Catching up on new Rasmussen poll of NM


Like other reporters, I neglected to report on a new poll of New Mexico last week as I covered the end of the legislative session. So here’s the skinny on the newest poll:


  • President Barack Obama leads Republican Rick Santorum 55 percent to 37 percent and Mitt Romney 55 percent to 36 percent in potential head-to-head contests, reports The Santa Fe New Mexican’s Steve Terrell.
  • Capitol Report New Mexico breaks down the numbers further and reports that the poll found Gov. Susana Martinez’s approval rating at 54 percent among Democrats and 66 percent overall. In addition, it reports that in the U.S. Senate race, Democrat Martin Heinrich leads Republican Heather Wilson 45 percent to 43 percent. Wilson was tied with Democrat Hector Balderas at 44 percent apiece.

The automated survey of 500 likely voters was conducted Feb. 14 and has margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

You can read more about the poll here, but you need a Rasmussen subscription to get to many of the details.

8 thoughts on “Catching up on new Rasmussen poll of NM

  1. Dr. J:
    You patronizing tone and presumptuous attitude aside, the reality is that Heather Wilson is the best campaigner the New Mexico GOP has put forward in the past twenty years, and very likely neither man has a chance of beating her; while Congressman (yes, he has a title, which you might want to – for once – consider showing the respect to use) Heinrich – who, as previously stated, no one refers to as “Marty” – has a slightly better chance of overcoming the former Congresswoman’s electoral talents, the reality remains that it is unlikely that either can overcome.  Frankly, considering the sparsity of good candidates (who actually stand a chance, anyway) for the first district – in either party – and how well Auditor Balderas is doing as his current job – particularly in comparison to his predecessors or his AG counter-part – I’d far prefer it if both men remained where they currently are.

  2. Well, DJ, maybe the Republican presidential nominee will at least pick someone better than Palin…

  3. Oh IP, you are a doozy.  We would never think you would automatically anoint Heinrich (Marty) over Hector, now would you?  I’m sure you would be as happy with Hector as Marty, que no?  But you do have it correct about the GOP Prez guys, they are dead meat in New Mexico, and probably about 38 other states, what a sorry field the GOP has this time, even worse than McCain, and I didn’t think that was even possible 4 years ago.

  4. Rasmussen is a former GOP pollster who often appears on Fox News to trumpet his polls findings. As others have noted, Rasmussen has a pronounced bias towards the GOP.

    And if Obama is running so far ahead of Romney and Santorum in New Mexico, it appears that Obama is headed to a similar margin of victory nationally as he had in 2008.

  5. For that matter, I also meant to say Nate Silver… I had a Josh Marshall article up at the time.  I am, apparently, having a supremely confused day.

  6. It should be noted, Hemingway, that Josh Silver (whose blog you link to below) gives Rasmussen a 4-point Republican home field advantage on average – meaning that they tend to show numbers for GOP candidates that are an average of four points higher than they really are – and, conversely, tends to rate Democrats about an equal amount lower.  This being the case, one has to wonder how far behind the President the GOP candidates are really trailing.  It should also be noted that this trend really only holds true in national breakdowns; their state-levels are far less consistent, and the Heinrich-Wilson race numbers probably couldn’t be counted on even if they weren’t already a statistical tie.

  7. Interestingly Rasmussen’s polls have faced heavy criticism. It supposedly has a flawed methodology. Here is an 2010 article describing the biased results that is still true today.
    When I hear Rasmussen, I ignore the poll. As one critic wrote: Rasmussen’s “cavalier attitude toward polling convention,” mostly done in the interest of cost savings, and closes with “the methodological shortcuts that the firm takes may now be causing it to pay a price in terms of the reliability of its polling.”