May 29, 2008
Poll Watch: SUSA Kansas GE (Veep edition)
SurveyUSA Kansas General Election Matchup
- John McCain- 49%
- Barack Obama- 39%
This is a poll of registered voters.
http://race42008.com/2008/05/29/poll-watch-susa-kansas-ge-veep-edition/trackback/
May 29th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Sebellius seems to add nothing to the ticket in Kansas; Obama/Sebellius then a flat McCain v. Obama matchup or the Obama/Edwards tickets.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
More evidence that McCain gets the biggest lift from Huckabee, and Obama gets the biggest lift from Edwards.
Of course some around here still think that Romney in the VP spot would be the greatest pick since God chose the Blessed Virgin Mary to birth His Son. They seem to think that EVERYBODY has a crush on Romney, which is precisely why he won the Nomina……
Oh, wait……..
May 29th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Still a long way to go until November, but Huckabee and Romney are looking strong thats for sure.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Funny that Sebelius - popular as she as - doesn’t give more of a lift in her home state.
May 29th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Look who’s at the bottom again!
May 29th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
IR-MN,
I seem to have to remind everyone of this each poll; unknown VP’s, without exception, perform poorly in these polls. Hey…isn’t it just, like, totally wild that Kathleen Sebellius was polling at Rendell and Hagel levels in Ohio, Penn, VA, etc, and now she’s suddenly tied with John Edwards as the strongest Democratic VP. I guess her popularity must have gone up by like 20 points in 2 days!
May 29th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Why, I wonder, does McCain/Pawlenty do 17 points better then Obama/Rendell or Obama/Hagel, while McCain only does 10 points better then Obama, by himself? Hey, maybe it’s because the 6% of Kansans that have heard of Tim Pawlenty are jumping over the moon to vote for him. That’s as silly as your interpretation “Pawlenty is weak, because Pawlenty is, oddly enough, not adding anything to McCain in a state where 6% of the voters have heard of him. Total…Failure…Is….Imminent”.
May 29th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
MWS - As a good Catholic, you may want to think of nicer ways to belittle candidates, some that are not quite so sacrilegious perhaps?
May 29th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Illinois,
Nothing sacriligious about it. God made the right choice (not that He needs my affirmation…).
May 29th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
#6, this will be settled when the MN poll comes out.
May 29th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
“I seem to have to remind everyone of this each poll; unknown VP’s, without exception, perform poorly in these polls”
No, they perform poorly - period. Unknowns (such as Pawlenty or Jindal) are going to perform far more poorly because people don’t know enough about them. And, while I’m sure they have their own positives, as long as McCain seems to be waiting, I doubt we could fully introduce, vet, and combat and negatives for a new face.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
act-blog,
What makes you think that these “negatives” would ever surface? Romney’s viewed so negatively by so many Americans in large part because he was campaigning for the presidency and his opponents had a vested interest in bringing out those negatives and the public (which was considering electing him, after all) had a vested interest in caring about these negatives. They did so through ads, through opposition research, through stump speeches, through a spin team which attempted to create a media narrative, etc. Being in the spotlight does that to you. In contrast, McCain’s image improved enormously in the late fall and Winter. Indeed, this is likely the reason he’s our nominee today; he was able to keep the spotlight off of himself during the time period where he was most likely to receive negative scrutiny.
By the time conservatives realized that John McCain, yes that John McCain, might be our nominee, it was far too late; the narrative had spiraled out of their control. VP’s are, to a large degree, ceremonial figures. Historically, the most attention Veeps have received came BEFORE they were chosen and in the first few days after their selection. After that initial introduction, they largely fade into the background, and they certainly don’t receive anything like the sort of negative attention that a presidential gets. I’ll bet you any sum you’d like that Mitt Romney currently has higher negatives then any “unknown” will ever have. Barring some major scandal, VP’s only serve to reassure voters, generate a little bit of temporary excitement (and newness always generates temporary excitement), and connect with voters, on a micro-level, in certain demographics or states. Most of this is behind the scenes stuff and simply isn’t capable of generating negatives. The only worry with “new” VP’s are scandals and major gaffes. McCain will have a larger personal dossier on his prospective VP then he ever had on Romney, so scandals largely not a problem (if McCain selects them, they’re probably free of major problems on that front) and gaffes largely come about because the person is an inexperienced campaigner, unfamiliar with the campaign’s message, or sketchy on the issues; none of these are true of Pawlenty. Your concerns are baseless, though understandable given your insistence that Romney’s the best VP, regardless of the facts on the ground.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
I think while we all love talking about he VP, and it’s exciting and there are all these possibliities…in the end, I don’t think the Vp choice will have much of an impact .
I think McCain will either win or lose based on his own attributes and the same goes for Obama.
On a scale of 1-100, 100 being McCain definitely wins, I’d say the VP will at most add a few pts to the total.
But with nothing else happening, really, we’re all focused on the VP choice.
This dem primary fight has been far more helpful to McCain’s chances, as has Obama getting the nomination, as would a Hillary convention fight which I give at least a 50% chance of happening.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
This would seem to indicate that a bi-partisan ticket does NOT go over well, given how poorly Obama-Hagel performs.
Given the current political climate, I had assumed the public would be clamoring for bipartisanship.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
While on the subject of potential veeps, Rudy Giuliani spoke with Steve Doocy on Fox and Friends this morning. Giuliani was asked what John McCain needs other than someone who is younger than himself in a running mate.
“Well, I think John needs somebody who can be president, first of all, because he can’t have any question about the possibility of anyone taking over in an instant. Knowing John, it will be who he’s comfortable with the most, who will make the best teammate.”
May 29th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
I agree with #13, in part. People vote for the top of the ticket, not the bottom. BUT the choice of running mate affects how people perceive the man on the top of the ticket.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Alright, lets assume that there WON’T be scandals. Fine. I wasn’t necessairily referring to scandal. I was referring to things like “he’s too young” (Jindal), “he lacks experience” (Crist). or “X is simply a pick to generate headlines” (Palin, Watts, etc.)
As for Romney being disliked, well, maybe - but have any of these Veep polls shown Romney to do significant damage to the ticket? He helps greatly in Michigan, probably the biggest swing state, and doesn’t appear to do any damage here.
—
“I think while we all love talking about he VP, and it’s exciting and there are all these possibliities…in the end, I don’t think the Vp choice will have much of an impact .”
I disagree. While national impact may be small, even bringing in one or two states could greatly change the result. And, in any case, the VP would deffinately be important for 2012.
—-
And, just give me an honest answer: Do you seriously believe that what is looking more and more like only a couple months between Veep announcement and election will be enough to introduce Pawlenty, reassure Conservatives about a person they don’t know, and allow him to generate a lage enough following?
May 29th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
I guess the Republicans are alive and well in Idaho. I noticed in their non-binding primary Tuesday that Ron Paul got more votes than Barack Obama did, and McCain got more than Hillary and Obama combined. That is one of the few states where Republicans have outvoted Democrats. I’m not sure why Hagel doesn’t play. I know Hagel is very conservative, but I thought the war was all Democrats cared about right now. I think voters might see a bipartisan ticket as insincere, and when polled, it might push partisans to the undecided category. For example, if someone polled me and asked who I’d vote for between McCain/Romney and Obama/Clinton, I wouldn’t give it two seconds thought. If the matchup was McCain/Lieberman vs. Obama/Hagel, I’d have to think for a long time about it and would probably say undecided.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
I don’t understand why Jindal being young is an issue. He has executive experience, something Obama does not. He has served in Congress. What swing voter is going to say, “I won’t vote for McCain because his running mate is too young.”? I guess the drawback is that it could look gimicky, a bit like the Quayle pick in 1988. I also wonder how Indian-American politicians tend to play with Hispanic voters. Does that help or hurt?
May 29th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Interesting from realclearpolitics:
MR. COOK: Let me switch gears if I could with both of you. Politics - a different housing issue - the White House. Who is going to occupy it going forward? Governor Rendell, on the Democratic side, you’ve been a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton. Tell me how this wraps up amicably and any prospect for a joint ticket.
GOV. RENDELL: Well, I’m not sure how it wraps up. You know, this is the most interesting political election that I’ve ever been through. Since March - and that’s now three months: March, April, and pretty much all of May - Senator Clinton has won the popular vote by 55, 45 percent. She’s had incredible landslides in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Puerto Rico, and Pennsylvania, and Ohio. And she’s been winning everything, basically everything - lost in North Carolina - and yet people are saying, well, she can’t win. She can’t be the nominee.
I always thought that it’s our party’s responsibility to elect - especially when you have two good, capable candidates like we do - to nominate the one who has the best chance of winning in November. And every poll shows that in the key states - the Pennsylvanias, the Floridas, the Ohios - in those key states, Senator Clinton is a far better fall candidate.
Having said that, I’m a realist, and I think most likely the superdelegates will give Senator Obama the votes he needs. I don’t think the DNC is going to fairly adjust what happened in Florida.
MR. COOK: That meeting this weekend.
GOV. RENDELL: Yeah, I don’t think they’re going to fairly adjust it. So I think it’s very unlikely that Senator Clinton can prevail. I think that means we’re not going to field our strongest candidate.
Can Senator Obama win? Sure he can. He’s a good charismatic candidate. He’s got some great ideas. Would he be strengthened by having Hillary Clinton on the ticket? I believe so. I believe so. But that can’t be worked out by any staff members, any advisors. The only way they can work it out is for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to sit in a room by themselves and discuss whether it’s workable. If they believe it’s workable, then I think that should be our ticket. If they don’t, then we should go on.
MR. COOK: Governor Pawlenty, in the mean time, while the Democrats have been bruising each other, there’s some suggesting that perhaps John McCain hasn’t brought together the Republican Party in full the way he needs to heading into the November election. What do you make of that?
GOV. PAWLENTY: Well, there’s a lot of anecdotal talk about that. But if you look at the polling that shows the support and the degree of support he’s getting from Republicans or conservatives, it’s as high or higher than all the other candidates at this point in the race in previous presidential elections. So I think that’s largely kind of chatter and not really consistent with the data that is coming in. So I think he has done a good job and has consolidated Republican or conservative support. And now, of course, he wants to reach out and try to attract independents and conservative Democrats and others.
MR. COOK: Have you penciled in October 2nd on your calendar? That’s the date for the vice presidential debate. And there’s some suggesting perhaps I’ve got the two men in the room who might be at that debate. Have you thought about that?
GOV. PAWLENTY: Well, I have not, no. But whether you’re Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton or John McCain, you’re going to be looking at dozens of people. And to suggest any one person is likely to be that person I think is just raw speculation.
MR. COOK: Do you have any thoughts on Governor Rendell joining the Democratic ticket?
GOV. PAWLENTY: I love Governor Rendell. He’s my buddy. And I’ve been out in cable TV world promoting him as a VP for the Democratic side.
GOV. RENDELL: As I have Tim.
MR. COOK: I was going to ask you your assessment of Governor Pawlenty as a running mate for John McCain.
GOV. RENDELL: Well, I think I kid around and say I’d be a great running mate for Senator Obama. I wear a flag pin, so it’s be a balanced ticket. Tim has youth and energy and great wisdom. You know, when I first met Governor Pawlenty, I said, boy, young man looks even younger than his age. But Tim brings a great sense of balance, and also a great sense of right and wrong. I think in this business, the one thing that people should look for is candidates who understand the difference between right and wrong. And I think he has it.
MR. COOK: One final question, I’ve got to run some numbers by you. SurveyUSA had Obama-Rendell versus McCain-Pawlenty 49-37 in favor of the Democrats.
GOV. PAWLENTY: Well, it’s early yet. I think Michael Dukakis was ahead 20 points at this point in the campaign earlier as well. So I think these early numbers don’t mean much until you get into the fall.
MR. COOK: Your take?
GOV. RENDELL: That’s the correct answer. I don’t think anybody on our side should be overconfident. John McCain, regardless of who his running mate is going to be, is going to be a tough candidate. Don’t underestimate John McCain ever.
GOV. PAWLENTY: But I think those numbers show the power of Rendell being on the ticket.
GOV. RENDELL: (Chuckles.) Right, absolutely.
MR. COOK: Let me squeeze in one last question to you. Have you had the heart-to-heart with Hillary Clinton? Has she asked you, should I get out?
GOV. RENDELL: No. I’m a great supporter of Senator Clinton but not an insider. In fact, I have had virtually no communication since they left Pennsylvania. And I haven’t reached out. If they want my opinion, they’ll ask for it. And I think she’s doing the right thing carrying this to the end of the primaries. Then, they’ll take a deep breath, make one last case to the superdelegates. If it doesn’t resonate, then I think get out and unify the party. But make that one last case, because I believe with all my heart she is our strongest candidate in the fall, in Pennsylvania, in Florida, in Ohio, in West Virginia, in Kentucky, so many of those states that could go either way. But we’ll see.
MR. COOK: I look forward to seeing you both in St. Louis on October 2nd.
(Laughter.)
GOV. RENDELL: We’ll be there. But we’ll probably be in the audience.
GOV. PAWLENTY: With popcorn in the back row.
MR. COOK: Appreciate it very much. Thank you for the time.
GOV. RENDELL: See you.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
I know we will win Kansas anyways, but it is interesting that Mr. Pawlenty does not add as much to the ticket as the others. There is still time for thing to change, but I admit I am a bit surprised that Mr. Pawlenty is not doing better. Perhaps the high undecided rate is a positive sign for him, he does have room to grow.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Clarence,
Chuck Hagel is not very conservative. According to National Journal’s 2007 Senate rankings, only eight GOP senators graded out as more liberal than Hagel (Warner, Lugar, Voinovich, Coleman, Collins, Specter, Smith, Snowe).
On social issues, only four Republicans (Lugar, Collins, Specter, Snowe) were more liberal.
On foreign policy issues, only Oregon’s Gordon Smith was more liberal. Democrats Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor and Joe Lieberman scored more conservatively.
It’s only on economic issues where Hagel grades out as a mainstream conservative, tying Lindsey Graham as the 18th most conservative GOPer.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Why are they wasting their time on Kansas? I want to see some Nevada, and Colorado, and states that can go either way and VPs may make a difference.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
So, why does McCain/Huckabee do a measly 4 points better than McCain/Romney against Obama/Edwards in Kansas? Mitt dropped out before Kansas, and therefore didn’t campaign there, whereas Huckabee was trying to make some sort of last stand there and campaigned as if his life depended on it. That explains the lousy 4 points difference.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Lieberman plays down chances of being on McCain ticket
Thu May 29 (AFP)
US Senator Joe Lieberman said Thursday he had no plan to be the running mate for Republican presidential hopeful John McCain.
“I have been there and done that. I already have that T-shirt and (I’m) proud of it,” he said during a visit to Japan when asked about the chances of a McCain-Lieberman ticket.
“I am spending all the time I can outside the Senate to help him (McCain) become our next president. He can find somebody better to be vice president,” he told a press conference.
Lieberman was visiting Japan to discuss anti-climate change legislation he has co-authored for congressional debate.
The veteran lawmaker said global warming would be a top issue for the next US president, regardless of his or her party.
Lieberman’s legislation aims to establish a market for emission trading and to cut emissions in the United States by some 70 percent by 2050 from 2005 levels.
“Both Senator McCain and Senator (Barack) Obama support a cap-and-trade system for the US,” said Lieberman.
“So regardless of the result of the election … the next president of the United States will be proactive on this important question,” he said.
A cap-and-trade system sets a limit on total greenhouse gas emissions but allows companies to sell unused emission credits to other firms that have exceeded their quotas.
Lieberman said the United States has a “moral responsibility” to fight global warming and US President George W. Bush made “a mistake with many consequences” when he withdrew the United States from the Kyoto Protocol.
Bush objected to Kyoto because it did not apply binding greenhouse gas targets to fast-growing China and India.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
#24 - Huckabee only scored 1 point higher per contest! Wait til you see the Colorado and Nevada. Mitt will clean their clocks! And in that state, as in Michigan, it will mean something.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Fwiw, it’s a waste of time and money to be polling potential pres/veep matchups, and a colossal waste to be doing so at the state level. But hey, it’s SUSA’s and their sponsors’ money and time, not mine.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
What are the chances that SUSA could have been secretly contracted by the McCain camp to do these polls?
May 29th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
“Bush objected to Kyoto because it did not apply binding greenhouse gas targets to fast-growing China and India.”
…and he was right to do so. The world shouldn’t expect the U.S. to stunt our economic growth while China and India take the lead restriction-free.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
btw, this is off thread but Harvey Korman, the Great Gazoo, has died. In the name of all those who laughed our heads off at Blazing Saddles and History of the World Part 1, RIP Count de Money.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
MWS, what are you talking about? Huckabee only scored one point better than Romney.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Guys. MWS needs a hug, he really sounds like he’s having a bad day. Don’t get down MWS, Huckabee is holding down the great(SWING)state of Kansas with 1% higher than Romney. That’s exactly what McCain is looking for when he chooses a VP. Who can capture KANSAS!!! Keep that head held high. *sigh*
May 29th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
It has been mentioned already that Huckabee campaigned hard in Kansas, and many Mitt supporters are probably a little miffed that they strongly supported him only to have him pull out just before they had a chance to vote for him. But, the other factor is that Kansas is a neighboring state of Arkansas. Albeit, it is one of the 6 states that when you add all their pardons together you don’t get as many as Huckabee issued during his tenure as governor.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
palin crushes huck and romney combined with the number of voters she can bring in. she made it to the finals of that veep poll with zero national exposure against huckabee, who was a national media darling. white woman have turned on obama, his negatives are soaring with them, think about a woman vp who can get those hillary voters with none of clinton’s negatives. mccain-palin wins, and wins big.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:19 am
I am not a Romney fan at all, but those are impressive numbers for Michigan. Even if Obama wins Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa and Nevada, if he wins Michigan, he is President.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Great point K.
If J’Mac has any sense he picks the Roms. Afraid that is a big if.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:02 am
The border with Kansas and Arkansas is really not that big and they are not exactly in the same region of the country, but I guess it is a border.
If Mr. Romney does deliver us Colorado, NM, Nevada, and Iowa or at least makes the difference between a win and a loss in at least some of them without serious damage elsewhere then yes, the Romney supporters are correct that he is a good, but winning Michigan alone does not cut it. Yes Michigan is 17 point, but as of yet (lack of polling) we have very little reason to believe that any other VP candidate would lose Michigan for us.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:09 am
Other than having good friends that live there, I do not know a whole about the state on the ground. It is a safe state, so they probably should not have polls there, (but every state should get one poll) but I admit the fact that Mr. Romney did OK, may mean that he is more acceptable to the general public than some of us previously thought.
May 30th, 2008 at 7:12 am
38-
I am open to that suggestion because I like Romney, but corporate-guy-in-a-suit republican scares me with that brand so toxic right now and the economy sure to be an issue in Nov.
May 30th, 2008 at 7:46 am
Aaron Goldman, you hit the right argument, Rudy does fit the VP requirements that McCain has
in mind. Forget about the names Pawlenty, Palin, Meg Whitman, Lieberman,Crist etc. etc. etc.
Rural America has no inkling of who these individuals are. But when you mention Rudy Giuliani
there is instant recognition by these ” hardworking white voters ” as Hillary referred to
which are a big voter bloc in the swing states which we have to court in order to win in the
general election. The negative on the Romney argument, he is likewise known by this voter
bloc and he looks dreary, not dramatic enough to counteract Obama’ s seemingly electric
rhetoric.
May 30th, 2008 at 8:00 am
I had a dream last night that I was driving along the road with McCain and he told me that Huckabee would be his pick.
I told him that I wouldn’t vote for him.
Bad dream.
May 30th, 2008 at 8:01 am
#40 - LOL - How can you keep a straight face and say that Romney ‘looks dreary, not dramatic enough’?
Rudy fell flat on his face in the campaign. He was fatally flawed. Did he get 1 delegate? I think so…..everywhere this guy campaigned, he went down in the polls. Maybe you were just trying to be funny?
May 30th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Alex, that wasn’t a dream, that was a night mare!
May 30th, 2008 at 8:16 am
It was a very bad nightmare, Illinoisguy!
May 30th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Huckabee is praying that we all have that dream. I kinda like that dream, though Sanford would be better.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I am rather suspicious of these types of polls. There are seventeen choices listed. They are basically the exact same question asked over and over and over and over again. The only difference between them only amounts to a minor tweak.
At what point do the brains of the respondents switch off and their eyes glaze over?
May 30th, 2008 at 11:28 am
marK: Exactly the point I was making to Illinoisguy in another thread. I think these VP polls are very dubious — respondents tune out after too many questions.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
I gree with you Bob. Unfortunately, these guys are being asked about VP choices they’ve never heard of and they can’t watch their American Idol and take these stupid polls at the same time.
May 30th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Guys, you got to get a life, when you’re starting to dream about this!!
May 31st, 2008 at 9:21 am
rudy is pro-choice, he has been damaged in the primary, and has a ton of scandals. if you want barack saying bernard kerik every 10 seconds, then rudy is vp. he is too old and too controversial. palin brings far more votes then rudy.