The CBS4/Boston Globe poll released today has some interesting numbers for the LG race:
Deborah Goldberg, the former chairwoman of the Brookline Board of Selectmen, received 26 percent support in the survey; Tim Murray, the mayor of Worcester, 20 percent; and business consultant Andrea Silbert, 18 percent. Twenty-seven percent are undecided.
But among those who say they will definitely vote, the race tightens. Goldberg and Murray both get 27 percent, and Silbert gets 16 percent. The margin of error for those 300 likely voters in the sample is about 5.5 percent.
I’m a little surprised by this. I know, Goldberg has tons of money. But why isn’t Silbert getting more traction, especially among the generally more left-leaning types who will definitely vote, and who you’d think would be her base? Theories? Is it just that this race is so far below radar that only the real junkies even know who Andrea Silbert is?
UPDATE: Alert blogger Jim Conley at On Brookline noted a slip-up in the Globe poll’s LG questions: they identified Deb Goldberg as “former chairwoman of the Brookline Board of Education,” rather than the Board of Selectmen. Anyone think that might have influenced the results?
A few things about these numbers surprise me. I too am surprised that Andrea is not gaining more significantly — her message and business credentials should have a broad appeal. I suppose we’ll have to see if she indeed does place third or if she is just flying under the radar. I’m guessing (and hoping) that progressives and others will think “the jobs candidate” when in the election booth.
<
p>
The most surprising bit of this is Murray’s numbers. So many of his supporters claim to have an unprecidented field campaign for a down ballot race. Either I don’t see it or a field campaign is not the way to win a down ballot race. For him to be in a statistical dead heat with Andrea for second place means that he just isn’t gaining much traction. So much for Murray’s super field operation — field just doesn’t cut it in a race when nobody pays attention.
<
p>
I bet he shocks us all and places third.
The numbers on the latest poll are very suprising. First, the latest poll reveals no margin of error, when the margin of error for the more high profile governers race is at 4.4% in the same poll, chances are the margin of error for the LG poll is higher, placing Murray and Goldberg in a more likely statistical dead heat, which is reflected in the poll of likely voters. Secondly, as any undergraduate political science student can inform you, primary races usually have extremely inaccurate poll results. Take for example the GOP Senate Primary in RI where Lincoln Chaffey who was down by as much as 12% in the polls won by 7%.
<
p>
Where Murray has the advantage is that his appeal reaches past 128. Murray has been working extremely hard to gain greater support in the 128 belt. He has received the endorsement of the Boston Globe and has made his presence known. The much forgotten residents of Massachusetts outside of 128 are more likely to have heard of Murray on election day, and due to the lack of attention this race has received, that is an extremely powerful advantage.
<
p>
Most importantly primaries, especially on this scale are about turnout. Support within Boston and Metrowest will most likely be split between Silbert and Goldberg with Murray still on the radar. But in Central and Western Mass, Murray is most likely to carry the vote. If the voters in those areas make it to the polls, the race is Timmy’s and with his field team, this is likely to happen. Small primaries ARE turnout and polls tend to lie. The edge goes to the man who is putting people out on the pavement.
In reading all the pro Deval postings (and believe me I am very pro Deval) there is the underlying message of without Tim Murray he can’t make it to the corner office to justify the Well Ur Um I like Andera, shes got what it takes BUT!! Deval needs Murray to win. With a 24 point lead for Deval it is time to get out of your head and back into your passion and get on board with the idea of Patrick/Silbert riding all the way to Beacon Hill. We need a woman on the ticket to beat Kerry Healy and it should not be another millionare dumping personal wealth into a campaign or a professinal politician (however charming) but someone who has been in the trenchs fighting for the other end of the economic scale. Go Andrea!!
Please coordinate your talking points with Hoss. He started out the campaign wondering why we would waste time on “field”, as it would not amount to much. He now talks about Silbert’s “field” organization matching Murray’s. Note the cross-tabs from the Globe poll in Central Mass, and understand why the Murray folks are comfortable with the strategy we picked at the beginning.
It’s a statistical dead heat – noone is pulling away in this race.
that a woman who has spent $2.5 Million already has been unable to pull away from Tim Murray …she has outspent and out advertised 3 to 1, but Tim is still holding her in a dead heat…I think that is AMAZING…(and I’m heartened to see that you may not be able to purchase a constitutional office, afterall)…she has flooded voters with expensive ads and should be 20 points up…guess they looked but did not buy…
<
p>
Think about it…
Patrick/Goldberg…Healey/Hillman’s Dream Ticket…
Patrick/Murray, Healey/Hillman’s Nightmare
<
p>
But people really ought to consider November when they vote on Tuesday. A Patrick/Goldberg ticket absolutely loses in November.
<
p>
Is the operative term. This was a survey of 300 people, with a margin of error of 5.5% for the LGs. Polls like this, especially in a low-profile race, are extremely dependent on adjustments made by the pollsters to bring the survey population in line with their assessment of the statistical profile of the larger community.
<
p>
I do think the observation above that Goldberg hasn’t opened a definitive lead despite her huge spending is testimony to her weaknesses and the strengths of her rivals. It’ll be interesting to see if there are any unexpected developments as we hit crunch time. For example, might Patrick endorse one of the candidates, especially if he agrees with some of the commenters that a particular matchup would be “death” to his chances in November, should he win the primary. I doubt he agrees that even Goldberg would be a mortal blow to his chances, so I doubt he would take such a risk, but who knows.
The survey has a major flaw: http://www.onbrookline.com
Spend lots of money, not get the bang for the buck. I guess by identifying Goldberg as being chair of the Board of Ed, someone will say it’s no different than her claims about her tenure in Brookline. Look, if municipal experience is the prime factor for anyone deciding, Murray would be head and shoulders above Goldberg. That said, is it not mine. I believe Silbert brings to the table success in economic development that dovetails well with the Patrick campaign.
This thing is neck and neck all the way. We’ll see the benefit of the field work on Tuesday. It looks like a good 20 percent of voters could make up their mind on the way into the polls.
<
p>
Don’t forget the Murray numbers when it’s expressed in terms of those most likely to vote, he’s essentially tied with Goldberg. Her ads, though pretty good, haven’t given her much traction in this thing to pull away.
<
p>
Silbert, despite the dedicated cheering section here on BMG, is languishing in third.
<
p>
The math still favors Murray. This isn’t all about Harvard degrees and bundles of money. Murray appeals to everyone, especially those west of 128 who want someone in Boston that knows the state doesn’t end at the Weston tolls.