{"id":40802243925,"date":"2019-09-19T11:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-09-19T15:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/?post_type=poll&p=40802243925"},"modified":"2019-09-24T09:49:37","modified_gmt":"2019-09-24T13:49:37","slug":"monmouthpoll_nj_091919","status":"publish","type":"poll","link":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/reports\/monmouthpoll_nj_091919\/","title":{"rendered":"Booker Clings to Positive Job Rating"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

West Long\nBranch, NJ<\/em> \u2013 Sen. Cory Booker\u2019s home state job rating has taken a hit\nsince he launched his campaign for president, but remains in net positive\nterritory. Still, most of his fellow New Jersey Democrats prefer one of the\nother leading candidates for their party\u2019s nomination, according to the Monmouth\nUniversity Poll<\/em><\/strong>.  More New\nJerseyans think he would make a better running mate than top of the ticket\ncandidate. The poll also finds that half the public says Booker bears at least\nsome responsibility for the current water crisis in Newark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Booker\nearns a 45% approve and 37% disapprove rating from Garden State residents for\nhis performance as the state\u2019s junior U.S. senator. Another 18% have no\nopinion.  His standing among registered\nvoters is 45% approve and 40% disapprove. \nHis current voter rating is slightly lower than the 48% approve and 38%\ndisapprove rating he received in February, shortly after he announced his\npresidential bid. However, his ratings this year are more negative than they\nwere prior to his national campaign. For example, in April 2018, he earned a\n54% approve and 31% disapprove rating from New Jersey voters.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Booker\ncurrently receives a positive rating from Democrats (71% approve and 11%\ndisapprove), a negative rating from Republicans (14% approve and 69%\ndisapprove), and a mixed rating from independents (40% approve and 45%\ndisapprove).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The poll\nalso finds that about half of New Jersey residents say Booker has either a\ngreat deal (28%) or some (23%) responsibility for the drinking water problem in\nNewark \u2013 the city he led as mayor until 2013. \nJust 1-in-5 say he has only a little (10%) or no (10%) responsibility\nfor this. The remainder have no opinion (8%) or are unaware (21%) of recent\nnews reports of high lead levels in the city\u2019s water system.  These results are fairly consistent across\nall partisan groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cRunning\nfor president can stretch the patience of home state constituents, and we are\nseeing some signs of that with Cory Booker. Still, he is managing to hold on to\na net positive rating despite his national campaign as well as recent news that\nbrought potentially negative attention to his time as mayor,\u201d said Patrick\nMurray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a\npresidential preference test among Garden State Democratic voters and\nindependents who lean toward the Democratic Party, Booker (9%) trails former\nVice President Joe Biden (26%), Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (20%), and\nVermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (18%).  California\nSen. Kamala Harris (6%) and South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg (6%) are\nthe only other candidates in a field of 19 who garner more than 2% support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe field\nwill certainly be much smaller by the time New Jersey\u2019s presidential primary\nrolls around. Booker\u2019s home state standing could change dramatically if he can\nscore an upset win in one of the February contests. But as it stands right now,\nJersey Democrats are gravitating toward the three candidates who currently\ndominate the national spotlight,\u201d said Murray.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite\nBooker\u2019s lower standing in the presidential preference poll, he earns personal\nratings on par with the other top contenders. Among New Jersey Democrats and\nDemocratic leaners, Booker has a 60% favorable to 24% unfavorable rating, which\nis similar to Biden (64% to 23%), Sanders (63% to 25%), and Warren (59% to\n17%).  Booker has better ratings than\neither Harris (43% to 22%) or Buttigieg (40% to 13%), although both those\ncandidates are not as well known to New Jersey Democrats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The New\nJersey public as a whole has become less likely to feel that Booker would make\na good president since he first launched his campaign. Currently, 29% say he\nwould make a good president and 52% say he would not, with 19% having no\nopinion. In February, 37% felt he would make a good president and 42% said he\nwould not. A small majority of Democrats (55%, down from 65% in February) say\nBooker would make a good president, compared to just 21% of independents (down\nfrom 32%), and 4% of Republicans (similar to 3%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reviews are more positive when his constituents picture Booker in the vice presidential slot.  Just under half (48%) say Booker would make a good running mate compared to 39% who say he would not, with another 13% offering no opinion. More than 3-in-4 Democrats (78%) say Booker is solid vice presidential material, compared with 39% of independents and 17% of Republicans who say the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Opposition\nhas softened on Booker being on the national ticket in 2020 and simultaneously\nrunning for reelection to his U.S. Senate seat. \nNearly half the public (49%) says he should only run for president or\nvice president, which is down from 66% who said he should only pursue national\noffice seven months ago. On the other hand, 29% say Booker should run for both\nsenate and national office (as allowed by state law), which is up slightly from\n21% in February. Another 22% have no opinion on what Booker should do in this\nsituation, which is up from 13%.  It\nshould be noted that the February question only asked about the possibility of\nBooker running for president, while the current poll question included\npresident or vice president as the national office option.  Opposition to Booker being on the 2020 ballot\nfor two different offices has dropped among all partisan groups since February.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth University Poll<\/em> also finds the\nratings for New Jersey\u2019s senior U.S. senator, Bob Menendez, continue to be\nnegative. They currently stand at 36% approve and 43% disapprove among all New\nJerseyans, and 37% approve and 45% disapprove among registered voters.  This is not significantly different from the\n40% approve to 45% disapprove voter rating Menendez received in February.  However, the 2019 trend is a marked change\nfrom the senator\u2019s ratings in Monmouth polls taken over the prior ten years,\nall of which were either positive or evenly divided. For example, Menendez\nreceived a split 37% approve and 38% disapprove voter rating in April 2018, and\na positive 41% approve and 35% disapprove rating in July 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth\nUniversity Poll<\/em> was conducted by telephone from September 12 to 16, 2019\nwith 713 New Jersey adults, which has a +\/- 3.7 percentage point sampling\nmargin of error.  Some results in this release are based on 325 registered\nvoters who identify as Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party and have a\nmargin of error of +\/- 5.4 percentage points.  The poll was conducted by\nthe Monmouth University Polling Institute in West Long Branch, NJ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

QUESTIONS AND RESULTS                                                                         <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

(* Some columns may not add to 100% due\nto rounding.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Q1\n& Q4 held for future release.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Q2-3\npreviously released.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[QUESTIONS 5 & 6 WERE ROTATED<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5.<\/span> Do you approve or disapprove of the job Bob Menendez is doing as United States Senator?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  All adults<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Approve\n <\/td>\n 36%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Disapprove\n <\/td>\n 43%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n TREND:
\n Registered\n voters <\/em>\n <\/td>		\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n April
\n 2018\n <\/td>		\n July
\n 2017\n <\/td>		\n May
\n 2016\n <\/td>		\n July
\n 2015\n <\/td>		\n May
\n 2015\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2015\n <\/td>		\n Sept.
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n June
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n April
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n Dec.
\n 2013\n <\/td>		\n April
\n 2013\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2013\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  Approve\n <\/td>\n 37%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 40%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td>\n 41%\n <\/td>\n 41%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 42%\n <\/td>\n 49%\n <\/td>\n 45%\n <\/td>\n 47%\n <\/td>\n 51%\n <\/td>\n 49%\n <\/td>\n 47%\n <\/td>\n 44%\n <\/td>\n 41%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Disapprove\n <\/td>\n 45%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 45%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 35%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 30%\n <\/td>\n 34%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td>\n 30%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n 23%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n 23%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 24%\n <\/td>\n 26%\n <\/td>\n 19%\n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n 26%\n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (651)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (549)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (632)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (758)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (703)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (453)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (441)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (712)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (680<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (717<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>690<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>690<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>698<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>694<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (697<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n TREND:\n Registered<\/em>\n voters\n <\/em>continued<\/em>\n <\/td>\n April
\n 2012\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2012\n <\/td>		\n Oct.
\n 2011\n <\/td>		\n Aug.
\n 2011\n <\/td>		\n May
\n 2011\n <\/td>		\n July
\n 2010\n <\/td>		\n Oct.
\n 2008\n <\/td>		\n April
\n 2008\n <\/td>		\n Jan.
\n 2008\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Approve\n <\/td>\n 40%\n <\/td>\n 41%\n <\/td>\n 43%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 46%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 34%\n <\/td>\n 41%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Disapprove\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n 26%\n <\/td>\n 29%\n <\/td>\n 33%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n 33%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 35%\n <\/td>\n 33%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n 29%\n <\/td>\n 26%\n <\/td>\n 29%\n <\/td>\n 41%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (692<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (709<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (693<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>730<\/em>)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (725<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>747)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>900)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>720)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>698)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

6.<\/span> Do you approve or disapprove of the job Cory Booker is doing as United States Senator?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n All adults<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Approve\n <\/td>\n 45%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Disapprove\n <\/td>\n 37%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n TREND:\n Registered<\/em>\n voters\n <\/em>\n <\/td>\n Sept.<\/strong>\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n Feb.\n 2019\n <\/td>\n April
\n 2018\n <\/td>		\n July
\n 2017\n <\/td>		\n May
\n 2016\n <\/td>		\n July
\n 2015\n <\/td>		\n May
\n 2015\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2015\n <\/td>		\n Sept.
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n June
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n April
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2014\n <\/td>		\n Dec.
\n 2013\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Approve\n <\/td>\n 45%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 48%\n <\/td>\n 54%\n <\/td>\n 50%\n <\/td>\n 53%\n <\/td>\n 45%\n <\/td>\n 51%\n <\/td>\n 51%\n <\/td>\n 42%\n <\/td>\n 48%\n <\/td>\n 47%\n <\/td>\n 47%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Disapprove\n <\/td>\n 40%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n 24%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n 23%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n 23%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 14%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 31%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 35%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 30%\n <\/td>\n 32%\n <\/td>\n 43%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (651)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (549)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (632)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (758)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (703<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (453<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (441<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (712<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (680<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (717<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (690<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (690<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (<\/em>698<\/em>)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q7-10\npreviously released.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

11.<\/span> How much have you heard about the drinking water problem in the city of Newark \u2013 a lot, a little, or nothing at all? <\/span><\/p>\n
\n  \n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n A\n lot\n <\/td>\n 46%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n A little\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Nothing at all\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   \n (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

11B.<\/span> How much responsibility does Cory Booker have for this problem \u2013 a great deal, some, only a little, or none at all?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  \n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n A\n great deal\n <\/td>\n 28%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Some\n <\/td>\n 23%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Only a little\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n None at all\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Not heard (from Q11)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   \n (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q12-16 held for future release.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Q17\nWAS ASKED OF REGISTERED VOTERS WHO IDENTIFY AS DEMOCRATS OR LEAN\nTOWARD THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY; n= 325, moe= +\/- 5.4%<\/em>.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

17.<\/span> I know the 2020 election is far away, but who would you support for the Democratic nomination for president if the candidates were the following? [INCLUDES LEANERS] [NAMES WERE ROTATED]<\/em> <\/span><\/p>\n
\n   (with\n leaners)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Joe Biden\n <\/td>\n 26%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Elizabeth Warren\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Bernie Sanders\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Cory Booker\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Pete Buttigieg\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Kamala Harris\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tulsi Gabbard\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Bill de Blasio\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Amy Klobuchar\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Andrew Yang\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Michael Bennet\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Steve Bullock\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Juli\u00e1n Castro\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Beto O\u2019Rourke\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tim Ryan\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tom Steyer\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Marianne Williamson\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n John Delaney\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Joe Sestak\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Other\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n No one\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Undecided\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q18\nWAS ASKED OF REGISTERED VOTERS WHO IDENTIFY AS DEMOCRATS OR LEAN\nTOWARD THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY; n= 325, moe= +\/-5.4%<\/em>.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

18.<\/span> I\u2019m going to read you the names of some people who are running for president in 2020.\u00a0 Please tell me if your general impression of each is favorable or unfavorable, or if you don\u2019t really have an opinion. If you have not heard of the person, just let me know. [NAMES WERE ROTATED<\/em>]<\/span><\/p>\n
\n   Democratic\n voters only:<\/em>   <\/em>
\n
\n <\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>		\n Favor-able\n <\/td>\n Unfavor-able\n <\/td>\n No\n opinion\n <\/td>\n Not\n \n heard\n of\n <\/td>\n (n)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Former Vice President\n Joe Biden\n <\/td>\n 64%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 23%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Vermont Senator Bernie\n Sanders\n <\/td>\n 63%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth\n Warren\n <\/td>\n 59%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n California Senator\n Kamala Harris\n <\/td>\n 43%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 26%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n South Bend, Indiana\n Mayor Pete Buttigieg\n <\/td>\n 40%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 31%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n New Jersey Senator\n Cory Booker\n <\/td>\n 60%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 24%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (325)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

ASKED OF EVERYONE:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

19.<\/span> Do you think Cory Booker would or would not make a good president?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  TREND:\n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2019\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Would\n <\/td>\n 29%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Would not  \n <\/td>\n 52%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 42%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   \n (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (604)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

20.<\/span> If he does not win the nomination, do you think Cory Booker would or would not make a good running mate for vice president?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  \n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Would\n <\/td>\n 48%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Would not  \n <\/td>\n 39%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   \n (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

21.<\/span> Booker is up for reelection to the Senate in 2020. If he wins the Democratic nomination for either president or vice president, do you think he should run for Senate as well or just run for president or vice president?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  TREND\n <\/td>\n Sept.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td>		\n Feb.
\n 2019*\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Run for Senate as well\n <\/td>\n 29%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Just run for president\n or vice president\n <\/td>\n 49%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 66%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 13%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   \n (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (713)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (604)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

  \n <\/em>*Feb \u201919 Question did not include the\nnomination for vice president<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q22-41\nheld for future release.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

METHODOLOGY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth\nUniversity Poll<\/em> was sponsored and conducted by the Monmouth University\nPolling Institute from September 12 to 16, 2019 with a random sample of 713 New\nJersey adults age 18 and older, in English. This includes 359 contacted by\na live interviewer on a landline telephone and 354 contacted by a live\ninterviewer on a cell phone. Telephone numbers were selected through\nrandom digit dialing and landline respondents were selected with a modified\nTroldahl-Carter youngest adult household screen. Monmouth is responsible for\nall aspects of the survey design, data weighting and analysis. Final sample is\nweighted for region, age, education, gender and race based on US Census\ninformation. Data collection support provided by Braun Research (field)\nand Dynata (RDD sample). For results based on this sample, one can say\nwith 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling has a maximum\nmargin of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points (unadjusted for sample\ndesign). Sampling error can be larger for sub-groups (see table\nbelow). In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question\nwording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or\nbias into the findings of opinion polls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n DEMOGRAPHICS (weighted)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Registered Voters<\/em> <\/td><\/tr>
\n 20%\n Republican<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 45% Independent<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 35% Democrat<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 48% Male<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 52% Female<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 29% 18-34<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 36% 35-54<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 35% 55+<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 59% White<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 13% Black<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 17%\n Hispanic<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 11%\n Asian\/Other<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 64% No\n degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 36% 4 year\n degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

Click on pdf file\nlink below for full methodology and crosstabs by key demographic groups.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trails top tier 2020 presidential candidates among home state Dems<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":40802243927,"template":"","geography":[30],"class_list":["post-40802243925","poll","type-poll","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","geography-new-jersey"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802243925","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/poll"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802243925\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40802243999,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802243925\/revisions\/40802243999"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40802243927"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40802243925"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"geography","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/geography?post=40802243925"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}