Plan B Forum

In all the years I've been following polling, I don't believe I've seen this many polls with such divergent results conducted over such a short period of time for a major race:

Poll Date Sample Cuomo (D) Paladino (R) Spread
RCP Average 9/16 - 9/22 -- 52.2 35.6 Cuomo +16.6
SurveyUSA 9/20 - 9/21 527 LV 49 40 Cuomo +9
Marist* 9/19 - 9/22 617 LV 52 33 Cuomo +19
Siena* 9/16 - 9/21 801 RV 57 24 Cuomo +33
Quinnipiac 9/16 - 9/20 751 LV 49 43 Cuomo +6
Rasmussen9/16 - 9/16 500 LV 54 38 Cuomo +16

So, over a space of six days, we have five polls conducted, where, depending on which one you want to believe, Cuomo is either in serious trouble or cruising to an easy landslide victory, or something in between....

The conventional wisdom had been that Cuomo would beat this unknown Buffalo businessman easily, but from what I've been reading so far he's been taking the race for granted to such an extent that his campaign has been virtually invisible. That would seem to be a huge mistake against an extremely wealthy opponent in a heavily anti-incumbent year, in a state that has been plagued by scandals and corruption to an extreme degree in state government (both by the past two governors and other leading figures in state legislature)

Those conditions are tailor made for a political outsider to knock off an incumbent office holder who is where he is primarily because of his last name...

Now, in an effort to try an determine the outlier in these poll results, let's compare these results to recent poll results in the New York Senate race between Sen. Gillibrand and Congressman Joe DioGuardi :

Poll Date Sample Gillibrand (D) DioGuardi (R) Spread
RCP Average 9/16 - 9/21 -- 49.8 39.0 Gillibrand +10.8
SurveyUSA 9/20 - 9/21 527 LV 45 44 Gillibrand +1
Siena 9/16 - 9/21 801 RV 57 31 Gillibrand +26
Quinnipiac 9/16 - 9/20 751 LV 48 42 Gillibrand +6
Rasmussen 9/16 - 9/16 500 LV 49 39 Gillibrand +10

I think this makes it pretty clear where the problem is....

It's the Siena poll.....

I've said all along that I felt strongly that Gillibrand would be very vulnerable because in all the polls taken for months, despite the fact that the GOP hadn't even picked a candidate till a couple of weeks ago, she rarely polled over 50% You can check this for yourself :

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1469.html

Look at all the previous polls before the one's I posted. With one exception, the polls that do have her over 50% are all Siena polls...and even they never had her anywhere near 57%

There are two things wrong with Siena:

First, it would appear that in this most recent poll, their must have been some sort of flaw in the methodology, because even by their own standards, the numbers look skewed....

The other problem is they are doing "registered voter" versus "likely voter" polling, which is always a less accurate predictor of the sentiment of the voters who will show up at the polls, particularly so in mid-term elections, and even more so in a year when there is an historically huge gap in voter enthusiasm.

So it seems to me that if you want to get a true take on where voter sentiment in New York stands at the moment in these two races, , you throw out the Siena polls and average the rest. If you do this, you see Cuomo with a clear lead, but not a mortal lock, and Gillibrand in a close fight.

Okay, well this sucks....

I posted those poll results with much more readable spacing...

I just went back and looked in edit mode and the spacing is exactly the way I set it up, but for some reason in the public post it's all run together making it difficult to read....

Wus up wid dat?

If you hit quote it looks fine

Perhaps a job for the suggestions page?

Probably...

What appears to have happened is this....

When I copied and pasted it from Real Clear Politics it pasted in that squished format...

So I manually separated it out so it would be more readable. (And in the edit function it still looks just the way I had it)

But when it posts, it reverts back to the way it looked when I originally pasted it...

This must be a script issue of some sort, because I've done the same thing at the CSB for years and not had this problem....

MOTU

THE FIENDS!

I've been following the pols in the newspaper (hard copy if you believe it). One day they blast on the front page that Pallidino is in a virtual tie with Cuomo, the next day they come out with Cuomo in a runaway. Then I read further and came to the same conclusion you did LordJim, the difference was "registered voters vs likely to vote". From what I've read, Cuomo is taking a "wait and see" approach for now. And from what he said, he's not going to run a "nasty" campaign. We'll see how this plays out.
I think the only way Palladino can win is if upstate voters come out in numbers and us downstate voters (NYC included) don't come out in numbers and those that do go no more than 55-45 for Cuomo.

Haven't read much about "how" either candidate is going to fix this state. Palladino is pretty much only using the "mad as hell and we're not taking it anymore" he acknowledged he got that from the movie Network tag line and Cuomo has said he is mad too but we should channel that energy into "solutions" not just rhetoric. What those solutions are remains to be seen.

Oh, and Palladino has been saying Cuomo should have the callunes (sp? aka balls) to debate him.

Haven't seen much, if anything, on Gillibrand, Schummer and opponents.

Palladino has been saying Cuomo should have the callunes (sp? aka balls) to debate him.

I suspect that if a few more polls come out showing him with a lead in single digits, Prince Andrew will decide to take Palladino up on his debate challenge....

I agree, but if I were in the Cuomo camp, one thing i would try to do is to get as many other third party candidates into the debates as possible to give them publicity so the anger can be spread out beyond Palladino (of course if i were in the Palladino camp I'd resist this at all costs). It will be interesting to see who caves first.

In my state (NJ) they're finding out first hand what happens when you elect a guy with abig mouth and not much else--things start collapsing due to incompetence--we lost billions in federal money because those in his administration couldn't even fill out the forms correctly, but there's till no shortage of rhetoric. People usually get the government they deserve.

And I wonder what Lazio is going to do. AFAIK, he's still on the Conservative ballot. I know the Repubs want him to drop out totally so Palladino can get the conservative nod. (unless he already dropped out, I was away for the weekend and haven't read saturday and sunday newspapers yet).

According to the radio today, he's out.

I heard that too, as well as his better comments of those voting based on anger alone. I imagine the republican establishment must have a lot of dirt to hold over his head and force him to leave the race--it doesn't really seem like he voluntarily left.

Yeah, Lazio's out, but he didn't come out and endorse Paladino either. Lazio said "I remain unconvinced that Carl Paladino will bring the improvements that New Yorkers need and want."

He was able to be removed from the Conservative ticket as he has been nominated as the GOP candidate for a judgeship in the Bronx (heavily Democratic and he's not expected to win).

So basically they are using that other race as a technicality to get him off the ticket.

Speaking of wackiness, this thing y'all do in NY of allowing people to stand as candidates of more than one party - completely f*cked.

Last time around the Suffolk executive Steve Levy (at the time a democrat**) was endorsed by the Dems, the Repubs, the Libs and the conservatives. We basically had no choice in the election. (But I do like Steve Levy and am happy he didn't get the cahnce to run for governor as I do like how he runs suffolk county)

**
He has switched parties and is now a Republican.

Actually, as i recall Rudy Giuliani, of all people, had the liberal party line both times he ran for mayor of NYC. And they say there's a difference between the parties...

I seem to recall that too. And didn't Bloomberg switch parties also?

Scooter wrote:
Speaking of wackiness, this thing y'all do in NY of allowing people to stand as candidates of more than one party - completely f*cked.

As long as I live I will never understand US politics.

Are you actually telling me that someone could stand for election as a Democrat AND a Republican?

That is truly insane.

Are you actually telling me that someone could stand for election as a Democrat AND a Republican?

Yessir...

In fact none other than good old Dick Nixon did it:

After service in the Navy he entered an entirely unstructured California political environment-- parties hardly existed there in the 1940s, and many voters were recent arrivals. As a result Nixon never built a secure base in California (or anywhere else). In 1946 he defeated five-term Democrat Representative Jerry Voorhis, a leading liberal. Two years later, Nixon ran for reelection in both the Republican and Democrat primaries and won endorsement of both parties in the general election.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Richard_Nixon