-It was interesting to note that there was indeed somewhat of a disparity in Terry McAuliffe's favorability depending on whether respondents were born in Virginia or elsewhere. Natives had a net negative view of him at 24/25, while transplants had a positive opinion of him, 34/22. Despite his 'minus' rating with natives, he still actually led Creigh Deeds and Brian Moran by a narrow margin among them because most of the life long Virginians who do have a favorable view of him are planning to vote for him already.
Doing poorly with natives may not end up hurting McAuliffe that much anyway. 62% of likely primary voters we interviewed last weekend said they were born outside the state. We'll have to do some more surveys before we establish that 60% + range for transplants as a fact rather than just a finding on this particular poll but it would not surprise me that much.
-Some folks thought it was odd McAuliffe led among blacks despite his well known support of Hillary Clinton last year. I think that advantage is closely related to his already being up on the air in the Hampton Roads area, which had a higher percentage of African Americans voters than any other region of the state we polled. He's doing disproportionately well with all voters there, including blacks.
-It'll be interesting to see if anyone is able to get a leg up with female voters in this all male contest. Right now the candidates are all within 6% of each other in that very powerful demographic.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Odds and Ends
-Avery County is just about the reddest county in North Carolina. Maybe Yadkin County is redder. Either way, last night it became the unlikely first place to pass the transfer tax. It sounds like one thing they did right was specify clearly that all the money generated would be spent on the schools. I'll be interested to hear how else they were able to succesfully counteract the growth lobby when no had been able to before.
-Americans care about how the economy is going to be fixed to make their personal lives better. They don't care about a few of Barack Obama's appointees having to drop out. This is about as 'inside the beltway' as an issue gets. I guess if it gives the pundits something to talk about that's fine but I don't think very many people outside the bubble are getting too worked up about this. There are other things to worry about.
-Unless something happens to persuade me otherwise before Friday our New Hampshire poll this weekend is going to be Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter against John Sununu and Charlie Bass. Four possible match ups is usually as many as we like to put on a single poll, lest respondents get bored and hang up.
-Two years ago I went to College Park to see UNC and Maryland play women's basketball so I got put on their ticket department's e-mail list. This morning I got an e-mail from Gary Williams informing me single game tickets were available for the rest of the season, including UNC. I snapped a pair up. You know it's a tough year for the Terps when the Carolina fans on their e-mail list can just buy tickets like that.
-Americans care about how the economy is going to be fixed to make their personal lives better. They don't care about a few of Barack Obama's appointees having to drop out. This is about as 'inside the beltway' as an issue gets. I guess if it gives the pundits something to talk about that's fine but I don't think very many people outside the bubble are getting too worked up about this. There are other things to worry about.
-Unless something happens to persuade me otherwise before Friday our New Hampshire poll this weekend is going to be Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter against John Sununu and Charlie Bass. Four possible match ups is usually as many as we like to put on a single poll, lest respondents get bored and hang up.
-Two years ago I went to College Park to see UNC and Maryland play women's basketball so I got put on their ticket department's e-mail list. This morning I got an e-mail from Gary Williams informing me single game tickets were available for the rest of the season, including UNC. I snapped a pair up. You know it's a tough year for the Terps when the Carolina fans on their e-mail list can just buy tickets like that.
75% undecided for LG in Virginia
Jody Wagner 13
Rich Savage 4
Michael Signer 3
Pat Edmonson 3
Jon Bowerbank 2
75% of likely Democratic primary voters in Virginia are undecided about who the party's nominee for Lieutenant Governor should be, although a majority of those who do have an early preference are supporting former Secretary of Finance Jody Wagner.
There really isn't much to make of polling numbers showing this level of undecideds, but it is interesting to note that Wagner is leading in all but one section of the state, so her early edge isn't due solely to good standing in her home region or anything along those lines.
When we conducted regular polling of the Democratic primary for LG in North Carolina last year with a similarly crowded field we found at least 60% of likely voters undecided until about two or three weeks before the primary, when the two candidates who had enough funds to run television ads started to separate themselves from the pack. I would imagine this race will run a similar course.
On another Virginia politics issue, 80% of Virginia Democrats approve of Tim Kaine's double duty as Governor and chair of the DNC, with only 8% objecting to it. Republicans and independents who identify themselves as likely Democratic primary voters are less supportive.
Full results here.
Rich Savage 4
Michael Signer 3
Pat Edmonson 3
Jon Bowerbank 2
75% of likely Democratic primary voters in Virginia are undecided about who the party's nominee for Lieutenant Governor should be, although a majority of those who do have an early preference are supporting former Secretary of Finance Jody Wagner.
There really isn't much to make of polling numbers showing this level of undecideds, but it is interesting to note that Wagner is leading in all but one section of the state, so her early edge isn't due solely to good standing in her home region or anything along those lines.
When we conducted regular polling of the Democratic primary for LG in North Carolina last year with a similarly crowded field we found at least 60% of likely voters undecided until about two or three weeks before the primary, when the two candidates who had enough funds to run television ads started to separate themselves from the pack. I would imagine this race will run a similar course.
On another Virginia politics issue, 80% of Virginia Democrats approve of Tim Kaine's double duty as Governor and chair of the DNC, with only 8% objecting to it. Republicans and independents who identify themselves as likely Democratic primary voters are less supportive.
Full results here.
Holding Burr Accountable
You might think that if you're Richard Burr and you're suffering from low approval ratings and the other stridently partisan Republican Senator from your state just got the boot, that with reelection time coming around you might start moving a little more toward the center.
A new analysis from Nate Silver though shows that's far from the case. When it comes to President Obama's agenda, Burr has been the ninth least supportive of the entire Republican Senate caucus. Even hyper partisans like Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn have been slightly more bipartisan and the only folks who have been more right leaning are notoriously conservative folks from notoriously conservative states like James Inhofe and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, and David Vitter of Louisiana. One big difference between them and Burr of course is that their states did not vote for Obama. Burr has been the least cooperative of any Senator whose state did give its electoral votes to the President.
Usually the candidates challenging an incumbent Senator hold him/her accountable for their actions, particularly in a situation like the current one where Richard Burr is working against public opinion in opposing the stimulus and SCHIP. Of course there are no announced opponents to him yet. It's good that Americans United for Change is running radio ads holding his feet to the fire on some of this stuff, but I also hope now that the North Carolina Democratic Party has new leadership that the PR machine will crank back up and start making sure folks know what Burr's up to until an opposing campaign apparatus steps in to take up some of that responsibility.
A new analysis from Nate Silver though shows that's far from the case. When it comes to President Obama's agenda, Burr has been the ninth least supportive of the entire Republican Senate caucus. Even hyper partisans like Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn have been slightly more bipartisan and the only folks who have been more right leaning are notoriously conservative folks from notoriously conservative states like James Inhofe and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, and David Vitter of Louisiana. One big difference between them and Burr of course is that their states did not vote for Obama. Burr has been the least cooperative of any Senator whose state did give its electoral votes to the President.
Usually the candidates challenging an incumbent Senator hold him/her accountable for their actions, particularly in a situation like the current one where Richard Burr is working against public opinion in opposing the stimulus and SCHIP. Of course there are no announced opponents to him yet. It's good that Americans United for Change is running radio ads holding his feet to the fire on some of this stuff, but I also hope now that the North Carolina Democratic Party has new leadership that the PR machine will crank back up and start making sure folks know what Burr's up to until an opposing campaign apparatus steps in to take up some of that responsibility.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
How Carnahan stacks up
Robin Carnahan is in the race for Senate in Missouri.
When we did a poll on this last month we found that 45% of voters in the state had a favorable opinion of her with 36% viewing her unfavorably. 19% had no opinion. 76% of Democrats viewed her positively, and her announcement should effectively clear the field on that side.
It is unclear how strong her bipartisan support is. Only 15% of Republicans we polled last month said they had had a favorable opinion of her, but at the same time our final pre-election poll last fall found her winning around a quarter of the Republican vote in her reelection bid for Secretary of State, which is quite a respectable performance. It could be that GOP voters would be more concerned with her party label as one of 100 Senators than they are with her serving in a state office.
When we tested Carnahan in possible match ups against Republicans Roy Blunt, Jim Talent, and Sarah Steelman she led all three, although it was pretty close against Blunt and Talent. One of the main reasons it was so close against them is that she earned only 54% support from black voters in those contests. Early polling tends to underestimate black support for Democratic candidates, which tends to run closer to 90%, but Carnahan may still have some work to do shoring up her standing with one of the party's key demographics. Assuming she can do that, her initial lead over potential GOP foes is stronger than our numbers indicate.
One of Carnahan's particular strengths as a Democratic candidate is her popularity with white voters. She led Talent and Steelman in that demographic in our initial polling, and only trailed Blunt by a single point. Any statewide Democrat in Missouri who can run roughly even with whites will win an easy victory overall. To put it in perspective, Barack Obama nearly won the state last year despite losing the white vote 57-42 according to the exit polls.
A seat in the Senate is not inevitable for Robin Carnahan in this perpetually competitive state, but she certainly starts out as the favorite.
When we did a poll on this last month we found that 45% of voters in the state had a favorable opinion of her with 36% viewing her unfavorably. 19% had no opinion. 76% of Democrats viewed her positively, and her announcement should effectively clear the field on that side.
It is unclear how strong her bipartisan support is. Only 15% of Republicans we polled last month said they had had a favorable opinion of her, but at the same time our final pre-election poll last fall found her winning around a quarter of the Republican vote in her reelection bid for Secretary of State, which is quite a respectable performance. It could be that GOP voters would be more concerned with her party label as one of 100 Senators than they are with her serving in a state office.
When we tested Carnahan in possible match ups against Republicans Roy Blunt, Jim Talent, and Sarah Steelman she led all three, although it was pretty close against Blunt and Talent. One of the main reasons it was so close against them is that she earned only 54% support from black voters in those contests. Early polling tends to underestimate black support for Democratic candidates, which tends to run closer to 90%, but Carnahan may still have some work to do shoring up her standing with one of the party's key demographics. Assuming she can do that, her initial lead over potential GOP foes is stronger than our numbers indicate.
One of Carnahan's particular strengths as a Democratic candidate is her popularity with white voters. She led Talent and Steelman in that demographic in our initial polling, and only trailed Blunt by a single point. Any statewide Democrat in Missouri who can run roughly even with whites will win an easy victory overall. To put it in perspective, Barack Obama nearly won the state last year despite losing the white vote 57-42 according to the exit polls.
A seat in the Senate is not inevitable for Robin Carnahan in this perpetually competitive state, but she certainly starts out as the favorite.
New Hampshire
We keep wanting to do a Kentucky poll but it seems prudent to put it off for another week because of the ice storm there, so I think we'll hit the field in New Hampshire this weekend.
It seems clear Paul Hodes will run. We'll test Carol Shea-Porter too unless she swears off a run by the end of the week. That seems to pretty much cover the Democrats, although please correct me if there's someone else we should really be looking at.
What are your suggestions for the Republicans? We'll see if anyone actually announces this week, but otherwise who are a couple people we should test against Hodes and Shea-Porter?
It seems clear Paul Hodes will run. We'll test Carol Shea-Porter too unless she swears off a run by the end of the week. That seems to pretty much cover the Democrats, although please correct me if there's someone else we should really be looking at.
What are your suggestions for the Republicans? We'll see if anyone actually announces this week, but otherwise who are a couple people we should test against Hodes and Shea-Porter?
Undecideds rule in Virginia
Terry McAuliffe 18
Brian Moran 18
Creigh Deeds 11
The first of what will be monthly polls on the Virginia Governor's race from PPP finds most likely primary voters are undecided.
The poll brings good news and bad news for Terry McAuliffe. The good news is that there are already hints at how his deep war chest could eventually allow him to run away with the nomination. McAuliffe has already been up on tv in the Hampton Roads region for a little while, and he's earning 22% there to just 6% for Deeds and 5% for Moran. It's virtually unprecented for a Gubernatorial campaign to go on the air this early, and it appears to already be paying dividends for McAuliffe in a region of the state where none of the three contenders has a natural base. That has major implications for the impact his money could have moving forward.
At the same time, he has by far the largest number of likely primary voters who hold a negative view of him. 23% of likely primary voters have an unfavorable opinion of him, compared to just 10% for Moran and 9% for Deeds. That speaks to potential difficulty Democrats could have getting on the same page to fight Bob McDonnell in the general election if McAuliffe gets the nod.
Moran gets the best overall reviews from the voters with 34% viewing him favorably compared to 30% for McAuliffe and 23% for Deeds. Moran is polling particularly strong in northern Virginia, where he gets 34% to McAuliffe's 14% and receives a positive review from 49% of voters, better than any of the candidates is doing in any other region of the state.
The poll is perhaps most discouraging for Deeds. Even though he has previously run for statewide office, he appears to have the lowest name recognition of the three candidates. Although he does poll pretty well in the central part of the state he represents in Richmond, that area does not have a huge proportion of Democratic primary voters compared to two other key constituencies that he is polling poorly with: African Americans and folks in northern Virginia. With each of those groups he's currently at just 3%.
Independent voters and African Americans are two voter blocs that could play a pivotal role in the primary and currently have even higher levels of undecideds than the electorate at large. McAuliffe has an early lead with blacks, but 65% don't have their minds made up. Moran has the early edge with independents, who seem likely to choose the Democratic primary this year with the Republican nominee already decided, but 64% of them are currently ambivalent.
Full results here
Brian Moran 18
Creigh Deeds 11
The first of what will be monthly polls on the Virginia Governor's race from PPP finds most likely primary voters are undecided.
The poll brings good news and bad news for Terry McAuliffe. The good news is that there are already hints at how his deep war chest could eventually allow him to run away with the nomination. McAuliffe has already been up on tv in the Hampton Roads region for a little while, and he's earning 22% there to just 6% for Deeds and 5% for Moran. It's virtually unprecented for a Gubernatorial campaign to go on the air this early, and it appears to already be paying dividends for McAuliffe in a region of the state where none of the three contenders has a natural base. That has major implications for the impact his money could have moving forward.
At the same time, he has by far the largest number of likely primary voters who hold a negative view of him. 23% of likely primary voters have an unfavorable opinion of him, compared to just 10% for Moran and 9% for Deeds. That speaks to potential difficulty Democrats could have getting on the same page to fight Bob McDonnell in the general election if McAuliffe gets the nod.
Moran gets the best overall reviews from the voters with 34% viewing him favorably compared to 30% for McAuliffe and 23% for Deeds. Moran is polling particularly strong in northern Virginia, where he gets 34% to McAuliffe's 14% and receives a positive review from 49% of voters, better than any of the candidates is doing in any other region of the state.
The poll is perhaps most discouraging for Deeds. Even though he has previously run for statewide office, he appears to have the lowest name recognition of the three candidates. Although he does poll pretty well in the central part of the state he represents in Richmond, that area does not have a huge proportion of Democratic primary voters compared to two other key constituencies that he is polling poorly with: African Americans and folks in northern Virginia. With each of those groups he's currently at just 3%.
Independent voters and African Americans are two voter blocs that could play a pivotal role in the primary and currently have even higher levels of undecideds than the electorate at large. McAuliffe has an early lead with blacks, but 65% don't have their minds made up. Moran has the early edge with independents, who seem likely to choose the Democratic primary this year with the Republican nominee already decided, but 64% of them are currently ambivalent.
Full results here
Monday, February 2, 2009
RIP Jim Long
Jim Long was one of the classiest politicians I have ever met, and incredibly popular with the voters of North Carolina.
Right before I started at PPP in the fall of 2007 Grier Martin and Kay Hagan passed on challenging Elizabeth Dole. I was looking over past election returns and saw that in both 2000 and 2004 Long had led the Democratic ticket and thought, what the heck, let's test Long against Dole.
Hagan ended up changing her mind and we didn't end up doing it, but given what a strong fighter he had always been for average North Carolinians I have no doubt he would have been a formidable candidate.
He left an outstanding successor in Wayne Goodwin, and leaves a strong legacy to North Carolina.
Right before I started at PPP in the fall of 2007 Grier Martin and Kay Hagan passed on challenging Elizabeth Dole. I was looking over past election returns and saw that in both 2000 and 2004 Long had led the Democratic ticket and thought, what the heck, let's test Long against Dole.
Hagan ended up changing her mind and we didn't end up doing it, but given what a strong fighter he had always been for average North Carolinians I have no doubt he would have been a formidable candidate.
He left an outstanding successor in Wayne Goodwin, and leaves a strong legacy to North Carolina.
Wrapping up Civitas
There were a few things that came out both from the Civitas poll results and the luncheon discussion with Bev Perdue consultant Mac McCorkle and Pat McCrory campaign manager Jack Hawke that helped to explain again why Perdue is in the Governor's mansion:
-One Civitas question asked what Perdue's top priority should be now that she's in office. Only 2-3% of respondents said anything about transportation or road building and less than 1% mentioned government corruption. It's kind of remarkable what a large percentage of campaign discourse focused on areas that just weren't that high of a concern to the voters. When Perdue started talking coherently about the economy, she won.
-But even if the Raleigh culture was a big deal for the voters, it still wasn't a good issue for Pat McCrory to be hammering on as a Republican. Their poll showed 56% of voters in the state thought Democrats were the better party for bringing change to state government with only 18% choosing the Republicans. I've been arguing since July that this was a foolish issue for the GOP to beat the drum on because voters don't pay much attention to what's happening in Raleigh and when they think corruption, they think Washington Republicans. McCorkle said the Perdue campaign's polling showed the change/corruption issue was not a detriment to her campaign and was thus surprised that McCrory spent so much time on it. He asked Hawke what his polling numbers showed to the contrary, but Hawke didn't say anything.
It often seemed to me like the McCrory campaign was being run on intuition rather than data, and this exchange furthered that perception on my part. McCrory apologists might say something about how virtuous it is if polling numbers weren't dictating strategy, but I'd rather be Governor than virtuous.
-There was also a fair amount of discussion of the 'Yankee trash' issue, which I have argued played a pivotal role in Perdue's small October turnaround. Hawke took responsibility for opening McCrory up to attack on that issue, admitting it was his suggestion that McCrory list the 2007 Solid Waste Management Act as a bill he would have vetoed had he been Governor on a questionnaire he filled out over the summer. The Republicans at the luncheon seemed infuriated that Perdue's campaign used that issue to such effect, ironic given their party's history of successfully turning little things into big things to win elections. What goes around comes around.
-One Civitas question asked what Perdue's top priority should be now that she's in office. Only 2-3% of respondents said anything about transportation or road building and less than 1% mentioned government corruption. It's kind of remarkable what a large percentage of campaign discourse focused on areas that just weren't that high of a concern to the voters. When Perdue started talking coherently about the economy, she won.
-But even if the Raleigh culture was a big deal for the voters, it still wasn't a good issue for Pat McCrory to be hammering on as a Republican. Their poll showed 56% of voters in the state thought Democrats were the better party for bringing change to state government with only 18% choosing the Republicans. I've been arguing since July that this was a foolish issue for the GOP to beat the drum on because voters don't pay much attention to what's happening in Raleigh and when they think corruption, they think Washington Republicans. McCorkle said the Perdue campaign's polling showed the change/corruption issue was not a detriment to her campaign and was thus surprised that McCrory spent so much time on it. He asked Hawke what his polling numbers showed to the contrary, but Hawke didn't say anything.
It often seemed to me like the McCrory campaign was being run on intuition rather than data, and this exchange furthered that perception on my part. McCrory apologists might say something about how virtuous it is if polling numbers weren't dictating strategy, but I'd rather be Governor than virtuous.
-There was also a fair amount of discussion of the 'Yankee trash' issue, which I have argued played a pivotal role in Perdue's small October turnaround. Hawke took responsibility for opening McCrory up to attack on that issue, admitting it was his suggestion that McCrory list the 2007 Solid Waste Management Act as a bill he would have vetoed had he been Governor on a questionnaire he filled out over the summer. The Republicans at the luncheon seemed infuriated that Perdue's campaign used that issue to such effect, ironic given their party's history of successfully turning little things into big things to win elections. What goes around comes around.
Obama and the white vote
There were nine states, according to the exit polls, where Barack Obama did worse in 2008 among white voters than John Kerry did in 2004.
Some of them were predictably deep south states: the biggest drops were in Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi. You can say that Obama didn't fly in the SEC West. BTW, could that division be any worse in basketball this year? LSU might go dancing by virtue of getting to play so many games against all the other cruddy teams in their division, but they won't go far. But I digress...
A couple more were Arizona and Alaska, not surprising with each having someone from home on the ticket. West Virginia is not a big surprise either.
The other two are surprising on the surface, although I am pretty skeptical about one of them. The exits showed Obama doing worse with whites in New Mexico than Kerry did, even though he won the state by 15 after the Democrats lost it in 2004. It claims that McCain won the white vote in the state 56-42, but we found Obama winning it 53-46. Our final poll there did overestimate Obama's winning margin by two points but it's still hard for me to imagine his standing with whites there having been remotely as poor as the exit poll puts it.
The other one is Massachusetts. That's not necessarily a surprise though, for the opposite reason of Arizona and Alaska. Had a native son on the ticket in 2004, didn't in 2008. Obama actually earned a slightly smaller percentage of the vote in the state than Kerry did.
The five states where white voters had the largest movements in Obama's direction? The deep red to blue states of Indiana and North Carolina, his native state of Hawaii, and Vermont and Oregon.
Some of them were predictably deep south states: the biggest drops were in Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi. You can say that Obama didn't fly in the SEC West. BTW, could that division be any worse in basketball this year? LSU might go dancing by virtue of getting to play so many games against all the other cruddy teams in their division, but they won't go far. But I digress...
A couple more were Arizona and Alaska, not surprising with each having someone from home on the ticket. West Virginia is not a big surprise either.
The other two are surprising on the surface, although I am pretty skeptical about one of them. The exits showed Obama doing worse with whites in New Mexico than Kerry did, even though he won the state by 15 after the Democrats lost it in 2004. It claims that McCain won the white vote in the state 56-42, but we found Obama winning it 53-46. Our final poll there did overestimate Obama's winning margin by two points but it's still hard for me to imagine his standing with whites there having been remotely as poor as the exit poll puts it.
The other one is Massachusetts. That's not necessarily a surprise though, for the opposite reason of Arizona and Alaska. Had a native son on the ticket in 2004, didn't in 2008. Obama actually earned a slightly smaller percentage of the vote in the state than Kerry did.
The five states where white voters had the largest movements in Obama's direction? The deep red to blue states of Indiana and North Carolina, his native state of Hawaii, and Vermont and Oregon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
