Talk:Opinion polling for the 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries

I don't want to mess with the Aggregate Polls graph ...

There are a couple of polls which need to be added, and I'd prefer that the editors who have been working on the polls handle them for now: Morning Consult (Feb. 23-25) and Fox News (Feb. 19-22). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:06, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

• I went ahead and added these to the tables but not to the Aggregate Polls graph. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

First poll featuring Ramaswamy

Should this poll be added to the page? 71.28.115.94 (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, that's the first poll I linked in my comment above, so I agree it should be added. (There is one other poll with Ramaswamy already listed, the McLaughlin & Associates Feb. 17-23 poll.) --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

CPAC

Do we include the CPAC straw poll or do we leave it out because it's a straw poll and not an actual poll run by an accredited polling service? Scu ba (talk) 03:50, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

• Straw polls, which are not conducted according to standard polling methods, should not be listed in this article. In the past, when we covered straw polls in election articles, we put them in a separate article, not with regular polls. See Template:2016 United States presidential election series. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

"Ramaswamy declared his candidacy"

Should there be a "Ramaswamy declared his candidacy" marker on the table for the polls since he is listed as a major candidate on the main article? Scu ba (talk) 23:28, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, there should be. I added it. DragonLegit04 (talk) 20:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

There is a lot of work to do formatting this article, please do not make these mistakes going forward

We cannot include inline links, please convert these to references with appropriate information and per MOS:TABLECAPTION and other accessibility guidelines, all data tables need to have semantic markup. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistent use of month name formatting

As I scrolled through the poll tables from state to state, I couldn't help but notice that the article seemingly randomly switches from using full names (e.g. "April") to abbreviated names (e.g. "Apr").

This made it somewhat difficult to do a Ctrl+F search of polls from specific points in time. Do other editors agree we should stick to using one format or the other? If so, which format? Are any editors acquainted with any relevant manual of style guidelines on this?

Thanks,

 Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:13, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

About those May surveys with Trump ≥63% . . .

I don’t see them in the table, although the chart—whose trendline has Mr. Trump hitting 60% at one point (FiveThirtyEight never has him above 55%)—displays four such surveys. What’s going on here? Encyclopedia Lu (talk) 08:47, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Should we add a way to know which polls are qualifying?

I think making it be shown which polls are qualifying based on the RNC's criteria would be a productive change. I see no reasons why it would be a net negative to the article TheFellaVB (talk) 06:26, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

The problem with that is the RNC is not making this information known beforehand. It only became known that certain polls did not qualify after the invitations were issued for the first debate. Furthermore, the information only came to light due to candidates who failed to qualify, and would have qualified otherwise. Unless RNC publishes their own list of qualifying polls, it is speculation and would need to be attributed to the RS making the speculation. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 12:33, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

We should continue with including any polls that are reported in reliable sources. We can also note which ones are not recognised by the Republican National Committee, or which ones are. Onetwothreeip (talk) 08:46, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

October 3

How come no one is editing this article to include polls of a later date?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

rip 2603:6011:9600:52C0:8914:46F4:6C11:21C4 (talk) 03:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Problems with the Maps section

At Opinion polling for the 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries#Maps, there are a few problems with the maps.

1. The maps fail to distinguish between states where the candidate has not placed above 1% in the last 6 months, and states where no polls have been held for the last 6 months. They should be colored differently from each other. A candidate can't poll over 1% if there haven't been any polls in the state.
2. The percentages for each state should be expressed as ranges, not as single numbers. For example, the shades for the Donald Trump map, represent 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, and 60%+. Should that say something like 20-29%, 30-39%, 40-49%, 50-59%, and 60%+ instead? It's unclear whether a state where Trump had 19% would be included within the 20% shade or not.
3. It's not clear what shade is used if a candidate has achieved different results in different polls in the same state during the last 6 months. The highest percentage, perhaps?

-- Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:24, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Moving Hurd into "Others"

Hurd's best showing was a 1.7%, but for every other poll he either isn't included or hovered at 0 to 0.1%, I know he is listed as a major candidate, but I feel like he should have his column be removed and moved over into the "others" column due to his lack of presence, especially since he dropped out. Scu ba (talk) 20:52, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I think we should wait for 1 or 2 more candidates to drop out and then make a make a new table for polling just like with previous election's primary cycles TheFellaVB (talk) 23:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

sounds good! Scu ba (talk) 18:47, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Now that Pence & Elder have withdrawn it seems like a good time to get started with the new table TheFellaVB (talk) 18:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)