Six Polls In Two Days: Cuccinelli Is Definitely Losing, But Pollsters Disagree On Whether He's Closing Or Fading

By far his highest profile campaign surrogate, Hillary Clinton's widespread popularity may indeed help McAuliffe to put it away next week. And more than a few DC journalists have reported that the McAuliffe '13 campaign serves the dual purpose of being a test run Hillary's old inner circle. A.P. photo.

For anyone trying to get a handle on the state of the Virginia Governor's race with just a week to go, today was not the best day to tune in. No less than SIX polling firms have released new numbers since Tuesday, all without a lot in common. Though one overiding theme is present in all of them: Ken Cuccinelli is losing.

In fact, McAuliffe has led his opponent in the last 32 consecutive polls. But agreement on who is winning is where the similarities stop. Consider the small table below, which groups all five recent surveys into one chart:

The Democrat leads by anywhere from a 4-pt to 15-pt spread, with McAuliffe ranging between 42-51% of the vote, Cuccinelli 33-41%, and Sarvis 8-12%.

So take your pick, right?

The problem for Republicans, however, is no matter how you mix and match those polling numbers, there just isn't a winning scenario for Ken Cuccinelli. McAuliffe's worst performance (42% in the Hampton poll) is still better than Cuccinelli's best (41% in the Quinnipiac poll).

Digressing back to the recent poll variation; the trajectory of the race is hard to decipher not simply because of the topline result, but because of divergent trendlines as well. The Washington Post and Roanoke College polls seem to think the ground is crumbling beneath the Republican nominee. In mid-September, McAuliffe led Cuccinelli 47-39%. That lead grew to 51-39% five weeks later. Roanoke found a similar trend, though to a greater extent. Just 3 weeks ago, the local Virginia pollster found the Democrat up against the Republican and Libertarian, 41-36-9%. He's now at 48-33-10%.

ABC / Washington Post House Ballot Poll Stands Out In More Ways Than One

Photo courtesy of http://historicalromneys.tumblr.com/

You know a poll finding might be a little screwy when the actual pollster releases the information with an explanation or caveat. And that's exactly what happened on Thursday morning when Gregory Holyk and Gary Langer of Langer research wrote this in explaining the substantial Democratic lead on the 2014 generic House ballot question in ABC/Washington Post's new national survey:

While it’s far too early to handicap the 2014 election in any serious way, registered voters currently favor the Democratic candidate over the Republican in their congressional district by 48-40 percent, the largest Democratic midterm advantage since 2006. The party saw steep losses in the 2010 midterms.

The result almost entirely reflects a current Democratic advantage in partisan affiliation. Among registered voters in this survey, 33 percent identify themselves as Democrats, 22 percent as Republicans; most of the rest are independents, and they split evenly in their 2014 preference. Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 6 points in the 2012 presidential election and by 7 points in 2008, but they were even in the last two midterms – meaning the Democratic advantage holds only if their midterm turnout improves dramatically.

What Mr. Langer is saying here is not that their finding is incorrect (though that is certainly possible), but rather that if it is accurate, it would break precedent. And as I've pointed out on this blog before, he's right. A Democratic partisan identification advantage over Republicans of 11 points is just very, very unlikely in a midterm election. In fact, partisan identification in every midterm election since 1990 has ranged between D+3 and R+1, a fairly tight window of difference.

Moreover, a glance at the 2014 House Ballot polling over the last month shows ABC/WaPo is a bit of an outlier, both in terms of party I.D., and the overall topline result:

Because Rasmussen Reports tracks the generic House ballot question once a week, their findings are listed as a monthly average for the sake of the chart.

As you can see, the average of pollsters shows the Democrats with just a 3 point advantage over Republicans on the generic House ballot, not 8 points, and with a 7 point party I.D. advantage, not 11 points. So not only is the Washington Post poll an outlier in the scheme of historical 2nd-term midterm election results, it's an outlier when compared to recent House ballot polling.

Tea Party Revival? Two New Polls Provide Conflicting Results in the Wake of the IRS Scandal

The Tea Party was the runner-up 'Person of the Year' for Time Magazine in 2010. Tea Party members, politicians, and activists are pictured above, from left: Sharron Angle, William Temple, Scott Brown, Sal Russo, Rick Santelli, Glenn Beck, Rand Paul, Jim Demint, Sarah Palin (center), Ron Paul, Dick Armey, Stephen Broden, Michele Bachmann, Christine O'Donnell, & Amy Kremer (far right). Illustration courtesy of Finlay Mackay

Though never known for their immense popularity with the public as a whole, the Tea Party has experienced a ratings-dive since their hey-day before the 2010 midterm election. Fortunately for them, there is some new poll data that indicates the recent IRS scandal may be providing the movement with a sympathy bump in terms of public perception.

In 2010, pollsters found the anti-tax, anti-spending conservative group with an overall 33/34% favorable/unfavorable rating, while roughly the same portion of Americans either had no opinion, or refused to state their opinion. At the same time, 29% said they supported the movement, while 26% opposed it.

Yet since those days when the stock market rose and fell in wild swings in a single day, when the unemployment rate peaked at a 10%, when wages plunged to a 20-year year low, public sentiment soured on the always alluring, yet always divisive grassroots movement.

Following the Republican's 2010 midterm landslide, the Tea Party saw their evenly-divided favorability ratings drop to a decidedly negative 30/43% average. And though polling has been somewhat limited since the 2012 election, they've averaged an even less stellar 32/48% in the 6 months since November. Meanwhile, the margin of those saying they "support" rather than "oppose" the movement dropped 6 points since 2010.

But in two surveys out after news broke on May 10th that the IRS targeted conservative groups, it appears the Tea Party is receiving a bit of a sympathy boost as a result of the perceived slight.

CNN is the first to release poll findings showing the Tea Party with a notable gain in public perception. While a plurality of Americans still say they view the Tea Party unfavorably (45%), that number is down from 48% in CNN's poll two months earlier. The number of Americans viewing the Tea Party favorably has seen an even bigger jump, with 37% now viewing the group favorably, vs. 28% in March. Most of that improvement is seen among Democrats and Independents, not Republicans, oddly enough.

ABC/Washington Post joined the fray yesterday with another survey showing the often demonized Tea Party with a respectable 40/43 favorability rating.

But does polling truly indicate an emerging Tea Party resurgence? 

It depends on which of the two post-IRS scandal pollsters you believe most: CNN or ABC/Washington Post.

If you believe CNN, there is some definite movement in favor of the Tea Party as compared to two months ago. The chart below looks at every CNN survey on the Tea Party's favorability rating since 2011, immediately following their takeover of the House of Representatives:

The Tea Party's favorable/unfavorable rating has improved a net 12 points since March 2013, the best numbers measured by CNN since 2010.

Moderate voters skew HEAVILY Democratic in PPP's 2016 polling

Map of 2012/2008 election results among MODERATE voters only. Exit polling was only conducted in 32 states in 2012. In the 18 states where there was no survey, 2008 exit poll results were used. Red = Republican, Blue = Democrat, Green = TIE

I consider myself to be pretty moderate on a number of policy issues, mostly social: abortion, immigration, gay marriage, the death penalty, separation of church and state. But if I were asked by an exit pollster my "ideology" on a scale of very conservative, somewhat conservative, moderate, liberal, or very liberal, I'd probably put myself in the somewhat conservative side of things. My views on taxation and the role of government in the economy shove me to the right. But there's a significant portion of the country that identifies their political ideology as "moderate" (41% to be exact). Who are these so-called "moderate voters" that typically make up the plurality of the presidential electorate, and how do they vote? Even more importantly, how will they vote in 2016?

If early Public Policy Polling surveys on 2016 are any indicator, Republicans will be STOMPED by Democrats among "moderates." In fact, the GOP is poised to win the LEAST amount of so-called "moderate voters" ever (or at least since exit polling began in 1976), especially if Hillary Clinton is their nominee. The chart below documents the moderate vote for Hillary Clinton vs. any GOP opponent in every national or state 2016 poll conducted by PPP over the last month. Unfortunately, the very few polling firms besides PPP that have already started surveying the 2016 race did not provide crosstabs for ideological breakdown. So the focus will be on PPP's results:

If you operate under the assumption that Conservatives vote Republican, Liberals vote Democrat, and Moderates split their vote, you'd be wrong, according to PPP...dead wrong. Hillary Clinton leads Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Newt Gingrich, and Scott Walker among moderates in every state & nat'l poll over the last month, by MASSIVE margins. In fact, the best that any Republican is able to do against Hillary among moderates is Paul Ryan's 57-32% deficit in the state of Pennsylvania. But even then, Hillary leads by 25 points. The WORST any Republican does with moderates is Marco Rubio in Michigan AND his home-state of Florida. Hillary leads him with moderate voters in both states, 65-16% and 71-23% respectively. That's border-line embarrassing for Rubio. To make it worse, Hillary has averaged a 63-25% lead over Republicans with moderates in PPP polling over the last month.

Democracy Corps and ABC/WaPo Confirm Obama's Numbers Are Falling

Photo courtesy of imgur

Since yesterday's post rounding up Barack Obama's job approval ratings post-reelection, two reputable organizations have released new surveys that reinforce the evidence that Obama's approvals are dropping.

Earlier today, ABC/Washington Post released a poll showing that the President has lost a net 10 points on his job approval rating since just before his inauguration in January. Then, 55% of American adults APPROVED of the job the President was doing, while just 41% disapproved. Two months later, the number approving of his job performance has dropped 5 points, while the number disapproving jumps 5 points (50/46). 

Just now, Democracy Corps (a reputable Democratic polling firm), released a poll showing Obama underwater with likely voters, with 48% approving of his job performance, and 49% disapproving. In January, he had a strong 54% approval rating, with just 44% disapproving. That's a net 11 point drop for the President in two months. Below is an updated chart (originally posted here) of the President's job approval rating since the sequester took effect. 

Where is Obama's drop in support stemming from? In the ABC/Washington Post poll, it's coming from Independents. Independents approved of the President's job performance by a 54/41% margin in January, whereas today they DISAPPROVE of his performance, 44/50%. That's a 19 point turnaround in just two months. Republicans also saw a net 12 point increase in their disapproval of the President's job performance. In terms of ideological identification and gender, his drop in support was uniform across Liberals, Moderates, Conservatives, men, and women.