Google Ads


Site Stats

CA-Gov: Brown Leads By 1 in Field Poll

by: Crisitunity

Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 2:47 PM EDT


Field Poll (pdf) (6/22-7/5, likely voters, 3/9-15 in parens):

Jerry Brown (D): 44 (43)
Meg Whitman (R): 43 (46)
Undecided: 13 (11)
(MoE: ±3.2%)

The Field Poll is back after a hiatus with its first look at the general election in California in more than three months; the news for Jerry Brown is so-so, with a negligible lead over Meg Whitman. Of course, that's a definite improvement over the previous poll, where Whitman led by 3 (taken during that brief period where Whitman had the airwaves to herself and several other pollsters found a narrow lead for her). Nevertheless, the general reaction of the punditry today is that the poll is a negative for Brown (take TPM for instance, where the headline is "Bad News for Brown" and the teaser reads "The latest poll of the California governor's race shows Whitman pulling to within one point of Jerry Brown."

Brown's favorables are mediocre, at 42/40 (not much changed since March, where he was at 41/37, but certainly a change from March 2009, when he hadn't been besmirched by negative ads and was at 50/25). Whitman, though, has taken much more of a pounding: she's underwater now at 40/42, down from 40/27 in March, having gotten hit by both Steve Poizner and Brown's surrogates. Although he should be cheered by the collateral damage to Whitman, there are some red flags here for Brown, in terms of how he performs among what should be the strongest Democratic constituencies: Latinos (among whom he leads by only 11, 50-39 perhaps thanks to some Spanish-language advertising by Whitman... he led 54-25 among Latinos in March) and the 18-39 set (among whom Whitman actually leads, 45-42, though that's a drop from her 46-36 lead in March). Brown's strength comes from those 50 and older, who are the ones old enough to remember his last turn in office, which happened to coincide with a time when California seemed to suck a lot less. If Brown can solidify his standing with young and Latino voters, he should be in more solid shape for November.

Crisitunity :: CA-Gov: Brown Leads By 1 in Field Poll
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

I actually look at this as good news for Brown
if Whitman cannot take the lead now, she'll probably never be able to take it considering there likely won't be a more advantegeous period for her.

You could look at it as Whitman underperforming among white people and older voters just as you could look at it as Brown underperforming among Hispanics and younger voters.


Yes, but in the end...
while it makes perfect sense why Whitman is doing worse than Brown among older voters (who generally lean more Republican), which should hold up to Election Day, it makes less sense that young voters will end up going for Whitman on Election Day.  These older voters have known about Brown for decades, and may not be really swayed by a 30-second ad claiming Brown is California's worst nightmare.  Younger and newer voters are more susceptible, yes, but in light of recent trends in younger voters' ideology and party affiliation, it may not be enough for Whitman.

As for Latinos, the Democrats just need to bring up Whitman's own words in the primary when she was going far to the right in an effort to block off Steve Poizner.

So it looks like the weaknesses for Whitman in certain constituencies will continue to be weaknesses, while the weaknesses for Brown can be made up.


[ Parent ]
I don't get the headlines from these people
He's doing better in the polling now than he was previously. Maybe he should be doing better, maybe the lead in the polls isn't great news, but "Whitman pulling to within one point of Jerry Brown" is just misleading, period.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


It's almost like the media
It's almost like the media just want to maintain their narrative about Brown running a lackluster campaign. No matter what this poll said, journalists were going to try to make it sound bad for Brown unless he had a decent lead.

I actually do not see how this is great news for Whitman at all. At this point, she has probably reached a plateau on the declining return on investment scale for television advertising.

Brown just needs to keep raising money and be prepared for the final months of the campaign. If he is in a tie now, that's a pretty good position considering the circumstances. Ultimately, I am expecting Brown to pull this one out.


Currently thinking...
Democrat - 37%
Republican - 33%
Independent - 30%

Brown - 87/10/46 = 49%
Whitman - 13/90/54 = 51%

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast


What are you basing the projection on?
1) If the election were held today
2) The final result in Nov.

If it's 1), I'd tend to agree with you. By comparison, per the '06 CNN exit poll, it was 40/35/25 (D/R/I), so you might in fact be a little low w/r/t Rs.

FWIW, current registration from http://www.capitolweekly.net/a... is

45/31/20 (D/R/I)

(I assume the remaining 4-5 % are members of other parties.) That provides an idea of the costs of low D turnout.


[ Parent ]
Indies are NOT going to be close to 30%......
If they register at 20%, and they were 25% in 2006, they're not going to be 30% now.

There really wasn't great Democratic motivation in CA in 2006, since, as everyone forgets and ignores now, Ah-nuld was extremely popular and won in a landslide, and there was no competitive Senate. race.  There were a couple hotly contested House races, but 2 out of 53, the rest were safe seats.  There wasn't all that much driving Democrats to show up in great numbers.

That being the case, I wouldn't count on Dems being any less motivated now than in 2006, in spite of the environment.  An open governorship and a hotly contested Senate race are plenty big enough.  And of course there's been 4 years of further demographic change, with the electorate just a teeny bit less white.

With the voter registration numbers being what they are, I'd expect an electorate no more Republican or conservative than in 2006.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Same here.
If Democrats made up 40% of voters that showed up in 2006, while posting 42.5% of registered voters at the last pre-election count, and with few races to motivate them to turn out, then with more than plenty of races to get them to the polls this time, I can't imagine the gap between their registration numbers (45% at this point, and could change between now and late October) being wider than in two thousand-freakin-six. Whitman is no Arnold (at least when he was popular). And of course having Obama on the stump can't hurt either.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
Good comparative info
Thank you ( both responders )

So even in a relative worst case, 40% D turnout (and the 2006 numbers overall) is a reasonable worst case.

Based on user andyroo's numbers, that's a virtual tie, but I'm assuming that Brown is at the floor of his support until he starts going on the air.


[ Parent ]
I'm thinking
D 39, R 33, I 28. I'm also thinking the media don't know how to report polls.

[ Parent ]
Still Likely Dem
One issue with the poll, i don't believe for one minute Whitman has recovered to only 40/42 favorability from the twenties she was in before the primary.  No way, no how.  She is one of the most disliked people in the state... though now that she is not running commercials people have forgotten about her.

Of course, it is basically a cinch that the more likely a person is to not be a "likely voter", the more that person hates Whitman for all the lame commercials.  Still, many people who will vote for Whitman will not say they have a favorable opinion of her.

I expect both these people to have significantly underwater approvals by election day, with Whitman's again plummeting into the 20s due to her scorched earth campaigning.


You misread the trend, it's gotten WORSE for Whitman, not better......
The Field Poll in March had Whitman's favorables at 40-27, now it's gotten worse at 40-42, all the movement against her.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
No I didn't misread it
I was refering to a different pollster.  Field did not poll right before the primary.

Whitman in March was all goodness in light.

Whitman after May 1st is all purge and puke.  I forget the pollster but it had her favorables in the 20s.  I do not believe she could possibly have 40% favorables.  No way... in other words, Field is saying all the people who liked her in March like her now (though more people dislike her).  I'd be stunned if she was over 30% favorables in reality.


[ Parent ]
Found it, she was 24/44 in PPP's poll in May
And she was 32/37 in the LA Times poll.

http://gqrr.com/articles/2447/...

http://www.publicpolicypolling...

No freaking way is she 40% favorable now.


[ Parent ]
Internals from different pollsters
are the stock definition of apples and oranges.  

[ Parent ]
Correct, that's not a valid comparison at all. You gotta compare...
...Field to Field on internals, and Field shows Whitman's favorables static and unfavorables spiking.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
Um, no
That's like saying you can only compare Field's head to head versus Field's previous head to head.

Obviously that makes no sense.  Polls only make sense in relation to 1) the election, and 2) the group of polls.

The gray area of the way "favorable" questions are asked are a consideration in comparing, but it's just silly to not view Field as an outlier given every other poll showing Whitman's approvals plummeting since March.  Static is simply not possible, no matter how they ask the question.

Polls are useless if only compared to the same company's other polls.  Rasmussen for example lives on an entirely different planet than other pollsters.  


[ Parent ]
You got a lot to learn about polling......
Pollsters differ wildly in crosstabs, that's routine.  You can't compare them across different pollsters unless a particular demographic breakdown is consistent, and those consistent ones are mostly predictable ones and therefore not news (e.g., overwhelming majorities of black voters supporting a Democrat over a Republican).

If you're comparing across different pollsters' results, you can compare toplines and their trends over time.

If you're comparing crosstabs, you have to look within the same pollter's work over time assuming the pollster hasn't changed its own methodology.

In all seriousness, you could use a class in statistics, and pay special attention to linear regression and statistical sampling.  You'll learn why your comparison of different polls' crosstabs, as you're doing here, doesn't work.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Same deal
Boxer campaign only really getting into gear now. Both these races remind me of the MI gubernatorial race in 2006. Though I don't think either will win by the double digit margin Granholm had over DeVos.

[ Parent ]

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox