Siena Poll: Gov Continues Slide, Marriage Equality Gaining Steam

by: phillip anderson

Mon Apr 20, 2009 at 10:45:56 AM EDT

The numbers for Paterson are pretty much universally bad, but the one that really sticks out is this one. Only 12 percent of New Yorkers are prepared to vote for Paterson next year. A whopping 71 percent are looking to vote for an unnamed "someone else." The Governor even loses out to his immediate predecessors as New Yorkers would prefer to see Mario Cuomo, George Pataki, or even Eliot Spitzer back in office over Paterson.

"Voters are pining for the days of Mario Cuomo (39 percent) and George Pataki (33 percent) as Governor," Greenberg said. "A plurality of Democrats and independent voters would choose Mario and a majority of Republicans chose George. While 14 percent of all voters want to see Spitzer back in the Capitol, only eight percent would opt to have Paterson as Governor if choosing among the last four to hold that office."

That's gotta hurt.

In other news, a majority of the state now supports Marriage Equality for all New Yorkers, support that is strongest in New York City, but is strong in all regions of the state.

Interesting times, these.

NY-20: New Siena Poll Shows 4 Point Murphy Lead

by: phillip anderson

Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 10:12:52 AM EDT

This morning's poll shows that independents are evenly split, that Murphy is seen as running a more positive campaign and that Tedisco's ads are still turning people off.

Murphy Takes 4-Point Lead Over Tedisco in Final Week
Tedisco Campaign Seen as More Negative; Murphy's More Positive

Loudonville, NY. As the special election in the 20th C.D. enters the final weekend, Democrat Scott Murphy has reversed a four-point deficit and turned it into a four-point lead over Republican Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco. Murphy leads 47-43 percent, having trailed two weeks ago by a 45-41 percent margin, according to a new Siena (College) Research Institute poll of likely voters. Tedisco's campaign is viewed by voters as more negative by a 44-25 percent margin, while Murphy's campaign is seen as more positive. Regardless of who they are supporting, by a 45-35 percent margin, voters think Tedisco will win the election.

"While the percentage of likely voters supporting Murphy has risen about three points per week for the last four weeks, the percentage supporting Tedisco has dropped three points. In the last four weeks, Murphy turned a 12-point deficit into a four-point lead," said Steven Greenberg, spokesman for the Siena New York Poll.

"Murphy has sealed the deal with Democrats, leading 84-11 percent, while Tedisco has the support of less than two-thirds of Republicans, leading 64-27 percent. Independents are virtually tied, with Tedisco leading 45-44 percent, after trailing with independents by six points two weeks ago and leading by 14 points four weeks ago," Greenberg said. "Tedisco's 16-point lead in Rensselaer and Saratoga Counties two weeks ago is down to six points. Murphy slightly expanded his lead in the northern counties from 25 to 29 points, and turned a seven-point deficit in the southern portion of the district into a two-point lead in two weeks."

"Murphy is now virtually as well known to voters as Tedisco, and Murphy has a slightly better favorable rating, 49-38 percent, than Tedisco's 48-41 percent," Greenberg said. "Senator Kirsten Gillibrand continues to be rated favorably by more than three-quarters of voters, while President Obama is viewed favorably by nearly two-thirds.

"At least nine in ten voters have seen or heard a commercial for both Tedisco and Murphy. By a margin of 30-23 percent, voters say Murphy's ads make them less likely to vote for him. Two weeks ago voters said, 28-20 percent, Murphy's ads made them more likely to support Murphy. Tedisco's commercials fare even worse with voters. Only 14 percent of those who have seen Tedisco's commercials are more likely to support him, while 37 percent say the ads make them less likely to support Tedisco (12-28 percent two weeks ago). About half of voters said both candidates' ads have no effect on who they are supporting," Greenberg said.

Forty-two percent of voters credit Murphy with waging the more positive campaign, compared to 25 percent who say that describes Tedisco. Similarly, by a 44-25 percent margin, voters say Tedisco has been running a more negative campaign than Murphy. Nearly one in five voters says it's both candidates. More than two-thirds of Democrats say Murphy's campaign is more positive and Tedisco's more negative. Republicans see it more even, with 36 percent saying Murphy's been more negative and 29 percent saying Tedisco. Independents say Tedisco's more negative by 42-25 percent margin.

This is great news and all and seems to confirm the movement described in other polls being leaked all week. That said, these low turnout special elections are notoriously difficult to predict. It' going to come down to which campaign gets their people to the polls on Tuesday and to things like the weather. (Weather looks nice, btw)

GOTV.

On the web: Scott Murphy for Congress

Siena Poll: Paterson Slips Even Further, Only 19% Job Approval

by: phillip anderson

Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 10:07:19 AM EDT

Paterson's Standing with Voters: from Bad to Worse
2/3 Prefer "Someone Else" in 2010; Gov Crushed by Cuomo, Giuliani

David Paterson is now viewed unfavorably by twice as many New York voters as those who view him favorably, and four times as many voters rate the job he is doing as Governor as only fair or poor compared to those who say he is doing an excellent or good job as Governor, according to a new Siena (College) Research Institute poll of registered voters. If a Democratic primary for Governor were held today, Paterson would lose to Attorney General Andrew Cuomo by nearly four-to-one, and Paterson would be easily beaten in a general election by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Paterson is viewed favorably by 29 percent of voters and unfavorably by 58 percent, down from last month?s 40-47 percent rating. His job performance rating is 19 percent positive, 78 percent negative down from 28-69 percent last month. Only 14 percent of voters are prepared to elect Paterson as Governor in 2010, compared to 67 percent who prefer "someone else." That?s down from 19-57 percent last month.

"Both in personal popularity and job performance, David Paterson?s standing with voters continues to slide," said Steven Greenberg, Siena New York Poll spokesman. "The speed of his falling numbers is staggering. Two months ago, 60 percent of voters viewed Paterson favorably, and now it?s less than half of that. Similarly, while more than half of voters said the Governor was doing an excellent or good job two months ago, now fewer than one-in-five believes that, with more than three-quarters saying he?s doing only a fair or poor job. More than two-thirds of voters prefer "someone else? for Governor next year."

In a hypothetical 2010 Democratic primary for Governor, Cuomo leads Paterson 67-17 percent, up from last month?s 53-27 percent. In December Paterson led 49-26 percent. In a potential general election matchup, Giuliani beats Paterson 56-33 percent, up from 51-36 percent last month. Paterson led 51-38 percent in December. Cuomo leads Giuliani 51-41 percent, similar to last month?s 51-38 percent.

"The Governor should be grateful he does not have to face the voters anytime soon," Greenberg said. "Against Giuliani, Paterson only leads with African American voters, Democrats and barely with New York City voters. Against Cuomo, Paterson trails big with every demographic group, including African American voters, who give Cuomo a 55-22 percent lead. And by a similar 52-25 percent margin, African American voters prefer „someone else? over Paterson."

Cuomo has a 68-17 percent favorable rating and a 67-26 percent job performance rating, his highest ever. Giuliani has 58-36 percent favorable rating.

Voters continue to believe the state is headed in the wrong direction (52 percent), rather than on the right track (30 percent). More than nine in ten voters say the state?s fiscal condition is poor or fair, including 60 percent who say it?s poor. By a 50-36 percent margin, voters say that the country is headed on the right track.

The poll also found that Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's numbers are also suffering, though more than half of New Yorkers still know too little about her to form an opinion. Senator Gillibrand's approval/disapproval fell from 34/20 last month to 26/20 this month.

All in all, it looks increasingly obvious that Paterson may indeed be dead in the water. Numbers like this can only impact negatively on his fundraising. As I said last month, these stories tend to snow ball and reinforce each other.

I just don't see how he and his crew turn this around.  

NY-20: The Trend, Illustrated

by: phillip anderson

Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 11:15:14 AM EDT

I like the looks of that.

NY-20: New Siena Poll Shows Tedisco Lead Cut To Just 4 Points

by: phillip anderson

Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 10:17:25 AM EDT

Republican candidate Jim Tedisco - 45 (-1)
Democratic candidate Scott Murphy - 41 (+7)
Libertarian candidate Eric Sundwall - 1 (+1)

Wow.

From Siena:

Murphy Cuts Tedisco's Lead From 12 to 4 Points
Tedisco Rated Better on 4 Issues; Murphy on 2, Including Economy
Murphy Now Leads with Independent Voters, After Trailing 2 Weeks Ago

Loudonville, NY. With less than three weeks until the special election in the 20th C.D., Democrat Scott Murphy has cut Republican Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco's 12-point lead by two-thirds. Tedisco now leads the race 45-41 percent, having led two weeks ago by a 46-34 percent margin, according to a new Siena (College) Research Institute poll of likely voters. While two weeks ago, voters said Tedisco would do a better job than Murphy representing them on six issues, Murphy now leads on two of those issues, including the most important issue for 20th C.D. voters: the economy.

"Scott Murphy has significantly narrowed the gap against Jim Tedisco, trailing by only four points in a district that has a 15-point Republican enrollment edge," said Steven Greenberg, spokesman for the Siena New York Poll. "Only 13 percent of voters remain undecided - down from 20 percent - and nearly 90 percent of voters say they are absolutely or fairly certain they will not change their minds.

"Murphy continues to do a better job of holding the support of Democrats, than Tedisco does with Republicans. The big turnaround from two weeks ago, however, is among independent voters, who previously gave Tedisco a significant 45-31 percent lead, and now favor Murphy by a 43-37 percent margin," Greenberg said. "Tedisco's leads in the Capital District and Hudson Valley fell slightly, while Murphy turned a slim two-point lead in the northern counties of the district into a now dramatic 25-point lead."

"Both candidates have become more known to voters over the last few weeks, as airwaves have been inundated with commercials and mailboxes have been filled with messages from both campaigns," Greenberg said. "Tedisco remains better known, with both higher favorable and unfavorable ratings from the voters.

"Eight in ten voters have seen or heard a commercial for Murphy, while 86 percent have seen or heard a Tedisco ad. By a margin of 28-20 percent, voters say Murphy's ads make them more likely to vote for him, with half of voters saying it has no effect on who they plan to support. Only 12 percent of those who have seen Tedisco's commercials are more likely to support him, while 28 percent say the ads make them less likely to support Tedisco, with 58 percent saying they have had no effect," Greenberg said.

"Voters continue to overwhelmingly think Tedisco will do a better job on homeland security. And by small margins, they also give him the edge on health care, education and bringing federal money into the district. Now, however, more voters think that Murphy will do a better job on successfully ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and on addressing the economy, which is far and away the most important issue voters want their new Member of Congress to address," Greenberg said.

Emphasis mine.

This race is going to be tight and, as always with specials, it'll come down to good, old fashioned GOTV. But, this is a very winnable race. The CW was that this was Tedisco's to lose.

It looks as if he just may lose it after all.

On the web: Scott Murphy for Congress.

Paterson Is In Serious Trouble

by: phillip anderson

Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:35:56 PM EST

According to the SRI, his favorable/unfavorable number plunged from 54/30 to 40/47. It was 64/19 three months ago.

Only 28% of New Yorkers approve of his job performance compared to 69% who think he's stinking up the joint. Last month, 51% approved while only 45% disapproved.

Even worse, only 19% of voters are prepared to vote for Paterson next year. 59% prefer an unnamed "someone else." That's a 3 to 1 preference for someone without a name. To put this in perspective, 42% of voters in November preferred Paterson to the 32% who preferred the candidate to be named later.

That, friends, is just brutal.

And it gets worse. In potential 2010 matchups, Paterson is losing ground at a furious clip. He loses a hypothetical Democratic primary against Andrew Cuomo by 2 to 1, 27% to 53%. In November, Siena had these numbers reversed, with Paterson crushing 53% to 25%. That was a scant three months ago. Hell, the Governor lost 20 points against the Attorney General in the last month. Ouch.

As for potential GOP challengers, Paterson enjoys his one bright spot. He waxes poor Rick Lazio 46% to 28%. Great. But, Cuomo beats the hapless Lazio by a whopping 66% to 16%.

Against the "walking. sometimes talking mountain of fail" that is Rudy Giuliani, Paterson loses badly, 51% to 36%. Last month, Paterson beat Rudy 44% to 42%, a -17% swing in thirty days. In December, Paterson beat Rudy 51% to 38%.

In contrast, Cuomo beats Giuliani this month by the exact same margin, 51% to 38%.

To make matter even worse, 53% of New Yorkers think that the state is heading in the wrong direction, the highest ever recorded by Siena, compared to only 31% who think the state is on the "right track." 65% think that New York's economy is "poor." Only 37% believe their elected leaders are capable of solving the crisis compared to 61% who have no confidence at all that the budget crisis will be solved.

All these numbers add up to big, serious, profound trouble for Governor Paterson. If he really wants to be elected to a full term next year, he's got to turn this thing around and do it awfully damn quick. Numbers like these are will begin to severely damage his fundraising, a task that was already more difficult thanks to the economy's nosedive. That leads to more stories about how he's not viable in 2010 and to more headlines about a rudderless administration and to...more polls showing how he's not viable in 2010. It's a vicious cycle that can very easily begin to snowball and reinforce itself.

Paterson and his crew had better get it together and stop this freefall if they are to have any chance at all in 2010. Otherwise, they will be doing not much more than wasting everyone's time and money.

Siena NY Poll: Obama 58 - McCain 36

by: phillip anderson

Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 11:06:08 AM EDT

If the poll, an obvious outlier, had any value, it was that it would once again give the NY GOP a glimmer of false hope. It would encourage them to publicly state again that they believed that John McCain and Sarah the Wonder Dolt were going to save their Senate majority. (this time last year it was Rudy on their white horse) Give them some hope and let them game plan around a McCain surge, I said.

Well, this morning comes news that the new Siena Poll shows 22 point lead for Barack Obama. It also shows that Sarah Palin's numbers have dropped like a stone, a phenomena seen in polling across the country in the last few weeks.

What this means for Skelos and Mondello is that the calvary ain't coming. The top of the GOP ticket isn't going to save them or their endangered incumbents.

Joe Robach, I'm looking at you.

Remember, You Heard It Here First

by: phillip anderson

Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 17:09:18 PM EDT

Second, some analysis from Bruce Gyory at Newsday.

The battles will be fought in Republican districts, not on Democratic turf and therefore will resemble in miniature the 2006 race for the control of the Congress. Moreover, in light of these polls, it will be very difficult for the Republicans to justify spending money to try expanding the field of contested races to additional Democratic seats.

In the two Democratic seats polled: Craig Johnson in Nassau and Darrel Aubertine from the North Country held huge leads over their Republican challengers. Craig Johnson led Barbara Donno by 24% (49% to 25%) and Aubertine lead Renzi by 20% (51% to 31%). These margins were huge, considering that the Republicans' campaign committee was reported to have already spent $1 million on the two seats.

In my last blog, I speculted that Senator Dean Skelos would try to expand the number of contested Democratic seats beyond Johnson and Aubertine. Given that nine Republican Senate seats are being actively contested, it could prove controversial within the Republican Conference to spend money speculatively against Democratic Senators like Stachowski in Buffalo and Oppenheimer in Westchester, when Republicans like Padavan in Queens and Volker not to mention Alesi in Western New York are under pressure.

We've been writing about this for months now. After all the crowing about how awesome their recruiting was going to be, Bruno and Skelos mainly ended up with their second and third choices, not the top tier candidates that they were promising. It's been plainly obvious for quite some time, long before Bruno decided to ride off into the sunset and leave Skelos holding the bag, that this cycle was going to be fought for GOP seats, not Dem seats. Skelos apparently didn't get the memo though, as he has been spending loads of money on offense with second and third tier candidates while a good number of his incumbents, the folks that actually raised a good deal of that money, have been twisting in the wind. Skelos has been telling donors and others that they were actually going to win seats this year, but the results so far speak for themselves. They are in trouble and everyone knows it.

Dave Renzi isn't going to win back SD-48. Liz Feld isn't going to beat Suzi Oppenheimer. Andrea Stewart-Cousins isn't going to lose to the woman whose name I have already forgotten.

The battlegrounds are on their turf and they are playing defense from Suffolk to Canada. What's even worse is that they have to play defense perfectly. They have absolutely zero room for error. Given the way that Skelos has run the show so far, spending millions on longshots and neglecting his incumbents, I'd say that's a pretty tall order for Dean.

Back to Bruce:

Right now, in light of this polling data showing Johnson and Aubertine blowing away their Republican challengers, the number of truly contested races has been reduced to nine seats, all held by the Republicans. Also the Republicans have to be nervous that they have alredy spent at least $800,000 to bolster Serph Maltese in Queens and are in a tie with Addabbo. This may resemble the lost Spano seat from Westchester, to Republican strategists. A seat lost in 2006 after an 18-vote victory by Spano in 2004. Bottom line is that no matter how much the central Senate Republican camaign committee spent on the Spano seat, they could not overcome changing political demogrphics.

The net result of what this Siena polling data reveals is that if Skelos' political team proposes spending big political resources on expanding the playing field,at this point, it may be met with resistance from incumbent Senators. If they could not move the dial by spending a million dollars against their top targets Johnson and Aubertine, do they want to risk spending another speculative million dollars against second-tier targets? The Senate Republicans under assault (and their allies) may demand that the remaining resources of the central Republican campaign committee be focused on saving incumbent Republicans.

In 2006, this same pattern hit the national Republicans and what they found was that when you are on defense it is very difficult to resist the opposing political tide. You play great defense in one seat, but that opens a surprise hole in other districts. I feel great sympathy for Senator Skelos in light of this predicament. It is the consequence of the poor candidate recruitment ,which came under his predecessor's watch, who left in late June,when the candidate matchups were already set. It was not Senator skelos' fault.I understand how and why Skelos' team wishes it could change the map, but that is probably too late.

I have to disagree a bit here. I can guarantee you that Barbara Donno wasn't recruited by Bruno. This is Skelos' vendetta race. Craig Johnson is his white whale and Skelos and Mondello took it awfully personally when they lost the SD-7 seat. Sure, blame Bruno for some of the others, but the Donno is all Dean's.

That said, I think the rest of Bruce's analysis is spot on and echoes much of what I and others here have been saying for a long time. The Dems aren't going to lose any seats this year, no matter what Skelos says. This really is much like the national playing field in 2006. The GOP is on their heels and the potential exists for significant Dem gains on election day.

But the Dems have to be smart, flexible and opportunistic, much like the DCCC in '06. The one significant advantage that the GOP holds is financial (which is why I'd prefer Skelos to not abandon his current strategy). Dems need to raise money and quick. They are still in better shape than they have been historically, but this is their year and they need the funds to be able to exploit opportunities as they arise. They need to be able to spread the playing field and drain the other side for maximum advantage. The second to none WFP field operation needs to be able to pivot on a dime as well. Money is important, but so is a top notch ground game. Many of the GOP incumbents haven't serious challengers in years, maybe ever. In these races, the WFP team can be even more decisive as they have been training up great folks for quite some time now and the local GOP machines might be a bit rusty.

The long and the short of it is that we simply aren't losing any seats this year. All the battlegrounds are held by the GOP. All the money that Skelos spent on offense is gone and now he's got a number of imperiled incumbents who probably aren't too pleased with him right now. The stage is set for a big year, the year, for Dems and the state Senate. A little discord in the ranks is the cherry on top.

The next 6 weeks are going to be epic. I hope everyone has got some comfy shoes and a phone  free nights and weekends. Can we capitalize on our good fortune?

We're all about to find out.

NY DSCC Responds To Skelos

by: phillip anderson

Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 13:40:55 PM EDT

Statement from Austin Shafran, Spokesman for the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee Re: Senator Skelos's Criticism of Siena Poll

"Senator Skelos's understanding of statistics and polls is equivalent to the Senate Republicans' understanding of arithmetic and budget- both ways New Yorkers lose," said Austin Shafran, spokesperson for the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee.

Ouch.

Skelos Gets Pwned By Siena

by: phillip anderson

Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 13:17:34 PM EDT

"I don't believe the Sienna poll is correct and we have our own internal polling that polls that have been done within all of these different district within the past 20 years that indicate a lot different," Skelos said.

"You know, they use the random digit dialing. Sienna has never done a poll in a senate districts and random digit dialing, for all you know, all the phone calls could've gone into Great Neck."

First, as I have already said, I don't believe that the methodology on these polls is bulletproof. One could conceivably make a reasonable critique of a number of factors. But, that's not what Dean did. He stated as fact that Siena was using "random digit dialing" in an effort to discredit the results, results he's obviously not happy with. It was an odd tack to take, to say the least. The problem is that he's absolutely 100% wrong. (Either he just pulled that one out of his rear end or he's deliberately trying to be misleading. You choose.)

Azi talked to Steven Greenberg at Siena:

I just got off the phone with Siena pollster Steven Greenberg who said Siena "does not use random-digit dialing to conduct it's statewide or senate district polls." He also said steps are taken to ensure "appropriate geographic disbursement" within polling areas. Greenberg said, "We call off voter lists."

So a day after Skelos sent Conway out to spin the Siena polls as much as possible even though the consensus opinion by pretty much the entire statewide media was that the polls show that Dean's strategy of playing offense and telling folks that they would actually pick up seats this year was essentially DOA, he decided to just make stuff up about the pollster to discredit the results.

Did he really think the folks at Siena were just going to let him do that?