Strickland Announces in Ohio; Chances? Walker Cruising

Seventy-three year old former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland’s (D) announcement that he will challenge first-term Sen. Rob Portman (R) was expected yet still surprising.

Clearly the defeated former governor is attempting to take advantage of what he believes will be a 2016 Democratic presidential victory not only nationally, but in Ohio as well. Such a finish could reasonably sweep in a Democratic Senate candidate on presidential coattails, of this we know.

While the former governor has six terms in Congress to his credit and another four years as the state’s chief executive, he is no stranger to losing. In fact, he lost four House races in addition to his re-election as governor. Strickland won for the first time on his fourth try for Congress, some 16 years after he originally ran.

Defeating Sen. Portman will be no small feat. As we know, aside from serving one term in the Senate, Portman won seven U.S. House races, exceeding 72 percent of the vote each time. In his 2010 US Senate victory, he racked up over 57 percent against the sitting Democratic lieutenant governor in a state that traditionally features close elections … and won all but six counties.

Having Strickland in the race arguably gives the Democrats their best possible candidate. He

Advertisement

Marist Poll Shows a Bunched GOP Pack

NBC/Marist conducted a series of polls in the first three presidential nominating states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina finding a host of Republican candidates all jumbled near the top in each place.

The surveys were commissioned during the Feb. 3-10 period. In Iowa, 320 potential Republican caucus goers were sampled; the number was 381 in New Hampshire and 450 for South Carolina. Democrats also were polled but their results did not provide any new or particularly significant information.

In none of the polls did any Republican candidate exceed 20 percent of the intra-party vote. Furthermore, no less than three and not more than five individuals found double-digits in the trio of surveys. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee led Iowa with only 17 percent. Jeb Bush finished first in New Hampshire at 18 percent, while South Carolina favorite son Lindsey Graham, the state’s senior US senator, topped the Marist result in his home territory with a similar 17 percent standing.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and neurosurgeon Ben Carson were the other candidates to reach the double-digit plateau in at least one state. All 11 tested candidates fell within 18 percentage points from top to bottom in the three studies.

Republicans: Headed for an Open Convention?

A new poll provides us an early clue about how spoiler candidates could force the Republican nomination into an open convention.

TargetPoint Consulting (Jan. 30-Feb. 3; 400 SC Republican primary voters) finds Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker leading the GOP pack of candidates in a preliminary poll, finishing one point ahead of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) in their new survey of South Carolina Republican primary voters. Both just barely top the double-digit mark (Walker 12 percent; Graham 11 percent), but still fare better than the other candidates including ex-Gov. Mike Huckabee (10 percent), who finished second in the 2008 South Carolina primary, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (9 percent).

Though the difference among the candidates is negligible, the fact that Bush cannot break away from single-digits is significant. A recent Iowa poll (Selzer & Company for the Des Moines Register) also projected Gov. Walker leading with Bush similarly mired in the middle of the pack. These poll results provide further evidence that the Republican nomination battle is wide open.

Sen. Graham has been publicly toying with the idea of entering the presidential race and promises a decision by the middle of this year. Aside from this poll of his home state electorate, he hasn’t even registered in surveys conducted in other

Q-Poll: Hillary Cruising

It is commonly believed that the path to the White House travels through big swing states such as Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. If so, former Secretary of State and First Lady Hillary Clinton is in strong shape less than two years before the next presidential vote.

Quinnipiac University went into the field to test the general electorates in these three critical places and found Clinton doing very well against the tested Republican candidates. The results, though too early to be a relevant predictor of any actual voting trend in November of 2016, provide us at least two important indicators.

First, the poll tells us that Clinton’s early low-key approach to this campaign is working. She has deliberately delayed forming a presidential committee, and kept a very low public profile. The Q-Poll results tell us that, so far, such a strategic move is paying dividends.

Second, it again confirms that Republicans are performing poorly in these three presidential battleground states (President Obama carried the trio in both of his campaigns) even though they have basically dominated elections for other offices. The GOP controls all six legislative houses in the tested states, all three congressional delegations, three of six US Senate seats, while holding two governors’ positions having just lost Pennsylvania last November. Yet, Clinton enjoys

Walker on Early Roll in Polls; Clinton Dominates

Selzer & Company, the Des Moines Register’s standard polling firm, just surveyed the Iowa presidential field (Jan. 26-29; 402 Iowa GOP likely Caucus attenders; 401 Iowa Democratic likely Caucus attenders) and the results tell a surprising story. The survey was conducted just before 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney publicly announced his exit.

Selzer took into account, however, that the former Massachusetts governor and two-time national candidate was no certainty to run, hence asked ballot test questions with and without him as a projected participant. Even when included, Romney failed to lead and actually dropped behind two of his prospective opponents.

Irrespective of Romney’s presence, however, it was Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker who placed first in both configurations. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul was second, just a point behind, each time. For the Democrats, not surprisingly, former Secretary of State and First Lady Hillary Clinton held a huge lead, topping 56 percent among those comprising the sampling cell.

Gov. Walker has been on an early roll and is clearly trying to break into the first tier of candidates early in the process. Forming a political action committee, Our American Revival PAC, the organization released a strong video last week on

With Romney Now Out, Will Bush Benefit?

It was a surprising Friday. As we are now well aware, Mitt Romney’s conference call with key supporters was not to “fire up the base” for another presidential run but rather to inform his listeners that he will not pursue the White House for a third time. As expected, much speculation is occurring as to how this development affects the remaining GOP presidential aspirants.

Many believe that the greatest beneficiary of Romney’s departure is former Florida governor, Jeb Bush; the impending battle between these two principals was commonly labeled as a fight for the heart of the Republican establishment. But, that may not be so readily apparent. Reports show that Romney, on the night of his announcement, actually met with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and not Bush. Though it is not known what Romney and Christie specifically discussed Friday evening, it is near certain that the conversation was not about helping Bush.

Romney’s decision not to run is likely a positive one for the former Massachusetts governor and Republican presidential nominee, himself. Though leading in virtually every early GOP poll, Romney’s margin was far below what one would expect for a reigning presidential nominee. In most surveys, he never broke even 30 percent, meaning seven out of every 10 Republicans polled were consistently choosing someone other than Romney.

What Boxer’s Retirement Means; An “SEC” Primary?

At the end of 2014, California Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) provided strong hints that she would not seek a fifth term in 2016. Yesterday, she made that decision official. In a video hosted by her grandson, Sen. Boxer announced that she will not be a candidate for the Senate next year, thus ending what will be a 34-year-career in Congress.

The succeeding election now marks the first time since Boxer originally won in 1992 that California will host an open US Senate campaign. A plethora of Democrats are expected to enter the statewide fray. The most interesting dynamic will be the interplay between political allies Gavin Newsom, the state’s lieutenant governor, and California Attorney General Kamala Harris. It would be surprising to see the two close colleagues challenge each other, but stranger things have happened in politics. It is also possible that neither will run. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti is apparently not giving serious consideration to the Senate race. One potential major contender who is seriously looking at becoming a candidate is former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Another mayor drawing attention is Sacramento’s Kevin Johnson, a former NBA professional basketball player.

“First” Presidential Primary Poll Yields Interesting Numbers

Though election results rarely resemble survey research data that is conducted more than a year in advance, early polling still provides benchmarks from which to begin analyzing a particular future campaign; in this case a presidential contest that promises to be, perhaps, the most wide open, interesting, and exciting political forum of the modern era.

As we stated many times during the immediate past pre-election coverage, 2016 campaign activity begins right after the mid-term voting concludes. Consistent with that axiom, the Purple Insights organization – the survey research arm of the Purple Strategies consulting firm – conducted a “first in the nation” presidential primary poll for Bloomberg Politics and St. Anselm’s College (NH). The survey was commissioned during the Nov. 12-18 period, interviewing 989 New Hampshire general election voters, including 407 previous Republican primary voters and 404 past Democratic primary voters.

Purple Insights tested 18 different political figures, 17 of whom have been linked to the upcoming presidential race. The only person not in the national category is New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R), who will stand for re-election in the next cycle. She scored a strong 47:27 percent favorability ratio, and a 28:42 percent positive to negative score among Democratic primary voters. The latter rating is actually quite

Romney, Obama Both Must Contend With Weak Support

Just two days after Rick Santorum exited the presidential race, which unofficially began the Obama-Romney general election campaign, new data is showing that both candidates have work to do to improve their standing within the electorate.

According to the Gallup research organization, Mitt Romney has the second lowest level of party support after unofficially clinching a nomination since the polling firm began regular testing of the presidential candidates all the way back in 1972. Gallup’s latest poll (April 4-9; 1,149 self-identified Republican and Republican-leaning Independent voters) gives Romney only a 42-24-10-10 percent preference over Santorum, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX-14), respectively. Again, even after seeing major publicity surrounding the Santorum exit, Romney fails by a large margin to reach the 50 percent threshold among Republican voters.

The lowest candidate score since Gallup began charting this type of research occurred in 1972 when then-Sen. George McGovern (D-SD), upon practically clinching the Democratic nomination of that year, only polled three points ahead of former Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey, 30-27 percent. As we all remember, McGovern would go on to absorb a crushing 49-state loss to then-President Richard M. Nixon.

Even other candidates who were soundly defeated, such as John McCain in 2008 for example, recorded strong intra-party preference numbers when it became clear their nomination was secure. In the first poll after McCain unofficially claimed the Republican nomination, he posted a 63-20 percent margin over former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, the second-place finisher.

Former Vice-President Walter Mondale (D) who, like McGovern, would lose 49 states in his subsequent general election, scored a 54-39 percent Gallup mark over former Sen. Gary Hart (D-CO) when it became clear in June of 1984 that he would win the Democratic nomination. And, then-Sen. Bob Dole (R-KS) who lost to President Bill Clinton in a similar statistical manner as McCain lost to Barack Obama, also registered strong intra-party numbers when it became obvious that he would be the GOP standard bearer. Dole was the choice of 58% in the final 1996 Republican presidential poll as compared to 15% apiece for businessman Steve Forbes and national political commentator Pat Buchanan.

But Romney is not the only one with problems. The Gallup data is still recording problematic numbers for President Obama, too. According to their latest monthly presidential job approval poll (March 1-31; a rolling sample of 16,037 adults) Obama stands only with a 46:46 percent favorable to unfavorable job approval ratio.

While he shows favorability improvement over the past several Gallup monthly studies, Obama still is not yet in good stead. Even his standing among minority voters is showing diminishing strength. While African-Americans still rate him extremely high, 43 percent above the national average, his support among Hispanics is declining. This group only rates him nine percent above the national average, down from their high of 22 percent above recorded in January of 2010. Whites have consistently rated him from seven to nine percentage points below the national average during that same time period.

Additionally, even the lowest income level group, those with less than $24,000 in annual household income, rate him now just five percent above the national average. Their high number was +11 percent, also in January of 2010. All other income groups, divided into three levels with the highest being over $90,000 annually, rate the President one percentage point below the national average of 46 percent positive.

In conclusion, it appears that President Obama and Mitt Romney must each contend with his own weakness issue. Therefore, in order to compensate for a lack of enthusiasm among his own support base, expect highly contrasting negative campaign strategies to emanate from both camps as the general election begins to formulate.