With the news today that Sarah Palin is resigning, possibly to focus on a 2012 Presidential bid, what are her chances?
For the Republican nomination, at least at this early point, pretty good. For the general election, not so much.
Monthly national PPP surveys looking at the 2012 contest for President have consistently found Palin as the most popular of the likely Republican candidates with Republican voters. Around 75% of them have a positive opinion of her, ranking her above Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich every time we've polled it.
When it comes to the general election though, she does the worst of the GOP contenders against Barack Obama. Our four surveys on it so far have shown her trailing the President by an average of 16 points nationally, an outcome that would likely give Obama well over 400 electoral votes.
Candidates can certainly grow a lot from polling conducted three years before an election- Obama himself did. The problem for Palin is that most voters have already formed an opinion about her. On average our polls have shown that only 9% of the electorate doesn't know enough about the former Vice Presidential candidate to view her either positively or negatively. That doesn't give her a lot of room to define herself as a fresh face to any meaningful swath of voters.
For her to get elected in 2012 she would have to change the minds of a significant number of independent and Democratic votes about her- and it's a lot easier to make a positive first impression than it is to change a negative one once it's already been formed.
It's going to give Republican voters some interesting choices- they like Palin the most, but many may also realize that nominating her is a general election death wish. More than usual this will set up a choice between likability and electability, as Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and even Newt Gingrich fare better against Obama in our polling.
My guess is that Palin never holds elected office again.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Interesting Findings from Pew
Last week Pew put out a new report related to polling in the 2008 election. A couple findings I thought were particularly interesting:
-On state level Presidential polls the average error for live interviewers was 1.6%. For IVR polls it was 1.5%. On all state level polls the average error for live interviewers was 2.1% and for IVR it was 1.7%. The difference between live interviewer and automated outfits is not large, but the automated ones were slightly more accurate. It's just another piece of evidence that as much as some in the mainstream media might want to deny it, automated polls are just as good- or maybe even better- at calling the horse race than traditional ones.
-The other interesting finding was that on state level Presidential polls with some error, 74 out of 126 of them overestimated John McCain. And on all polls 125 out of 211 overestimated the Republican candidate. For all the accusations from the right of pollsters being biased toward Democrats, the data doesn't back up that assertion.
-On state level Presidential polls the average error for live interviewers was 1.6%. For IVR polls it was 1.5%. On all state level polls the average error for live interviewers was 2.1% and for IVR it was 1.7%. The difference between live interviewer and automated outfits is not large, but the automated ones were slightly more accurate. It's just another piece of evidence that as much as some in the mainstream media might want to deny it, automated polls are just as good- or maybe even better- at calling the horse race than traditional ones.
-The other interesting finding was that on state level Presidential polls with some error, 74 out of 126 of them overestimated John McCain. And on all polls 125 out of 211 overestimated the Republican candidate. For all the accusations from the right of pollsters being biased toward Democrats, the data doesn't back up that assertion.
Obama's Popularity by Region
We have five monthly polls now looking at Barack Obama's approval rating in North Carolina, and cumulatively they give a good a gauge of where he's popular and where he's not.
His best numbers by far, not surprisingly, are in the Triangle. 58% of voters there approve of his job performance while 37% disapprove. Generally speaking the more urban an area is the more popular the President is going to be there, and it was also the only region in the state where he won last fall, his margin there big enough to make up for narrow losses in most of the rest of the state. The Triangle was last year and will continue to be the key to Obama's success in North Carolina.
He's least popular in the Mountains, where only 47% approve of his performance so far with 45% disapproving. That area is pretty conservative, but there are also some simple demographic reasons for Obama's lack of support there- it has fewer African Americans and fewer young people than any other place in the state, and those tend to be the groups most supportive of him. Democrats may get frustrated with Heath Shuler's deviations from the party line, but these numbers help to explain it.
Other than the Triangle Obama is getting his best numbers in metro Charlotte and in northeastern North Carolina, where he has identical 54/39 ratings. He's at 52/41 in southeastern North Carolina, and gets his second lowest numbers in the Triad at 48/44.
Obama's political standing in North Carolina now really isn't any different than it was in November. Just over half of the population supports him- he hasn't built on his narrow victory at the polls last fall but he hasn't lost any of his support either. This may never be a 'safe' state for Obama but his standing here is a lot better than we would probably have guessed a year ago at this time.
His best numbers by far, not surprisingly, are in the Triangle. 58% of voters there approve of his job performance while 37% disapprove. Generally speaking the more urban an area is the more popular the President is going to be there, and it was also the only region in the state where he won last fall, his margin there big enough to make up for narrow losses in most of the rest of the state. The Triangle was last year and will continue to be the key to Obama's success in North Carolina.
He's least popular in the Mountains, where only 47% approve of his performance so far with 45% disapproving. That area is pretty conservative, but there are also some simple demographic reasons for Obama's lack of support there- it has fewer African Americans and fewer young people than any other place in the state, and those tend to be the groups most supportive of him. Democrats may get frustrated with Heath Shuler's deviations from the party line, but these numbers help to explain it.
Other than the Triangle Obama is getting his best numbers in metro Charlotte and in northeastern North Carolina, where he has identical 54/39 ratings. He's at 52/41 in southeastern North Carolina, and gets his second lowest numbers in the Triad at 48/44.
Obama's political standing in North Carolina now really isn't any different than it was in November. Just over half of the population supports him- he hasn't built on his narrow victory at the polls last fall but he hasn't lost any of his support either. This may never be a 'safe' state for Obama but his standing here is a lot better than we would probably have guessed a year ago at this time.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Sotomayor Polling
I think it's interesting that Rasmussen's poll yesterday showing just 37% of the country in support of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court hasn't received more attention.
We've only polled on Sotomayor in North Carolina but we found pretty similar numbers, with 39% favoring Senate approval here a month ago.
This definitely seems like something where folks might be more comfortable expressing opposition to the nomination on an automated poll than a live interviewer one.
I don't think it means Obama's choice is a bad one- this doesn't seem likely to be a big issue at the polls in either 2010 or 2012 even with those not enthused about the nomination, and women and Hispanics seem by and large happy with it. But I'm not sure I buy into the conventional wisdom that Sotomayor was a broadly popular pick.
We've only polled on Sotomayor in North Carolina but we found pretty similar numbers, with 39% favoring Senate approval here a month ago.
This definitely seems like something where folks might be more comfortable expressing opposition to the nomination on an automated poll than a live interviewer one.
I don't think it means Obama's choice is a bad one- this doesn't seem likely to be a big issue at the polls in either 2010 or 2012 even with those not enthused about the nomination, and women and Hispanics seem by and large happy with it. But I'm not sure I buy into the conventional wisdom that Sotomayor was a broadly popular pick.
Obama's National Approval by Party and Ideology
The below chart shows Barack Obama's approval nationally by party and ideology groups from our poll a couple weeks ago. No huge surprises. The biggest group where he probably needs to prop back up his standing- and where he's lost the most support in the last few months at least according to our polling- is among conservative Democrats.
Take the liberal Republicans numbers with a trough of salt- the 100% approval comes because he's popular with all 7 of them that we interviewed!
Take the liberal Republicans numbers with a trough of salt- the 100% approval comes because he's popular with all 7 of them that we interviewed!
| Group | Obama Approval | Percentage of Electorate Group Accounts For |
| Liberal Republicans | 100% | 1% |
| Liberal Democrats | 92% | 13% |
| Liberal Independents | 88% | 2% |
| Moderate Democrats | 86% | 23% |
| Moderate Independents | 54% | 14% |
| Conservative Democrats | 49% | 7% |
| Moderate Republicans | 41% | 9% |
| Conservative Independents | 20% | 8% |
| Conservative Republicans | 5% | 23% |
Notes on New Jersey
-Barack Obama's approval in New Jersey might not be as good as it was earlier in the year, but it's still to Jon Corzine's definite advantage to have the President campaign for him. Among voters who approve of Obama's job performance Corzine is currently leading Chris Christie 70-20...winning over most of the 30% of the electorate that approves of Obama but isn't currently planning to vote for him is going to be pretty integral to Corzine's chances at reelection. Among voters who disapprove of Obama, Christie has an 89-6 advantage.
-Voters in New Jersey are remarkably polarized when it comes to their assessments of these candidates. Fewer than 4% of respondents to our poll said they hold a favorable opinion of both Christie and Corzine. We're in the field in Virginia right now too, and it's safe to say there are markedly more voters there who like both Creigh Deeds and Bob McDonnell. 8% of New Jersey voters have an unfavorable opinion of both candidates, while most voters fall in the 'like one and not the other' camp.
-Voters in New Jersey are remarkably polarized when it comes to their assessments of these candidates. Fewer than 4% of respondents to our poll said they hold a favorable opinion of both Christie and Corzine. We're in the field in Virginia right now too, and it's safe to say there are markedly more voters there who like both Creigh Deeds and Bob McDonnell. 8% of New Jersey voters have an unfavorable opinion of both candidates, while most voters fall in the 'like one and not the other' camp.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Growth with implications at the polls
New census numbers this week show that from July 1, 2007 to July 1, 2008 four North Carolina cities ranked in the top 25 nationally for population growth- Cary in third, Raleigh in eighth, Durham in 16th, and Charlotte in 23rd.
It is not an exaggeration to say this helped make the difference in Barack Obama's winning the state last year. We found at one point during the campaign that folks migrating to the state were supportive of Obama at a clip 13 points greater than life long North Carolinians. Beyond that the areas of this steep population growth- Wake, Durham, and Mecklenburg Counties- provided Obama with his three largest victories in the state last year in terms of raw votes. The new residents were a big contributor to that.
Once upon a time the conventional wisdom was that growth in the state benefited Republicans- that pendulum now seems to have turned more toward Democrats. Urban/suburban areas are going to gain legislative seats in the 2010 redistricting, and although those districts have the potential to be pretty competitive Democrats are likely to have a leg up.
Also, last year's Presidential results were a pretty clear indication of just how close this state is politically, and if next year's Senate race ends up being that tight Richard Burr's chances at reelection could come down to how well he does with voters who didn't even live here when he got elected in 2004.
Every time these growth stats come out and show North Carolina at the top of the list it's a nice reminder of what a desirable place this is to live- but the political implications are pretty meaningful too.
It is not an exaggeration to say this helped make the difference in Barack Obama's winning the state last year. We found at one point during the campaign that folks migrating to the state were supportive of Obama at a clip 13 points greater than life long North Carolinians. Beyond that the areas of this steep population growth- Wake, Durham, and Mecklenburg Counties- provided Obama with his three largest victories in the state last year in terms of raw votes. The new residents were a big contributor to that.
Once upon a time the conventional wisdom was that growth in the state benefited Republicans- that pendulum now seems to have turned more toward Democrats. Urban/suburban areas are going to gain legislative seats in the 2010 redistricting, and although those districts have the potential to be pretty competitive Democrats are likely to have a leg up.
Also, last year's Presidential results were a pretty clear indication of just how close this state is politically, and if next year's Senate race ends up being that tight Richard Burr's chances at reelection could come down to how well he does with voters who didn't even live here when he got elected in 2004.
Every time these growth stats come out and show North Carolina at the top of the list it's a nice reminder of what a desirable place this is to live- but the political implications are pretty meaningful too.
More on Obama in NJ
We wrote last week about how we were finding approval ratings for Barack Obama on a state by state basis that on average were within 1-2 points of the percentage of the vote he received in that state...and that it made sense given that the sampling we were using was the same as for an even year general electorate.
The 53% approval rating we found for Obama in New Jersey over the weekend though is a little off that trend- four points below the 57% he earned at the polls there in November.
The difference may be that in New Jersey the sampling we're using is for an odd year general electorate, since we're polling the Governor's race there. A big part of Obama's strength was his ability to get out new voters or more casual voters to the polls, and those folks would not be reflected in our Gubernatorial polling. That certainly could result in our finding lower numbers for Obama in both New Jersey and Virginia for the rest of the year.
And of course getting those folks who turned out for Obama to come out for him could be key to Jon Corzine's chances at reelection this fall. But history suggests there will be at least a 30% dropoff in turnout from last November to this November.
The 53% approval rating we found for Obama in New Jersey over the weekend though is a little off that trend- four points below the 57% he earned at the polls there in November.
The difference may be that in New Jersey the sampling we're using is for an odd year general electorate, since we're polling the Governor's race there. A big part of Obama's strength was his ability to get out new voters or more casual voters to the polls, and those folks would not be reflected in our Gubernatorial polling. That certainly could result in our finding lower numbers for Obama in both New Jersey and Virginia for the rest of the year.
And of course getting those folks who turned out for Obama to come out for him could be key to Jon Corzine's chances at reelection this fall. But history suggests there will be at least a 30% dropoff in turnout from last November to this November.
Numbers for Obama, Senators not great in Jersey
PPP finds Barack Obama's approval rating at 53% in New Jersey, a level below that found in any other public polling since he took office, and a result fitting the trend of his slowly declining numbers nationally.
As is the case in most places Obama's numbers are highly polarized on party lines, with 88% of Democrats but only 13% of Republicans giving him good reviews. Independents are pretty much split down the middle with 46% viewing his performance unfavorably and 43% giving him positive marks.
Obama continues to be very popular with the minority groups who gave him large majorities at the polls in the state last year- 85% of African Americans and 68% of Hispanics say they like the job he's doing. But among whites he's dropped into slightly negative territory with 47% disapproving to 46% approval.
Obama is a good deal more popular than the state's two Senators. Bob Menendez's numbers are particularly troubling with just 32% of respondents saying they like the job he's doing with 43% viewing it unfavorably and 25% without an opinion. Particularly striking are his numbers among independents, just 14% of whom express approval for his job performance. In other words, with Obama's approval at 43% with independents, less than one third of those who approve of the President's performance also approve of Menendez's. Independent voters almost by definition look down on excess partisanship, and his gig as head of the DSCC may be turning off some in that group.
Of course it's a long way to 2012 so it's not like Menendez has that much to worry about at this point- and there are plenty of examples in recent New Jersey history of voters expressing dislike for a politician and then reelecting him anyway. Frank Lautenberg is a good case in point- polling in 2006 showed him as one of the least popular Senators in the country and in late 2007 just 36% of voters in the state said he should be reelected. He nevertheless won an easy 56-42 victory last fall. Candidates can improve their numbers when they take to the airwaves and get to define themselves in a positive manner, and Republicans frequently just haven't nominated strong enough candidates to take advantage of some of these weak points.
Speaking of Lautenberg, his personal numbers are 41% approving and 46% disapproving.
Full results here
As is the case in most places Obama's numbers are highly polarized on party lines, with 88% of Democrats but only 13% of Republicans giving him good reviews. Independents are pretty much split down the middle with 46% viewing his performance unfavorably and 43% giving him positive marks.
Obama continues to be very popular with the minority groups who gave him large majorities at the polls in the state last year- 85% of African Americans and 68% of Hispanics say they like the job he's doing. But among whites he's dropped into slightly negative territory with 47% disapproving to 46% approval.
Obama is a good deal more popular than the state's two Senators. Bob Menendez's numbers are particularly troubling with just 32% of respondents saying they like the job he's doing with 43% viewing it unfavorably and 25% without an opinion. Particularly striking are his numbers among independents, just 14% of whom express approval for his job performance. In other words, with Obama's approval at 43% with independents, less than one third of those who approve of the President's performance also approve of Menendez's. Independent voters almost by definition look down on excess partisanship, and his gig as head of the DSCC may be turning off some in that group.
Of course it's a long way to 2012 so it's not like Menendez has that much to worry about at this point- and there are plenty of examples in recent New Jersey history of voters expressing dislike for a politician and then reelecting him anyway. Frank Lautenberg is a good case in point- polling in 2006 showed him as one of the least popular Senators in the country and in late 2007 just 36% of voters in the state said he should be reelected. He nevertheless won an easy 56-42 victory last fall. Candidates can improve their numbers when they take to the airwaves and get to define themselves in a positive manner, and Republicans frequently just haven't nominated strong enough candidates to take advantage of some of these weak points.
Speaking of Lautenberg, his personal numbers are 41% approving and 46% disapproving.
Full results here
Sanford still more popular than Perdue
A survey for Politico taken last week after the news about Mark Sanford's affair came out still showed his approval rating at 47% with South Carolina voters, a result a good deal better than any of the three polls on Bev Perdue's job performance have found this month.
I think there are a couple takeaways from that:
-Voters are more concerned about the economy than the sex lives of their politicians. And that's a good thing. Although I don't think NC voters are right to blame Perdue for the state's financial woes it's still reassuring to see that's a bigger deal for them than Sanford's personal indiscretions are for SC voters.
-Voters in both parties are hypocrites when it comes to sex scandals. 68% of Republicans in the poll still said they approved of Sanford's job performance- do you think it would have been the same if it was a Democratic politician? At the same time only 22% of Democrats gave Sanford good marks and it's a safe bet most of them would have been willing to give Bill Clinton a free ride for his moral mistakes.
-Speaking more specifically about Perdue, this comparison goes to show just how unpopular she's become- and how important it is for her to make a sustained effort to rebuild her support with the public. Going to half a dozen rallies for education funding and then retreating right back to anonymity probably isn't going to cut it.
I think there are a couple takeaways from that:
-Voters are more concerned about the economy than the sex lives of their politicians. And that's a good thing. Although I don't think NC voters are right to blame Perdue for the state's financial woes it's still reassuring to see that's a bigger deal for them than Sanford's personal indiscretions are for SC voters.
-Voters in both parties are hypocrites when it comes to sex scandals. 68% of Republicans in the poll still said they approved of Sanford's job performance- do you think it would have been the same if it was a Democratic politician? At the same time only 22% of Democrats gave Sanford good marks and it's a safe bet most of them would have been willing to give Bill Clinton a free ride for his moral mistakes.
-Speaking more specifically about Perdue, this comparison goes to show just how unpopular she's become- and how important it is for her to make a sustained effort to rebuild her support with the public. Going to half a dozen rallies for education funding and then retreating right back to anonymity probably isn't going to cut it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
