The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer has won two Emmy awards for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq, and The Numbers blog was honored this year as winner of the 2008 Iowa Gallup Award for Excellent Journalism Using Polls.
ARCHIVES
SUBJECT INDEX
RECENT POSTS
- Views on the Terror Trials
- Sarah Palin: Rogue for President?
- Chasing Feathers
- Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
- Schwarzenegger's Nastygram: One in 10 Billion?
- Executive Pay? Cut Away
- Pols, Polls and Pushback
- On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
- Polling, Politics and Nobels
- The War in Afghanistan: Reassessment, Eight Years On
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
November 02, 2009 3:13 PM
While spinmeisters from both sides will do their best after tomorrow’s results are in, it's a dicey business to draw broad conclusions from state and local off-year elections. The turnout's different and the issues and candidates are idiosyncratic, meaning conclusions need to be hedged. Nonetheless there are themes worth watching – economic discontent chief among them, given its customarily awesome political power.
But first things first: Is tomorrow's voting a referendum on Barack Obama?
Pre-election data suggest that notion's a tough sell. Consider for example a Washington Post poll last week, in which likely voters in the Virginia governor’s race divided essentially evenly on whether they were voting in part to express support for Obama (14 percent) or opposition to him (15 percent); the rest – and most by far, 70 percent – said he wasn’t a factor in their vote one way or the other. In another, similar measure, 16 percent said it's better to have a governor from the same party as the president; 13 percent, from a different party – and 71 percent said this, too, made no difference.
Further, Obama held a 95 percent approval rating among Virginia likely voters who reported having voted for him a year ago. Fourteen percent of those '08 Obama voters told the Post they favored the Republican, Bob McDonnell, in this race – suggesting more a failure on the part of the Democratic nominee, Creigh Deeds, to win those voters, than a judgment on Obama in their preferences.
Among all likely voters in Virginia, 54 percent approved of the way Obama's handling his job overall; Deeds' 44 percent support further suggests that his challenges are more of his own making. Similarly, in the New Jersey governor's race, a Quinnipiac University poll found 55 percent approval for Obama among likely voters, again well over Democrat Jon Corzine’s own support. Among '08 Obama voters, 89 percent said they approve of his performance today; 7 percent disapproved.
I'm not seeing these kinds of data from the NY23 congressional race, in which the Republican nominee Dede Scozzafava has stepped aside and endorsed her Democratic opponent in the face of a strong challenge by Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman. The upstate district, formerly represented by Republican John McHugh, appointed by Obama as secretary of the Army, is an interesting one. On one hand Obama won it by 52-47 percent over John McCain a year ago. On the other, McHugh won it by a resounding 65-35 percent at the same time, and it's a district where registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats by a substantial margin, 12 percentage points.
In a district where median household income is $8,000 below the national figure, note the populist, throw-the-bums out content of Hoffman's statement after Scozzafava bailed yesterday: “It's time for us to send a message to Washington – we’re sick and tired of big-spending, high-taxing, career politicians and by voting for me on Tuesday you will send that message loud and clear.”
That cuts to what's likely the most important factor to watch in tomorrow’s races and beyond. With the possible exception of an unpopular war, there is no more consistently powerful force in election politics than economic discontent. It breeds broader disaffection that can be harnessed to the out party's (or even a third party's) advantage. It can damage incumbents more generally. And for 2010, it's what to watch.
We've seen the harm economic discontent can do to incumbent presidents and parties. It cost the first President Bush re-election in 1992, pushed his son to record-high disapproval a year ago and helped Obama to his election as president. We've also seen what it can do in off years; most pertinent is 1994, when, though the economy was slowly mending from the 1990-91 recession, 59 percent of voters in our exit poll said it still was in bad shape – and 62 percent of them voted for Republican candidates for Congress, lifting the GOP to a 52-seat gain and control for the first time in 42 years.
Soothsayers might note than in 1993, a year before that historic election, Republicans won in New Jersey – where Christine Whitman unseated incumbent Gov. Jim Florio – and in Virginia, where George Allen won an open but previously Democratic seat. That is what it is; for '10 tea leaves I'd look most closely at economic discontent, and the corrosive effect it can have on incumbents in general, and especially on the party in power.
November 2, 2009 | Permalink | User Comments (16)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
It will not be on Obama personally, but perhaps on the policies the dems, in general, have tried to implement.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | Nov 2, 2009 5:06:37 PM
You put a lot of stock in the Washington Post...just another Obama backer rag. I believe the election is a referendum against Socialism which is what Obama and the Democrats are trying to bring about!! WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF THESE CAREER POLITICIANS WHO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES WITH A REAL JOB, THINKING THAT THEY KNOW WHAT IS BETTER FOR US THAN WE DO OURSELVES!!!!!
Posted by: 1stLog | Nov 2, 2009 5:48:38 PM
WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF THESE CAREER POLITICIANS WHO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES WITH A REAL JOB, THINKING THAT THEY KNOW WHAT IS BETTER FOR US THAN WE DO OURSELVES!!!!!
Well cowboy then you give it a shot. I know one thing any person that had to live the last 8 years know what not being able to provide for there family. To have to go broke because there little girl had to have Cancer treatment and could not aford or even get coverage. Sick yes that is for sure. If any person could not provide for there family and voted Republican for eight years, well you got just what you voted for!
Posted by: Russ | Nov 2, 2009 6:18:33 PM
Pelosi's bill is only $300B over what she said last week and includes over 110 new Federal boards, panels, etc.. For what ?????????? This economy can not handle that overload?
Posted by: deanbob | Nov 2, 2009 7:09:59 PM
Our fast-food society has already forgotten what the last eight years have brought to this country. Is there any wonder these wingnuts support the repubs who rely on their ignorance and fear to win elections. Now they're even eating their own. Keep it up repubs and Dems - no matter what they do - will be in the driver's seat for quite some time. And I thought last year's race was a referendum on Obama. Guess since a Dem won they moved that referendum thing back to this year. What a joke!
Posted by: pamp205 | Nov 2, 2009 8:33:10 PM
Just as the 1994 election was a referendum on Bill Clinton and he turned out to be one of the best presidents USA has ever had. He left office with t he economy is good shape and surplus. Enough of this stupid talk of referendum. President Obama is a thoughtful leader and will lead the country to a very strong and sound footing. Let the press worry about referenda.
Posted by: Ndubueze Chuku | Nov 2, 2009 10:36:00 PM
Ist Log, I'm very sorry to hear about your little girl and your job situation. I know it absolutely tears you apart to have a sick child, I know, we have three sons, went through some things with them, but thankfully they're all grown and healthy now. The thing is, Obamacare, as written by Pelosi and Reid, will only provide imsurance to 10% of the uninsured, plus put 894 BILION more dollars of debt on future generations. Also would you prefer free health care or losing your freedom?
deanbob, It's past ime to be thinking about Dems and Repubs, but instead what's best for the Country, and running a once Great Nation into the ground by bankrupting it and subverting all the freedoms we have all enjoyed, isn't the way to go. It's time for people to come together, see past their Fathers' and Grandfathers' politics and do what's best to save our Country before it's to late.
I know I'll catch HELL for this, and it won't be the first time, buit it MAY be close to the last if our rights are continuosly taken away by a President whose greatest achievements are being a community organizer and an attorney for a corrupt organization to being a Senator from Illinois for a whole six months, then running for President the rest of his time in office, THEN, winning the Nobel Peace Prize for ----WHAT. He had only ben in office NINE DAYS before the Nobel Committee voted on his PRIZE.
I don't have all the answers by a long shot, otherwise my Wife and I wouldn't be in bankruptcy, right? But something has to be done to fix the system before it's too late, and I sure as Hell hope SOMEBODY has the answers before I end up in a Gulag.
Posted by: James Taylor | Nov 2, 2009 10:57:41 PM
Sorry deanbob, I meant to have pamp205 there.
Posted by: James Taylor | Nov 2, 2009 11:00:53 PM
I didn't mean to get anyone madder at me than they already are.
Posted by: James Taylor | Nov 2, 2009 11:06:00 PM
Obama has offered no real entitlement reform. Universal health-care proposal increase costs by $1 trillion or more, whereas Medicare/Medicaid reform is supposed to decrease costs.
Since Obama's budget projections show radical budget deficits over the next decade anyone with half a brain has to wonder what is Obama up to?
Why does not the media in the plethora of talk show appearances by Obama and his cronies not ask these questions? Can it be that the watchdog media is not such a watchdog at all?
Posted by: Ed Taylor | Nov 3, 2009 12:35:34 AM
It is interesting to read about the tactics the Dems are using in NJ - robocalls in favor of the Independent -
Do they have no shame? This is integrity???????????????????? I am sure glad I don't live in NJ - sleaziness at its best (or is it worst). Politics is an ugly business without people stooping to such disgusting tactics. Are the Dems so unsure of their positions / candidate that they need this kind of behavior to try to influence their constituents? Shameful.
Posted by: tired of it all | Nov 3, 2009 6:22:25 AM
This is most definitely a referendum on Obama. Obama was a great campaigner but is a horrible leader. He talked about sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows and made everyone feel good during his campaign. Funny how people forget he rarely voted anything but "present". Funny how dems scoffed at his inexperience. Funny how dems were so anti-Bush they couldn't see the guy was an empty suit. It's a good thing we've only got three years left of Obama's dithering and indecisiveness.
Posted by: afkbrad | Nov 3, 2009 9:04:59 AM
To James Taylor. James people like me (and there are many more like me than your simple mind can understand)aren't "mad" at you. We are just disappointed in your inability to understand how rich conservative lobbyists and politicians have turned you against yourself and the rest of your fellow middle class citizens. Would you prefer health care or losing your freedom..???" What planet are you on to even make a ridiculous comparison like that. I do know one thing from the turmoil we have seen in politics over the last nine months. As long as ther are small, naive and not very intelligent monds around, the rich conservative "haves" will be always be able to effectively combat needed progressive changes. And one other thing, the analogy you used with fathers and grandfathers "political logic'? That only applies to the conservative minds that do not know how to think for themselves. The rest of us know how to do that for ourselves.
Posted by: CND FOX | Nov 3, 2009 2:36:53 PM
Barack Obama is our leader but he forgot.
We the people are 80% Christian mostly white at times gullible but quick to obey our commanders in the field of
battle especially when we are at war. As "President" all our eyes are upon you, no jobs? not a Christian nation? Too
much bailouts? and most importantly no troops? are you a man-child?
James E. from Alabama
Posted by: James E Reeves | Nov 4, 2009 9:28:45 AM
I may be a member of AARP but I DO NOT agree with your stand on the health care issue? I DO NOT want the government telling me what I can do or not do in my personal health care. How can you go along with Mrs. Pelosi and her trying to herd us all into one plan and let the government take over.
Posted by: B J Schmidt | Nov 5, 2009 9:35:09 PM
The election results are not a referendum on President Obama's abilities, success, or perception. It is not a failure of the Democrats or a success caused by any Republican work. What hasn't been said anywhere I have read or watched is that it was not "cool" to vote for white guys in 2009. Many Democrats rode in on Obama's coat tails and not because people thought the Democrat Governors were the best choice. The people that put Obama in the White House also stand outside in 30 degree below zero temperatures at Best Buy to get the new Playstation. They want to say, "I voted for the first black President of the United States." If another black candidate ran, not as many people will be so excited to vote for her or him. Voting was cool then, but not now.
Posted by: mollmaguire13 | Nov 11, 2009 1:09:58 PM
Post a comment
