Politico devoted entire article to internal RNC polling that shows McCain with "a solid lead" over Clinton, Obama
SUMMARY: Politico senior political writer Jonathan Martin reported on Republican National Committee "[i]nternal polling data" showing Sen. John McCain "with a solid lead over both his potential general election rivals," but Martin did not report -- nor did he give any indication that he had sought -- any additional information about the RNC's data, or provide any justification for treating the results of an internal partisan poll as newsworthy.
In an April 9 article on Politico.com, Politico senior political writer Jonathan Martin wrote, "Internal polling data, presented privately last week at the Republican National Committee's state chair meeting and provided to Politico, shows [Sen.] John McCain with a solid lead over both his potential general election rivals. Powered by the same appeal to Democrats and independents that fueled his primary election success, McCain is leading [Sen.] Barack Obama 48 percent to 42 percent and [Sen.] Hillary Clinton 51 percent to 40 percent according to RNC polling done late last month." While Martin did point out that "[m]ore recent public polls portray a much more competitive race," he did not report -- nor did he give any indication that he had sought -- any additional information about the RNC's "[i]nternal polling data," including the sampling method, the exact wording of the questions asked, the sample size, the margin of error, or who conducted the poll, all of which are recommended by the National Council on Public Polls' principles of disclosure. Nor did Martin provide any justification for treating the results of an internal poll -- favorable to the group doing the polling and inconsistent with those of other "[m]ore recent public polls" -- as newsworthy.
By contrast, discussing the RNC's internal polling on the April 10 edition of MSNBC Live, anchor Tamron Hall asked, "[T]his internal RNC polling data that shows McCain out ahead of the Democrats -- is this reliable, or is this strategy?" Michael Crowley, a senior editor at The New Republic, responded that "internal polling data always has a suspicious way of being somewhat more favorable to the person who did the poll than the external polls." After Hall asked the Chicago Tribune's Jill Zuckman, "Is there a disconnect, in your opinion, in polling?" Zuckman responded, "No. You know what? I don't take any of this all that seriously."
Moreover, at least one other recently reported internal Republican poll, which was conducted by the same GOP pollster whom Martin quoted discussing the poll that indicated McCain's "solid lead" over Clinton and Obama, also appears to directly contradict contemporary public opinion polls. A March 14 U.S. News & World Report article reported, "What has the West Wing buzzing is a survey by GOP pollster Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group that found that, for all his troubles, voters still like the president. 'Fully 56 percent of likely voters approve of the president personally, driven by voter sentiments that he is a person of strong moral character and integrity,' Goeas writes in a private analysis designed for Republican leaders. 'If the situation in Iraq continues to improve and the national economy improves, this goodwill will be crucial in allowing voters to change their assessment of his job performance.' " Although Media Matters for America could find no polls on Bush's favorability among likely voters, contemporary public opinion polls of registered voters indicate that he is highly unpopular:
- A Diageo/The Hotline poll of 799 registered voters conducted between March 28 and March 31, indicated that 61 percent of respondents had a somewhat unfavorable or strongly unfavorable view of Bush. An earlier Diageo/The Hotline poll of 803 registered voters, conducted between February 14 and February 17, similarly found that 58 percent of respondents had an unfavorable view of Bush.
- An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll of 800 registered voters, conducted between March 24 and March 25, indicated that 54 percent of respondents rated Bush negatively. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll of 1,012 registered voters, conducted between March 7 and March 10, indicated that 55 percent of registered voters rated Bush negatively.
As Media Matters for America documented, during the October 24, 2006, edition of National Public Radio's All Things Considered, former White House senior adviser Karl Rove told host Robert Siegel, "I'm looking at all of these [races], Robert, and adding them up. I add up to a Republican Senate and Republican House. You may end up with a different math but you are entitled to your math and I'm entitled to the math." Democrats ultimately won 30 House seats and six Senate seats, regaining control of both chambers of Congress.
From Martin's April 9 Politico.com article:
Internal polling data, presented privately last week at the Republican National Committee's state chair meeting and provided to Politico, shows John McCain with a solid lead over both his potential general election rivals. Powered by the same appeal to Democrats and independents that fueled his primary election success, McCain is leading Barack Obama 48 percent to 42 percent and Hillary Clinton 51 percent to 40 percent according to RNC polling done late last month.
He's moved ahead of the two Democrats by consolidating support among Republicans, but also by retaining his backing among a wide swath of independents and picking up a small chunk of cross-party support.
Among independents, McCain leads Obama 48 percent to 39 percent and Clinton 54 percent to 34 percent. Among Democrats, he picks up 20 percent in a race against Obama and leads Barack Obama 48 percent to 39 percent and Senator Clinton 54 percent to 34 percent.
More recent public polls portray a much more competitive race between McCain and either Democrat, with Obama leading in some surveys.
But Republican pollster Ed Goeas said the contrast between the standing of the Republican Party and its actual nominee was reassuring.
"You do have to look at the generic presidential ballot, which is continuing to show a Democrat lead," said Goeas. "But the fact that McCain is running ahead of both Obama and Clinton, and in terms of net advantage, is running 16-17 poitns [sic] ahead of that deficit is a good thing."
Providing hope to Goeas and other Republican operatives are two key elements that appear to be shaping the race: McCain's untraditional appeal and the protracted Democratic primary.
"What is most instructive is how McCain is running 10 points ahead among Democrats, compared to what the Democrats are getting from Republicans," Goeas said.
According to the survey, Obama would take 11 percent of Republican votes and Clinton 6 percent.
"The more intense, more nasty [their race is] the more you're going to solidify a certain group of Democrats that will vote for McCain over whoever gets nomination on the Democratic side."
But Democrats, while concerned about the ultimate impact of their continuing primary, say McCain's support is soft and much about him remains unknown.
Democratic National Committee officials provided Politico with their own internal polling data, done late last month in 17 swing states, that shows far more voters volunteered knowing "just some" and "very little" about the Republican than those saying they "knew a lot" or even "a fair amount."
"People don't have a well-formed image about him," said DNC chairman Howard Dean. "There is very little McCain brand."
From the 10 a.m. ET hour of the April 10 edition of MSNBC Live:
HALL: This -- as a private, internal RNC polling -- shows John McCain leading Barack Obama by six points and ahead of Hillary Clinton by nine points. Michael Crowley is a senior editor at The New Republic, and Jill Zuckman is a national correspondent for the Chicago Tribune. So, Michael, this internal RNC polling data that shows McCain out ahead of the Democrats -- is this reliable, or is this strategy?
CROWLEY: Well, internal polling data always has a suspicious way of being somewhat more favorable to the person who did the poll than the external polls. But I will say, I mean, a key dynamic that's shaping up early in this race is that, generically voters are saying they vastly prefer Democrats to Republicans -- a Democratic candidate, in the abstract, to a Republican candidate. The thing that should make Democrats a little nervous is that when you actually attach names and say, what about Obama versus McCain? What about Hillary versus McCain? The numbers are much tighter, and in some cases McCain is leading. So the Democratic candidates right now are underperforming, which some Democrats say is because they've got this long, drawn-out, sometimes ugly primary --
HALL: Right.
CROWLEY: They want to get it over with.
Well, Jill, it's interesting, public polls show much more competitive race than those internal RNC numbers we were just talking about. The latest Gallup tracking poll actually puts Obama two points ahead of McCain, shows McCain and Clinton tied in a potential general election matchup. Is there a disconnect, in your opinion, in polling?
ZUCKMAN: No. You know what? I don't take any of this all that seriously. I think it is important that no one's real happy with the Republicans these days, but McCain is competitive with the Democrats when you have the names on them, as Michael was saying.
Gotta love your p_tty mouth!
Oh my goodness, here's another article from Politico that only mentions internal polling data from a democrat! Why, what will they do next to jeopardize a free election!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0408/Could_Wickers_House_seat_be_in_play.html
I propose that Media Matters (very little) start a word count to make certain that each article, yeah each paragraph, yeah each sentence have an equal allotment of consonants and vowels between the major parties. Third party candidates will have sentences structured according the votes captured in prior elections. Therefore, Ralph Nadar will at most only be allowed to have written, "The global capatalist conspirators wil...", that's it your time is up Ralphie.
Once again, kudos to MM(vl) for keeping those political dogs feet to the fire!
Nice job PC...this really is a pretty limp effort by mmfa...but typical of their style and agenda. If they don't agree...then it must be wrong.
The Politico article was pretty even-handed on the issue and mmfa didn't report any problem with polling ethics when Martin apparently failed to delve into the democrat internal polls that he cited.
This type of fatuous reporting has marginalized mmfa's effectiveness...and is part and parcel to their traffic count plummeting to at or below their start up numbers.
Do you see a difference in these two sentences?
The poll, conducted by the Democratic firm Anzalone-Liszt
Internal polling data, presented privately
Here's a hint for you, one of them provides a source for verification.
-- one of them provides a source for verification. -- moonbat
Both democrat and republican polls were privately commissioned...they can only be verified if they choose to release the info when asked about the specifics...the point of mmfa's carping.
mmfa took exception to Martin apparently failing to ask for specifics when he reported on the republican poll...but failed to note any ethical lapse when Martin quoted Dean/DNC on the democrats internal poll...without delving into the specifics or proving to mmfa that it was newsworthy.
Missing the point. We know the Democrats poll was privately commissioned and were given the name of the polling firm that performed. With that information a journalist, if there was one somewhere, could verify the story. While the firm is not free to release th poll results in total, they are completely within the law to confrim information released by the Democrats about the poll.
The Republican poll? Hmmm, still missing that information.
Missing the point? You sure are.
Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group is clearly identified as the pollster cited by Politico.
Neither you or mmfa has any idea how much background polling info that Politico looked into...and they certainly don't have to provide their research notes to you and mmfa every time they write a story.
mmfa didn't like the results provided by the RNC internal poll...and that is the basis of their criticism of Politico. They liked the results cited by the DNC internal poll...but failed to use the same standards on those results as reported by Politico.
This is how Ed was mentioned in the article: "But Republican pollster Ed Goeas said the contrast between the standing of the Republican Party and its actual nominee was reassuring". I did not immediately assume that he was the pollster behind the figures they were discussing and his organization was not mentioned at all. My sloppy reading combined with Politico's sloppy reporting. Sorry about that.
I'm not asking for all the research notes or any other such things from any journalist when they do a story, but if they cite a poll, they are obligated to clearly mention who did the poll and who commissioned it. This was done much better in the article about the Dem poll than it was in the Rep poll.
Another difference, the McCain poll is framed as a strong lead, while the house seat cited by the other poll is about Dems "outside chance" in a very conservative district.
But , that being said, I wouldn't pick on this item too bad. I'm charitable enough to let the Repoops enjoy the next few months, or however it takes the Dems to hash out their nominee, by having Gramps McCain revel in his 3 way race numbers.
For anybody who doesn't have the stomach for am righty radio, this is the pep rally move right now; polling the Obama/Clinton/McCain race, and promoting McCain's powerful numbers-- while the Dems are split. May not be so pretty for the straight-talk express once the opponent isn't cut in half.
COL:
You bring up a good point. Even the "internal" GOP polls reflect a terrible reality for the upcoming election: The THREE candidates are virtually TIED for support.
But there will not BE three candidates. The two Democrats will become ONE, and will take almost ALL of those numbers, and McCain will no longer be facing split alliances. Turnout in the primaries underscore this reality: Democrats have been voting from 2-1 to 4-1 IN MORE NUMBERS than the Republicans.
All told, this will be a blowout for the Democrats. Even Limbaugh is trying to whip up support for McCain by conceding Democrats WILL have a veto-proof majority in the Senate. The GOP must have someone to stand against them, he reasons.
The Rightwing Media ... which INCLUDES MSNBC, CNN, ETC, are doing their best to show McCain as a contender. Come November, it won't even be close.
The media have spent the past year ignoring Hillary Clinton's dramatic double digit lead over her Democratic rivals, reporting only the most disparaging and consistently negative news about until, as they taught us would happen in mass communication 101, her lead shrivelled up! So now they are making McCain look popular. It's called Join the Bandwagon in marketing.
All hail our next leader, John McCain. And another hundred years war in the Middle East.
It's not that the RNC poll was inaccurate. It's that since last month, Obama has made a comeback, therefore it was useless for Martin to tout old polls.
Then again, let's call Martin what he is: A Republican.
well, here's a shocker: i suspect "internal" DNC polling shows the dem. nominee ahead of mccain, nationally.
of course, so do many unaffiliated polls, but why be nit picky? lol
What relevance does "recommendations" of the National Council on Public Polls' have for internal i.e. private polls such a the one conducted by the RNC?
Since when does a publication like Politico, or any for that matter, have to justify to MMFA what is "newsworthy" or not? Have they lost their prerogative to publish what they see fit? Honestly get a life and find a real story. May I suggest Obama's flip flop on public financing, or his pretty misleading television commercial on energy policy? Our friends over at the Annenberg Political Fact Check, a legitimate website rather than a dispensary of leftist misinformation like MMFA, took a critical look at that commercial, why not you guys? Too professional and objective of an undertaking for you I would imagine.
Not in MMfa's writ. In their area they have done some fine research. Feel free to examine some of it.
Obama's position has been covered here because? Surprise it was miss represented. I'll pass on this oportunity to examine John's situation on this, but if you're not up on it, do investigate.
Politico can safty publish without MMfa's ok. How many ways this is an absurd statement, I haven't the patenience to count. They put out conservstive missinfo, it can appear here, you can make a statement, you can get called on it. Internet wheel of life.
And by the way, Go Ming!!
Polls suck....Wait til November....exploding Republan heads everywhere, grown weenie Repulans crying in the streets...Republans fleeing the country because the world is near an end. I can fantasize can't I. But this reality will begin about 8:00pm election night.
Now we rationally move forward.