NJ-GOV: Fairleigh Dickinson/AARP: Murphy +25 with voters aged 50+

[NewYorkExpress]

https://www.fdu.edu/news/murphy-holds-25-point-lead-among-older-voters/

Voters 50 and over favor incumbent Democrat Phil Murphy, by a wide margin over his Republican challenger, Jack Ciattarelli. According to a new survey from the FDU Poll, in partnership with AARP, Murphy has a 25-point lead over Ciattarelli among older voters as the race goes into the final month, though many voters remain undecided.

Overall, 56 percent of registered voters 50 and over say that will support Murphy for a second term, compared with just 31 percent who say that they will back Ciattarelli; the remainder say they will vote for someone else, no one, or they just don’t know yet. Murphy has largely held on to his base – 89 percent of Democrats say they’ll be backing the incumbent, with only 3 percent of Democrats saying they will vote for the Republican. Ciattarelli still has some work to do, with 84 percent of Republicans backing Ciattarelli, and 9 percent of Republicans saying they’ll support Murphy.

[wbrocks67]

Wow, in the 2017 exit poll, it was as follows:

45-64: Murphy +10 (54-44)
45 and older: Murphy +3 (51-48)

If Murphy is up +25 with that age group then he's easily winning by at least 15.

[Person Man]

This probably isn’t true unless this poll is finding a new class of hidden voters.

[Matty]

AARP polling

Really?

[kwabbit]

Why would you do a poll of just 50+ voters it’s so useless. A complete poll would get a large enough sub sample for 50+ to be reliable and would probably be more accurate. I feel like a lot of these subgroup only polls get wonky results, I know all the Asian/Hispanic only polls from 2020 showed results massively skewed towards Biden like 25+ point misses in terms of margins. A Murphy +25 result among 50+ voters strain credulity, so this poll is essentially meaningless.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I'm skeptical, as with basically all polls these days.

But if I were to take it as reflecting reality, why might this be? Murphy's handling of the pandemic? Of course we all saw how that worked out in Florida. Seniors were supposed to deliver the state to Biden for that reason. Remember?

What it might truly suggest though is that Murphy is fairly popular in ways that an incumbent New Jersey Governor hasn't been in awhile.

[ElectionsGuy]

Sure Jan.

[Senator Incitatus]

I'm skeptical, as with basically all polls these days.

But if I were to take it as reflecting reality, why might this be? Murphy's handling of the pandemic? Of course we all saw how that worked out in Florida. Seniors were supposed to deliver the state to Biden for that reason. Remember?

What it might truly suggest though is that Murphy is fairly popular in ways that an incumbent New Jersey Governor hasn't been in awhile.

The last incumbent Governor was more popular at his re-election.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I'm skeptical, as with basically all polls these days.

But if I were to take it as reflecting reality, why might this be? Murphy's handling of the pandemic? Of course we all saw how that worked out in Florida. Seniors were supposed to deliver the state to Biden for that reason. Remember?

What it might truly suggest though is that Murphy is fairly popular in ways that an incumbent New Jersey Governor hasn't been in awhile.

The last incumbent Governor was more popular at his re-election.

Sorry, I meant Democratic New Jersey Governor.

[S019]

This is about as believable as the poll with Murphy only up 6 (that is, not at all)

[Xing]

Obvious garbage, but people should be skeptical of all polling that seems to go against fundamentals, not just those which show results that they don't like.

[MT Treasurer]

Obvious garbage, but people should be skeptical of all polling that seems to go against fundamentals, not just those which show results that they don't like.

Except a Murphy +6 result is far more believable than this nonsense given the current environment and Democrats' national numbers (which everyone here seems to be ignoring, pretending that we’re still in 2017), so no, you don’t have to dismiss the Emerson poll just because you (understandably) dismiss the one.

[Xing]

Obvious garbage, but people should be skeptical of all polling that seems to go against fundamentals, not just those which show results that they don't like.

Except a Murphy +6 result is far more believable than this nonsense given the current environment and Democrats' national numbers (which everyone here seems to be ignoring, pretending that we’re still in 2017), so no, you don’t have to dismiss the Emerson poll just because you (understandably) dismiss the one.

A Murphy +4 result might be *relatively* more believable than this poll, but that's a low bar. A 4-point result in NJ is not plausible barring a huge drop in popularity for Murphy or a 1980-style environment for Democrats. If this were 2017, I'd expect more like Murphy +20 instead of Murphy +10.

[Schiff for Senate]

Now if Democrats could get FL's seniors to vote like that...