Poll update: Rasmussen has very different numbers

these numbers have Capuano only 15% back from Coakley (6.00 / 1)

two more weeks of 7.5% gains and we have a race on primary day.

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:05:18 PM CST

They also (5.00 / 1)

have Khazei only 7 points back from Capuano.  Not to rain on your parade ...  ;-)

---

by: David @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:13:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Khazei's ok. He's 22% back from Coakley. (6.00 / 1)

that's two weeks of 11% gains. I wouldn't rule it out.  Bottom line? Nobody has been paying attention to this race. Nobody.  

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:16:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Also of interest (0.00 / 0)

Add the two "favorable" and "unfavorable" numbers together and get (f/u)

Coakley---61%/30%

Capuano--62%/26%

Khazei----47%/31%

Pagliuca--49%/37%

I would not have figured Capuano as Mr. Congeniality in this race!

---

by: Trickle up @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:12:34 PM CST

Tough sell.. (6.00 / 2)

Capuano has better net favorables than Martha?  That surprises the snot out of me, and I frankly have trouble believing it.  I'd love to know what "other candidate" is being favored by one out of 20 voters.  KennedySeat has some other, er, confusing numbers.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:13:29 PM CST

Me too. (0.00 / 0)

Like I said in the post, I don't really believe the fav/unfav numbers.

---

by: David @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:16:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

why so surprising? (0.00 / 0)

They're both well-respect politicians. Why should anyone find it surprising that one has a higher favorability rating than the other -- if by the tiniest of margins.

I'm not going to say it isn't an outlier, right now it is, but it just may end up being right. Who knows?  

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.

---

by: Ryepower12 @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 01:21:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Because (0.00 / 0)

Capuano was a well-known politician among people who know politicians.  People in general didn't have a formed opinion of the Congressman, and his debate performances were aggressive enough to lead me to wonder what they'd do to his unfavorables.  

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 06:26:27 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Martha Coakley has, by far, better name recognition (0.00 / 0)

They're both well-respect politicians. Why should anyone find it surprising that one has a higher favorability rating than the other -- if by the tiniest of margins.

Coakley's number (probably) represent more people knowing about her, leading them to be more likely to have an opinion somewhere along the favorable/unfavorable spectrum.  

With less name recognition, Capuano's numbers (probably) represent a smaller group of people who have an opinion on that graph.  That smaller population can have fav/unfav in the same proportion as Coakley, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can extrapolate that towards truth.

For example (using grossly distorted numbers for illustration sake...): if you poll a hundred people and 75 people say they like Martha Coakley and 24 say they don't like her, then her rate is both true and representative.    The one person who doesn't know about her, and doesn't form an opinion, is a rounding error.  

If, however, of those same 100 people, only 4 said they knew about Capuano and 3 of the 4 said they liked him and 1 of the 4 said they didn't, then Capuano will have the same fav/unfav as Martha. 75%/25%, but it won't be either true or representative.    If you add one more person to the unfavorable column, then the ratio becomes 60%/40%.   With smaller populations, each individual contributes to a greater share of the outcome...

That's why name recognition is important: Capuano's numbers are likely muddled (by how much I have no way of knowing...) by lesser name recognition.  The same is probably true (or more true) for Pagliuca and Khazei.  

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 01:55:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I smell an "outlier" poll... (6.00 / 3)

I can buy a shrinking 15 point gap between martha and Mike (I think Martha wins by five points--a big win in most 4 people primaries, but will it be considered "razor thin"?).  But as much as I do like Khazei, he didn't shine in the only tv debate; he not only had a limited tv buy, but his tv message was also limiting--as discussed here.  I just don't see him tied with pags.  And you can have all the problems in the world with Fav/Unfav...but it doesn't explain how 78% of those polled have an opinion of Khazie, given his limited exposure...unless his 500 canvassers randomly knocked on the doors of those surveyed.

I just don't have confidence in that poll, given the other two that have been in the field.  Did Rasmussen poll this race before?

---

by: FrankSkeffington @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:51:42 PM CST

Yes, but (0.00 / 0)

at the time, the candidates were Coakley, Capuano, Lynch, Tierney, and Markey, IIRC.  Not all that helpful.

---

by: David @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 19:15:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Movement within a pollster's numbers.... (6.00 / 2)

Coakley's Globe poll numbers have been very consistent:

Candidate: Current (last week) {3 weeks ago}
Coakley: 43 (44) {42}
Capuano: 22 (16) {16}
Pagliuca: 15 (17) {15}
Khazei: 6 (3) {5}

This consistency, to me, is important. Maybe more important than differences from one pollster to another, especially when one drops in every couple of months. Determining "likely" voters in this case must be driving all (or at least both pollsters) nuts. We've never had an election like this at this time of year. More people are thinking about finding a tie for crazy Uncle Harry than thinking about this election.

This Rassmussen number also isn't very different than the last Rasmussen poll, way back in September. (Which was light years ago for this race, I admit.) And her favorables are still pretty good. And she's got statewide recognition and organization.

(Why Pags and Khazei have such low favorability numbers in the Rasmussen poll I don't understand. But that isn't good.)

The Globe does show Capuano picking up support over the three weeks, at least in the last week. In a longer race, with voters paying more attention, he might might have made a game of it. But, Thanksgiving starts the holiday season in earnest, and voter interest probably drops even further.

Average the Globe and Rasmussen polls and she's at about 40% and he's at 21%. I just don't see him gaining that much ground without something major happening; or him getting an early Christmas present.

Democrats protest war. Republicans protest healthcare.  

---

by: MedfieldBlueBob @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 19:29:29 PM CST

Crosstabs (6.00 / 1)

It's too bad that Rasmussen doesn't offer their crosstabs for free, because it would be interesting to compare to the Globe (and other) polls. I suspect that this isn't so much recent "movement" for one candidate or another as much as it is different assumptions about the likely voter screens. (Rasmussen had Coakley around her current support in its last poll of the race (38%) two-and-a-half months ago, though Capuano was only at 7% in the previous poll and at 21% now. But that was way back in September, so the comparison probably doesn't mean much).

If Rasmussen's likely voter assumptions are correct, then the other candidates probably have at least a small shot (though Pagliuca's numbers should be much higher given his blanket advertising). If the Globe's assumptions are correct, the race is likely over. It would be nice to see those crosstabs...

---

by: Hoyapaul @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 20:15:15 PM CST

very good point (6.00 / 1)

I actually discussed this on Today's LeftAhead. I would imagine it's very, very difficult to predict who turns out at a special election like this. Massachusetts has literally never had one like it before. This is one of those races that is far more likely than most others to have results that are unlike the polls, because of how difficult it would be to guess at what the turnout would be and who, exactly, will bother to turn out to begin with. Will certain segments of the populace be ramped up for a primary like this? Etc.  

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.

---

by: Ryepower12 @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 01:26:52 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I know (0.00 / 0)

The old adage is that the only poll that counts is on election day, but, I'm seriously believing that with this race.

While it's clear that Coakley is the definite front runner, I wouldn't be surprised by an Obama/Clinton NH result.

I'm not even sure to what degree we can trust any of these polls beyond Coakley being the front runner and Caps pulling up 2nd.

Proverbs 10:14

---

by: AlexSWill @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 20:24:14 PM CST

True in this race more than others... (0.00 / 0)

...because I suspect people saying they are "for" a candidate in any of these polls is no indication at all of who will actually get ID'd supporters to mosey on over to the polls and cast a vote.

By this measure, my hunch is that either Capuano --who has proven he can run a stellar election day operation-- and Khazei --who appears to be laying substantial GOTV groundwork for this very untraditional race-- will most defy the polls.

---

by: ThrobbingPatriot @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 22:56:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Or both! (0.00 / 0)

...in which case, advantage Coakley.

---

by: Trickle up @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 07:53:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Agreed (5.00 / 1)

I suspect Pagliuca's support is extremely soft, and wouldn't be surprised to see half of it vaporize in the next week.  If Cap gets most if it, we may have a real race.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 06:24:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Not Sure what to make of this race (0.00 / 0)

I'm not sure what to make of this race. If this was a general election and not a special I'd say Coakley would be safe with two weeks to go. But with so few people paying attention to this race how many will actually vote on the 8th?

I say no more than half a million and probably less. Whichever candidate has done the most grassroots work will win the race if that's the case.  

---

by: Suffolk Democrat @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 08:43:28 AM CST

other thoughts (6.00 / 1)

Assuming this poll is correct, and wishing we could see the crosstabs, a few brief thoughts.

Did Pagliuca's early tv buy get what it's going to get, and now  he's hit capacity? Interesting that he seems to be stable or even maybe slowly moving down over the last two weeks. Did the bad stories in the Herald and Globe make an impact? Has his stand that he'll vote for any health care bill whatsoever, even if that means far more restrictions on women's ability to have an abortion than the status quo hit people the wrong way? Did we just see evidence of just how much support tv can buy an unknown candidate?

Getting to within the teens is good news for Capuano, and having nearly-equal favorables to Coakley is also good, but 15 points in two weeks is a huge gap to fill, and no doubt there's bad news in this poll for Capuano too.

For all the Khazei supporters who have said to me "Alan Khazei's numbers are not the margin of difference between Coakley and Capuano..." well, now it may be. Congratulations. When you think about the opportunity to elect an actual progressive to the U.S. Senate, Khazei is now unofficially in the role of spoiler. To you, I make this pledge: Though I believe Capuano is far and away the best candidate in this race, if in the days before the election, I see believable evidence that Khazei has a better chance than Capuano of defeating Tom Reilly (err... I mean Martha Coakley), I will switch my vote. I hope you will consider the same.

Disclosure: I'm a supporter and volunteer for Mike Capuano.

---

by: thinkingliberally @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:51:12 PM CST

there is absolutely a diminishing return (0.00 / 0)

on money spent in politics, perhaps most particularly money spent on ads. Doug, you should have spent some of that ad money on door knockers and phone callers...

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.

---

by: Ryepower12 @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 21:28:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]