Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

New Polls Have Carson Surging While Trump Falls

New Polls Have Carson Surging While Trump Falls

Outlier or trend?

A poll released by Investor’s Business Daily Friday shows Dr. Ben Carson sailing past Donald Trump. While Trump’s numbers are steadily declining, he remains one of three contenders pulling in doubly digits in IBD’s poll, the third being Senator Rubio.

WEBprez100515_345.gif.cms

IBD writes:

The nationwide survey found that 24% of Republicans back Carson, compared with 17% who say they support Trump.

Marco Rubio came in third with 11% and Carly Fiorina fourth at 9%. Jeb Bush, once considered a prohibitive favorite, ranked fifth with just 8% support, which was a point lower than those who say they are still undecided.

The IBD/TIPP Poll has a proven track record for accuracy, based on its performance in the past three presidential elections. In a comparison of the final results of various pollsters for the 2004 and 2008 elections, IBD/TIPP was the most accurate. And the New York Times concluded that IBD/TIPP was the most accurate among 23 polls over the three weeks leading up to the 2012 election.

“Have we reached Peak Trump?” IBD asked. Fiorina continues to hover around 10% with Rubio right at her heels, and while Trump and Carson continue vying for the top spot, the last few weeks indicate Carson’s popularity continues to grow, steadily whittling away at Trump’s.

Real Clear Policy’s polling averages support IBD’s claims:

Screen Shot 2015-10-04 at 12.16.31 AM

IBD explains:

Other polls show Trump’s support slipping in recent weeks. The Real Clear Politics average of six national polls shows him falling from 30.5% in mid-September to 23.3% by the end of the month. That average does not include the IBD/TIPP findings.

“Things appear to be catching up with Trump on multiple fronts,” said Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, which conducts IBD’s monthly poll. “In addition to facing increasing attacks from other candidates, Trump’s boycott of Fox News may have set him back,” Mayur said, noting that the poll was being conducted during Trump’s self-imposed hiatus.

When asked on CNBC about his slipping poll numbers, Trump said that “if I fell behind badly, I would certainly get out.”

Carson’s gain comes after his controversial remarks on “Meet the Press” that he couldn’t support a Muslim for president.

Rubio’s third-place standing shows he has gained considerable ground since the second GOP debate. But Fiorina, who was widely seen as having won that debate, has been unable to capitalize on it with Republicans.

A new NBC poll shows similar trends:

Carson gained national attention late last week with a “I am a Christian” declaration following the horrific Oregon Community College shooting where reportedly, the shooter targeted Christians.

The next Republican presidential debate is scheduled for October 28.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I suspect that some of the regulars will be a tad upset with IDB.

    PhillyGuy in reply to genes. | October 4, 2015 at 11:16 am

    I don’t think IBD has that good of a reputation in polling. Plus why highlight that one when there other polls that came out the same day which show the exact opposite?

      Estragon in reply to PhillyGuy. | October 4, 2015 at 5:05 pm

      It’s a PPP poll. Traditionally they have leaned left, but were the most accurate in the last two cycles. But that is when it actually matters.

      – –

      NONE of the polls have much significance at this point. The record of poll leaders in either party in the year before the election is abysmal in seriously contested races. They mean NOTHING at all.

      Polls serve as an excuse for media to cover only the tactics and “horse race” status of the campaign, avoiding issues themselves (except where they can be used to embarrass Republicans). When conservatives and our pundit class join in the obsession, we are serving the vital interests of the Democratic Party, not the nation or our own.

    Our kind host might have to start incorporating a “Trigger Warning” at the top of any posts which offer anything less than full-throated panegyrics on The Donald.

    Trumpians seem to be a mite sensitive.

      PhillyGuy in reply to Amy in FL. | October 4, 2015 at 2:33 pm

      That doesn’t make any sense Amy. Kemberlee wondered if the poll reflected a trend or was it an outlier. Well the best way to test that thought process out is to examine other polls that were released the same day that covered the same time period. That way all of us can balance what we see. That seems fairly logical.

        Yes, it does make sense. Whenever there’s a post that’s not suitably pro-Trump, the Trumpians here get all upset and foot-stompy. Surely I don’t need to give you examples.

          PhillyGuy in reply to Amy in FL. | October 4, 2015 at 4:01 pm

          I am just referring to what Kemberlee posted. Taking one poll and making conclusions about it when you have others to examine seems a bit premature.

          Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | October 4, 2015 at 5:24 pm

          DUDE! Read! She referred to TWO polls and a POLLING average that has been used (unchanged…for CONSISTENCY) YEARS!

          CRIIIIIIIPES….!!!

      forksdad in reply to Amy in FL. | October 5, 2015 at 11:07 am

      Maybe if the poll wasn’t an outlier with a standard deviation or more between the other polls taken it might be worth your time to write this.

      To me this screams of “Oh good anybody but Trump”. And I prefer Carson. I would want to see the methodology of the polling and the numbers as well as the questions.

      Carly’s face should come with a trigger warning. Just look at it.
      Poor Liberal concern trolls now have to defend a candidate for a change.

      lol

Professor, do you have any idea who Ryan, running at 3%, is? I haven’t!

    Shakespit in reply to herm2416. | October 4, 2015 at 12:49 pm

    Of course the Ryan is Meg Ryan, the dried up old time actress from eons ago. Why would good old Meg be included in this weird little poll? Makes as much or more sense than anything else about this poll. All the other polls out in the last few days show Trump stable, improving a bit or improving a lot–up to 35% in a very good poll. Does anyone know anything about this little nothing of a poll?

    Shakespit in reply to herm2416. | October 4, 2015 at 12:53 pm

    Why, of course, darling, the Ryan is Meg Ryan, the dried up old time actress from eons ago. Why would good old Meg be included in this weird little poll? Makes as much or more sense than anything else about this poll. All the other polls out in the last few days show Trump stable, improving a bit or improving a lot–up to 35% in a very good poll. Does anyone know anything about this little nothing of a poll?

IBD is notoriously anti-Trump. Hedge fund managers who aren’t too thrilled with his tax plan. And how “accurate” is a poll that lists Paul Ryan still? Looks like they transposed Trump’s and Carson’s names — based on all other polls out there.

Real Clear Politics is also anti-Trump.

And all of this endorsed by The New York Times, which loathes Donald Trump.

Nice try.

    RCP doesn’t conduct polls, only reports them with a link to the source.

      PhillyGuy in reply to genes. | October 4, 2015 at 11:17 am

      They should report all the polls then. Not just a few.

        genes in reply to PhillyGuy. | October 4, 2015 at 1:24 pm

        They report the polls with the best reputations or best actual record.

          You are correct about what they attemt to do but problem is reputational factors are subjective and at best lagging indicators of past performance. In a change year election like this one those factors are subject to being wrong by a considerable margin, and it is quite possible some of the polls they exclude are more accurate than some of tge polls they do include.

          PhillyGuy in reply to genes. | October 4, 2015 at 2:28 pm

          Really? IBD has a poor reputation according to Nate Silver. The NBC/WSJ poll had a very lousy sample but they included both. I am not following your assertion.

          IBD has a poor reputation according to Nate Silver.

          He gave IBD a “B” in his pollster ratings. He gave Gravis, which does the OAN polling, a “C”. He gave Ipsos online, which does Reuters’ polling, a C+. So if you want to eliminate IBD polls, you also have to eliminate OAN & Reuters polls.

          http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/pollster-ratings/

          PhillyGuy in reply to genes. | October 4, 2015 at 4:04 pm

          No I wasn’t arguing to eliminate the poll just to include more polls. You are suggesting the exact opposite of what I wanted to do.

          You’re complaining about the inclusion of the IBD poll because IBD polling has a “poor reputation.” So your solution to that injustice is to throw two polls with even worse reputations into the mix.
          Okaaaay.

        Estragon in reply to PhillyGuy. | October 4, 2015 at 5:11 pm

        They report polls using the same criteria they always have: only those using standardized methods are included. Online polls with self-selected samples are not included because they are not valid statistically.

        Of course, if they are doing it wrong, you are free to start your own site and do it right. You’ll get rich, it’s called the free market.

    Ragspierre in reply to ZurichMike. | October 4, 2015 at 11:29 am

    Wrong, Mike. Hedge fund managers come out GREAAAAT under T-rump’s tax plan.

    You made the mistake of reading the fluff in the “plan”, some of which is an implicit lie, like “…ends the current tax treatment of carried interest for speculative partnerships that do not grow businesses or create jobs and are not risking their own capital…”.

    Really? Name one of those for us.

    It is ALSO anything BUT “revenue neutral”.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/trump-s-tax-plan-would-add-more-debt-obama_1038452.html

      ZurichMike in reply to Ragspierre. | October 4, 2015 at 11:56 am

      IBD is anti-Trump. RCP is anti-Trump in that it doesn’t post all polls. The NY Times is virulently anti-Trump.

      Don’t get caught in the weeks, Rags.

        ZurichMike in reply to ZurichMike. | October 4, 2015 at 11:56 am

        weeds

        Ragspierre in reply to ZurichMike. | October 4, 2015 at 12:15 pm

        Oh, I don’t get lost anywhere, Mike!

        I take it all in, and I think about it critically.

        Like “RCP is anti-Trump in that it doesn’t post all polls” doesn’t make any sense. What it DOES do is what it HAS done. Which is consistent. And what it DOES do is show trends. You may not LIKE the trends…consistent with everything it’s done in the past, but it isn’t “anti-Trump”.

        It IS data.

        RCP is anti-Trump in that it doesn’t post all polls.

        Here’s a list of the polls RCP is using for their latest average. Which ones are they missing?

          genes in reply to Amy in FL. | October 4, 2015 at 2:15 pm

          The ones that show Trump at around 40% national conducted by left wing news orgs that figure Trump will lose in November because he’s unpopular with independents, blacks,and Hispanics.

          They exclude Reuters, OAN/Gravis, and Zogby. I’m sure there are others.

          Genes, In a general election Trump will pull more black votes than any other republican except Carson. He will pull the Reagan demicrat union voters. No other GOP candidate will do that. He will pull more than enough hispan I c voters and he will cause a conservative gop turnout at the polls not seen in 30 years. Trump will be even stronger in general election than in primaries.

          Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | October 4, 2015 at 2:52 pm

          Awwww…

          The touching blind faith of the true believer.

          Is there anything more…I dunno…disturbing…???

          September 14th-19th, Trump was at over 30% on the RCP averages. How did that happen, if they have a systematic anti-Trump bias?

          Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | October 4, 2015 at 4:38 pm

          >>soto voce<<

          Amy, shhhhh. It was a RCP rope-a-dope to lure in the T-rumps, and earn a patina of creds.

          Guess who were the dopes in the roping…???

I hope Carson wins and Fiorina is his VP. A black man and a woman, both Republican. That would make liberals’ heads explode.

    GrumpyOne in reply to rokiloki. | October 5, 2015 at 8:39 am

    “I hope Carson wins and Fiorina is his VP. A black man and a woman, both Republican. That would make liberals’ heads explode.”

    Oh great… Another black man with no managerial experience, eh? How did such work out since January of 2009?

    No Thanks!

      forksdad in reply to GrumpyOne. | October 5, 2015 at 11:12 am

      He’s managed surgical teams of nearly a hundred. How many people do you think the president actually manages himself? What do you think his assistants and cabinet members are for?

Went to see who wrote this bildge, then thought why bother – I can easily guess and Yup I was right.

    If you don’t want to read anything but all pro-Trump cheerleading, all the time, why bother coming to a blog that actually reports the facts and, thanks to a wide range of co-bloggers, puts forth a diverse range of opinions?

I’m not surprised given the propaganda war against Trump. The left is also betting that a black man like Carson will eventually let racial politics trump all (so to speak) and go hard left just like Colin Powell did.

    genes in reply to randian. | October 4, 2015 at 1:26 pm

    Powell didn’t go left, he just took of his mask. Now he’s playing Step’N’Fetchit for his real party while still claiming to be a Repub.

      Powell pretends to be a Bush 41 big government interbationalist republican. His turning on those who made his career has been unseemly.

      GrumpyOne in reply to genes. | October 5, 2015 at 8:47 am

      Powell was a product of affirmative action which is reflective of his decision making of which the prime example was ending the first Iraq war before Schwarzkopf was ready.

      Then there is the rest…

It “may” show a decline in support for Trump. Hard to tell with so little information. The “R” voters polled could be registered R’s or independents leaning R. No data to tell which. The margin of error seems quite high at +- 5%. 377 total polled. Polls that sometimes have a decent track record close to the election were off months back.

Some pollsters are agenda driven. I do not know if this is one. My opinion, based on the lack of information, is it very well may be an anti Trump group. Other polls show just the opposite.

In a few more weeks we will know as other polls are updated. Short term trends can be an indicator, or short term noise, no way to know until it stretches out a bit.

    I’m not especially comfortable with polls which trumpet their headline results, but which don’t link to the actual poll questions and the methodology they used. I couldn’t find either for this IBD poll.

It is difficult to understand how two other polls coming out at the same time as the IDP poll both have Trump leading by far. Reuters has Trump at 32% with second place Carson at 12%. OAN/Gravis poll also has Trump at 33%.

Polling models make adjustments to their numbers based on assumptions of what mix of voters will turn out on election day. I suspect that these assumptions will not be very accurate for this election cycle and they explain why the polls showing Trump in the lead can have him leading at 20% while others have him leading at 33%.

Over the next two weeks more polls will come out and we will know for sure about the accuracy or inaccuracy of the IDB polls.

My guess based on the size of crowds the candidates draw is that the IDB poll is very flawed. Time will tell.

    genes in reply to garybritt. | October 4, 2015 at 1:29 pm

    Trump was 20-23% 2 days before these polls. Don’t think he gained 10% that fast. The LEFT wants Trump to be the nominee.

      It isn’t a matter of did he gain 10 points in a week. It is a matter of some polls show Trump in low 20s while others at the same time show him in the 30s. This has been true for a couple months. Rueters had him at 30% a month ago and at 33% now in their most recent poll.

      These large differences between polls reflect differences in assumptions and methodologies. Which are correct? We don’t know but if crowd sizes and enthusiasim are inducations then Trump is leading by a lot.

        genes in reply to garybritt. | October 4, 2015 at 8:54 pm

        2 days, not a week. That jump brings into question the 2 polls that have it. the other poll shows a drop that’s within the margin of error.

The sad news for Kimberlee is that this poll and all post debate 2 polls seem to show Fiorina’s post debate bump has fallen off as people learn more about her. She seems to have a ceiling between 6% and 11%. It will shrink further I suspect.

Her response to putin was the same as Hillary’s. Create a no fly zone and then choose between looking like a fool to the world when putin immed I ately sends some bombers in or starting world war 3 by shooting the russian jets down. Trump is the only one who gets what to do. There are no moderates in middle east. Assad has never wanted to attack usa homeland. We don’t know whether that would remain true if Assad goes. Let Russia attack ISIS and others in Syria and bomb and tgen take over the Iraq oil fields held by ISIS and take away their money.

    Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 4, 2015 at 1:59 pm

    Not that it has a damned thing to do with polling, but…

    you and your little yellow god are both foreign policy morons.

    “NATO’s supreme allied commander for Europe, General Philip Breedlove, was the first top Western official to publicly state that Russia’s new military infrastructure inside Syria, which includes anti-aircraft defense systems, was a de facto no-fly zone. He warned on Tuesday that Russia had created a new anti-access/area-denial bubble in Syria where U.S. planes could no longer travel.

    He said the “very sophisticated air defense capabilities” were not aimed at the Islamic State. “They’re about something else,” he said.”

    Putin’s adventuresome is the ME is like Hitler’s very early in the prelude to WWII. He won’t continue in the face of opposition. And T-rump is no opposition.

    Putin is forming an alliance with Syria and Iran. Letting him do that is as wise as letting Hitler establish a stronghold in North Africa. Or Japan in Indo-China.

    How’d that work out?

      Your entire response merely states Putin has setup an unannounced no fly zone. But we aren’t discussing Putin’s no fly zone. My pist had to do with it being stupid for Fi I rina and Hillary to espouse the creation of no fly zones in other parts of Syria because Putin would immed I ately send in his bombers to a target in that area and dare Hillary/Fiorina to shoot them down and start world war 3.

      So try to stay on topic.

      As to it being bad that Russia is filling the vacuum deliberately left by Obama yes it is but the question for the jext president is how to deal with this effectively without starting world war 3. Trump gets it and Fiorina/Hillary don’t.

        Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 4, 2015 at 2:33 pm

        “Putin would immed I ately send in his bombers to a target in that area and dare Hillary/Fiorina to shoot them down and start world war 3.”

        That’s a false dichotomy. And you’re too stupid or dishonest to read what I wrote and deal with it. When Kennedy faced down the Soviets, did THAT start WWIII? When Reagan faced down the Soviets, did THAT start WWIII?

        So YOU try to stay on topic. Like WTF does your BS about “Syria never attacking the USA homeland” have to do with policy in the ME? Sounds kinda Ronulan to me.

        AND deal with my points about Germany and Japan, instead of your silly assertion that “Trump gets it”. He obviously DOES NOT “get it”.

          My pist clearly deals with all your off topic nonresposive responses. The fact that you are unable to realize that doesn’t maje it my job to take you by the hand abd walk littke Ragzinn8 through it again. Reread my prior post but this time for comprehesion.

          As for facing down soviets you seem to think this is 1961 or 1984. It isn’t. And Hillary and Fiorina are not Kennedy or Reagan.

          I knew John Kennedy. John Kennedy was a friend of mine and Hillary and Fiorina are no John Kennedy.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 4, 2015 at 2:53 pm

          You have a vivid imagination. And nothing else.

          jayjerome66 in reply to Ragspierre. | October 5, 2015 at 5:07 pm

          TurdPierre, the “I knew John Kennedy” remark is a reference to the 1988 United States vice-presidential debate between Benson and Quayle, you moron. He’s not suggesting Kennedy was actually a friend of his, stupid. And the words subsequently became part of our political lexicon to deflate pretentious jerks like you for thinking too highly of themselves and obviously failing.

          He was snidely insulting you for your misuse of history, and obviously succeeding since the significience of his statement went over your bald head.

          Yeah, respond by saying you understood the reference but were referring to some other (fill in the blanks explanation).

          And by the way, in the polling data discussed above, where is your guy Ted Cruz sitting these days? Sorta of in the position as your reputation for intelligent grasp of reality – buried near the bottom.

          Looks like Trump continues to take a Dump on your unperspicacious political punditry.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 5, 2015 at 7:19 pm

          You have a vivid imagination. And nothing else.

      forksdad in reply to Ragspierre. | October 5, 2015 at 11:19 am

      We shouldn’t have gotten involved in the first damn place. But once we were we shouldn’t have been arming AQ, ISIS and their allies. The whole damn mess is of our making. We destabilized their neighbors, opened a power vacuum big enough to build a caliphate in, we provided arms and support saying it was for moderates but most has gone to AQ allies or ISIS. We lied about our objectives and who we were supporting.

      This is a mess we should back slowly away from and let Russia lead the way and beat ISIS and their ‘moderate’ allies. Is Assad a saint? No. Is he better than any of the real alternatives. Of course.

      If you believe differently you are wearing rose-colored glasses.

Sample size of less than 400 with error of +/- 5% which disagrees with 2 other major polls.

Hmmm.

Much as I like Carson, it’s too early for the polls to have much meaning, for me. Nobody has even voted in a primary, yet.

I really like the idea of Carson for President, because I think a person of his character and wisdom would be excellent in office.

I don’t think any polls at this point in the 2007-2008 or 2011-2012 GOP primary cycle ended up with the person who’d actually end up winning the primary on top.

On this date in the 2008 cycle, Guiliani was still on top at 28% with Fred Thompson right behind on 21%. McCain wasn’t leading in any of the polls till January.

On this date in the 2012 cycle, it was still Perry, Romney then Cain (which switched to Gingrich, Romney and Paul by December; Santorum, Romney and Gingrich by February; with Romney not becoming the clear front-runner till March).

There’s still a long ways to go.

Henry Hawkins | October 4, 2015 at 7:46 pm

The polls are meaningless until about May.

The headline should have read new “poll” not “polls”. On the same day Reuters had Trump at 34%. One of them is an outlier.

Trump, as Rush pointed out last Friday, erred in saying that if he went down in the polls he would quit. Well, the pollsters have taken him at face value and presenting poll results to ensure he quits.

    Radegunda in reply to Juba Doobai!. | October 4, 2015 at 10:56 pm

    You’re assuming that Trump always does what he says he’ll do. Never mind that sometimes he makes contradictory statements what he’ll do.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Radegunda. | October 5, 2015 at 4:55 pm

      Having changed his party registration four times since 1999, Trump might not even be a Republican by the time the primaries start. Sometimes the wind changes direction, and if anything is made clear by four party changes in sixteen years, it is that Trump minds wind direction and adjusts accordingly.

      I’m a Republican! Nope, I’m a Democrat! Nope, I’m an Independent! Nope, I’m a Republican again! He also ran for the nomination in the Reform Party, so you could call it five changes in sixteen years.

      Why do people think Trump will stick with what he’s currently saying when he changes principles, policies, and party affiliations like a teenager changes clothes?

        forksdad in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 5, 2015 at 6:31 pm

        Both primary systems are rigged against party outsiders but it is possible to stay in for a man like Trump. He has to know that he would never get elected as a Dem. They despise big business unless it is crony capitalism. They are explicitly, pro criminal and pro leach. They absolutely need illegal immigrants.

        The Rep base knows the party does not need illegal aliens just the party elites. They know that we would have more jobs without a race to the bottom on wages and hours. JOe Average lives with the crime, changing neighborhoods, and schools etc.

        That’s why Trump will stick with the Reps because the base agrees with him.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to forksdad. | October 5, 2015 at 7:35 pm

          Five party changes in sixteen years says Trump certainly does not stick with much of anything very long.

          forksdad in reply to forksdad. | October 6, 2015 at 6:48 pm

          Agreed. Like I said Carson is my choice. Trump is in it for at least the rest of the year. Maybe next year. If he can squeeze past the gate keepers on the primaries he’ll be the nominee. If not he’ll keep shoving the Overton window on immigration and outsourcing either way it’s better than what we have.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend