Suffolk University Comprehensive Poll
Submitted by staff on Fri, 03/10/2006 - 9:20pm.
I received this poll in my inbox from a reader (thanks !) - a poll conducted by the Suffolk University Boston, it's pretty comprehensive. It was taken between March 4th and 7th. What I gleaned from it:
Ted Strickland is in a very strong position (18 ahead of Blackwell, 11 ahead of Petro). His favorables are high and unfavorables very low.
Ken Blackwell is weak and polarizing. Higher negatives than positives.
Petro isn't as damaged by the corruption as I expected, but it's showing.
Brown gets whooped by DeWine 35-51...with only 15% undecided Brown looks like he is toast. DeWine's favorables are above 50 at 51%. Brown needs to start bringing Dewine down or this race is over. where ya at Hackett ?!
Other observations. Number of folks saying they will vote in November is high and it looks like it over sampled Democrats by a few % (unless of course people are reluctant to say they are Republicans given the low performance results they get in this poll, which is possible.
Full poll results in the extended.
I think it is
Submitted by staff on Fri, 03/10/2006 - 10:21pm.
I just dont see Brown making the adjustments he needs to make. He is clearly a one trick trade pony and it isnt playing.
Trade, trade, trade, trade, trade, trade....
Submitted by AmberCat on Fri, 03/10/2006 - 11:41pm.
....Oh, sorry, where was I? Yeah, this is about the result I expect. I think if Strickland keeps chugging along the way he has his showing will only improve. The Republicans will probably nomiante Blackwell and the more info that gets out about Blackwell, the less people are going to like him. His negatives are going to shoot WAY up. As for Strickland, I'm sure the Repugs will make up some stuff, but there really isn't a whole lot negative there. I think most of us disagree with him on a few things but overall he's pretty solid.
Also, based on the results for other candidates, DeWine's favorable is skyhigh. Of course, Brown and hackett are much much higher in the unknown category.
Looking at the poll more closely
Submitted by Drdemocrat on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 6:16am.
There is an extremely high independent identification. I suspect that some "Republican" voters are now identifying themselves as independent. Those are the voters that Hackett could have reached but Brown has not demonstrated that he can get resulting in him being down in the polls.
Brown needs to pick it up soon and not wait until the fall to go after these voters. As I stated on my post, where is Brown's offense? Saying the word "trade" isn't going to cut it.
Yeah, interesting
Submitted by tjqhzonff on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 8:47am.
57% saying they are independants seems like there has to be some Democrats in that pot as well. I googled a bit for the party percentages in Ohio but couldnt find anything. Anyone know how the registration overall breaks down?
Interesting that Ohio has a very high independent
Submitted by Drdemocrat on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 10:47am.
voting block.
If it is true that there is a 20, 20, 60 split. then I suspect that Brown is doomed. In Ohio that 60% independent group are probably the pro-choice but pro-gun group exactly the people Hackett could have reached and will vote for Strickland.
they arent really indies
Submitted by staff on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 11:35am.
they are undeclared. Ohio has same day registration so a lot of it is a factor of low primary turnout, which is the only place and time you register for a party.
So a lot of so called "indies" are just lazy voters.
I suspect
Submitted by AmberCat on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 11:27am.
The high number of independents/non-affiliated reflects a general disgust with politics and a sense that voters don't know who they can trust anymore. It's something the Dems can tap into in this state since the Republicans are so corrupt, but it tells me they MUST do that and not swoon and natter on about how unnice it is to be negative and how they must talk about their "plan." I suspect at this point people aren't so much interested in details of someone's trade (shudder) plan as they are in "can I trust you? Will you sell the state down the river?" If Dems run from this, they're going to have an uphill battle. I mean, Blackwell is working with Jerome Corsi. Brand the guy as a nasty, insult-spewing extremist liar and say "What does this say about the allegedly "moral" Blackwell?" Come on, guys, this isn't a tea party.
If anybody
Submitted by SusanD on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 1:06pm.
asked me at this point I would say "unaffiliated". I can hardly stand to associate myself with the current weak-kneed Dems. They throw plenty of sharp elbows when they want to be out front. Then they fold their hands and talk "plans". People are looking for somebody who's going to fight for them, not a policy-wonk. When a politician stands around being "nice" and blathering on about what he'll do, it just makes me feel like he's not even aware of the damage inflicted on the people of Ohio. Candidates *should* be outraged, just as we are, and they shouldn't be afraid to show it. When they come out being so mild and their opponents so vicious it doesn't make them look "nicer", it makes them look like weak fools who don't know, or care about, what's happening.
Molly Ivins
Submitted by LisaCD on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 7:39pm.
had a good commentary saying much the same thing. You can find it at /www.commondreams.org/views06/0310-20.htm
One line from
Submitted by tjqhzonff on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 9:22am.
her article that particularly resonated with me:
"This is not a time for a candidate who will offend no one; it is time for a candidate who takes clear stands and kicks ass."
Sigh.
"This is not a time for a candidate who will offend no one; it is time for a candidate who takes clear stands and kicks ass."
Sigh.
Speaking of being outraged
Submitted by AmberCat on Sat, 03/11/2006 - 2:19pm.
Did you read that when Hillary Clinton responded to the Republicans' charge that she's angry by saying that when there's so much stuff to outraged at, you SHOULD be outraged, her ratings went UP? A lot of people are tired of being told they shouldn't be "angry" or "shrill" when they are being ruthlessly battered by the greediest, most power-hungry, most amoral, hypocritical and unprincipled bunch of politicians in this country's history.
Poll is crap.
Submitted by ratdg1 on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 5:05pm.
This poll is crap. Look at the question order.
They ask about Sherrod Brown in Question 3-right after Taft & Petro. Then they ask about a bunch of other candidates.
Finally, they ask about Mike Dewine in Q.7, immediately followed by the "who would you vote for" question.
Additionally, they use the phrase "Democrat Sherrod Brown," but not "Republican Mike DeWine" which biases the responses you're gonna get.
They also ask about whether you trust Petro, but not Blackwell. They ask how people would grade Bush, then immediately follow with how people grade Congressional Democrats, but never ask about how people grade Congressional Republicans.
All in all, this is a pretty shitty poll.
They ask about Sherrod Brown in Question 3-right after Taft & Petro. Then they ask about a bunch of other candidates.
Finally, they ask about Mike Dewine in Q.7, immediately followed by the "who would you vote for" question.
Additionally, they use the phrase "Democrat Sherrod Brown," but not "Republican Mike DeWine" which biases the responses you're gonna get.
They also ask about whether you trust Petro, but not Blackwell. They ask how people would grade Bush, then immediately follow with how people grade Congressional Democrats, but never ask about how people grade Congressional Republicans.
All in all, this is a pretty shitty poll.
heh
Submitted by staff on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 6:39pm.
Funny thing is, I think i would trust the U of Suffolk's judgement more than yours.
The weird thing about poll results - those who are down always think they are crap and those that are up think they are great.
Anyhow - keep ya blinders on - 2 polls in a row showing Brown getting creamed and another coming out in a week or so will show the same.
One more thing
Submitted by ratdg1 on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 6:50pm.
Where's the poll from? I just checked the Suffolk website, and there's nothing there about a poll released on march 10. The most recent is from February 6, and it deals with the Massachusetts races.
Interestingly, there's no information about this poll from any site but this one, and one Dkos diary that uses this site as a source. No media coverage, nothing on the site it supposedly came from, no other mentions at all.
Interestingly, there's no information about this poll from any site but this one, and one Dkos diary that uses this site as a source. No media coverage, nothing on the site it supposedly came from, no other mentions at all.
dude
Submitted by staff on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 7:39pm.
calm down - it was emailed to me in advance by one of the pollsters at the U. it aint released officially yet.
oh, the polls
Submitted by bryan on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 10:47pm.
as expected, this poll confirms that favorability rating = voter preference this far out. this doesn't mean that sherrod is out of the race -- far from it -- just that voters are loath to turn out an incumbent they generally like and trust.
anyone can pick any poll apart -- they are not, for all the protests of some pushers, all science and no art. a better course of action is to acknowledge the tough fight ahead and get to work securing the base.
just look at how strickland has handled the coleman and fingerhut withdrawals. he has been, well, genius. sherrod needs this same outcome now.
I have always said
Submitted by Drdemocrat on Mon, 03/13/2006 - 8:41am.
That if Brown had sent out a press release praising Hackett like Strickland did for Coleman and Fingerhut even if Hackett was upset, a lot of this would have been smoothed out. I think that both sides would have conducted themselves better.
But instead, nothing was said except for lies about why Hackett dropped out (based upon a poll which ain't true), Hackett probably heard the truth about Dan Lucas's whisper campaign and the backroom machinations, and now ill feelings. Luckily, Hackett says he is now laying low until the ill will feelings that are unproductive goes away.
easy to fix
Submitted by bryan on Mon, 03/13/2006 - 8:52am.
it is an incredibly easy situation to fix. and i'm glad hackett is walking away from the situation for a bit -- probably best for all involved.
what sherrod really needs now is support from HIS rank-and-file. no more bomb throwing or salt-in-the-wound posting on the internets. doesn't win any arguments -- and wins even fewer friends.
in the meantime, sherrod is doing a pretty good job introducing himself to the non-netroots. i think part of the frustration with his all-trade-all-the-time discussion is that we already know him and know those issues. most ohioans don't. from a strategic perspective, i'm not sure it's a bad idea to find one issue and hammer it home for months.
I don't think it's that easy to fix
Submitted by AmberCat on Mon, 03/13/2006 - 10:42am.
and i think Brown lacks the will. The way he handled Hackett's withdrawal wasn't fatal in and of itself, but it as as an indicator of Brown's ineffectual modus operandi. Of course, Brown has the support of his rank-and-file (Dem and union activists), always has. From last October to mid-February, I was arguing with such people constantly about why Hackett might be a better candidate and they just thought Brown was unstoppable. The rank-and-file isn't the problem; the problem is the 90% of voters who aren't the Brown true believers.
In fact, Sherrod is doing a horrible job introducing himself to the "non-netroots" (where 99% of my time in politics is spent). Most of his meetings seem to be in front of the absolute convicted
I wish
Submitted by AmberCat on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 6:51pm.
instead of wearing blinders and making a bunch of excuses about why the polls are wrong, that Brown and his supproters would look at what they are doing and why they are maybe not reaching people. They could make some changes to improve their chances but
it sure is a strange way they look at things
Submitted by staff on Sun, 03/12/2006 - 7:58pm.
I'm curious to know what polling they think Brown is currently doing - if they think the last 2 are fantasy.
Name ID
Submitted by Alan Harvard on Mon, 03/13/2006 - 2:24am.
Amazing that only 9% of those polled don't have a rating for DeWine - that means he has GREAT Name ID.
"Amazing" is not the word . . . "Scary" is the word.
DeWine has the most Cash on Hand right now too.
Ya, where ya at Hackett?!
I really miss Hackett. I just wrote a diary in the new forum topic section how Brown is running away from cultural issues. His timidity may bite him in the butt in November...Hackett was never afraid.
Is this Senate race lost already?