We haven't been paying quite as much attention to next Tuesday's Virginia Democratic Primary as we probably should. But these charts from Pollster.com tell you pretty much all you need to know:
The purple line is Creigh Deeds, whom I'd been hoping might lose mainly because I don't want to be misspelling his first name for the next six months. But there's been some fairly robust polling of this race, and Deeds has all sorts of momentum. The green line is Terry McAuliffe, the outspoken former DNC chair and longtime Democratic consultant. McAuliffe does not have the momentum. In fact, his stock is dropping like a rock. Meanwhile, the third candidate, Brian Moran, is gaining ground on McAuliffe too but having trouble keeping up with Deeds. Does this pattern look familiar to anyone?
This was the polling situation in the run-up to the 2004 Iowa Democratic Caucus, with the last data point representing the actual results. As you can see, while it was clear from the polling that Howard Dean was losing momentum and John Kerry and John Edwards were gaining it, the polling far underestimated the magnitude of the momentum, and Dean wound up losing to Kerry by 19 points.
These kind of dramatic late swings happen more often in primaries than in general elections, and more often in multi-candidate fields than in two-candidate ones. I don't want to say they're always dispositive, because I haven't studied the issue systematically enough. Of note is that at least one hot-off-the-presses poll (from SurveyUSA) still has McAuliffe ahead by 6 points. But overall, and particularly in consideration of the fact that is Terry McAluiffe, who started out with the biggest warchest and the most name recognition, it's hard to see what he's going to do to halt his slide.
McAuliffe does, however, have one asset that Howard Dean didn't: Bill Clinton, whom he already pulled out of his hat in mid-May and who will return to Virginia over the weekend. McAuliffe, because of his access to the Democratic establishment, presumably also has things like superior voter lists, which could help his turnout on Election Day.
There is one last problem for McAuliffe, though: what happens to those Moran voters? Will they stick with their guy? He does, after all, seem to have some momentum of his own, and is polling within the margin of error in several surveys. Or, rather than playing the role of John Edwards, will Moran be more like Dick Gephardt, who also lost momentum in the days before the Iowa Caucus and saw most of his vote go to candidates like Kerry and Edwards? If some Moran voters do defect, presumably they would be more likely to go to Deeds, who has substantially better favorables than McAuliffe according to PPP (although Research 2000 disagrees).
My armchair assessment is that the probabilities here are something like Deeds 60-70%, McAuliffe 20-30%, and Moran 10-20%. Like Dean, McAuliffe wears his emotions on his sleeve, and if he were to lose, the concession speech should be something to watch.
6.04.2009
McAuliffe : Virginia :: Dean : Iowa?
by Nate Silver @ 8:13 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

38 comments
first comment woooo
First intelligent comment:
I hope Deeds wins because as a Democrat I don't believe that McAuliffe's access to voter lists, etc. would overcome his reputation as a carpetbagger who wants to use the job as a springboard to higher office (perhaps unfair reputation because he's lived in Virginia for fifteen years but things are what they are.) Deeds, with a base in the southwestern end of the state (where Republicans would roll up large margins vs. either of the other two candidates) and a down-home appeal to voters, is frankly the best candidate the Democrats could run if they actually want to WIN the Governor's race. In fact, I'd give Deeds about a 50% chance to beat McDonnell (which is more than I'd give McAuliffe).
Moran doesn't seem to be coming on that strongly.
Major development is Moran realizes Deeds is the new front runner. He unloaded his firs negative ad against Deeds instead of Mcauliffe.
Its makes sense Moran has the establishment liberal dems locked up. The smaller the electorate the better Moran is and as we all know negative campainging drives down turnout.
Like you I am having a hard time seeing Mcauliffe supporters joining Deeds I think it is more that the undecides (which have always been a large chunk often overpolling any candidate) are choosing Deeds.
Apologize to the grammer police in advance
I'd like to see some polling and analysis on Obama's speech today in Cairo. Quite a big step, if you think about it, and just the thing to stir the wingnuts into a fine fury.
I was planning on supporting Moran, but I really don't want McAuliffe to win. I guess I will see what things look like Monday before jumping ship to Deeds.
If you look into the cross-tabs, Deeds' support is much more firm than McAuliffe's or Moran's.
Full write-up here:
http://www.wiserthanthecrowd.com/2009/06/more-virginia-polls.html
"But overall, and particularly in consideration of the fact that is Terry McAluiffe, who started out with the biggest warchest and the most name recognition, it's hard to see what he's going to do to halt his slide."
Anyone find it a little ironic that Nate expresses concern over his ability to spell Deeds' first name, and then misspells McAuliffe's last name? :P
But yeah, those trend lines are crazy. And heartening, too; I'm personally pulling for Deeds.
Nate,
I feel for you. After seven years as Mayor of Baltimore City, and now in his third year as Governor, I still have to check the spelling of the Maryland Governor's name, and still get it wrong at times (and that's why I'm not spelling out Martin's last name - VBG).
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
The comparison with Iowa 2004 would be more interesting/convincing if Iowa 04 had been a primary.
It is not clear why we should expect momentum to play out similarly in the two completely different environments (nice quiet voting booth vs noisy meeting voting in the open with friends).
"Like Dean, McAuliffe wears his emotions on his sleeve, and if he were to lose, the concession speech should be something to watch"
We're going to win in NORFOLK! and we're going to win in RICHMOND! and we're going to win in DANVILLE! YAAAA-haaaaa!
I'm also pulling for Deeds right now, but I recognize that he's a bird-in-the-hand for the Democrats, and I'm not going to go dancing in the streets if he wins this November.
As someone who is partially color blind, I can tell you that you're first graph is confusing. "The green line is..." only had the effect of confusing me, because I thought that Moran's line was green, and McAuliffe looked red. If you are going to color code stuff, please use thicker lines, they are much less confusing.
This is where we need a runoff. Especially if McAuliffe won. Moran's supporters would probably push Deeds over the top.
Anyway, what kind of name is Creigh (which I keep pronouncing Cray)...?
As someone who has spent 55 of my 57 years in Virginia I am gratified to see McAuliffe falling in the polls. He is the classic corporate Democrat. I get ill when I hear him extolling the virtues of lowering the capital gains tax, shades of Ray Gun Ronnie. MY father used to have a rather crude expression about individuals he did not like. he would say, "He makes my ass want to chew tobacco"
that fairly well sums up my views on McAuliffe.
While there has been lots of polling, it is a mess.
#1 - Virginia does not have party registration. All primaries are open. Turnout is (a) low and (b) highly variable.
#2 - Because of #1, predicting turnout is largely a guessing game. This makes picking randomized polling sets very difficult and also makes it very difficult to adjust the polling results/samples to match actual predicted turnout patterns.
#3 - For example, there are approximately 10 House of Delegates primaries going on which will goose turnouts in 10 of 100 races which means proportionately higher turnouts in those districts. If overall turnout is 5% those 10 seats carry extra weight, but it's impossible to adjust for that in polling because the area codes don't necessarily match the districts in any strict sense (all of these are robopolling).
#4 - The polling in this race has been erratic. Many of those polling samples have included many self-identified Republicans. The pollsters screening methodologies are not very clear.
#5 - The campaigns have the best polling because they are based off live calls made based on good data that comes from the Party's voter file. Therefore, my read of what's going on is based on campaign strategy - whoever is attacking is probably behind and whoever is running positive is happy where they are.
#6 - Virginia has NEVER had a non-presidential primary where the candidates invested $15,000,000. In the 2005 race, the candidates spent approximately $1.5M. In 2006, Miller & Webb invested probably under $2M (I can't remember). This race is an unprecedented experiment. There are no precedents to model from.
The bottom line, is that I would not trust most of these polls or read too much into anything.
What to note is how solid the trendline is for Moran, compared with the jumpiness of both McAuliffe & Deeds, whom have both basically traded the "momemtum voter" who may in fact not even vote.
Also of note: the massive inequality of institutional support (mayors, committee dems...) in favor of Moran by a factor of 2:1 over both Deeds & McAuliffe combined.
I could go on with more numbers but would be giving away secrets till Tues;)
McAuliffe really scares me. I just could not take his Pollyanna musings during the Clinton/Obama campaign. I don't know if it's just me, but I was actually embarrassed by the charade. I'll take any other Dem, thank you.
Oh, and I have the vowel rendering thing, too. Regardless of the little associated learning ditty, spelling words with 'ei' or 'ie' is always a losing proposition. Thank god for spell check and auto format.
I guess the thing that worries me is, when you've got a multi-candidate field and one party jumps all the way from the back at the last minute, is this really a good way of being sure you get a good candidate? It seems like if someone's in or near the lead they get a lot of scrutiny, and if someone's at the back there's less so. It could be scrutiny makes the lead candidate seem less attractive, or lack of scrutiny [yet] will let the back candidate seem more attractive. It sometimes seems to me like a recipe for making decisions you regret later, like John Kerry, or Michael Steele.
Add me to the anybody-but-McAuliffe camp. Deeds rise in the polls doesn't strike me as a last-minute "surge" but the payoff from lots of plain hard work in meeting the voters throughout the state.
Deeds announced for Governor early in 2008, and spent a lot of time since then at no-publicity events introducing himself to voters. For example, on a Saturday afternoon in June 2008, he showed up at a library in Northern Virginia where I was among a small group of Obama volunteers meeting to go canvas in the neighborhood. He gave a few words of encouragement, and said he was running for Governor and wanted to introduce himself to people outside his home area in southern Virginia.
Moran represented my district in the Virginia House of Delegates, so I'd be leaning towards him, but if willingness to work hard is important, then Deeds certainly qualifies.
I might vote for Deeds as a candiate more likely than Moran to defeat the Republican McConnell in the general election, by being able to attract more downstate, moderate voters.
(But if I had to bet money, I'd guess the Republicans are likely to win the Virginia governorship this year. They've been out of office long enough that people have forgotten what a financial mess their no-taxes-no-matter-what policies tend to leave behind.)
VA Gov is the biggest race this year, right? A race everybody focuses on to gauge whether the GOP is showing any signs of recovery.
I don't want the GOP to score success, particularly at this stage. It'd only serve as an affirmation for their obstructionist tactics and off-the-reservation rhetorics.
I only know McAuliffe from the Dem primary. What a partisan hack and oddball. I would loathe to see him representing me.
For all his cash and backing, he sure isn't doing well. Seems there's a big anti-McAuliffe vote out there. That really cuts into his electability in the general as well and strategic voting in the primary will boost his main opponent.
@UncleHo:
"He makes my ass want to chew tobacco"
Hahahahaha...I love it!
wv: miscru: don't miscru my post as meaning that I have any particular dislike for McAuliffe.
"a last-minute 'surge'"
Creigh Deeds was endorsed by the Washington Post on May 22nd. I know newspaper endorsements don't always make a lot of difference, but the Post is still a big deal in Northern Virginia, and this was a race with many, many undecideds.
You can add me to the anybody but McAuliffe camp as well. I believe he would be crushed by McDonnell in the general election.
As yet, I'm undecided between Deeds and Moran, but have been leaning toward Moran. Deeds bugged me a little during his AG campaign four years ago with his pro-death penalty and tough sentencing stance. I realize that you probably need to say that to win AG this state, but I still disagreed with him. He also lost to McDonnell (albeit very narrowly)then. The change in demographics in VA over the last few years would probably be enough to get him those 350 votes he didn't have in 2005, but you never know.
Moran is more appealing because of his anti-drilling stance (one of the few actual issue differences between the three that's been publicly promoted), and the feeling I get that he would work more efficiently with the both parties in the state legislature.
I'll be doing a bit more research before making my decision and casting my vote on Tuesday.
Slightly off topic - Do McDonnell's ads showcasing his family annoy anybody else? Vote for me! I've got a wife and five grown kids! That means I'll be a great governor! Blech. At least say something inflammatory so I can scream at the TV in rage.
I assume this primary is first-past-the-post, like most US elections?
Sigh.
Well I was a Moran supporter but I have, as of last week, jumped ship for Deeds. I feel McAuliffe doesn't understand Virginia, and treats it like something he can play around with. I am not wowed by Clinton and big donors, that make me dislike him more.
I'm also in the anyone but McAuliffe category and deciding between Deeds and Moran.
I'm a little confused though. Does anyone else notice an error in the Pollster average? Usually they average out the most recent polls. The averages for Deeds and Moran seem right, but not the one for McAuliffe. Two polls have him at 26% and the other at 35%. In fact there's only one PPD poll that has him at 24%, yet his average is 25%. Something doesn't seem right. Even looking at the green dots, his average line doesn't fall between the dots.
I might be retarded when it comes to statistics, but this just seems glaringly wrong.
@Bryan Thorne
To me, they look like the opening for a sitcom from the 1980s. All you need is one of the kids stopping to ask Bob McDonnell for some money, and then a goofy kid next door for comic relief, maybe an ethnic stereotype, and you've got yourself a great ABC TGIF space-filler. I'm thinking Patrick Duffy as Bob McDonnell.
If you take out Brian's internals, the graph looks really different, showing no peak for mcauliffe. Take it for what you will, but it's interesting.
Why would anyone jump ship from moran to Deeds? I respect anyone supporting deeds but he is a much different candidate from Moran. Stay with Brian... he can win this thing with true party loyalists
The Democrats need to win the general election. The GOP of course is heavily pinning its hopes here, and McDonnell, I have to grudgingly admit, is a reasonably strong candidate. It seems faily clear to me that McAuliffe would have the least chance of beating McDonnell. The GOP base will turn out against him, and his appeal to independents is limited by perceptions that he is a carpetbagger, ethically challenged, and/or a dilettante. Meanwhile, Deeds played McDonnell to a virtual tie under more difficult circumstances and will be very hard for the GOP to paint as out of touch with Virginia values. I have a little less feel for how Moran will do. He would be strong in Northern Virginia and strikes me as having an authenticity (McAuliffe has the opposite of authenticity) that will be attractive to independents.
Count me in the "Creigh si, Brian si, Terry no" camp.
JJ,
don't underestimate the pollster.com methodology, it's not that much less sophisticated than what you get here. Actually, I'm not sure if I'd trust 538 over Pollster should they disagree.
They're not doing an average, but a local regression (LOESS)- so they are probably extrapolating the negative trend for McAuliffe.
@Damien Sullivan:
Yes, plurality takes it, not a good method in a three-candidate race but it's what we always do.
Another way that Moran is like Gephardt: I recall Gephardt going very negative on frontrunner Dean (and then to a lesser extent vice versa) clearing a path for the more positive, unscathed Kerry and Edwards. I can see Deeds being Kerry/Edwards in this race.
Its fascinating to me how much the Clinton's are toxic in bloggerland. Bill and to a lesser extent Hillary seem to have become very poisonous as far as some within the Democratic Party are concerned. Is that bad judgement on the part of the Clinton's or is it that the Clinton's themselves are unpopular in the grassroots and have become a weight around peoples necks?
Deeds, not words
If you think "Creigh" is a tough name, consider a factoid that I became aware of only just yesterday when I voted absentee and saw the actual ballot. Deeds is listed as "R. Creigh Deeds".
How awkward does your first name have to be before you decide to go with your second name, when your second name is "Creigh"?
Robert. Doesn't sound too awkward imo. Maybe he just wanted a memorable name.
In response to comment that Virginia does not have party registration making predictions of turnout a guessing game, the same is virtually true in Iowa. That is, one can register the night of the caucuses or change party registration the night of the caucuses. So, they function as though there was no party registration. That does not mean polls cannot predict what will happen or that they cannot be trusted.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment