« Dems Lead Presidential Race in NH; Senate Race Still Up for Grabs | Main | North Carolina Question Suggestions »

January 12, 2016


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


So the Republican race "is really remarkably steady," with not one candidate seeing "their support shift by more than 2 points". On the Democratic side, however, "Clinton is down 6 points .. while Sanders is up 6 points", reducing what was an impressive 18-point lead to a narrow one of just 6 points. "Tightening up" indeed!

That's all interesting stuff. But considering the eye-catching change on the Democratic side and the lack of any on the GOP side, why is the Democratic primary relegated to a three-paragraph summary at the bottom of the piece, buried underneath a full nine paragraphs about the Republicans? That seems counter-intuitive.

Bill Sullivan

Who will argue any thing for Trump. Many say what the very people who put Natural Born in the constitution meant in 1790, was that both the man and woman of a child had to be citizen. They say you can tell this by the use of the word CITIZENS (plural) Let's look at what they said and show the impossibility of that ILLOGICAL thought.
"[T]he children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States."...
This shows:
1. That it is talking about more than one ( many American women) and or couples having children. Thus it says plural (citizens)
2. The fact it said the children, means it is talking about any and all.
3. Does it mean they (both man and woman) are are citizens, No.
HOW DO YOU KNOW No. 3 is right "no"?
4. Because it addresses a woman that that might have a child with any man in the world. including those that have never lived here.
5. Then it explains. that only if that man, AT SOME POINT have lived here, NOT that he EVER became a citizen, can the Child be considered Natural born.
What is the significance of seeing a 1790 repealed law?
*** It shows what the 8 founders who put it in the CONSTITUTION thought of as natural born. Because that cannot change. the LAW can change but the basic ONE PARENT cannot change, once you know what they were talking about. That is what we have seen in all the changes in law. Changes in details only but keeping the fundamentals.
Understand there are people who for various incentives or reasons hold views like a religion but you now see what the founders thought..And there is NOTHING they can do to get around it. But the way the new Citizenship and naturalization changes over the years, make it easier for people like Cruz. Don't be deceived. A million opinions does not matter as much as ONE of the founders and now you have examined 8 of the 11 WHO PARTICIPATED in the 1790 law.

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: 2006-2016

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
Email Sign up: New Polling Data email