Barack Obama's approval rating in North Carolina hit its lowest level since he took office this month, and one group that he's seen a particularly steep decline with is conservative white Democrats.
They were integral to his victory in the state last year. Many registered Democrats who frequently would have voted Republican at the federal level because of the national party's views on social issues stuck with Obama because of overriding concern about the economy. But as the number of folks in that demographic listing the economy as their top issue has declined- with a corresponding increase in ones naming moral and family values- his approval ratings have gone down.
In February and March conservative white Democrats split almost evenly in their appraisals of Obama's performance, with 38-39% saying they liked the job he's doing, and 41% dissenting. In February 54% of voters in that group said the economy was their top issue with just 14% naming moral and family values.
Fast forward to June and Obama's level of disapproval with that group has climbed from 41% to 55%. Over that same period the economy dropped to 48% as their top issue, while the number of folks listing moral and family values nearly doubled to 26%.
The increase in states legalizing gay marriage seems to have shifted the priorities among at least some white conservative Democrats from the economy back to social issues- and if that remains the case it's going to be a lot harder for Obama to hold onto their support moving forward.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Quick Thought on South Carolina
I follow South Carolina politics pretty closely because that's where my family's from and I was pretty amused by today's editorial in The State saying that Mark Sanford needs to stay in office mostly so that Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer is not able to take the top spot.
There's no doubt Bauer's an embarrassment. He likes to run red lights, drive over 100 mph, and generally has not shown the maturity you would expect from someone in such a high position.
And he has paid a political price for all that. In 2006 he had to come from behind to win renomination in the runoff, then won in the general election by less than three tenths of a point even as Republicans were generally dominating the rest of the ticket. Bauer was able to survive though because a significant number of voters were not aware of all his foibles, something made possible by the generally low profile nature of the office he currently holds.
So while I get The State's point, I actually disagree with their conclusion- the surest way to keep Bauer from winning the Governor's office next year is to let him serve out Sanford's term. The level of scrutiny he'd have to deal with would likely bring a broader level of public awareness to his bad behavior that probably would keep him from winning a full term. I really don't care whether Sanford resigns or not, but I actually think his doing so would ultimately hurt the chances of Bauer's being Governor in 2011 more than it would help them.
There's no doubt Bauer's an embarrassment. He likes to run red lights, drive over 100 mph, and generally has not shown the maturity you would expect from someone in such a high position.
And he has paid a political price for all that. In 2006 he had to come from behind to win renomination in the runoff, then won in the general election by less than three tenths of a point even as Republicans were generally dominating the rest of the ticket. Bauer was able to survive though because a significant number of voters were not aware of all his foibles, something made possible by the generally low profile nature of the office he currently holds.
So while I get The State's point, I actually disagree with their conclusion- the surest way to keep Bauer from winning the Governor's office next year is to let him serve out Sanford's term. The level of scrutiny he'd have to deal with would likely bring a broader level of public awareness to his bad behavior that probably would keep him from winning a full term. I really don't care whether Sanford resigns or not, but I actually think his doing so would ultimately hurt the chances of Bauer's being Governor in 2011 more than it would help them.
Christie leads Corzine
The first of what will be monthly Public Policy Polling surveys looking at the race for Governor in New Jersey finds Chris Christie leading Jon Corzine 51-41.
Christie is being buoyed by a 60-26 advantage with independent voters and a remarkable degree of party unity, as he leads 93-3 with Republicans. By comparison, Corzine has just a 75-16 edge with Democrats.
There's not much doubt Christie's lead is being fueled largely by Corzine's unpopularity. 56% of voters in the state have a negative opinion of the incumbent, while just 36% view him favorably. For Christie the breakdown is 43% positive and 33% unfavorable.
One number pretty much sums up Corzine's current level of unpopularity but also his prospects for improvement. Among the 25% of voters who don't know enough about Christie to have formed an opinion of him one way or the other, he has a 48-30 lead over Corzine. That speaks pretty strongly to the Governor's lack of popularity, but it also speaks to the fact that if he can make those voters to whom Christie is currently a blank slate dislike his challenger even more than they currently dislike him he has a chance. It's probably going to take an effective, relentlessly negative campaign against Christie for Corzine to get reelected.
There are still a lot of votes up for grabs four months out from the election. While just 9% of respondents say they're undecided, 30% of those who currently have a preference say they could change their minds between now and November. That leaves around 36% of the electorate persuadable.
Christie is certainly a strong favorite at this point, but there are enough factors in play that at least have the potential to work in Corzine's favor that it's far from over.
Full results here.
Christie is being buoyed by a 60-26 advantage with independent voters and a remarkable degree of party unity, as he leads 93-3 with Republicans. By comparison, Corzine has just a 75-16 edge with Democrats.
There's not much doubt Christie's lead is being fueled largely by Corzine's unpopularity. 56% of voters in the state have a negative opinion of the incumbent, while just 36% view him favorably. For Christie the breakdown is 43% positive and 33% unfavorable.
One number pretty much sums up Corzine's current level of unpopularity but also his prospects for improvement. Among the 25% of voters who don't know enough about Christie to have formed an opinion of him one way or the other, he has a 48-30 lead over Corzine. That speaks pretty strongly to the Governor's lack of popularity, but it also speaks to the fact that if he can make those voters to whom Christie is currently a blank slate dislike his challenger even more than they currently dislike him he has a chance. It's probably going to take an effective, relentlessly negative campaign against Christie for Corzine to get reelected.
There are still a lot of votes up for grabs four months out from the election. While just 9% of respondents say they're undecided, 30% of those who currently have a preference say they could change their minds between now and November. That leaves around 36% of the electorate persuadable.
Christie is certainly a strong favorite at this point, but there are enough factors in play that at least have the potential to work in Corzine's favor that it's far from over.
Full results here.
Monday, June 29, 2009
McCrory in the 8th District?
Roll Call reports today that Republicans might like for Pat McCrory to run against Larry Kissell in the 8th District next year.
One thing the story misses is that McCrory, you know, doesn't live in the 8th District.
But putting that aside, how might he fare? Well don't expect a big home field advantage in Charlotte. There are 29 8th District precincts within Mecklenburg County and last year Bev Perdue won 26 of them against McCrory in the race for Governor, a heavy contributor to Perdue's surprise victory on the mayor's home turf.
Mecklenburg County actually only contains the third largest number of votes in the district. The most come from Cabarrus County, where McCrory did very well, and the second most come from Cumberland County, where McCrory crashed.
So there are strengths and weaknesses in a possible McCrory campaign- the greatest of which is obviously the extent to which voters would be willing to support a candidate who either didn't live in the district or moved into it for the sole purpose of seeking office. One person who I imagine would be happy- at least privately- about such a candidacy is Perdue because either McCrory would be safely in Washington instead of seeking a rematch in 2012, or he would be pretty damaged goods after losing two elections in a row.
One thing the story misses is that McCrory, you know, doesn't live in the 8th District.
But putting that aside, how might he fare? Well don't expect a big home field advantage in Charlotte. There are 29 8th District precincts within Mecklenburg County and last year Bev Perdue won 26 of them against McCrory in the race for Governor, a heavy contributor to Perdue's surprise victory on the mayor's home turf.
Mecklenburg County actually only contains the third largest number of votes in the district. The most come from Cabarrus County, where McCrory did very well, and the second most come from Cumberland County, where McCrory crashed.
So there are strengths and weaknesses in a possible McCrory campaign- the greatest of which is obviously the extent to which voters would be willing to support a candidate who either didn't live in the district or moved into it for the sole purpose of seeking office. One person who I imagine would be happy- at least privately- about such a candidacy is Perdue because either McCrory would be safely in Washington instead of seeking a rematch in 2012, or he would be pretty damaged goods after losing two elections in a row.
More on Burr
Stuart Rothenberg weighs in today on Richard Burr's battle against us with the DC media establishment.
One odd critique made by unnamed 'GOP insiders' is that our samples are too Democratic and too urban.
North Carolina's voter registration breakdown by party is currently 46% Democrats, 32% Republicans, and 22% independents. The state's exit poll last year found the electorate to be 42% Democrats, 31% Republicans, and 27% independents. So we're looking at a Democratic advantage of somewhere between 11 and 14 points.
The breakdown of our most recent survey, the one that really seemed to set off the Burr camp, was 45% Democrats, 37% Republicans, and 18% independents- in other words containing a smaller percentage of Democrats than there are registered and a higher percentage of Republicans than there are registered.
Recent polls conducted by two conservative groups- The Carolina Strategy Group, run by Burr's chief strategist, and the Civitas Institute have had samples that were 47% Democratic, 37% Republican, and 16% independents and 47% Democratic, 36% Republican, and 17% independents respectively.
Anyone who says the sample of our most recent Burr poll was too Democratic clearly knows nothing about North Carolina politics.
The criticism that our polls are too urban is a new one. Our most recent survey had 14% of respondents describing their community as urban. Let's operate on the assumption that the only 'urban' places in the state are Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro, Durham, and Winston-Salem. Those cities add up to a population of 1.7 million, about 19% of a state with a population just over 9 million. I really would be interested to see the metrics behind the claim that our samples are too urban.
Anyway Rothenberg's piece is a good read, check it out here.
One odd critique made by unnamed 'GOP insiders' is that our samples are too Democratic and too urban.
North Carolina's voter registration breakdown by party is currently 46% Democrats, 32% Republicans, and 22% independents. The state's exit poll last year found the electorate to be 42% Democrats, 31% Republicans, and 27% independents. So we're looking at a Democratic advantage of somewhere between 11 and 14 points.
The breakdown of our most recent survey, the one that really seemed to set off the Burr camp, was 45% Democrats, 37% Republicans, and 18% independents- in other words containing a smaller percentage of Democrats than there are registered and a higher percentage of Republicans than there are registered.
Recent polls conducted by two conservative groups- The Carolina Strategy Group, run by Burr's chief strategist, and the Civitas Institute have had samples that were 47% Democratic, 37% Republican, and 16% independents and 47% Democratic, 36% Republican, and 17% independents respectively.
Anyone who says the sample of our most recent Burr poll was too Democratic clearly knows nothing about North Carolina politics.
The criticism that our polls are too urban is a new one. Our most recent survey had 14% of respondents describing their community as urban. Let's operate on the assumption that the only 'urban' places in the state are Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro, Durham, and Winston-Salem. Those cities add up to a population of 1.7 million, about 19% of a state with a population just over 9 million. I really would be interested to see the metrics behind the claim that our samples are too urban.
Anyway Rothenberg's piece is a good read, check it out here.
New Jersey Preview Stat
On the topic of the party affiliation of moderates...
On the New Jersey poll we'll start releasing tomorrow we found 40% of moderates identifying as Democrats, 37% as independents, and just 23% as Republicans.
And Chris Christie still has a 47-42 lead with those voters.
On the New Jersey poll we'll start releasing tomorrow we found 40% of moderates identifying as Democrats, 37% as independents, and just 23% as Republicans.
And Chris Christie still has a 47-42 lead with those voters.
Moderates and Party ID
I was reading the local paper in an airport somewhere in the Midwest on Friday- either Omaha or Chicago- and saw a letter to the editor referencing the recent Pew finding that a plurality of Americans are conservatives and wondering why the Democrats are still in charge.
I can answer that question pretty easily: Republicans have ceded the middle to the Democrats. We've broken down party identification by ideology identification nationally and in six different states over the last two months. Here are the numbers:
So there are more than twice as many Democrats as Republicans among moderates in all of these geographies with the exception of Alabama.
Taking it a step further, Democrats are doing nearly as well among conservatives as Republicans are among moderates:
On average only 2% more of moderates are identifying with the Republican Party than conservatives are identifying with the Democratic party.
In other words Democrats are doing nearly as well with right leaning voters as Republicans are with centrists. As long as that's the case, the GOP will continue to be out of power.
I can answer that question pretty easily: Republicans have ceded the middle to the Democrats. We've broken down party identification by ideology identification nationally and in six different states over the last two months. Here are the numbers:
| Party ID of Moderates | Democrat | Republican | Independent |
| National | 49 | 20 | 31 |
| | 44 | 26 | 30 |
| | 47 | 22 | 31 |
| | 53 | 23 | 24 |
| | 55 | 23 | 23 |
| | 60 | 25 | 14 |
| | 45 | 18 | 37 |
So there are more than twice as many Democrats as Republicans among moderates in all of these geographies with the exception of Alabama.
Taking it a step further, Democrats are doing nearly as well among conservatives as Republicans are among moderates:
| State | % of moderates who are Republicans | % of conservatives who are Democrats |
| National | 20 | 19 |
| | 26 | 20 |
| | 22 | 21 |
| | 23 | 24 |
| | 23 | 19 |
| | 25 | 29 |
| | 18 | 13 |
On average only 2% more of moderates are identifying with the Republican Party than conservatives are identifying with the Democratic party.
In other words Democrats are doing nearly as well with right leaning voters as Republicans are with centrists. As long as that's the case, the GOP will continue to be out of power.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Coming next week...
We're going to most likely continue our of late weekly polls showing Democratic Governors in bad shape- but it won't come as a surprise to anyone this week as we begin our monthly polling on New Jersey and Jon Corzine.
We haven't started the poll yet so who knows, maybe we'll find Corzine doing better than the current conventional wisdom.
That should be out Tuesday.
We haven't started the poll yet so who knows, maybe we'll find Corzine doing better than the current conventional wisdom.
That should be out Tuesday.
Looking at North Carolina's Moderate Republicans
Moderate Republicans are the endangered species of North Carolina politics, but they could hold a lot of power in next year's elections.
Less than 10% of voters in the state currently identify themselves as moderate Republicans. That trails conservative Republicans (27%), moderate Democrats (22%), liberal Democrats (13%), conservative Democrats (10%), and moderate independents (10%). The only voter groups smaller than moderate Republicans are liberal Republicans and liberal and conservative independents.
They have some views out of the mainstream of their party. For instance a majority support increasing income taxes on the rich in the state this year. A quarter of them approve of Barack Obama's job performance, compared to only 6% of conservative Republicans. More than 50% of them say that Jim Hunt, rather than Jim Martin, was their favorite Governor of the last 37 years. More of them list education as their top issue than moral and family values. And perhaps most telling only 36% of them say Richard Burr should be reelected while 41% believe it's time to give someone else a chance.
That's really not a big surprise- Burr, as well as Republican legislative leaders in the state, have played much more to the party's right leaning base than its voters in the middle. These folks might agree with something like banning gay marriage but it's not as high a priority for them as money in the classroom. They might be sympathetic to what Bev Perdue is pushing right now.
Simply put Burr and Republican legislative candidates can't assemble a winning coalition without these voters but risk losing their support to moderate Democratic candidates by pursuing a nearly uniformly conservative agenda. It will be interesting to see what steps are taken to try to keep these voters in the fold over the next year, or what Democrats might be able to do to convince them to cross over.
Less than 10% of voters in the state currently identify themselves as moderate Republicans. That trails conservative Republicans (27%), moderate Democrats (22%), liberal Democrats (13%), conservative Democrats (10%), and moderate independents (10%). The only voter groups smaller than moderate Republicans are liberal Republicans and liberal and conservative independents.
They have some views out of the mainstream of their party. For instance a majority support increasing income taxes on the rich in the state this year. A quarter of them approve of Barack Obama's job performance, compared to only 6% of conservative Republicans. More than 50% of them say that Jim Hunt, rather than Jim Martin, was their favorite Governor of the last 37 years. More of them list education as their top issue than moral and family values. And perhaps most telling only 36% of them say Richard Burr should be reelected while 41% believe it's time to give someone else a chance.
That's really not a big surprise- Burr, as well as Republican legislative leaders in the state, have played much more to the party's right leaning base than its voters in the middle. These folks might agree with something like banning gay marriage but it's not as high a priority for them as money in the classroom. They might be sympathetic to what Bev Perdue is pushing right now.
Simply put Burr and Republican legislative candidates can't assemble a winning coalition without these voters but risk losing their support to moderate Democratic candidates by pursuing a nearly uniformly conservative agenda. It will be interesting to see what steps are taken to try to keep these voters in the fold over the next year, or what Democrats might be able to do to convince them to cross over.
Poor Gerald Ford
I've been writing from Omaha this week doing my best Roy Williams Jayhawk sticker impression by cheering on LSU in the finals of the College World Series while wearing a Carolina baseball shirt and a Tiger baseball hat. It did not give me 1/1000th of the joy it will when the Tar Heels finally finish the season with a win here, but I was happy for coach Paul Mainieri and his team.
Here are some of my politics related observations from my week in middle American:
-I went to the birthplace of Gerald Ford on Tuesday, and his bust there was covered in bird poop and had clearly not been cleaned in a long time. In some sense I thought that was symbolic because of his reputation for buffoonery, but a former President deserves better than that. The city of Omaha does almost everything in a first class manner, but this is something they need to work on. There were also horribly faded mementos in a display case at the birth site that had not been preserved as well.
-Another local politician who didn't reach the White House but has a much better tribute to his legacy is Senator Bob Kerrey. The pedestrian bridge over the Missouri River bearing his name is beautiful, a great connection between Iowa and Nebraska, and a definite improvement to the area since I was last here in 2007. It was full of people every time I went by it.
-There aren't a lot of more politically competitive places in American right now than Omaha. Barack Obama won the city's Congressional district 50-49, then in its Mayoral race last month Democrat Jim Suttle held off Republican Hal Daub by a 51-49 margin. Democrats came close to winning its Congressional seat last fall, and now appear to have a stronger potential candidate to challenge Lee Terry in 2010. It's a very interesting city politically.
Here are some of my politics related observations from my week in middle American:
-I went to the birthplace of Gerald Ford on Tuesday, and his bust there was covered in bird poop and had clearly not been cleaned in a long time. In some sense I thought that was symbolic because of his reputation for buffoonery, but a former President deserves better than that. The city of Omaha does almost everything in a first class manner, but this is something they need to work on. There were also horribly faded mementos in a display case at the birth site that had not been preserved as well.
-Another local politician who didn't reach the White House but has a much better tribute to his legacy is Senator Bob Kerrey. The pedestrian bridge over the Missouri River bearing his name is beautiful, a great connection between Iowa and Nebraska, and a definite improvement to the area since I was last here in 2007. It was full of people every time I went by it.
-There aren't a lot of more politically competitive places in American right now than Omaha. Barack Obama won the city's Congressional district 50-49, then in its Mayoral race last month Democrat Jim Suttle held off Republican Hal Daub by a 51-49 margin. Democrats came close to winning its Congressional seat last fall, and now appear to have a stronger potential candidate to challenge Lee Terry in 2010. It's a very interesting city politically.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Signs of GOP strength with independents in NC
Last year Democrats in North Carolina, especially at the federal level, did pretty well with independents. Our final polls showed Barack Obama and Kay Hagan both winning by four points with them, a result not that important to Hagan's victory but critical to Obama's.
They could make the difference in whether Richard Burr gets reelected or not next year, as well as in Republican hopes to retake the legislature, and right now they appear to be leaning in the GOP's direction.
When we asked a generic ballot question on a survey a couple weeks ago 38% of independents said they planned to generally vote Republican next year, compared to only 26% intending to go for Democrats.
When we tested Burr specifically against a generic Democrat last week he led 39-32 with independents, even though he trailed 41-38 overall.
Burr has also led among independent voters against every hypothetical Democrat we've tested him against, including Roy Cooper, against whom he had a 37-29 lead with indy voters.
The divided government message- that the country will be better off if it doesn't give Democrats too much power and retains some level of balance- is going to be critical to GOP success next year and may have a higher level of appeal with independents.
This is some initial good news for Republicans, but there is also a caveat. Many polls have shown GOP identification at an all time low, and it may be that a spike in independent ranks in North Carolina reflects conservative voters disenchanted with the party choosing to leave. They're still conservative though even if they don't want to wear the GOP label and much more likely to support Republican candidates even if they do it under a different name.
They could make the difference in whether Richard Burr gets reelected or not next year, as well as in Republican hopes to retake the legislature, and right now they appear to be leaning in the GOP's direction.
When we asked a generic ballot question on a survey a couple weeks ago 38% of independents said they planned to generally vote Republican next year, compared to only 26% intending to go for Democrats.
When we tested Burr specifically against a generic Democrat last week he led 39-32 with independents, even though he trailed 41-38 overall.
Burr has also led among independent voters against every hypothetical Democrat we've tested him against, including Roy Cooper, against whom he had a 37-29 lead with indy voters.
The divided government message- that the country will be better off if it doesn't give Democrats too much power and retains some level of balance- is going to be critical to GOP success next year and may have a higher level of appeal with independents.
This is some initial good news for Republicans, but there is also a caveat. Many polls have shown GOP identification at an all time low, and it may be that a spike in independent ranks in North Carolina reflects conservative voters disenchanted with the party choosing to leave. They're still conservative though even if they don't want to wear the GOP label and much more likely to support Republican candidates even if they do it under a different name.
Our low Obama approvals
As many of you have noticed, we show lower approval numbers for Barack Obama both nationally and on a state by state basis than most pollsters.
I think part of this has to do with IVR- people are just more willing to say they don't like a politician to us than they are to a live interviewer because they don't feel any social pressure to be nice. That's resulted in us, Rasmussen, and Survey USA showing poorer approval numbers than most for a variety of politicians.
But I think another part of it may be who we're calling. When we conduct polls this year we are using the same sampling criteria we used for all of our surveys last year- folks who voted in one of the last two or three elections. And if you look at our state by state approval numbers for Obama, they tend to link up pretty closely with the percentage of the vote he got in those places:
On average Obama's approval rating is 1.5% higher than the share of the vote he received in a given state, so pretty close to identical. And here's my big question: if you didn't vote for Obama, why would you approve of his job performance now? He was pretty clear during the campaign about what he was going to do if he got elected, and that's pretty much what he's done. If you didn't like that enough to vote for him I'm not sure why you would like it enough to approve of him now.
That's not a criticism of the President by any means, the reality is that we're just a very divided nation politically. 5% of the electorate might have changed sides between 2004 and 2008 to move us from an R+3 country to a D+7 country but we're still pretty evenly split and any President who makes tough choices or exhibits leadership is going to earn the wrath of a significant chunk of the population.
It makes sense to me that Obama's approval numbers would closely track his vote numbers. Other pollsters may be using less strict sampling criteria that results in a good number of folks being polled who didn't vote last year and I would think apathetic folks are less likely to be unhappy with the President. There's not a right or wrong way to do it but I just wanted to shed some light on one of the factors I think might be responsible for the relatively modest figures we get for Obama.
I think part of this has to do with IVR- people are just more willing to say they don't like a politician to us than they are to a live interviewer because they don't feel any social pressure to be nice. That's resulted in us, Rasmussen, and Survey USA showing poorer approval numbers than most for a variety of politicians.
But I think another part of it may be who we're calling. When we conduct polls this year we are using the same sampling criteria we used for all of our surveys last year- folks who voted in one of the last two or three elections. And if you look at our state by state approval numbers for Obama, they tend to link up pretty closely with the percentage of the vote he got in those places:
| State | Obama Approval | Obama 2008% of Vote | Over/Under |
| | 63 | 62 | +1 |
| | 61 | 62 | -1 |
| | 60 | 54 | +6 |
| | 55 | 56 | -1 |
| | 51 | 52 | -1 |
| | 50 | 50 | Same |
| | 49 | 54 | -5 |
| | 47 | 39 | +8 |
| | 46 | 41 | +5 |
| | 45 | 44 | +1 |
| | 45 | 39 | +6 |
| | 39 | 43 | -4 |
| | 38 | 34 | +4 |
On average Obama's approval rating is 1.5% higher than the share of the vote he received in a given state, so pretty close to identical. And here's my big question: if you didn't vote for Obama, why would you approve of his job performance now? He was pretty clear during the campaign about what he was going to do if he got elected, and that's pretty much what he's done. If you didn't like that enough to vote for him I'm not sure why you would like it enough to approve of him now.
That's not a criticism of the President by any means, the reality is that we're just a very divided nation politically. 5% of the electorate might have changed sides between 2004 and 2008 to move us from an R+3 country to a D+7 country but we're still pretty evenly split and any President who makes tough choices or exhibits leadership is going to earn the wrath of a significant chunk of the population.
It makes sense to me that Obama's approval numbers would closely track his vote numbers. Other pollsters may be using less strict sampling criteria that results in a good number of folks being polled who didn't vote last year and I would think apathetic folks are less likely to be unhappy with the President. There's not a right or wrong way to do it but I just wanted to shed some light on one of the factors I think might be responsible for the relatively modest figures we get for Obama.
More on Burr Polling
After PPP and Civitas have pretty consistently shown Richard Burr with an approval rating in the 30s over the course of 2009, Insider Advantage joined the fray yesterday with a new poll showing his spread at 39/30.
Are they a bunch of liberals? Well the main guy there is a former Republican legislator in Georgia and aide to Newt Gingrich so I don't know that the Burr operation can play that card on this one.
It was very interesting to see yesterday that the News&Observer reported on Burr's going on the attack against us more than 24 hours after the Politico article was published and only after a commenter on their blog brought it to their attention.
That would seem to indicate the Burr campaign was pushing the 'rogue pollster' story only to the inside the Beltway media and not back home. Interesting decision and I see a couple reasons for it:
1) We have built up a lot of credibility with the North Carolina press corps after showing Elizabeth Dole's vulnerability and Barack Obama's ability to win the state before those two things were really widely viewed as possible- but we've also been very frank about Bev Perdue's lack of popularity- so the folks down here know that we've been quite accurate and they also know we're willing to deliver bad news to Democrats, making it a lot harder to push the bias angle.
2) They're getting too swept up about what people are saying about Burr in DC...insider perceptions matter to some extent but it's not like fundraising is going to dry up for an incumbent Senator because of some stories about unfavorable poll numbers in the major Washington publications. When you start worrying about that too much and let it get you off your game then you're in trouble...I know Republicans who thought the whole flap with Burr's internal/non-interal poll last week made his operation look chaotic and desperate and the fact they felt the need to go after PPP just lent more significance to our numbers.
Sometimes you have to sit back, take a deep breathe, and look at the big picture.
Are they a bunch of liberals? Well the main guy there is a former Republican legislator in Georgia and aide to Newt Gingrich so I don't know that the Burr operation can play that card on this one.
It was very interesting to see yesterday that the News&Observer reported on Burr's going on the attack against us more than 24 hours after the Politico article was published and only after a commenter on their blog brought it to their attention.
That would seem to indicate the Burr campaign was pushing the 'rogue pollster' story only to the inside the Beltway media and not back home. Interesting decision and I see a couple reasons for it:
1) We have built up a lot of credibility with the North Carolina press corps after showing Elizabeth Dole's vulnerability and Barack Obama's ability to win the state before those two things were really widely viewed as possible- but we've also been very frank about Bev Perdue's lack of popularity- so the folks down here know that we've been quite accurate and they also know we're willing to deliver bad news to Democrats, making it a lot harder to push the bias angle.
2) They're getting too swept up about what people are saying about Burr in DC...insider perceptions matter to some extent but it's not like fundraising is going to dry up for an incumbent Senator because of some stories about unfavorable poll numbers in the major Washington publications. When you start worrying about that too much and let it get you off your game then you're in trouble...I know Republicans who thought the whole flap with Burr's internal/non-interal poll last week made his operation look chaotic and desperate and the fact they felt the need to go after PPP just lent more significance to our numbers.
Sometimes you have to sit back, take a deep breathe, and look at the big picture.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Senate Delegation Approval Ratings
PPP has polled on the approval ratings of the entire Senate delegation in 13 different states over the last year. Here's how they stack up:
Minnesota's one woman Senate delegation comes in first. Amy Klobuchar has registered the highest individual approval rating of any individual Senator with us in the last year, and since she's her state's only one Minnesota comes in first. Spots 2-6 on the list are an indicator of the popularity that comes with longevity. Only one of the ten Senators in those states is in his first term, and a lot of them have been in office for quite a long time.
At the bottom end of the spectrum Illinois' bad rating is completely the fault of Roland Burris, as Dick Durbin has pretty solid numbers. North Carolina and Florida's spots at the bottom are more a product of unfamiliarity than unpopularity, as the states have three first term Senators and one second term one, driving up the number of respondents with no opinion. They're also big states, where there tend to be higher levels of 'don't know' when folks are asked to rate their officials.
| State | Average Approval Rating |
| | 62/25 |
| | 56/32 |
| | 53/38 |
| | 52/36 |
| | 50/35 |
| | 49/34 |
| | 46/25 |
| | 38/40 |
| | 38/44 |
| | 36/50 |
| | 34/34 |
| | 33/33 |
| | 32/48 |
Minnesota's one woman Senate delegation comes in first. Amy Klobuchar has registered the highest individual approval rating of any individual Senator with us in the last year, and since she's her state's only one Minnesota comes in first. Spots 2-6 on the list are an indicator of the popularity that comes with longevity. Only one of the ten Senators in those states is in his first term, and a lot of them have been in office for quite a long time.
At the bottom end of the spectrum Illinois' bad rating is completely the fault of Roland Burris, as Dick Durbin has pretty solid numbers. North Carolina and Florida's spots at the bottom are more a product of unfamiliarity than unpopularity, as the states have three first term Senators and one second term one, driving up the number of respondents with no opinion. They're also big states, where there tend to be higher levels of 'don't know' when folks are asked to rate their officials.
Updated Senate Approval Chart
Here are all the approval ratings we've found for various Senators across the country over the last year:
| Senator | Approval |
| Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) | 62/25 |
| Tom Coburn (R-OK) | 59/29 |
| Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) | 58/31 |
| Tom Carper (D-DE) | 57/26 |
| Kit Bond (R-MO) | 57/27 |
| Mark Pryor (D-AR) | 54/30 |
| John McCain (R-AZ) | 53/31 |
| Russ Feingold (D-WI) | 53/36 |
| Robert Byrd (D-WV) | 53/37 |
| James Inhofe (R-OK) | 52/35 |
| Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) | 52/39 |
| Jeff Sessions (R-AL) | 50/33 |
| Herb Kohl (D-WI) | 50/36 |
| Richard Shelby (R-AL) | 48/35 |
| Dick Durbin (D-IL) | 47/34 |
| Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) | 45/40 |
| Jim Webb (D-VA) | 44/33 |
| Mitch McConnell (R-KY) | 44/47 |
| Bill Nelson (D-FL) | 42/29 |
| Mark Udall (D-CO) | 41/46 |
| Sherrod Brown (D-OH) | 38/36 |
| George Voinovich (R-OH) | 37/44 |
| Ted Kaufman (D-DE) | 35/24 |
| Richard Burr (R-NC) | 34/35 |
| Michael Bennet (D-CO) | 34/41 |
| Kay Hagan (D-NC) | 33/33 |
| Johnny Isakson (R-GA) | 30/25 |
| Jim Bunning (R-KY) | 28/54 |
| Mel Martinez (R-FL) | 23/37 |
| Roland Burris (D-IL) | 17/62 |
Ohio Approval Ratings
51% of Ohio voters approve of Barack Obama's job performance, with 40% disapproving.
His numbers break down pretty much the same way they do everywhere else. He is very popular within his own party (an 81% approval rating), not very popular with Republicans (11%), and getting relatively mixed reviews from independents (49%).
He has maintained his strong appeal to moderate voters in the state, with 61% of them giving him good marks and just 29% negative ones. There's a significant gender gap in his approval, as he earns a +22 rating from women (55/33) but is in slightly negative territory with women (46/48).
Both of Ohio's Senators find approval ratings below 40%. Sherrod Brown is the slightly more popular one, with 38% of voters giving him good marks and 36% dissenting. A quarter of the state's population has no opinion about him either way.
George Voinovich's numbers are in negative territory, with 44% disapproving and 37% approval. Bad approval numbers for Voinovich have been a constant in PPP's polling- when we last looked at in August the numbers were 30/38- and he's not seeing a wave of popularity in the wake of his retirement. Missouri Senator Kit Bond had shown mediocre approval numbers last summer, then a major improvement after he announced he would not run again but that is not the case in Ohio.
Ohio, along with North Carolina, is one of just two states where PPP has found approval ratings for both Senators under 40. It's partially that Voinovich and Brown aren't that popular, but also a function of the fact that you find a lot more voters with no opinion in bigger states.
Full results here
His numbers break down pretty much the same way they do everywhere else. He is very popular within his own party (an 81% approval rating), not very popular with Republicans (11%), and getting relatively mixed reviews from independents (49%).
He has maintained his strong appeal to moderate voters in the state, with 61% of them giving him good marks and just 29% negative ones. There's a significant gender gap in his approval, as he earns a +22 rating from women (55/33) but is in slightly negative territory with women (46/48).
Both of Ohio's Senators find approval ratings below 40%. Sherrod Brown is the slightly more popular one, with 38% of voters giving him good marks and 36% dissenting. A quarter of the state's population has no opinion about him either way.
George Voinovich's numbers are in negative territory, with 44% disapproving and 37% approval. Bad approval numbers for Voinovich have been a constant in PPP's polling- when we last looked at in August the numbers were 30/38- and he's not seeing a wave of popularity in the wake of his retirement. Missouri Senator Kit Bond had shown mediocre approval numbers last summer, then a major improvement after he announced he would not run again but that is not the case in Ohio.
Ohio, along with North Carolina, is one of just two states where PPP has found approval ratings for both Senators under 40. It's partially that Voinovich and Brown aren't that popular, but also a function of the fact that you find a lot more voters with no opinion in bigger states.
Full results here
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Ideology along generational lines in North Carolina
We know that generational change is making North Carolina more Democratic- the disparity last year between Barack Obama's 48 point win among voters under 30 in the state and John McCain's 13 point victory with senior citizens was only greater in one other state in the country. But is it making the state more liberal? Here's how ideology breaks down along age lines over the course of our polling so far in 2009:
We definitely see that there's a linear relationship along age lines for both liberals and conservatives- the number of conservatives drops the younger the age group while the number of liberals increases. That said, even among the youngest age group there are still more conservatives than liberals.
One thing these figures point to is that the electorate is moving more and more toward being dominated by moderates than conservatives, as the age groups over 45 show the greatest number of voters being conservatives but those under 45 show the plurality as moderates. That's just another data point showing how centrist we're becoming- North Carolina is a pretty good bellwether for the country.
| Age Group | Liberal | Moderate | Conservative |
| 18 to 29 | 25 | 41 | 34 |
| 30 to 45 | 17 | 43 | 40 |
| 46 to 65 | 15 | 40 | 45 |
| Older than 65 | 12 | 39 | 49 |
We definitely see that there's a linear relationship along age lines for both liberals and conservatives- the number of conservatives drops the younger the age group while the number of liberals increases. That said, even among the youngest age group there are still more conservatives than liberals.
One thing these figures point to is that the electorate is moving more and more toward being dominated by moderates than conservatives, as the age groups over 45 show the greatest number of voters being conservatives but those under 45 show the plurality as moderates. That's just another data point showing how centrist we're becoming- North Carolina is a pretty good bellwether for the country.
Palin: the moderate choice?
One interesting fact within our national poll looking at the 2012 Presidential picture last week: Sarah Palin is the most popular potential candidate with moderate Republicans.
61% have a favorable opinion of her to 53% for Mitt Romney, 50% for Mike Huckabee, and 44% for Newt Gingrich.
She's generally thought of as the darling of the conservative wing of the party- and she's the most popular there too as 83% view her positively to 79% for Huckabee, 77% for Gingrich, and 69% for Romney- but it may come as a surprise that she's tops with moderates as well.
That popularity with the centrist wing of the party speaks well to her prospects for assembling the coalition of voters she would need to win the nomination...but she continues to poll the weakest in a general election match up, setting up what could be a hard choice for some GOP voters in 2012 between who they like the most and who they think can actually beat Barack Obama.
61% have a favorable opinion of her to 53% for Mitt Romney, 50% for Mike Huckabee, and 44% for Newt Gingrich.
She's generally thought of as the darling of the conservative wing of the party- and she's the most popular there too as 83% view her positively to 79% for Huckabee, 77% for Gingrich, and 69% for Romney- but it may come as a surprise that she's tops with moderates as well.
That popularity with the centrist wing of the party speaks well to her prospects for assembling the coalition of voters she would need to win the nomination...but she continues to poll the weakest in a general election match up, setting up what could be a hard choice for some GOP voters in 2012 between who they like the most and who they think can actually beat Barack Obama.
Democrats strong in Ohio Senate race
Jennifer Brunner and Lee Fisher have nearly identical leads over Rob Portman in the race to replace retiring Republican Senator George Voinovich.
Fisher leads Portman 41-32 and Brunner has a 40-32 advantage. For both that's a strong improvement since PPP first looked at the race in January. At that time it was Portman with a 41-39 lead over Fisher and a 42-34 one over Brunner.
Anyone trying to figure out whether Brunner or Fisher would make a stronger general election candidate or which has a leg up in the primary will not find it from this poll, as their numbers are nearly identical across the board. 32% of respondents have a favorable opinion of both Fisher and Brunner. 32% have an unfavorable one of Brunner, while the number is 31% for Fisher. Among just Democrats 51% have a favorable opinion of both candidates, with 13% having a negative one of Brunner to 12% for Fisher.
Portman is seen favorably by 22% of voters and unfavorably by 34%, not a particularly good place to start. It's interesting that really none of the three candidates are very popular, with Fisher holding a +1 net favorability rating, Brunner even, and Portman at -12. You'd think with the rare commodity of an open Senate seat someone would run who had already earned a greater measure of popularity with Ohio voters, but there don't seem to be any likely candidates who fit the bill.
All three candidates are getting 65-69% of the vote within their own parties, but with a significant Democratic identification advantage in Ohio and a slight lead for Brunner and Fisher with independents it gives them the overall solid leads.
Full results here
Fisher leads Portman 41-32 and Brunner has a 40-32 advantage. For both that's a strong improvement since PPP first looked at the race in January. At that time it was Portman with a 41-39 lead over Fisher and a 42-34 one over Brunner.
Anyone trying to figure out whether Brunner or Fisher would make a stronger general election candidate or which has a leg up in the primary will not find it from this poll, as their numbers are nearly identical across the board. 32% of respondents have a favorable opinion of both Fisher and Brunner. 32% have an unfavorable one of Brunner, while the number is 31% for Fisher. Among just Democrats 51% have a favorable opinion of both candidates, with 13% having a negative one of Brunner to 12% for Fisher.
Portman is seen favorably by 22% of voters and unfavorably by 34%, not a particularly good place to start. It's interesting that really none of the three candidates are very popular, with Fisher holding a +1 net favorability rating, Brunner even, and Portman at -12. You'd think with the rare commodity of an open Senate seat someone would run who had already earned a greater measure of popularity with Ohio voters, but there don't seem to be any likely candidates who fit the bill.
All three candidates are getting 65-69% of the vote within their own parties, but with a significant Democratic identification advantage in Ohio and a slight lead for Brunner and Fisher with independents it gives them the overall solid leads.
Full results here
Burr on the attack...against us
I guess Richard Burr's consistently poor approval numbers have gotten under his skin, because his campaign operation went attacking us to Politico this week.
When a campaign starts running against pollsters that's usually a pretty bad sign. The three North Carolina ones I can remember dissing us to the media last year- Elizabeth Dole, Richard Moore, and Bill Daughtridge- didn't end up so good.
In fact the timing of this salvo from Burr's campaign is almost identical to one launched against us by the Dole campaign in July 2007, and we all know how that ended up.
Now the Burr campaign did one thing well in this article, which is create an impression that we're the only group out there delivering bad news and we're just doing it because we have a partisan interest. Of course the conservative Civitas Institute has repeatedly found pretty similarly bad numbers, including a 40% approval rating and 33% favorability on its last two polls. The truth is that pollsters on both sides of the spectrum are finding the same thing when it comes to Burr's vulnerability.
Anyone who follows us closely knows that we put out the numbers however they come- in the last week alone we've shown Bev Perdue with a dreadful approval rating in North Carolina, as well as unexpected levels of vulnerability next year for the Democratic Governors in Wisconsin and Ohio. We show lower approval ratings for Barack Obama than almost any other pollster.
If Burr's numbers are worse than Elizabeth Dole's at the same point in the cycle then that's a real cause for concern, and attacking PPP isn't going to help his cause, although we don't mind the attention. And if his approval ratings improve, our numbers will reflect it.
When a campaign starts running against pollsters that's usually a pretty bad sign. The three North Carolina ones I can remember dissing us to the media last year- Elizabeth Dole, Richard Moore, and Bill Daughtridge- didn't end up so good.
In fact the timing of this salvo from Burr's campaign is almost identical to one launched against us by the Dole campaign in July 2007, and we all know how that ended up.
Now the Burr campaign did one thing well in this article, which is create an impression that we're the only group out there delivering bad news and we're just doing it because we have a partisan interest. Of course the conservative Civitas Institute has repeatedly found pretty similarly bad numbers, including a 40% approval rating and 33% favorability on its last two polls. The truth is that pollsters on both sides of the spectrum are finding the same thing when it comes to Burr's vulnerability.
Anyone who follows us closely knows that we put out the numbers however they come- in the last week alone we've shown Bev Perdue with a dreadful approval rating in North Carolina, as well as unexpected levels of vulnerability next year for the Democratic Governors in Wisconsin and Ohio. We show lower approval ratings for Barack Obama than almost any other pollster.
If Burr's numbers are worse than Elizabeth Dole's at the same point in the cycle then that's a real cause for concern, and attacking PPP isn't going to help his cause, although we don't mind the attention. And if his approval ratings improve, our numbers will reflect it.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
More on the Williams/Krzyzewski Poll
I saw a bunch of commentary around the blogosphere to the effect that our polling showing Roy Williams was more popular with North Carolinians than Mike Krzyzewski was stupid because UNC has a bigger fan base.
I already pointed out that Williams was more well liked by Duke fans than Krzyzewski is by UNC fans, but here's another statistic on that point:
-Among respondents who are not UNC fans 53% view Williams favorably and 12% negatively.
-Among those who are not Duke fans 47% have a positive opinion of Krzyzewski and 15% have a negative one.
In other words, Williams is at +41 among folks who are not his partisans and Krzyzewski is at +32, for a disparity of nine points. That is smaller than the overall 14 point disparity when all respondents are included, but it still shows Williams more popular even when you control for the size of the two teams' fanbases.
I already pointed out that Williams was more well liked by Duke fans than Krzyzewski is by UNC fans, but here's another statistic on that point:
-Among respondents who are not UNC fans 53% view Williams favorably and 12% negatively.
-Among those who are not Duke fans 47% have a positive opinion of Krzyzewski and 15% have a negative one.
In other words, Williams is at +41 among folks who are not his partisans and Krzyzewski is at +32, for a disparity of nine points. That is smaller than the overall 14 point disparity when all respondents are included, but it still shows Williams more popular even when you control for the size of the two teams' fanbases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
