Google Ads


Site Stats

PA-Sen: Casey Continues to Lead All Comers

by: DavidNYC

Sun Apr 17, 2011 at 9:22 AM EDT


Public Policy Polling (PDF) (4/7-10, Pennsylvania voters, 1/3-5 in parens):

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 51 (51)
Charlie Dent (R): 31 (31)
Undecided: 18 (18)

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 50 (49)
Jim Gerlach (R): 32 (33)
Undecided: 19 (18)

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 49 (48)
Rick Santorum (R): 37 (41)
Undecided: 13 (10)

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 51 (50)
Marc Scaringi (R): 28 (27)
Undecided: 21 (22)

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 51
Jake Corman (R): 35
Undecided: 14

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 51
Laureen Cummings (R): 32
Undecided: 17

Bob Casey, Jr. (D-inc): 50
Kim Ward (R): 29
Undecided: 21
(MoE: ±4.0%)

What to say here? As you can see, Casey's numbers are little changed from January, when PPP first tested the race. He's at almost exactly 50% against everyone he faces, and no one does better than 37%. But that figure is misleadingly high: If the universally-known Rick Santorum is only at 37 right now, how can he expect to go much higher? His favorable rating (you'll need to check PPP's presidential poll, since they tested him there) is just 37-47, which is pretty ugly. In any event, Santorum seems pretty committed to a pointless presidential run; I'd be surprised to see him go for a rematch.

Every other potential candidate is entirely unknown, with anywhere from 75 to 84% of respondents expressing no opinion on this batch of Republicans (and among those who do know this crowd, all have negative ratings). Of course, that means someone like state Sen. Jake Corman has proverbial "room to grow," but with Casey already at 50, he'd need to pull away people who are already willing to support the incumbent.

So my money is on Casey, despite his relatively soft job approval numbers. I think Tom Jensen has it right:

On one hand, he has weak approval numbers-only 39% of voters approve of the job he's doing to 35% who disapprove-you can certainly get defeated with those kinds of numbers. On the other hand he leads seven potential opponents for next year that we tested against him by anywhere from 12 to 23 points-you'll pretty much never get defeated with those kinds of numbers.

My sense is that Casey is not terribly vulnerable. Here's the thing about his low approval numbers-Democrats aren't in love with him. Just 55% approve of him and 22% disapprove. Generally you'll see a Senator closer to the 70% or 80% mark within his own party so his lack of approval from the party base is what's keeping Casey's approval number under 40%. But even though they don't necessarily like Casey, Democrats are still perfectly willing to vote for him-he gets 78-80% of the Democratic vote in head to head match ups against the seven Republicans we tested. And his 19% approval number with Republicans, although it may not sound like much, is actually a pretty decent amount of crossover support in this highly polarized political climate.

The GOP has had a hard time recruiting any big names, and these numbers help explain why. The biggest note of caution, I think, is the very Dem lean of this sample: 51 D, 38 R, 11 I. It was 44-37-18 in 2008. It's hard to imagine Democrats having such a big advantage on election day next year. Nonetheless, even if you reallocated those "extra" Ds to the independent column, Casey would still out ahead, since he holds sizeable leads with indies against every candidate (except, oddly, Santorum). This is a race where you'd simply rather be Team Blue than Team Red.

DavidNYC :: PA-Sen: Casey Continues to Lead All Comers
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

nice map
Obama 08 did better than Casey 04 in Montgomery, Delaware, Chester, Lancaster, Monroe, and Pike.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12

[ Parent ]
but look how Casey
dominated the Southwest Corner of the state. Woah.

Besides, the Philly suburbs have been veering sharply towards the Dems in recent years, so that should help Casey in 2012.


[ Parent ]
This one's Likely D, methinks
And, it's only not Safe D because the presidential race could prove competitive. I expect Casey to garner 93 percent of Democrats and 55 percent of Independents, at least, so he'll rather comfortably win here. The GOP nominee would have to be extraordinary.

D - 43
R - 36
I - 21

Casey - 96/12/57 = 57%
Republican - 4/88/43 = 43%

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


Casey is safe
I'm willing to bet the Republicans end up with a third-tier challenger, like a State Senator or something.

buyer's remorse over Toomey
at least that's what i want to think

26, male, Dem, NJ-12

Actually
Toomey isn't that unpopular. Sorry to burst your bubble, but due to his keeping quiet in these battles, he has actually good numbers for any Senator.

He's not popular, but buyer's remorse is too strong a term.


[ Parent ]
Meh, 32% approval isn't exactly stellar
he has actually good numbers for any Senator.

I'm fairly certain no senator (at least come election time) would jump for joy with that


[ Parent ]
Uh, Casey's only at 39 percent approval...
So, he and Toomey aren't really that far apart in popularity. There seems to be way more buyer's remorse over Corbett than Toomey, who I suspect might well be wholly capable of garnering a second term.

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

[ Parent ]
It's way too early to determine that
Toomey won by 2 points in a bad year for Democrats. That doesn't scream "strength" right off the bat. And we have to wait for possible gaffes and political climate shifts.

[ Parent ]
The LAST thing anyone should bet on is who will be "safe" or "vulnerable" in 2016!......
A prediction like that is mission impossible.

Even with, say, a popular Republican in Wyoming or a popular Democrat in Rhode Island, you just don't know 100% what 2016 will bring.

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


[ Parent ]
Good thing Wyoming and RI don't elect senators in 2016 ;)
jk, your point is taken.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
Did you look that up or did you just know?
I don't know whether to be bemused or impressed and bemused.

23, liberal democrat, SSP Gay Caucus Majority Whip, IN-02 (home), IN-03 (birth), SC-03 (early childhood), IN-09 (college);   DKos: HoosierD42

[ Parent ]
I knew
RI is my home state, so I know. And WY I just remembered not having an election last fall which means it wouldnt have one in 2016;

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
Impressive. Most Impressive.
[/Vader voice]

[ Parent ]
Well
To be fair, we don't know that yet. Someone could retire and then there very well could be an election.

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

[ Parent ]
*
*Special election. There could also be a death, but hopefully not.  

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

[ Parent ]
Casey polls better among Republicans and Independents
than Toomey does wil Democrats and Independents. In a presidential election year, Casey will get the votes of Ds that aren't in love with him. Toomey is likely to shed all but his Republican base.

[ Parent ]
PA Senate
Pennsylvania has a fairly older population.  When the GOP proposals for Medicare start coming into full view, Casey's numbers will soar and the GOP numbers in this state will tank.

I don't approve of Casey very strongly.
He is pro-life. I'm a strongly pro-choice dem. So i might say that i disprove of him in a poll. There are a lot, especially in the urban areas and their suburbs where people are like me. But almost all of us are gonna vote for us cause we only disagree on that one issue.

18, Dem, PA-7

Casey and Liberals
I suspect that a lot of liberals, both on the Internet and in Pennsylvania, actually like him more than some might think. He's good to great on pretty much every issue if you are a Democrat, and while he's not in line with most on the issue of abortion, he's not in anyone's face about it, unlike Santorum. Plus, those who are thinking strategically realize he's probably got the seat for as long as he wants it, which is no small feature.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Oh yeah
Trust me, I don't dislike him. But I'm not sure I would say i strongly approve. I'll vote from him every election until he decides not to run again, including primaries.  

18, Dem, PA-7

[ Parent ]
I'm biased because I interned for him
a few years ago. But in my view, he has been about as good as we could have hoped for (especially considering that most of us were willing to settle for Not Santorum).

His position on choice rankles deeply, but he has consciously chosen not to make a nuisance of himself about it (unlike at least one other Democrat I could name).


[ Parent ]
and he did vote for Planned Parenthood funding. NT


[ Parent ]
I noticed that
Then again, so did Ben Nelson.

[ Parent ]
Is anyone else
getting annoyed with PPP's sampling? I like Jensen, I think he's done a great job the last couple years, and I'm no expert on polling, but a few of his polls have had very heavy Dem leans. Of course, I hope he's right about the breakdowns but it just seems off.

24, male, Democrat, VA-06 (currently in Italy), went to school in VA-05

Well, in all fairness, all you have to do is apply their crosstabs to a better voter model
Let's take the Casey/Dent numbers, for instance, and skew them to a more plausible voter model.

D - 43
R - 36
I - 21

Casey - 80/14/44 = 48%
Dent - 9/60/29 = 32%

That, as opposed to 51 to 31 under the PPP model. So, you're looking at about a 4 point overestimation of D performance in the PPP model.


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


[ Parent ]
Or not
because adjusting by Party ID has as much potential to distort as adjusting by the toplines themselves.  

[ Parent ]
PPP
That's great that if you adjust this and that you can get more realistic numbers, but that doesn't change the fact that they are off.  I used to shrug off RRH complaints due to PPPs great track record, but I think at this point we have to start raising an eyebrow.

29/D/Male/NY-01

[ Parent ]
Why do you assume making an adjustment is really "realistic"
A lot of people just take it as an article of faith that the exit poll was "correct" and that PPP has a Democratic slant to it. PPP's numbers actually follow the actual registration numbers in Pennsylvania quite closely (50.84% Dem, 37.00% Rep, 11.71% unaffiliated or other).

Seriously, I don't understand why people are so quick to jump on crosstabs that are measuring something extremely fluid unlike actual demographics (which seem quite reasonable in the context of Pennsylvania).

Politics and Other Random Topics

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


[ Parent ]
It's easier to be "concerned" about the foggy and nebulous than objective facts
This PPP poll and most of the others they have released this year skew a little bit pro-McCain.  Here we have a 100% sample of McCain voters and about 90% of Obama voters, that breaks down closely to registration numbers.

The poll has a sample more conservative than the most recent Presidential year electorate.  Its not greatly more conservative, but it is clearly, objectively more conservative.

It's total nonsense to assert the exact opposite of the objective figures.  


[ Parent ]
That's partially based on turnout assumptions
If you were to put out a poll for a 2010 race which had the 2008 breakdown of Obama / McCain votes, your numbers would be WAY off.

[ Parent ]
No, it's not assuming anything
The numbers are what they are.

This poll is more McCain/conservative than the 2008 electorate, and is similar to current PA party registration.  Period.  No assumptions, no nuthin'.

Now every individual has to judge what they think turnout will actually be in 2012, and compare that to the sample turnout PPP has here.

Turnout in 2012 may in fact be 90% McCain voters, whatever.  This poll merely reflects the stated opions of a sampling of voters a bit more McCain-ish than the 2008 electorate was.  That's all.  Use it as a guide... but don't absurdly state it is the opposite of what it is.


[ Parent ]
PPP poll: Mccain 44, Obama 48
Actual results:  McCain 44, Obama 54

So 6% of Obama's margin just being zapped into the stratosphere is a "very heavy Dem" lean?????

Nonsense.

The party ID question is far inferior to factual previous vote question, as party ID is liquid and previous actions are not.

This is a significantly Mccain-voter weighted poll, period.


[ Parent ]
Probably
a lot of conservative Hillary Dems in Pennsylvania

[ Parent ]
Just a note of caution
The poll is not "weighted" to McCain voters - PPP only weights by age, race, and gender. I think you might have meant it has a McCain "lean" or "tilt" or some other word that isn't a specific term of art.

But even there, I'd disagree with you, because it could just as easily be that McCain hasn't shed any support (since he got 44% in both instances), while Obama has.


[ Parent ]
I would say tommypaine is correct with a qualification......
The thing is, the sample is definitely skewed toward McCain compared to 2008.

tommypaine used the term "weighted," and in his case I suspect (but don't know) he was not being so loosy goosy with words but considered the sample to be designed that way.

But aside from semantics, the sample obviously is, in fact, as tommypaine says, more conservative with fewer Obama voters than the 2008 electorate.

It's worth noting, too, that this is not a consistent trend in PPP polling.  There are states where the samples have mirrored 2008, and other states where samples have been more conservative and less Obama-friendly.

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


[ Parent ]
Ugh.
I typically value your comments and view them as absolutely top notch, but do you have to impugn others' intellectual abilities?

21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.

[ Parent ]
Excuse me, how exactly do you think my comment impugned anyone?......
I re-read my comment a couple times just now, and I don't see anything in it that could be construed as critical of anyone.  I was defending tommypaine, but yet not criticizing David.  At least that's how I meant it, and I'm having a hard time seeing how it could have come off differently.

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

[ Parent ]
Maybe "weighted" isn't the right word, but the context is pretty clear
There are two basic ways to make a sample... randomly call people and release what you get; or set a whole pile of precise numbers.  PPP does the former, not the latter.  However, just because you randomly call people doesn't mean you can't occasionally end up with a not-good sample... like 70% men and 30% women.  

Ignoring the word weighted, this sample is objectively higher in Mcacin voters versus Obama voters than the 2008 electorate.  That's it.  Anyone criticizing the sample as unrealistic must then assert the 2012 electorate is going to be even more Mccain-favoring than this sample.  But that is speculation.  We don't know what 2012 turnout will be like.  We do know that this sample is relatively more favorable to Mccain than the 2008 electorate was.


[ Parent ]
People are notoriously bad
ad remembering which candidate they voted for in the last Presidential election. You should only weight by demographic measures that are not known to be volatile.  

[ Parent ]
I agree, that's all I, too, was trying to say. (nm)
nm

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

[ Parent ]
I don't understand your point
Something doesn't need to be deliberate to be "weighted".

What term would you use is a poll was 90% McCain and 10% Obama?

As for McCain not shedding support... what does that have to do with the topic?  It's not relevant at all.


[ Parent ]
Oh good, I was hoping to hear this constantly for the next 18 months.


[ Parent ]
Wow I had no idea PA had so few indies...
n/t

NY-01/NY-19

51-32 is the correct Cummings matchup numbers
50-29 is vs. Kim Ward (whoever that is).

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


No.
There's certainly no funny business going on, for one thing. For another, you can fiddle with the numbers, and the top line is usually the same or very close. This sample could be the result for any number of reasons, like left-leaning Indies saying they are Democrats.

I've wondered about the results on a few, but that's when I see Romney getting 20 percent of blacks against Obama. But you are bound to see an outlier here or there. A weird result against many good polls, and not just in the sense that they look for us, is no reason to be that skeptical, at least not now.

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


Smartest thing Casey ever did...
Was endorse Barack Obama when he did. Remember the six-week slog before the Pennsylvania primary? Clinton and Obama traversed the state, and this was in the heat of the Jeremiah Wright problem too. Casey came right out and endorsed Obama and he was one of the few politicians in PA to do so. I think this endeared him to the liberal base and won over a lot of pro-choice Democrats in the process who weren't yet sold on him.

Hometown: PA-8, Currently: CA-30.
Alt. Delegate to the CA DEMs from the 41st Assembly District.


He's in a good position for a couple of reason
Number one, he can do good in ancestral Democratic areas that are trending Republican and number two, the Presidential race comes with Pittsburg and Philadelphia turnout, which further pads his margin. I'm seeing a 56-43 win for Casey.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.

I don't think this poll is particularly pro-Dem
Take a look at the breakdown by ideology, for example where you get 27/33/40 Liberal/Moderate/Conservative (compared to the exit poll's breakdown of 23/50/27).

Honestly, in a state like Pennsylvania, where there genuinely are still a lot of registered Democrats who don't really vote for Democratic candidates, that shouldn't be horribly surprising.

Politics and Other Random Topics

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


Agreed
As always the crosstabs are contrary. Frankly, I'm getting quite tired of this whole argument. Do I really have to drag up yet again the numerous examples where their head to head numbers reflect actual election results while the crosstabs of the same polls end up looking nothing like exit polling?

[ 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