Veteran Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA) is locked in a tough Dem v. Dem election in California.
The marathon that is the election cycle is now drawing fairly close to the finishing kick, as we are now just three weeks away from Election Day 2014.
And one thing that many of us have long suspected is now becoming obvious: this is going to be a fairly thin cycle for polling, at least in terms of volume.
With just 21 polling days until Election Nerd Christmas, we are still only at roughly 1475 polls for the entire cycle to date. The dearth is most apparent in House polling, where there have been fewer than 200 polls released to date, more than half either by campaigns or by partisan sources electing to poll to satisfy their own curiosity. What this has meant, as a result, is that there are a number of races that are considered either tossups or bare leans to one party or another that have somehow, for the entirety of the cycle, gone completely unpolled.
Therefore, the lack of volume and the relatively partisan nature in House polling this cycle has left us with few tea leaves with which to assess the state of play in the lower chamber of Congress. Following the money has probably become the best way to know the lay of the land, but another little hint is watching for what I like to call "retaliatory strike" polls.
It has long been a "tell", in the eyes of most of us here in the fraternity of elections nerds, that an unanswered partisan poll is a half-hearted admission that said poll is close to the fairway. But there is a bit of an art to the counter-poll, a skill which we will explore after the jump, along with (gasp!) 82 polls which have dropped out of the sky since last Friday (Oct 10-13).
AK-Sen (Hickman Analytics--R): Dan Sullivan (R) 46, Sen. Mark Begich (D) 41
CO-Sen (SurveyUSA for High Point Univ.): Cory Gardner (R) 46, Sen. Mark Udall (D) 42
GA-Sen (Hickman Analytics--R): David Perdue (R) 41, Michelle Nunn (D) 39, Amanda Swafford (L) 6
GA-Sen (Landmark Communications--R): Michelle Nunn (D) 46, David Perdue (R) 46, Amanda Swafford (L) 4
IA-Sen (Rasmussen): Joni Ernst (R) 48, Bruce Braley (D) 45
IA-Sen (Selzer/Des Moines Register): Joni Ernst (R) 47, Bruce Braley (D) 46
KS-Sen (PPP--D): Greg Orman (I) 44, Sen. Pat Roberts (R) 41, Randall Batson (L) 5
LA-Sen-General (Hickman Analytics--R): Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) 39, Bill Cassidy (R) 29, Rob Maness (R) 6
LA-Sen-Runoff (Hickman Analytics--R): Bill Cassidy (R) 46, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) 45
MI-Sen (Mitchell Research--10/12): Gary Peters (D) 50, Terri Lynn Land (R) 39
MI-Sen (Mitchell Research--10/9): Gary Peters (D) 48, Terri Lynn Land (R) 43
NC-Sen (High Point Univ.): Sen. Kay Hagan (D) 40, Thom Tillis (R) 40, Sean Haugh (L) 7
NC-Sen (SurveyUSA): Sen. Kay Hagan (D) 44, Thom Tillis (R) 41, Sean Haugh (L) 7
NH-Sen (SurveyUSA for High Point Univ.): Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D) 48, Scott Brown (R) 46
SD-Sen (Harper Polling--R): Mike Rounds (R) 37, Rick Weiland (D) 33, Larry Pressler (I) 23
AK-Gov (Hickman Analytics--R): Gov. Sean Parnell (R) 46, Bill Walker (I) 38
AK-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Bill Walker (I) 45, Gov. Sean Parnell (R) 40
AL-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Robert Bentley (R) 65, Parker Griffith (D) 28
AR-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Asa Hutchinson (R) 49, Mike Ross (D) 38
AZ-Gov (Moore Information--R): Fred DuVal (D) 39, Doug Ducey (R) 36
AZ-Gov (The Polling Company--R): Doug Ducey (R) 46, Fred DuVal (D) 37
AZ-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Doug Ducey (R) 50, Fred DuVal (D) 39
CA-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Jerry Brown (D) 56, Neel Kashkari (R) 36
CO-Gov (SurveyUSA for High Point Univ.): Bob Beauprez (R) 46, Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) 44
CO-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) 49, Bob Beauprez (R) 45
CT-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Dan Malloy (D) 41, Tom Foley (R) 41
FL-Gov (Gravis--R): Gov. Rick Scott (R) 44, Charlie Crist (D) 42
FL-Gov (McLaughlin and Associates--R): Gov. Rick Scott (R) 43, Charlie Crist (D) 42, Adrian Wyllie (L) 6
FL-Gov (St. Pete Polls): Rick Scott (R) 45, Charlie Crist (D) 44, Adrian Wyllie (L) 8
FL-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Rick Scott (R) 47, Charlie Crist (D) 44
GA-Gov (Hickman Analytics--R): Gov. Nathan Deal (R) 44, Jason Carter (D) 36, Andrew Hunt (L) 8
GA-Gov (Landmark Communications--R): Gov. Nathan Deal (R) 45, Jason Carter (D) 45, Andrew Hunt (L) 5
GA-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Nathan Deal (R) 48, Jason Carter (D) 43
HI-Gov (Global Strategy Group--D): David Ige (D) 45, Duke Aiona (R) 33, Mufi Hannemann (I) 10
HI-Gov (CBS/YouGov): David Ige (D) 41, Duke Aiona (R) 35, Mufi Hannemann (I) 6
IA-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Terry Branstad (R) 52, Jack Hatch (D) 39
ID-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Butch Otter (R) 57, A.J. Balukoff (D) 33
IL-Gov (We Ask America--R): Gov. Pat Quinn (D) 44, Bruce Rauner (R) 41
IL-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Pat Quinn (D) 46, Bruce Rauner (R) 43
KS-Gov (PPP--D): Gov. Sam Brownback (R) 42, Paul Davis (D) 42, Keen Umbehr (L) 6
KS-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Sam Brownback (R) 45, Paul Davis (D) 42
MA-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Martha Coakley (D) 47, Charlie Baker (R) 41
MD-Gov (OpinionWorks/Baltimore Sun): Anthony Brown (D) 49, Larry Hogan (R) 42
MD-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Anthony Brown (D) 55, Larry Hogan (R) 38
ME-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Michael Michaud (D) 39, Gov. Paul LePage (R) 37, Eliot Cutler (I) 10
ME-Gov (Rasmussen): Gov. Paul LePage (R) 41, Michael Michaud (D) 40, Eliot Cutler (I) 16
MI-Gov (Mitchell Research--10/12): Gov. Rick Snyder (R) 47, Mark Schauer (D) 44
MI-Gov (Mitchell Research--10/9): Gov. Rick Snyder (R) 47, Mark Schauer (D) 46
MI-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Mark Schauer (D) 46, Gov. Rick Snyder (R) 44
MN-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Mark Dayton (D) 49, Jeff Johnson (R) 42
NE-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Pete Ricketts (R) 55, Chuck Hassebrook (D) 35
NH-Gov (SurveyUSA for High Point Univ.): Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) 50, Walt Havenstein (R) 42
NH-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) 49, Walt Havenstein (R) 39
NM-Gov (Public Opinion Strategies--R): Gov. Susana Martinez (R) 55, Gary King (D) 36
NM-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Susana Martinez (R) 48, Gary King (D) 41
NV-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) 56, Robert Goodman (D) 25
NY-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) 57, Rob Astorino (R) 30
OH-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. John Kasich (R) 52, Ed FitzGerald (D) 36
OK-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Mary Fallin (R) 58, Joe Dorman (D) 33
OR-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. John Kitzhaber (D) 49, Dennis Richardson (R) 42
PA-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Tom Wolf (D) 50, Gov. Tom Corbett (R) 41
RI-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gina Raimondo (D) 41, Allan Fung (R) 38
SC-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Nikki Haley (R) 53, Vincent Sheheen (D) 36
SD-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R) 57, Susan Wismer (D) 31
TN-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Bill Haslam (R) 60, Charlie Brown (D) 28
TX-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Greg Abbott (R) 54, Wendy Davis (D) 40
VT-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Peter Shumlin (D) 46, Scott Milne (R) 29
VT-Gov (Castleton Polling Institute): Gov. Peter Shumlin (D) 47, Scott Milne (R) 35
WI-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Mary Burke (D) 49, Gov. Scott Walker (D) 48
WY-Gov (CBS/YouGov): Gov. Matt Mead (R) 53, Pete Gosar (D) 30
CA-17 (Lake Research--D for Honda): Rep. Mike Honda (D) 42, Ro Khanna (D) 27
CA-17 (David Binder Research--D for Khanna): Rep. Mike Honda (D) 38, Ro Khanna (D) 38
CT-05 (Garin Hart Yang--D): Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D) 52, Mark Greenberg (R) 36
FL-26 (DCCC IVR--D): Rep. Joe Garcia (D) 45, Carlos Curbelo (R) 40
FL-26 (Saint Leo Univ.): Carlos Curbelo (R) 46, Rep. Joe Garcia (D) 42
IL-10 (Lester and Associates/Global Strategy Group--D): Rep. Brad Schneider (D) 48, Bob Dold! (R) 40
MA-06 (Voter/Consumer Research--R): Richard Tisei (R) 44, Seth Moulton (D) 42
MN-07 (SurveyUSA): Rep. Collin Peterson (D) 50, Torrey Westrom (R) 41
ND-AL (Forum Communications): Rep. Kevin Cramer (R) 46, George Sinner (D) 27
UT-04 (Dan Jones and Associates): Mia Love (R) 49, Doug Owens (D) 40
WA-01 (Moore Information--R): Rep. Suzan DelBene (D) 43, Pedro Celis (R) 34
WV-03 (Harper Polling--R): Evan Jenkins (R) 50, Rep. Nick Rahall (D) 44
If you look immediately above, you'll see a pretty fair dollop of House polling. Of that smattering of surveys, you see several that were conducted on behalf of either (a) campaigns or (b) affiliated groups with a rooting interest in a particular campaign.
And, in one glorious example, we get an example of point/counterpoint. In CA-17, the dueling Democratic campaigns of incumbent Mike Honda and challenger Ro Khanna (for those unaware, California has adopted a variation of Washington's "top two" election structure, where an all-party primary narrows the field to two general election candidates, who may be from the same political party).
Early this morning, the Khanna campaign trumpeted a poll, from their pollster (David Binder, who was a pollster for Pres. Obama), which showed the race between Honda and Khanna deadlocked at 38 percent each. Within an hour, the poll was tweeted far and wide by Khanna staffers and supporters (I guess when your campaign lives and breathes on Silicon Valley cash, it shouldn't be a surprise to see the campaign using Twitter as a megaphone).
Just five hours later, along came Team Honda with their own poll, which showed a markedly different contest: their poll (by Lake Research, one of the more experienced Democratic firms in the game) showed Honda staked to a 42-27 lead over Khanna.
This rapid response was a shrewd move, and it kicks off a few signs of savvy use of campaign polling:
1. The faster the response, the better.
What made Honda's immediate counter-strike of a poll so effective was that it stepped on Khanna's poll release in a way that gave the challenger the stage for roughly half a day, and nothing more. It also turned the narrative from "OMG. Dead heat!" to one of "Campaigns release dueling polls."
When it is possible, and practical, this is a good move. As I said in the introduction, unanswered campaign-sponsored polls have a way of becoming the conventional wisdom, because a logical and dispassionate observer will simply conclude that if the other campaign had better numbers, they'd release them. Silence becomes affirmation, in a sense.
Take the recent smattering of GOP-sponsored polls in one of the more perilous tossup Democratic districts in the nation: Ann Kirkpatrick's seat in Arizona's 1st district. When Democratic staffers and advocates noted, correctly, that both polls showing Republican Andy Tobin with an edge had what appeared to be comically low samples of Native Americans in a district where that demographic is vital, Republican staffers returned serve with a simple counterpoint: "We're sure you polled the 'right' proportion of Native Americans. So what do your numbers show?"
That's the kind of taunt that merits a response...if you can respond.
2. If the poll can change a narrative, all the better.
The DCCC poll linked to above in South Florida seemed to be more in response to an independently released poll (the IVR poll conducted by Florida-based St. Leo University). But it made a partisan point, and a solid one, at that.
The poll served as a simple counterweight to St. Leo's poll, which gave Republican challenger Carlos Curbelo a modest four-point lead over Democratic Rep. Joe Garcia (46-42). The DCCC's poll gave Garcia a 45-40 advantage over Curbelo.
But it did more than that. It also tried to develop a rationale for why Curbelo's numbers were weaker in their survey:
"The results of the survey come on the heels of increased communication highlighting Curbelo's comments in Washington calling Medicare and Social Security a 'Ponzi scheme,' indicating that Curbelo has done significant damage to himself and that this is a powerful line of attack in South Florida," the DCCC said.
Chances are only election junkies will read an article about a House poll. But if some curious reader came across this article in the
Miami Herald, they now know that Carlos Curbelo said some pretty risky things about Medicare and Social Security. While running for Congress. In Florida. Well played.
3. Not all internal polls need a counterweight.
Sometimes, when your opponent is doing nothing to help himself or herself, the best thing you can do is stay out of the way. For the life of me, I do not understand why the campaign team for Pedro Celis in Washington's 1st district thought to release that poll. When the Democratic incumbent won by eight points in a solid Democratic election year in 2012, why in the world would you release a poll showing that same incumbent leading by ... nine points?!
Evidently, team Celis is putting all their faith in the fact that DelBene is at 43 percent, but the old canard that "challengers win all the undecideds" has been mythbusted so many times it barely merits repeating at this point. Celis also tries to flog this utterly worthless talking point of the polling loser:
How does the Celis campaign divine good news from the numbers? They note that "among voters who are aware of both candidates, Celis actually leads 47-41."
Sure, that matters. In April. When you have months to define yourself as a candidate and define your opponent. But it's October! If that small amount of the electorate is aware of your existence, it is going to take a pretty Herculean effort at the last to bridge that gap.
Will DelBene even offer her own numbers here? Probably not. She doesn't need to. Nobody in Republican-land is more energized about that race now than they were before Team Celis dropped that poll. DelBene was over 50 percent in the August all-party primary, while Celis barely limped into the general with 16 percent.
No one thought Celis was on DelBene's heels before the GOP poll was released. No one does now. There's no need to pile on, especially if those numbers run the risk of being viewed as underwhelming.
Polling Note: No. We have not gone crazy. There are about a half dozen polls out today from Hickman Analytics that are listed as "Republican" polls. Yes, we are well aware that Hickman is a Democratic polling firm. However, in this case, they are polling on behalf of a very conservative interest group: the oil industry-backed Consumer Energy Alliance. After some deliberation, those polls were defined as Republican because the client is pushing for a conservative cause, even if the firm itself is a nominally Democratic outlet.