Ivan Moore Research (9/23-27, likely voters, no trendlines):
Scott McAdams (D): 28
Joe Miller (R): 43
Frederick Haase (L): 2
Lisa Murkowski (volunteered): 18
Undecided: 9
(MoE: ±4.1%)
We saw two polls yesterday finding Lisa Murkowski either winning or in a dead heat, but those polls made no mention of Murkowski’s unusual status as a write-in candidate, which should be viewed as a methodological problem. But now we have the first poll that seems to deal head-on with the write-in problem, and as an added bonus, it’s Ivan Moore, probably Alaska’s best-regarded local pollster. The result shows that Joe Miller might want to stop measuring the drapes.
Stay the same: 55
Write in Lisa Murkowski: 31
Not sure: 15Scott McAdams (D): 14
Joe Miller (R): 36
Frederick Haase (L): 2
Lisa Murkowski (WI): 44
Undecided: 6
(MoE: ±4.1%)
So here’s what Moore did: his first round of questioning omitted Murkowski but permitted respondents to volunteer her; then he asked, as a follow up question “As you may know, Lisa Murkowski is running a write-in campaign for U.S. Senate. Knowing this, would your vote for U.S. Senate stay the same or would you write in Lisa Murkowski?” The second set of results are then re-computed based on prompted Lisa Murkowski votes. That still may not re-create the actual voting experience, where there isn’t a voice reminding you that Lisa Murkowski is running. But this still seems an improvement from just listing her with the other candidates.
Here’s Moore, with some circumspect analysis of what he tried:
Now, the reality of the situation is that neither of these results is going to be correct. The first should be perceived as a minimum for Lisa, the latter a maximum. The reality lies somewhere in between… the question is where? Personally, I think the second measure is what will happen in an ideal, impediment-less world, and should be adjusted downwards by what we’d reasonably expect the attritional effects of the write-in to be. I have always maintained these will be relatively minimal, maybe not much more than a few percent of people who somehow remain unaware come election day that Lisa is an option, or get her name wrong, or don’t fill in the oval, or decide they can’t be bothered to write a name.”
There are also results from the (comparatively uneventful) gubernatorial and House races.
Ethan Berkowitz (D): 35
Sean Parnell (R-inc): 53
Other: 6
Undecided: 6Harry Crawford (D): 32
Don Young (R-inc): 65
Undecided: 4
(MoE: ±4.1%)
Personally, I’ll be glad if Lisa can pull this one out – either way, looks like a GOP hold. Lisa has agreement from the Senate GOP leadership that she’ll caucus with them…with the added benefit of being a torn in DeMint’s side.
His mustache alone should be worth at least 10 points. We need him election based on the mustache alone…
…any Dem-leaning support Murkowski has really holds up.
It’s a HUGE gap between 44 and 18, and knocking down McAdams’ support in HALF doesn’t look realistic at all. The polls that offer Murkowski as a named choice all have McAdams in the 20s, and THOSE polls probably overstate her support since he’s advertising only NOW.
I can imagine if loss of pork is THAT important to Alaska Dems that they might go ahead and write in Lisa’s name.
But, frankly, she is worthless to us as Democrats outside Alaska. We’re actually BETTER off with Miller than her, because he’ll be here embarrassing his own party for 6 years. Murkowski will vote the same as Miller, but won’t hurt the GOP while doing it like he will.
I still hope Lisa and Joe nuke each other. Her first 2 ads avoid that and focus on informing voters she’s running as a write in. She actually cannot win that way I think, she has to attack Miller, and Miller WILL attack her.
“I have always maintained these will be relatively minimal, maybe not much more than a few percent of people who somehow remain unaware come election day that Lisa is an option, or get her name wrong, or don’t fill in the oval, or decide they can’t be bothered to write a name.”
That all depends on how much effort Lisa puts into educating people how to cast a write-in ballot. Right now, I’m not convinced she’s doing nearly enough.
Her first ad as a write-in is 60 seconds of a talking head, with no instructions as to the write-in process:
And her website offers no guidance at all.
She’s got a month to fix it, but there’s little doubt in my mind that she needs to seriously ramp up the education process. Just like pollsters can’t poll her as a normal candidate, she can’t campaign like a normal candidate. I remember Tony Williams’ 2002 write-in campaign for DC mayor, and 30-40% of his ads/mail/etc. was dedicated to drilling into voters’ heads HOW to write him in. It seems dumb, but voters can be pretty dumb.
This will of course be erode, as both Miller and McAdams go after her.
Huh, a reverse of the FL-Sen scenario. (FWIW, I’ve endorsed Crist.)
Check it out!
http://www.scottmcadams.org/
The first poll understates it because write-in is not offered as an option, thus requiring the voter to contradict the person on the other end, which they might be shy about doing. The second question though is the equivalent of saying, “Are you sure you don’t want the strawberry rhubarb? I just picked the ingredients from the garden out back this morning?” (With the caveat that the pie wasn’t on the menu in the first place) I’m looking forward to the PPP poll that Kos is commissioning. That seems to get the methodology right by offering write-in as an option then asking the voter who if they select that.