Tag: polls

State of the Unions

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Washington, D.C. is under about eight feet of snow, the federal government has called it a week already, and the House has started their Presidents’ Day Recess a few days early.  Heck, the Metro isn’t even running trains to outdoor stations.  With no action on Capitol Hill, a Quinnipiac University poll showing that Republicans are gaining public trust has become the big political news of the day.  Analysts have pondered the falling support of the Obama administration among independents and speculated about what that means for the electoral chances among Democrats.

It’s a valid question, but Politico brings up an even more relevant issue: falling support of Congressional Democrats among their own Big Labor base:

Union leaders warn that the Democrats’ lackluster performance in power is sapping the morale of activists going into the midterm elections.

“Right now if we don’t get positive changes to the agenda, we’re going to have a hard time getting members out to work,” said United Steelworkers International President Leo W. Gerard, in an interview.

Please note that the term “work” in Gerard’s quote refers not to the members’ day jobs, but their efforts on the campaign trail.  As many jokes present themselves about this being the only time a hardcore union activist actually works, this is an important source of energy for a Democratic campaign.  These are the folks that make phone calls, knock on doors, march in parades, and do all the other things that are so important leading up to election day.  And even though many snide remarks could be added about using a blackjack as a get-out-the-vote program or a beat down rod as a debate strategy, the truth is that boots on the ground that know what they’re doing make those things unnecessary.

Now, Democrats have some tough choices.  Pushing the Big Labor agenda means things like removing secret ballots from union formation elections and other ways to drum up union membership – meaning more union dues are siphoned out of paychecks, meaning more money in the coffers of the AFL-CIO, UAW, and their fellow travelers.  After unsuccessfully trying to sell the health care overhaul as a matter of “the people” versus “special interests” how does a Congressman face his or her constituents with a vote to whip up union membership fresh on the voting record?

Untold Tales of Massachusetts

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

In discussing the Scott Brown victory with friends and colleagues over the past few days, some angles of the race incredibly haven’t been picked up by the endless mainstream news media coverage.

#1: Specter’s Swap caused the Bay State flop

A casual conversation with a veteran campaign operative brought up an interesting angle to Brown’s victory: that  Arlen Specter may have unwittingly delivered this seat to Republican control with his April party switch.

Back in April, Specter’s switch didn’t just make the rallying cry of “The 41st Vote” relevant, it also eliminated the Republican primary between the liberal Specter and conservative Pat Toomey.  Remember Toomey had just barely lost a 2004 primary challenge and was poised to overtake Specter in 2010 – if he had the right resources.

If you were a conservative donor somewhere outside of Massachusetts or Pennsylvania, to whom would you donate money if you had to choose: a well-known candidate who had legitimate shot to help return the Senate to its roots, or a long-shot barely-known state senator trying to take Ted Kennedy’s seat?  Specter’s swap in April made Brown the best investment when his nine point poll deficit was announced earlier this month.

Who said Arlen Specter never helped the GOP?

#2:  Speaking of polling…

Remember how Democrats were roundly criticizing Rasmussen polls for supposedly being skewed in favor of Republicans?  Well, it was Rasmussen who first signaled that this race may be closer than the conventional wisdom would suggest it could be.

#3: Jack E. Robinson helped break the “color barrier” for the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation

No, it isn’t THAT Jackie Robinson, and that “color barrier” is, of course, blue.  Robinson has been a Republican candidate for multiple state offices since his 2000 challenge of Ted Kennedy, but is considered something of a joke among Massachusetts Republicans.  Yet Brown took him at least semi-seriously in their primary match-up.

The contested primary was no contest – Brown won 89% of the vote.  But Mike Rossettie, who blogs at RedMassGroup (and used to run the political machine that was the UMass Republican Club) made the point that the primary was an opportunity to campaign, drum up name recognition, and win endorsements and free media.

Mass hysteria

~ Jim Eltringham ~ 2 Comments

In an early surprise of 2010, Republican State Senator Scott Brown is picking up steam in the special election to fill the Massachusetts Senate seat left vacant by Ted Kennedy’s death last year.  Of course, he’d need a lot of steam, since even Rasmussen’s polls put him nine points behind Attorney General Martha Coakley – who still polls at 50%.  A deeper reading of the poll shows some reasons for even further optimism, though:of those who “definitely” plan to vote, Brown’s disadvantage sinks to 2%.  In a special election in January in New England, leading among independents and the most passionate voters is enough to be within striking distance.

Massachusetts Republican-leaning bloggers from conservative thinker Dan Flynn to scum-of-the-Earth, fake-bloody-sock-wearing Curt Schilling have expressed excitement about Brown’s run.  And given the political environment in Massachusetts, this is an against-the-spread race.  If Brown finishes within 5-10 points on election day, he’ll start the media narrative that, even in the bluest of blue states, support for the Obama agenda is wavering.  And it will help excite the Bay State Republican Activists who would be crucial for later contests – including a Governor’s race later this year.

Polling for messages

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

As a follow-up to yesterday’s post about polling, check out the poll being conducted by Organizing for America, the de facto campaign wing of the White House.  With so many plates spinning at once, it’s a smart move by the DNC.   There’s plenty of energy on the right as 2010 kicks off – but not all of it is being ably mobilized by the Republican party.  A poll like this allows the Democrats to not only identify which issues will spur on their base, but also to communicate to activists individually instead of painting them all with the same brush.

Rasmussen: high disapproval among Democrats

~ Jim Eltringham ~ 1 Comment

Democrats who are tired of flogging Fox News are ripping Rasmussen Reports, the polling agency which produces survey results which tend to favor Republicans.  Viewed in conjunction with the fervor with which those on the left attack Fox News, it echoes the shrill media conspiracy theory accustations espoused by the most ardent conservatives of the 1970s and 1980s.  It also reflects a lack of understanding of some facets of public opinion.

For instance, Eric Boehlert of Media Matters accuses Rasmussen of “under-polling” President Obama because the Rasmussen presidential approval ratings tend to be lower than in other polls.  Leaving aside that other polls have largely caught up to that trend, Boehlert ignores the fact that Rasmussen polls samples of likely voters – rather than all adults.  This makes Rasmussen a less reliable source for taking the temperature of the general public but makes for a much more accurate forecast of the only poll that matters – the one held on election day.

Some Democrat operatives have problems that go deeper – citing the wording of questions:

In August, for example, Rasmussen asked respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement “It’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.”

“Why stop there, Rasmussen? Why not add a parenthetical phrase about how tax cuts regrow hair, whiten teeth, and ensure that your favorite team will win the Super Bowl this year?” responded Daily Kos blogger Steve Singiser, who frequently writes about polls.

Questions like the ones above are fairly common in polling and – with a more sophisticated reading – provide valuable insight for partisans of either stripe.  The question doesn’t measure opinions on tax breaks, it measures the reasons for people’s opinions on tax breaks.  If 80% of the likely voters polled say “yes” to that question, then a Democratic communications operative might recognize his candidate’s need to correlate tax hikes to public, versus personal, benefits.  A Republican operative might try to do the opposite.

A Rasmussen poll which might be even more interesting, though, is whether Democratic “inside baseball” complaints about news organizations and pollsters they perceive to be against them will help win them any support – especially among likely voters.

Gallup-ing to the right

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Fellow UMass alum Dan Flynn points out Gallup’s evidence that Americans are trending more conservative in 2009 than they did in 2008.  The most important aspect of this revelation is the cause: apparently, independents are shifting right. And this wasn’t just self-identification: conservative positions on government involvement in business, union influence, and even gun rights became more popular.

Note that these numbers reflect people’s issue position and not necessarily their political party preference.  As the Republican party is finding out in NY-23, the two are not necessarily one and the same.  Even if the GOP tallies a pair of victories in New Jersey and Virginia next week, the lessons for a return to power nationally may be learned in upstate New York.

McDonnell has poll-mentum

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

The latest Washington Post poll puts Bob McDonnell nine points ahead of Creigh Deeds in the race to be Virginia’s next governor.  More telling about the zeitgeist in the Old Dominion though is the compilation of various polls pulled together by Virginia-based consultancy McGuire-Woods.

Most of the polls, which track the race at varying points since the summer, have McDonnell performing fairly consistently in each poll.  While the individual polls differ (one has the Republican in the 53-55% range, the other has him bouncing between 48% and 51%) in each poll he maintains a consistent range.  Deeds is much less consistent – the Post poll has him swinging between a low of 39% in early August to a high of 47% in mid-September. In each poll, however, Deeds appears to have dipped from his high water mark since mid-September.

What does it all mean?  Well, McDonnell has maintained a steady stream of support – even as Deeds tried to get mileage out of his 20-year-old grad school writings and paint him as a Bible-thumping Cro-magnon who would do more to hurt the cause of women than Ike Turner and  Amp energy drink combined.  And where Deeds did make inroads, his campaign’s lack of a positive message – or even a coherent one – meant he couldn’t keep the support.

If these trends hold up, it wouldn’t be surprising if McDonnell’s get-out-the-vote efforts on election day are more successful and he outperforms the opinion polls.  McDonnell voters have a candidate to vote for, which is actually motivating on election day; Deeds voters have a candidate to vote against, which is less exciting.