Catching up... -- Fitzy

For the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Benenson Strategy Group conducted a poll over October 6 and 7, 2008. With a margin of error of 4.9 percent, here's what they found:

Mark Schauer (D) - 43
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 35

The press release didn't release details like sample size or, for that matter, if they asked any other questions, and I'm mentioning this late enough that I feel silly asking for those details now. Suffice it to say, this seems more or less in line with the poll the Schauer campaign released at about the same time.

Right now, I'm inclined to believe that both polls are accurate, and Schauer is leading by a respectable margin, with a lot of undecideds. Why? It's been weeks, and the Walberg folks haven't released their own counter-poll. If they had better-looking data than this, you'd better believe they'd release it.

Labels: 2008 Election, DCCC, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

Here I was, thinking Republican endorsements and tonight's Siena Heights University candidate forum would be the only excitement. The Schauer campaign released a new poll:

BATTLE CREEK—A new internal poll released today by Myers Research & Strategic Services for congressional candidate Mark Schauer (D-Battle Creek) shows the state Senator leading incumbent Congressman Tim Walberg by ten points, 46 to 36 percent, outside the 4.4 percent margin of error.

“This new poll confirms that Mark’s record of working with businesses and fighting for jobs is resonating with voters,” said campaign manager B.J. Neidhardt. “This race will almost certainly tighten between now and Election Day, but Mark has always run like he’s ten points behind, and that’s exactly what he’ll continue to do.”

and

“Today, by a 28-point margin voters are more likely to blame unfair trade policies than taxes for Michigan’s economic situation, and across the board they favor Schauer on every economic issue,” said pollster Andrew Myers. “Make no mistake, this political environment is becoming dangerous for any Republican incumbent, particularly one whose connection to voters here is as tenuous as Walberg’s.”

Once again, it was through Myers Research & Strategic Services. It was conducted October 5 and 6, surveying 500 "likely voters." The partisan breakdown was 36 percent Democratic, 33 percent Republican, and 31 percent independent. The margin of error is 4.38 percent with a 95 percent confidence level.

Here are the reported results (Sept. 23-24 results in parentheses, where available):

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg

Mark Schauer (D) - 46 (42)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 36 (36)

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg - Independents Only

Mark Schauer (D) - 39
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 27

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg - Lansing Media Market Only

Mark Schauer (D) - 48
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 33

Trust On Taxes

Mark Schauer (D) - 37
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 30

Generic Congressional Ballot

Democrat - 44
Republican - 36

Barack Obama vs. John McCain

Barack Obama (D) - 50
John McCain (R) - 39

Walberg Job Performance

Positive (Good or Excellent) - 34 (34)
Negative (Fair or Poor) - 42 (46)

There's lots of good stuff in there for Mark Schauer.

Labels: 2008 Election, Mark Schauer, Poll, Taxes, Tim Walberg

Democracy Corps is a group founded by Bill Clinton adviser James Carville and pollser Stanley Greenberg which advises Democrats and analyzes elections. Every so often, they release a "battleground poll" surveying the most competitive congressional races in the country. Although they don't give any information broken down by district, they use this to analyze national trends.

In 2008, Michigan's 7th District is listed in "Tier 1" of Republican-held seats, along with 19 others. In total, 50 districts were included in the survey.

The whole report is worth reading if you're a political junkie. I thought I'd share a few interesting items. Remember, this isn't a poll of the 7th District, but it's a poll that includes the 7th District.

The financial crisis, which had not yet reached its peak when this survey was in the field, is driving a deepening anger across the country and in these Republican districts. Just 14 percent of likely voters believe the country is heading in the right direction, the lowest number we have seen in our Democracy Corps congressional polling, even in this Republican battleground. The intensely negative mood is more directed at Republicans, who are seeing their brand continue to erode. President Bush remains toxic and the Republican Party is now significantly less popular than the Democrats, even in this more conservative battleground.

and

Democratic candidates are taking advantage of this favorable environment and now hold a 49 percent to 45 percent lead in the 40-seat Republican battleground.>[2] This is a broad lead – with Democrats holding equal 4-point cushions in the top tier of races, the 20 most vulnerable seats, and in the second tier, the next 20 districts.� If the election were held today, Democrats would be poised to win, perhaps, well upwards of 20 Republican seats.

and

... In fact, Republican incumbents are losing further ground, being dragged down by the toxic environment and unpopular GOP brand. As disdain for Washington has increased, the Republican incumbents have failed to establish their independence from Bush or their party. Since May, the percent saying Republican incumbents are not independent has risen from 45 to 53 percent while the percent saying these incumbents follow Bush’s direction too much has jumped from 40 to 49 percent.>[3]

and

Meanwhile, 48 percent now disagree that Republican incumbents are “on your side,” up from 40 percent four months ago. This key attribute is another important driver of the vote in our regressions. As a result of this poor performance on so many attributes, a near majority of 48 percent of voters in these 40 Republican districts now say they simply can’t vote to reelect their incumbent congressman and in a named matchup, the Democratic challengers lead these incumbents 49-45.

(Emphasis added.)

By now, I've probably exceeded fair use guidlines, but there's a lot more in the full report that's worth reading. It doesn't mean that Tim Walberg will lose to Mark Schauer, but it does mean that we're part of a nationwide trend toward the Democrats this year. If you're a Democrat, you've got a lot of reasons to be optimistic.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, James Carville, Poll, Stan Greenberg

From the Battle Creek Enquirer:

Tim Walberg has his own poll, and according to that one, he's leading the 7th Congressional District race.

The campaign for the Tipton Republican released the results Thursday of a Sept. 15-16 poll, only hours after the release of polling information from state Sen. Mark Schauer, D-Bedford Township, Walberg's main opponent.

In addition to the Enquirer, Chetly Zarko got the memo from the Walberg campaign.

It was conducted over September 15 and 16 by National Research, Inc., a Republican polling firm. It has a sample of 300 "likely voters" stratified geographically, and has a margin of error of 5.7 percent.

Here are the results (with 7/08-09 results in parentheses where available, also +/- 5.7):

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg

Mark Schauer (D) - 40 (31)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 50 (47)

Walberg Favorable - Unfavorable

Favorable - 57
Unfavorable - 29

Schauer Favorable - Unfavorable

Favorable - 33
Unfavorable - 18

Obama vs. McCain

Barack Obama (D) - 40
John McCain (R) - 55

Generic Congressional Ballot

Republican - 46
Democrat - 41

So, what does all of this mean?

First, it means that either A.) the last Walberg internal was an outlier or B.) Mark Schauer has made an enormous nine-point gain since the beginning of August. The first one isn't a big deal-- it made Walberg's people feel good about themselves for a day. The second one should worry them a lot. Though, then again, here's what Walberg's pollster says:

Despite the barrage of negative ads directed against him, Congressman Tim Walberg leads Mark Schauer 50%-40% according to our most recent congressional survey in the district, conducted on September 15 and 16 among 300 likely voters in the district. This represents a significant gain for Congressman Walberg, who was garnering 47% in our July survey. With his poll numbers now at 50%, Walberg enters the month of October with momentum.

(Emphasis added.)

That's quite a positive spin! Personally, I'd say that the significant gain goes to the one who, you know, actually gained more.

It's also important to note that, with a 10-point lead in a poll with a margin of error of 5.7 percent, Walberg is now within the margin of error (barely) in his own polling. That's not what will get the headline, though. The magical 50 percent mark is an important one to the media, and one that I don't think Walberg has reached in any previous polling. (He also didn't reach it in 2006-- he had 49.99 percent of the vote).

Last night, I wrote a partial defense of internal polling, saying that it's still useful and reliable. Now, I'm wondering if there might actually be a systematic difference between Schauer's polls and Walberg's polls-- namely, in the geographic breakdown and in the likely voter screen. Is Walberg oversampling Branch County and undersampling the youth vote? Or is Schauer oversampling Calhoun County and undersampling Hillsdale County? I don't know, and the campaigns don't release that kind of information.

The reason I wonder about that is the name recognition. Only 55 percent know who Mark Schauer is in this poll, where 67 percent did in Schauer's last poll. Similarly, 86 percent know who Tim Walberg is in this poll, where it was only 76 in Schauer's poll. That kind of difference surprises me, and makes me think someone weighted the counties differently.

Then again, both polls strike me as plausible, especially with the large margins of error. It really doesn't matter, though. There are 38 days until election day. That's more than enough time for everything to change.

Overall, it was a good poll for Walberg, but maybe a better poll for Schauer.

Labels: 2008 Election, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

While you're all watching Senators McCain and Obama, I thought I'd finally get around to writing more about the poll the Schauer campaign released. Just for a reminder, here's what the poll found:

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg

Mark Schauer (D) - 42 (37)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 36 (40)

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg (Plus Undecideds, allocated based on stated partisan leanings)

Mark Schauer (D) - 48 (45)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 41 (47)

Name Recognition

Mark Schauer (D) - 67 (42)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 76 (74)

Walberg Job Performance

Positive (Good or Excellent) - 34 (34)
Negative (Fair or Poor) - 46 (42)

So, what does all of this mean? Schauer's pollster, Andrew Myers, picks out one important finding:

This survey demonstrates that Schauer’s communications are clearly taking root. Today Schauer is known by 67 percent of voters, a substantial 25 point jump in identification since May

That's the big one, much more than the 42-36 headline. It shows that Schauer's breaking out of his Senate district and getting more attention elsewhere in the district. This is good-- it means the money they're spending on television ads and field organizing is working. It shows that the overall strategy of introducing Schauer to more voters is working. Remember, Schauer doesn't have to win Lenawee County or Hillsdale County to win the election, he just has to not lose too badly, and then perform well in his base. Man, I'd love to see a geographical breakdown of the results.

Of course, by running mostly attack ads, Walberg might be helping to increase Schauer's name recognition. Walberg's attacks might drive up some of Schauer's negatives, but it also makes sure people know that there's an alternative to Tim Walberg. Oh, the irony.

But let's get back to that headline. Schauer leads, 42 to 36. But it's also an internal poll, commissioned by Mark Schauer through a Democratic polling outfit. It must be rigged, right?

No. Just like Walberg's internal poll released a couple of months ago, I don't doubt that the poll was conducted with fair, legitimate polling practices. It's not in anyone's interest to pay for inaccurate polling-- the Schauer campaign probably cares a lot more about getting useful information than about sending out a good press release and having a favorable news cycle.

Does that mean that this poll is accurate? No, not necessarily. A 95 percent confidence level means that 95 percent of the time, the poll will be correct to within the stated margin of error (in this case, 4.38 percent). Schauer's lead is within the margin of error, though it's better to be leading and within the margin of error than losing. But it's also possible that this is one of those 5 percent polls (like I think Walberg's was), where it's not accurate by more than the margin.

Supposing Schauer's poll is absolutely correct, this is a big deal. There are still a lot of undecideds-- and a lot of people who are paying close attention to Obama-McCain, but haven't thought about Schauer-Walberg. But among those that are decided, Schauer is leading a sitting congressman by six points. That's a tough thing to do.

I don't know that I'm saying anything new or interesting tonight, I just wanted to share a few thoughts. It's a good poll for Schauer.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

UPDATE: Sorry for the delay. The poll was conducted by Myers Research & Strategic Services, who are the same ones that conducted the Schauer internal poll from May that was released a month or two ago. They're a Democratic firm, but that isn't necessarily a reason to doubt the numbers. More on that later.

The poll was conducted September 24 and 25, 2008 (CORRECTION: September 23 and 24), with a sample size of 500 "likely voters," and the respondents were "stratified geographically"-- in other words, this wasn't all Battle Creek. The margin of error is +/- 4.38 percent, with a 95 percent confidence level.

Here are the results released today (previous results in parentheses, MoE +/- 4.00):

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg

Mark Schauer (D) - 42 (37)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 36 (40)

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg (Plus Undecideds, allocated based on stated partisan leanings)

Mark Schauer (D) - 48 (45)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 41 (47)

Name Recognition

Mark Schauer (D) - 67 (42)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 76 (74)

Myers also asks respondents to rate candidates on a "personal feeling thermometer," where 100 is very warm and 0 is very cold, with 50 neutral.

Personal Feeling Thermometer

Mark Schauer (D)
Warm (>50 degrees) - 35 (23)
Cold (<50) - 19 (9)
Average Temperature - 57 degrees

Tim Walberg (R-inc.)
Warm (>50 degrees) - 36 (36)
Cold (<50) - 28 (23)
Average Temperature - 52 degrees

And, finally:

Walberg Job Performance

Positive (Good or Excellent) - 34 (34)
Negative (Fair or Poor) - 46 (42)

Myers also says that "seven in ten" respondents believe the country is on the wrong track, which is where it was in their May poll, as well.

I've got a lot of thoughts on this poll, which I'll be compiling this afternoon. I'll have more later today.


----
The Schauer campaign just released a poll-- Schauer 42, Walberg 36. More information and thoughts to come soon.

Labels: 2008 Election, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

UPDATE: Full poll results are at the bottom, via WXYZ.

For the Detroit News, EPIC-MRA brings us a new poll:

Walberg of Tipton leads Schauer, a state senator from Battle Creek by 43-40 percent, which is within the poll's 4.9-point error margin. A decisive 14 percent of voters in the district are undecided.

[...]

The Knollenberg-Peters poll was conducted from Aug. 21-23; the Walberg-Schauer survey was done from Aug. 20-22. Each was conducted among 400 likely voters.

[...]

Walberg, 57, and Schauer, 47, are battling over a district that includes all of five counties -- Eaton, Jackson, Lenawee, Hillsdale and Branch -- and most of Calhoun and Washtenaw counties.

Voters, by 43-32 percent, give Walberg negative ratings for his job performance.

Pollster Porn said a finding in the poll shows Schauer must go on the attack if he is to win. When voters were read the biographies of both candidates, they favored Walberg 46-44 percent.

"Schauer needs to run an aggressive, hard-hitting campaign against Walberg," Porn said. "If Schauer thinks he can run a positive campaign, that will not be enough for that district, because it is too Republican. He needs to contrast with the Walberg record."

Walberg knocked off a less conservative Republican incumbent, Joe Schwarz, in 2006, and some Democratic strategists believe he is too conservative for a majority of voters in the district.

B.J. Neidhardt, Schauer's campaign manager, said the poll numbers come as Walberg has had a TV ad up since Aug. 6, while his candidate has yet to air an air.

"The numbers show voters aren't buying what Congressman Walberg is selling," Neidhardt said.

(Emphasis added.)

The Schauer campaign sent out a press release:

NEW INDEPENDENT POLL SHOWS DEAD HEAT IN MICHIGAN'S 7TH DISTRICT

Walberg trails in fundraising, losing ground after several weeks of paid advertising

BATTLE CREEK—Tonight a new poll released by EPIC-MRA for Detroit News/WXYZ indicated that the race between state Senator Mark Schauer (D-Battle Creek) and Congressman Tim Walberg in Michigan's 7th Congressional district was a statistical dead heat. The news represents a huge fall in standing for Walberg, who has been advertising on television for more than three weeks and spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars communicating with voters through automated robocalls, on the radio, in newspaper inserts, and in the mailbox.

"This poll reflects the momentum we've been seeing on the ground for the past several months," said B.J. Neidhardt, Campaign Manager for Mark Schauer's campaign. "People simply aren't buying what Tim Walberg is selling, and Mark has the message and the momentum to win this race in November."

The independent poll released tonight showed a statistical dead heat with Schauer at 40% and Walberg at 43%, well within the 4.9% margin of error. The complete story can be found at:

[Link]

In the second quarter, Schauer's campaign out-raised incumbent Tim Walberg for the fourth straight filing period, bringing in more than $427,000. Over the course of the campaign, Schauer has brought in more than $1.33 million and raised more than Tim Walberg's total contributions for the entire 2006 election cycle.

Background:

• The previous EPIC-MRA poll, released in March, showed Tim Walberg leading 51-40.

# # #

This really does look bad for Walberg. He's still leading, and, contrary to the Schauer press release, it's not a "dead heat," but it is within the margin of error. That's a lot closer than it should be for an incumbent in a lean-Republican district. It's certainly a lot closer than the internal poll the Walberg campaign released last month.

As the Schauer campaign points out, this also comes after a few weeks of Walberg being on the air, yet he's losing ground against a challenger who has yet to really advertise. Both sides are the beneficiaries (and victims) of independent attacks.

Perhaps more significant than the Walberg-Schauer result is the job performance result. Recall:

Voters, by 43-32 percent, give Walberg negative ratings for his job performance.

That's ridiculously awful. A net 11 point disapproval means that even the Republican base is disappointed in him. I'd be interested to see where Schauer stands on name identification. If it's still relatively low, combined with Walberg's negative ratings, then we can expect to see the race tighten further. Maybe this isn't a conservative district after all!

-----

Via WXYZ, the full results.

7TH DISTRICT RESULTS

Overall, would you say that things in the United States are generally headed in the right direction, or have things pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?

8% Right direction
78% Wrong track
14% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

How about in Michigan – Do you think that things in Michigan are generally headed in the right direction, or are things pretty seriously off on the wrong track?

10% Right direction
82% Wrong track
8% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

Now, I would like to read a list of several political figures. For each one, please tell me if you recognize the name, and whether you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of that person.

George W. Bush
- Favorable - 32%
- Unfavorable - 61%

Jennifer Granholm
- Favorable - 40%
- Unfavorable - 52%

Barack Obama
- Favorable - 44%
- Unfavorable - 36%

John McCain
- Favorable - 46%
- Unfavorable - 34%

Mark Schauer
- Favorable - 25%
- Unfavorable - 15%

Tim Walberg
- Favorable - 39%
- Unfavorable - 29%

Overall, how would you rate the job being done by George W. Bush as President -- would you give him a positive rating of excellent or pretty good, or a negative rating of just fair or poor?

TOTAL POSITIVE - 24%
TOTAL NEGATIVE – 73%
Overall, how would you rate the job being done by Jennifer Granholm as Michigan’s Governor – would you give her a positive rating of excellent or pretty good, or a negative rating of just fair or poor?

TOTAL POSITIVE - 26%
TOTAL NEGATIVE - 71%

How would you rate the job being done by Tim Walberg in the United States Congress – would you give him a positive rating of excellent or pretty good, or a negative rating of just fair or poor?

TOTAL POSITIVE - 32%
TOTAL NEGATIVE - 43%

Over the next six months to a year, do you think Michigan’s economy will improve, get worse, or remain about the same?

18% Improve
29% Get worse
48% Remain about the same
5% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

In the election for President, if the election were held today, would you vote for John McCain the Republican, Barack Obama the Democrat, Ralph Nader the Independent, or Bob Barr the Libertarian?

TOTAL OBAMA - 39%
TOTAL McCAIN - 43%
TOTAL NADER - 3%
TOTAL BARR - 3%

If the November general election for U.S. Senate were held today, would you vote for Jack Hoogendyk the Republican, Carl Levin the Democrat, Harley Mikkelson of the Green Party, Michael Nikitin of the U.S. Taxpayers Party, Scotty Boman the Libertarian, or Doug Dern of the Natural Law Party?

TOTAL LEVIN - 46%
TOTAL HOOGENDYK - 28%
TOTAL MIKKELSON - 1%
TOTAL NIKITIN - 0%
TOTAL BOMAN - 2%
TOTAL DERN - 0%

If the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you vote for Mark Schauer the Democrat, Tim Walberg the Republican, Lynn Meadow of the Green Party, or Ken Proctor the Libertarian?

TOTAL WALBERG - 43%
TOTAL SCHAUER - 40%
TOTAL MEADOWS - 1%
TOTAL PROCTOR - 2%

Now I would like to read a brief description of the two major party candidates running for congress.

Tim Walberg is 57 years old and the incumbent Republican. He was born on the south side of Chicago. After graduating from high school he became a member of the U.S. Forest Service. To pay his way through college, he worked as a union steel mill worker, attended Western Illinois University, Taylor University, Moody Bible Institute, where he was trained as a minister, and Wheaton College Graduate School, where he earned his B.S. and M.A. degrees. He was a pastor for 10 years, then served in the Michigan House of Representatives from Lenawee County for 18 years. In the 2006, he defeated the incumbent Republican by campaigning on a platform of support for President Bush’s war on terror and opposition to pork barrel spending. Walberg is a social and economic conservative, taking a strong pro-life position on abortion and supporting traditional marriage. He and his wife Sue have been married for 34 years, raised three children and live in Tipton in Lenawee County.

Mark Schauer is 47 years old and the Democratic leader of the Michigan State Senate, representing Calhoun and Jackson Counties since 2003. Before that, he served in the Michigan House of Representatives. Born in Howell, he was his class Valedictorian and then graduated with honors from Albion College. He worked as an urban planner for Calhoun County while continuing his college education, earning Masters Degrees in Public Administration from Western Michigan and Political Science from Michigan State. He worked for and later became the Director of the Community Action Agency in Battle Creek, was a founding member of the Battle Creek Habitat for Humanity, and an active supporter of the Food Bank. He has been a strong advocate of quality schools, early childhood development, job training, economic development, access to quality health care, and he is pro-choice on the abortion issue. He and his wife Christine live in Battle Creek with his three step children.

After hearing these descriptions, let me ask you again, if the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you vote for Mark Schauer the Democrat, Tim Walberg the Republican, Lynn Meadow of the Green Party, or Ken Proctor the Libertarian?

TOTAL WALBERG - 46%
TOTAL SCHAUER - 44%
TOTAL MEADOWS - 0%
TOTAL PROCTOR - 1%

There's a lot to digest there.

UPDATE II: Fixed typos.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

Via Swing State Project, which was via Hotline, the Walberg campaign released an internal poll:

Mark Schauer (D): 31
Tim Walberg (R-inc): 47

Margin of Error +/- 5.7%, over July 8th and 9th, surveying 300 "likely voters" conducted by National Research.

I have a few thoughts on this poll.

For starters, it doesn't look good. Walberg leading by 16 points hurts. Obviously, we (meaning both the Schauer campaign and concerned voters in general) need to do a better job.

At the same time, there are some things that make me a little suspicious of whether or not this is actually the real state of the race. This is an internal poll, commissioned for Tim Walberg, but that doesn't mean it isn't accurate. It's not in their interest to get bad data. However, they do get to sit on it for as long as they want without showing it to the media, which they did. The poll was taken early in July, and they kept it quiet until they had a bad news cycle (with Schauer outraising Walberg again).

That means that this could be one of multiple polls they've commissioned over the last few months. It's in their interest to only release favorable polls, so they can just sit the results they're getting until they get one that looks good. It's not dishonest and it's still statistically accurate-- for those that recall their high school math classes, you know that one in twenty polls will be off by more than the margin of error. That's just statistics.

So, I don't doubt that Walberg is leading or that his campaign got that data in their poll. All I doubt is whether that's the only data they have. They probably have other polls taken other times that aren't nearly as favorable, but decided to release this one. I don't believe that Tim Walberg is leading by 16 points.

--------------------

So, I thought I posted the above last night. Apparently, Blogger disagreed, and I went to bed not knowing that it didn't show up, nor did other things I had written. Hrm.

I discovered this a few minutes ago, moments after I also discovered another internal poll in my inbox, this time conducted for the Schauer campaign. For this one, I have a little more information.

This poll was conducted by Meyers Research & Strategic Services over May 8 to 15, 2008, surveying 600 "likely voters." The margin of error is +/- 4.0 percent.

When asked about the Schauer-Walberg match-up, the poll found:

Mark Schauer (D): 37
Tim Walberg (R-inc): 40

When undecided voters were "allocated to candidates based on their self-described partisan leanings," it was:

Mark Schauer (D): 45
Tim Walberg (R-inc): 47

They also tested two other races. Incumbent Democratic Senator Carl Levin leads Republican Jack Hoogendyk by 15 percent and Senators Barack Obama and John McCain are tied in the district at 42 percent each.

Other findings, from pollster Andrew Myers:

On other key measures Walberg also proves wounded. Walberg’s re-elect is an abysmal 35 percent, with one-third of voters saying they would prefer someone new (33 percent), and perceptions of his job performance remain net negative as well, with just 34 percent saying he is doing an excellent to good job, while a plurality, 42 percent, say fair to poor.

Today, Schauer is identified by 42 percent of voters and continues to earn a better than two-to-one warm to cool ratio, 23 percent warm, favorable reviews, and 9 percent cool, unfavorable reviews. Walberg, on the other hand, remains far better known than Schauer from the start, with 74 percent able to identify him, but his warm to cool ratio is less than two-to-one, 36 percent warm, 23 percent cool.

While the contest remains generally unchanged, there is evidence that voters are ready for change. Specifically, while voters were sour to begin with in our survey in August, this electorate has soured further, and just two-in-ten voters today report that things in the United States are on the right track, while seven-in-ten say they are pretty seriously off on the wrong track.

Bottom line, this contest remains close despite Walberg’s significant expenditures on
incumbency protection, and Walberg remains critically wounded on every key measure for an incumbent. Voters appear more aligned for change today, and Schauer will have the resources to press the case come Election Day.

(Emphasis added.)

So, where does this leave us? Obviously, the same notes on the Walberg poll above apply here. The Schauer campaign sat on this until they needed it-- this time, for two-and-a-half months. As far as the actual state of the race, I'm inclined to think that it's closer to three points than sixteen. Chances are, Walberg's lead is somewhere in the five to 10 range.

But Eric at Michigan Liberal picks out the other significant finding:

I don't put a great deal of stock in polling, especially 100 days out and super especially internal polls. The story here, I think, is that not even Walberg's own internal polling has him above 50 percent, which is just not good news for him especially since he's being outraised.

(Emphasis added.)

He's right about that. An incumbent under the 50 percent has a metaphorical target painted on his back. If the national Republican Party is forced to prioritize which seats they're going to defend, they're not going to pick the guy whose own polls show him doing badly.

Now, what we really need is some independent and transparent polling. There are a lot of questions that could be asked about the candidates and the issues, and I'd love to see a county-by-county breakdown of the race. I'd do it myself, but I'm only one man!

As of July 09, 2008, I have been working with the Schauer for Congress campaign in Lenawee County. My thoughts and writings are my own opinions, and I do not speak for Senator Schauer or anyone else in his organization.

NOTE: This disclaimer was added a few days late... I keep forgetting to add it at the end.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Brewer, Poll, Tim Walberg

(Many thanks to those of you who continue to share articles from the subscription-only MIRS and Gongwer with me.)

Last week's Detroit News/WXYZ poll conducted by EPIC-MRA showed some trouble for Congressman Walberg. I haven't seen all the data yet or the survey questions, but MIRS and Gongwer have a little bit more than the initial Detroit News article.

Some of the data below is incomplete, and the way I've listed it here is likely different from the way it was asked in the survey. I'm giving you everything the Detroit News, MIRS, and Gongwer have published, as well as data from RealClearPolitics.com.

(Margin of error +/- 4.9%)

Party Identification:
Democrats and lean (D) independents - 35%
Republicans and lean (R) independents - 47%
Independents/Other - 18%

All Independents - 40%

Walberg versus Schauer, no biographies:
Walberg (R) - 51%
Schauer (D) - 40%

Walberg versus Schauer, with biographies:
Walberg (R) - 48%
Schauer (D) - 49%

By Party:
Republicans, no bio:
Walberg - 82%
Schauer - 9%
Republicans, with bio:
Walberg - 83%
Schauer - 15%

Democrats, no bio:
Walberg - N/A
Schauer - 82%
Democrats, with bio:
Walberg - N/A
Schauer - 91%

Independents, no bio:
Walberg - 35%
Schauer - 46%
Independets, with bio:
Walberg - 38%
Schauer - 55%

By County (2006 results in parentheses):
Calhoun, no bio:
Walberg - 40% (45%)
Schauer - 57% (Renier 51%)
Calhoun, with bio:
Walberg - 38%
Schauer - 59%

Eaton, no bio:
Walberg - 58% (48%)
Schauer - 29% (Renier 50%)
Eaton, with bio:
Walberg - 60%
Schauer - 36%

Jackson, no bio:
Walberg - 55% (51%)
Schauer - 36% (Renier 46%)
Jackson, with bio:
Walberg - 51%
Schauer - 45%

Lenawee, no bio:
Walberg - 60% (56%)
Schauer - 30% (Renier 42%)
Lenawee, with bio:
Walberg - 46%
Schauer - 46%

Washtenaw, no bio:
Walberg - 46% (47%)
Schauer - 43% (Renier 50%)
Washtenaw, with bio:
Walberg - 53%
Schauer - 47%

(Branch, Hillsdale counties were not given in any article.)

Walberg Name Recognition:
Recognize Walberg - 93%
Do Not Recognize - 7%

Schauer Name Recognition:
Recognize Schauer - 47%
Do Not Recognize - 53%

Walberg Favorable vs. Unfavorable:
Favorable - 42%
Unfavorable - 30%

Schauer Favorable vs. Unfavorable:
Favorable - 19%
Unfavorable - 12%

Walberg Job Approval:
Positive - 39%
Negative - 38%

Bush Approval:
Positive - 37%
Negative - 62%

Granholm Approval:
Positive - 34%
Negative - N/A

Country Right Direction/Wrong Track
Right Direction - 17%
Wrong Track - 68%

Presidential Race:
McCain (R) over Clinton (D) by 25%
McCain (R) over Obama (D) by 16%

Most Important Issues:
Improving Economy - 41%
Protecting America From Terrorism - 13%
Health Care - 11%

Pro-Life/Pro-Choice Self-ID:
Pro-life - 43%
Pro-choice - 50%

... And that's all I've got for now. First, for all the reporters out there, the political junkies like me would really appreciate it if, when possible, you posted the complete data in addition to analysis. I had to look through four articles to piece all of that together, and there are still some gaps. I'd love to see the biographical sketches that were read, as well as see any other data from the poll.

I have a few observations, but before I start, I like the introduction to the MIRS article:

Wily Republican strategist Lee ATWATER's axiom was that a candidate was dead when his negatives hit 35 percent and his positives aren't at least 5 points higher — because those figures aren't likely to change.

If you glance up again, you'll notice that Walberg's negatives are at 38 percent, and his positives are only one point higher. So, Lee Atwater (Karl Rove's mentor) would be bailing on Walberg right about now.

I'm surprised by how well Walberg does in Eaton County and Washtenaw County, and I really do expect those numbers to drop this summer. Similarly, while I'd love for Mark Schauer to be able to win Lenawee County (my home county and Tim Walberg's home county), I really doubt that it'll happen. Still, if Schauer can hit 46 percent in Lenawee County with just a biographical sketch, it's definitely a place worth campaigning in.

Schauer is strong among independents (very important), and he improves more than Walberg does in every category when the biographical information is read. Since the poll was commissioned by the Detroit News (a paper that has never endorsed a Democratic presidential nominee), I'm going to assume the biography was fairly balanced.

I think it's also worth pointing out that Schauer gets significant support simply for being a Democrat. The lesson here, I think, is that one shouldn't run away from the (D) after the name this year. Independents are leaning strongly for Democrats, as was demonstrated in the recent Illinois 14th District special election, where Bill Foster won former House Speaker Dennis Hastert's seat with ads prominently featuring his party affiliation.

Still, remember that this is still a lean-Republican district, and it won't be an easy campaign. However, when 53 percent of the voters don't know who the leading Democratic candidate is, these results are pretty good.

Labels: 2008 Election, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

A friend was kind enough to pass this along to me, and then the Schauer campaign sent out a press release about 45 minutes later. EPIC-MRA conducted a poll for WXYZ-Detroit and the Detroit News on the 7th District, polling a match-up between incumbent Congressman Tim Walberg and state Senator Mark Schauer.

(While nothing is ever guaranteed, the rest of this post works under the assumption that Schauer is the nominee, and that it's Walberg versus Schauer in November. I don't want to keep repeating caveats like "Assuming Schauer wins the nomination over Renier..." because that gets repetitive.)

Here's what they found:

A survey of 7th Congressional District voters conducted by Detroit News/WXYZ-Action News pollster EPIC-MRA shows Rep. Tim Walberg of Tipton in a statistical dead heat when voters are read biographical information about him and challenger Mark Schauer, who represents the Battle Creek area in the state Senate. Walberg stood at 48 percent and Schauer at 49 percent.

The error margin of the survey of 400, Feb. 27 through March 2, was 4.9 percentage points.

and

When voters had no additional information than the two candidates' names and party affiliations, Walberg was favored by 51 percent to Schauer's 40 percent. That head-to-head question was asked first, then asked again after the biographical information was read to survey respondents.

Here's a bit of analyisis:

"If I were in Tim Walberg's camp, I would have grave concerns at this point that a relatively unknown Democrat in a traditionally Republican district can match up so competitively," said EPIC-MRA political analyst John Cavanagh.

[...]

But Cavanagh says migration from Ingham County to Eaton County is watering down the Republican flavor of the district.

And, finally, here's some fun with issues and approval ratings.

Voters showed little interest in two issues that are among Walberg's priorities: Only 7 percent of voters in the district picked "promoting morality and family values" as their top concern while 3 percent chose "keeping federal taxes low."

The overwhelming top concern picked by voters -- 41 percent -- was "improving the nation's economy and providing jobs."

The poll found that 53 percent of voters didn't know Schauer. Among those who do, 19 percent view him favorably and 12 percent don't.

On Walberg, a fiscal and social conservative who sits on the House Agriculture Committee, 42 percent of voters have a favorable view, while 30 percent don't.

But voters were split when asked to "rate the job being done" by Walberg: 39 percent rated his performance as positive and 38 percent gave him negative marks.

Walberg Chief of Staff Joe Wicks declined to comment on the poll results, saying "Congressman Walberg is focused on the economic issues."

(Emphasis added.)

Let's make all of that easier to read.

(Margin of error +/- 4.9%)

Walberg versus Schauer, no biographies:

Walberg (R) - 51%
Schauer (D) - 40%

Walberg versus Schauer, with biographies:

Walberg (R) - 48%
Schauer (D) - 49%

Walberg Favorable vs. Unfavorable:

Favorable - 42%
Unfavorable - 30%

Schauer Favorable vs. Unfavorable:

Favorable - 19%
Unfavorable - 12%

Walberg Job Approval:

Positive - 39%
Negative - 38%

I'm told by Deb Price, the reporter with the Detroit News, that more details from the poll will be available tomorrow afternoon. For now, that's what we've got.

So, what does all of that mean? For starters, Tim Walberg is in a weak position for an incumbent. Given no other information about the leading Democratic challenger, Walberg only manages to get 51 percent. That's almost half of the district that's already looking for someone news.

Schauer, meanwhile, manages to start off with a base of 40 percent from his name alone, and he gets an extra nine percent when a simple biography is read. That's a strong starting position for a challenger.

The fact that Schauer is leading Walberg by one percent when biographies are read doesn't really have any meaning when the poll has a margin of error of five percent. If anything, it gives Mark Schauer the benefit of headlines like "Schauer Leads Walberg in New Poll" all across the 7th District.

Supposing Schauer's name identification increases between now and November (which, with over $500,000, he should be able to do even if he just stopped fundraising now), that means we'd be starting the race essentially even. That's significant. All the advantages of incumbency that Walberg has only manage to make this a 50-50 race.

Walberg also isn't helped much by the fact that people don't really care about his anti-tax bills or his moral values. The focus right now is on economic issues, and on Schauer's website, that's the first thing you see-- the mortgage crisis and the economy. When you visit Walberg's website (such that it is), you see items mentioning taxes, government spending, abortion, same-sex marriage... and nothing about the economic issues people are thinking about.

And, beyond all of that, a good rule of thumb is that if only 39 percent approve of the job you're doing, you're probably in a lot of trouble.

This is bad news for Walberg, but Schauer and Democrats in general have some work to do. There are a lot of people out there who don't like Walberg and are looking for something better. Now we just have to convince them.

Labels: 2008 Election, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

There was a nice response to the poll about who you liked to take out Walberg. Now I am wondering about the level of financial commitment the readers of this Blog will make to defeating Walberg.

What best describes your commitment to defeat Tim Walberg
	Will not donate to any campaign
	Will donate only after the primary
	Will donate to Berryman
	Will donate to Nacht
	Will donate to Renier
	Will give but have not decided on a candidate yet
	Have already given to Berryman
	Have already given to Nacht
	Have already given to Renier
Free polls from Pollhost.com

If you want to give to Berryman you can do so through my Act Blue Page.

Labels: $, 2008 Election, David Nacht, Jim Berryman, Poll, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

This is just for fun. I have only the three announced Democrats in this race. I know it is early, but make a choice, we won't hold you to it.

Remember to make a comment as to why you voted the way you did.

Who do you like to take on Walberg
	Sharon Renier
	David Nacht
	Jim Berryman
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Labels: David Nacht, Jim Berryman, Poll, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg