Tag: Polls

Garin-Hart-Yang (D) for Dan Seals (11/5-7, likely primary voters):

Dan Seals (D): 58%
Jay Footlik (D): 6%
Undecided: 36%
MoE: ±5.0%

Nice lead for Seals there.  Undoubtedly, much of this has to do with the great deal of residual name recognition that Seals enjoys from his ’06 campaign (the poll pegs him at 69% name recognition among likely primary voters; Footlik’s at 24%).  Footlik begun running biographical television ads right around the time the poll was conducted, so their impact wasn’t measured here.

Still, with a lead this large, Foolik would have to swamp out Seals in expenditures in order to claim the nomination.  With only three months left to go until the primary, that looks to be a pretty tall order.

From the Associated Press:

U.S. Rep. Tom Udall has decided to run for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Republican Pete Domenici, according to an aide.

“He’s definitely running,” Tom Nagle, Udall’s chief of staff told The Associated Press. […]

Udall initially had said he would stay in the House, where he is a member of the Appropriations Committee.

But he reconsidered after a “groundswell” of encouragement from New Mexicans, Nagle said.

“He thinks it’s too important not to run for the Senate,” Nagle said. “A lot of the good things we’ve been able to do (in the House) don’t go anywhere in the Senate.”

Nagle said there has been criticism that Udall is “too liberal” for the seat but he disputed that, saying “the rhetoric doesn’t match the reality of what the data show.”

He said internal campaign polling of likely voters conducted for Udall at the end of October showed the congressman with a considerable lead over either Wilson or Pearce, including among self-described moderates.

Sweet!

Update: Check out the details of an internal poll conducted for Udall by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates (10/23-10/27, likely voters):

Tom Udall (D): 52%
Heather Wilson (R): 36%
Undecided: 12%

Tom Udall (D): 50%
Steve Pearce (R): 33%
Undecided: 17%

Martin Chávez (D): 47%
Heather Wilson (R): 43%
Undecided: 10%

Martin Chávez (D): 40%
Steve Pearce (R): 44%
Undecided: 16%
MoE: ±4.3%

The Chávez numbers seem to jive with the most recent polling from SUSA, and the 17 and 18 point leads that Udall enjoys over Pearce and Wilson match up well with the R2K polling for DailyKos.  In short: the poll is good.

Udall starts off in a position of strength in the primary, capturing a solid 50% of Democratic primary voters:

Tom Udall: 50%
Martin Chávez: 30%
Don Wiviott: 2%
Undecided: 17%
MoE: +/-4.6%

Mayor Marty’s ego is clearly stung, hence his unwarranted attacks on Udall’s voting record (the very same voting record that Chávez said he would emulate in a chat with local progressive bloggers).  This primary will be as ugly as he wants it to be, but his extremely high negatives — confirmed by both Udall’s and SUSA’s polling — indicate that this will be a likely loss for the Mayor.  A nickel’s worth of free advice to Martin: bow out gracefully.

(From the diaries. What’s your take? – promoted by James L.)

As we all watched in amazement last year, the Blue Wave in 2006 was so strong Republicans almost lost House districts in Wyoming and Idaho – two of the most conservative districts in the country (only 10-20 districts gave Bush a higher percentage of the vote in 2000 or 2004).  Not one Democratic seat was lost.

It couldn’t get better than that, could it?

Could it?

As the latest Democracy Corps memo puts it, “If Americans have ever been angrier with the state of the country, we have not witnessed it…”  And that anger is directed mostly at Republicans. 

Now, the numbers – first up, the Master Indicator – the Generic Ballot question.  The graph show the net Democratic advantage:

Click to enlarge.

Join me on the flip for a fourteen ways to look at the 2008 House races – and, in some cases, the mood of the country in general. 

Cross-posted at Open Left and Daily Kos.

Note: If I haven’t linked to polling data directly, you can find it at pollingreport.com. Unless I forgot to put in the link. 

The Vote

1.  Generic Ballot (+)  (The plus sign means an improvement from 2006 for Democrats)
The generic ballot question really has done a great job predicting the actual nationwide vote in congressional elections recently, when the results of all polls are averaged together.  The actual Democratic advantage has ended up about 3-4 points less than what the polls say in the final week for the past four elections in the Bush era.  So far, despite increasing unhappiness with Congress, Democrats continue to have a stunning advantage on the generic ballot. 

2. Battleground Districts (+)
Democracy Corps has once again been busy polling the House races in key areas of the country.  The Mountain West favors Democrats slightly more than they did in 2006, but the amazing numbers are in the 35 most vulnerable Republican districts.  Their poll numbers are lousy.  No wonder so many have decided to retire (more on that later).  The 35 most vulnerable House Democrats, on the other hand, are not so vulnerable at all, polling well ahead of generic Republicans (55 to 37). 

Party preference in key districts. Click to enlarge.

The Parties and Approval

3.  Bush Approval (+)
Bush’s approval continues on a downward trajectory, overall, and he is making sure Republicans go down with him.  In 2006 Bush’s approval was related to Republicans’ performance in House elections; there’s no guarantee for 2008, but lower approval ratings for Bush are worse for Republicans than higher approval ratings.  Note the map below for districts is from July 2007, when Bush’s approval was a few points lower than today.  (An archive of old approval ratings maps is now available on dKosopedia.)

Bush’s approval by state (10/07) and district (7/07).  Click to enlarge.

4.  Party Approval (-)
The Republican brand is trashed.  Democrats have a net approval that is less than November 2006, but still positive, and not unusually low.  Republicans remain way, way in the negative.

Net favorability of Democrats and Republicans.  Click to enlarge.

5.  Congressional Approval (=)
Nobody likes Congress, we’ve heard, but people like Congressional Republicans a fair amount less than they like Congressional Democrats.  According to ABC/Washington Post polls, people are most likely to blame Bush and the Republicans for blocking Democrats from doing what the people elected them to do.  The difference between the parties’ approval is still about the same as last year.

Approval of Democrats and Republicans in Congress, and who is to blame for Congress not getting things done.  Click to enlarge.

6.  Party ID (+)
Republicans and Democrats are at about the same levels as 2006 according to Rasmussen, but when you include Independents who lean towards Democrats, Pew shows the leftward shift continuing into this year.

Two measures of partisan identification.  Click to enlarge.

The Issues

7.  Party Trust (+)
The public continues to swing to the Democratic side of issues, part of a longer-term trend.  Republicans used to be the party of Fiscal Discipline, but last July, an NBC/WSJ poll showed Democrats have advantages on Reducing the Deficit (+25), Controlling Government Spending (+16), and Taxes (+9).  Well, so they’re left with God, Guns, and Gays, right?  No…. Rasmussen asked about Abortion (+7 average this year), and Newsweek about Guns (+2) and Same-Sex Marriage (+8).  And White Evangelical Christians are abandoning the party in droves – some to become Democrats, but mainly to become Independents or apolitical.  Then what about Terra, Terra, Terra, 9/11?  Still no…at best, Republicans come out even on questions about National Security and the so-called War on Terror.  On the issues voters claim are most important to them, Democrats have increased their advantage since 2006, and two issues that are among the most favorable for Democrats (health care and the economy) have gained prominence.  There is one sour note in this symphony: a decrease in the Democratic advantage when it comes to corruption and ethics in government.

Democratic advantage on key issues and importance of key issues in recent elections.  Click to enlarge.

8.  Iraq (+)
The public continues to think the war in Iraq simply isn’t worth it, to a greater extent than a year ago, although opinion was more pessimistic mid-year.  More and more people also think the number of troops should be decreased.

Opinion on whether Iraq is worth it and troop withdrawal.  Click to enlarge.

9.  The Economy (+)
As we saw above, the public trusts Democrats much more on the economy, and the economy is coming to the fore in terms of important issues this election season.  People think things aren’t very good and they’re getting worse, despite all the rosy numbers the Bush administration keeps putting out.  And when the Republicans try to talk up the economy, it really pisses people off (see Page 7.)  One reason, of course, is because Real People actually buy things like milk and gas, and the prices keep going up while wages are not.  Over Bush’s presidency, gas has been increasing at 13% per year (log plot here), while wages have been increasing at about 3% per year.  Up until about 2004, the public perception of the economy’s future seemed to be tied strongly to the stock market; after that, it appears gas prices are key.  For more and a much better analysis, see How to hide a recession.

Public perception on the current state of the economy, direction of the economy, milk and gas prices, and how gas and the Dow influence public opinion.  Click to enlarge.

10.  Health Care (+)
Health care availability and cost are both increasing problems, and surely related to perceptions of the economy.  The percentage of Americans without insurance has been rising steadily through the Bush presidency, and the number now stands at 47 million. Those who have health care plans through work have seen premiums almost double, while benefits dwindle and copays multiply.

Percent of Americans who are uninsured and premium prices.  Click to enlarge.

The Campaigning

11.  Fundraising (+)
Any way you slice it, Congressional Democrats and Democratic challengers are beating the pants of the Republicans in the money race.  The bad news is where a lot of this money is coming from.  The new members of Congress are raising a ton of cash, and Republican challengers are not.  Data for the first six months of 2007 and previous years are available from the FEC.

Total and median funds for incumbents, median funds for challengers, and number of challengers.  Click to enlarge.

12.  Recruitment (+)
As BENAWU has tirelessly documented, there are more districts with Democrats running now than at this time in 2005.  Part of this, of course, is that we started out with a few extra seats in the House filled with incumbents!  Nonetheless, Democrats are having a great recruitment season.

Number of districts with Democrats running, and district status as of mid-October.  Click to enlarge.

13.  Retirement (+)
Democrats are keeping their behinds tightly plastered to their seats and Republicans are fleeing for the exits, as covered by many of Steve Singiser’s diaries.  The Cook Political Report has tracked retirements over the past few cycles, and based on the numbers, it looks like we can expect another wave of Republican retirements in the new year, possible making it up to 30.  Democrats, on the other hand, have far fewer retirements or even potential retirements compared to the 2004 or 2006 cycles. 

Republican and Democratic retirements, and Republican and Democratic potential retirements.  Click to enlarge.

14.  Coattails (-)
In 2006, we had no national Democrat for Republicans to run against in House races.  In 2008, we will, and whoever it is will have high negatives after the right-wing slime machine is done with them. 

The good news is, right now, 74% believe that Clinton will be the nominee, and her most recent NBC/WSJ ‘very negative’ ratings were 26%.  No, really – this is good news, because it means the current excellent Generic Ballot numbers (which recently have had a good relationship with the actual vote) must therefore already have substantial negative coattails built in.  We still should assume the effect will increase.  Below are Kerry’s numbers from 2004 and the generic ballot numbers (note that approval of Democrats in general was also falling at the end of the campaign).

Kerry’s disapproval and the generic ballot, 2004.  Click to enlarge.

Summary:

Out of 14 factors, there are only two that are worse now compared to the 2006 cycle.  The generic ballot favors Democrats to an amazing extent.  This will be affected by local campaigns, of course, and here the Democrats are also excelling, with outstanding fundraising, recruiting, and retention.  Broader factors such as the economy and presidential approval ratings are also trending towards Democrats.  The public trusts Democrats more, and approves of Democrats more, even as they are unsatisfied with what Congress is doing.  As of now, Democrats are in an excellent position for the 2008 elections, despite the shortcomings of Democratic leaders over the past year. 

In a recent Roll Call article on the DCCC’s strategy to turn the GOP’s black-hearted support of President Bush’s S-CHIP veto into some serious November Pain for rank-and-file House Republicans, DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen let slip some rough polling numbers for S-CHIP hater Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-MI).  Knollenberg has an A-list challenger in former state Sen. Gary Peters.

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for the DCCC (likely voters, 10/31-11/02):

Gary Peters (D): 35
Joe Knollenberg (R-inc): 42
(MoE: ±4.8%)

While the exact trendlines are not available, Knollenberg’s 7-point lead is down from a 12-point lead in April.  He’s also well under the magic 50%
mark, well before the campaign has even been engaged.  Not good news for Team Red.

And in a sign of S-CHIP’s salience, Knollenberg is very vulnerable on the issue:

Knollenberg’s 7-point lead turned into a 7-point deficit after respondents were read both a push question characterizing his position on SCHIP, and the Democratic and Republican arguments for and against the program.

This one’s going to be fun.

A recent round of Survey USA polling commissioned by Roll Call predicts Democrats will do quite well in next year's high-profile US Senate races. From poll-to-poll, the MOE varies from 3.8-4.0% with an approximate sample size of 650 respondents.

Colorado:

Mark Udall (D): 48
Bob Schaeffer (R): 41
Undecided: 11

Maine:

Tom Allen (D): 38
Susan Collins (R-inc): 55
Undecided: 8

Minnesota (07/30 results in parens):

Mike Ciresi (D): 44 (42)
Norm Coleman (R-inc): 44 (48)
Undecided: 12 (11)

Al Franken (D): 45 (42)
Norm Coleman (R-inc): 46 (49)
Undecided: 9 (9)

New Hampshire:

Jay Buckey (D): 36
John Sununu (R-inc): 49
Undecided: 16

Jeanne Shaheen (D): 53
John Sununu (R-inc): 42
Undecided: 5

New Mexico:

Marty Chavez (D): 48
Steve Pearce (R): 43
Undecided: 9

Diane Denish (D): 47
Steve Pearce (R): 43
Undecided: 10

Bill Richardson (D): 58
Steve Pearce (R): 37
Undecided: 4

Don Wiviott (D): 32
Steve Pearce (R): 49
Undecided: 18

Marty Chavez (D): 48
Heather Wilson (R): 44
Undecided: 8

Diane Denish (D): 49
Heather Wilson (R): 43
Undecided: 9

Bill Richardson (D): 59
Heather Wilson (R): 37
Undecided: 5

Don Wiviott (D): 38
Heather Wilson (R): 47
Undecided: 15

Oregon:

Jeff Merkley (D): 39
Gordon Smith (R-inc): 48
Undecided: 13

Steve Novick (D): 39
Gordon Smith (R-inc): 45
Undecided: 16

Virginia (9/17 results in parens):

Mark Warner (D): 52 (56)
George Allen (R): 42 (37)
Undecided: 6 (7)

Mark Warner (D): 57 (60)
Jim Gilmore (R): 35 (32)
Undecided: 8 (8)

Thoughts? Surprises?

Reasearch 2000 for the Lexington Herald Leader (PDF), taken Oct. 22-24 (likely voters, no trendlines):

Chandler (D): 41
McConnell (R-inc.): 46
Undecided: 13

Stumbo (D): 37
McConnell (R-inc.): 46
Undecided: 17

Luallen (D): 40
McConnell (R-inc.): 45
Undecided: 15

Horne (D): 34
McConnell (R-inc.): 45
Undecided: 21
(MoE: ±4%)

They say you can’t tell the players without a program. So:

• Ben Chandler currently represents Kentucky’s 6th Congressional District. He lost a gubernatorial race to Gov. Ernie Fletcher in 2003, but held statewide office for many years prior.
• Crit Luallen is Kentucky’s State Auditor. She is seeking re-election to that post this year. The same poll discussed in this post also shows Luallen with a commanding 55-33 lead in the auditor’s race.
• Greg Stumbo is the outgoing state Attorney General. He is probably best known for bringing charges against Fletcher over the latter’s corrupt state hiring practices. Stumbo ran for the Dem Lt. Gov. nod earlier this year on a ticket with Bruce Lunsford, but the pair lost to Steve Beshear and Daniel Mongiardo.
• Andrew Horne is a Marine who lost a primary last year to John Yarmuth in KY-03. (Yarmuth of course went on to defeat GOP Rep. Anne Northup in one of the bigger upsets of 2006.)

The most interesting thing here is not just that McConnell is held under 50% by all comers, but by the fact that he gets the same score no matter who he goes up against. Horne only has 45% name rec (which actually strikes me as high), and yet he still keeps McConnell at 45%.

This undoubtedly has a lot to do with McConnell’s weak favorability rating – just 47-46, with 25% saying their opinion is “very” unfavorable. This is in line with SUSA’s numbers (49-46). I’ll note that McConnell’s internal polling (apparently provided to the newspaper in this accompanying article) has him at 55-32, but when set against the Herald-Leader and SUSA numbers, this survey is an outlier.

The favorability numbers for McConnell’s potential challengers:

Chandler: 57-31
Luallen: 56-21
Stumbo: 49-38
Horne: 36-9

Chandler has said he won’t run, but he hasn’t issued any Shermanesque statements. Luallen is obviously waiting until after the upcoming elections. Stumbo and Horne are both in exploratory modes. No matter who our nominee ultimately is, Mitch McConnell is looking awfully weak for a Republican party leader sitting in a red state. This could definitely be a pick-up opportunity if we see another wave election.

Now that former state Rep. Suzanne Kosmas is formally in the race against Jack Abramoff’s golfing pal, Rep. Tom Feeney of Florida, the DCCC has just released some polling numbers that they commissioned from Garin-Hart-Yang back in July — and the results aren’t pretty for Feeney.  The full polling memo can be viewed here (PDF file).

In a straight head-to-head match-up, here’s how Feeney fares (likely voters, no leaners):

Tom Feeney (R-inc): 42%
Suzanne Kosmas (D): 23%
MoE: ±5.0%

Mr. Feeney is well under that magical “50%” mark against an opponent who only has 19% name recognition in the district, according to the poll (vs. 86% for Feeney).  Additionally, the poll finds that Feeney has a net negative job approval (46% fair/poor; 36% excellent/good).

After hearing a brief positive bio for each candidate, Feeney leads Kosmas by a 45%-40% margin.  After informing voters of Feeney’s involvement with convicted felon Jack Abramoff, Kosmas jumps ahead to 45%-37%.  Additionally, 58% “express major doubts after hearing about Feeney’s support for privatizing Social Security”.

And yes — I’m well aware that this kind of a “message testing” poll does not necessarily mean that Feeney is slated to lose the election.  But with the race still in its formative stages, Kosmas has some seriously good material to work with in order to give Feeney a major challenge.  I expect this to be a tight race.

Another note from the poll: while Bush won the district by 10% in 2004, on the generic presidential ballot, the Democratic candidate edges the Republican by a 42%-41% margin.

Update: The Politico picks up the poll, too, and gets a hilariously delusional comment from Feeney’s office:

Responding, Feeney’s chief of staff, Tonnie Wybensinger, said, “Feeney has always had a 24 percent unfavorable rating because 25 percent of the district is liberal – not enough to elect Kosmas. Kosmas’ appeal right now is that no one knows who she is and once people do know, that appeal will diminish.”

Tom Feeney: he’s not only out of his league — he’s out of his mind.  I should take this opportunity to note that only 53% of voters knew of Feeney’s Abramoff connections, according to the poll.  Can’t wait for some more “voter education” here.

Alaska pollster Ivan Moore shares a new poll with the Swing State Project that tests the candidates on both sides of the aisle in Alaska’s at-large US House race next year.

The poll, conducted over “this last weekend” (10/19-10/21), shows Don Young with some very lackluster numbers in the Republican primary for a guy with three and a half decades of incumbency:

Don Young (R-inc): 61%
Gabrielle LeDoux (R): 33%
Undecided: 5%
(n=238)

If Young is losing that much of the Republican base against a low-profile candidate (LeDoux is a state Rep and former Democrat), you know that things aren’t looking so hot for the scandal-plagued incumbent.

Among potential Democratic primary voters, former state House Minority Leader Ethan Berkowitz holds an early edge:

Ethan Berkowitz (D): 45%
Diane Benson (D): 19%
Jake Metcalfe (D): 14%
(n=328)

The poll also shows that Berkowitz has nearly 80% name recognition in the state, while Benson has 66% and Metcalfe 65%.  If that seems slightly high, remember that Benson was the ’06 nominee while Metcalfe has already begun airing campaign commercials — and that this is a pretty small state with a cheaper-than-average media market.

Big news out of Alaska: Anchorage pollster Ivan Moore shares a shocking new poll (PDF) with the Swing State Project that shows former state Rep. Ethan Berkowitz with an early lead on scandal-tainted Rep. Don Young:

Ethan Berkowitz (D): 51%
Don Young (R-inc.): 45.5%
(MoE: ±4.4%)

Wowza.  Could we be seeing the continuation of an anti-incumbent wave washing across the Last Frontier, which began with Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski’s landslide primary defeat to Sarah Palin in 2006?  With Alaskans growing increasingly frustrated with their representation in Washington, 2008 could be a banner year for change in the state.

Moore’s poll also shows Young with a 49.9% negative rating in the state (43.1% positive and 7% neutral) — something that I do not expect to improve for Young as the ethical and legal morass that is his too-cozy relationship with the overwhelmingly unpopular VECO corporation continues to grow.

Still, Young will be no pushover.  He is currently sitting on a massive warchest of over $1.6 million (although some of this is being eaten away by hefty legal fees), he has the state’s Republican tilt in his favor, and he’s held statewide office since Jesus invented the wheel.

There is also the possibility that Young could take one for the team and retire, or that he could fall in a primary to a fresh-faced Republican, such as state Rep. and current challenger Gabrielle LeDoux.  In such an event, Berkowitz could find himself twice unlucky: his Lt. Governor bid in 2006 fell short because Republicans had the sense to replace the unpopular Murkowski with the independent-minded Palin.

For now, though, it’s looking like Berkowitz picked the right time to run.

Race Tracker: AK-AL

In a new poll released by the Washington Post, former Gov. Mark Warner continues to crush his potential GOP foes:

Mark Warner (D): 63%
Tom Davis (R): 28%

Mark Warner (D): 61%
Jim Gilmore (R): 31%

(MoE: ±3%)

My favorite nugget of the poll?  This one:

In Davis’ own base of Fairfax County, Warner beats Davis 57%-33%. And among self-described conservatives, whom Gilmore has been courting, four in ten say they would vote for Warner.

So let’s get this straight: in Tom Davis’ backyard, where name recognition is no problem for him, Mark Warner’s numbers are barely dented.  Perhaps it’s not surprising, given that Warner enjoys a 67%/17% favorable/unfavorable rating throughout the state.  Fairfax voters may think well of Tom Davis, but they like Mark Warner a whole heck of a lot more.  So much for the idea of a tight race in NoVa with Tom Davis at the helm.

Speaking of Davis, are we being too presumptive in thinking that he’ll get the nomination?  The poll also shows Davis trailing former Gov. Jim Gilmore by a 48-29 margin in a primary match-up… and that’s assuming a primary even happens (it could be decided by a nominating convention, in which Gilmore is seen as having the inside edge on the more moderate Davis).