SurveyUSA for WHAS-TV and the Louisville Courier-Journal (9/21-23, likely voters, 8/30-9/1 in parentheses):
Jack Conway (D): 47 (40)
Rand Paul (R): 49 (55)
Undecided: 4 (5)
(MoE: ±4%)
That’s a fat bounce for Jack Conway – a change dramatic enough to make this his best performance in a SUSA poll since November 2009. Of course, SUSA’s last poll came under a great deal of scrutiny for its likely voter model that only gave Democrats a 47-42 partisan advantage over Republicans. When that poll was released, SUSA spokesperson Ken Alper pushed back on any suggestions that the model was flawed, arguing that the numbers (which are out-of-whack with historical realities) were a reflection of shifting partisan identification and a burgeoning enthusiasm gap in the state. But now, SUSA’s likely voter sample seems more realistic at 51D-36R. So which is it?
I find SUSA head Jay Leve’s explanation a little… unconvincing:
“There is a natural ebb and flow to party composition,” said pollster Jay Leve of Survey USA, “I would not make more of this than there is.”
It seems to me that a ten point shift in party ID in three weeks is something other than mere “natural ebb and flow”, but what do I know.
problems? They have said they are adjusting for cell phone usage only, but I wonder if they are adjusting enough.
According to this 2009 survey, 1 in every 4 US households are cell phone only. That increased from 1 in 5 from 2008. Two demographics really affected by this shift:
Nearly half of adults aged 25-29 years (48.6%) lived in households with only wireless telephones. More than one-third of adults aged 18-24 or 30-34 (37.8% and 37.2%, respectively) lived in households with only wireless telephones.
Hispanic adults (30.4%) were more likely than non-Hispanic white adults (21.0%) or non-Hispanic black adults (25.0%) to be living in households with only wireless telephones.
Could cell phone usage only be the reason SurveyUSA consistently has younger voters supporting Republicans?
How can a polling firm have such a swing in partisan ID? Im sure they have be having internal discussions about their methodology.
Havent they had other polls lately that have been insanely swingly?
That is, unless there’s something major going down on the grounds in Kentucky. After all, Paul has been a far more disciplined candidate than say, Sharron Angle. Conway is a fine candidate, but, at least in this cycle, despite a Dem-friendly voter model, I can’t help but think this is a Likely R race.
Democrat – 45%
GOP – 41%
Independent – 14%
Conway – 83/5/42 = 45%
Paul – 17/95/58 = 55%
They do appear to have gotten worse since 2006, but it’s hard to say for sure, and if so, why.
As to their methodology, I agree with them entirely that asking for party ID, and not weighting by party, is the right way to go. Party, unlike race, gender, age, or other census demographics, is not immutable in a way you should weight for.
ad from Jack Conway. It really puts a face and a story onto drug abuse in Kentucky, something Rand Paul believes isn’t a problem.
There hasn’t been any big play on either side that would explain such a drastic swing.
It’s still 6-7 point lead for Paul.
That new ad linked above is very good though. Conway needs to hit on the fact that Paul wants to be a national rockstar rather than represent Kentucky’s interests in the Senate.
Conway being AG, he can really hit on the law and order aspect as differentiation between Paul and himself.
55-40 was the outlier this is no outlier. All other polling shows this semi close. CNN-Time, PPP and others. Conway has just started advertising recently, very effectively I might add. Trust me, this is close, no lean, and definitely no likely R race.