Candidates Close in North Carolina

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Rudy Giuliani (R) 44%
Hillary Clinton (D) 43%
Other 10%
Not Sure 3%

Hillary Clinton (D) 44%
Fred Thompson (R) 44%
Other 10%
Not Sure 2%

McCain 43%
Clinton 43%
Other 11%
Not Sure 3%

Romney 41%
Clinton 46%
Other 10%
Not Sure 4%

This telephone survey of 500 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports in patnership with FOX Television Stations, Inc. on October 18, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

For full poll results, click here.

[Padfoot]

Wow, this is highly unexpected.  Although I'd wager that most of the 10% that are undecided would swing for the GOP.

[Smash255]

A bit surprised, but if true, perhaps an explanation.   Many people from the northeast especially New York and New Jersey have moved down to NC, specifically the Charlotte and Raleigh areas.  Perhaps all those from NY & NJ moving down to NC has pushed it more Democratic than originally thought, but it was a bit obscured in 2004 as the 9/11 Bush bounce that was seen in suburban NYC was also seen in the voting of the transplanted New Yorkers down in NC, and they voted Republican at a higher rate than they otherwise would have due to it.  Now its a theory and likely a stretch, but something to ponder, especially if future NC polling supports this one.

[Erc]

A bit surprised, but if true, perhaps an explanation.   Many people from the northeast especially New York and New Jersey have moved down to NC, specifically the Charlotte and Raleigh areas.  Perhaps all those from NY & NJ moving down to NC has pushed it more Democratic than originally thought, but it was a bit obscured in 2004 as the 9/11 Bush bounce that was seen in suburban NYC was also seen in the voting of the transplanted New Yorkers down in NC, and they voted Republican at a higher rate than they otherwise would have due to it.  Now its a theory and likely a stretch, but something to ponder, especially if future NC polling supports this one.

It's a stretch.  NC voted in much the same way it did in 2004 as it did in 2000, after accounting for a slight (2%ish) Edwards boost.

A lot of places are polling the same way, and we'll get the true picture (one way or the other) once both parties have picked nominees.

[Smash255]

A bit surprised, but if true, perhaps an explanation.   Many people from the northeast especially New York and New Jersey have moved down to NC, specifically the Charlotte and Raleigh areas.  Perhaps all those from NY & NJ moving down to NC has pushed it more Democratic than originally thought, but it was a bit obscured in 2004 as the 9/11 Bush bounce that was seen in suburban NYC was also seen in the voting of the transplanted New Yorkers down in NC, and they voted Republican at a higher rate than they otherwise would have due to it.  Now its a theory and likely a stretch, but something to ponder, especially if future NC polling supports this one.

It's a stretch.  NC voted in much the same way it did in 2004 as it did in 2000, after accounting for a slight (2%ish) Edwards boost.

A lot of places are polling the same way, and we'll get the true picture (one way or the other) once both parties have picked nominees.

However, if you look at the trend in the state it was heaviest in the Charlotte and Raleigh areas, which leads me to believe the trend in NC was more NY/NJ transplant related than anything else.  Perhaps the Bush bump in the NYC metro area was also felt down there and it could have made the trend smaller than it otherwise would have been.  In other words even the NY/NJ transplants while voting more Democratic than the native population causing a Dem trend in those areas, did not vote as heavily Dem as they otherwise would have due to 9/11, therefore the actual Dem trend appeared to be less than it otherwise would have been with the transplants.   

I do agree we need to see more polls and need to know who the nominee's are before we get a clearer picture.  I'm just offering up a bit of a theory to explain why the results are what they are if this poll happens to be an accurate one  (which is way too early to tell).  When you look at other areas which have gone through the heavy NY/NJ transplant phase you do see a rather sharp Democratic trend.  Look at Florida during the 90's, especially Broward and Palm Beach counties (which is where the largest portion of the NY/NJ transplant population went) and how hard those areas trended Dem.  Both counties trended Dem at more than 20 points against the national average between 92  & 00. upwards of 30 points going back to 88.

[Erc]

I'll agree that the Research Triangle effect is something to be cognizant of...but it's not going to make enough of a difference to swing the state unless the national race is enough of a blowout where it doesn't matter.

As for the "NYC Bush Bounce" in NC...it makes some sense, but it's going to be (at best) a second-order effect--a slight swing in a relatively small segment of the population isn't going to have an effect larger than a couple tenths of a percentage point in the statewide result.  Whatever effect was present was mostly (or, more likely, completely) eliminated by a local 'Edwards bounce' which also won't be present in 2008 unless Edwards wins the nomination.

[Хahar 🤔]

Interesting but Clinton's not going to end up with more than 47 or 48 percent of the vote.

[Lief 🗽]

Hm... wish they had polled Edwards.

[Smash255]

I'll agree that the Research Triangle effect is something to be cognizant of...but it's not going to make enough of a difference to swing the state unless the national race is enough of a blowout where it doesn't matter.

As for the "NYC Bush Bounce" in NC...it makes some sense, but it's going to be (at best) a second-order effect--a slight swing in a relatively small segment of the population isn't going to have an effect larger than a couple tenths of a percentage point in the statewide result.  Whatever effect was present was mostly (or, more likely, completely) eliminated by a local 'Edwards bounce' which also won't be present in 2008 unless Edwards wins the nomination.

In 2000 NC was about 13 points more GOP than nationally, in 04 it was just under 10 points more GOP than nationally.  Even with Edwards out of the picture I was originally thinking there would be a small Dem trend in NC, a couple points in part due to the high number of NY metro area transplants moving down there. I was thinking that NC would be 7-7.5 or so points more GOP than nationally in 08 (closer obviously with Edwards).  But if the Bush 9/11 transplant bump did occur, the state may have been more along the lines of 8-8.5 points more GOP than nationally, which could put it in the 4-5 point more GOP than nationally in 08 range.  Compare this result, with what most the national Rudy-Clinton numbers are and you are in that 4-5 more GOP than nationally range. 

[Josh/Devilman88]

With the type of job I have, I see alot of people with in a year. Over the past year I have seen more people from NY, MI, PN and NJ moving to the Greensboro area. I'm not to sure about the rest of the state but I believe in 2008 the Democrats will carry Guilford County with about 55% or better.

Here is what I think as of right now for the state of NC:

Clinton-51
Romney- 48
Other-1

Clinton-48
Giuliani-49
Other-3

Clinton- 50
Huckabee-49
Other-1

Obama- 50
Giuliani- 49
Other- 1

Obama- 53
Romney- 46
Other- 1

Obama- 50
Huckabee- 49
other- 1

Edwards- 54
Giuliani- 45
Other- 1

Edwards- 56
Romney- 43
Other-1

Edwards- 51
Huckabee- 48
Other- 1

[Eraserhead]

Hm... wish they had polled Edwards.

Me too... and Obama.

[Smash255]

With the type of job I have, I see alot of people with in a year. Over the past year I have seen more people from NY, MI, PN and NJ moving to the Greensboro area. I'm not to sure about the rest of the state but I believe in 2008 the Democrats will carry Guilford County with about 55% or better.

Here is what I think as of right now for the state of NC:

Clinton-51
Romney- 48
Other-1

Clinton-48
Giuliani-49
Other-3

Clinton- 50
Huckabee-49
Other-1

Obama- 50
Giuliani- 49
Other- 1

Obama- 53
Romney- 46
Other- 1

Obama- 50
Huckabee- 49
other- 1

Edwards- 54
Giuliani- 45
Other- 1

Edwards- 56
Romney- 43
Other-1

Edwards- 51
Huckabee- 48
Other- 1

Good point about Guilford County, while not as strong as Charlotte, Raleigh or Asheville the Greensboro area trended strongly to the Dems in 04, and has seen a large influx of people from out of state specifically NY/NJ

The trends in the these areas tend to be quite strong

Durham 11.30%
Buncombe 11.23%
Orange 11.16%
Meckelnburg 9.33%
Guilford 6.05%
Wake 7.95%

[Erc]

I'll agree that the Research Triangle effect is something to be cognizant of...but it's not going to make enough of a difference to swing the state unless the national race is enough of a blowout where it doesn't matter.

As for the "NYC Bush Bounce" in NC...it makes some sense, but it's going to be (at best) a second-order effect--a slight swing in a relatively small segment of the population isn't going to have an effect larger than a couple tenths of a percentage point in the statewide result.  Whatever effect was present was mostly (or, more likely, completely) eliminated by a local 'Edwards bounce' which also won't be present in 2008 unless Edwards wins the nomination.

In 2000 NC was about 13 points more GOP than nationally, in 04 it was just under 10 points more GOP than nationally.  Even with Edwards out of the picture I was originally thinking there would be a small Dem trend in NC, a couple points in part due to the high number of NY metro area transplants moving down there. I was thinking that NC would be 7-7.5 or so points more GOP than nationally in 08 (closer obviously with Edwards).  But if the Bush 9/11 transplant bump did occur, the state may have been more along the lines of 8-8.5 points more GOP than nationally, which could put it in the 4-5 point more GOP than nationally in 08 range.  Compare this result, with what most the national Rudy-Clinton numbers are and you are in that 4-5 more GOP than nationally range. 

All else considered, I'll agree with you that there should be some trend towards the Democrats (if only marginal).  However, I can't agree with you that it was obscured by the 9/11 effect:  Even Staten Island even only shifted about 9 points because of it.    That's a lot, but even if the NYC transplants were affected by 9 points, the recent NYC transplants are a small fraction of the population (by no means could they be 10% of the population, unless I'm horribly mistaken).  So, unless you're saying that recent NYC transplants were affected more by 9/11 than those living on Staten Island, or that they're more than 10% of the NC voting population--the '9/11 bounce' effect definitely could not be in the 1.5-2% range that you claim, and is more likely to be around .1-.2%--not enough to cause an additional swing to the Democrats in '08.

There are plenty of other reasons that NC could swing, of course--they liked Bush more than they like the current crop of candidates, and the plain old Research Triangle effect, to name just two.

[Smash255]

I'll agree that the Research Triangle effect is something to be cognizant of...but it's not going to make enough of a difference to swing the state unless the national race is enough of a blowout where it doesn't matter.

As for the "NYC Bush Bounce" in NC...it makes some sense, but it's going to be (at best) a second-order effect--a slight swing in a relatively small segment of the population isn't going to have an effect larger than a couple tenths of a percentage point in the statewide result.  Whatever effect was present was mostly (or, more likely, completely) eliminated by a local 'Edwards bounce' which also won't be present in 2008 unless Edwards wins the nomination.

In 2000 NC was about 13 points more GOP than nationally, in 04 it was just under 10 points more GOP than nationally.  Even with Edwards out of the picture I was originally thinking there would be a small Dem trend in NC, a couple points in part due to the high number of NY metro area transplants moving down there. I was thinking that NC would be 7-7.5 or so points more GOP than nationally in 08 (closer obviously with Edwards).  But if the Bush 9/11 transplant bump did occur, the state may have been more along the lines of 8-8.5 points more GOP than nationally, which could put it in the 4-5 point more GOP than nationally in 08 range.  Compare this result, with what most the national Rudy-Clinton numbers are and you are in that 4-5 more GOP than nationally range. 

All else considered, I'll agree with you that there should be some trend towards the Democrats (if only marginal).  However, I can't agree with you that it was obscured by the 9/11 effect:  Even Staten Island even only shifted about 9 points because of it.    That's a lot, but even if the NYC transplants were affected by 9 points, the recent NYC transplants are a small fraction of the population (by no means could they be 10% of the population, unless I'm horribly mistaken).  So, unless you're saying that recent NYC transplants were affected more by 9/11 than those living on Staten Island, or that they're more than 10% of the NC voting population--the '9/11 bounce' effect definitely could not be in the 1.5-2% range that you claim, and is more likely to be around .1-.2%--not enough to cause an additional swing to the Democrats in '08.

There are plenty of other reasons that NC could swing, of course--they liked Bush more than they like the current crop of candidates, and the plain old Research Triangle effect, to name just two.

When talking trends I mean Dem- GOP (or vice versa) compared to the national average.  Between 2000 and 2004 Staten Island trended to the GOP by just under 18 points, Rockland by about 15, Nassau by just under 11.   While the 1.5-2% effect is probably a bit high, it is likely more than just .1 or .2%.  I wouldn't say the NY metro transplant is more than 10% of the population, 5-7% I would say is a fair estimate (though 10% might be the case in the Charlotte and Raleigh areas as a whole I would say 5-7%).  If the 9/11 Bush bounce was similar with the NY transplant population as it was in metro NY you are likely looking at the true trend to be close to or at 1% more than what it looks like.  So instead of the trend being 3.4% the truer trend might be 4- 4.25%.  That trend very well could repeat itself for 08 (against the national average), no Edwards might make you think it could slow up, but the amount of NY transplants moving down there has actually picked up a bit in recent years.  As a result the trend very well could continue at the same pace it was previously, which could put NC in the 5 point more GOP than nationally range.

[Erc]

Aha...multiply my trend figures by 2 to make them consistent with yours.  Closer, but we're still off by an order of magnitude.

In any event, regardless of whether the effect we're discussing is .15% or 1.5%, who the candidates are and how they play in NC relative to the rest of the country will likely overshadow these relatively small effects.  So, we'll see how things look in the summer. 

[minionofmidas]

A bit surprised, but if true, perhaps an explanation.   Many people from the northeast especially New York and New Jersey have moved down to NC, specifically the Charlotte and Raleigh areas.  Perhaps all those from NY & NJ moving down to NC has pushed it more Democratic than originally thought, but it was a bit obscured in 2004 as the 9/11 Bush bounce that was seen in suburban NYC was also seen in the voting of the transplanted New Yorkers down in NC, and they voted Republican at a higher rate than they otherwise would have due to it.  Now its a theory and likely a stretch, but something to ponder, especially if future NC polling supports this one.

It's a stretch.  NC voted in much the same way it did in 2004 as it did in 2000, after accounting for a slight (2%ish) Edwards boost.

Little to nothing to do with Edwards. Several urban areas in the state swinging Dem either due to long-term demographic trends (the growing ones. That is, those of the growing ones that swung Dem. Nowhere near all of them.) or to acute economic depression (the shrinking ones). A candidate-related boost would have been more centred on the rural parts of the state.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

i just dont see any democrat making NC a swing state. edwards couldnt carry the state if he was the nominee. most NCers hate him.

[Smash255]

Aha...multiply my trend figures by 2 to make them consistent with yours.  Closer, but we're still off by an order of magnitude.

In any event, regardless of whether the effect we're discussing is .15% or 1.5%, who the candidates are and how they play in NC relative to the rest of the country will likely overshadow these relatively small effects.  So, we'll see how things look in the summer. 

True, the candidates, and how the candidates and the race plays out is what is going to have the real impact.  I was basically just making an argument for where the starting point should be.

  You look at how the state as a whole is trending, and how the state is relative to the national average 5 points more GOP, 5 points more Dem, 10 points, etc) and use that as a starting point, and then make adjustments from that point based on the candidates themselves and how the election plays out.