A new poll just released by UMass-Amherst shows that Elizabeth Warren has continued to gather strength and is now slightly ahead of Scott Brown. The poll shows Warren with 43% of the vote to Brown’s 39%, a 4% lead that is barely inside the poll’s margin of error of +/- 4.4%. According to the pollster:
“These numbers could mean trouble for Scott Brown,” Schaffner says. “The race is a dead heat and his support is well under 50 percent, which usually means difficulty for an incumbent, especially this far out from Election Day.”
That is an excellent point. Even more critical than the horserace numbers at this stage is the fact that Brown’s support is way, way below 50%. For a known quantity like Brown, that portends a very tough race. Another key fact is that Brown’s lead among unenrolled voters is only 18 points, at 49-31, with 15% unsure. That may sound impressive, but once you remember that Brown absolutely crushed Martha Coakley among unenrolled voters 65-35, or by 30 points, it becomes clear that it’s not nearly good enough.
In related news, the poll finds Warren with 73% of the vote in the Democratic primary, against 7% for Tom Conroy and 6% for Marisa DeFranco.
One especially awesome feature of this poll – you can view the full results here (PDF) – is that they asked what word the respondents thought best described Warren and Brown and generated a little word cloud for each. Here they are – first Warren, then Brown (click for larger images).
The full release from UMass is on the flip.
In High-Profile Matchup, UMass Amherst Poll Finds Elizabeth Warren in Dead Heat with Incumbent Sen. Scott Brown
Dec. 1, 2011
Contact: Ed Blaguszewski
413/545-0444AMHERST, Mass. – A political poll conducted by the University of Massachusetts Amherst finds that Elizabeth Warren, the leading Democrat in the field of challengers to incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, is running even or perhaps ahead of Brown in a potential matchup next fall.
Warren leads Brown by 4 points among registered voters in the UMass Amherst Poll, 43 percent to 39 percent, the difference being within the 4.4 percent margin of error, say UMass Amherst political scientists Brian Schaffner and Ray La Raja. The poll finds Warren is drawing strong support from women, middle-to-low income residents and younger voters. Brown maintains a large lead among Independent voters while Warren is getting overwhelming support from Democratic voters in Massachusetts.
“These numbers could mean trouble for Scott Brown,” Schaffner says. “The race is a dead heat and his support is well under 50 percent, which usually means difficulty for an incumbent, especially this far out from Election Day.”
The new poll, part of the iSurvey Project at UMass Amherst, is run by Director Schaffner and Associate Director La Raja, both associate professors of political science. The project is committed to studying public opinion in Massachusetts and the United States to inform policy making in the Commonwealth and beyond. This initial round of polling, done between Nov. 9 and Nov. 22, reflects the views of a sample of 500 adults in Massachusetts. The survey was conducted by YouGov America (http://yougov.com). Schaffner’s research focuses on public opinion and campaigns and elections, and he is a contributor to the award-winning political site Pollster.com. La Raja’s research focuses on American political parties, interest groups, elections and money in politics.
Detailed results of the poll can be downloaded atwww.umass.edu/newsoffice/images/upload/UMass%20Poll%20detailed%20results_0.pdf.
A key group in the election will be Independent voters. Here, Brown’s lead remains substantial with Independents favoring him by 18 points, 49 percent to 31 percent However, 15 percent of Independents remain undecided, which means there is substantial room for change.
Schaffner says, “Because of the advantage Democrats hold in this state, Republicans must dominate the independent vote to win. Brown’s 18-point edge among Independents is impressive and similar to what Republican gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker enjoyed in 2010, but that edge was not large enough to push Baker to victory.”
Brown’s support is higher by 6 points among those making more than $100,000 (42 percent for Warren vs. 48 percent for Brown). Warren’s candidacy appears to resonate strongly among lower and middle class voters. Respondents earning $40,000-$100,000 support Warren by 11 points (48 percent to 37 percent), while those making less than $40,000 support her by of 15 points (42 percent to 27 percent).
La Raja says, “Warren’s populist campaign is clearly winning her points among the working and middle class. But it is not clear that outrage against Wall Street will win the day in a state that relies heavily on the financial industry.”
Warren’s chief strengths are among women, middle-to-low income residents and young voters, the poll finds. Women favor Warren over Brown by 15 points (46 percent to 31 percent), while Brown holds the edge among men by 6 points (40 percent for Warren compared to 46 percent for Brown). A large number of women, 20 percent, remain undecided, while only 9 percent of men have not made up their minds.
The survey does suggest some potential areas of weakness for Warren’s candidacy. When asked to describe the candidates in a single word, two of the three most common words used to describe Warren were “liberal” and “socialist” while the most common word used to describe Senator Brown was “moderate.” Schaffner says, “If Brown can solidify his position as the moderate in this race while painting Warren as too liberal, he has a good chance of winning re-election.”
Brown gained office by winning a special election two years ago against Martha Coakley, the Massachusetts Attorney General. Among voters who voted in that election, the ground has shifted somewhat toward the presumptive Democratic nominee. Twelve percent of voters who voted for Brown said they would vote for Warren or someone else in 2012, while only 4 percent of those who voted for Coakley said they would vote for Brown or someone else.
With respect to geography, Warren’s strongest areas of support are in the western parts of the state and Boston area. In Western Massachusetts she leads Brown by 21 points (46 percent to 25 percent) and by 7 points in the Boston area (46 percent to 39 percent). Brown, in contrast, is stronger in regions that are dense with Independent voters, including Central Massachusetts, which extends from Worcester to the outlying Boston area. There he has a 13-point advantage among voters (48 percent to 35 percent). The candidates are virtually tied in the southeastern part of the state with 41 percent of voters favoring Brown and 38 percent favoring Warren.
For Warren to face Brown next November, she must win the Democratic primary in 2012, and she currently holds a wide lead in that race. Among likely Democratic primary voters, Warren is the overwhelming favorite, with 73 percent of likely Democratic primary voters saying they would vote for Warren if the primary were held today. This compares to just 7 percent for Thomas Conroy, 6 percent for Marisa DeFranco and 2 percent for Herb Robinson.
The poll also assessed the job performance of state and national officeholders.
• While Massachusetts citizens generally do not see things going in the right direction, they are more negative about how things are going in the country than they are about the Commonwealth. Only 13 percent see things in the country as headed in the right direction, compared to 71 percent who think the country is off on the wrong track. A total of 32 percent see things in Massachusetts as headed in the right direction, and 52 percent see Massachusetts as off on the wrong track.
• A total of 49 percent of Massachusetts adults approve of the job President Barack Obama is doing while 48 percent disapprove. Gov. Deval Patrick’s approval ratings are similar: 47 percent approve while 45 percent disapprove. Just 37 percent of Massachusetts adults approve of the job Sen. Brown is doing while 49 percent disapprove.
• Disapproval of the Massachusetts Legislature is high, but not nearly as high as it is for Congress. A total of 28 percent approve of the job the Massachusetts Legislature is doing compared to 56 percent who disapprove. Meanwhile, just 12 percent of Massachusetts citizens approve of Congress while 79 percent disapprove.
stomv says
The nominating convention caucuses aren’t too far away, and if Warren keeps her opponents (TConroy, MDeFranco) under 15% each, they don’t get to be on the primary ballot, as they won’t have a minimum threshold of support.
That will allow her to focus on Scott Brown, who’ll be targeting her the whole time anyway.
Mark L. Bail says
she’s been to Western Mass. She’s talked to the people who will be drumming up support for her. It’s good politics to contact town committees and I expect we’ll be contacted, but no one out here in Western Mass has even heard of the other candidates. I’m not exaggerating. Most of us don’t get the Boston area papers or Boston area new, so the also rans are also unknowns.
thinkliberally says
…if her opponents can’t get 10,000 signatures. Think Grace Ross.
Besides, I find it hard to believe that she really is worried about that. She’s at 70% in the primary poll. What possible benefit does she get keeping anyone off the ballot? How much time do you think she’s going to spend worrying about Conroy and DeFranco, ballot or no?
Your larger point about her getting out on the campaign trail and being more visible around the state is a good one, however.
Christopher says
The word liberal is huge, which may be OK, but socialist is pretty big as well. On Sen. Brown’s cloud the biggest word is moderate. Looks like there is still work to be done on the contrasts.
MassMinister says
I was just thinking the same thing.
Although, once Warren, and others, turn the microscope on Brown’s record, that moderate association should shrink. The question for me is: how much?
Additionally, what narrative will the Brown campaign pick up on? We all know they were probably always going to go with the “she’s a liberal elitist” route, but now we see that argument might be that much easier to make.
I’m also wondering, which narratives have been more effective in MA elections? The “I’m a (good attribute)” or “They’re a (bad attribute)”? Which do you see gaining traction this cycle?
David says
But if you look at the actual numbers on the word cloud, it’s much less worrisome. Out of the 296 people who offered a word about Warren, only 18 called her a “socialist” – and almost certainly those 18 were among the 169 who said they preferred Brown to Warren in the general election. I find the word clouds entertaining, which is why I put them in the post, but I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in them.
mannygoldstein says
And I don’t think the Repubs have an appetite for pushing Capitalism vs. Socialism, per Frank Luntz.
Once folks who described Brown as a “moderate” realize that within the barn coat lies a fringe-right savage, Warren will have new supporters.
mannygoldstein says
http://thinkprogress.org/special/2011/12/01/379365/frank-luntz-occupy-wall-street/
Mark L. Bail says
can’t exactly how that would happen, but he’s in trouble. Bear in mind, Elizabeth Warren has a nominal lead without even campaigning.
He’s got two problems: 1) he’s a Republican running for statewide office in a state where 36% of the population are registered Democrats. Spot Warren 35% of the vote and all she needs to take is 16% of independent voters to win.
2) The guy’s really, really shallow, hasn’t accomplished anything, and isn’t in danger of doing so. Warren is really, really smart. She’s good at explaining things. She’s already accomplished things.
Brown’s best quality is that he’s relatively unobjectionable, and no one has really paid much attention to him. Without even trying, Warren is going to make Brown look like the shallow (I’m trying to be nice) guy he is. And when he gets lumped in with the national GOP, he’s going to start looking less moderate and more part of the problem. Brown got elected for who he wasn’t, not who he was. In our political and economic climate, that’s not much to offer voters.
mski011 says
By support I mean that new PAC ad which just flashes pictures of Brown with the word independent. They are especially laughable in Western Mass, where his support was weaker than statewide generally (he still won towns he shouldn’t have, however). The sad thing is that the Pro-Brown PACs can’t even tout anything he’s done. They have to stick to vague claims of independence and how he’s working to create jobs (how?) a common refrain Brown himself likes to tout, with nothing to show. Excuse me, if we just junk air and water pollution controls we’ll be back to full employment within minutes.
I’m sure it will get nastier and sharper, but frankly at this point the dueling PAC ads for and against Brown don’t ad any substance to him (except maybe in the negative direction thanks to Rethink) and Crossroads? Well, let’s just say the worst thing it did was give Warren a way to raise money. I don’t think Brown is raising money off of Warren’s introduction ad, except from people who already supported him. [cough] Wall Street!
long2024 says
The incumbent 50% rule is a myth. See http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/myth-of-incumbent-50-rule.html
The fact that Brown is under 50% does not, in itself, bode poorly for him. However, the fact that he’s losing to Warren by 4% does.
oceandreams says
I do not consider a 4 point lead with a 4.4% margin of error a “dead heat.” Yes, the lead is within margin of error and that means you can’t be confident who’s actually ahead. However, that’s NOT the same thing as a “dead heat.”
What a 4% margin of error means is that the actual level of support for Warren is probably between 39% and 47% (I’m rounding here) and the actual level of support for Brown is likely somewhere between 35% and 43%. Within that spread, there’s a reasonable chance that Brown is actually ahead; but I wouldn’t say it’s the same probability as Warren being ahead.
oceandreams says
A more scholarly explanation of why this race is not a “dead heat”
http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/4/292.pdf
This actually discusses the case of a 4-point lead within a 4% margin of error and concludes there’s a 98% chance that the one with the 4 point lead is indeed actually ahead. Is that really a “statistical dead heat?” No.
David says
“Statistical dead heat” is really a meaningless term used by lazy journalists who don’t understand statistics, and by political types who find it a useful form of spin. (And I confess I have occasionally fallen into the latter category!) We delved into this subject some years ago in this post. In fact, the odds are very high that, right now, Elizabeth Warren is actually ahead of Scott Brown.
retired-veteran says
The poll numbers seem to be on the liberal side. Once the campaign really starts, Warren will have to defend her statements. Her numbers will change. Sen. Brown will take off the gloves during the campaign. Warrens support for the middle class comes down to supporting the special interest of the unions.
Warren’s attack today on Brown and Wall Street will back fire when Warren is forced to open her income tax filings to the public and we, the voters, will get a chance to see her Wall Street stock holdings. Then who is beholding to Wall Street? Scott Brown will win the election. The machine is in place all over the state and when the call comes to start your engines, you will hear the roar once again. Especially from Veterans.
oceandreams says
but disagree on the direction. Expect they’ll go up. She’s got a lot of room to increase her support among Democrats who don’t know her yet, since 14% say they’re not sure. Meanwhile, Scott Brown already has the support of pretty much all the Republicans he can get, while his support among independents is way lower than it was when he won two years ago (now that they know more about him). I’m curious how many incumbents have been re-elected with support less than 40% when they have such a disadvantage in party registration. I suspect not many.
stomv says
EWarren’s two brothers are vets. She comes from a military family. She’s not shy about telling those stories, nor is she embarrassed or ashamed of her family’s long time commitment to serving in uniform.
Oh, and nobody can force her to disclose her income tax filings, and even if she does, that doesn’t mean you’ll see the stock she owns since [in general] only sales of stock in a given year show up in the tax filings.
stomv says
all military.
David says
Retired-vet is engaging in wishful thinking that is likely to lead to disappointment. Warren is unlikely to make her tax returns public (few Senate candidates do), nor is she likely to disclose details about her stock holdings, whatever they may be. I’d venture that the likelihood that she’s secretly a big shareholder in Goldman Sachs is quite remote, but anything’s possible.
As for “the machine” being in place all over the state, I’d agree with that, but not in the way Mr./Ms. Retired thinks. The reality is that John Walsh and the Mass Dems put together an astonishing GOTV machine in 2010, and with a presidential race atop the 2012 ballot, that machine is likely to be even more effective this time around.
michaelhoran says
Oh, I wouldn’t worry too much about the liberal-socialist tags. Ms Warren will have no problem portraying herself as the all-too-moderate centrist, somewhat sorta-liberal that she apparently is, cut from cloth not dissimilar from that of the President. I have no doubt but that she’ll march in lockstep with him. Hooray.
Meanwhile, the most progressive candidate in the race has just relaunched her website. I gave Marisa De Franco the win in Lowell (and wasn’t a supporter of hers at the time) and I’m looking forward to another strong performance on Tuesday. Yeah, I could jump on the bandwagon too. But I’m getting a bit old to back winners who simply don’t believe as I do. Better to get crushed early on than be dispirited later.
I need authenticity. An unscripted candidate who doesn’t mince words during a campaign to win over the center. I am Occupy, and watching Mayor Menino’s legions stealing the sink from Occupy Boston tonight reminds me again of Ms Warren’s oft-repeated words when it comes to her “support” for Occupy: “They have to obey the law!” They HAVE been obeying the damn law, Ms Warren. But you’ve stayed silent when your own university was under lockdown, and you haven’t said a word in support since your statement about being the godmother of OWS backfired. Meanwhile the harassment and the raids go on. No comment? I understand. Too well.
This tells me everything I need to know about what kind of Senator she”s likely to be. And you’re all pleased that she can tout her hawkishness? Great.
As far as “beholden to Wall St,” I’m pretty sure first place goes to Charlie Schumer. That would be the gentleman last seen convincing Ms Warren to run. BUt I suppose I shouldn’t draw any conclusions from that.
Yeah, I’m a bit bitter tonight. Occupy gets a respite in court today, and a Democratic mayor retaliates by stealing the damn sink (brought in to in good faith to try to adhere to the health code “violations!”)–and, as I’ve just this moment learned, a cop assaults Eric, whose sterling performance in court today I was just praising a few hours ago in another Comment. Scratch “a bit bitter.” Insert “steaming.” And our elected officials, and our candidates? Silent. Add: “sold out.”
Not Marisa. She’s won my trust. And as her website (see “Issues”) makes clear, she’s not shy about her progressive take on the issues.
BTW, it’s great to have a champion, but the middle and upper aren’t the only classes. I know, they’re the only ones capable of making those substantial donations. I see a lotta lip service paid to Occupy. And that’s all it is.
jconway says
This is definitely a good start, I would also be interested to compare these numbers to the President’s nationally and statewide, and I would say that Warren is running ahead of the GOP and Brown is probably running significantly below. 2012 will be a referendum on all incumbents, and I suspect that there will be less ticket splitting this time around since Brown has shown his stripes, as my dad would say, as an “empty shirt” who does very little, and Warren is quite impressive to a wide swath of potential voters. It will be a real knock out and drag out fight, but Brown will have to really go on the attack against Warren and I am not sure how that will vibe with the direction of the state vis a vis Obama cruising to a win here. Mediocre quantities rise and sink with the tide, case in point Specter and Lincoln losing last time around, Coakley too. Brown will sink as the tide statewide turns blue, against Wall Street, and in favor of creating jobs which Brown voted against.
answer-guy says
Obviously a higher margin for error than the poll as a whole, but I like what I see here.
The thing that jumps out at me most is that Scott Brown isn’t even clearing 50% support among male voters, >$100K voters, Central Mass voters, self-identified moderate voters, or unenrolled voters. I would venture that he won all of those groups handily last time around; every truly competitive Republican statewide candidate does.
Mark L. Bail says
respondents–thus the higher margin for error. I’m glad my alma mater a few times over is doing a poll.
Brown’s in trouble.
merrimackguy says
I’m sure we’ll all be sick of the ads when it’s over.
A lot will ride on Democratic turnout and how unenrolleds feel about Obama.
Warren will need the urban part of the 36% to turn out (we’ll see), and she needs to hope that independants who register an anti-Obama vote don’t check Brown afterwards at a rate greater than a 2:1.