Race for Gov: Undecided Losing Badly

DeVos Dominates Granholm; McCain cruising to White House (4.00 / 1)

Dick DeVos seems quite assured of beating Granholm, as he has opened an 8-point lead over the well-known governor.

Meanwhile, John McCain has opened up a huge lead over Barack Obama - 54-44% in one poll, according to Gallup.

(Hint: The One Poll That Mattered gave Granholm a 56-42% win, while Obama beat McCain 53-46%.)

Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott

---

by: ScottyUrb @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 19:27:37 PM UTC

And I think (4.00 / 1)

it was the debates which helped swing the voters' attitudes (and the Selection of Bible Spice).

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 20:11:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

With all due respect (0.00 / 0)

Virg Bernero ain't Jennifer Granholm or Barack Obama.  I'm not counting Virg out by any means and after his primary win it'd be foolish to do so, but he really needs to tighten up his game and message to win.  On top of that, he needs good fundraising and volunteer support, and so far donors haven't seemed as willing to open up their pocketbooks as they were for Granholm in '06 or Obama in '08.  

With Snyder's personal wealth + the Republican Governors Association putting millions into their Michigan PAC (the first time they've played in Michigan), this page should be bookmarked and visited often by anyone who wants to see Virg win in November.  

---

by: Bootsy @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 23:14:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

With regards to debates (4.00 / 1)

While it is clear that Snyder doesn't like debates*, I'm inclined to think that this is a campaign tactic by Bernero. Bernero, who needs to make up a massive deficit in the polls (when you're down by a margin greater than the number of undecided voters, you're in trouble), needs to throttles Snyder during the debates, something that he is more than capable of. He also needs to make Snyder look bad outside of the debates so as to bridge the favorability gap.

Based on statements from both campaigns, it seems to me that Bernero took the opportunity to accept three debates coming at times he considered advantageous for his campaign without consulting or negotiating with Snyder. By doing so, he put Snyder in something of a pickle. If he doesn't agree to Bernero's terms, he will look like he is afraid to debate Bernero and he'll look more like a regular politician if he attempts to alter the terms. Alternatively, Snyder can ultimately accept the debates Bernero chose, thus giving Bernero his choice debate times.

If I'm right, then I think this shows that Bernero is a great campaigner and will be a formidable opponent for Snyder. Then again, it strikes me as a little cynical to make such a maneuver in the first place. Of course, I could be wrong and this could be a miscommunication or Snyder could be waffling or whatever.

*I actually don't necessarily blame him for this because the current trend in debates is to stick to annoying, unsubstantial talking points. That said, while flawed, they are still useful enough that forgoing them would be a problem and I would be very apprehensive of voting for someone who refused to participate in at least three debates for the general election.

---

by: Seth9 @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 19:38:18 PM UTC

Wait... (0.00 / 0)

what?

"when you're down by a margin greater than the number of undecided voters, you're in trouble"

The quote clearly says:

The Ann Arbor businessman holds a 51 percent to 32 percent edge over Lansing's mayor, with 18 percent of likely voters undecided.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 20:13:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So... (0.00 / 0)

So Snyder leads by 19% with 18% undecided...and this isn't ominous for Bernero?

This is not to say that things can't change when we actually get into the heart of the campaign, but it is something of a mountain to overcome when a (presumably) competently produced poll has you trailing your opponent by a margin greater than the total number of undecided voters.

---

by: Seth9 @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 20:37:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No one knows (0.00 / 0)

who Virg is...that will change.

But who didn't expect this? This is not a year for Democrats, what did you expect the case to be?

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 00:44:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again... Huh? (0.00 / 0)

The candidates have roughly equal name recognition -- 88 percent for Snyder and 80 percent for Bernero -- but with widely divergent favorability ratings.

On what do you base your conclusion that no one knows who he is?

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 00:55:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Name reognition (0.00 / 0)

and knowing who the candidate is are two distinct things.

When you ask someone if they recognize their name, they say yes or no...that is not the same thing as knowing anything about the person.

For example, you could conduct a poll asking people which positions they support (or which resume they like better) and will often come up with a divergence in those two numbers.

Also, I don't know if you know this, but people have a tendency of answering poll questions without knowing what any information about WHAT they are answering (see ABM treaty).

No of this means anything until after Labor Day, when the voters actually start paying attention.

Am I saying that Virg is on easy street...no. But don't pretend that polls conducted in the middle of August will mean the same as the middle of September.

It is possible for those numbers to move...a lot.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 02:51:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

So In Other Words... (4.00 / 4)

You're basing it on no specific evidence. Glad we cleared that up. (Granted, it does not mean that you're necessarily wrong, though.)

And I don't know if you know this, but the rest of us did not just fall off the back of the turnip truck, so you can hold off on the condescension.

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 11:40:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually I'm basing it on (0.00 / 0)

political science research...but if it helps, you can pretend I am pulling it out of my ass.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sun Aug 15, 2010 at 00:53:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

And if you want a recent example (0.00 / 0)

I give you the polling of the Dem primary going into the primary.

The numbers changed drastically over the last month. I would argue most potential voters were uninformed about the two candidates (though they could recognize their names and were willing to answer a poll without any knowledge (something well know in polling practice)).

What influenced the change? The Labor ads, endorsements, voters tuning in the last month, etc.

Wait to see what the numbers are come end of September, after a few weeks of campaigning and the selection of Lt. Gov. (and perhaps a debate), when the voters who are going to be likely to vote will be exposed to large information about the two candidates.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sun Aug 15, 2010 at 01:06:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Polls (0.00 / 0)

One more thing if you're parsing polls results: margin of error.  And I'd consider both the margin as calculated by the poll taker and any additional points you might want to add if you don't trust the questions.  Plus who was polled?  Likely voters? And how will you figure in the younger voters who don't get counted because they generally don't have land lines?  So I guess this means I'm with Scotty on this one.

---

by: grmom @ Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 18:39:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Polls (0.00 / 0)

The poll included registered voters (although respondents who claimed that they did not intend to vote were turned away). It had no objectionable questions. I don't know if it only polled landlines (probably correct), but even if younger voters were neglected, it should be noted that younger voters rarely turn out in significant numbers for non-presidential elections. Furthermore, Snyder's campaign has been directed at a wider base that includes younger voters, so the usual advantage that Democrats get from younger voters will likely be reduced in this race.

It should be noted that the pollster likely induced some error that benefitted Snyder in this particular poll (the crosstabs show that Democratic leaning areas make up a relatively low percentage of the poll, although that can arguably be attributed to an enthusiasm gap), but even giving a moderately generous 2.5% boost to Bernero from deficiencies in the poll and very generously giving Bernero the full margin of error (4%), he's still down by double digits.

---

by: Seth9 @ Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 20:06:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And it is very likely (0.00 / 0)

that those numbers will change considerably...because it is too early in the race for them to mean much.

There are no trend lines...you are talking about name recognition, etc.

The best polls are traditionally the last polls conducted of likely voters the last three days before the election.

Am I saying the numbers will change? No. I am saying that they might and you shouldn't be surprised if they change.

I'd be more concerned with Virg's apparent inability to raise cash, which is probably the best determinant of success (unless you are Dick DeVos...no amount of money can overcome THAT personality).

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sun Aug 15, 2010 at 00:58:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No...it's not (0.00 / 0)

A 5 point lead doesn't always mean a lot early in the race. You could even make that argument for a 10 point lead. A 19 point lead, on the other hand means a ton, especially when the lead candidate has a net favorability rating of 26% (41/15) and the other has a net favorability rating of -6% (21/27). Yes, this will change when Bernero starts up the negative ads on Snyder, but that is still a monumental difference to overcome.

---

by: Seth9 @ Sun Aug 15, 2010 at 03:16:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If it actually a real deficit. (0.00 / 0)

You are basing this on ONE poll conducted pre-Labor Day on a race where most of the people in Michigan don't know anything specific about the two candidates.

All I am saying to you is that we will know what the TRUE deficit/advantage is for the two candidates closer to the end of September and don't be surprised to see the numbers change a lot between now and then.

At which point, should the numbers close, I will fully expect people to jump on here and start claiming that Virg is a wunderkind campaigner and we should all bask in his awesomeness.

At which point I will be back to point out the same thing I am pointing out now. The poll conducted after the primaries was close to meaningless and we really won't know where the race was until after Labor Day...just like the numbers for the primary were "bad for Virg" and broke for him drastically in the last month (many of the numbers firming up in the last week).

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sun Aug 15, 2010 at 14:50:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rasmussen Also Conducted a post-primary poll (0.00 / 0)

It showed Snyder leading by 12 points (49-37) using a likely voters rather than registered voters. It had a 4.5% margin of error. Assuming that reality lies somewhere between the two, Snyder leads by 15-16 points.

Also, primaries are notoriously difficult to poll and are more prone to major shifts near the actual primary date than general elections because there are fewer primary voters, primary voters vote strategically for candidates, and little-known candidates are able to gain support as they gain recognition through their campaign ads.

Finally, it should be noted that the most active voters during the primaries are the bases for the Republican and Democratic parties. This is shaping up to be a Republican election and Bernero's message, which did well in leftist circles, is not likely to resonate in a general election, especially when he's facing a moderate like Snyder. The 2006 election is also not analogous to this election because 2006 was a Democratic year in which the Republicans nominated a capital-C Conservative in Dick DeVos to go up against Granholm.

---

by: Seth9 @ Mon Aug 16, 2010 at 02:46:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm thinking (4.00 / 1)

of starting a group devoted to former undecided supporters who will advocate for supporting a Snyder-Undecided ticket.

I think the delegates were stolen at the convention and am super pissed about this!

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 20:15:07 PM UTC

We could call it (4.00 / 3)

PUMAs = Perpetual Undecided Massive Associational supporters

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 20:16:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What about the MichLib Poll? (0.00 / 0)

Which consists of one question:

Are we, the posters and regular commenters at Michigan Liberal -- self-appointed leaders of the state's netroot activist community -- going to quibble endlessly over polls, whine about independents and crossovers, and let disappointing numbers affect how (or whether) we vote on November 2...

Or,

Will we set aside all that and spend the next 11 weeks fighting for Virg, Jocelyn, David, Mark, Gary and the rest of the Democratic ticket, leading up to Election Day when we proudly vote for the Progressive Candidates we WANT (no matter how badly they might be trailing) -- because we know that even if some of our candidates lose, our efforts may give the others the margin they need to win?

---

by: helzapoppn @ Mon Aug 16, 2010 at 15:48:19 PM UTC

Admirable but... (4.00 / 1)

MichLib isn't the official (or unofficial) blog of the Michigan Democratic Party.  We (the people) are liberal (except for Brady, but we keep him around for entertainment), but that's about it.

That being said, sure, you're welcome to post diaries in support of candidates that you admire/respect/plan to vote for.  However, if you're being paid to do so, please disclose that relationship (I have to do it too).

Oh, and the guy who runs MichLib? And a bunch of us front-pagers? We're not members of ANY political party.  

Do stupid people know they are stupid?

---

by: JPowers155 @ Mon Aug 16, 2010 at 17:45:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So in that entire post, the word you object to is "Democratic?" (0.00 / 0)

I understand what this blog is and what it represents -- I think I said as much in the last post. It's not the MDP...fine.

Regardless of that...

Given the absence of viable non-GOP candidates this November (unless you want to call the Tea Party slate "viable"), what are the options for those of who are so proud to declare you're "not members of ANY political party?"

Aside from Brady or the actual Republicans/conservatives who post and comment here (hi Leon!), do you REALLY want to sit on your hands and watch as Republicans, Tea Partiers and other wingnuts win every contested office?

That's what I'm getting at.

And, if anyone here thinks letting the Democrats get demolished is going to "send a message" to make them behave better next time -- as if, once the redistricting is done Progressives and Liberals will have ANY cahnce until 2016 at the earliest -- then that would just prove every point Robert Gibbs made about the "professional left."

And no, I'm not paid by anybody, and never have been.

---

by: helzapoppn @ Mon Aug 16, 2010 at 19:52:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What I want are less ineffective Democrats (0.00 / 0)

The idea that anyone wants Democrats to lose power or "get demolished" to send a message is horribly off point.  What is on point is that the crisis of confidence the Democratic leadership faces today is one of that leadership's own making.  It's not just the big picture stuff, too, like watering down financial reform or health care reform or punting on stuff like net neutrality and climate change. It's also the little stuff ... running like scared children whenever some two-bit crank from the Right starts hooting.  Van Jones got the boot because Glenn Beck called him a communist; Shirley Sherrod got canned because Andrew Breitbart called her a racist.  Instead of backing their people, under the bus they went which was followed by a lot of hand wringing about how they'd been duped once again. And, now, you've got Obama walking back his comments about the Ground Zero mosque.

It's pathetic, and I'll be damned if I'm going to stick my neck out for cowards.  I don't expect these people to deliver everything I want as if politics is some kind of restaurant menu, but I do expect people who I help to at least be able to demonstrate a whiff of courage when it matters.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 14:53:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And our state and local candidates are to blame...how? (0.00 / 0)

As I mentioned privately, we here in Michigan don't get to choose the Democratic leadership at the federal level -- aside from indirectly helping the GOP take control if anger at "ineffective Democrats" and the treatment of Van Jones, Shirley Sherrod and Elizabeth Warren contributes to losses by our Congressional candidates...particularly Gary Peters and Mark Schauer.

And at the state level, "big picture" issues like financial reform, health insurance reform, net neutrality and climate change aren't part of the debate. Jobs, gridlock and next year's Redistricting(!)...are.

Ball's back in y'all's court. And the question I posed above remains (reworded):

Do we try to make this election competitive by helping the MORE liberal and MORE progressive candidates (even if some are gonna lose), or do we sit on our hands for 11 weeks, accepting that this is an all-consuming GOP/Tea Party "wave election" that will undo all the gains made in 2006 and 2008?

---

by: helzapoppn @ Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 15:56:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, I'm not an activist, so I'll leave that question for those persons... (4.00 / 1)

First off, as to the leadership ... we don't get to choose it, but the people we elect do. If Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid weren't so ineffective at getting stuff done, there'd be more progressive energy at the grassroots and more support for individual members. So, those individual members who wind up getting hurt for lack of enthusiasm can certainly turn up the heat on their caucus leaders to stop wincing every time Fox News issues an unkind word.  That's accountability.

As for the state ... this site went hard for Granholm in 2006, and generally supported Democratic candidates again in 2008 to help build in-state majorities. What was the reward? Andy Dillon getting the screws put to him last year by Mike Bishop and Jennifer Granholm capitulating on stuff practically before the ink was dry on it.

As for this site, I'm not going to do the job of campaigning for anyone. This site has an incredibly liberal posting policy whereby anyone can post something here and engage people directly. Hell, there's a libertarian candidate for something that posted here a few days ago.  At some point, Democrats -- even good ones -- are going to have to come to terms that simply shrieking, "The Republicans are coming!" is a poor replacement motivation for actually producing something of value.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 17:01:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sitting on hands (4.00 / 3)

It's the job of the Bernero campaign to excite Democratic and independent progressive voters enough to support his campaign or at least get them to vote.  They don't own him that support.  And even if progressives aren't excited by Bernero, there are plenty of other races to help with.  I can assure you that I'm not sitting on my hands this year, far from it.

---

by: Brady @ Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 16:44:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Technically, it's the job of Citizens to Vote Reponsibly (4.00 / 1)

The fact that so many people who can vote refuse to perform this basic responsibility -- perhaps because they expect to be "excited" or riled up by a specific candidate or issue -- doesn't make the statement any less true.

The original point was, would we rather whinge about poll numbers and whether a specific campaign can "excite" voters, or try a different way between now and 2 November?

Virg Bernero can work a room. I saw it just last night at the West Oakland County Democrats meeting in Wixom. He is not lacking for energy, passion or the ability to do the hard work of retail campaigning.

Money and media buzz, on the other hand...when even News Corp (Fox News' parent) starts pouring money into governors' races, we got problems.

[Of course, if money were all that mattered, we'd be talking about stopping Governor DeVos' reelection bid.]

---

by: helzapoppn @ Wed Aug 18, 2010 at 18:44:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]