3/31: Bloomberg Approval Rating at 40% … City Viewed as Moving in Wrong Direction

The high approval ratings once enjoyed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg are, for now, a thing of the past.  According to this NY1-Marist Poll, Mayor Bloomberg’s job approval rating among registered voters citywide is 40%.  This includes 9% who believe the mayor is doing an excellent job in office and 31% who say he is doing a good one.  About four in ten voters — 38% — rate Bloomberg’s job performance as fair while 21% view it as poor. Only 1% is unsure.

Click Here for Complete March 31, 2011 NYC NY1-Marist Poll Release and Tables

When NY1-Marist last reported voters’ opinions toward Bloomberg’s job performance in February, 44% of voters gave the mayor above average marks, 29% thought Bloomberg was doing a fair job, and 26% thought his performance was poor.  One percent, at the time, was unsure.

“Mayor Bloomberg is not immune from ‘third term-itis,’” says Dr. Lee M. Miringoff, Director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion.  ”If you mix together the rough winter weather, a sluggish economy, and the ongoing battle over public schools, he’s spending too much of his political capital.”

Mayor Bloomberg’s approval rating has dropped in Queens and Staten Island.  Currently, 35% of voters in Queens and Staten Island think Bloomberg is doing either an excellent or good job in office compared with 49% who thought the same in early February.  The mayor’s approval rating is little changed in the Bronx and Brooklyn.  36% of voters in the Bronx and 35% of those in Brooklyn now approve of Bloomberg’s job performance.  When NY1-Marist last reported this question in early February, the mayor’s approval rating stood at 38% in both boroughs.  Bloomberg’s approval rating, though, has bumped up in Manhattan.  59% of registered voters in Manhattan currently give the mayor a thumbs-up compared with 50% in early February.

Table: Mayor Michael Bloomberg Approval Rating
Table: Mayor Michael Bloomberg Approval Rating Over Time

NYC Needs New Compass, Says Majority

A majority of voters citywide — 53% — believe the Big Apple is moving in the wrong direction while 42% think it is on the right track.  Five percent are unsure.  This is a turnaround from early February when a majority — 52% — said the city was traveling in the right direction and 44% said the city was heading in the wrong direction.  Four percent, at the time, were unsure.

The change in attitude has occurred in each of the boroughs except for Manhattan.  In the Bronx, 61% view the city as going in the wrong direction, a 22 percentage point increase from early February when 39% held this view.  In Brooklyn, there has been a 12 percentage point increase on the positive side.  Currently, 53% of these voters report the Big Apple is moving in the wrong direction compared with 41% in NY1-Marist’s previous poll.  And, in Queens and Staten Island, 55% say the city needs to be redirected, up from 45% in early February.  Opinions toward the city’s direction are little changed in Manhattan.  45% now view the city as moving along the wrong path compared with 47% previously.

Table: New York City Direction
Table: New York City Direction Over Time

Nearly Two-Thirds Fail Bloomberg on Schools

65% of registered voters in New York City disapprove of how Mayor Bloomberg is handling the city’s public schools while just 27% approve.  Eight percent are unsure.

What a difference a third term makes.  When Marist last asked this question in July 2009, a majority — 53% — approved of how Bloomberg was doing while 38% disapproved.  Nine percent, then, were unsure.

67% of voters with children in the city’s public schools disapprove of how Bloomberg is handling the schools while 29% approve.  Just 3% are unsure.

Table: Bloomberg on Public Schools

Bloomberg’s Handling of Schools: Is Control the Issue?

When it comes to laying off teachers, Mayor Bloomberg opposes “last in, first out.”  However, is his desire to end tenure based more upon an attempt to gain greater control over the public schools or to close the city’s budget deficit?  Half of New York City adults — 50% — think it’s a control issue while 38% say it’s for budgetary purposes.  12% are unsure.

Among parents with children in the New York City public schools, nearly six in ten — 57% — think Bloomberg wants this rule changed because he wants greater control over schools while 34% say it is based upon his desire to close the city’s budget deficit.  Eight percent are unsure.

However, when asked if Bloomberg wants to change the rule of “last in, first out” to reduce the deficit or to weaken the teachers union, residents divide.  44% believe his rationale is budgetary while 43% say it is to weaken the union.  13% are unsure.

Half of parents with children in the public school system — 50% — cite the desire to weaken the unions while 40% say it is to close the deficit.  10% are unsure.

Table: Bloomberg’s Opposition to “Last In, First Out” — Budget or Control Issue?
Table: Bloomberg’s Opposition to “Last In, First Out” — Budget Issue or to Weaken Union?

Seniority Motivates Teachers Union, Says Majority

56% of New York City residents think teachers want to maintain the policy of “last in, first out” just to protect seniority while only 35% believe it is to keep the most experienced teachers in the classroom.  Nine percent are unsure.

Among households with a union member, 62% think teachers are motivated by seniority while 31% believe their support is based more on their desire to retain the most experienced teachers.  Seven percent are unsure.

Table: Teachers’ Support of “Last In, First Out” — Keeping Experienced Teachers or Seniority?

Budget Blues for Bloomberg

Mayor Bloomberg’s financial ability was at the core of his third term re-election campaign.  However, voters view Bloomberg as falling short.  A majority — 56% — disapprove of how Bloomberg is handling the city’s budget compared with 38% who approve.  Six percent are unsure.

Views toward Bloomberg’s handling of the budget have steeply declined.  When Marist reported this question in July 2009, 49% approved of his fiscal management while 41% disapproved.  10%, at the time, were unsure.

Table: Bloomberg on the City’s Budget

Bloomberg’s Legacy Status Quo

So, what does all of this mean for Mayor Bloomberg’s legacy?  There has been little change.  39% of voters citywide say that Bloomberg will be remembered very positively.  Included here are 10% who think that, when he leaves office, he will be viewed as one of the city’s best mayors and 29% who say he will be remembered as an above average mayor.  37% report Bloomberg’s legacy will be about average while 15% say he will be seen as a below average mayor.  One in ten say Bloomberg will be considered one of the city’s worst mayors.

When NY1-Marist last reported this question in early January, similar proportions of voters shared these views.

Table: Bloomberg’s Legacy

NY1-Marist Poll Methodology

3/31: Third Term: A Bridge by Any Other Name

Now that Ed Koch has had the Queensboro Bridge named after him, maybe the “How Am I Doing?” former mayor might be able to teach the current occupant of City Hall a thing or two about how hard it is to bridge the gap between a second and third term.  When it comes to how he’s doing, Mayor Bloomberg is learning that he isn’t immune from 3^rdterm-itis just like Koch and former Governor Mario Cuomo before him.  They both learned the hard way.  Bloomberg is also struggling to make the grade.

What is it about third terms that makes for the growing unpopularity of chief executives?  When first elected, freshly minted officeholders typically ride into office on a wave of change and energy.  Their enthusiastic followers have been promised a new day.  The first termer has accumulated political capital as his followers have invested in the new administration.

If handled wisely, the new leader can successfully strategize about his re-election prospects which usually incorporate a “we need to finish what we started” ring to it.  Re-election is never guaranteed but seems to be a frequent happening even in these change-oriented, turbulent times.

Then, the itch for a third term shows up and it’s off to the races once again.  The problem is in finding a new rationale for running and governing. Now, in the case of Mayor Bloomberg, term limits presented a major obstacle. He eked out a surprisingly close win over an underfunded opponent.

But, according to the latest Marist Poll, his approval rating has sunk, his legacy is on shaky ground, and he is plagued by a series of missteps that threaten to make his remaining years in office difficult. How’s he doing? Not so hot. Will his recent TV ads resurrect his third term?  Stay tuned, but the odds are long.

3/30: More Yanks than Mets Fans in NYC … Yanks Prepared for Season, Mets Not So Much

Major League Baseball’s Opening Day is tomorrow!  So, to whom do New York City baseball fans pledge their allegiance?  According to this NY1-Marist Poll, more than six in ten baseball fans citywide — 61% — cheer for the Bronx Bombers while 30% root for the Metropolitans.  Nine percent support neither team.

Click Here for Complete March 30, 2011 NYC NY1-Marist Poll Release and Tables

Have the Yankees and Mets done enough in the pre-season to improve their teams?  It depends.  A majority of baseball fans — 52% — say the Yankees have done just the right amount to make their team stronger.  More than one in five — 22% — report they have done too little, and 17% say they have gone overboard.  Nine percent are unsure.  54% of Yankees fans say the team has taken the appropriate steps to make the Bombers a better team, and another 15% say they have gone above and beyond.

However, the Mets are a different story.  Nearly six in ten New York City baseball fans — 59% — believe the Mets have done too little during the off-season to improve the team.  22% say they have done the right amount while just 5% think the Mets have done too much.  14% are unsure.  69% of Mets fans say their team fell short in their off-season preparations.

Table: Mets Fan or Yankees Fan
Table: Off-season Preparations: Yankees
Table: Off-season Preparations: Mets

World Series What If?  Yankees vs. Phillies …  Mets vs. Red Sox

The Yankees and Mets are cross town rivals, but each team has their own out of town nemesis.  Would Yankees fans root for the Mets or the Red Sox if the two faced off in the World Series?  Most Yankees fans have a greater dislike of the Red Sox.  83% would want to see the Mets take down the Red Sox.  14%, on the other hand, say they would cheer for the Red Sox over the Mets.   Three percent would not support either team.

When it comes to a Yankees-Phillies World Series matchup, about six in ten Mets fans — 61% — would back the Yanks.  However, a notable 34% would root for the Phillies.  Four percent would not cheer on either team.

Table: Mets/Red Sox World Series
Table: Yankees/Phillies World Series

Wilpon Family Scandal … Distraction for the Mets?

For the Mets to make it to the post-season, their focus needs to be on the field.  But, 53% of Mets fans think the financial troubles and lawsuit facing the team’s owners, the Wilpon family, will distract the team.  46% don’t think it will.  Only one percent of Mets fans are unsure.

Table: Wilpon Scandal – Distraction for the Mets?

Ticket Prices Strike Out

Nearly three in four baseball fans in New York City — 73% — don’t think the price of a Major League Baseball ticket is a good value for the money.  23% disagree and say that tickets are worth the price of admission.  Just 4% are unsure.

Mets fans — 82% — are more likely than Yankees fans — 69% — to think attendees don’t get a good bang for their buck when they attend a Major League Baseball game.

Table: Ticket Value

Take Me Out to the Ballgame?

When it comes to attending a Major League Baseball game this season, about one-third of New York City baseball fans — 34% — report they will attend the same amount of games they did last year.  14% will go to more games, and 10% will attend fewer games.  41% did not venture out to a stadium last year.

Table: More or Less Games than Last Year

NY1-Marist Poll Methodology

3/30: What Is a Yankees Fan to Do?

Play ball!!  I’ve waited through a very long, cold winter to hear those words.  And now it’s here, it’s here … it’s finally here!  It’s baseball season!  Although the 2011 baseball season is still in its infancy, in New York, it’s never too soon to talk about the postseason.  In a recent New York City Marist Poll, we asked Yankees and Mets fans who they would root for in the most unfortunate World Series matchups.  Mets fans were asked who they would root for if the Yankees were playing the Philadelphia Phillies in the World Series.  61% of New York City Mets fans said they would keep it in the New York family and cheer on the Yankees, and 34% would support the Phillies.  I wonder if this was actually the case in 2009?!?  When asked who they would root for if the Mets were playing the Boston Red Sox in the World Series, Yankees fans were a little kinder to their cross-town rivals.  83% of New York City Yankees fans said they would be in the Mets corner, while 14% said they would rally behind the BoSox.

As a Yankees fan, the thought of this hypothetical matchup put my stomach in knots and left me wondering what I would do if this horror actually came to pass.  After much thought and rationalization, I still can’t definitely say what I would do.  Initially, I thought I would support the Mets over the Red Sox.  If my New York team didn’t make it to the World Series, why not root for another New York team?  But, upon further reflection I started digging a little deeper.  In order for the Red Sox to advance to the postseason and ultimately the World Series, they would have had to have a better season than the Yankees.  So, if the Sox won the World Series, at least I would know that my Bombers were beaten by the best.  It falls under the same logic that had me rooting for the Packers in the Super Bowl.  They beat the Giants and it made me feel better about Big Blue’s demise to know it was the Super Bowl Champs that put the brakes on their postseason chances.  This kind of thinking also made me a fan of the Duke women’s basketball team after they eliminated the Marist Red Foxes from the 2011 NCAA tournament in a close contest.

So, what’s my conclusion?  The answer is “I don’t know.”  All I can hope for is that it’s a decision I never have to make.  And, if that World Series matchup does ever happen, check back with me … I might be rooting for the New York Red Sox or the Boston Mets!

Until then … happy baseball season!

3/30: Media Advisory — Dyson Foundation/Marist Poll Announces: “Striking a Balance: New Yorkers Speak Out on Rightsizing Local Government”

For media inquiries and technical assistance:

The Marist Poll, 845-575-5050

Lee M. Miringoff

Mary Azzoli

The Dyson Foundation

Diana M. Gurieva, 845-790-6312

Steve Densmore, 845-234-8713

What: Faced with high taxes, rising costs, and declining financial support from state and federal governments, how can local governments still provide essential services?  Is rightsizing local government the answer?

Funded by the Dyson Foundation and conducted by the Marist Poll, this survey of 4,500 New York State residents takes an in-depth look at New York State, as a whole, and nine regions — the Capital Region, the Adirondacks, Western New York, the Finger Lakes, Central New York, the Mid-Hudson Valley, the Lower Hudson Valley, New York City, and Long Island.  The study answers:

• Where do New Yorkers stand on the issue of local government consolidation?
• What are the arguments for and against consolidation?
• Which services – schools, police, fire, parks, water, sewage, public transportation, and prisons — do New Yorkers support or oppose for consolidation?

Who: Lee M. Miringoff, Director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, Robert R. Dyson, President of the Dyson Foundation, and Diana M. Gurieva, Executive Vice President and CEO of the Dyson Foundation

When: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12 p.m.

Where: LCA Press Room, the Legislative Office Building in Albany

Remote audio and video opportunities are also available. Lee M. Miringoff and a representative from the Dyson Foundation will conduct a telephone conference call immediately following the press conference at 1:30 p.m. A remote satellite video tour will also be held beginning at 2:30 p.m. Satellite interviews must be booked by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, April 6, 2011. To book a satellite interview or receive conference call information, call Mary Azzoli, Director of Interactive Media Systems at the Marist Poll, at 845-575-5050.

3/16: An Overdue Visit to “the Garden”

This week I found myself at Madison Square Garden checking out Ranger Blue.  They didn’t disappoint with a 6 to 3 win over the expansion team (I guess I’m a little too much of a traditionalist) New York Islanders.  “Gooooaaallll… Hey, Hey, Hey!”  Rangers fans know what this means.  I was able to follow most of the action but didn’t actually see the goal cross the crease until the score reached 4 to 2.

My one and only hockey game prior to last night was March 21, 1965, a mere 46 years ago.  No one ever accused me of being a rabid hockey fan.  But, that game was memorable.  You can make up your own version of the old joke “I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out.”  Because what I saw back then, didn’t much resemble a hockey game.  The Toronto Maple Leafs trounced the hometown Rangers 10-1.  I recalled the score being 11-0, but memory clearly plays tricks on you with the passage of time.  Was this the biggest trouncing in Ranger history?

Ok, maybe hockey isn’t in my blood.  My visits to MSG over the years have been for several political conventions where the outcome is pretty much known in advance or for competitive events, like the Westminster Dog Show, where the contestants have more bark than bite.  Will last night’s victory start a trend not only for this wayward hockey fan but for this potentially play-off bound team?  Will the Rangers hoist the Stanley Cup this year at MSG as others have become their political party’s nominee or won Best in Show?  Will I ever attend a Knicks’ game?

3/9: Is Good, Good Enough?

The release of the latest national job numbers has been met with cautious optimism from those waiting for momentum in the economic recovery.  Boosted by a jump in private sector hiring, unemployment has fallen below 9% for the first time in memory.  Is it possible these new numbers represent an end to what has been largely a jobless recovery so far?

Although “growth” has replaced “decline” in the economist’s lexicon, you don’t have to be a student of Tom Lehrer’s new math to see that the numbers don’t yet exactly add up to a healthy economy.  First, nearly 14 million Americans are actively, but unsuccessfully, seeking work.  That’s still way too high.

Second, when you include people working part-time and those thought to be so discouraged to have stopped looking for work, the unemployment rate is still hovering around 16%.  No wonder it doesn’t feel like the nation has sufficiently clawed its way out of the economic slump.

Finally, if you include a variety of reasons for Americans staying on the work force side lines, overall, less than two-thirds of adults are considered to be in the work force.  Bottom line: you aren’t counted as unemployed if you aren’t in the work force.  Anyway you tally the equation, this represents the lowest worker participation rate in more than two decades.

Marist Poll trend data in recent months has shown that the recession remains a reality in the minds of most Americans although there has been a drop in the percentage who thinks so.  Also, a majority believe that the worst for the economy is now behind us.  To the degree that momentum counts in decisions about hiring and spending, the hope for continued improvement in the economy is there.  So, is the view that we still have a long way to go.

3/9: Now, Why Didn’t I Think of That

I caught a piece in Sunday’s (3/6/11) New York Times about the Gallup Poll’s statistical profile of the happiest person in America.  Gallup has been collecting daily data on President Obama’s approval rating and much more, too.  (I doubt Obama is the happiest man in America, but being President is a good gig nonetheless).

Well, it turns out that the happiest person is tall, Asian-American, an observant Jew, over 65 years old, married, has children, lives in Hawaii, has his own business, and a six-figure income.  And, if you haven’t had your fill of kosher egg rolls yet, they actually discovered Alvin Wong who is a perfect match!  (The picture in The New York Times shows him with a broad smile.  What else?)

At the Marist Poll, we also enjoy the fun side of polling.  From our annual New Year’s resolution poll, to Americans’ picking their most annoying word or phrase… whatever… Our longest running gag poll strikes close to home.  For more than two decades, we have asked Americans whether they consider my age to be young, middle-aged, or old?  How better to find out what the nation thinks of my advancing age.

So far, so good.  People think someone born in 1951 is middle aged.  The cross tabs are even more positive especially among those who are 65 years of age or older.  How’s that for pollster spin!

But, May 3^rd is just around the corner and so is the big 6-0.  I fear the numbers are likely to shift dramatically despite Alvin Wong’s happiness at 69.

In the meantime, hat’s off to my friends at Gallup for cushioning the blow.

 

 

 

3/4: Road Rules: Re-Testing Drivers at Age 65?

There could be even longer lines at the Department of Motor Vehicles if nearly two-thirds of Americans have their way.  66% of adults nationally think licensed drivers should be required to re-take their road test once they reach the age of 65.  32% believe another road test is not necessary, and 3% are unsure.

Not surprisingly, younger Americans are more in favor of the suggestion than are older ones.  Most — 84% — of those younger than 30 years old, 76% of those 30 to 44, and 62% of those aged 45 to 59 think re-testing drivers at age 65 should be mandatory.  Even 48% of those 60 or older agree.

Table: Mandatory Road Test at 65

Marist Poll Methodology

 

3/2: Does Senator Thune’s Announcement Really Shake up the GOP Field?

Last week, South Dakota’s junior senator, John Thune, announced he would not seek the GOP nod for president in 2012.  For someone who is barely an asterisk in the extremely early pre-election polls, this “news” created more than just a ripple.  No one was really expecting Thune to take this wire to wire.  No one was referencing failed South Dakotan 1972 Democratic candidate George McGovern with an “as South Dakota goes, so goes the nation.”  And, certainly, no one was racing up to Mt. Rushmore to take measurements for further excavation.

A couple of points on the reasons for the “big splash:”  First, the GOP field is so poorly formed at this point that it is even difficult to draw the top tier/second tier demarcations that are typical a year before the primary/caucus season.  Now, Thune’s withdrawal is seen as a boost to the chances of a fellow low recognition 2012 wannabee … Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty.  They appeal to a similar conservative constituency within GOP circles.  But, how thinly can you dissect a blip on the radar screen anyway?

Second, political pundits gravitated to a potentially far bigger historical happening when Thune backed off.  For the first time since 1904, according to Politico, a sitting member of Congress will not be among the crop of candidates seeking the presidency.  And, for the first time in modern political history, according to The Washington Post, the presidential campaign will commence without a sitting U.S. senator in the field. (Where’s Senator DeMint when you really need him?)

Despite enjoying a more than modest bank account, Thune has to be worried (even if he is thinking about 2016) that Capitol Hill tenants often run for president but almost as often fail to win.  Before 2008, when Obama and McCain were both sitting senators (I guess one of them had to win), the previous victorious sitting senator was John F. Kennedy.  Before him, you need to rewind to Warren G. Harding.

I’m sure campaign 2012 will have more interesting moments than what Senator Thune shared with the political community.  But, with Thune’s decision the winnowing has begun even before the field has formed.