Monmouth, Rutgers-Eagleton Final NJ Senate Polls Disagree On Strengh Of Lonegan Surge

Conservative heavyweights that you wouldn't expect to see campaigning for Republicans in blue New Jersey, like Rick Perry, Rand Paul, and Sarah Palin, began descending on the state in mid-September, about the same time Lonegan's polling rise began. From left to right, photo courtesy of John Munson/The Star-Ledger, Ruby Cramer/Buzzfeed, and Julio Cortez/A.P.

The New Jersey special Senate election set by Governor Chris Chrstie last spring for a random weekday in October is finally upon us. And if you're the Booker campaign, you're probably thanking your lucky stars it's over. If you're the Lonegan campaign, you're wishing there was more time.

That's because the trajectory in the special Senate race is clear: Republican Steve Lonegan has cut his initial deficit against Cory Booker in half.

Fortunately for Booker, his initial lead was substantial enough (about 20-22 points, according to Huffington Post Pollster) to sustain a fall. With the race coming to a close, he now leads an average 52-41%.

Today alone, with 48 hours remaining before polls close in New Jersey, two new surveys have been released, with Monmouth giving Steve Lonegan his best result to date (52-42%), while Rutgers-Eagleton finds Cory Booker winning by a landslide 58-36%.

Monmouth University has released four surveys on the special New Jersey Senate race since June, with Lonegan making steady progress in each (from Booker +16, to +16, to +13, to +10 now). Rutgers-Eagleton's two surveys on the race agree with Monmouth in finding Lonegan making gains since September, though Booker's lead over Lonegan was always much more formidable according to their numbers (from +35 to +22 now). For the record, recent polls from Stockton University, Rasmussen, and Quinnipiac tend to line-up more with Monthouth's latest overall finding.

So how can two surveys that were in the field at roughly the same time produce such dramatically different results? By disagreeing entirely on the candidate's strengths among various political and demographic groups:

Steve Lonegan Looks Dead On Arrival Thanks to Chris Christie, Cory Booker, & A Special Off-Year Electorate

The trio of a popular Booker, a popular President, and a less than helpful Governor have all but sealed Steve Lonegan's fate. Photo courtesy of Tim Larsen/NJ Governor's Office

Both Democrats AND Republicans can find reason for optimism in New Jersey this year. While Barbara Buono has been headed for certain and substantial defeat at the hands of Governor Chris Christie since Hurricane Sandy, the death of Senior Senator Frank Lautenberg provided Democrats with a golden opportunity to fast track one of their up and coming stars into national political office.

Though what appears to be a sure snoozer of a Special Senate contest this October between Cory Booker (D) and Steve Lonegan (R) didn't always have to be that way.

New Jersey Republicans anticipated challenging either an aging Sen. Lautenburg, or a primary battered Cory Booker in November 2014, not October 2013.

And failed 2005 and 2009 Republican primary challenger for Governor Steve Lonegan was likely FAR from their first choice to take on the popular Newark Mayor. With a statewide electoral record bad enough to make any Republican squirm, Lonegan seems particularly out of his depth against the Obama-esque Booker, especially when accounting for the incredibly abbreviated campaign schedule in a very blue state.

Then came the double-whammy - Republican Governor Chris Christie would be scheduling the special Senate race three weeks in advance of his own gubernatorial re-election, on October 16, 2013, thereby ensuring Lonegan and political observers would be denied learning whether the New Jersey Governor's coattails matched his lofty job approval ratings. It also ensured that Lonegan would likely not lose to Booker by anything less than an embarrassing margin, especially if the early and limited polling on the race is any indication:

Photo courtesy of Real Clear Politics.

PART II: The "Age" Factor - Approaching 70 isn't a great place to be for someone with an old "youth vote" deficit

A variety of young or new faces seem capable of exploiting Hillary's 2008 weakness with young Democratic primary voters. From left, TX Rep. Joaquin Castro, Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Hillary Clinton, San Antonio Julian Castro, and newly-elected Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Though Hillary Clinton caught a bit of bad press recently regarding her national favorability rating, her continued strength as a Democratic primary contender remains unfazed by the factors that caused her popularity to take a slight dip last month, at least according to public polling on the matter.

The most recent survey on the race shows Clinton leading all of her likely Democratic opponents AND undecideds by a miraculous 63-37%, besting her closest competitor Joe Biden by 50 points!

It may all sound a bit like deja vu, until you realize that Hillary is out-distancing her potential 2016 competitors by a far greater margin than she ever did in 2008. Her 2016 polling averages are strong among the groups she's been historically strong with (whites, Hispanics, and women), as well as the groups she performed poorly with in 2008 (blacks, men, 'very liberal' voters).

But there was another group, besides the "change voters" discussed in Part I of this series, that were particularly down on Hillary during her battle with Barack Obama: 18-29 year olds. And if 2008 is any guide, Hillary will want to do some serious advance work on nailing down the youth vote, strong early polling aside.

Despite recent chatter in some conservative circles proposing preemptive attacks on Hillary Clinton's age in preparation for 2016, advanced age in and of itself is certainly no bar to a party's nomination (for recent examples, see Bob Dole and John McCain), nor even the the presidency (see Ronald Reagan).

But when you couple that advanced age with a historical weakness among young voters, you can see why Hillary may need to be creative with ways to reach out to this increasingly influential Democratic voting block.

What do I mean by Hillary Clinton's "weakness with young voters"? I mean that she lost 18-29 year-olds in 2008 to Barack Obama by a significant 60-34%. I also mean that she won 18-29 year olds in just 5 of 40 contests where exit polling was conducted (Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Massachusetts, and West Virginia). Moreover, as the chart below indicates, she lost the next youngest age group, 30-44 year olds, to Obama by a hefty 13 points (54-41%).

Exit Poll Data compiled from CNN. National figures were compiled from state-by-state exit polling, the results of which can be found here.

 
It isn't until the 45-59 age group that Hillary even reaches parity with Obama, tying him 47-47%. Her only significant advantage among any age group came with Democratic primary voters aged 60 and older (Obama only won this age group in 6 of 40 exit-polled contested (Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, South Carolina, Vermont, and Virginia)

Which of Hillary's 2008 weaknesses are most likely to reemerge in 2016? Part I: The "CHANGE" Factor

"Change" candidates aren't always successful at seeking their party's nomination, but that was not the case in 2008. If Clinton wasn't the change candidate then, how can she be in 2016? Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Richard Drew/Pool

In 2008, the Clinton juggernaut collapsed before a comparatively unknown, three-year Senator from Illinios, in part because the big-wigs in Hillaryland failed to anticipate the degree to which members of their own party wanted a candidate who represented that exhausted political buzzword: "change."

It's not that Mark Penn, Patti Solis Doyle, Howard Wolfson, and other 2008 Clinton campaign verterans were idiots - they knew something about how to run a political campaign, and were certainly well aware that after 2.5 years of a historically unpopular President George W. Bush, Americans at the national level would be craving change. But what were the odds that Democrats would turn those same desires against their own darling Clinton? After all, it was the Clinton family that ushered the Democrats out of the political wilderness of the 1980s. It was the Clintons who became the first Democrats to win two presidential terms since FDR. It was the Clintons that presided over the greatest peacetime economic expansion in history.

Yet still, in the Winter and Spring of 2008, Democrats simply weren't buying what the Clintons were selling anymore; this wasn't an "experience" election, and Hillary was NOT the candidate of change.

Whether through miscalculation on her campaign's part, or simply her opponent's own strength, Clinton performed very, very poorly among voters in her party who said they wanted a candidate that could best "bring about change," which, unfortunately for Hillary, wound up being the majority of the Democratic electorate that year.

Flash forward five years, and Hillary Clinton again leads the primary, though this time sweeping nearly every subset of every subgroup of potential Democratic primary voters. Which begs the question: is 2016 the next 2008? Will the next Democratic Presidential primary, or even the next general election, feature a "change" component to the extent seen in 2008? It's hard to say, and there are some obvious differences.

In 2016, it will be Hillary's party that has dominated the White House for 8 years, which could end up a net negative OR positive for her campaign, depending on how Americans continue to perceive the job President Barack Obama is doing (which, as of today, isn't too well).

Yet if the national mood is such that a party of Obama-Democrats jump on the "change" bandwagon once more, Hillary Clinton has a major soft spot for opponents to target, especially if 2008 is any guide.

To understand the extend of Hillary's potential weakness with this group of voters, consider the chart below that documents the make-up of the 2008 Democratic primary electorate based on what voters identified as the "top candidate quality" to exit pollsters, as well as how proponents of each candidate quality split their vote between Clinton and Obama:

Data is compiled from CNN's state-by-state exit polling. I compiled the national data from CNN state exit polling. That process can be found here.

The difference in Obama and Clinton's vote margins among people who identified the ability to "bring about change" as the most important candidate quality, and those who did not, is stark. Obama carried the "change" voters by a landslide 41 points (68-27%), while Hillary carried the rest (voters who said experience, electability, or empathy for others was the most important candidate quality) by an identical 41 points, or 63-22%.

New Jersey Senate 2014: Geraldo Rivera's very, very longshot against Cory Booker

Photo courtesy of Steve Zmijewski, Townsquare Media NJ

The midterm elections, which are typically giant snooze-fests compared to presidential contests, are shaping up to be a downright intriguing, if not puzzling affair. From a Hollywood starlets possible run in Appalachia, to a gay, South Carolina conservative considering a primary challenge from the right against Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), to a former Florida Republican Governor hoping to regain his old seat from the GOP incumbent as a...wait for it...Democrat, there seems to be no shortage of attention-grabbing contests in 2014. And IF Geraldo Rivera throws his name in the ring, you can count the New Jersey Senate race as one of them.

Newark, New Jersey Mayor Cory Booker has long been at the top of Democratic party big wig's list of pols with the most potential; sort-of like the next Barack Obama (who will be exiting the national political stage for good in less than four years). He has many of the qualities Barack possesses; an uncanny ability to connect with people, a burgeoning charisma, and ambition, ambition, ambition! The only problem for party leaders is elevating him from his position of mayor to an office that could serve as a launching pad for something greater. New Jersey Democrats deeply wanted him to challenge Christie in the New Jersey Govenror's race, and just as it began to look like he may, Hurricane Sandy happened, Chris Christie reached near God-like status, and naturally, Booker chickened out. But if Booker was afraid of Gov Christie, he was more than willing to let establishment NJ Democrats know he was NOT afraid of 89 year old, 30 year Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). Despite some tough words threatening a Democratic primary from the Lautenberg camp, the old-man acquiesced, and announced his retirement just a few weeks ago. Since then, limited polling has been pretty strong for Booker in both the Democratic primary and the general election. And according to the new Fairleigh Dickinson PublicMind survey, this remains true even when New Jerseyans are given well-known journalist/TV personality Geraldo Rivera as the Republican choice for Senator in 2014: 

If the election for Frank Lautenberg’s United States Senate seat was held today, and the choice was Democrat Cory Booker or Republican Geraldo Rivera, for whom would you vote?

Cory Booker (D)  -  52%

Geraldo Rivera (R)  -  21%

Unsure  -  23%

If Republicans were hoping that Geraldo would be their savior in New Jersey in 2014, think again. But honestly, who else would give Booker a better run for his money? Nonetheless, let's take a look at where Booker is drawing his strength from through the prism of racial/ethnic identification. Right off the bat, the Fairleigh Dickinson cross tabs draw your attention to the fact that Booker leads Rivera by 27 points, 50-23%, with white voters (he also leads among non-white voters, 60-16%). But Rivera shouldn't let this fact alone keep him from entering the race, especially when you consider how unlikely it is that Booker's support from white's will last through a partisan campaign. The chart below illustrates this point by noting Democrat and Republican's share of the white and non-white vote in every state-wide NJ election I could find exit poll information for:

First off, notice that no single Republican for statewide office in New Jersey has lost the white vote by more than 4 points since 1992. In every other election in which exit poll data was readily available, Republicans won the white vote anywhere from 1 to 25 points. In fact, in the one New Jersey election where Republicans lost the white vote (1996), a strong third party candidacy from Ross Perot was largely to blame, as well as a very weak Republican candidate in Bob Dole. 

Chris Christie's post-Sandy Bounce Holding Strong 4 Months Later, Buono (D) Barely On The Radar

Photo courtesy of Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty

From the standpoint of political popularity, it doesn't get much better than it currently is for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R). He assumed office in 2009 with a respectable 3.5 point victory over the incumbent Democrat, and remained reasonably well-liked, reforming state pensions and taking on the teachers union, in a state known for its preference for Democratic politicians.

But that all changed in the days following October 30, 2012. Hurricane Sandy made landfall in New Jersey, and Chris Christie made a very impassioned, and very public plea for aid for New Jersey residents. Furthermore, as President Obama toured the storm-ravaged area, just days before his reelection, Republican Christie heaped praise on him, to an excessive degree in the minds of many Romney supporters. The total effect of Christie's leadership and bipartisan cooperation in the wake of a devastating storm had a huge lifting affect on attitudes towards Christie personally, as well as the job he was doing in New Jersey. Even nationally, Christie saw a boost in his ratings.

That's why the much touted Newark Mayor, Cory Booker (D) decided against a 2013 gubernatorial run last month. At a point before Hurricane Sandy, Christie was viewed as vulnerable in 2013, and not just because he was your standard Republican running for reelection in a Democratic state, but also because Booker was particularly popular among the Democratic base. In fact, PPP found Booker beating Christie in a hypothetical race in July, 47-43%. Quinnipiac found him trailing just 46-42% in October, while also finding the little-known State Senator Barbara Buono losing by a to-be-expected 49-33% margin. But unfortunately for both of them, that's not the Chris Christie they will get to face in November 2013. No, the new, wildly popular, post-Sandy Christie led Booker in polling by anywhere from 14 to 18 points. As for the woman who is most likely to actually have to face Christie?...

Quinnipiac Poll, Feb 13-17, 2013; NJ Gubernatorial Race:

Chris Christie (R)  -  62%
Barbara Buono (D)  -  25%

She trails by a staggering 37 points. In a post on this blog in December, I argued that Cory Booker, as the Democrats strongest candidate, should still consider running for Governor, under the belief that Christie's post-Sandy job approval would inevitably fade. But as of today, his numbers have shown no recent signs of fading: Consider the below chart on Christie's job approval rating since he took office in 2010:

Compiled from TPM, The Argo Journal, and other random finds

UPDATE #2: Christie vs. Booker, New Jersey Governor's race 2013

Public Policy Pollling (D) became the third pollster in the last week to test a hypothetical Chris Christie (R) vs. Cory Booker (D) 2013 gubernatorial run. On the bright side for Booker, he performs much stronger against Christie in the PPP poll (only trails 50-36%), as opposed to the Rutgers (54-34%) and Quinnipiac (53-35%) poll. On the down side, Booker, a popular Democrat in a blue state, still trails the Republican incumbent by double digits.
     
Similar to the Rutgers and Q-poll, PPP again finds Christie performing exceptionally well with Independents  AND Democrats. In fact, Booker only attracts 57% of Democrats, nearly 30% LESS than the scandal-ridden former New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine (D) did against Christie in 2009. This is almost certainly due to the strong positive marks NJ residents give their Governor on his handling of Hurricane Sandy. But are those strong positive feelings likely to last until election day, 2013?  As I've explored here and here, below is a table showing what the PPP poll would look like had they found Booker attracting 86% of the Democratic vote (the amount Corzine attracted in 2009):

UPDATE: Christie vs. Booker, New Jersey Governor's race 2013

 
Yesterday I proposed that Cory Booker may not want to give up yet on the NJ Governorship in 2013, considering Christie's inflated numbers with Democrats and Independents in the wake of Hurricane Sandy in a new Rutgers-Eagleton poll.

Today, Quinnipiac released their own poll on a hypothetical Booker v. Christie race, and found nearly the exact same result as Rutgers; Christie leads 53-35% (he led 53-34% in the Rutgers poll). Also like the Rutgers poll, Christie is dominating among Republicans and Independents, while siphoning off a fair number of Democrats - 20%, to be exact (26% in the Rutgers poll).

But like last night's post, the results look a bit different in the event Booker is able to do at least as well among Democrats as John Corzine (D) in 2009. The Rutgers poll showing Christie up 53-34% became a 2 point Booker lead (46-44%) if the poll is reweighted to show Booker receiving 86% of the Democratic vote (the percentage obtained by Corzine in '09). Does the same thing happen to the Quinnipiac poll when reweighted to Corzines '09 numbers?:

Why Cory Booker may want to give the 2013 NJ Governor's race another glance

As survey after survey pours out of New Jersey confirming Chris Christie (R) as one of the most popular Governors in America, the likelihood of popular Democratic mayor Cory Booker entering the 2013 gubernatorial race has dropped.

Once thought to be somewhat vulnerable to a challenge from a strong Democrat, Chris Christie now leads all of his challengers by at least 19 points, including the much hyped, rising Democratic star,  Cory Booker. A new Rutgers-Eagleton poll of New Jersey, taken Nov 14-17, shows the boisterous New Jersey Governor receiving a 19 point bounce in his personal favorability rating following a mega-storm that left millions throughout the northeast stranded and without power. Just one month earlier, before Sandy struck, and 1 month after his keynote speech at the RNC, Christie was barely above water with New Jersey voters. His favorability rating was an unimpressive 48/42%, and more voters said they'd rather NOT reelect him (47-44%). Seven weeks later, and Christie's favorability rating has surged to 67/25%, representing a net 36 point net increase. Now, Voters DO want to see him reelected, 59-32%, and a recent Fairleigh Dickinson poll shows his job approval rating at  77%.