Wednesday, July 2, 2014

New Democratic Louisiana Senate Poll Finds A Tied Race, But With Strong Likelihood of Republican Gains

A recent television ad paid for by by 'Friends of Mary Landrieu' shows citizens of a rural Louisiana town watching Landrieu TV appearances in which she takes it to the Obama Administration on a number of issues. Separating herself from an unpopular president is a must if she hopes to hang on to her seat.

Of the premier 2014 midterm contests, the Louisiana Senate race is *the* most likely to flip into Republican hands, at least according to current Huffington Post Pollster averages. That's why the  new Public Policy Polling survey allowed the Landrieu campaign to breathe at least a slight sigh of relief, especially considering the recent spate of run-off polling. An incumbent who is tied with their opponent at 47% wouldn't typically be received as welcome news for most political campaigns, unless six of the eight polls taken this year found that opponent ahead.

But as far as Democrats are concerned, the good news stops there. Because a closer inspection of the PPP memo and crosstabs suggests little room for improvement for the incumbent:

The likely Landrieu/Cassidy match up for the December runoff is tied at 47. Among those who support Maness or Hollis or are undecided for the November election, 68% move to Cassidy for December compared to only 11% who move toward Landrieu. Even though only 6% of voters are undecided in that match up, they don't set up great for Landrieu- 61% voted for Romney to 20% who voted for Obama, and she has a 14/65 approval rating.

It's July, and if you buy the PPP numbers, a mere 6% of likely voters are undecided. So no matter where they end up, the Louisiana Senate race is bound to be at least remotely close.

As Nate Silver has argued before, at least at the presidential level, there comes a point in the election cycle where job approval ratings become a leading indicator of final result. So let's divvy up that tiny 6% slice of the electorate to the Louisiana Senate candidates, with 14% going to Mary Landrieu (her approval rating among undecided voters), and 65% going to Republican Bill Cassidy (her disapproval rating among undecideds).

Suddenly, the GOP challenger jumps out to a 51-48% lead, which goes to show that despite undecided voters being few and far between, Landrieu is unpopular enough with them to make a difference. The same thing happens when you reallocate undecideds according to how they voted in the 2012 election (61% for Romney, 20% for Obama). What was a 47-47 tie again becomes a 51-48% Cassidy lead.

Friday, May 9, 2014

Democrats May Have A Midterm Turnout Problem In North Carolina, But Not So Much So, Says New Rasmussen Poll

Photo courtesy of Scott McIntyre.

The release of Rasmussen's first post North Carolina Senate GOP primary survey reminded me of Nate Cohn's New York Times article from last week, titled 'Why The Democrats Turnout Problem Is Worst In North Carolina.' The piece provided some useful information pertaining to North Carolina voting demographics from the 2010 midterm election, especially considering the fact that no exit poll was conducted in the state that year.

For example, per Cohn, the white percentage of the 2010 North Carolina midterm electorate was six points whiter than in 2012 (77% vs. 71%, respectively). The black vote was three points lower than in 2012 (20% vs. 23%), while the '65 years & older' age group was 6 points higher (26% vs. 20%). Naturally, this is all good news for Republicans, as they typically perform stronger with white voters than minorities, and older voters vs younger.

In light of the information provided in the New York Times piece, lets consider how the Rasmussen survey results would have differed applying 2010-like race and age statistics.

Tillis leads Hagan overall in the survey 45-44%. Among white voters only, his lead grows to 26 points, or 57-31%. For what it's worth, that's a good deal less impressive than Romney's 68-31% advantage over Obama in 2012, when he carried the state overall by two points. Rasmussen also finds that white voters make up 72% of the NC electorate, vs. 77% in 2010. Those numbers are more in line with 2012 style turnout than 2010. So what would Rasmussen have found if survey respondents had been more illustrative of 2010 racial identification (all other findings remaining the same)?

What was a virtual tie between Tillis and Hagan becomes...welll...less of a tie. The Republican's lead is still within the four point margin of error, but he does add a bit more distance between himself and the incumbent.

A similar occurrence is seen when applying 2010-age identification to the Rasmussen survey. Tillis leads among the oldest of voters, 62-35% (while younger voters spring for Hagan, 46-29%). Rasmussen found just 20% of North Carolina likely voters identifying as being over the age of sixty-five years old, though they made up 26% of the electorate in 2010. How would the Rasmussen results have looked with a larger pool of older voters?

Again, not a significant shift, but definite movement in Tillis's direction. The bottom line is that, if you buy Rasmussen's numbers, Tillis is starting the general election against Hagan with an advantage regardless of which electorate - presidential or midterm - shows up.

Sunday, May 4, 2014

45 Years Of House Ballot Polling Finds Pollsters Typically Overstate Democrats Actual Performance

Image on the left is courtesy of Alaskans For Begich TV ad, and highlights the wealthy, mega-donors Koch Brothers support of Republican candidates. Image on the right comes from an anti-Obamacare ad sponsored by Generation Opportunity.

Glancing at the current HuffPollster and RCP polling averages, Democrats and Republicans are essentially tied on the generic House ballot question. The former finds Republicans ahead by less than half-a-percentage point, while the latter finds them down by a roughly equal margin. But don't expect the same polling dynamic that exits today to be present on election day - at least not if past generic House ballot polling dating back to 1970 has anything to do with it. And further, I'd caution against relying too much on the surveys taken in the final week before the election, too, as they've been pretty hit-or-miss themselves.

Hundreds of generic ballot surveys taken over the last 45 years and eleven midterms finds polls conducted in the Spring of an election year (April, May, and June) have overstated the eventual Democratic margin in nine of them, or 82% of the time (including the last five midterms in a row). Surveys taken in the final week(s) of a campaign are no exception, understating the Republican margin in eight of eleven elections. Consider the tables below, the first of which provides polling data in the spring of each midterm since 1970 compared to the final result, the second of which compares polling data taken in the final week(s) of the campaign with the actual result.

Polling data pre-2006 was provided by the Roper Center's IPOLL databank. * Indicates the cutoff date for polls to be included in the average was TWO weeks prior to the actual election day. ** Indicates the cutoff date for polls to be included in the average was THREE weeks prior to the actual election day. Dates were only altered if necessary to obtain a large enough sample to average.

Surveys conducted in the Spring of the last eleven midterm elections tended to overstate the eventual Democratic margin over Republicans by an average of five net points. Looking at specific elections, such as 2010, you can see Republicans were polling an average 43% in the Spring of that year, though they eventually won 51% of the popular vote. Democrats, meanwhile, were polling an average of 42% that Spring, and wound up with 45% that November. The Republican advantage over Democrats grew from just one point in April, May, and June, to six points in November.

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Undecided Voters Poised To Flock To Mark Pryor's Republican Challenger in Senate Race, Says New PPP Poll

Photo courtesy of Club For Growth TV ad.

A new poll in Arkansas from the Democratic leaning pollster Public Policy Polling puts incumbent Senator Mark Pryor ahead of his Republican opponent Congressman Tim Cotton by just one point, or 43-42%, with 16% undecided. This result might be interpreted by some as impressive for a Democratic Senator in a deep-red state, especially considering the conventional wisdom around the race for much of the last year as one of the Republican Party's likeliest Senate pick-up opportunities.

But not so fast. Tom Jensen tweeted out this crucial bit of information following the official poll release:

In a race where both major party candidates are polling in the lower 40s, the undecided vote could dramatically alter the outcome. And there are several data points that would assist in providing clues about where those undecided voters will ultimately end up. Are they Democrats or Republicans? Young or Old? Liberal or Conservative? Among PPP respondents who said they voted in the 2012 election, it's the Romney voters that remain more undecided than Obama voters (17% to 8%). That's an obvious plus for Tom Cotton (R). Conservatives are more undecided than liberals (16% to 12%), another plus for Cotton. A full eighteen percent of Independent voters remain undecided (more than Republicans or Democrats), and they support Cotton over Pryor 50-31%. Yet at the same time, women, who support Pryor by greater margins than men, are more undecided than men. African Americans, as well as younger voters, both of which being groups more likely to support Pryor, are more undecided than whites or older voters.

But perhaps more important than any of these stats regarding undecideds is what Tom Jensen tweeted above - the fact that the President's approval rating is upside down with these voters by 61 points!

Unfortunately, PPP didn't provide a crosstab of how poll respondents that approved or disapproved of Obama's job performance said they would vote in a Pryor vs. Cotton match-up. But pollsters that have provided such info in the past would note that there's a very close correlation between a voters feelings towards the President's job performance, and how he or she may cast a vote in a federal partisan contest.

Suppose those sixteen percent of Arkansas voters that said they were undecided between Mark Pryor and Tom Cotton supported the two candidates by the same proportion they approved or disapproved of President Obama? Or in other words, suppose 13% of those undecided voters end up supporting Mark Pryor, while 74% end up supporting Cotton. How would PPP's final result have looked?

Senator Mark Pryor's one point lead over Tom Cotton evaporates into an eight point DEFICIT in the event undecided voters break for the candidates in a proportion identical to their approval of Obama's job performance. What was a 43-42% Democratic lead becomes a 53-45% Republican lead.

Obviously, this is purely speculative. But the big news from this PPP poll shouldn't be the fact that Pryor's clinging to a lead. It should be that if the crosstabs are to be believed, Pryor's lead is fleeting.

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Despite Some Screwy Crosstabs, NYT Polling Finds Unpopular Obama Hasn't Sunk Senate Democrats Yet

Photos courtesy of Corbis Images.

A spate of brand new surveys put out by the New York Times and conducted by the Kaiser Foundation finds once incredibly vulnerable Democratic incumbent Senators hanging on, and in some cases, leading their Republican opponents in four states carried by Mitt Romney in 2012:

  • Arkansas, which Obama lost in 2012 61-37%
  • Kentucky, which Obama lost in 2012 61-38%
  • North Carolina, which Obama lost in 2012 50-48%, and
  • Louisiana, which Obama lost in 2012 58-41%.
The Democratic resilience found by the Kaiser Foundation seems all the more miraculous considering how deeply unpopular the president is in all four states. His most positive rating is 41/51%, found in North Carolina, with his most negative rating coming from Kentucky, where just 32% of registered voters approve of the job Obama is doing, and 60% disapprove. Yet still, in those states, both incumbent Democratic Senator Kay Hagan, and Democratic challenger Allison Lundergen Grimes, are exceeding expectations considering the unpopularity of their party boss. Hagan's net job approval rating is 10 points higher than the President's, and she actually leads both of her likely primary opponents by 2. Grimes, who is saddled by a President with a 60% disapproval rating, only trails McConnell 44-43%.

The same applies in Arksansas and Louisiana. In the former, Obama is stained by a 33/60% job approval rating, a full THIRTY-SIX net points LOWER than Democratic incumbent Senator Mark Pryor's 47/38% job rating. Not only that, but Pryor leads Cotton (R) 46-36%. In Louisiana, the President's net job rating is SIXTEEN points lower than Democratic incumbent Mary Landrieu's.

All in all - this is some much-needed decent news for Democrats. But a word of caution regarding the results...

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Unknown Charlotte Pastor Performs Stronger Against NC Sen. Hagan Than Establishment-Backed Tillis

Taken during the Tuesday Night, April 22 North Carolina Republican Senate Primary debate. From left, Pastor Mark Harris, Nurse Heather Grant, Physician Greg Brannon, and State Legislator Thom Tillis.

The Republicans vying to take on North Carolina's Junior Senator Kay Hagan (D) met last night in a debate format for the first time prior to the May 6 primary. Besides a few barbs thrown at the Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads backed Thom Tillis (R), the event likely did little to shift opinion in the largely unsettled primary. But there was one claim made during the closing arguments of First Baptist Church of Charlotte Pastor Mark Harris that sounded dubious coming from someone who is largely (73%) unknown outside of his congregation.

Consider the tweet below from debate viewer Jonathan Kappler, Director of UNC's State Government Relations:

The poll referred to by Pastor Harris was conducted by SurveyUSA at the end of March, and showed Sen. Hagan trailing Harris 47-43%, more than she trailed anyone else, though NOT outside the poll's 2.6% margin of error (that would have required Harris lead Hagan by at least 49-43%). But SurveyUSA isn't the only pollster to find Harris leading the incumbent Senator by a larger margin than the rest of the field. Local partisan pollster Public Policy Polling also found Harris with a four point lead against Hagan, better than all but one primary opponent, (but again, inside the survey's 3.6% margin of error). For what it's worth, the establishment-backed Tillis only led Hagan 46-45% in the SurveyUSA poll, and actually trailed Hagan 43-41% per PPP.

President Hits 6-month Job Approval High on Gallup and RCP

Photo courtesy of The Guardian.

Today's Gallup tracking update fits nicely with the new Democratic narrative that, just maybe, despite years-long conventional wisdom, Obamacare and its creator aren't as doomed as originally thought. For the first time since their October 8, 2013 update, President Obama's job approval rating came within two points of matching his disapproval rating on Gallup.

In the intervening period since October, the President's net approval (the difference between his approval and disapproval rating) has ranged from -4 (on April 19-20 and March 19-20), and -16 (on March 1-2 and March 15, 2014). Furthermore, today marks only the second time since October 8 that Obama's approval rating has reached as high as 46% (the other time being on February 20). Today also marks the first time since October 8 the President's job DISAPPROVAL rating dropped below the 49% level.

You have to go all the way back to September 26th to find the President's net job approval higher than it is now. And unfortunately for Republicans, the Gallup daily tracker isn't the only pollster showing Obama's job ratings improving from months ago. Check out his RCP and Pollster averages. Obama's at his best net average job rating since October 29 per the former, and since September 24 per the latter.

There are two obvious theories behind the ratings change: 1) the outrage over the Obamacare website's failures and canceled insurance policies, which began in early October, roughly around the same time as Obama's approval rating drop, is subsiding. Though the evidence for this seems split at best. 2) The Gallup tracker has a history of bouncing around on a day-to-day basis, which is most likely all we're seeing in today's numbers. Afterall, the President was at 42/52% on April 16, just six days ago. And over the course of two days earlier this month, the President's job rating fell from 45/49% to 40/55%, a net drop of eleven points. On the other hand, Obama's WEEKLY average job approval (which is a better metric for spotting trends), is the lowest its been in two months, even before factoring in today's lofty 46/48% figure. You have to go back to the week of September 29 to find a higher average weekly net job approval for the President.

In the end, remember, we're talking about Gallup's daily tracker. It can be erratic, sometimes wildly so. But today's numbers, taken in the context of most recent national surveys, bode well for Democrats.

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Recent Surveys Show Scott Brown Falling Well Short Of Markers Set By Romney, Ayotte In New Hampshire

Photos from left to right courtesy of Just Jared, Gretyl Macalaster, and Marc Nozell. Apologies for not being able to resist the gratuitous shirtless Scott Brown pic.
Given recent stories of New Hampshire GOP weariness regarding the now announced Scott Brown Senate bid, it's hard to believe there was a time when the pick-up truck driving, common-man type was a source of great Republican pride. After all, how could the establishment, or the Tea Party for that matter, begrudge the man who wrestled away the Senate seat held by liberal lion Ted Kennedy for five decades, in a state with a partisan bent like Massachusetts?

But a stinging, if not anticipated loss to Elizabeth Warren and the Democratic presidential turnout machine in 2012, on top of less than inspiring polling numbers against his new Democratic opponent Jeanne Shaheen, have caused the former model/attorney to lose a bit of his luster. Most recent surveys of the 2014 Senate battle find Brown trailing Senator Shaheen by around 10-pts or more. However, he's got three other headaches to contend with beyond the simple fact he's losing.

First of all, his polling trend lines do not look good. After a strong month in January (when he trailed Shaheen by an average of 44-40% across four surveys), Brown now trails by an average 50-39% (in four surveys taken since February). He's also lost ground among various demographic and political groups. Consider the chart below:

Polling used in the average can be found at Huffington Post's Pollster.

Brown went from leading among New Hampshire voters aged 18-45 years old by three points in January, to trailing with this group by eleven points in February/March. He held Shaheen to an eleven point advantage among women in January, though her advantage has now doubled to twenty-two points. Brown's lead among men dropped, while Shaheen's lead with >46 year olds and Independents grew slightly. The only positive trend for Brown from January to February/March was his numbers among Republicans, which improved from January ever-so-slightly.

The second headache for Brown? Not only is he trailing Shaheen, but he's WELL behind where his would-be Senate colleague, Kelly Ayotte (R) was polling at this point in 2010, and is failing to hit crucial markers reached by Mitt Romney in 2012. Granted, Brown has nearly impossibly large shoes to fill if he hopes to recreate Ayotte's landslide 60-37% victory over Paul Hodes (D) during the last Republican wave. But for the record, she was leading Hodes by double-digits before the Spring of 2010. Brown hasn't led a poll against Shaheen yet, at least not according to the Huffington Post or Real Clear Politics.

"No Man Is A Hero To His Valet" - The Home State Voter Phenomenon In Presidential Politics

The meaning of the proverb in the title above, as applied to the topic of this piece, is that no politician is a hero to his constituents, because it is those voters that know him best. And public opinion polls have certainly bore this out. More on the proverb, here. Photo courtesy of John Wagner/Getty Images

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo was wildly popular in his home state, according to a mid-2012 Quinnipiac University poll - to the tune of a 73/16% job approval rating. Despite all the local love, just 36% of registered New York voters wanted him to run for President in 2016, including only 44% in his own party. Thirty-nine percent of all voters did not want him to run. A second survey taken by Sienna College just after the 2012 Presidential election showed that while Cuomo's job approval rating had deteriorated to some degree, he remained quite popular. Yet still - New Yorkers weren't willing to jump on board for a 2016 run, opposing such a move by an even larger 49 - 39% margin. It seems as though Andrew has followed in his father, Mario's, footsteps in more ways than one. A 1990 CBS News Exit Poll found just 45% of New Yorkers felt the popular, 8 year governor would be a good President, while an equally large share felt he would not be.

This apparent disconnect between a politician's home-state popularity, and the desire of their constituents to see them ascend to the presidency, doesn't end with New York voters. Governor Christie is in the same boat, even after his approval ratings shot through the roof in the aftermath of his apparently competent handling of Hurricane Sandy. Take, for example, a May 2013 NBC/Marist poll that found his statewide approval at 69%, with just 24% disapproving. Regardless, less than half of the number that approved of his job performance wanted him to run for President (34%), while a solid majority preferred he not run (55%). A Quinnipiac Poll from one month earlier had similar findings. Christie was again wildly popular (sporting a 70/23% job approval rating), while a slight plurality of New Jersey registered voters (47%) preferred he NOT run for President in 2016. And a six-month old Harper Polling survey, taken well before "Bridgegate" became a part of our political lexicon, found only 34% of New Jersey voters wanted Christie to run for President, while 43% would rather he didn't; this, despite a strong 56/34% favorability rating.

What drives this aversion to higher office so often seen in voters who are generally supportive of their home-state politicians? Is it mere selfishness - do they feel their Senator, or Governor, has done such a great job, that they couldn't bare for him or her to leave? Or is it less hero-worship, and something more apathetic? Do they fear national embarrassment? Either way, the phenomenon has reared its head time and again with both 2012 and 2016 presidential primary nominees, and throughout history (at least based on the somewhat limited public data I was able to retrieve on the topic.)

Consider the table below, which compiles state-based polls on local support for home-state Senators or Governors running for an upcoming Presidential race in one chart. The far right column documents the politician's local job approval or favorability rating at the time of the poll (where the information is available). Entries highlighted in red indicate at least a plurality of state-voters were supportive of the particular candidate running for President.

* denotes favorability, not job approval rating. **asks to rate the Governor/Senator's job performance as excellent, good, fair, or poor.  ^Asks whether Pawlenty/Bachmann should run for POTUS, Sen, House, or No Office.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Another Special Election Proves To Be Too Tricky For PPP, while Red Racing Horses Finally Shines

2010 Democratic nominee for Governor looks sternly at her opponent during that race. Her loss last night seems all the more surprising, given her status as a known commodity statewide, and Jolly's relative obscurity. Pic courtesy of Getty.

Special thanks to Greg Giroux, whose work is cited frequently throughout the article.

Last May, Democratic pollster Public Policy Polling caught a little flack for what more than a few observers considered a major polling miss in South Carolina's special election between Mark Sanford and Elizabeth Colbert-Busch. And though their single Florida Special House poll wasn't quite so bad, it wasn't good either.

Republican David Jolly defeated Democrat Alex Sink last night by about 2 points. Yet according to PPP, Sink was supposed to have won, and by 3 points. At the same time, PPP's Republican counterpart, Red Racing Horses, nailed the final margin with a poll they released last week. So score one for Red Racing Horses

In a survey that was concluded Sunday, PPP also found that Democrat Alex Sink was carrying early voters 52-45%. Red Racing Horses found Sink leading by just 2 points with early voters, 48-46%. The actual final result among early voters? Sink by 2 points, or 48.5 - 46.2%. Score two for Red Racing Horses.

Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Ann Richards, She Is Not: Ominous Signs For Wendy Davis On Texas Primary Night

Photos courtesy of Bettmann/CORBIS and Erich Schlegel/Getty

Wendy Davis, as beloved by the liberal grassroots, Hollywood left, and abortion rights activists as she may be, doesn't seem all that poised to become the first Democrat to capture the Texas Governor's mansion since Ann Richards in 1990. In spite of an impressive fundraising presence, she's had a bumbling media presence, and poor poll numbers.

After a close look at last night's primary results, it's doubtful anyone will be disabused of the notion that Davis is likely to lose to Abbott in the fall. With 99.9% of precincts reporting, Wendy Davis defeated her primary opposition in a two-person field with an undeniably impressive 79% of the vote (about 432,000 people).

But the bright-spots stop there. She attracted less primary votes than three of the two Democratic Texas Gubernatorial nominees before her - Bill White in 2010 (517,000 votes), and Tony Sanchez in 2002 (609,000 votes). She outperformed the third only slightly, Chris Bell, in 2006 (325,000 votes). In fact, Davis's vote total was only a fraction of the woman's she no-doubt considers a hero, former Governor Ann Richardson (who attracted 807,000 votes in her primary for re-election 20 years ago).

As bad as that sounds, it gets worse. Republican Greg Abbott also won his party's primary last night, but by an even more impressive 92%. That's a whopping 1.2+ million votes, by far the most of any Texas Gubernatorial Primary candidate, Republican or Democrat, ever.

Yeah, yeah, I know what you're thinking. Texas is filled with Republicans, so obviously, Abbott's primary vote total is is going to be higher than Wendy's. True, but her vote total, as a percentage of the winner of the GOP primary's vote total, is lower than Bill White and Chris Bell's before her (Rick Perry ran unopposed in the 2002 GOP primary).

Before going on to lose to Perry in the general election by 9-pts, Chris Bell (D) managed to win 59% of the total number of voters that Perry won on primary night, 2006 (553,000 votes). In 2010, Democrat Bill White won an even larger share of Perry's voters (68%) on primary night than Bell. He, too, went down in defeat to Perry that November, by 13-pts.

What share of Greg Abbott's vote total did Wendy Davis win last night? A pretty paltry 35%.

Yes, you read that correctly. Davis, in her primary, won just 35% of the total votes won by Greg Abbott in his.

Obviously, variables like primary vote totals don't necessarily predict the outcome of a general election months down the road. These races aren't frozen in vacuums. They're fluid, and susceptible to any number of things, like the noise of the 24-hour news cycle. And look no further than 1994 for an example of when the bigger primary vote-getter did NOT go on to win the general election.

...but still. Thirty-five percent, and 432,000 votes? Is this even remotely impressive for someone of Wendy's rock-star status?  More than that, what does it say of the Democrat's hopes of "turning Texas blue"?

Friday, February 28, 2014

Newest Michigan Senate and Governor Poll Provides A Great Lesson On Identifying Outliers

Photo courtesy of A.P.

One of the brightest spots for Republicans in the 2014 midterm cycle thus far has been the unexpected competitiveness of the Michigan Governor's and Senate race. Not so long ago, incumbent Republican Governor Rick Snyder's job approval ratings were in the doldrums, as Democrat Gary Peters enjoyed a near-year long polling advantage over Republican Terry Land in the battle for retiring legend Carl Levin's senate seat. To boot, Barack Obama had just won Michigan, Romney's home-state, by ten points, while incumbent Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow went on to topple her Republican challenger by 20 points. In other words, things just didn't look as feasible for Republicans as they do today in Michigan before the last few months.

But after several months and several polls, Democrats were finally thrown a bone from a new Democratic polling group called Clarity Campaigns. Yes, the website that had twitter ensnared yesterday in a clever name-game/political profile also released a survey that flies in the face of the most recent Michigan gubernatorial and senatorial polls that show the pair of Republicans with small to comfortable statewide leads. Clarity, on the other hand, finds both gubernatorial challenger Mark Schauer (D) and senate hopeful Gary Peters (D) with comfortable leads over Gov. Snyder (R) and Terry Land (R). Consider the chart below:

Only the last 3 Michigan Sen/Gov surveys with readily available crosstabs were used in this comparison.

As you can see, with regards to the 2014 Michigan Governor's race, it's as if Clarity and Epic/Harper/PPP are polling in two different universes. Of the twelve measurements considered across four demographic groups, Democratic challenger Mark Schauer leads Gov. Rick Snyder in all but two. The opposite is true for Epic-MRA, Harper Polling, and PPP. Epic-MRA finds Rick Snyder leading Mark Schauer in EIGHT of the TWELVE measurements examined. Harper finds him leading in TEN of TWELVE measurements, PPP finds Snyder leading in six of eleven measurements.