VA-PPP: Huckabee 21% Gingrich 20% Palin 17% Romney 15% Paul 7% Pawlenty 5%

[Mr. Morden]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_VA_1118.pdf

Huckabee 21%
Gingrich 20%
Palin 17%
Romney 15%
Paul 7%
Pawlenty 5%
Daniels 3%
Thune 2%

favorability/unfavorability among Republicans:

Mike Huckabee 72%/18% for +54%.
Sarah Palin 70%/24% for +46%.
Newt Gingrich 64%/20% for +44%.
Mitt Romney 63%/22% for +41%.

[Mr. Morden]

who leads among:

men: Gingrich
women: Huckabee
under 30 years old: Palin
30-45: Gingrich
46-65: Huckabee
over 65: Gingrich

[California8429]

I was sorta surprised at such high showings for the others. But hurray for Gingrich

[Whacker77]

I'm surprised Huckabee receives the support he has.  He's a skilled speaker, but his conservatism is social issues based.  The top four just suck.

[Ben Romney]

I am surprised!!
I would have thought Palin or Romne ywould leading in VA

[CatoMinor]

Red- Giant Douche; Blue - Huck, Pink - Palin;Light Green - T-Paw; Green - Gingrich

[Poundingtherock]

Hillary,

Why would you think Palin would be leading in VA?  It's a below-average state for her in the 538  model.

[tpfkaw]

Relatively good showing for Paul (tied for second among 18-29s!).

I'm surprised at Palin leading among youngs.  I'd have guessed Huck.

[California8429]

Relatively good showing for Paul (tied for second among 18-29s!).

I'm surprised at Palin leading among youngs.  I'd have guessed Huck.

but these guys are the least likely to vote. Granted, if he was actually tied, he would win them in the primary since nobody else would show up.

[tpfkaw]

Relatively good showing for Paul (tied for second among 18-29s!).

I'm surprised at Palin leading among youngs.  I'd have guessed Huck.

but these guys are the least likely to vote. Granted, if he was actually tied, he would win them in the primary since nobody else would show up.

I think that we can expect substantially higher turnout from Paul supporters than others (his support may not be wide, but it is deep).  I believe it was the youth vote in the primaries that pushed Goldwater over the top in 1964.

[California8429]

Relatively good showing for Paul (tied for second among 18-29s!).

I'm surprised at Palin leading among youngs.  I'd have guessed Huck.

but these guys are the least likely to vote. Granted, if he was actually tied, he would win them in the primary since nobody else would show up.

I think that we can expect substantially higher turnout from Paul supporters than others (his support may not be wide, but it is deep).  I believe it was the youth vote in the primaries that pushed Goldwater over the top in 1964.

That's what I'm saying. Say the primary was tomorrow, I would expect a Paul win in the age group by a reasonable margin, but I would also expect the youth to make up minimal amount of the vote.

[Ben Romney]

Maybe I dont know much about VA at that point!!

[Poundingtherock]

If Romney isn't leading in Montana, I think we can call him down for the 3-count.

Politico has an article out about how he's maintaining a smaller staff now and is going to announce later.  This guy is getting cold feet and those feet will get a little colder if he's not even leading in Montana.

[Poundingtherock]

HIllary,

I don't think Virgnia would be a particularly strong primary state for her.

Huckabee did very well in the Virginia GOP primary last time.  Newt is also strong in the South.

[Ben Romney]

I am more worried that The Obumbler leads in VA against every R

[Poundingtherock]

Well, Virginia/Colorado have always been strong for Obama given the trends in those two states.

Let's see how Obama is doing against his opponents in PA, MI, and WI.  If he's barely up in those three states, then it cancels out his lead in Virginia.

[California8429]

If Romney isn't leading in Montana, I think we can call him down for the 3-count.

Politico has an article out about how he's maintaining a smaller staff now and is going to announce later.  This guy is getting cold feet and those feet will get a little colder if he's not even leading in Montana.

he's 100% going to run. His team just has put together an entirely bold and risky campaign strategy of not exposing Romney too much. He's barely done national interviews and such and is still doing very well in the polls. So he's literally doing nothing and mainting a lead instead of risking saying something stupid to maintain this early lead that means nothing.

[Bull Moose Base]

If Romney isn't leading in Montana, I think we can call him down for the 3-count.

Politico has an article out about how he's maintaining a smaller staff now and is going to announce later.  This guy is getting cold feet and those feet will get a little colder if he's not even leading in Montana.

he's 100% going to run. His team just has put together an entirely bold and risky campaign strategy of not exposing Romney too much. He's barely done national interviews and such and is still doing very well in the polls. So he's literally doing nothing and mainting a lead instead of risking saying something stupid to maintain this early lead that means nothing.

His risky strategy of not taking any risks?

[California8429]

If Romney isn't leading in Montana, I think we can call him down for the 3-count.

Politico has an article out about how he's maintaining a smaller staff now and is going to announce later.  This guy is getting cold feet and those feet will get a little colder if he's not even leading in Montana.

he's 100% going to run. His team just has put together an entirely bold and risky campaign strategy of not exposing Romney too much. He's barely done national interviews and such and is still doing very well in the polls. So he's literally doing nothing and mainting a lead instead of risking saying something stupid to maintain this early lead that means nothing.

His risky strategy of not taking any risks?

yes. Risky because it may very well fail, while he refrains from being in the public eye and taking risks.