the Democrats complaining about gerrymandering when they controlled the House for about 30-40 years last century. Nonetheless, you have to have a majority in the legislature to redistrict. Further, redistricting doesn't account for the Republicans success in the Senate and Governorships. Between the two parties, it's the Democrats that should be the most worried about their future. They are becoming the minority party for the first time since about the 1920s.

Paul K. Ogden said...

Anon 5:23,

I certainly think there are a lot of talented younger Republican governors out there, many of whom did not run this time around. I don't think you can seriously compare the GOP bench to the Dems. The GOP has them by a mile.

I think you're view on what an "embarrassment" is definitely jaded by your partisanship.

LamLawIndy said...

Paul, you and I both know that nationwide polls are fairly meaningless at this juncture. In Iowa, Cruz seems to have quite a bit of lift right now, and I just do not see the Trump strategy of getting new voters to caucuses working.

Paul K. Ogden said...

Lam, normally I would agree with you. But Trump has dominated the national and most of the state polls since summer. That is significant. I think conservatives would be foolish to not be concerned that this fake conservative might actually win the nomination.

LamLawIndy said...

Paul, I'm not saying that we shouldn't be concerned that a statist like Trump may win the nomination. I'm saying that I just don't think his Iowa strategy will work.

The best way to win Iowa is to target people who have attended caucuses before; a voter who's attended every caucus since age 18 is likely to attend in 2016. What's more, he's familiar with the caucus system. Cruz is going after THIS type of voter. Trump is banking on getting new voters to the caucuses, a difficult task even for a candidate with low negatives.

Paul K. Ogden said...

Lam,

I think Cruz will cruise to victory in Iowa. My concern is after that. I don't think Cruz's success will necessarily carry over to the other states and that means Trump could win the nomination which would be a disaster for conservatives.

LamLawIndy said...

Paul, we'll see. If Trump, Bush AND Christie go into NH (& presumably divide the vote of the non-religious, non-libertarian wings of the GOP electorate), Cruz may still win a plurality of the vote. Regardless, a Cruz win in Iowa will at least provide legs for lasting to the primaries in the South, which is more fertile ground for Cruz.

Anonymous said...

http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/16/military-strategist-explains-why-donald-trump-leads-and-how-he-will-fail/ Long article but Boydian analysis is quite common in the Armed Forces. Electing people with no Armed Forces experience seems like a great stupidity these days....