FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
|
|
- Thomasina Griffith
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California Tabulations From a Survey of Californians Likely to Vote in the June 2016 Presidential Primary Election - prepared for the - Sacramento Bee and Capitol Alert June 2,
2 Introduction This volume presents the statistical data developed from a survey in California conducted among 1,002, of whom 571 are considered in the state s June Democratic presidential primary and 351 are in the Republican presidential primary. Interviews were administered by telephone in English and Spanish by live professionally trained interviewers calling from the Davis Research central location call center in Calabasas. Sampling Individual were sample at random from listings derived from the statewide voter registration rolls. Once a voter s name and telephone had been selected, interviews are attempted only with the specified voter. Interviews can be conducted on either the voter s landline or cell phone, depending on the source of the telephone listing from the voter file and the of the voter. In this survey, 581 were interviewed on their cell phone, and 421 were interviewed on a landline or other type of telephone. Prior to the start of data collection, professionally-trained telephone interviewers were briefed with regard to the survey s proper calling and interviewing procedures by the Study Director. This session provided both interviewers and supervisors with an overview of the study and includes a question-by-question review of all items in the survey. Interviewers then completed survey interviews by telephone through the computer-assisted telephone interviewing (TI) system. TI controls the telephone scripts read to individual respondents by displaying the appropriate questionnaire items and their valid response code alternatives in their proper sequence on computer screens at each interviewer's booth. The interviewer then reads each question aloud to the respondent from the screen and enters each respondent's pre-coded answer category through the keyboard directly to a computer disk. All answers are automatically stored in computer memory. In order to bring hard-to-reach respondents into the survey, up to four attempts were made to each telephone number selected for inclusion into the sample. Callbacks were made at different times and on different days to increase the probability of finding available for the interview. Where possible, appointments are made at specified dates and times to maximize convenience. 2
3 Data Processing The data file resulting from TI interviewing is itself virtually error-free. Even so, a final series of data checks were performed by means of a specially designed cleaning program that scrutinizes each respondent record for internally inconsistent information. Once the data were determined to be clean and error-free, the overall sample was weighted to align it to regional and demographic characteristics of the state s voter population. Guide to Reading the Tables The following is an explanation of the detailed statistical tabulations contained in this report: The question or questions upon which the data are based is shown at the top of each table. Tables are percentaged vertically with the raw percentage base appearing at the top of each column. The data have been weighted to known parameters of the statewide voter population. All percentages and frequencies reported in each table are therefore weighted tabulations. In instances where percentages are calculated on small bases (e.g., when the base is fewer than 100 respondents) the reader is urged to interpret the data with caution, since results are subject to larger levels of sampling error. Throughout the tables an asterisk is used to denote a value of less than 1/2 of 1%. A hyphen indicates zero value. On some tables the percentages may add to more than 100% due to multiple mentions. s of subgroups used in the tabulations may add to less than the total number of respondents due to some respondents not reporting that characteristic. 3
4 Subgroup Definitions The following are some of the definitions applicable to some of the voter subgroups reported in this volume: Southern California: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Imperial, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Kern, and San Luis Obispo counties Northern California: all other 48 California counties Coastal Counties: San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Monterey, Santa Cruz, San Mateo, San Francisco, Contra Costa, Alameda, Marin, Napa, Solano, Sonoma, Santa Clara, Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte counties Inland counties: all other 38 California counties Los Angeles: Los Angeles County San Diego/Orange: San Diego County and Orange counties So Cal: San Bernardino, Riverside, Imperial, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo SF Bay Area: San Francisco, Marin, Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo Central Valley: Butte, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba North Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Del Norte, El Dorado, Humboldt, Inyo, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa, Mendocino, Monterey, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Plumas, San Benito, Santa Cruz, Sierra, Siskiyou, Trinity, and Tuolumne SF Bay/North/ Central Coast: San Francisco, Marin, Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, Del Norte, Humboldt, Trinity, Mendocino, Santa Cruz, and Monterey counties Central Valley/Sierras: Butte, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, Yuba, Siskiyou, Modoc, Lassen, Plumas, Butte, Lake, Sierra, Nevada, El Dorado, Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Tuolumne, Mono, Mariposa, and Inyo counties 4
5 Estimates of Sampling Error In any survey based on a sampling, there is some sampling error introduced into the data by the process of sampling itself. When the sample has been drawn using random processes, it is possible to apply probability principles to determine the potential range of such error. While survey samples of human populations rarely, if ever, meet all of the criteria theoretically required for the application of these principles, it is customary to use them as an approximation of error that is introduced as a result of sampling. The table below shows the range of error associated with samples of various sizes at the 95% confidence level, which is customary for most public opinion surveys. For example, if 50% of the overall sample of 571 in the Democratic presidential primary answered yes to a specific question, this statistic would have a sampling error of plus or minus about 4.1 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. This means that there is a 95% chance that had the overall population of all Democratic primary statewide been interviewed using the same questionnaire and methods, the results of such a census would yield a result between 45.9% and 54.1%. The same procedure can be used to estimate the sample error ranges of any other statistic contained in this report. Approximate percentage distribution of replies to question Sample size 10% 30% 50% 70% 90% 100 +/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /- 1.9 There are many other possible sources of error other than sampling variability in this and any other public opinion survey. The overall design and execution of the survey minimized the potential for these other sources of error. 5
6 Questions Asked (ASKED OF DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS WHO HAD ALREADY VOTED) In California's Democratic primary for President, for whom did you vote (NAMES AND PARTIES OF NDIDATES READ IN RANDOM ORDER)? (ASKED OF LIKELY DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED) If California's Democratic primary for President were being held today, for whom would you vote (NAMES AND PARTIES OF NDIDATES READ IN RANDOM ORDER)? (ASKED OF EACH NDIDATE S SUPPORTERS) Which of the following best describes your support for (Hillary Clinton) (Bernie Sanders) as the Democratic Party's nominee for President enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? (ASKED OF ALL DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS) Generally speaking, is your opinion of (Hillary Clinton) (Bernie Sanders) favorable or unfavorable? (ASKED OF REPUBLIN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS WHO HAD ALREADY VOTED) In California's Republican primary for President, for whom did you vote (NAMES AND PARTIES OF NDIDATES READ IN RANDOM ORDER) or someone else? (ASKED OF LIKELY REPUBLIN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED) If California's Republican primary for President were being held today, for whom would you vote (NAMES AND PARTIES OF NDIDATES READ IN RANDOM ORDER) or someone else? (ASKED OF ALL REPUBLIN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS) Generally speaking, is your opinion of Donald Trump favorable or unfavorable? (ASKED OF ALL LIKELY VOTERS IN LIFORNIA) If the November general election for President were being held today and the candidates were Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton, for whom would you vote Trump or Clinton? (ASKED OF ALL LIKELY VOTERS IN LIFORNIA) Suppose the candidates in the November general election for President were Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders. If the November general election for President were being held today, for whom would you vote Trump or Sanders? 6
7 Q1 (Banner 1) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Q1. In California's Democratic primary for President, for whom would/did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES)? Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders (DO NOT READ) OTHER (VOLUNTEERED) (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 46.8% 41.7% 43.7% 47.9% 49.6% 37.0% 49.4% 48.6% 42.2% 23.6% 49.2% % 21.0% 48.3% 47.2% 43.8% % 42.1% 44.6% 45.3% 35.1% 40.5% 51.8% 40.7% 29.9% 45.5% 68.1% 40.3% % 60.4% 40.4% 37.6% 44.8% % 0.9% 1.2% 0.7% 2.2% - 2.2% 1.5% 2.3% 0.8% - 1.1% - 0.5% 0.8% 1.0% 1.9% 0.8% % 10.3% 12.5% 10.3% 14.8% 9.9% 9.0% 8.4% 19.3% 11.5% 8.3% 9.4% % 17.8% 10.2% 13.3% 10.7% Field Research Corporation Table 18 7
8 Q1 (Banner 2) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary Gender Age Ethnicity Political Ideology Male Female or older White non- Hispanic Latino Black Asian/ Strongly conservative Moderately conservative Middle of the road Moderately liberal Strongly liberal Tea Party Republican Q1. In California's Democratic primary for President, for whom would/did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES)? A lot/ some Not at all/ dk Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders (DO NOT READ) OTHER (VOLUNTEERED) (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 39.1% 48.7% 14.7% 33.1% 48.8% 55.9% 55.6% 44.2% 45.9% 57.3% 33.5% 31.3% 50.7% 43.5% 40.7% 50.4% % 47.8% 39.6% 74.8% 60.1% 39.6% 31.4% 27.7% 44.2% 42.1% 35.9% 46.5% 46.4% 33.3% 39.0% 51.2% 46.8% * * % 1.2% 0.9% % 0.3% 3.3% 1.3% 0.7% - 0.8% 10.7% 1.4% 1.1% % 11.9% 10.8% 10.5% 6.8% 11.0% 12.4% 13.4% 10.3% 11.3% 6.9% 19.2% 11.5% 14.6% 16.4% 8.1% 2.8% - - Field Research Corporation Table 19 8
9 Q1 (Banner 3) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary H.S. or less Some college/ trade school Education Household Income Religion College Post work Under $20,000 $20,000 - $40,000 $40,000 $60, $100,000 $60,000 More than $100,000 Protestant/ other Christian Catholic religion No Born again Christian Yes, born again No, not born again Married/ Not married living together Marital Status Widow/ separated/ divorced Q1. In California's Democratic primary for President, for whom would/did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES)? Never married Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders (DO NOT READ) OTHER (VOLUNTEERED) (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 43.7% 40.2% 43.4% 51.5% 29.6% 40.9% 45.7% 46.8% 49.7% 46.8% 54.0% 39.5% 37.1% 45.6% 44.4% 45.9% 53.8% 33.7% % 35.8% 48.6% 45.4% 39.1% 57.4% 47.0% 44.6% 44.4% 38.4% 40.5% 30.7% 51.9% 51.2% 42.9% 43.2% 40.1% 35.3% 58.4% % 1.0% 1.2% 0.6% 1.3% - 1.6% 1.8% 0.8% 0.7% 2.5% 1.5% % 0.8% 1.2% 1.1% 0.5% % 19.5% 10.0% 10.7% 8.1% 13.0% 10.4% 7.9% 8.1% 11.2% 10.2% 13.8% 8.6% 11.6% 9.4% 11.6% 12.9% 9.8% 7.5% Field Research Corporation Table 20 9
10 Q1 (Banner 4) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders (DO NOT READ) OTHER (VOLUNTEERED) (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED Republican presidential Nov Own Rent / Clinton Sanders Undecided Trump All others Favor Oppose Union Affiliation Tenure Democratic presidential Yes, union HH Non-union HH Possible 3rd party presidential candidate in Q1. In California's Democratic primary for President, for whom would/did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES)? Depends/ undecided % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% % 43.2% 45.0% 48.4% 40.3% 100.0% % 54.1% 42.8% % 50.8% 41.4% 41.1% 46.3% % % 38.1% 39.0% 6 * % 0.4% 1.2% 1.2% 0.4% % 1.1% % 5.6% 12.4% 9.3% 12.9% % % 6.0% 17.1% Field Research Corporation Table 21 10
11 Q1 (Banner 5) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary Males under age 40 Gender by age Gender by age Political Ideology Household Income Area White White Females non- Latino Females non- Latino Strongly All Under $60,000 - $100,000 L.A. under Hispanics under age 40+ Hispanics age 40+ liberal others $60,000 $99,999 or more County So. age 40 under age age 40 age Males age 40+ SF Bay Area/ North or Central Coast Q1. In California's Democratic primary for President, for whom would/did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES)? Central Valley/ Sierras Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders (DO NOT READ) OTHER (VOLUNTEERED) (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 18.9% 49.3% 26.8% 57.4% 28.9% 49.1% 17.8% 67.2% 50.4% 41.7% 39.9% 46.8% 49.7% 49.6% 42.7% 40.5% 46.8% % 70.5% 36.4% 65.9% 29.1% 61.6% 38.6% 76.4% 16.2% 46.8% 41.4% 48.8% 44.4% 38.4% 40.5% 46.7% 47.3% 33.4% % - 1.8% - 1.2% - 1.8% - 1.2% - 1.5% 1.3% 0.8% 0.7% - 1.8% 0.7% 2.0% % 10.5% 12.5% 7.2% 12.3% 9.5% 10.5% 5.8% 15.5% 2.8% 15.4% 10.1% 8.1% 11.2% 9.9% 8.7% 11.4% 17.8% Field Research Corporation Table 22 11
12 Q2 (Banner 1) : Will vote/ have voted for Hillary Clinton Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Q2. Which of the following best describes your support for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC % 43.6% 46.3% 46.1% 40.0% 45.5% 42.3% 39.5% 36.7% 50.6% 55.9% 44.2% % 52.3% 44.2% 42.5% 45.4% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 46.9% 46.4% 47.7% 46.8% 47.3% 45.5% 54.0% 47.8% 52.7% 42.4% 44.1% 47.4% % 34.0% 47.8% 49.3% 46.2% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 7.3% 8.6% 5.5% 5.7% 12.7% 6.3% 3.7% 12.7% 10.7% 6.2% - 7.1% - 8.7% 10.0% 7.1% 7.4% 7.3% UPSET % 0.7% 0.5% 0.8% - 1.2% % - 0.7% % 0.9% 0.5% % 0.8% - 0.6% - 1.5% % % 0.3% - 0.6% Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote Field Research Corporation Table 23 12
13 Q2 (Banner 2) : Will vote/ have voted for Hillary Clinton Gender Age Ethnicity Political Ideology Male Female or older White non- Hispanic Latino Black Asian/ Strongly conservative Moderately conservative Middle of the road Moderately liberal Strongly liberal Tea Party Republican Q2. Which of the following best describes your support for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% - - ENTHUSIASTIC % 42.8% 45.9% 47.2% 50.8% 39.9% 47.3% 42.2% 45.9% 45.7% 37.0% 42.1% 59.8% 40.2% 37.6% 33.0% 52.6% - - SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 46.9% 46.7% 47.1% 43.4% 49.2% 46.0% 42.5% 52.2% 43.7% 46.6% 60.0% 55.1% 40.2% 46.6% 52.1% 60.9% 40.2% - - DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 7.3% 7.7% 7.0% 9.5% % 8.7% 3.6% 9.6% 6.2% 3.0% % 9.0% 6.1% 7.2% - - UPSET % 1.6% % - 1.5% - 2.8% - 4.7% 0.6% % 1.3% % - 0.9% % A lot/ some Not at all/ dk Field Research Corporation Table 24 13
14 Q2 (Banner 3) : Will vote/ have voted for Hillary Clinton H.S. or less Some college/ trade school Education Household Income Religion College Post work Under $20,000 $20,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $60,000 $60,000 - $100,000 More than $100,000 Protestant/ other Christian Catholic religion No Born again Christian Yes, born again No, not born again Married/ Not married living together Marital Status Q2. Which of the following best describes your support for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC 44.7% 45.0% 48.7% 39.3% 46.0% 65.6% 43.3% 50.3% 41.4% 44.5% 44.4% 44.9% 43.0% 49.5% 50.7% 43.5% 42.5% 45.0% 50.3% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 46.9% 48.9% 44.9% 52.1% 42.7% 34.4% 51.7% 48.1% 47.5% 43.4% 48.7% 45.9% 49.3% 39.1% 43.5% 47.6% 46.9% 45.5% 49.7% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 7.3% 3.6% 6.5% 6.9% 10.6% - 2.9% 1.6% 9.1% 12.2% 6.1% 7.9% 7.7% 8.9% 2.1% 8.3% 8.7% 9.5% - UPSET % 2.5% % % - 0.9% 1.2% % - 1.0% % % % - 1.1% % - 0.6% 0.8% - - Widow/ separated/ divorced Never married Field Research Corporation Table 25 14
15 Q2 (Banner 4) : Will vote/ have voted for Hillary Clinton Republican presidential Nov Own Rent / Clinton Sanders Undecided Trump All others Favor Oppose Union Affiliation Tenure Democratic presidential Yes, union HH Non-union HH Possible 3rd party presidential candidate in Depends/ undecided Q2. Which of the following best describes your support for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC % 35.7% 46.6% 40.6% 51.1% 44.7% % 51.8% 53.8% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 46.9% 53.0% 45.6% 48.6% 44.1% 46.9% % 41.6% 39.5% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 7.3% 10.1% 6.7% 9.1% 4.8% 7.3% % 5.7% 3.6% UPSET % - 0.8% 1.0% - 0.6% % 1.9% % 1.2% 0.3% 0.8% - 0.5% % 1.2% Field Research Corporation Table 26 15
16 Q2 (Banner 5) : Will vote/ have voted for Hillary Clinton Males under age 40 Gender by age Gender by age Political Ideology Household Income Area Males age 40+ Females under age 40 Females age 40+ White non- Hispanics under age 40 White non- Hispanics age 40+ Latino under age 40 Q2. Which of the following best describes your support for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC % 46.6% 42.0% 51.4% 44.9% 49.4% 45.1% 51.1% 44.6% 52.6% 40.1% 51.1% 41.4% 44.5% 45.5% 40.8% 50.1% 39.4% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 46.9% 44.9% 47.0% 48.6% 46.8% 45.1% 43.4% 48.9% 46.2% 40.2% 50.8% 46.5% 47.5% 43.4% 45.5% 50.7% 43.1% 50.8% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 7.3% 8.4% 7.6% - 8.4% 5.5% 10.4% - 7.4% 7.2% 7.3% 1.7% 9.1% 12.2% 6.3% 8.5% 6.0% 9.8% UPSET % - 1.9% % - 1.0% - 1.0% - 1.2% - 0.8% % - 1.5% % % 0.7% 1.1% - 1.5% Latino age 40+ Strongly liberal All others Under $60,000 $60,000 - $99,999 $100,000 or more L.A. County So. SF Bay Area/ North or Central Coast Central Valley/ Sierras Field Research Corporation Table 27 16
17 Q3 (Banner 1) : Will vote/ have voted for Bernie Sanders Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Q3. Which of the following best describes your support for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC % 65.6% 65.1% 69.5% 45.7% 67.3% 64.1% 63.4% 46.8% 69.0% 74.3% 62.8% % 79.3% 62.0% 60.4% 66.6% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 29.5% 30.7% 28.0% 27.0% 41.5% 31.7% 31.0% 28.2% 44.6% 25.0% 16.9% 31.9% % 19.1% 31.9% 32.4% 28.7% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 2.7% 2.0% 3.6% 1.5% 8.9% - 5.0% 2.2% 8.6% 1.2% 8.8% 2.4% - 3.8% 1.6% 3.0% 1.4% 3.1% UPSET % 0.9% 2.1% 1.4% 1.4% 1.0% - 2.2% - 3.0% - 1.6% - 1.0% - 1.8% 3.6% 0.9% % 0.8% 1.2% 0.6% 2.6% % - 1.7% - 1.3% % 2.2% 0.7% Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote Field Research Corporation Table 28 17
18 Q3 (Banner 2) : Will vote/ have voted for Bernie Sanders Gender Age Ethnicity Political Ideology Male Female or older White non- Hispanic Latino Black Asian/ Strongly conservative Moderately conservative Middle of the road Moderately liberal Strongly liberal Tea Party Republican Q3. Which of the following best describes your support for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% - - ENTHUSIASTIC % 67.1% 63.8% 77.6% 59.4% 82.3% 58.8% 41.6% 63.1% 77.8% 47.6% 58.9% 31.4% 43.8% 59.9% 63.2% 79.5% - - SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 29.5% 27.3% 31.4% 17.8% 40.6% 12.5% 33.6% 48.9% 29.2% 20.3% 52.4% 38.9% 44.9% 51.8% 33.7% 34.9% 17.7% - - DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 2.7% 3.5% 2.0% 1.1% - 2.4% 2.7% 9.5% 4.8% % - 2.8% 1.9% UPSET % - 2.8% 1.6% % - 1.2% 1.9% - 2.2% - 4.4% 2.2% - 1.3% % 2.0% - 1.9% - 2.7% % % - 1.5% - - A lot/ some Not at all/ dk Field Research Corporation Table 29 18
19 Q3 (Banner 3) : Will vote/ have voted for Bernie Sanders H.S. or less Some college/ trade school Education Household Income Religion College Post work Under $20,000 $20,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $60,000 $60,000 - $100,000 More than $100,000 Protestant/ other Christian Catholic religion No Born again Christian Yes, born again No, not born again Married/ Not married living together Marital Status Q3. Which of the following best describes your support for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC 65.4% 72.2% 69.1% 63.7% 57.2% 74.2% 59.7% 67.1% 64.3% 64.4% 49.6% 52.8% 80.7% 73.5% 58.5% 66.7% 66.1% 50.0% 72.4% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 29.5% 24.0% 26.9% 29.6% 37.2% 22.3% 40.3% 26.8% 32.4% 28.2% 46.0% 36.3% 16.5% 22.7% 30.9% 29.2% 29.1% 44.8% 21.8% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 2.7% 3.8% 1.8% 3.0% 3.2% 3.5% - 1.6% 2.2% 3.7% 3.4% 6.0% - 2.0% 7.9% 1.8% 3.1% 5.2% 1.0% UPSET % - 2.2% 2.3% % 1.1% 1.9% 1.1% 2.5% 0.9% 1.8% - 1.7% 0.9% - 3.1% % % 2.3% % - 1.8% - 2.4% 1.9% - 2.8% 0.6% 0.8% - 1.8% Widow/ separated/ divorced Never married Field Research Corporation Table 30 19
20 Q3 (Banner 4) : Will vote/ have voted for Bernie Sanders Republican presidential Nov Own Rent / Clinton Sanders Undecided Trump All others Favor Oppose Union Affiliation Tenure Democratic presidential Yes, union HH Non-union HH Possible 3rd party presidential candidate in Depends/ undecided Q3. Which of the following best describes your support for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % % 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC % 75.9% 62.1% 58.9% 73.0% % % 66.2% 72.3% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 29.5% 20.1% 32.3% 33.7% 24.2% % % 27.5% 19.1% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 2.7% 2.1% 3.0% 4.6% 0.7% - 2.7% % 4.1% 4.4% UPSET % - 1.9% 1.8% 1.0% - 1.4% % 1.2% 1.4% % 1.8% 0.7% 0.8% 1.1% - 1.0% % 2.9% Field Research Corporation Table 31 20
21 Q3 (Banner 5) : Will vote/ have voted for Bernie Sanders Males under age 40 Gender by age Gender by age Political Ideology Household Income Area Males age 40+ Females under age 40 Females age 40+ White non- Hispanics under age 40 White non- Hispanics age 40+ Latino under age 40 Q3. Which of the following best describes your support for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party's nominee for President - enthusiastic, satisfied but not enthusiastic, dissatisfied but not upset, or upset? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ENTHUSIASTIC % 69.1% 65.1% 71.3% 57.0% 71.1% 58.4% 83.6% 56.9% 79.5% 57.7% 67.1% 64.3% 64.4% 67.3% 63.8% 72.0% 45.0% SATISFIED BUT NOT ENTHUSIASTIC 29.5% 28.6% 26.1% 25.5% 36.8% 24.9% 32.0% 14.0% 43.1% 17.7% 35.9% 29.5% 32.4% 28.2% 31.7% 29.9% 22.6% 43.9% DISSATISFIED BUT NOT UPSET 2.7% - 7.0% 1.3% 2.7% 1.5% 6.5% % 1.7% 2.2% 3.7% - 3.9% 1.1% 11.2% UPSET % % 3.5% - 1.9% 2.4% - 1.3% 1.5% 0.6% 1.1% 1.9% 1.0% 0.9% 2.7% % 2.3% 1.8% % 1.2% % 0.7% 1.2% - 1.8% - 1.6% 1.6% - Latino age 40+ Strongly liberal All others Under $60,000 $60,000 - $99,999 $100,000 or more L.A. County So. SF Bay Area/ North or Central Coast Central Valley/ Sierras Field Research Corporation Table 32 21
22 Q4 (Banner 1) : Likely Voter in Republican Primary Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Q4_AV. In California's Republican primary for President, for whom did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES) or someone else? Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote Donald Trump Ted Cruz John Kasich (KAY-SICK) SOMEONE ELSE (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 60.1% 60.5% 56.2% 66.7% 51.5% 67.9% 60.0% 68.9% 42.6% 73.6% % % 60.6% 59.4% 60.6% % 9.2% 9.2% 9.8% 8.1% 15.1% 4.4% 7.6% 13.4% 8.4% % % 8.7% 5.3% 10.4% % 7.3% 12.2% 11.4% 6.3% 7.3% 7.6% 7.3% 6.4% 23.4% 4.2% - 9.4% % 8.7% 12.8% 8.3% % 13.8% 10.1% 14.0% 9.5% 13.8% 14.2% 13.7% 5.6% 14.3% 14.8% % % 12.4% 15.3% 11.3% % 9.6% 8.0% 8.7% 9.4% 12.4% 5.9% 11.4% 5.8% 11.3% 7.4% - 8.9% - 2.5% 9.6% 7.3% 9.5% Field Research Corporation Table 33 22
23 Q4 (Banner 2) : Likely Voter in Republican Primary Gender Age Ethnicity Political Ideology Male Female or older White non- Hispanic Latino Black Asian/ Strongly conservative Moderately conservative Middle of the road Moderately liberal Strongly liberal Tea Party Republican Q4_AV. In California's Republican primary for President, for whom did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES) or someone else? A lot/ some Not at all/ dk % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Donald Trump % 62.6% 57.7% 51.3% 50.2% 70.3% 53.5% 65.6% 62.6% 42.6% 54.5% 64.3% 70.9% 60.3% 52.1% 20.2% 16.9% 65.4% 54.4% Ted Cruz % 9.6% 8.7% 17.6% 7.9% 4.6% 12.7% 7.4% 9.1% 10.6% - 8.4% 13.7% 8.2% 6.7% % 5.9% John Kasich (KAY-SICK) 9.4% 9.2% 9.5% 13.7% 6.4% 1.2% 14.6% 9.6% 9.9% 6.2% 19.1% 6.1% 4.4% 14.5% 11.1% % 6.9% 12.2% SOMEONE ELSE % 12.0% 12.5% 14.9% 27.6% 11.0% 10.8% 8.6% 9.7% 28.1% 26.4% 13.5% 4.8% 7.2% 20.5% 64.1% 45.3% 7.7% 17.5% (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED 8.9% 6.5% 11.6% 2.5% 7.9% 12.9% 8.4% 8.8% 8.6% 12.5% - 7.7% 6.3% 9.8% 9.7% 15.6% - 8.0% 10.0% Field Research Corporation Table 34 23
24 Q4 (Banner 3) : Likely Voter in Republican Primary H.S. or less Some college/ trade school Education Household Income Religion College Post work Under $20,000 $20,000 - $40,000 $40,000 $60, $100,000 $60,000 More than $100,000 Protestant/ other Christian Catholic religion No Born again Christian Yes, born again No, not born again Married/ Not married living together Marital Status Widow/ separated/ divorced Q4_AV. In California's Republican primary for President, for whom did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES) or someone else? Never married % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Donald Trump % 65.8% 66.8% 60.3% 46.4% 53.8% 57.1% 67.5% 65.7% 56.5% 60.0% 66.6% 51.5% 63.6% 61.3% 59.8% 60.5% 60.1% 58.9% Ted Cruz % 10.2% 7.2% 13.4% 7.9% 6.3% 3.1% 8.9% 13.6% 5.9% 10.0% 11.4% 5.5% 7.7% 12.1% 7.8% 10.1% 6.7% 8.5% John Kasich (KAY-SICK) 9.4% 1.9% 6.6% 11.2% 16.4% 3.6% 9.4% 6.9% 6.8% 14.8% 8.5% 8.7% 14.2% 8.3% 8.1% 10.0% 10.4% 4.2% 11.9% SOMEONE ELSE % 9.6% 12.2% 8.6% 16.7% 20.1% 20.8% 11.7% 5.1% 15.6% 12.6% 7.3% 10.5% 20.4% 10.0% 13.3% 9.9% 18.8% 13.8% (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED 8.9% 12.5% 7.2% 6.5% 12.5% 16.2% 9.6% 5.0% 8.8% 7.2% 9.0% 5.9% 18.3% - 8.6% 9.1% 9.1% 10.2% 6.9% Field Research Corporation Table 35 24
25 Q4 (Banner 4) : Likely Voter in Republican Primary Donald Trump Ted Cruz John Kasich (KAY-SICK) SOMEONE ELSE (DO NOT READ) UNDECIDED/NOT SURE/REFUSED Republican presidential Nov Own Rent / Clinton Sanders Undecided Trump All others Favor Oppose Union Affiliation Tenure Democratic presidential Yes, union HH Non-union HH Possible 3rd party presidential candidate in Q4_AV. In California's Republican primary for President, for whom did you vote (READ NAMES OF NDIDATES) or someone else? Depends/ undecided % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 54.7% 61.3% 62.0% 55.4% % % 76.7% 51.8% % 6.9% 9.7% 8.6% 11.8% % 13.3% 7.5% 8.3% % 16.3% 7.9% 10.7% 4.7% % 17.4% 6.1% 8.0% % 14.0% 11.9% 11.2% 15.9% % 26.0% 5.7% 13.4% % 8.1% 9.2% 7.5% 12.1% % 4.0% 18.6% Field Research Corporation Table 36 25
26 Q6a (Banner 1) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Q6a. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Hillary Clinton favorable or unfavorable? Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 64.1% 64.4% 65.1% 61.3% 64.7% 65.8% 59.7% 65.5% 66.5% 46.5% 65.5% % 48.5% 66.8% 68.7% 62.9% % 30.2% 29.5% 29.0% 33.1% 28.8% 31.4% 32.8% 30.0% 27.1% 45.5% 28.7% % 43.2% 27.7% 28.6% 30.3% % 5.7% 6.1% 5.9% 5.6% 6.5% 2.8% 7.6% 4.5% 6.5% 8.0% 5.8% - 6.1% 8.4% 5.5% 2.7% 6.8% Field Research Corporation Table 41 26
27 Q6a (Banner 2) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Gender Age Ethnicity Political Ideology Male Female or older White non- Hispanic Latino Black Asian/ Strongly conservative Moderately conservative Middle of the road Moderately liberal Strongly liberal Tea Party Republican Q6a. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Hillary Clinton favorable or unfavorable? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 62.3% 65.7% 40.4% 63.4% 59.4% 70.8% 77.0% 64.6% 59.9% 85.7% 54.4% 53.5% 64.0% 62.5% 59.6% 71.2% % 32.6% 27.8% 54.7% 28.7% 32.9% 21.4% 21.0% 29.9% 31.5% 14.3% 39.7% 46.5% 29.7% 29.9% 35.1% 25.6% % 5.0% 6.5% 4.9% 7.9% 7.7% 7.8% 2.0% 5.5% 8.7% - 5.9% - 6.4% 7.6% 5.4% 3.1% - - A lot/ some Not at all/ dk Field Research Corporation Table 42 27
28 Q6a (Banner 3) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary H.S. or less Some college/ trade school Education Household Income Religion College Post work Under $20,000 $20,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $60,000 $60,000 - $100,000 More than $100,000 Protestant/ other Christian Catholic religion No Born again Christian Yes, born again No, not born again Married/ Not married living together Marital Status Widow/ separated/ divorced Q6a. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Hillary Clinton favorable or unfavorable? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% FAVORABLE 64.3% 62.1% 59.4% 62.0% 74.5% 52.5% 68.2% 62.0% 63.2% 70.3% 69.1% 67.2% 64.0% 56.3% 67.4% 63.7% 66.8% 69.3% 54.0% UNFAVORABLE 29.9% 33.0% 35.4% 33.3% 18.4% 38.6% 26.3% 30.9% 32.5% 24.4% 28.2% 26.0% 30.9% 35.7% 28.8% 30.1% 27.7% 27.7% 37.1% % 4.9% 5.3% 4.8% 7.1% 8.9% 5.5% 7.1% 4.3% 5.3% 2.8% 6.8% 5.1% 8.0% 3.8% 6.3% 5.5% 3.0% 8.9% Never married Field Research Corporation Table 43 28
29 Q6a (Banner 4) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Republican presidential Nov Own Rent / Clinton Sanders Undecided Trump All others Favor Oppose Union Affiliation Tenure Democratic presidential Yes, union HH Non-union HH Possible 3rd party presidential candidate in Q6a. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Hillary Clinton favorable or unfavorable? Depends/ undecided % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% % 64.7% 64.0% 67.1% 60.7% 91.2% 37.7% 65.1% % 70.4% 60.6% % 29.9% 29.9% 27.8% 32.2% 6.1% 56.2% 17.3% % 27.1% 28.2% % 5.4% 6.1% 5.0% 7.1% 2.6% 6.1% 17.6% % 2.5% 11.2% Field Research Corporation Table 44 29
30 Q6a (Banner 5) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Males under age 40 Gender by age Gender by age Political Ideology Household Income Area Males age 40+ Females under age 40 Females age 40+ White non- Hispanics under age 40 White non- Hispanics age 40+ Latino under age 40 Latino age 40+ Strongly liberal All others Under $60,000 $60,000 - $99,999 $100,000 or more L.A. County So. SF Bay Area/ North or Central Coast Q6a. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Hillary Clinton favorable or unfavorable? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 49.7% 68.7% 52.0% 71.2% 55.1% 67.4% 44.6% 71.4% 71.2% 60.9% 61.4% 63.2% 70.3% 64.7% 63.0% 65.0% 64.0% % 46.1% 25.8% 39.9% 22.9% 39.2% 27.3% 47.1% 19.7% 25.6% 31.9% 31.5% 32.5% 24.4% 28.8% 32.0% 28.5% 31.0% % 4.2% 5.4% 8.1% 5.9% 5.7% 5.3% 8.3% 8.9% 3.1% 7.2% 7.1% 4.3% 5.3% 6.5% 5.0% 6.5% 5.1% Central Valley/ Sierras Field Research Corporation Table 45 30
31 Q6b (Banner 1) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Q6b. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable or unfavorable? Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 74.4% 77.8% 77.0% 71.5% 73.3% 86.5% 70.2% 73.3% 76.1% 80.2% 75.4% % 81.0% 75.0% 72.5% 76.9% % 18.7% 15.1% 15.8% 22.1% 19.0% 11.0% 21.3% 20.1% 14.9% 19.8% 17.3% % 13.3% 17.7% 22.2% 15.6% % 6.9% 7.1% 7.2% 6.4% 7.6% 2.5% 8.5% 6.6% 9.0% - 7.3% - 6.0% 5.7% 7.2% 5.2% 7.5% Field Research Corporation Table 46 31
32 Q6b (Banner 2) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Gender Age Ethnicity Political Ideology Male Female or older White non- Hispanic Latino Black Asian/ Strongly conservative Moderately conservative Middle of the road Moderately liberal Strongly liberal Tea Party Republican Q6b. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable or unfavorable? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 81.8% 71.3% 91.8% 84.5% 75.0% 73.7% 63.3% 79.7% 70.2% 68.2% 74.0% 64.4% 58.3% 71.2% 80.9% 85.7% % 13.7% 19.7% 6.0% 10.8% 14.8% 20.5% 26.1% 16.6% 16.8% 22.5% 16.9% 32.5% 37.4% 18.5% 14.5% 10.5% % 4.5% 8.9% 2.2% 4.7% 10.3% 5.8% 10.6% 3.7% 13.0% 9.2% 9.1% 3.1% 4.3% 10.2% 4.6% 3.8% - - A lot/ some Not at all/ dk Field Research Corporation Table 47 32
33 Q6b (Banner 3) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary H.S. or less Some college/ trade school Education Household Income Religion College Post work Under $20,000 $20,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $60,000 $60,000 - $100,000 More than $100,000 Protestant/ other Christian Catholic religion No Born again Christian Yes, born again No, not born again Married/ Not married living together Marital Status Widow/ separated/ divorced Q6b. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable or unfavorable? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% FAVORABLE 75.9% 70.2% 78.3% 72.6% 80.7% 80.2% 79.7% 78.1% 79.0% 70.7% 74.3% 62.2% 81.1% 87.7% 63.9% 78.1% 76.0% 71.3% 80.8% UNFAVORABLE 17.1% 19.9% 16.2% 18.2% 15.1% 7.9% 13.4% 16.4% 15.6% 23.8% 22.0% 25.5% 11.7% 8.2% 22.9% 16.0% 16.8% 22.8% 12.1% % 9.9% 5.5% 9.2% 4.2% 11.9% 6.9% 5.5% 5.4% 5.6% 3.7% 12.3% 7.2% 4.2% 13.2% 5.8% 7.2% 5.9% 7.1% Never married Field Research Corporation Table 48 33
34 Q6b (Banner 4) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Republican presidential Nov Own Rent / Clinton Sanders Undecided Trump All others Favor Oppose Union Affiliation Tenure Democratic presidential Yes, union HH Non-union HH Possible 3rd party presidential candidate in Q6b. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable or unfavorable? Depends/ undecided % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% % 73.1% 76.4% 74.7% 77.3% 62.3% 93.2% 65.3% % 75.3% 68.9% % 23.1% 15.6% 19.2% 14.6% 28.6% 6.1% 12.7% % 21.3% 17.3% % 3.8% 8.0% 6.1% 8.0% 9.0% 0.7% 22.0% % 3.4% 13.7% Field Research Corporation Table 49 34
35 Q6b (Banner 5) : Likely Voter in Democratic Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Males under age 40 Gender by age Gender by age Political Ideology Household Income Area Males age 40+ Females under age 40 Females age 40+ White non- Hispanics under age 40 White non- Hispanics age 40+ Latino under age 40 Latino age 40+ Strongly liberal All others Under $60,000 $60,000 - $99,999 $100,000 or more L.A. County So. SF Bay Area/ North or Central Coast Q6b. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable or unfavorable? % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 89.5% 78.0% 87.5% 64.9% 89.3% 76.1% 85.9% 58.4% 85.7% 71.1% 79.2% 79.0% 70.7% 73.3% 79.1% 77.5% 71.5% % 8.7% 16.2% 7.8% 24.5% 7.1% 20.2% 11.2% 21.1% 10.5% 20.3% 13.2% 15.6% 23.8% 19.0% 15.6% 14.0% 22.6% % 1.8% 5.8% 4.7% 10.6% 3.6% 3.7% 3.0% 20.6% 3.8% 8.6% 7.6% 5.4% 5.6% 7.6% 5.2% 8.5% 5.9% Central Valley/ Sierras Field Research Corporation Table 50 35
36 Q6c (Banner 1) : Likely Voter in Republican Primary FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Southern Northern Region Area Party Registration Voting History Voter Type Coastal counties Inland counties L.A. County San Diego/ Orange So. Central Valley SF Bay Area Northern Democrat Q6c. Generally speaking, is your opinion of Donald Trump favorable or unfavorable? Republican No party First time voter Past voter Already voted Have not voted, but to vote % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 61.4% 58.1% 56.2% 65.9% 52.8% 72.2% 56.4% 71.3% 40.7% 57.3% % % 62.2% 55.4% 61.4% % 34.0% 35.7% 37.2% 30.9% 36.3% 26.2% 41.5% 25.0% 50.3% 35.3% % % 32.0% 40.3% 33.0% % 4.6% 6.2% 6.6% 3.2% 10.9% 1.6% 2.1% 3.8% 9.0% 7.4% - 5.3% % 4.3% 5.6% Field Research Corporation Table 64 36
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Field Poll Survey of California Registered Voters About
More informationFIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Survey of California Likely Voters about the 2016 Presidential
More informationFIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 4153925763 Tabulations From a Field Poll Survey of California Likely Voters in the June
More informationFIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Survey of California Registered Voters About the Overall
More informationFIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Survey of California Likely Voters about the 2016 Presidential
More informationFIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Survey of California Likely Voters Measuring Voter Preferences
More informationFIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION
FIELD RESEARCH CORPORATION FOUNDED IN 1945 BY MERVIN FIELD 601 California Street San Francisco, California 94108 415-392-5763 Tabulations From a Survey of California Likely Voters Measuring Voter Preferences
More informationCity and County of Denver Thursday, August 25, :39 PM City and County of Denver: EBE Approval Letter
From: Sent: To: Subject: City and County of Denver Thursday, August 25, 2016 4:39 PM email City and County of Denver: EBE Approval Letter COMPANY NAME ADDREESS Dear : SUBJECT: Emerging
More informationAn Introduction To: Help Me Grow-LA. August 11, 2016
An Introduction To: Help Me Grow-LA August 11, 2016 Presenters MODERATOR Reena John Senior Program Officer First 5 LA Christina Altmayer Vice President of Programs First 5 LA Wendy Schiffer Director of
More informationCertified Enrollment Entity Change Request Form
Certified Enrollment Entity Change Request Form USE THIS FORM TO REQUEST CHANGES, UPDATES, OR EDITS TO YOUR ONLINE CERTIFIED ENROLLMENT ENTITY APPLICATION Entity Name: Change Request Submitted For Entity
More informationCERTIFIED ENROLLMENT ENTITY CHANGE REQUEST FORM FOR APPROVED APPLICATIONS
Tips for Faster Processing Use IPAS My Files to submit your change request form https://ipas.ccgrantsandassisters.org/ o If unable to upload documents, please fax to: (559) 436-5293 Must submit page 1;
More information2014 CFD Rating Analysis
214 CFD Rating Analysis ITEM NUMBER CFDs issued 2 213 (1) 1,51 CFDs with Reserve Fund draws (1) 32 CFDs with Reserve Funds draw for administrative reasons (2) 7 Reserve Fund draws for credit reasons 25
More informationCAIR2 Health Plan HEDIS/Patient Match Flat File Specification
CAIR2 HEDIS/Patient Match Flat File Specification CAIR2 Health Plan HEDIS/Patient Match Flat File Specification (for Health Plans, Medical Groups, IPAs only) Last Updated: April 11, 2018 Note: The file
More informationProvisional Envelopes An Overview
Provisional Envelopes An Overview This section of the Provisional Manual contains this Overview, Images of Provisional Envelopes in a pdf format, and a spreadsheet summarizing size and attributes of the
More informationCAIR2 Patient Match (HEDIS) Flat File Specifications
CAIR2 Patient Match (HEDIS) Flat File Specifications Effective January 27, 2017; revised February 9, 2017 1 of 12 New Patient Match Requirements Because of the transition to the new CAIR2 software, health
More informationThe Growing Gap between Landline and Dual Frame Election Polls
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2010 Republican Share Bigger in -Only Surveys The Growing Gap between and Dual Frame Election Polls FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Keeter Director of Survey Research Michael
More informationCASF FUNDED RURAL AND URBAN REGIONAL BROADBAND CONSORTIA
For more information: Gladys Palpallatoc, Associate Vice President, California Emerging Technology Fund (CETF) CETF is lending technical assistance, support and resources to Regional Consortia in California
More informationGUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THE LEGAL SECRETARY
GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THE LEGAL SECRETARY 1. DEADLINES FOR RECEIPT OF ARTICLES BY EDITOR a. For August issue (First Quarter)................ June 1st b. For November issue (Second Quarter)...........
More informationSurvey Questions and Methodology
Survey Questions and Methodology Spring Tracking Survey 2012 Data for March 15 April 3, 2012 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Research Center s Internet & American Life Project
More informationUC Berkeley Research Reports
UC Berkeley Research Reports Title Observational Study of Cell Phone and Texting Use Among California Drivers 0 and Comparison to 0 Data Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/vdxdm Authors Cooper,
More informationClinton Leads Trump in Michigan by 10% (Clinton 49% - Trump 39%)
P R E S S R E L E A S E FOR RELEASE: August 16, 2016 Contact: Steve Mitchell 248-891-2414 Clinton Leads Trump in Michigan by 10% (Clinton 49% - Trump 39%) EAST LANSING, Michigan --- The latest Fox 2 Detroit/Mitchell
More informationSpring (percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding)
Spring 2016 Survey Information: Registered Voters, Random Selection, Landline and Cell Telephone Survey Number of Adult Wisconsin Registered Voters: 616 Interview Period: 4/12-4/15, 2016 Margin of Error
More informationSurvey Questions and Methodology
Survey Questions and Methodology Winter Tracking Survey 2012 Final Topline 02/22/2012 Data for January 20 February 19, 2012 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Research Center
More informationColorado Results. For 10/3/ /4/2012. Contact: Doug Kaplan,
Colorado Results For 10/3/2012 10/4/2012 Contact: Doug Kaplan, 407-242-1870 Executive Summary Following the debates, Gravis Marketing, a non-partisan research firm conducted a survey of 1,438 likely voters
More informationDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, UC San Diego CSE Course Approximations
CSE5A CSE8A CSE8B CSE11 CSE12 CSE 15L CSE20 CSE21 CSE30 CSE 70 CSE80 CSE 80 CSE 86 ALAN HANCOCK AMERICAN RIVER CISC 32A CISC 401 CISC 39 & CISC 40 ANTELOPE VALLEY CITY CISC 161 CISC 164 CISC 440 CISC 310
More informationGALLUP NEWS SERVICE GALLUP POLL SOCIAL SERIES: VALUES AND BELIEFS
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE GALLUP POLL SOCIAL SERIES: VALUES AND BELIEFS -- FINAL TOPLINE -- Timberline: 937008 IS: 727 Princeton Job #: 16-05-006 Jeff Jones, Lydia Saad May 4-8, 2016 Results are based on telephone
More informationSample: n=2,252 national adults, age 18 and older, including 1,127 cell phone interviews Interviewing dates:
Survey Questions Spring 2013 Tracking Survey Final Topline 5/21/2013 Data for April 17-May 19, 2013 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Research Center s Internet & American
More informationCalifornia. CA1 Feather River BSM
California If you cannot locate a chapter 4vp@bluestarmothers.us near you contact the Chartering Chair at CA1 Feather River BSM Chapter President Gina Pixler Email ginapixler@gmail.com Mailing Address
More informationSmartphone Ownership 2013 Update
www.pewresearch.org JUNE 5, 2013 Smartphone Ownership 2013 Update 56% of American adults now own a smartphone of some kind; Android and iphone owners account for half of the cell phone user population.
More information2013 Local Arts Agency Salary & Benefits Summary EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR / PRESIDENT / CEO
Local Arts Agency Salary & Benefits Summary EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR / PRESIDENT / CEO PRIVATE LAAS ONLY PUBLIC LAAS ONLY The Executive Director / President / Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is the chief staff
More information2014 AARP Connecticut Telecommunications Survey
2014 AARP Connecticut Telecommunications Survey Residents Age 50+ Support Oversights and Protections for All Telecommunication Customers Nearly all Connecticut residents age 50 and older (96%) surveyed
More informationTelephone Survey Response: Effects of Cell Phones in Landline Households
Telephone Survey Response: Effects of Cell Phones in Landline Households Dennis Lambries* ¹, Michael Link², Robert Oldendick 1 ¹University of South Carolina, ²Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
More informationThe Rise of the Connected Viewer
JULY 17, 2012 The Rise of the Connected Viewer 52% of adult cell owners use their phones while engaging with televised content; younger audiences are particularly active in these connected viewing experiences
More informationx_ APPROVED BY CLIENT
POLL (SEPTEMBER '99) - project Registration # OMNIBUS (POLL) SEPTEMBER '99 Gallup Canada, Inc. Josephine Mazzuca, Analyst/ SOM September, 999 x_ APPROVED BY CLIENT DATE-, -.,... -:: Copyright, Gallup Canada,
More informationSegmented or Overlapping Dual Frame Samples in Telephone Surveys
Vol. 3, Issue 6, 2010 Segmented or Overlapping Dual Frame Samples in Telephone Surveys John M Boyle *, Faith Lewis, Brian Tefft * Institution: Abt SRBI Institution: Abt SRBI Institution: AAA Foundation
More informationSample: n=2,252 national adults, age 18 and older, including 1,127 cell phone interviews Interviewing dates:
Survey Questions Spring 2013 Tracking Survey Final Topline 5/21/2013 Data for April 17-May 19, 2013 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Research Center s Internet & American
More informationBay Area Information Sharing Report
East Bay ARIES- Jason Vorhauer, Lieutenant Contra Costa County SO West Bay COPLINK- Ronda Caine Alcantara, NCRIC Data Sharing Partnership Administrator South Bay COPLINK- Juan J. Gallardo, IT Director
More informationSnyder leads by 5%, Peters leads by 14% Snyder 48% - Schauer 43% Peters 52% - Land 38%
P R E S S R E L E A S E FOR RELEASE AFTER 6:30 PM October 28, 2014: Contact: Steve Mitchell 248-891-2414 Snyder leads by 5%, Peters leads by 14% Snyder 48% - Schauer 43% Peters 52% - Land 38% EAST LANSING,
More informationMarquette Law School Poll September 24-28, 2015 Results for Registered Voters
Marquette Law School Poll September 24-28, 2015 Results for Registered Voters (ages are rounded to whole numbers for reporting of results. Values ending in.5 here may round up or down if they are slightly
More informationAT&T California SCHEDULE CAL.P.U.C. NO. 175-T San Francisco, California 8th Revised Sheet 563 Cancels 7th Revised Sheet 563
San Francisco, California 8th Revised Sheet 563 Cancels 7th Revised Sheet 563 9. Directory Services 9.1 Directory Assistance Service 9.1.1 General Description Directory Assistance (DA) Service Transport
More information(2) Provide fair compensation that aligns with regional market indicators for compensation levels for each position;
Policy Number: 10 Original Adoption Date: December 15, 2016 Revised: October 25, 2018 Subject: Inclusive and Sustainable Workforce Policy Policy: One of PCE s strategic goals is to foster a work environment
More informationMarquette Law School Poll September 25-28, 2014 Results for Likely Voters
Marquette Law School Poll September 25-28, 2014 Results for Likely Voters (ages are rounded to whole numbers for reporting of results. Values ending in.5 are rounded to even whole numbers. Frequencies
More informationFY Bay Area UASI Risk and Grants Management Program Update. November 14, 2013
FY 2013-2014 Bay Area UASI Risk and Grants Management Program Update November 14, 2013 Overview FY 2013 Bay Area UASI Risk and Grants Management Program May 2013 December 2013 Data Management Analysis
More informationSpring FREQUENCIES
Survey Information: Random Selection, Landline and Cell Telephone Survey Number of Adult Wisconsin Residents: 401 Interview Period: 3/24 4/3, 2014 Margin of Error: +/- 5% at the 95% confidence level. Spring
More information2017 NEW JERSEY STATEWIDE SURVEY ON OUR HEALTH AND WELL BEING Methodology Report December 1, 2017
207 NEW JERSEY STATEWIDE SURVEY ON OUR HEALTH AND WELL BEING Methodology Report December, 207 Prepared for: Center for State Health Policy Rutgers University 2 Paterson Street, 5th Floor New Brunswick,
More informationQ1. Do you have a cellphone, or not? 1. Yes 2. No [SHOW IF Q1=1] Q2. Do you have a cellphone that connects to the Internet and can have apps, or does your phone only receive calls and text messages? 1.
More informationMobile Access July 7, 2010 Aaron Smith, Research Specialist.
Mobile Access 2010 Six in ten Americans go online wirelessly using a laptop or cell phone; African-Americans and 18-29 year olds lead the way in the use of cell phone data applications, but older adults
More informationPut your Paralegal Career into Second Gear Become Certified!
Subscribe Past Issues Translate RSS www.caparalegal.org View this email in your browser. CAPA Connection Issue # 11 - August 2018 Share Tweet Forward CAPA's GOAL WEBINAR AUGUST PRESENTATION Put your Paralegal
More informationEducational Message Services, Inc Alessandro Drive. Suite 100, Ventura CA USA Phone:
Currently supporting Texting Programs for WICs in CA: Santa Barbara County BFED Santa Cruz County Alameda County San Luis Obispo County Other States Louisiana Ohio North Carolina Colorado Idaho! *The Santa
More informationVictim Personal Statements 2016/17
Victim Personal Statements / Analysis of the offer and take-up of Victim Personal Statements using the Crime Survey for England and Wales, April to March. November Foreword One of my commitments as Victims
More informationQuantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Media
Quantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Media Juhi Kulshrestha joint work with Motahhare Eslami, Johnnatan Messias, Muhammad Bilal Zafar, Saptarshi Ghosh,
More informationƒ % ƒ % ƒ %
4. Under Vermont law, the use of marijuana is illegal, including for medical purposes. Currently in the Vermont Legislature, there is a bill pending that would allow people with cancer, AIDS, and other
More informationNew Jersey economic issues poll April 5-14, 2018 Stockton Polling Institute Weighted frequencies
New Jersey economic issues poll April 5-14, 2018 Stockton Polling Institute Weighted frequencies Q1. How would you rate the U.S. economy: Frequency Valid Valid Excellent 47 6.6 6.6 6.6 Good 302 42.1 42.1
More informationPractical Issues in Conducting Cell Phone Polling
Practical Issues in Conducting Phone Polling for DC-AAPOR April 16, 2009 Michael Dimock, Leah Christian & Scott Keeter Pew Research Center Frame Surveys at Pew 14 full dual frame surveys in 2008 ~22,000
More informationBoard of Directors April 25, BART The Next 40 Years BART Metro Vision Update Enhancing Service, Capacity and Coverage
Board of Directors April 25, 2013 BART The Next 40 Years BART Metro Vision Update Enhancing Service, Capacity and Coverage Agenda Project background Update on progress of study Review evaluation process
More informationIssue # 9 - June 2018
Subscribe Past Issues Translate RSS www.caparalegal.org View this email in your browser. CAPA Connection Issue # 9 - June 2018 Share Tweet Forward Obtaining the CCP credential is a way for California paralegals
More informationSpring Change Assessment Survey 2010 Final Topline 6/4/10 Data for April 29 May 30, 2010
Spring Change Assessment Survey 2010 Final Topline 6/4/10 Data for April 29 May 30, 2010 for the Pew Research Center s Internet & American Life Project Sample: n= 2,252 national adults, age 18 and older,
More information2013 AARP Survey of Pennsylvania Residents Age 50+ on Telecommunications
2013 AARP Survey of Pennsylvania Residents Age 50+ on Telecommunications AARP s Pennsylvania State Office, in response to its commitment to ensure reliable telecommunications service for all residents,
More informationMobile-only web survey respondents
Vol. 9, Issue 4, 2016 Mobile-only web survey respondents Peter Lugtig *, Vera Toepoel, Alerk Amin * Institution: Utrecht University Institution: Utrecht University Institution: RAND Corporation Abstract
More informationCell phones and Nonsampling Error in the American Time Use Survey
Cell phones and Nonsampling Error in the American Time Use Survey Brian Meekins Stephanie Denton AAPOR 2012 American Time Use Survey (ATUS) A Bureau of Labor Statistics survey, conducted by the U.S. Census
More informationBY Aaron Smith and Kenneth Olmstead
FOR RELEASE APRIL 30, 2018 BY Aaron Smith and Kenneth Olmstead FOR MEDIA OR OTHER INQUIRIES: Aaron Smith, Associate Director, Research Tom Caiazza, Communications Manager 202.419.4372 RECOMMENDED CITATION
More informationZogby Analytics Online Survey of Adults 11/9/16-11/10/16 MOE +/- 2.8 Percentage Points
11/9/16-11/1/16 MOE +/- 2.8 age Points 1. Are you planning to purchase any internet-connected devices this holiday season, such as fitness trackers, televisions, video cameras, home appliances or wearables?
More informationVoters and Mail. 5 Insights to Boost Campaign Impact. A United States Postal Service and American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC) study
Voters and Mail 5 Insights to Boost Campaign Impact A United States Postal Service and American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC) study Voters are waiting for you at the mailbox. The American
More informationAdobe Creative Cloud Mike Riley and Jim Babbage, Adobe Adobe Systems Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.
Adobe Creative Cloud Mike Riley and Jim Babbage, Adobe Changing the world through digital experiences April 3, 2010? April 3, 2010 New platforms mean new challenges Introducing the Creative Cloud Everything
More informationENERGY PERMIT SUMMARY REPORT PRIVATE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
ENERGY PERMIT SUMMARY REPORT PRIVATE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION The Energy Permit Summary report contains detailed building permit data by category for all 58 counties and reporting cities pertaining to change-outs
More informationUser Manual. Last updated 1/19/2012
User Manual Last updated 1/19/2012 1 Table of Contents Introduction About VoteCast 4 About Practical Political Consulting 4 Contact Us 5 Signing In 6 Main Menu 7 8 Voter Lists Voter Selection (Create New
More informationL2 VoterMapping - Display Options
L2 VoterMapping - Display Options In L2 VoterMapping, there are six ways to control the display of voter data and each can provide you with valuable information for visual analysis: Map Type, Boundaries,
More informationNANOS SURVEY NANOS SURVEY
Canadians are three times more likely to say Canada should ban than allow Huawei from participating in the 5G network in Canada National survey released August, 2018 Project 2018-1260A Summary Fifty-four
More informationLab Assignment. Lab 3: Potpourri. Assignment Preparation. Part 1: Finishing SQL scripts
.. Fall 2012 CSC/CPE 365: Database Systems Alexander Dekhtyar.. Lab 3: Potpourri Due date: Tuesday, October 16, beginning of the lab Lab Assignment Please note, you will definetly get Lab 4 assignment
More information51.42 Million. 16,344 students ICT taught in instructors preparing the ICT workforce. 139,055 students since inception
Corporate Social Responsibility Impact Profile California Cisco Networking Academy Education and technology are two of the greatest social equalizers. Education helps people improve their economic opportunities,
More informationTHE AP/AOL POLL CONDUCTED BY IPSOS PUBLIC AFFAIRS PROJECT # ONLINE VIDEO STUDY
1101 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 463-7300 Interview dates: July 27-30, August 1-3, & August 7-9, 2006 Interviews: 3003 adults, 1347 online video watchers Margin of error:
More informationVictim Personal Statements 2017/18
Victim Personal Statements / Analysis of the offer and take-up of Victim Personal Statements using the Crime Survey for England and Wales, April to March. October Foreword A Victim Personal Statement (VPS)
More informationClient and Service Information (CSI) Statewide Data Quality Best Practices Plan Report
Client and Service Information (CSI) Statewide Data Quality Best Practices Plan Report Issues and Proposed Solutions for CSI Data Quality The following document and project was funded by the Mental Health
More informationMarquette Law School Poll May 15-18, 2014
Marquette Law School Poll May 15-18, 2014 (ages are rounded to whole numbers for reporting of results. Values ending in.5 are rounded to even whole numbers. Frequencies have been rounded to whole numbers
More informationSPRING 2014 PENN STATE POLL
SPRING 2014 PENN STATE POLL Report of Methods Prepared by: Center for Survey Research May 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...1 METHODOLOGY...2 Instrument Development...2 Sample Design...2 RDD Landline
More informationUndergraduate Admission File
Undergraduate Admission File June 13, 2007 Information Resources and Communications Office of the President University of California Overview Population The Undergraduate Admission File contains data on
More informationCALIFORNIA County Table 9 (Part 1 of 7).-SPECIFIED CROPS HARVESTED: CENSUSES OF 1954 AND 'ii
CALIFORNIA 9 County Table 9 (Part of ).-SPECIFIED CROPS HARVESTED: CENSUSES OF 9 AND 90 The State Alemedn Alpine.Amador Butte Calaveras Coluen Contra Costa Del Norte (For definitions and. oxpland. tiona,
More informationQuantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Media
Quantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Media Muhammad Bilal Zafar with Juhi Kulshrestha, Motahhare Eslami, Johnnatan Messias, Saptarshi Ghosh, Krishna Gummadi
More informationSouthern California Counties Backflow Tester Certification Requirements Please contact the local certifying agency for current information.
Foundation for Cross-Connection Control County Los Angeles Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division 5050 Commerce Drive, Rm 116, Baldwin Park, CA 91706 Dan Bacani ccwpcp@ph.lacounty.gov
More informationAbstract. Introduction. Number 61 n October 12, 2012
Number 61 n October 12, 2012 Wireless Substitution: State-level Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, 2010 2011 by Stephen J. Blumberg, Ph.D., Julian V. Luke, National Center for Health
More informationFusion Centers Information Sharing, Analysis and Coordination
Fusion Centers Information Sharing, Analysis and Coordination Matthew V. Tompkins Supervisory Intelligence Analyst, FBI Threat Intelligence Manager, NCRIC Fusion Center Overview Fusion Center Roles Fusion
More informationSAMPLE Treatment Perceptions Survey (TPS) Report. XXXXXX County, N=239. (Not Real Data) All Substance Use Treatment Programs Surveyed.
Perceptions Survey (TPS) Report XXXXXX County, N=239 (Not Real Data) All Substance Use s Surveyed November 2017 Prepared by the University of California, Los Angeles Integrated Substance Abuse s *For county
More informationTHE MAGAZINE FOR EXPERT INTERIOR DESIGN IDEAS
2018 THE MAGAZINE FOR EXPERT INTERIOR DESIGN IDEAS A great source of inspiration for helpful, accessible design ideas, Les idées de ma maison guides readers through their design projects with plenty of
More informationAnnual Gadgets Survey Final Topline 4/21/06
Annual Gadgets Survey Final Topline 4/21/06 Data for February 15 April 6, 2006 1 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Internet & American Life Project Sample: n = 4,001 adults
More informationTo start, please type the ID number from your invitation letter here, then click Log in.
ANES 2016 Time Series Web Screening Questionnaire [PROGRAMMING: Define preload variable PRESELECTED. Set PRESELECTED=0 for all cases (meaning there is no pre-selected person, meaning that the household
More informationTHE MISSING AGENDA THE IMPORTANCE OF CYBER SECURITY TO U.S. VOTERS
THE MISSING AGENDA THE IMPORTANCE OF CYBER SECURITY TO U.S. VOTERS This election season voters have heard promises to make the U.S. great again and how we re stronger together. But they have yet to hear
More informationWelcome! Visioning Workshop. 24 March 2015
Welcome! Visioning Workshop 24 March 2015 5:30p.m. Open House and Check-in 6:00 p.m. Opening Remarks 6:10 p.m. Overview Presentation 6:25 p.m. Discussion 7:00 p.m. Report back 7:10 p.m. Wrap-up Overview
More informationSPRING 2015 PENN STATE POLL
SPRING 2015 PENN STATE POLL Report of Methods BLUE POLL Prepared by: Center for Survey Research May 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...1 METHODOLOGY...2 Instrument Development...2 Sample Design...2
More informationFALL 2006 MBA EXIT SURVEY (Sample size of 17)
FALL 2006 MBA EXIT SURVEY (Sample size of 17) EVALUATION OF MBA CURRICULUM Scale items: 1 = Very Satisfied 6 = Very Dissatisfied Please rate your satisfaction with the graduate education you received within
More informationA Brief History of Cell vs Landline Performance Wisconsin BRFSS
A Brief History of Cell vs Landline Performance Wisconsin BRFSS 2015 IFD&TC John Stevenson, August Salick, Robert Cradock, Jennifer Dykema May 2015 2014. Materials may not be reproduced without permission
More informationFall 2012 PENN STATE POLL
Fall 2012 PENN STATE POLL Report of Methods Prepared by: Center for Survey Research November 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...1 METHODOLOGY...2 Instrument Development...2 Sample Design...2 RDD Landline
More informationBasic facts about Dudley
Basic facts about Dudley This report provides a summary of the latest available information on the demographic and socioeconomic make-up of the 1 Big Local (DRAFT)s in Dudley. It looks at the population
More informationSample: n=2,252 national adults, age 18 and older, including 1,127 cell phone interviews Interviewing dates:
Survey Questions Spring 2013 Tracking Survey Final Topline 5/21/2013 Data for April 17-May 19, 2013 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Research Center s Internet & American
More informationThe DataDude (MS Excel) and Documentation for users are available at: Contents
1 Dude, Where s My Data? UCB DataDude (v. 0.6.7) User Guide Center for Social Services Research University of California at Berkeley http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ Dude, Where s My Data? The University of California,
More informationINTEGRATING RESOURCES TO ACHIEVE SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES FOR JUSTICE INVOLVED INDIVIDUALS
Third Annual Conference on Public Safety Realignment Innovations in Public Safety and Justice in California INTEGRATING RESOURCES TO ACHIEVE SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES FOR JUSTICE INVOLVED INDIVIDUALS Thursday,
More informationAdmission, Discharge, Update Client Data and Associated Forms
Admission, Discharge, Update Client Data and Associated Forms Table of Contents Introduction... 2 When to Update Client Data... 2 Admission Form... 2 Discharge Form...10 Update Client Data Form...11 CSI
More informationDATA MEMO. The volume of spam is growing in Americans personal and workplace accounts, but users are less bothered by it.
DATA MEMO BY: Senior Research Fellow Deborah Fallows DATE: May 2007 The volume of spam is growing in Americans personal and workplace email accounts, but email users are less bothered by it. Spam continues
More informationMI LAST NAME DATE OF BIRTH GENDER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE MI LAST NAME DATE OF BIRTH GENDER
PARTICIPANT FORM New member Update member information PRIMARY ACCOUNT HOLDER HOUSEHOLD #: FIRST NAME MI LAST NAME DATE OF BIRTH GENDER EMAIL ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE SECONDARY ACCOUNT HOLDER FIRST NAME
More informationSubject: Audit Report 16-50, IT Disaster Recovery, California State University, Fresno
Larry Mandel Vice Chancellor and Chief Audit Officer Office of Audit and Advisory Services 401 Golden Shore, 4th Floor Long Beach, CA 90802-4210 562-951-4430 562-951-4955 (Fax) lmandel@calstate.edu February
More informationPETER D. HART RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Study #7006--page 1 May 2003 OMB No
PETER D. HART RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Study #7006--page 1 1724 Connecticut Avenue, NW Interviews: 760 respondents Washington, DC 20009 Dates: May 19-20, 2003 (202) 234-5570 FINAL Study #7006 OMB No.
More information