search
Scene from movie Dazed & confused of students standing, sitting, and laying on and inside an orange convertible car

We Should Hang Out More

Movies often serve as perfect time capsules, offering snapshots of what life was like in an earlier time. Take Dazed and Confused. The movie is set in late seventies Texas and focuses on groups of ... Read Now >

News

1/27: An Optimistic Picture of the NYS Economy

January 27, 2012 | by

By Barbara Carvalho

One of the most interesting numbers from Marist’s poll of New York State deals with those who now believe the worst of the state’s financial failings are behind us.  As recently as this past November, only 42% thought that we had turned the economic corner.  Now, 52% see things in a more rosy picture.  Are we about to turn the page on public perceptions about the sluggish economy?

There’s evidence from other questions in this survey that this may, in fact, be the case.  26% currently think the state’s economy is on the upswing, double the proportion who shared this view in November.  30% think their family finances are improving while only 15% think their money matters are getting worse.

Many New Yorkers are still having difficulty making ends meet.  The unemployment numbers still point to talk of an economic recovery as being fragile, at best.   And, although improved, 72% continue to think we remain mired in an economic recession.

But, the numbers do represent a change.  And, that is a welcome sign for those who have long awaited an improvement on the economic front.

1/13: On the Ground in New Hampshire

January 13, 2012 | by

It’s a political junkie’s drug – New Hampshire in the days leading up to the primary.

2012 marked the Marist Poll’s seventh venture to the Granite State, but I was a newbie.

Here’s the back story.  Plain and simple, I love politics!  My passion for politics began fairly early in life, debating politics with family at the tender age of 12.  (With wisdom, I have learned to refrain from such discussions at family dinners.)

There are a couple of political endeavors to my credit.  Two valiant, yet failed, efforts – one in junior high and one in high school — for class president.  (Perhaps, a third attempt in college would have proved successful.  Even Nixon eventually gained the White House.)

Politics also played a role in fueling my future career in broadcast journalism.  However, when it came to major political events, I was often in-house taking in tape, editing pieces, creating graphics, and writing.  Certainly, I was never in the field in New Hampshire.  But, as a member of “Team Marist,” I was primed.

The excitement built within me as we traveled through New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and, finally, into New Hampshire.  As we made our way into the state, roads were dotted with signs expressing support for the candidates.  It was almost as though politics permeated the air, and it wasn’t long before I witnessed the reality of the stories I had heard.  You can’t walk down the block without bumping into a journalist or politician.  I was in my element.

While I could go on and on, I will spare you every last detail of the trip.  Here are a few of my personal highlights.

    • The ABC News/Yahoo “Your Voice, Your Vote – Republican Presidential Debate in New Hampshire,” on Saturday, January 7th: This was no ordinary experience.  Our team was credentialed to watch the debate in the press filing center followed by access into the spin room.  There, my journalistic juices were flowing.  As each candidate’s representative entered the gymnasium of Saint Anselm’s College in Manchester, I darted over to the pack of journalists with my compact camera in hand.  Upon realizing former Senator Rick Santorum’s arrival, I elbowed my way into the pack trying to get a good shot of the candidate, but I was behind the senator.   After a quick scan of my surroundings, I noticed the exit to the room was to my right.  The light bulb went off.  Santorum would have to turn in my direction to leave.  I dug in and stayed put.  Santorum thanked the pack, turned, and slowly made his way through the scrum of journalists (a special word of thanks to Nancy Miringoff who braced me as the pressure of the group became almost overwhelming).  Then, the senator stopped and answered a question right in front of me.  Score!  I got the money shot.
    • The NBC News-Facebook Debate on Meet the Press on Sunday, January 8th:  Still riding high from the experience the night before, our team made its way in the wee hours of the morning from our hotel in Nashua to Concord for the final debate before the Republican primary.  Hard to believe, but this experience outdid the night before.  Sitting inside the debate hall, I watched the candidates interact with their advisers, their families, and each other during the commercial breaks; a very unique perspective.  (Thanks to our GOP primary polling partners at NBC News for making such an experience possible.)
    • Candidates’ Events on Monday, January 9th:  A Santorum town hall meeting in the morning, a Gingrich event in the afternoon, and a failed attempt to attend a Romney rally early in the evening offered a small taste of the candidates’ grueling schedule.  More importantly, witnessing the crowd size and the audience’s reactions demonstrated their enthusiasm (or lack there of) for the candidates.  The choice of venue, style, and candidate spin when answering audience questions, not only demonstrated their campaign strategies, but their proficiency or inexperience on the stump.
    • Polling Place Visit on primary day, Tuesday, January 10th:  After hopping a barricade, I was, once again, caught up in a pack of reporters as former Governor Jon Huntsman approached a polling place in Manchester.  Handicapped by height and distance, I tried to figure out a way to get the video I wanted.  Then, I realized Huntsman’s car was to my right.  I made my way to the car, hoping to get a shot of his departure, and soon, I found myself pinned against the vehicle.  As my knee went in one direction and my leg in the other, I raised my tiny camera and pushed back against the throng of reporters who came toward me.  Battling for the best angle, I viewed Huntsman and his wife through my lens and captured the governor as he discussed his daughters’ impact on his campaign.
    • A Who’s Who in the Radisson in Manchester on primary day added an exclamation point to my final hours in New Hampshire.  With the clock ticking down to the end of voting, Lee Miringoff, Barbara Carvalho, Nancy Miringoff, and I gathered at the hotel to conduct a few media interviews and to watch the results of the primary.  We stopped briefly to chat with an ABC reporter in the downstairs corridor of the hotel when I saw a group of cameras out of the corner of my eye.  A quick glance revealed Senator Santorum, his wife, and two of their children walking in our direction.  As they passed, the senator asked us how we were and continued on his way.  Up to the second floor we went for a radio interview.  After leaving radio row, we met up with Governor Huntsman on the staircase.  I took some video of Lee speaking with the candidate prior to my shaking hands with Huntsman.

And, so our whirlwind trip came to a close, but I would be remiss if I don’t mention two items which deserve honorable mention.

  • Famished and slightly exhausted, half of the MIPO team (the non-football fans went shopping) took a breather at J.W. Hill’s Sports Bar and Grille in Manchester to watch the NY Giants defeat the Atlanta Falcons in the playoffs.  (A tip: if ever in the Manchester area, be sure to try the spinach and avocado dip at J.W. Hill’s.  The added tomato created a tantalizing culinary experience.)
  • Who knew?  Visitors to the Merrimack area can visit the Anheuser-Busch Brewery for a tour and get up close and personal with the famed Budweiser Clydesdales!

That said.  The race moves on to South Carolina, but this time I will be watching from afar!

1/3: Pollster Spin for Wednesday Morning

January 3, 2012 | by

By Dr. Lee M. Miringoff

Dear Pollsters, Pols, and Press,

caricature of Lee Miringoff

As you head to New Hampshire, I thought I’d save you time by providing a little pre-caucus, post-caucus pollster spin.

Case #1: Why our Iowa polls were actually very, very accurate really.

1.       We interviewed over 3,000 people to eventually distill the number down to a reasonable sample of likely Iowa caucus-goers.  The model of likely participants turned out so well we plan to issue a patent.  On second thought, we will maintain our policy of transparency and disclosure.  I’m also wondering if the combined number of likely participants identified by all of the Iowa pre-caucus polls exceeded the actual number of caucus-goers.

2.       Although it is expensive and time-consuming, we interviewed a large number of cell phone only households.   Not calling cell phones is another element of risk in what is already a very difficult polling environment.  Is it true that every Ron Paul supporter only owns a cell phone?

3.       Quality interviewers and repeated callbacks are best practices.  Iowans are getting bombarded by robo-calls.  Many would simply prefer to celebrate the holidays without having to answer our or anyone else’s survey.

4.       The golden rule in presidential caucus/primary polling is “knowledge rules.”  As the campaign goes from state to state, who can vote varies.  In Iowa, independents and Democrats may declare their GOP partisan intentions and participate.  Not so, everywhere.

5.       Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure.  Everyone can see how our poll was conducted.  Visit Maristpoll.marist.edu

Unfortunately,   despite doing all of the above and a lot more methodological gymnastics to measure Iowa GOPers intentions…

Case #2: Why our Iowa polls were ever so slightly a tiny bit off

1.       We can’t help it if the candidates and campaigns continued to seek voter support for five days after we finished our interviews.  (This is a slightly resentful restatement of the “snapshot theory,” namely that a poll is accurate only at the time it is taken.)

2.       Those who told us they “might vote differently” in our final poll clearly did.  (Again, this is a slightly hostile restatement of the “intensity theory,” namely, that a poll needs to consider the intensity of voter support for a candidate.)  If you’re not firmly committed, then, you might reconsider your preference or decide not to caucus.  And, there is, after all, the Sugar Bowl on caucus night that might prove to be an attractive alternative for college football fans.

3.       Undecided voters must have mostly opted for the eventual winner.  This is a traditionally useful ruse for pollster spinners.  The undecided, decided!

4.       There is strength in numbers (not a pollster pun), and misery definitely loves company.  The polls have mostly been reporting similar findings throughout the Iowa campaign.  In fact, during the final week, the polls conducted by NBC News/Marist, CNN/Time, and the Des Moines Register were all on the same page.  (We all did separate interviews, honest.)

5.       A word of caution before jumping onto the why the polls were wrong bandwagon.  In a contest where the top tier was barely distinguishable from the second tier, small changes in voter preferences could upset the applecart.  A lot of emphasis on the order of finish, for example, was based on “differences” that fell well within a poll’s margin of error.

A couple of closing thoughts as you land in Manchester.  Given that the final pre-caucus polls were alike, there was a needless poll-liferation of surveys in Iowa, or so the argument goes.  But, methods used by different polling organizations do vary even if their results sometimes do not.  Good polls contribute to the narrative of the campaign and the Iowa polls did just that, chronicling a memorable roller coaster ride with as many as five different candidates occupying the lead car at one point.

It has often been said that predictions are difficult especially about the future.  (By the way, this is often mistakenly attributed to Casey Stengel or Yogi Berra when, in fact, the Danish physicist Niels Borh is its earlier author, and you can look it up!)  So, there’s no need for my fellow psephologists (look that one up, too) to wipe away any tears. There’s no crying in polling, either.  We perform admirably and often exceed what meteorologists and seismologists do!  If the methods are fully disclosed, then the public and the media are “let in on the secret” of what the private campaign pollsters are using to shape their campaign strategies.  In that way, public polls contribute to an informed electorate.

Safe Travels,

Lee  M. Miringoff, director of the Marist Poll or,

Lee M. Mirin-goof, depending upon how things went

12/9: A Look at the GOP Contest in Iowa and New Hampshire

December 9, 2011 | by

By John Sparks

With time counting down to the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary, are there more twists and turns ahead?

Carl Leubsdorf

Carl Leubsdorf

The Marist Poll’s John Sparks visits with Marist Poll Analyst and syndicated political columnist Carl Leubsdorf who writes a weekly column for The Dallas Morning News about the latest trends in the 2012 campaign for the GOP presidential nomination.

John Sparks
Carl, it’s less than a month until the Iowa caucuses, and according to the latest Marist Poll there have been some changes. But before we talk about those changes, I’ve got to ask you: Which is more important to a candidate, Iowa or New Hampshire?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, it depends which candidate, I think, because for certain of the candidates for the group of — that we call the conservatives in this race, they’re all conservative, but basically who have been jockeying all year for position, and I’m talking about Speaker Gingrich, Governor Perry, Representative Bachman, in particular Herman Cain because he’s not there anymore, and to a lesser degree Ron Paul, Iowa is more important because it’s going to establish the pecking order among those people. In effect, we’ve had sort of two primaries going on, the — on one side, the establishment side, we’ve had Romney and the two former governors, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, and on the other side, we’ve had the other candidates. So, among the other candidates, they’re jockeying for position, and Iowa is extremely important because of the nature of the electorate, quite conservative. It’s a caucus system which encourages activists, so… But for Governor Romney, while there’s some importance in Iowa, the key thing for him is to win New Hampshire and win it decisively so that the media does not write: Well he won, but he didn’t meet expectations because he needs to use New Hampshire where he has a summer home and where he spends a lot of time as a board to sort of propel himself into the primaries in South Carolina and Florida.

John Sparks
Well, let’s talk about Iowa first since it comes first. The caucuses are January 3rd, and the latest Marist Poll has Newt Gingrich on top with 26%, followed by Mitt Romney at 18% and Ron Paul at 17%. Now Marist Poll Director Lee Miringoff says, “Hold on tight for further twists and turns.” Carl, do you think we could see more changes between now and January the 3rd?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, historically there have been a lot of changes in the last six weeks, and one thing I’ve been advising everyone that I’ve talked to and probably have discussed in these interviews previously, is that Iowa tends to firm up in the last month to six weeks. There are a lot of changes near the end, and the way it stands in August or in June probably isn’t going to be the way it’s going to end up, and that, in fact, has happened with the emergence of Speaker Gingrich as the leader there. It’s going to be interesting. I don’t know whether he can maintain it. It’s a shorter period he has to maintain it than some of the others who’ve come up. There’s the question: If he doesn’t maintain it, who would get his votes since just about everyone of his rivals among that group has been up there earlier.

Ron Paul is an interesting and sort of a separate phenomenon. He has a very fervent following, a lot of it young people. He’s got a solid vote, which is I would rate at 10-to-12%. But the latest poll is, not only the Marist Poll but the two others that were taken, show his numbers coming up in Iowa, so he’s clearly a contender for first place.

And the third player near the top of the poll, Governor Romney, has not spent that much time in Iowa. He spent a lot of time four years ago. He definitely has a following. We have to remember that while the Iowa Republican Party and likely caucus attendees are pretty conservative, maybe a quarter to a third of them are more moderate and more establishment, and Romney will do very well there whether he spends a lot of time in Iowa or not. I found interesting in these last polls, and we’ll find out later if it was meaningful, Romney’s numbers appear to have come down in Iowa for no particular reason, and this is the phenomenon we saw four years ago that the more he campaigned in a place, the less well he did, and people forget that at one point he was the leader in both Iowa and New Hampshire four years ago, and he ended up winning neither. So, whether we’re seeing that phenomenon in the fact that he’s dropped from the mid 20s into the upper teens (inaudible) polling caucuses is very difficult and finding likely attendees.

John Sparks
You know, Carl, second choices might tell us something because Herman Cain was still in the race when the Marist Poll was taken, and 28% of Cain’s supporters said that Gingrich was their second choice, followed by Paul and Romney with each 19%.

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, I think the general assumption has been that Cain’s vote is… more of it will go to Gingrich than to anyone else. They’re both from Georgia. They both had some affinity on the issues. They’re quite…  There are a few suggestions that Cain will in fact endorse Gingrich fairly soon, so that’s not surprising. In a way, the thing that Romney most fears is the consolidation of the conservative vote behind one candidate early in the game. Romney was counting on the fact that the conservative vote would stay very divided, and, in fact, in a very divided conservative vote, Romney with say 25% might win the Iowa caucuses. But if the vote begins to consolidate in Iowa behind one person, then, at the moment that appears to be Gingrich, that’s a problem for a candidate like Romney who has shown great difficulty in getting above about a quarter of the vote everywhere except in New Hampshire.

John Sparks

The Marist Poll showed that among caucus goers who consider themselves Tea Party or conservative and Evangelical Christians, Gingrich gets 35% compared to only 11% for Romney.

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, that’s not Romney’s electorate, but the… I didn’t notice what percentage in your poll was people who consider themselves conservatives as opposed to moderate or however it’s described in the poll, and maybe it wasn’t asked. But I said, the assumption has been about two-thirds of the caucus electorate or maybe a little more would be Tea Party people, Right-To-Lifers, Christian conservatives, the various factions that make up the right side of the Republican Party, and that is not a group that where Romney is going to do very well.

John Sparks
You know, I think it’s always interesting, polling people and asking them why they vote like they do, and in Iowa, three in ten that are likely to be caucus goers tell us they want a candidate who is closest to them on issues – 29% say the candidate who shares their values is a key, and that’s flip-flopped a month ago. Any significance to this that now there’s…

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, I think it seems to be fewer of them are saying that the first choice would be someone they think that can win, and actually we’ve seen in the some of the polls lately, more people think that Gingrich can win than think Romney can win. Romney has not… Romney has run this very buttoned up campaign where he tries to avoid the other candidates, where he behaves like the front-runner, where he straddles the issues and tries to say as little as possible, and when you combine that with his bland personality and the fact that he doesn’t have much of a persona, I think it’s hurt him, and I think it’s, you know, Gingrich has emerged as a more dynamic candidate, as a candidate who could get in Obama’s face. I mean, the thing that Republicans want most is to beat President Obama. They want a candidate who will stick it to him in the debates and who will be outspoken, and I think they see Romney is not able to do that. So, in the other candidates, and I say Gingrich is the favorite of the moment, they see ones who both agree with them and can be aggressive against Obama.

John Sparks
It’s interesting that you mention the general election. When Iowans turn to the general election, Obama ties Ron Paul, but he defeats Gingrich in Iowa 47% to 37% and he defeats Romney 46% to 39%.

Carl Leubsdorf
That’s interesting. That’s especially interesting because Iowans have been subjected to a steady barrage of anti-Obama rhetoric. The president’s been there a couple of times, but since there is no Democratic primary, most of the — most of what’s coming out in politics is Republicans, and most of what they’re doing is attacking Obama, and for Obama’s numbers to hold up that well is probably a good sign for him from the Fall that I think it’s the calculation of the Obama campaign at this point that in a relatively close election where they have a reasonable chance to win, Iowa would be one of those states that the president would be able to carry. It’s considered one of the states definitely in play. It was carried by, I guess, by Bush in ’04 and by Obama in ’08, but that is not a great sign for the Republicans, and there’s some sense, and there’s a new Pew Poll on this too, that what’s going on in the Republican Party has actually hurt the party somewhat. Whether that will have a long-term affect, we don’t know.

John Sparks
Carl, organization has always been an important factor in the campaign.  Is it still an important factor, especially in Iowa?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, it’s important in Iowa because in order to vote, you have to go to a caucus in your precinct, and there are 2,400 precincts in Iowa, and the weather in January when this takes place is often not very good, and traditionally, the way you won in Iowa is you set up a structure in every county, you said the 99 counties and then a lot of the towns, to get people out to the caucuses. I think that’s going to be less of a factor. If it is a big factor, Speaker Gingrich will be in big trouble because he doesn’t have much of an organization there. Ron Paul’s got a perfect organization out there supposedly, and Mitt Romney has one because he had one four years ago. But, this campaign has really been fought out in the televised debates. That’s what’s really driven the race and have gotten the most attention, and the flubs of the various candidates like Governor Perry’s problem, naming the third department he would get rid of or outside issues like the problem Mr. Cain had with various women have really driven the narrative of this campaign, and television advertising’s about to start really full scale in Iowa, but I don’t think that’s the major factor either. I would guess organization will be less important. But if we wake up on caucus morning and Newt Gingrich is in fourth place, then we’ll know organization was more important than we think it is, but I think it’s been reduced a lot.  Another factor on the organization side is there’s a difference between the Democratic caucuses and the Republican caucuses in Iowa.  In the Democratic caucuses, they have a system where if you get — if someone has less than 15%, their support doesn’t count. The caucuses are precinct caucuses. They elect delegates to the county conventions, which eventually this will get to a state convention. In the Democrats, they all line up for the different candidates in different corners of the room. Anyone who’s got under 15%, his candidate is out, and those people can go join one of the other groups, and you really need organization to do that. The Republicans have a straight vote. It’s like a straw poll. When they arrive at the caucus, they vote for one of the candidates, and that’s how the delegates are allocated to the county then. That’s much easier. It’s more like a regular election than a primary than like a caucus, and if they don’t want to stay for the discussion of the issues and all that, they can go back home as soon as they vote. The Democrats, you got to stay awhile. So, it’s another factor that reduces the importance of organization in this election.

John Sparks
Let’s go from Iowa to New Hampshire. The New Hampshire primary comes a week after the Iowa caucuses, and the latest Marist Poll shows that in New Hampshire, Mitt Romney is in the lead 39% to 23% over Gingrich, but that lead has been cut in half since last month’s Marist Poll in New Hampshire. Any significance there?

Carl Leubsdorf

Yeah, I think a couple of interesting things there. One, Romney has steadily been… I think most of the fact that it’s been cut in half is probably because Gingrich has gained and less that Romney has been consistently in most polls in the neighborhood of 40%. And the fact is, if he gets 40% in the primaries, he’s almost certainly going to win. One thing… the biggest caution on New Hampshire is that the day after the Iowa caucuses, all the numbers you’ve seen so far in New Hampshire will be worthless because the numbers will change according to what happens in Iowa. It happens every year, you see a real change, and the fact that the primaries are only — and the caucus in Iowa and the primary is in New Hampshire are only week apart means that there can be a big affect of what happens in Iowa. What that means is that the winner in Iowa will get a boost in New Hampshire. Now, if it’s Gingrich, and he’s already surpassed 20%, that could put him up near the 30% level. And, unless Romney comes out of Iowa with a feeling well he did okay considering he didn’t campaign much there, his numbers might come down a little bit. Now if Romney’s numbers come down a little bit, that votes probably not going to go to Gingrich, it’s probably going to go to Jon Huntsman who is the former Governor of Utah, has concentrated in New Hampshire, and although his record is equally as conservative as the other candidates, his more moderate manner and the fact that he’s not spent all of his time bashing President Obama gives him an appeal to the independents.  Remember in New Hampshire, independents can vote in the primary, and with no Democratic primary, we expect a lot of independents to vote there. Not all independents are moderate to liberal to be sure, but I think there are more of those than arch conservatives. So, what you’ll see in… Now if Romney comes in to say a strong second in Iowa, his numbers will hold up very well, but if comes in a weak third, he may suffer some erosion there, and certainly the winner in Iowa will get a bump up, so you’ll see a change there by the Thursday or Friday of that week, and it’ll determine whether anyone actually has a chance of beating Romney. The great fear I think from the Romney point of view is that he survives to win, but he wins so narrowly that it does not give him a boost for the later primaries. As I said before, New Hampshire is extremely important to Romney. He was governor of a neighboring state. He has a summer home there. He’s spent a lot of time there. He really needs to have a strong victory there, or he’s going to have real problems when the race moves south.

John Sparks
Interesting that you mention the independent voters in New Hampshire. Romney leads Gingrich by 12 points among Republicans in New Hampshire, but when it comes to independents, his lead opens up to 21 points over Gingrich.

Carl Leubsdorf
Well that’s exactly right because the two candidates who the independents are most likely to vote for or like more than will vote for are Romney, considered the moderate in this race. Remember, he’s taken all these conservative positions, but a lot of people don’t believe he really believes them, including a lot of conservatives, so he will get a lot of that independent vote, but if he falls or has seen trouble, it’ll go to Huntsman I think.

John Sparks
According to Marist, the New Hampshire voters are firmly committed to their candidate – 49% say they’re strongly committed while 31% report they’re somewhat committed, whatever that means, but that may tell us something…

Carl Leubsdorf
That’s more than in Iowa is and…  that’s more than in Iowa that it’s… they’re less committed, I think.

John Sparks
Correct, but I wondering if this might tell us something about what the general election might be like in New Hampshire. There’s something that’s interesting about New Hampshire.  Marist has President Obama losing to Romney in New Hampshire by only three points, 46/43, but they have the president defeating Ron Paul by only two points, and they have the president defeating Gingrich by ten points and yet…

Carl Leubsdorf
I think…

John Sparks
I was going to say – and yet a majority of New Hampshire voters, 52%, say they don’t approve of Obama’s performance.

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, I think if you compare the two states, Obama has much less chance of carrying New Hampshire than Iowa, especially if his opponent is Romney who is — we said is well known there and has ties there. He is not popular in New Hampshire. All the polls have shown that consistently. He’ll have a difficult time carrying New Hampshire. I would bet if you could get an Obama person to say what was the map that they would have assuming that they barely got over the 270 mark needed for an electoral vote, what’s on that map? I would guess that Iowa would be on it and New Hampshire would not.

John Sparks
Probably so.

Carl Leubsdorf
One of the interesting things in New Hampshire that I should mention is the influence of the Union Leader newspaper. For years, the Union Leader, which is the only statewide paper in New Hampshire, has played an outsized role in New Hampshire Republican politics. It’s… the person that has supported hasn’t always won, but a recent study showed that, I think by Nate Silver of the New York Times, was that the endorsement of the Union Leader is definitely worth a number of points.  That candidates who were endorsed by the Union Leader gained strength afterwards. A couple weeks ago they endorsed Speaker Gingrich as their candidate. That’s undoubtedly one of the factors in his rise to 23% in the Marist Poll, and it will be a factor because when the Union Leader endorses someone, they don’t just write one editorial and then go back to their knitting.  There will be more front page editorials in the Union Leader, and not only will they spend some time supporting Gingrich, but they will be beating up on the candidates they don’t want, and number one on that list is Mitt Romney. So, that is going to part of the dynamic here. It will help whoever emerges from Iowa as the leader of that conservative group, and, at the moment, it looks like it will be Speaker Gingrich.

John Sparks
Carl, I’ve got to ask you with everything that’s going on in my business, people are not reading newspapers as much, so does the Union Leader still have the influence it once had?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, you know it’s interesting in New Hampshire.  It’s the closest thing to a statewide newspaper. Television, there’s only really one major television station in New Hampshire, WMUR in Manchester. Now, of course, they get news on cable, and they get a lot of Boston TV in New Hampshire, but New Hampshire outlets — New Hampshire has an interesting group of newspapers. I know a fair amount about it because my son, Ben, works for the Concord Monitor. There’s a string of local regional papers in New Hampshire, most of them dailies but some weeklies, and which have a fair amount of readership in their local area. The Union Leader has more influence. Manchester is the biggest city in New Hampshire. It has a bigger readership, and also what the Union Leader does gets trumpeted by TV. It’s always a big thing. What some of the smaller papers do doesn’t get as much as publicity.  So, I think it’s less than it once was, but all signs are it does have influence and especially on the Republican side.

John Sparks
Carl, it’s always interesting to talk presidential politics with you. We’re getting to that time when the rubber meets the road, and I look forward to visiting with you again real soon.

12/8: Why GOP Primary Poll Numbers Could Be Wrong

December 8, 2011 | by

By Dr. Lee M. Miringoff

10. Many voters waiting until November 12th to make up their minds

caricature of Lee Miringoff9. Romney voters claim our questions are biased by asking about the Newt Hampshire primary
8. GOP voters torn between anybody-but-Obama vote and anybody-but-Romney vote
7. Couldn’t find enough people in Lexington and Concord voting in the New Hampshire primary
6. Voters agree with Paul that the Trump debate turns reality politics into reality TV.  Yet, they still don’t want Iran to have a nuke
5. Tea Party voters were at Tea Party when we tried to reach them
4. Likely voters suddenly switched to not-likely voters when they realized Obama was about to put electrified fences around GOP primary voting booths
3. Forgot number 3… oops!
2. Confused Iowa voters thought we were asking about 1988 candidate de-caucus.
1. Voters waited for us to ask them about Trump, Palin, Huckabee, Daniels, Giuliani, Barbour, Christie, got frustrated and hung up.

WATCH: IN THE LEAD: POLLS, POLITICS, AND 2012

November 16, 2011 | by

Join Dr. Lee M. Miringoff, Director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, as he moderates an insightful discussion about the events shaping the 2012 Presidential Election.

Bitter political divisions polarize the nation.  With an ever evolving contest for the Republican nomination for President of the United States, who will be the likely nominee?  What are President Barack Obama’s re-election chances?  What are the likely roles of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements, and what is the overall sentiment of voters toward the future of the country?

Hosted by Marist College, leading academics and journalists provide an insider’s look at the worlds of polling, political reporting, and life on the campaign trail.

Featuring the latest results from the NBC News/Marist Poll and the McClatchy-Marist Poll, panelists include:

Dr. Barbara L. Carvalho
Director, Marist Poll

Beth Fouhy
Political Reporter, Associated Press

Steve Thomma
Chief Political Correspondent, McClatchy News Service

Glenn Thrush
Senior White House Writer, Politico

Watch the Discussion:

11/9: Test for Cuomo Could Come Down to the Economy

November 9, 2011 | by

By Dr. Lee M. Miringoff

Just how long is Governor Cuomo’s  honeymoon going to last?  One year after being elected governor, Andrew Cuomo is receiving a strong showing from New Yorkers.  What is particularly noteworthy is that his appeal blurs traditional party and regional divisions.  He is attracting majority support for his job performance from Democrats, independents, and even Republicans.  The story is pretty much the same when it comes to New York City and suburban voters, and the upstate electorate.  This is occurring at a time when there is a strong anti-government, anti-incumbent, and anti-institutional sentiment in our politics.

caricature of Lee MiringoffCuomo is navigating successfully against a strong current.  Three or of four voters think he is a strong leader for New York.  Nearly two-thirds of the electorate think he is fulfilling campaign promises and changing Albany for the better.  Most telling, perhaps, is at a time when the edges of our political spectrum from the Tea Party to Occupy Wall Street are the focus of the press and the pundits, Cuomo has carved out a favorable position as a political moderate and as supporter of the middle class.

The test for Cuomo, of course, will come down the road, and it is likely to occur over the state of the economy.  Nearly four out of every five voters think the state is in an economic recession.  A majority believes that when it comes to the economy, the worst is yet to come.  73% say the state is not affordable, and there has been a decline in the number who think their family finances are likely to improve in the coming year.  People are worried and expect changes.

So, Governor Cuomo is off to a good start in the realm of public opinion.  The honeymoon extends from Long Island to Niagara Falls.  But, he still faces the test of time.

10/31: The Candidate’s Spouse on the Campaign Trail

October 31, 2011 | by

By John Sparks

Presidential candidates willingly step into the political spotlight, but their spouses are, sometimes, reluctant participants.  What is the role of a candidate’s spouse on the campaign trail?  Historically, how important have they been?  Veteran news correspondent Bonnie Angelo discusses this topic with the Marist Poll’s John Sparks.

Bonnie Angelo, author of “First Families: The Impact of the White House on Their Lives” and “First Mothers: The Women Who Shaped the Presidents” (courtesy HarperCollins).

John Sparks

Bonnie, we’re in the throes of a presidential election. We read and see a lot about the candidates, but do the candidates’ wives play any significant role in the campaign?

Bonnie Angelo

I would say that the candidates’ wives in this day and age play a very significant role.  A candidate’s wife can be a tremendous help, or she can be a disaster.  If she says the wrong thing at the right time, it can haunt her.  So, she’s playing a very important role because people expect a candidate’s wife, the person who wants to be First Lady, live in the White House, be a public figure around the world, she’s got to have something more than just average sorts background.  So, I think that the candidate’s wives are going to be examined more closely.  Each election, they’re going to be examined more closely than they were before.  They’ve got to be public figures, and they’ve got to understand it from the start.

John Sparks

Is it the press who is responsible for this attention on the wives?  I recall when Jackie Kennedy became the media darling, but she really did not like the campaign, did she?

Bonnie Angelo

Oh, Jackie hated it.  She hated the whole scene of politics.  She wanted the White House, and she did beautiful things with the White House, but she did not want to live up to the part where you have to shake a lot of hands, be in boring meetings, be on display whether you want to be or not.  She didn’t really like that; she wanted it on her own terms.  She pretty well managed that, too.

John Sparks

Well, that takes me to leaping to Hillary Clinton.  She actively campaigned for her husband Bill, and then of course, four years ago, she was a candidate.  Now, I think it’s fair to say that with the Clinton’s, either Hillary or Bill, that most folks are not on the fence.  They either really like them, or they don’t.  But I’m just curious, was Bill an asset or a liability in Hillary’s run against Obama four years ago?

Bonnie Angelo

I think he was an asset.  I think he took great pains not to overshadow her.  He did a lot of things on her behalf, speeches and that kind of thing, in a way that did not attract that much attention.  I believe that he was truly supportive, and I think that both of them thought how exciting it would have been for the each of them to have been President of the United States.  It would be historic, and they had a great sense of history.  So, I think that he kept his place very nicely, shall we say.

John Sparks

Sure.  Now, I recall back in 1998 when Hillary is campaigning for Bill on his first run.  She made a comment during the campaign that she would not be the kind of woman that would be at home baking cookies, and that prompted Family Circle magazine, they sponsored this cookie bakeoff between Hillary and Barbara Bush, and certainly got a lot of press, but did that have any impact on the election at all?

Bonnie Angelo

I don’t think it had any impact on the election.  I think the election was going to go the way it would, but it did not help because once she was doing was demeaning the role of the average American housewife, and I think that they could see that it was like they were being kind of scoffed at for baking cookies.  Now, she should have handled that smoother.  Would have done it had she stopped to think.  One of the problems for candidates, there’s no time to stop and think.  A question comes flying at you, and you answer it, and you think, “Oh, I wish I hadn’t said that,”  but she couldn’t take it back.  But, I don’t think that helped her at all.

John Sparks

You know in thinking about things that one might want to take back, in 2004, John Kerry’s wife, Teresa Heinz, made a comment about Laura Bush.  She said that Laura had never really held a real job.  That hurt her I think, and then also the fact that Teresa Heinz had also been a Republican before she married John Kerry, but was she really a factor in the outcome of that election in 2004?

Bonnie Angelo

No, I think the handwriting was already on the wall on that.  I don’t think she helped, not at all.  Maybe, she cased some vote, but I don’t think the outcome would have been any different.  It was  not, shall we say she had not thought it through what she was saying, because you can’t insult somebody in a rather personal way, the way she seemed to insult Laura Bush. Not a wise thing to say, she never put her foot wrong again after that, but you have to be very, very, I should say, the candidate’s wife has got to be very, very careful where she makes — gives opinions.

John Sparks

In summing up, what would you say is the primary thing a candidate’s wife should remember about her role during a campaign?

Bonnie Angelo

I think she could remember that she is out there to help his cause, not in any way trying to overshadow him, and I think they don’t instinctively, but they must bear that in mind that to be very careful not to say anything, to be so well versed in the issues that she would not say anything that could be used against him, and to be supportive of him without being a doormat.

John Sparks

Bonnie, it’s always a pleasure to talk to you.  I appreciate your time this afternoon.

10/24: Back to the Presidential Future

October 24, 2011 | by

By Dr. Lee M. Miringoff

Can’t be certain just yet if the future for campaign ’12 will turn out to be as we remember it, I have this nagging feeling that we’ve experienced something resembling this year’s fisticuffs way back when.  I’m thinking of the presidential campaigns of 1968, 1972, and 1976 and am not sure which path we are on this election cycle.

caricature of Lee MiringoffIn the turbulent and tragic times of 1968, we witnessed an explosive reaction from the progressive side of society targeted at an incumbent Democratic president.  The more conservative GOP couldn’t serve as an outlet for the frustration so it spilled onto the street.  I’ve noticed that energy pouring out of Occupy Wall Street and see the similarities.

Where does the political energy go when the occupant of the White House is in the middle of the political spectrum between protesters and his conservative GOP electoral challengers?  Does the protest end up being bad news for President Obama by sapping the enthusiasm for change he had harnessed in 2008?  Maybe… Maybe not.

Then, there’s the 1972 election when a small, highly motivated wing of the Democratic Party captured the nominating process primary by primary, state by state at the exclusion of the party establishment.  Its candidate carried one state in the general election in the fall.  Now, I’m not going to suggest that the Tea Party movement could wreak this degree of havoc on  the GOP in 2012.  But, most of the anti-Romney candidates would be welcome opponents to team Obama.

If you don’t buy this scenario, try 1976 and the nomination of Jimmy Carter.  Here, the eventual nominee emerged with his party’s nomination by playing off a lengthy field of candidates from the opposite side of his party.  He narrowly carried a slew of primaries to emerge under the system of proportional delegate selection to win.  This would be the 2012 Mitt Romney model.

Is there a prototype from these three examples that fits 2012?  Stay tuned.  Clearly, it is always difficult making predictions especially about the future, and hindsight is, after all, always  20/20.

10/11: A Look at the Republican Contest for the Presidency

October 11, 2011 | by

By John Sparks

The Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary are just months away.  With so much attention given to these early contests, what are the implications for the current field of Republican candidates?  The Marist Poll’s John Sparks speaks about this issue, the contest on the national level, and President Barack Obama’s re-election strategy with Marist Poll Analyst and syndicated political columnist Carl Leubsdorf who writes a weekly column for The Dallas Morning News.

Carl LeubsdorfJohn Sparks
Carl, we’re three months away from the Iowa caucuses.  So, where we are today with a GOP candidate?

Carl Leubsdorf
Mitt Romney is, as he’s been for some time, the frontrunner, but he’s — in one sense he’s not a very strong fron-trunner.  If you look at the Republican polls, he’s polling between a quarter and a third of the Republican vote.  He hasn’t gone up much.  He hasn’t gone down much.  He’s sort of stable there. And if you look at the more conservative candidates, and I’ll include just about everyone else in the field except Ron Paul, who I think is a special case, they’re polling about 50% of the Republican vote, but the problem is, of course, that it’s all divided up.  And when Perry came into the race, it first was going to be Michele Bachmann, and she had that good debate performance in June and suddenly she started gaining, and then Perry came into the race and then everyone sort of — the conservatives sort of shifted over to him.  Now he’s had some problems and some bad debates. He’s clearly not fully ready for what’s come up.  He’s had the controversy over the racist word on that ranch his family leases in Texas, and he’s dropped, and Herman Cain has come up.  It’s like the vote is shifting from one of them to the other while Romney is over there on the other side.  So, eventually one of two things will happen. Either the conservative vote will consolidate behind someone, and Perry is still the best chance for that, or Romney might be able to win against the very divided field if they all sort of stay in and no one can get enough votes to beat him.  If in Iowa, if in the Iowa caucuses, the field is divided enough, it is not impossible that Mitt Romney could win the Iowa caucuses with a rather low percentage. That’s happened before that the winning candidate didn’t have that much support, and he’s already the favorite in New Hampshire. If he won in Iowa, he’d have a good chance of winning in New Hampshire, and history tells us that Iowa/New Hampshire double winners are almost always nominated.

John Sparks
This business of Rick Perry renting the ranch with a name that’s a racial epithet, is this going to be a fatal blow to his campaign do you think?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, I don’t think it’s fatal in itself.  His… and I think his bigger problems are two other things.  One is that his position on immigration, which is a very volatile issue and where Republicans feel especially strongly against the flood of illegal immigrants who’ve come into this country, because of the fact that Texas passed a law granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens, and Perry has strongly supported it, that is a very unpopular position in the Republican Party. That was one of the big factors, I think, in his loss of support in the Florida Straw Poll, and the other is that he has not performed well in debates.  Again, it’s not all that surprising. He came into the race late. He’s not spent a lot of time dealing with some of these national and international issues, and it’s sort of the classic situation that the successful politician on the state level, be he a senator or a governor, doesn’t realize until he gets into it how difficult running for president is. Every issue that was visited before is going to be revisited, and he’s suddenly expected to be an expert on all sorts of subject that he never thought much about.

John Sparks
I want ask you about Herman Cain. I saw a poll today that has Romney and Cain tied on top. Do you think that we could really see a presidential election with two African Americans facing off?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, I think we could see that some day, but I don’t think we can — likely to see it in 2012.  Herman Cain is basically the “none of the above candidate.”  I think that’s really for the conservatives.  Now he has a lot of appeal to the conservative portion of the Republican Party, the Tea Party crowd. He’s a terrific speaker. He’s very dynamic.  I remember, I have one of my sons, who does some work in politics, told me last summer, said, “The guy you really ought to watch out for is Herman Cain.” And, he does very well when he speaks before these conventions, but he’s really the “none of the above candidate.” I think no serious Republican politician or analyst expects him, in fact, to be nominated, but it’s a sign of Perry’s problems that his support suddenly shifted to Cain.

John Sparks
You and I spoke back in June about Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Sarah Palin. Do you believe any of these folks are still serious players?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, I think Ron Paul is a serious player to the extent that he’s always going to get his 10-to-12%. He has a very strong following.  It’s interesting, I wrote a column in the Dallas Morning News about the fact that the press doesn’t take Paul seriously, and they never pay any attention, and I discussed some things that he had said at a breakfast I was at with him for reporters, and he said, you know, that some of the economic stuff he talks about, he admits it’s a little arcane and that he hasn’t explained it very well.  Paul’s not going anywhere, but he’s also not going to be nominated.

Now as for the other ones, Sarah Palin, as far as we know, is not in the race and has no plans to enter, and that hasn’t changed any.  Of the others, I would guess that most of them have no real chance. I don’t think Michele Bachmann has a chance. I don’t think Newt Gingrich has a chance. The one in that group who might conceivably have a chance is Rick Santorum, and I say that only because he’s come across in the debates as a pretty intelligent guy.  He’s got strong views which fit with the Republican Party.  He knows what he’s talking about, and he doesn’t do some of these verbal shenanigans that Gingrich does denouncing the reporters, and he served two terms in the United States Senate, so he has a background of some experience. He doesn’t have much money and he’s just sort of hanging in there, but it’s conceivable that if the Perry candidacy would not get its moorings and would not recover that he’s the one in that group who just might have an outside chance to make a strong showing in Iowa and somehow get into this race.

The question in the end is: If Perry doesn’t recover to be a strong foe for Romney, can one of these other people do it?  And what happens to the many Republicans who are very cool to the Romney candidacy? Do they just accept it?  We’ve sort of run out of new candidates.

John Sparks
Yeah, but you know, Carl, if Mitt Romney is the fallback, is that really so bad for Republicans?

Carl Leubsdorf
As a neutral analyst, I think it’s probably pretty good for Republicans.  By all signs, he’s still the strongest general election candidate they have.  He consistently runs better against President Obama than the other candidates. He’s a much better candidate for the party in the North than I think Perry would be, who has — beyond all the issues we’ve talked about, has — there are some — he’s so culturally Texan and Southern that that might be a handicap and appealing to moderate independent voters in Northern states.  Romney, who is from Michigan and served in Massachusetts, would have some appeal there. Now he’s got some problems, most of which are getting very little attention now because of all the to-do about Christie and Herman Cain and Perry. For example, his position on immigration is more hard line than Perry’s, and that could be a problem with Hispanic voters who will be very crucial in states like Colorado and New Mexico and Nevada. He was strongly opposed to the administration’s bailout of the auto industry as he was to most of the administration’s economic policies. Well, the auto industry bailout of Chrysler and GM seems to have worked. It’s one of the success stories the administration has, and there are a lot of auto workers in Wisconsin and Ohio and in Michigan who are probably very happy about it and might not like a candidate who is against it, so there are some issues out there.

John Sparks
I saw a Rasmussen Report that said “A generic Republican wins over Obama 47 to 41 among likely voters.”  Do you think that any of these Republicans could defeat the President?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, we don’t know that now. If the President’s approval level is in the low 40s and if unemployment is 9% and if more than 70% of the country think that the country is going in the wrong direction, historically it says that it’s very hard for that president to get re-elected, and that would be a real problem.  However if things improve a little bit, it may really depend on which Republican runs against him. The one… the other warning signal for Obama in the current situation — current polls, is in that poll that you mentioned, Obama had 41%, but even in a number of polls that show him ahead in major states, he’s ahead like 45 to 43 or 46 to 44 or 44 to 41.  An incumbent who’s polling in the mid 40s historically is going to have a lot of problems in an election because that probably means that the — all the ones he doesn’t have are going probably going to be against him in the end.

John Sparks
Do you think the main issue, though, still is going to be the pocketbook and jobs?

Carl Leubsdorf

Sure, barring something happening.  I mean it’s always possible something would happen in the month before the election to take attention. Our attention spans seem to be very short on these things, and something becomes a big issue.  Remember when everyone said that the BP oil spill in the Gulf would be the defining issue for Obama, well, that didn’t last very long, and although the anti-terrorism policy has been very successful in this administration because of the ability to kill major Al-Qaeda leaders starting with Osama bin Laden and a whole bunch of others. That’s not getting very much attention these days, so it’s the economy, and it’s the outlook for the economy isn’t very good. It’s as likely we’ll have a double dip recession that will have — than that we’ll have a speedy recovery.

John Sparks
Carl, people complain that our government is broken, needs fixing, but what about the presidential election process? It’s media-driven, and isn’t the problem that the process is more about headlines and controversy than finding an effective executive who’s right for the moment?

Carl Leubsdorf
To a considerable degree, yes, although I think that it’s interesting.  I mean the cover — the news coverage is certainly that way, and it’s focused on these things. I think the voters, and especially in some of these early states who are much maligned because Iowa and New Hampshire, which come first in the process, are not typical states. They’re much wider than the country as a whole. Iowa is much older than the country as a whole.  Still the people there, I’ve been in those states for a number of elections, and they take it very seriously. They listen to the candidates. They discuss issues.  The press may not be — on cable television may not be discussing the issues, but when they have town meetings with candidates, that’s what they want to know is where these candidates stand on the issues, and that in many cases determines how they vote.  One of the problems is — with the system is that that’s true in the early states, but when a bunch of all these other states compiled in afterwards, it’s sort of like a ping-pong effect, and what happens earlier has an enormous effect on what happens later. That’s why, for example, while Mitt Romney is certainly ahead in New Hampshire now, he has a home there and he’s campaigned there before, the day after the Iowa caucuses, those numbers in New Hampshire are all going to change. If he does well in Iowa, he ought to be able to hold that lead, but if he does very poorly there, and one of the other candidates, whether it’s Perry or Santorum or Cain, does very well, believe me, there will be a quick boom for that candidate in New Hampshire in the five or eight days between the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.

John Sparks
Carl, while the Republicans are posturing, what’s Obama’s strategy?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, for most of this year, President Obama tried — continued to try something that he talked about a lot during in the 2008 campaign and the debt-ceiling fight tried to — which was to try to be in the middle ground, to be, as the White House people used to call it, the adult in the room and to work our compromises with the Republicans in Congress on some of these economic issues and some of these budget issues.  Not only did the effort fail, but the result of it is that everyone’s — the voters’ attitude towards almost everyone in politics went down. And although you’ll find many polls that show that more people favor the Obama position versus the Congressional Republican position, it hasn’t helped Obama’s approval rating, which is — continued to hover in the low 40s.  Starting with Labor Day, the White House has switched course.  When the president presented his jobs program, which by the way included some things that many Republicans have supported before, they show no sign of interest in supporting now, basically what President Obama was proposing was a proposal that was not likely to be approved, but which he could take the country and use as an example to say, “This is what I’m trying to get and this what the Republicans are against.” It’s quite clear that the Republicans are not going to make any major deal in part because they can’t.  Even the leaders who are interested — were interested in dealing with him, such as Speaker Boehner, found themselves constrained by the more hawkish members of their constituency in the House of Representative, and even when they’ve — now both sides agreed on what the budget level should be for the year that just started, the House — some of these House Republicans still trying to cut them even more.  So, I think the White House recognizes there’s not going to be a deal on jobs program, and they’re going to use this politically as much as possible.  When the president was in Dallas recently, he pointed out — he sort of fingered Eric Cantor, the House Majority Leader, and said, “What kind of a jobs program is he for?  Why is he against everything I propose?” And it’s sort of the Harry Truman policy — procedure in 1948.  And Harry Truman in the 1948 election was in deep trouble, and at the time of the Democratic Convention, there was a lot of dissatisfaction, and they all thought they were going to lose, and he electrified that convention, and the way he did it was he made a speech at 1:30 in the morning in which he called Congress back into special session and said he was going to make them consider all the things that they had refused to do.  Well, they didn’t consider them anymore than they had before, but he had an issue, and he took the issue of the do nothing Congress to the country, and Obama is doing something of the same thing, and we’ll see how that works.

John Sparks
Harry Truman also surprised everyone on Election Day in 1948. Is Obama going to be a Harry Truman you think?

Carl Leubsdorf
Well, one reason they surprised him is because polling wasn’t as good as it is now.  With modern polling, it — you’re very rarely enormously surprised. Now the result can be slightly different from the polling. You could have one candidate ahead by two points and then the other one wins by three.  In presidential campaigns, the polling has been quite good lately, but it’s — a lot is going to happen between now and November of 2012, and the situation is going to be affected by external events, going to be affected by the course of the campaign. Obama said the other day that he’s the underdog in the election, and that’s probably true, but a lot of people in Washington would not be totally shocked if in the end he gets elected.  That generic Republican you talked about doesn’t exist, he’s going to have to beat a real live one, and each of them has his shortcomings.