« Democrat leads in key Iowa race | Main | Toss-up on Mississippi ‘personhood’ amendment »

November 07, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


So... you refuse to do a generic ballot in virginia, but you do one here?

Tom Jensen

We weren't going to do one of our final 2011 polls somewhere where the only thing we had to ask about was the generic ballot. In Mississippi we had the Gubernatorial race, two contested down ballot races, and 3 constitutional amendments to look at. If Virginia's Governor's race had been up this year we certainly would have polled it and done a generic legislative ballot as we did in 2009 and as I'm sure we'll do in 2013.


Thanks for this most informative poll on Mississippi. I've been keenly interested in what's going to happen in tomorrow's elections. Did you by any chance poll Mississippi's views on same-sex marriage?


Give me a break. When has Mississippi ever been a democrat state? Of course the republicans are going to have the edge this Tuesday.


"When has Mississippi ever been a democrat state?"

Mississippi started drifting away from the Democratic party at the Presidential level in the 1960's, but that process at the state level took much longer. The Democratic party held a marjority in both chambers of the Mississippi state legislature (the state senate and the state house) from the end of Reconstruction until just after the 2003 election, when the GOP gained control of the state senate for the first time due to multiple party-switchers. Since Reconstruction, the GOP has never had a majority in the state house. Also, following Reconstruction, Mississippi did not elect a GOP governor until 1991, and elected a Democratic governor as recently as 1999.

In fact, the states that made up the Confederacy were often referred to as the "Solid South" from the end of Reconstruction until the mid-1960's because the South basically voted as a block for the candidates of the Democratic party. Things change.


@Jeff, You need to check your history. Mississippi was nearly 100% Democrat throughout the majority of it's history. Only after the era of Reagan did it begin the transformation to Republican.


Mississippi was a solidly Democratic state right up until Democrats decided to stop being the party of racist whites and the Republicans eagerly filled that void. Then it swung to being a Republican state, first at the federal level and devolving down over time to the local levels.

Dustin Ingalls

Steve: We did. Those numbers will be out either later this week or early next.

Jeff: Are you kidding me? MS had a Democratic governor (granted, they'd be Republicans today) every year from 1825 to 1870 (with a few exceptions) and again from 1876 to 1992, and then again 2000 to 2004.

Andrew Carvin

Our bodies are designed for sex because the process of evolution is powered by sex. You exist today because a lot of people had sex, and naturally people who had the most sex had the most babies. In evolution the people who have the most babies win because whoever has the most babies will be most representative of a species.

Fast forward millions of years, and you end up with humans beings who are healthier when they have sex on a regular basis. It relieves stress, it involves close social contact, promotes well-being, etc. Sex is not optional for most people who want to remain healthy.

At the beginning of human civilization it was necessary to make lots of babies mainly because other than fecundity humans are very ill equipped to deal with the natural world. Comparatively we have poor body strength, immune systems, reflexes, senses, etc even when compared to our closest ape ancestors. We survived our early evolutionary years because we are good at making babies.

Over time, social and technological developments would make baby making less and less important for the survival of the human species because attrition of babies dramatically decreased, and far more survived to adulthood then ever before.

Today we have bodies evolved to need sex, but have sociological and technological developments that make having unnecessary babies detrimental. Babies consume resources, and with most of today’s babies reaching adulthood, not all of those babies will have resources to consume.

This is why free birth control (abortion, pills, etc) is good. Having unnecessary babies causes financial strain on the family, causes strain on societal resources, increases crime, and a host of other negative consequences all of which cost money to fix. By providing free birth control you are avoiding the far more costly consequences of allowing unnecessary babies to be born.

A person's right over what happens to their own body is one of the most precious rights we have. Acknowledgement of this right prevents all manner of atrocities (non-voluntary organ harvesting, slavery, etc), and protects those who do not have enough money/power to be protected otherwise. Without the right to abortion any other rights women have are meaningless as they are only one rape away from being treated subhuman. Every woman should have the right to get an abortion if she chooses to do so.

The fetus is a potential person that looks increasingly human during development. However, without the necessary mental development acquired through experiencing life after birth it is no more a person than a skin cell because it does not have a personality matrix.

Without a personality matrix it is no more a person than a doll made of meat. The only reason that human babies look like “little people” is to engender parental feelings after birth by making them look cute and non-threatening so that we do not kill or eat them. This is something that developed over millions of years of evolution, and can be seen in a wide variety of other animals.

Anti-Abortionists view women as baby factories to pump out units to further their agenda. They don't care about the actual children. If they did they wouldn't orgasm every time the Republitards suggest cutting back on social programs that help/protect mothers/children.

Anti-Abortionists = "We want you to poop out babies until you DIE, and we are not going to help you in any way that actually costs us to take care of all those children. Just make sure you brainwash them to be religious/vote Republican before they die of starvation, or end up in jail. Hurr hurr derp derp."

Religions get their power base mostly by brainwashing innocent children into their warped delusional view of reality. It's a form of enforced mental retardation that I liken to child abuse. So it's really no wonder religions oppose anything that doesn't have women pooping out babies until they die. Reproductive control/choice threatens Religion’s power base.

Here is the fundamental difference between pro-choice, and anti-choice people.

Pro-abortion = Fighting for the right to control their own bodies.

Anti-abortion = Fighting for the right to control the bodies of other people.

Anti-abortionists are evil.

Obama 2012

It's interesting that the results here (10% win for NO) are off a bit from your prediction (1% win for YES) ... but certainly not in the direction that those who claim you are biased would expect.

Anyway - the results on this are very encouraging. It's also important to note that Mitt Romney said he supports this amendment. An amendment so far right wing that it fails even in Mississippi. Romney is running for President of the Tea Party, not of the United States. He is not fit for the White House.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

PPP POLLS BY YEAR: 2006-2017

We came to PPP after a public poll in the San Jose Mayoral race showed our opponent ahead by 8 points. They found our candidate (Sam Liccardo) ahead by 3 points and that allowed us to be able to push back with the press against the perception that our opponent was now a strong favorite in the race. Sam ended up winning by 2 points and is now the next Mayor of San Jose. PPP worked very fast and had a very accurate read on the electorate when we needed them
–Eric Jaye, Storefront Political Media.

For more information on hiring PPP for your polling needs click here

Among the Best Pollsters, Year after Year.

2014 :
Rated Most Accurate Pollster in Governor’s Races Nationally

2012 :
Correctly predicted the winner of every state in the Presidential race, and the winner of every major Senate race

2010 :
First pollster to predict Scott Brown’s upset win over Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race, only pollster to predict Christine O’Donnell’s upset victory over Mike Castle in the Delaware Republican Senate primary.

2008 :
Ranked by the Wall Street Journal as the 2nd most accurate swing state pollster in the Presidential election.

WSJ Graphic


Public Policy Polling
2912 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 201
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: 888.621.6988

Questions or Comments?
Email Us




Dean Debnam Dean Debnam
Public Policy Polling CEO

PPP is best known for putting out highly accurate polling on key political races across the country, but we also do affordable private research for candidates and organizations.  Why pay tens of thousands of dollars for a survey when one of the most reliable companies in the nation can do it for less?"

Learn more about working
with PPP for your next project >


Facebook Facebook
Twitter Twitter
RSS Feed RSS Reader