{"id":40802244986,"date":"2019-12-10T11:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-12-10T16:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/?post_type=poll&p=40802244986"},"modified":"2019-12-10T11:00:54","modified_gmt":"2019-12-10T16:00:54","slug":"monmouthpoll_us_121019","status":"publish","type":"poll","link":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/reports\/monmouthpoll_us_121019\/","title":{"rendered":"Washington, Obama, and Trump, Oh My!"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

West Long Branch, NJ<\/em> \u2013 Most Americans agree that George Washington was a better president than either Donald Trump or Barack Obama \u2013 but there are some interesting partisan divisions in that opinion.  Jumping ahead to 2020, Trump\u2019s reelection prospects are holding steady in the latest Monmouth University Poll<\/em><\/strong>.  Former Vice President Joe Biden, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders continue to swap positions as the top three contenders for the Democratic nomination.  Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg enters the race with low favorability ratings among voters of every partisan stripe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just over 4-in-10 (43%) registered voters feel that Trump should be reelected, while a majority (54%) say it is time to have someone new in the Oval Office.  These numbers have not really budged in the past month (42% reelect and 55% someone new in November). The current results are statistically similar to late September when news broke about the Ukraine call (39% reelect and 57% someone new) and August when the House impeachment inquiry was just getting started (39% reelect and 57% someone new).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe impeachment hearings over the past month have not moved the reelection needle in either direction,\u201d said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump currently has a personal rating of 46% favorable and 52% unfavorable among registered voters. The president\u2019s personal rating has grown slightly more positive since news of the Ukraine call first broke, but the shifts so far are not statistically significant. He had a 44%-54% rating in November and a 43%-56% rating in late September.  Moreover, there continues to be a wide net negative gap among those who have a strong opinion of the president \u2013 33% very<\/em> favorable<\/em> versus 47% very<\/em> unfavorable<\/em>.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The leading Democratic contenders to take on the president in 2020 have also seen little change in their own personal ratings over the past month. Biden has a rating of 43% favorable and 50% unfavorable among all registered voters (identical to his 43%-50% rating in November), Sanders has a rating of 41% favorable and 54% unfavorable (identical to his 41%-54% rating in November), and Warren has a rating of 40% favorable and 50% unfavorable (slightly more negative than her 42%-44% rating in November).  South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg gets a 34% favorable and 35% unfavorable rating, which is a slight improvement from his 27%-34% rating in November.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bloomberg has a 26% favorable and 54% unfavorable rating among all registered voters.  Bloomberg earns a split decision (40% favorable and 39% unfavorable) from Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters, but has a decidedly negative rating among Republicans and Republican-leaners (12%-72%) as well as among independents who do not lean toward either party (26%-51%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBloomberg said he got into this race because he wants to defeat Trump, but his campaign kicks off with even lower ratings than the incumbent. That is not the most auspicious start, but views of Bloomberg are not as deeply held as they are for Trump, so he has room to shift those opinions,\u201d said Murray.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bloomberg\u2019s rating among Democrats and Democratic-leaners is much lower than other contenders in the field.  Warren (76% favorable and 15% unfavorable), Biden (76%-20%) and Sanders (74%-21%) have broad popularity among party voters. Warren\u2019s rating has ticked down slightly since November (from 79%-9%), Biden\u2019s has held steady (from 76%-19%), and Sanders\u2019 has ticked up (from 72%-25%). Buttigieg earns a 53%-18% rating among his fellow Democrats, similar to his rating in November (49%-16%).  Bloomberg\u2019s within-party favorability is also worse than entrepreneur Andrew Yang, who currently gets a 42%-17% rating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n2020 CANDIDATE OPINION AMONG DEMOCRATIC VOTERS\n<\/strong>\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nNet favorability rating:<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nDec \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nNov \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nSep \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nAug \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nMay \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nApr \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nMar \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nJan \u201919<\/em>\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nElizabeth Warren\n<\/td>\n\n+61\n<\/td>\n\n+70\n<\/td>\n\n+66\n<\/td>\n\n+52\n<\/td>\n\n+46\n<\/td>\n\n+32\n<\/td>\n\n+30\n<\/td>\n\n+40\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nJoe Biden\n<\/td>\n\n+56\n<\/td>\n\n+57\n<\/td>\n\n+52\n<\/td>\n\n+41\n<\/td>\n\n+57\n<\/td>\n\n+56\n<\/td>\n\n+63\n<\/td>\n\n+71\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nBernie Sanders\n<\/td>\n\n+53\n<\/td>\n\n+47\n<\/td>\n\n+56\n<\/td>\n\n+40\n<\/td>\n\n+44\n<\/td>\n\n+44\n<\/td>\n\n+53\n<\/td>\n\n+49\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nPete Buttigieg\n<\/td>\n\n+35\n<\/td>\n\n+33\n<\/td>\n\n+41\n<\/td>\n\n+29\n<\/td>\n\n+24\n<\/td>\n\n+29\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n+2\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nAndrew Yang\n<\/td>\n\n+25\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n+12\n<\/td>\n\n-1\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n0\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\nMike Bloomberg\n<\/td>\n\n+1<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\nn\/a<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n+1<\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n+10\n<\/td><\/tr>
\n\n \n<\/td>\n\n <\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n <\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n <\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n <\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n <\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n <\/em>\n<\/td>\n\n \n<\/td>\n\n \n<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

Bloomberg\u2019s current net +1 party rating (40%-39%) is similar to what he earned in a Monmouth poll conducted back in March when he initially flirted with a presidential run.  Democratic opinion was evenly divided then at 27% favorable and 26% unfavorable. He had a somewhat more positive rating in Monmouth\u2019s initial poll of the potential Democratic field in January 2019 (35%-25%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters continue to be divided over who they want to put up against Trump in 2020.  The top contenders continue to be Biden (26%), Sanders (21%), and Warren (17%). However, these three are in a slightly different order than where they stood last month (23% Biden, 23% Warren, and 20% Sanders) or in late September (28% Warren, 25% Biden, and 15% Sanders).  Buttigieg is the preferred choice of 8% of Democratic-identifying voters (similar to 9% in November and 5% in September).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bloomberg enters the race at 5% support nationally.  He had 2% support in March and 4% in January when he was included as one of the potential contenders for the Democratic nomination.  Other candidates registering support in the current poll are Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar (4%), Yang (3%), New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker (2%) and seven other candidates who earn 1% or less.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The poll also finds that more Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters continue to prefer a candidate who would be stronger against Trump even if they disagree with that candidate on most issues (56%) than say they want a nominee who aligns with them on the issues but would have a hard time beating Trump (30%).  This result is virtually unchanged from the 58% to 34% response this question received in May and the 56% to 33% result in January. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Among those Democrats who prioritize electability, 31% support Biden in the \u201chorse race,\u201d followed by Warren (18%), Sanders (17%), Buttigieg (8%), Klobuchar (6%), and Bloomberg (4%).  Among those who stick with issue alignment, 33% support Sanders followed by Biden (15%), Warren (15%), Buttigieg (12%), Yang (5%), and Bloomberg (3%).  In Monmouth\u2019s May 2019 poll, electability voters named Biden (36%) as their top pick, followed by Sanders (14%) and Warren (10%), as well as California Sen. Kamala Harris (14%) who has since dropped out of the race.  Among those who valued issue alignment over electability in May, Biden (26%) led Sanders (18%), Warren (9%), Buttigieg (8%), and Harris (7%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The poll also asked all registered voters if the nation\u2019s first president was better than either of the two most recent occupants of that office. For the current incumbent, 71% say Washington was better while 15% pick Trump. Against the current president\u2019s immediate predecessor, Washington gets the vote of 58% compared to 33% who say Obama was better.  Among Republican voters, Washington edges out Trump by a narrow 44% to 37% margin. Among Democratic voters, though, the \u201cFather of Our Country\u201d trails Obama by a 29% to 63% margin.  It\u2019s worth noting that among independent voters, Washington does even better against Trump (72%-11%) than against Obama (62%-28%).  This question was inspired by a recent Economist\/YouGov Poll that asked whether Trump or Abraham Lincoln was a better \u201cRepublican president.\u201d  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThere is a combination of factors at work when you ask a question like this. Democrats may be more likely than Republicans to be influenced by recency bias, valuing what they are familiar with over historical opinion. It\u2019s a fun question to ask, but I\u2019m not sure what it means,\u201d said Murray.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth University Poll<\/em> was conducted by telephone from December 4 to 8, 2019 with 903 adults in the United States. The results in this release are based on 838 registered voters and have a +\/- 3.4 percentage point sampling margin of error.  This release also includes results based on 384 voters who identify as Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party which have a margin of error of +\/- 5.0 percentage points. The poll was conducted by the Monmouth University Polling Institute in West Long Branch, NJ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

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

[Q1-4 held for future release.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Note: Q5 was rotated with Q4-Trump impeachment question, which will be\nreleased tomorrow<\/em>.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5.<\/span> Looking ahead to the 2020 election for President, do you think that Donald Trump should be reelected, or do you think that it is time to have someone else in office?<\/span><\/p>\n
TREND:
ALL REGISTERED VOTERS<\/em> <\/td>		\n Dec.
\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td>		\n Nov.
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n Sept.
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n Aug.
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n June
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n May
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n March
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n Jan.
\n 2019\n <\/td>		\n Nov.
\n 2018\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Should be reelected\n <\/td>\n 43%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 42%\n <\/td>\n 39%\n <\/td>\n 39%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 38%\n <\/td>\n 37%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Someone else in office\n <\/td>\n 54%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 55%\n <\/td>\n 57%\n <\/td>\n 57%\n <\/td>\n 59%\n <\/td>\n 60%\n <\/td>\n 57%\n <\/td>\n 57%\n <\/td>\n 58%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (835)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (1,017)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (689)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (660)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (719)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (746)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (735)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (716)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q6-10 held for future release.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Q11 WAS ASKED OF DEMOCRATS\/LEANING DEMOCRATIC\nVOTERS.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

11.<\/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<\/em>] [NAMES WERE ROTATED<\/em>] <\/span><\/p>\n
\n TREND:
\n (with leaners)<\/em>\n <\/td>		\n Dec.<\/strong>\n 2019<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n Nov.\n 2019\n <\/td>\n Sept.\n 2019\n <\/td>\n Aug.\n 2019\n <\/td>\n June\n 2019\n <\/td>\n May\n 2019\n <\/td>\n April\n 2019\n <\/td>\n March\n 2019\n <\/td>\n Jan.\n 2019\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Joe Biden\n <\/td>\n 26%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 23%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n 19%\n <\/td>\n 32%\n <\/td>\n 33%\n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n 29%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Bernie Sanders\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 14%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n 16%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Elizabeth Warren\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 23%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 10%\n <\/td>\n 6%\n <\/td>\n 8%\n <\/td>\n 8%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Pete Buttigieg\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 9%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 6%\n <\/td>\n 8%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Mike Bloomberg\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Amy Klobuchar\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Andrew Yang\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Cory Booker\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Juli\u00e1n Castro\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Deval Patrick\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tom Steyer\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tulsi Gabbard\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Marianne Williamson\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Michael Bennet\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n John Delaney\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n 0%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Other\n <\/td>\n <1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n \n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) No one\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Undecided\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 7%\n <\/td>\n 10%\n <\/td>\n 10%\n <\/td>\n 11%\n <\/td>\n 9%\n <\/td>\n 14%\n <\/td>\n 8%\n <\/td>\n 9%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Kamala Harris *<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Beto O\u2019Rourke *<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n n\/a<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (345)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (434)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (298)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (306)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (334)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (330)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (310)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

     * Candidate not\nincluded in current poll.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q12 WAS ASKED OF DEMOCRATS\/LEANING\nDEMOCRATIC VOTERS.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

12.<\/span> Which type of candidate would you prefer if you had to make a choice between: a Democrat you agree with on most issues but would have a hard time beating Donald Trump or a Democrat you do NOT agree with on most issues but would be a stronger candidate against Donald Trump? [CHOICES WERE ROTATED<\/em>]<\/span><\/p>\n
\n   TREND:<\/em>
\n DEMOCRATS\/DEM LEANERS ONLY<\/em>\n <\/td>		Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong><\/td>		May
2019<\/td>		Jan.
2019 <\/td><\/tr>
\n Agrees with but hard time \n beating Trump\n <\/td>\n 30%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 34%\n <\/td>\n 33%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Do\n not agree with but stronger \n against\n Trump\n <\/td>\n 56%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 58%\n <\/td>\n 56%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL)\n Rejects choice\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 6%\n <\/td>\n 10%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (334)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q13 held for future release.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[ASKED OF EVERYONE.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

14.<\/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 very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, or very 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 TREND: ALL REGISTERED VOTERS<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Very\n favorable\n <\/td>\n Somewhat\n favorable\n <\/td>\n Somewhat\n unfavorable\n <\/td>\n Very\n unfavorable\n <\/td>\n No
\n opinion\n <\/td>		 Not heard of <\/td>\n (n)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Former Vice President\n Joe Biden\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 34%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (835)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September\n 2019<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 26%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 27%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (1,017)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Vermont Senator Bernie\n Sanders\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 15%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 39%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 40%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (835)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September\n 2019<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 24%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 37%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (1,017)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Massachusetts Senator\n Elizabeth Warren\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 39%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 35%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (835)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September\n 2019<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 31%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (1,017)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n South Bend, Indiana\n Mayor Pete Buttigieg\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (835)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September\n 2019<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (1,017)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Former\n New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September 2019<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Entrepreneur\n Andrew Yang<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 22%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 24%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September\n 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n President\n Donald Trump<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 47%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 34%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 50%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (835)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — September\n 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 30%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 50%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (1,017)<\/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>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
TREND:
DEMOCRATS\/DEM LEANERS ONLY<\/em><\/strong> <\/td>		 Favorable <\/td> Unfavorable<\/td> No
opinion <\/td>		 Not
heard of<\/td>		\n (n)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Former Vice President Joe Biden<\/td>\n 76%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 76%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (345)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — September 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 72%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (434)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n    — August 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 66%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (298)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — May 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 74%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (334)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
  — April 2019<\/em> <\/td>\n 72%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (330)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
  — March 2019<\/em> <\/td>\n 76%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (310)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
  — January 2019<\/em> <\/td>\n 80%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/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>
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders<\/td>\n 74%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 72%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (345)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — September 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 75%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (434)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — August 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 64%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 24%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 2%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (298)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — May 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 65%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n 12%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n (334)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — April  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 65%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (330)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — March  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 70%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (310)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — January  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 68%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/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>
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren<\/td>\n 76%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 15%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 79%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (345)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — September 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 75%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (434)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — August 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 65%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (298)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — May 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 60%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (334)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — April  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 51%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (330)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — March  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 49%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 19%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 15%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (310)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — January  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 57%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/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>
South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg<\/td>\n 53%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 49%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 21%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (345)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — September 2019<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 53%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 18%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (434)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — August 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 43%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 20%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 23%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (298)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — May 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 35%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 24%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 30%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (334)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — April  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 35%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 34%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (330)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — March  2019<\/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   — January  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 27%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 58%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/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 Former\n New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 40%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 39%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — November 2019<\/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   — September 2019<\/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    — August 2019<\/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   — May 2019<\/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   — April  2019<\/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   — March  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 27%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 26%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 31%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (310)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — January  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 35%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 25%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/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>
Entrepreneur Andrew Yang<\/td>\n 42%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 17%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 27%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 14%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (384)<\/em><\/strong><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — November 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — September 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n —<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — August 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 24%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 36%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 29%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (298)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — May 2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 13%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 42%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (334)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   — April  2019<\/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   — March  2019<\/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   — January  2019<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 26%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n 53%<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (313)<\/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

[QUESTIONS 15 & 16 WERE ROTATED<\/em>]<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

15.<\/span> Who was a better president: George Washington or Donald Trump?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n ALL REGISTERED VOTERS<\/em>\n <\/td>Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n George Washington\n <\/td>\n 71%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Donald Trump\n <\/td>\n 15%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Both equally\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

16.<\/span> Who was a better president: George Washington or Barack Obama?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n ALL REGISTERED VOTERS<\/em>\n <\/td>Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n George Washington\n <\/td>\n 58%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Barack Obama\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Both equally\n <\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q17-26 held 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 December 4 to 8, 2019 with a national random sample of 903\nadults age 18 and older, in English. This includes 363 contacted by a live\ninterviewer on a landline telephone and 540 contacted by a live interviewer on\na cell phone. The results in this poll\nrelease are based on a subsample of 838 registered voters. 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. The full sample\nis weighted for region, age, education, gender and race based on US Census\ninformation (CPS 2018 supplement). Data collection support provided by\nBraun Research (field) and Dynata (RDD sample). For results based on the registered\nvoter sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to\nsampling has a maximum margin of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points\n(unadjusted for sample design). Sampling error can be larger for\nsub-groups (see table below). In addition to sampling error, one should\nbear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting\nsurveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n DEMOGRAPHICS (weighted)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n REGISTERED VOTERS<\/em>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 27% Republican<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 42%\n Independent<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 31%\n Democrat<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 49% Male<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 51%\n Female<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 28% 18-34<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 34% 35-54<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 38% 55+<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 67% White<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 12% Black<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 15% Hispanic<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   6% Asian\/Other<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 68% No degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 32% 4 year degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n DEMOGRAPHICS (weighted)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n DEMOCRATIC VOTERS<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 37% Male<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 63% Female<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 34% 18-34<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 29% 35-54<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 37% 55+<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 58% White<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 21% Black<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 14%\n Hispanic<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   8% Asian\/Other<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 58% No\n degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 42% 4 year\n degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em> <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

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

Biden, Sanders, Warren continue to jockey for 2020 pole position <\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":40802245023,"template":"","geography":[18],"class_list":["post-40802244986","poll","type-poll","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","geography-national"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802244986","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":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802244986\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40802245113,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802244986\/revisions\/40802245113"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40802245023"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40802244986"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"geography","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/geography?post=40802244986"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}