{"id":40802245749,"date":"2020-02-27T10:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-02-27T15:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/?post_type=poll&p=40802245749"},"modified":"2020-02-27T08:36:31","modified_gmt":"2020-02-27T13:36:31","slug":"monmouthpoll_sc_022720","status":"publish","type":"poll","link":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/reports\/monmouthpoll_sc_022720\/","title":{"rendered":"Biden Maintains Lead"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

West Long Branch, NJ<\/em> \u2013\nJoe Biden stays well atop the field in South Carolina, according to the third Monmouth\n<\/em><\/strong>(\u201cMon-muth\u201d)\n<\/em><\/strong>University Poll<\/em><\/strong> of likely Democratic primary voters there. Tom Steyer and Bernie\nSanders are fighting for the second spot. Biden\u2019s wide lead in the poll is\nunderpinned by solid support among black voters in the state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Among South\nCarolina voters who are likely to participate in the Democratic primary on\nSaturday, support currently stands at 36% for Biden, 16% for Sanders, and 15%\nfor Steyer. Candidates who currently fall below the statewide delegate\nviability threshold include Elizabeth Warren (8%), Pete Buttigieg (6%), Amy\nKlobuchar (4%), and Tulsi Gabbard (1%). Another 15% of likely primary voters\nremain undecided and do not lean toward any candidate at this time. In\nMonmouth\u2019s October poll, 33% supported Biden, 16% Warren, and 12% Sanders. It\nshould be noted that interviews for the current poll were conducted after the\nNevada caucuses, wrapping up right before Tuesday night\u2019s debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBiden\nappears to be holding on to his core support among African Americans in South\nCarolina. The recent endorsement by Rep. James Clyburn should help solidify\nthat,\u201d said Patrick Murray, director of\nthe independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Black\nvoters, who form a majority of the likely primary electorate, back Biden (45%)\nby a wide margin over Steyer (17%) and Sanders (13%). White voters are more\ndivided, with Biden (26%) followed by Sanders (17%), Warren (13%), Buttigieg\n(13%), and Steyer (12%). Among those who identify themselves as Democrats, 44%\nback Biden, followed by Sanders (15%) and Steyer (14%), while those who are\nindependent or identify with another party are divided among Biden (22%),\nSanders (18%), Steyer (15%), and Warren (11%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just over 4\nin 10 likely South Carolina Democratic primary voters are set on their\ncandidate choice, including 39% who say they are firmly decided and another 4%\nwho have already voted by absentee ballot. Biden (59%) and Sanders (57%) are\nthe most likely to have their support locked in. Less than half of those\nbacking other candidates are firmly decided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA key\nmetric for Biden in this make-or-break state is that his support appears to be\nfirm. There is still a large chunk of the electorate who are undecided, but\nthey are mainly moderate black voters. That\u2019s a group that tends to like\nBiden,\u201d said Murray.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mike\nBloomberg is not on the ballot in South Carolina, but 1 in 4 likely primary\nvoters say they would be either very (9%) or somewhat (16%) likely to vote for\nhim if he was. Another 19% would not be too likely to vote for him and 46%\nwould not be at all likely. Those who would be at least somewhat likely to\nsupport Bloomberg include 41% of Steyer voters, 26% of Biden voters, and 19% of\nSanders voters.  [Note: 2% of those polled actually volunteered that they would vote for\nBloomberg when initially asked for their candidate choice. These respondents\nwere reassigned to a second choice after being informed that Bloomberg is not\non the ballot and cannot be written in.]<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first\nthree contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada have not had much impact on\nhow South Carolina voters view this race. Very few say those results made them\ntake a second look at the field, with 8% saying they changed their mind about\nwhom to support and 7% saying they did not change their choice in the end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Democratic\nprimary voters are looking for electability \u2013 66% say beating President Donald\nTrump is more important to their vote than lining up with a candidate on any\npolicy issue. Another 16% say electability is about as important as their top\npolicy concern while 15% say it is less important than issue alignment. Among\nthose who say beating Trump is their top priority, 38% support Biden, 16%\nsupport Sanders, and 13% support Steyer. Among those who say it is not a top\npriority, Biden (32%) still retains a lead over Sanders (16%) and Steyer (15%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking at candidate qualities, 53% of likely Democratic primary voters say they want someone who can unite the country, while 41% say they prefer someone who can bring about change. Interestingly, this change number is higher than in the Super Tuesday states Monmouth has polled (32% in California and 27% in Virginia). In those states, Sanders is the most popular choice among \u201cchange\u201d voters, but in South Carolina it is Biden (29%), with the edge over Sanders (20%) and Steyer (18%). Biden (43%) has a larger lead among \u201cunite\u201d voters over Sanders (14%) and Steyer (12%). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Palmetto State Democratic primary voters are divided on the\npossibility of beating Trump in November. Over 4 in 10 (44%) think the\nincumbent will be reelected, while a nearly identical number (46%) think he\nwill lose to the Democrat. Still, nearly two-thirds (65%) of likely primary\nvoters feel optimistic about this year\u2019s election (32% very and 33% somewhat),\nwhile only 25% are pessimistic (9% very and 16% somewhat). Black voters (68%)\nare more likely than white voters (58%) to feel optimistic about the 2020\nelection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth University Poll<\/em>\nwas conducted by telephone from February 23 to 25, 2020 with 454 South Carolina voters who are likely to vote in the\nDemocratic presidential primary on February 29, 2020, out of 713\nregistered voters that were contacted for the poll. The\nquestion results in this release have a margin of error of +\/- 4.6 percentage\npoints. The poll was\nconducted by the 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

1.<\/span> If the Democratic primary election for president was today, would you vote for [NAMES WERE ROTATED<\/em>]?\u00a0 [If UNDECIDED:<\/em> If you had to vote for one of these candidates at this moment, who do you lean toward?]<\/span><\/p>\n
\n TREND:
\n (with leaners)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>		Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td>		Oct.
2019<\/td>		July
2019<\/td><\/tr>
\n Joe Biden\n <\/td>\n 36%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 33%\n <\/td>\n 39%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Bernie Sanders\n <\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 12%\n <\/td>\n 10%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tom Steyer\n <\/td>\n 15%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Elizabeth Warren\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 16%\n <\/td>\n 9%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Pete Buttigieg\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 3%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Amy Klobuchar\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Tulsi Gabbard\n <\/td>\n 1%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 1%\n <\/td>\n <1%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Other\n <\/td>\n 0%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 15%*\n <\/td>\n 17%*\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Undecided\n <\/td>\n 15%<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 17%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n     (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n (402)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (405)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

      <\/em>*\nIncludes candidates who have since dropped out.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

2.<\/span> Are you firmly decided on your candidate choice or are you open to the possibility of voting for a different candidate on primary day?\u00a0 [If OPEN<\/em>: <\/strong>Would you rate the possibility of supporting a different candidate as high, moderate, or low?]<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Firmly decided <\/td>\n 39%<\/strong><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Open to different candidate \u2026<\/td>high possibility<\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
moderate possibility<\/td>\n 22%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
low possibility<\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Already voted<\/em><\/td>\n 4%<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Don’t know<\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
No first choice (from Q1)<\/em><\/td>\n 15%<\/em><\/strong><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(n)<\/em><\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

3.<\/span> Mike Bloomberg will not be on the ballot in South Carolina. How likely would you be to vote for him if he was on the ballot \u2013 very likely, somewhat likely, not too likely, or not at all likely?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Very likely<\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Somewhat likely<\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Not too likely<\/td>\n 19%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Not at all likely<\/td>\n 46%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Already voted<\/em><\/td>\n 4%<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Don’t know<\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n       (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

4.<\/span> Did the results of the prior contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada make you take a second look at any of the candidates, or did these results not really change your thinking about who you will support in the primary? [If TOOK A SECOND LOOK:<\/em> <\/strong>Did you actually change your mind about who to support or not?]<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Took a second look, and\u2026<\/td>changed mind<\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
did not change mind<\/td>\n 7%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Not really change thinking<\/td>\n 77%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Already voted<\/em> <\/td>\n 4%<\/em><\/strong><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don’t know\n <\/td>\n 4%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

5.<\/span> When thinking about who you are supporting in the Democratic primary, how much of a factor is beating Donald Trump next November \u2013 is it more important than any policy issue you are concerned with, about as important as your top policy concern, or less important than your top policy concern?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
More important<\/td>\n 66%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
About as important<\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Less important<\/td>\n 15%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Don’t know<\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n       (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

6.<\/span> If you had to choose, are you more concerned about choosing a candidate who can bring about change or a candidate who can unite the country?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Bring about change<\/td>\n 41%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Unite the country<\/td>\n 53%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Neither<\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Don’t know<\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n       (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

7.<\/span> Do you feel optimistic or pessimistic about the 2020 presidential election? [Is that very or somewhat optimistic\/pessimistic]?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Very optimistic<\/td>\n 32%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Somewhat optimistic<\/td>\n 33%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Somewhat pessimistic<\/td>\n 16%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Very pessimistic<\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Neither, don\u2019t care<\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Don\u2019t know<\/td>\n 7%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n       (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

8.<\/span> As of right now, what do you think the chances are that Donald Trump gets reelected in November \u2013 do you think he will definitely get reelected, probably get reelected, probably lose to the Democrat, or definitely lose to the Democrat?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>Feb.<\/strong>
2020<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Definitely get reelected<\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Probably get reelected<\/td>\n 38%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Probably lose to the Democrat<\/td>\n 28%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
Definitely lose to the Democrat<\/td>\n 18%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Depends on the Democrat<\/td>\n 3%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
(VOL) Don\u2019t know<\/td>\n 7%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n       (n)<\/em>\n <\/td>\n (454)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\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 February 23 to 25, 2020 with\na statewide random sample of 713 South Carolina voters drawn from a list of\nregistered voters who participated in a primary or general election in the past\ntwo election cycles (excluding those who have consistently voted in Republican\nprimaries), or have registered to vote since November 2018. This\nincludes 231 contacted by a live interviewer on a landline telephone and 482\ncontacted by a live interviewer on a cell phone, in English. Results are based on 454 voters who are likely to vote\nin the Democratic presidential primary on February 29, 2020. \nMonmouth is responsible for all aspects of the survey design, data weighting\nand analysis. The full sample is weighted for age, gender, race, education and region\nbased on state voter registration list information and U.S. Census information\n(CPS 2018 supplement). Data collection support provided by Braun Research\n(field) and Aristotle (voter sample). For results based on the sample of likely Democratic primary voters, one can say\nwith 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling has a maximum\nmargin of plus or minus 4.6 percentage points (unadjusted for sample design).\nSampling error can be larger for sub-groups (see table below). In addition\nto sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical\ndifficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the\nfindings of opinion polls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n DEMOGRAPHICS (weighted)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Self-Reported\n Party<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 63% Democrat<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 33% Independent<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   4% Republican<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 41% Male<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 59% Female<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 20% 18-34<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 23% 35-49<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 34% 50-64<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 23% 65+<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 37% White,\n non-Hispanic<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 57% Black<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   6% Other<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 61% No\n degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 39% 4 year\n degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 39% Low\n CD1\/6<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 29% PeeDee\n CD5\/7<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 32%\n Upstate CD 2\/3\/4<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/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.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sanders and Steyer jockey for second<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":40802245764,"template":"","geography":[84],"class_list":["post-40802245749","poll","type-poll","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","geography-south-carolina"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802245749","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\/40802245749\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40802245770,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802245749\/revisions\/40802245770"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40802245764"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40802245749"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"geography","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/geography?post=40802245749"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}