State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/14/09)

[Click to Enlarge]

I'm taking a rather surly approach with this update because the narrative in the New Jersey gubernatorial race (that Corzine isn't living up to the typical Democratic electoral comeback in the Garden state) is really getting tiresome. I don't say that as a Corzine fan [FHQ is indifferent.], but rather as someone who is irritable when the same tired and false story of this trend is rolled out. Yes, recently in New Jersey politics there has been a series of elections in which the Republican did better than expected in early polling only to see that position fade down the stretch of the campaign. Mostly when this idea comes up, commentators will bring up the polling in the state from the 2004 presidential election when Bush ran consistently within (less than) 10 points of Kerry. Chris Cillizza (The Fix) at The Washington Post dusted this argument off today and carted it out for all to see and even added the Senate elections in 2000, 2002 and 2006 and the gubernatorial election from four years ago as evidence of this "trend" of Republican surge and decline.

Look, FHQ can't throw stones while living in a glass house. We've certainly done a fair amount of talking about Corzine's cushion among the electorate in a Democratic-leaning state, but we have also tried to caution that for any comeback to take place, the governor is absolutely going to have to emerge from the upper 30s rut he has been stuck in the entire year. [The real danger for Corzine now appears to be the independent candidacy of Chris Daggett, who will reportedly pull in 15% in tomorrow's Public Policy Polling release from New Jersey.] It cannot simply be a matter of Christie's support dropping off.

That said, of the elections Cillizza mentioned as evidence, the 2006 Senate race between Menendez and Kean fits the bill (and I'll have to track down the polling from the 2000 and 2002 races), but the gubernatorial race in 2005 does not. It may have been closer than expected, but at no point during the post-primary period (early June onward) was Republican nominee, Doug Forrester, ahead of the Garden state senator-turned-candidate for governor. In fact, as I have continually pointed out, gubernatorial races in New Jersey have failed to perform to the rubric of this phenomenon in every election stretching back to 1977 when Democrat Brendan Byrne became the last Democrat to pull off the comeback.

Here are the facts of the race currently:
1) Corzine is stuck in a range between about 38% and 42% in recent polling (...meaning FHQ probably has him slightly undervalued in our averaging). This has not changed since 2009 began.

2) Christie has slipped from a summer peak above the 50% mark, but has seemingly settled in to the 44-47% area of late.

3) The new poll out of Monmouth this morning did nothing to change the underlying dynamic of the race.

4) Corzine can come back but the incumbent will have to increase his stock some and continue to hope that Chris Daggett's support goes the way of so many other early fall third party supporters in other electoral arenas (ie: to one of the two major party candidates).

And none of those points is in any way consistent with the September Surge tag that is appended to all of Corzine's Twitter updates within the last few days.

2009 New Jersey Gubernatorial Race Polling
Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Corzine	Christie	Daggett	Undecided
Monmouth/Gannett [pdf]	Sept. 8-10, 2009	+/- 4.3%	531 likely voters	39	47	5	7

Again, the Monmouth poll was nothing new. Both candidates fit into the same ranges, but Corzine did lead among the wider, registered voter sample that was surveyed. That means zilch unless Corzine can close the so-called enthusiasm gap (which PPP is set to talk about some more with its release tomorrow) and turn those registered voters who prefer him into actual voters that can help reelect him. That may or may not be a tall order, but with the well-worn upper 30s rut the governor continues to find himself in (see below), it appears that it is.

[Click to Enlarge]

Recent Posts:
Vote for Arizona

"You Lie!"

State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/10/09)

Vote for Arizona

We don't usually do this, but FHQ is urging all its readers to head over to Public Policy Polling's blog and vote for Arizona as the location for the firm's next survey. You can also choose from among California, Georgia, Missouri or Ohio.

Yes, they'll include a 2012 presidential question (if you must know) since, as Tom Jensen puts it, "without John McCain at the top of the ticket this might be one of the most flippable states." Indeed. Obviously FHQ finds that inherently interesting but the primary challenge from McCain's right flank has also piqued our interest. I doubt they'll find McCain in trouble, but we'd like an answer to that question more than the 2010 questions in the other states.

...but that's just FHQ.


Recent Posts:
"You Lie!"

State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/10/09)

FHQ Reading Room (9/10/09): Redistricting

"You Lie!"

Typically, FHQ tries to steer clear of this sort of thing (...unless it happens in the context of a campaign.*). Having been born and bred in the South, we also have an aversion to actors taking on southern drawls (They are usually missing some element of authenticity.). But on a Friday, after a long week, this one is too good to pass up.

"YOU LIE"with Joe Wilson from Corbin Bernsen

Hat Tip to the folks at CQ's Politics (Un)seriously for the link.

*Of course, I have been making the argument to my intro classes this week that House members are constantly in the midst of a permanent campaign. In keeping with that, I should probably include a link to the Public Policy Polling survey that shows Wilson behind 2008 challenger, Rob Miller, in a hypothetical 2010 match up.


Recent Posts:
State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/10/09)

FHQ Reading Room (9/10/09): Redistricting

It's Never too Early for a 2012 (Value Voters) Straw Poll

State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/10/09)

[Click to Enlarge]

As the calendar has turned from August to September, there is some evidence that the Garden state race for governor is tightening. And it isn't so much that Jon Corzine is gaining on Republican Chris Christie so much as it is a case of the Christie campaign showing some signs that the recent flurry of negative attention is bring the former US attorney back to earth. In fact, the Rasmussen data reflect a rather inflated sense of the race on both sides by including the firm's infamous "leaners" (undecideds or third party supporters who tip their hands in Rasmussen's view as to who of the two major party candidates they lean toward). Now, there's nothing wrong with the leaners per se -- Rasmussen made a similar switch down the stretch in the presidential race a year ago -- but during the summer the inclusion of the leaners really serves to inflate the amount of support each candidate has. Once fall dawns, though, their inclusion makes a bit more sense.

But how much of a difference are we talking about? The switch from leaners to no leaners has on average meant a four point gain for Christie and a 3.3 point bump for Corzine. No, that doesn't change the spread that much but it has for the entire summer kept Christie at or around the 50% mark in these polls. And on top of that Rasmussen mentioned in the poll write up that the eight point spread in the reported poll dropped to four in the "without leaners" version of the survey. And for all intents and purposes, that means that Christie likely would have had more of a drop in that transition than would have Christie. The effect is that Christie, in that version, likely would have dropped below the 45% mark. And that would be the first time since January that the Republican has had that small a share of support in a Rasmussen survey.

What does that mean? Well, Corzine still isn't making any jump in any of these polls, but as Mark Blumenthal at Pollster mentioned last week, the incumbent hasn't moved that much all year. All the movement has been on the Christie side. He rose and peaked in the summer and has been tracking downward of late. And what that really means is that, despite the fact that Corzine's numbers haven't budged all year, the Democrat is now more likely to pull off the Democratic comeback that has been typical of recent Senate and presidential races but has not really manifest itself in a gubernatorial race since Brendan Byrne mounted a charge in the 1977 race.

2009 New Jersey Gubernatorial Race Polling
Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Corzine	Christie	Daggett	Undecided
Rasmussen	Sept. 9, 2009	+/- 4.5%	500 likely voters	38	46	6	10
Democracy Corps [pdf]	Sept. 8-9, 2009	+/- 4%	615 likely voters	38	41	10	10

But Rasmussen wasn't the only polling outfit to release a survey today. [It was the most noteworthy, but not the only one.] Democracy Corp/GQR also found a tight race. But the three point spread is the same as it was a few weeks ago, though both candidates have dropped three points each since that point. All that essentially does is raise the specter of Chris Daggett in the race. If both candidates are regressing, then the independent is on the rise because the undecided total is not increasing at this late date. However, these are just two polls with Daggett crossing over into double digit support. It could be an anomaly or it could be a trend, but one thing seems to be sure: the independent with the great web ad is negatively affecting Corzine more so than Christie (or has to this point).

So how do these polls affect FHQ's graduated weighted average? Christie continues to drop closer to the 46% mark while Corzine is still camping out in the 37-38% range. That isn't significant change, but it is the state of the race in early September.

[Click to Enlarge]

Recent Posts:
FHQ Reading Room (9/10/09): Redistricting

It's Never too Early for a 2012 (Value Voters) Straw Poll

New Members on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee

FHQ Reading Room (9/10/09): Redistricting

Before we can even consider the electoral college landscape in 2012, we have to clear the redistricting hurdle first. And the chatter on the subject has ramped up as of late.

In Indiana, they're thinking about a less partisan gerrymandered map.

In Texas, two new seats are taking shape for the gains the Lone Star state is likely to enjoy following next year's census. And according to Texas Democratic Party chair, Boyd Ritchie, the DNC may get involved financially in state legislative races next year with redistricting (and the 2003 Republican redraw) in mind.

Two opposite ends of the spectrum there.


Recent Posts:
It's Never too Early for a 2012 (Value Voters) Straw Poll

New Members on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/5/09)

It's Never too Early for a 2012 (Value Voters) Straw Poll

Next week's Value Voters Summit is certainly not short on speakers doubling as potential hopefuls for the 2012 GOP nomination. And since many are going to be there speaking anyway, why not poll those in attendance to gauge the amount of support behind each candidate among this valuable group of Republican primary voters?

Why not, indeed? Why should Iowa and New Hampshire have all the fun?

Here's the ballot:

Newt Gingrich
Mike Huckabee*
Bobby Jindal
Sarah Palin
Ron Paul
Tim Pawlenty*
Mike Pence*
Rick Perry*
Mitt Romney*
Rick Santorum

*also scheduled to speak

That's a deep pool. But what? No Crist, no Barbour, no Thune?

Normally, I'd add the usual caveats that I include in any 2012 polling post. But in this case, I find this straw poll to be a fairly significant early indicator of how the 2012 field is going to shape up.

"The 2012 presidential primaries may be several years away but many value voters are already surveying the field of possible candidates," said Family Research Council Action President Tony Perkins. "This straw poll is an early test for possible presidential contenders who have shown leadership on the major issues facing our country."

It's no mistake that Mitt Romney will be speaking; this is a group he is absolutely going to have to convince of his conservative bona fides in some respects in order to gain their vote in just more than three years time. He is playing the current period correctly by staking out a firm, fiscally conservative line, but this is a group he will need if he is to be the frontrunner heading into the 2012 primaries. Things looked good on paper for Romney in 2008 as well, but it didn't work out.

One additional note we should make is that there are a few folks on the ballot that have been discussed in the context of splitting this segment of the Republican primary voting bloc in an early state like Iowa; making a Romney victory there more likely. It will be interesting also to see if the Sarah Palins and Mike Huckabees and Rick Santorums of the list split a sizable chunk of the vote in any noticeable way.


Recent Posts:
New Members on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/5/09)

The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter (Aug. 2009)

New Members on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee

It is too bad that this story appeared over at The Hill on Saturday. It is something that got lost amid the distractions of a long holiday weekend.

To the victor goes the spoils.

DNC Chairman Tim Kaine last week appointed several new members to the Rules and Bylaws Committee (Remember them?) of the Democratic Party. To me, though, the interesting thing is not the inevitability that Clinton supporters in positions on the committee were replaced by Obama supporters (or New Hampshire's representation on the R&B), but the fact that there are at least three members of the Rules and Bylaws Committee that are simultaneously serving on the Democratic Change Commission. Jeff Berman, Minyon Moore and Randi Weingarten are all pulling double duty.

Why is this noteworthy?

Well, as things are set up for 2012 (presidential nomination) rules making, the Democratic Change Commission debates, formulates and recommends a plan to tweak and ultimately govern delegate selection for the 2012 nomination. That recommendation, though, is passed off to the Rules and Bylaws Committee for approval. The Change Commission is due to make said recommendation by January 1, 2010, and if history (the 2008 cycle) is any indication, the R&B will formalize those rules some time during the late summer of next year.

Still, what does the fact that several members are pulling the double matter? It means that the Rules and Bylaws Committee has representation (at least 3 of the 37 Democratic Change Commission members) on the Change Commission. Does that mean they can push through or prevent reform to some degree? Not really (with so many total members), but it does provide the committee with something of a symbolic footprint on the meetings this fall of the DCC. It also further bolsters the notion that real change to this process will be shunted off to be dealt with in the future and that the president (as so many presidential nominees of both parties before him) is attached to the status quo; the process though which he won the nomination.

In a summer of discontent this likely won't sit well with those on the left looking for change. And though, I'll admit that the Change Commission (at least some among its ranks) foresee the need to make some significant changes to the nomination system, that has always run against the notion that presidents stick with what got them there. Does that mean that the latter will outweigh the former in this instance. It does not, but it would be wise to consider both as the 2012 rules are being considered, crafted and certified.


Recent Posts:
State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/5/09)

The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter (Aug. 2009)

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/2/09)

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/5/09)

[Click to Enlarge]

How about now?

Have the ideas proffered by Bob McDonnell in his thesis and covered widely this week sunk in among likely voters? More importantly, has it had any impact? The Rasmussen poll that was in the field on the Monday after the news broke showed very little, if any movement away from McDonnell or toward Deeds since the previous survey of the state from the polling firm. The same is true of the Survey USA poll that was released on Friday night (before a holiday weekend!?!).

2009 Virginia Gubernatorial Race Polling
Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Deeds	McDonnell	Undecided
Survey USA	Sept. 1-3, 2009	+/- 4%	611 likely voters	42	54	4

Since the firm's last poll in the race (in late July), there has essentially been no movement. Sure, it appears as if there has been a slight shift toward Deeds -- the gap has closed in the interim period from 15 to 12 points -- but that movement is within the margin of error.

So the thesis has had no impact?

Well, it looks that way doesn't it? But let's look a bit more closely at the toplines of this poll. What segment of the likely voting population would be expected to be most affected by the news of the thesis. Other than Democrats, the most obvious answer is women (Yes, there is a fairly broad overlap between the two.). The underlying "a woman's place is in the home" theme that peppers the thesis would hypothetically motivate women (on average) to want to vote against Bob McDonnell or say they would.

But what do we see in the latest Survey USA poll? First of all, women in this sample actually prefer McDonnell to Deeds by a margin of seven points. And secondly, that has increased since the firm's last, pre-thesis poll in July. Now, this is a finding that runs counterintuitively to what we know of electoral politics. Typically, women side with the Democratic candidate. That varies from race to race, but more often than not that gender gap is present to some extent. Before we dismiss this poll -- something FHQ wouldn't do anyway -- let's look at some other recent polls and how the samples broke along gender lines.

This isn't an exhaustive examination, but let's look at this trend in the polls conducted during and since August. The polls for which we have data in that period are the Public Policy Polling survey conducted last weekend and the Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll done earlier in August. The Washington Post poll, though it released a ton of data, did not include the gender breakdown and the two Rasmussen polls* are excluded. For good measure, let's throw in that July Survey USA poll and the earlier August poll from PPP.

PPP (early Aug.):
McDonnell: 50
Deeds: 38

SUSA (July):
McDonnell: 49
Deeds: 44

Kos/R2K (Aug.):
McDonnell: 45
Deeds: 46

PPP (Aug.):
McDonnell: 40
Deeds: 49

SUSA (Sept.):
McDonnell: 52
Deeds: 45

Honestly, those results are all over the place; especially those PPP numbers. They represent the two extremes, +12 McDonnell (in the early August poll that showed McCain voters outnumbering Obama voters by 11 points in the sample) to +9 Deeds in their latest poll. Granted across all of these polls, we're talking about subsamples, but on gender; not on something like liberal Republicans who voted for Obama, for example. It's a healthy subsample in other words. If we simply average the spreads in these five polls (not accounting for any kind of decay in the polls' weights over time) we find McDonnell ahead by about 3 points among women. At least that gives us some baseline for comparison. It provides us with enough information to say, "Well, it looks like this recent Survey USA poll shows a but more support for the Republican than average."

The bottom line is that this is still a somewhat striking result given what we know of the gender gap. However, at least we have some context now.

Gender wasn't what Survey USA thought was interesting in this particular poll. To the firm it was about the 2008 vote choice of the respondents in the sample. "Of those who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and who are judged by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in November 2009, 13% cross-over for McDonnell, twice the number of McCain voters who cross-over for Deeds." Yeah, that catches your eye, too. I'd really like to see those cross-overs isolated (talk about a subsample) just so we can see what the characteristics of a typical Obama-McDonnell or McCain-Deeds respondent are.

That may be asking too much.

[Click to Enlarge]

For the moment, though, it looks as if McDonnell has yet to be affected by the thesis revelation. It still feels too early to me for there to have been an effect. [This coming week's polls will be indicative.] That hunch is conditioned by the presence of the story to some extent. If it continues to get play in the media, that obviously increases the chances that it will potentially have an effect (exposure theory). Of course, the more polls released that show no impact, the better for McDonnell. That will serve to shift the narrative away from his previous writings.

*Yeah, I'm still too cheap to pony up for the Rasmussen subscription that would provide me with a more in-depth series of crosstabs for these polls. If you're reading this, have a Rasmussen subscription and would like to share that gender information with our readers, just drop a comment in the comments section below.


Recent Posts:
The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter (Aug. 2009)

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/2/09)

State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/1/09)

The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter (Aug. 2009)

August meant more than just summer vacation and a congressional recess. Ultimately, the month proved to be -- given those distractions -- a slow month for the prospective 2012 candidates on Twitter. Even at 140 characters or less, most of the (now growing group) of possible candidates found other ways to while away the waning days of summer.

Of course, much of that could have been fueled, at least in terms of perception, by the sudden absence of the most prolific Twitterer of the bunch, Sarah Palin. @AKGovSarahPalin called it quits on the microblogging service as soon as her resignation from the chief executive's position in the 49th state became official, but promised to return (apparently as @SarahPalinUSA) sometime in the future. That day has not come, which leaves us with a conundrum here at FHQ. How do we account for the former Alaska governor's following between two accounts? Much of that issue will disappear eventually once Palin actually begins tweeting again on her new account. For the time being, though, her original account is still pulling in more followers (even with no new tweets since our last update) than the new account, sans tweeting, has. For the time being, then, we'll be using the original account in our updates. And really that only affects her tweets per day numbers and her follower ratio (She's still well ahead of all the other prospective candidates, save Newt Gingrich.). For comparison, however, FHQ will note that @SarahPalinUSA has (as of this morning) just under 4000 followers.

But how did everyone else fare during August?

[Click to Enlarge]

What can you say? Newt Gingrich continues to dwarf all the other candidates with only Palin putting a dent in the former Speaker's advantage. Well technically, it isn't really a dent as Gingrich is still gaining more per month, but Palin is the only one who really registers. Even that is a distant second, though. At the moment (as of this morning) Gingrich was closing in on the one million follower mark. One politician he does trail is Barack Obama who has recently crested above the two million follower level. The bully pulpit, it seems, stretches into the microblogging realm as well.

[Click to Enlarge]

But let's pull Gingrich out and see where the other Twittering pols come in this month. One addition we've made since the July update is Rick Santorum, who appears to be testing the waters for a possible run at the GOP nomination in 2012. I'd wager, he's hoping to get a better response on the campaign trail than on Twitter thus far. That probably isn't a fair assessment, though, considering the former Pennsylvania senator only began tweeting in late July. Still, he's got some catching up to do. There's a little flash of green by his name above, but this graph is clearly about Palin, with Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal representing the only others who avoid (what should be dubbed) the monthly Twitter afterthought designation.

[Click to Enlarge]

Granted, as FHQ has argued, a Twitter following is conditioned by how often a candidate is tweeting. Some 2012ers tweet more than others. Gingrich and Palin (even though the latter isn't currently active on the service) continue to maintain large tweet per day numbers. And Mike Huckabee is the only other candidate who makes Twitter a daily routine. Everyone else is only sporadically adding to their comments. FHQ has made a habit of pointing out how Palin, Huckabee and Romney have been constantly clustered together atop 2012 primary polling throughout 2009, but only the former Arkansas governor and his colleague from the north are the ones active through this medium. Mitt Romney, despite being the early favorite for the 2012 nomination, has not turned to Twitter as a means of amassing a following for political purposes. It seems the Bay state's former governor has been busy raising money through his Free and Strong American PAC and making donations to those up for reelection in 2010 to turn to Twitter. But grassroots growth is something that would likely work well for Palin or Huckabee and would make Twitter a valuable tool. Romney on the other hand is working the establishment within the Republican Party and Twitter honestly is not going to do him much good in that capacity. Now, that may change when and if Romney officially announces in say, early 2011, but he may remain a quiet microblogger between now and then. A sudden uptick in Twitter usage may signal Romney is getting ready though. We'll see.

[Click to Enlarge]

Even without being too terribly active, Romney still has a pretty good Follower Ratio (followers/tweet/day). The former Massachusetts governor trails only Newt Gingrich in that respect. Only Bobby Jindal registers anything approaching the bang for the buck that those two are getting out of what they put into the service. And that is where Palin continues to lack. Sure, the Alaskan has been tweetless since July, but for what she put into it even before her resignation, she wasn't getting much of a return in terms of a following.

FHQ will be back next month to see if that changes any.

See FHQ's May, June and July Twitter updates as well.


Recent Posts:
State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/2/09)

State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/1/09)

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/1/09)

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/2/09)

[Click to Enlarge]

It is too early.

Anxious observers of both partisan stripes are waiting for the inevitable (or perhaps not so inevitable) negative impact Bob McDonnell's Regent University thesis will have on the Virginia Republican's fortunes in the 2009 gubernatorial race in the Old Dominion. A day after the beginning of the political week began, when this story broke, is just too early for this to have sunk in and have had any measurable influence. Does that mean McDonnell is headed for automatic defeat in this contest? No. However, this does represent an opening for the Deeds campaign. It affords the Deeds campaign the opportunity to energize their base and close the enthusiasm gap in a way that to this point has been lacking (not from lack of trying). As I said recently, this isn't the type of revelation that is necessary going to hurt McDonnell among conservatives, but it does potentially put some independents in play.

Is it to that point yet? Will it get to that point? Maybe. Maybe not. But it will take some time. Polls next week will be a good starting barometer of the state of things post-thesis.

2009 Virginia Gubernatorial Race Polling
Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Deeds	McDonnell	Undecided
Rasmussen	Sept. 1, 2009	+/- 4.5%	500 likely voters	39	49	9

In the meantime, Rasmussen released a new poll in the Virginia race today that did not really show that much movement from a month ago. In fact, Deeds dropped by a handful of percentage points among the sans-leaners version of the survey results while McDonnell stood pat. [Again, it is FHQ's policy to take that version -- the one where undecideds are placed in the camp of one candidate or another -- over the other.] Is this status quo result a telltale sign that McDonnell is safe on this? No, I don't think so (for the reasons I've mentioned already).

That said, the numbers didn't make that much of an impact on FHQ's graduated weighted average. Yes, Deeds fell a bit and McDonnell held steady versus yesterday's update, but we are not talking about some fundamental shift here. This was a status quo sustaining survey.

The bottom line? McDonnell leads, but an unknown has been introduced into the equation; one that could have an effect on the former Virginia attorney general's numbers.

[Click to Enlarge]

Recent Posts:
State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (9/1/09)

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (9/1/09)

2012 Presidential Trial Heats (Clarus Research Group): Obama vs. Gingrich/Huckabee/Palin/Romney