A State House source called my attention to this new poll conducted by UMass between Sept. 19 and 27 (methodology is here; most results are +/- 5%). Here are some key numbers:
Regarding the proposed 2008 ballot question that would ban gay marriage: 40% are either "very" or "somewhat" likely to support it; 56% are either "not very" or "not at all" likely to support it.
Favorable/unfavorable ratings for various Gov candidates (these numbers combine the results for "very" and "somewhat" into "favorable," and "not very" and "not at all" into "unfavorable"):
Romney: 52 fav/47 unfav/2 don’t know (but 55% say it’s "time for a change" of Governor);
Healey: 49 fav/31 unfav/21 don’t know
Mihos: 28 fav/13 unfav/60 don’t know
Rappaport: 32 fav/23 unfav/45 don’t know
Reilly: 56 fav/22 unfav/24 don’t know
Patrick: 24 fav/13 unfav/64 don’t know
Galvin: 51 fav/17 unfav/33 don’t know
Head to head matchups:
Romney 38 – Reilly 53 (don’t know 9)
Romney 42 – Patrick 37 (don’t know 21)
Romney 42 – Galvin 46 (don’t know 13)
Healey 28 – Reilly 53 (don’t know 19)
Healey 34 – Patrick 37 (don’t know 29)
Healey 33 – Galvin 46 (don’t know 21)
A three-way hypothetical race among Healey (R), Reilly (D), and Mihos (Ind.) gives the very interesting split of 22-47-13, meaning that Mihos siphons off almost exactly the same number of voters from Healey and from Reilly.
It is good news that, at least right now, the gay marriage ban appears to be struggling, although early polling on ballot questions is notoriously unreliable. And it’s good news for Dems that Tom Reilly’s "favorable" rating remains high and that he continues to trounce all comers in hypothetical Gov race matchups. However, these numbers strike me as very disappointing for Deval Patrick. The percentage of voters who don’t know enough about him to answer the favorable/unfavorable question remains astronomical at 64%; he is the only Democrat who loses in a hypothetical race to Romney; and he barely beats Kerry Healey with a "don’t know" number so high for that race that the result seems meaningless. In fact, he consistently does less well than Bill Galvin who hasn’t even said he’s in the race yet. And here’s another less-than-encouraging number: the polling includes results from the last survey taken in June. In the Romney-Reilly matchup, Reilly’s improvement (6%) is about the same as the decline in undecideds (5%), while Romney is static (actually losing a point), indicating that voters are moving the right way in that matchup. However, in the Romney-Patrick matchup, both candidates have gained 3% since June, indicating that the undecideds are breaking evenly. If it continues, that is a very bad trend for Patrick.
For a while, it was fine for Patrick to say that he is a relative unknown, that he hasn’t been involved in MA politics before, and that therefore people need some time to get to know him. But with recent reports of his campaign’s financial difficulties and with little apparent movement in his poll numbers, it seems fair to start wondering aloud whether his campaign is gaining any traction outside the small circle of activist/progressive types who are the core of his campaign.
I still think you’re jumping the gun on Deval Patrick’s lack of public recognition. He’s got plenty of time.Money, for me, is a bigger concern. Can he raise enough money to raise his persona above unknown? A few great commercials and some Boston Globe articles and he’d go a long way. That could happen at any time.
I have to say I agree that it’s way too soon to get worked up about Deval’s status as an unknown. How many times has he been on a front page story of any newspaper? In the Globe, mostly he’s relegated to B2 or worse. Nobody’s focussed on a primary that’s a year out, esp. when the media are too fascinated in whether the current governor might run for the White House.Locally, political activities are all focussed on the local and mayor’s races. Next year, I think the Democratic convention is going to be a huge coming-out party for Deval. And until then, I think he’d be foolish to start buying air time. He’s not going to have major media outlets giving him strong play, and his unknowns will remain high. Even some of my most politically active liberal friends still don’t know anything about Deval, because there’s just been no breaking news on him.I certainly can see why there’s cause to raise an eyebrow, but there is only one progressive candidate running for governor next year, and he’s going to win over a lot of people once they see him speak and hear him over the air.Have patience.
I agree that it’s far too early to worry about poll numbers. Only the political buffs like us are really paying attention right now. What amazes me is that, once people do have a chance to hear about Deval Patrick (or better yet, meet him in person), they almost inevitably are intrigued by his candidacy.The excitement about Mr. Patrick is broad-based: you have those wide-eyed college students who like his progressive stance, local community leaders who are interested in taking back the corner office through a grassroots campaign, and even heavy hitters like Barack Obama and Robert Reich. The more people learn about Mr. Patrick, the more they are convinced that he’s the best choice for our state. I remain optimistic that many people will learn about him as the election enters the collective consciousness.
I think I have to agree with the post that linked name recognition and money. Also, I agree that no one is paying attention to the gubenatorial right now.No matter what, progressives should be happy to see that the Republican candidates are floundering worse than the White House trying to spin Bush’s decision to put a loyal bureaucratic hard worker on the highest Court in the land.
i was an early Patrick supporter who is terribly disappointed by his performance. I thought he was going to bring something different to the table and instead it is a bunch of tired ideas, wasting money and using the SAME OLD TIRED play book that has lost year in after year out. If the man can’t manage to raise enough money to survive this early he won’t be there later. Oh and i hate to break the bad news to all of you — the Democratic Convention is a non-event. June 3rd half the state will be on the Cape and the other half will be in Maine or New Hampshire. We need to appeal to the 51 % of our state that is unenrolled and BEGGING for a leader. I hate to admit it but Reilly had it right at the convention when he asked us all to go out and win those voters — Deval even started parroting him. I guess I am just frustrated and disappointed. It seems more now that the Patrick campaign is an exercise in vanity and nothing more. I like the guy but i feel ZERO connection any more to him or his campaign. And the poll only shows me that after spending $800,000 he can’t manage to move his numbers at all. I am sorry but i am not putting him in charge of the budget here in Massachusetts.
There’s a consensus forming in this thread that it might be too early to take much from this poll other than that the Republicans are in trouble. I agree.It’s worth pointing out that Obama faced some of the same challenges Patrick is facing now. At first Obama trailed his two competitors for the nomination, beacuse of lack of name recognition. I expect that like Obama, the more people learn, the more they’ll like Patrick. I think Obama and Patrick represent something new and exciting in Democratic politics. No wonder that, as Jumbo mentioned, Obama supports Patrick. I’d suggest that Dave W check out the series of position papers that Patrick is accumulating on his web site. He’s outlining a rich, detailed, and well-thought out vision for the state. At least, I think so. What’s tired is cautious establishment insiders. Isn’t the public’s distate for patronage politics one of the lessons we should take from the last race for governor?
I think you are overreacting to media reports, Dave W. The campaign is not in financial trouble. The campaign has had a pretty well-sized full-time staff with benefits since April. The campaign has out-earned Reilly in every month but one since they announced. And have you looked at any of Patrick’s ideas? Have you looked at his economic plan? His health care plan? His education plan? And you think Reilly would have the stones to say any of this? Reilly will run a campaign that basically is “I have more money, and I have political experience.” He’ll waffle in the middle, abandoning any sort of progressive ideals along the way. If that’s what you want from a governor, then you have a candidate.
why are we spending our time trying to destroy democratic candidates???mitt romney is running for president by bashing us. he is trying to destroy our state by pushing through a crappy health care plan and a careless tax cut in order to please south carolina conservatives. THAT IS THE ISSUE HERE! The democratic primary will sort itself out and we can worry about that in January 2006 when Romney is officially out. Right now – ONCE AGAIN! – we are fighting each other while the Republicans in this state glide into another election. After every election, democrats talk about how next time they are going to stick together. That lasts about 6 seconds. Let’s not worry about which Dem candidate for Governor has more money 13 months out and instead make the argument that MITT ROMNEY AND KERRY HEALEY ARE BAD FOR THE COMMONWEALTH. I repeat, MITT ROMNEY AND KERRY HEALEY ARE BAD FOR THE COMMONWEALTH.Why aren’t we talking about that?
I am with Deval Patrick. I think we are worried about Reilly when we should be concerned about Galvin. He has record, ability to raise money, naame recognition and is not Reilly. Many dems do not like Reilly and have nothing against Galvin.
RE: patronage politics. Yes, the public doesn’t like patronage politcs. But the insinuation being made here is that AG Reilly is being given the nomination. Was he given the position as Middlesex DA or as AG of the Commonwealth. I think not. Both were earned, and in both cases he did the office proud. I don’t see any patronage politics in announcing his intention to run and then trying to win. If you follow this logic, progressives could only nominate candidates who have never run for office before.Which bring me to my second point … the Obama – Patrick comparison. I’ve heard it before and dismissed it, but it seems to be picking up steam since the junior Senator from Illinois has given Patrick his backing. First, it’s unfair to compare anyone to Obama. His speech at the DNC, his tenor and tone since election, and his incredible post (a selection from a floor speech) at Daily Kos a few days back show him to be a progressive leader paralled by NONE at this point. Even if we were only looking at rhetoric, I would say there might be 1 or 2 other people on his level, and its a stretch to find them. Further, when Obama began his Senate race he had (1) a community base from his work as a civil rights lawyer in the community. Deval, as far as I know – and please correct me if I am wrong – has no such base in the community. His work has entirely been outside the commonwealth. (2) Obama’s race for the Senate was his 2nd race for major office. Prior, he had run for Congress against incumbent Democrat Rep. Bobby Rush for the seat representing the South side of Chicago, and was summarily defeated. This experience, I believe, helped shape the politician and leader Obama has become and will be for years. So while there are many connections on the personal level between Obama and Patrick, the connections on the political level are few and far between. Again, this isn’t to criticize Patrick, so much as to point out important differences. As for Galvin, is he running to be governor or to avoid running against Cameron Kerry for Secretary of State?It would be unfair to compare anyone to Obama, just as it’s unfair to label the AG a creature of “patronage politics.”
I agree that comparing Patrick to Obama is unfair to both. I have questions about whether it’s just too easy to say one black politician reminds everyone of another black pol. They are both progressive black Democrats, with a civil rights background, both appear relatively youthful, and both have a tremendously appealing ability to connect to voters through public speeches. But surface appearances aside, they are their own men, and I think the media and the public is way too quick to just tie people together based on a couple of similarities.As for uniting as Democrats, I think we united as Democrats behind O’Brien, and what did it get us? I’m not interested in just ANY Democrat being in corner office. Oh, I’ll probably vote for one of the other Dems if forced to. But I’m tired of having to hold my nose to vote for these mediocre Dems we keep putting forward?Dems who don’t share my values, Dems who can’t deliver a message, Dems who seem to run because it’s their turn, or who win the primary by default. I still can’t even believe that we managed to lose to Paul Cellucci? How did that happen?We’re a year away from the primary, and I’m waiting to see if Reilly has anything to say. He’s run a whisper campaign to the media now for months, trying to ruin Deval’s candidacy, trying to make this campaign all about money, and he’s got the contacts to make it effective. But when is he going to stand for something? Waiting until the last day and the certifying the anti-gay marriage ballot initiative? Enforcing the 1913 law? Opposing Cape Wind? When does the Democrat in Reilly show up?
I agree that it’s too early to take much from these poll numbers (except happiness over Romney and Healey’s general bad performance and the low numbers for the anti-gay ballot question!). I feel that right now, the most important things for Patrick to do are to continue laying out policy proposals, raise more money, and continue to seek endorsements from state legislators and local officials. If Patrick comes out of the 2006 caucuses with solid backing from many convention delegates, he should be safely in the mix. Also, keep in mind that whenever Romney announces that he isn’t running, it will create heightened media interest in the governor’s race. Patrick should use that interest to try to aggressively raise his profile in MA. If these poll numbers are similar in next April, I’ll be worried. For now, I’ll give the Patrick campaign time.
Just a quick question, I saw a press release where Patrick referred to the “Healthcare for All” plan as “my plan” … isn’t that a little well, ridiculous.And about policy proposals in general, how many times in the 2004 campaign did john Kerry or John Edwards talk about a great “plan” they had for this issue or that issue. Just something to for perspectives sake.
Just delurking for a second to ask a procedural question…Everyone on these blogs keep mentioning the caucus and the convention. Are these a big deal? Are all citizens allowed to take part? Is that why it’s going to be used as a “coming out party” for Deval?I apologize for sounding ignorant, but I’m a bit new to the process and I’m curious about why you all make it sound important and I’ve never heard of it.
Its fairly simple. In Jan or Feb of 06, every town in MA will hold party caucuses. The purpose of the caucuses is to elect delegates to the state party convention, which I believe is being held in May in 06. The main goal of the convention is to recommend a slate of candidates as the nominees of the Democratic party for the statewide offices. However, any candidate who gets 15% of the vote on the first ballot,(if I recall the current party rules properly) may also appear on the primary ballot. Party primary will be in September. The person who wins the convention usually, but not always, wins the primary as well. For example the first time Reilly ran for AG, Lois Pines won the convention, but Reilly came out ahead in the primary. So while the caucuses are an important test of strength of the various candidates, they are not determinative. Just one important step in a long process. Anyone who is a registered Dem by the end of December of this year may vote in the town caucus and is eligible to be elected as a delegate. So don’t wait to get registered as a Dem if you are not!I think thats the main stuff. Did I leave anything important out, anyone?
Regarding Ben’s comment about Patrick’s health care plan. While Patrick has endorsed Health for All, he also has his own plan.http://209.211.250.98/press_releases.cfm?ID=27 Here is the link to Patrick’s press release on the campaign web site.
Thanks for the clarification Frederick, it must not have been an official release I saw. I thought it was weird, and now I know why.Thanks again.
Was just reading through the comments and realized I missed one glaring thought, Friend of Deval’s said, “we should be concerned about Galvin. He has record, ability to raise money, name recognition” As far as I know (1) Galvin STILL hasn’t officially thrown his hat into the ring, why not? and (2) what’s the record? I’m not saying this facetiously, but seriously, what’s his record? When I think of Bill Gavlin, more so than Reilly, I think, “establishment pol” … yet somehow he flies under the radar and avoids the tag.
Galvin has used his office to the fullest extent via securities enforcement. Although a former state representative he has always been viewed as an outsider.
Just to add a bit of detail to what Fred provided, which was absolutely on the money:The town/ward caucuses are to be held on February 4 of next year. A town/ward committee may request (and is routinely granted) a postponement to a different date as long as it is held by February 12. To emphasize what Fred mentioned: you must be a registered Democrat [by 12/31] to participate in the caucuses (i.e. not “unenrolled”). This is different from primary elections, in which unenrolled voters may vote in the Democratic Primary. The nominating Convention will be held on June 2 and 3. As Fred suggests, “winning” the Convention is no guarantee of winning the Primary. Other than gaining a bit of exposure to the Party faithful, the only real benefit to coming in first is a mention in the papers the next day. Campaigns are won and lost in the media and on the ground, not at the Convention. That said, to the extent that Patrick (or any other candidate) can use the Convention to motivate hardcore activists to get out and do the work needed to canvass and call voters, it will be a net plus to the campaign. Still, if a campaign is relying on the Convention to create that buzz, it is probably too late. btw, if you haven’t seen my comments on the latest Zogby poll, check outhttp://www.mfw.us/goodnews-from-zogby