January 28, 2005
Public Opinion on Revote

Strategic Vision released its latest public opinion poll of Washington voters, conducted Jan. 24-26:

The poll finds that 53% of respondents favor a revote for governor; 35% oppose; and 12% are undecided. If there was a revote, 51% would support Republican Dino Rossi; 43% would support Christine Gregoire; and 6% were undecided. When asked who they believe actually won the gubernatorial election in November 53% said Dino Rossi; 37% said Christine Gregoire; and 10% were undecided. When asked if they believed if the courts would allow a revote, 41% said yes; 55% said no; 4% were undecided. Christine Gregoire was viewed favorably by 38%; 57% viewed her unfavorably; and 5% were undecided. Dino Rossi was viewed favorably by 50%; 47% viewed him unfavorably; and 3% were undecided.
hat tip: Rich Lowry

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 28, 2005 09:09 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Isn't this bad news? There is no way an election would be allowed if the Democrat has a chance to lose.

Isn't this good news? Will the voters be upset enough at this move that they give Republicans a chance to govern.

Posted by: Ray J. Tuleya, Oregon on January 28, 2005 09:15 AM
2. Well, just tell that 35% they don't have to participate if they don't want to.

Posted by: Matt J Kurlander on January 28, 2005 09:24 AM
3. Stefan - a request / suggestion

There have been a few references in the comments to the fact that the FBI and Milwaukee city police are investigating fraud in Milwaukee's vote last November ... as reported in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel most recently in the last few days.

Would it be possible to put in a topic devoted to whether this could or should be done in King county -- and how it could be initiated? I'm especially interested in the "how initiated" part. If things continue as they are, I doubt very much that this will happen.

Thanks for all you do.

Posted by: Boonie on January 28, 2005 09:28 AM
4. Glad to see Berendt thinks they won the PR battle. When only 37% of the respondents think your candidate is the winner, you have some PR problems.

Posted by: Marc on January 28, 2005 09:28 AM
5. The bad news is that even if we get a re-vote, there are already intitiatives and taxes being passed while we wait. Do you know the current tax target is "vanity tax"? Yes, for any cosmetic surgery, people would have to pay an additional "vanity tax".
And next is a fuel tax, to add to our already hiked gas prices.
Cigarettes and booze are next too, the "sin" taxes, which I don't care about but some people might.
Then there's the pending State income tax...

So even if we got the changes we all want it would take some doing to undo what's being done.

Living in Sweden was interesting as I learned that the sales tax was 25%, income tax 45-60%, and fuel was a good $5-6/gallon, true unemployment figures (including programs and adult schooling due to lack of jobs) is around 25% - Sweden is not doing well economically because, they now realize, they taxed the country to death. Their social medicine system is falling apart, companies can't afford to hire and grow, the schools are totally stagnant - my daughter is reading the same material over there her father read 25 years ago. Ikea is their current best thing, especially now that Volvo belongs to Ford.
That country did not do well from massive taxes. The temporary fix was really really temporary.

Taxing us to death will not bring the State out of a hole. Balancing funds smartly and making good and sound business decisions will go a long way.
I am NOT happy about this right now.

BTW-You can contact the Seattle Times with your opinion; they may be running a peice on how the election events have impacted public opinion.

Posted by: manderson on January 28, 2005 09:35 AM
6. Yesterday when driving to work in Olympia, I was stopped at a stop light, when low and behold Paul Berendt came crossing the road. Scar and all. I wanted to scream out the window, but it was a useless cause. He was yammering on his cellphone while walking. Hair a mess, or what hair he has. Wearing a blue sweatshirt straight from kmarts rack, and no name jeans. I sat their thinking this is what democrat control does to you.

Posted by: Jamie on January 28, 2005 09:55 AM
7. I'm a little bit troubled by Dino's Favorable/Unfavorable ratings, but I note that those are pretty much the same numbers Bush was posting before he won the Presidency.

Posted by: Nathan Azinger on January 28, 2005 09:58 AM
8. Jamie,

You sound just like what most dem's want Republicans to sound like....snobs. Mr. Berendt has a birthmark/scar, hardly his fault. Not everyone wears brand name jeans and there is nothing wrong with buying at KMart. Now, if you were commenting on the garbage that comes out of his mouth, I might be inclined to listen to you.

Posted by: NWBarb on January 28, 2005 10:04 AM
9. With these kind of poll results, is it any surprise the dirty Dems are doing everything they can to stop a revote? Where's the confidence in their candidate? Oh yeah, there is none: they know she would lose miserably.

Posted by: Greg on January 28, 2005 10:36 AM
10. Ah, glorious polls. Has anyone here ever been polled for their opinions? I know I haven't.

Posted by: Daniel K on January 28, 2005 10:49 AM
11. manderson:

And yet, oddly enough, Sweden (as well as the rest of Scandanavia, which isn't in much better shape) is frequently held up by the left as a shining example of how our country should be run.

Posted by: Vexorg on January 28, 2005 11:00 AM
12. 53% favor a revote, thats pretty good news considering it has been almost 3 months since the election. I take that to mean people are still interested. With a week to go before the next wave of activity we need to just keep on yacking about it. Kudos to Mr Power Talk @ ktth 770 am for the continued coverage in the morning. Seigel has been diligent and passionate about this and I hold my ear to his show every morning.

Posted by: chardonnay on January 28, 2005 11:00 AM
13. Interesting, a quick review of the internet indicates that:

* Strategic Vision is a Republican polling firm.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/mn_polls.html

Is there a recent neutral poll?

Posted by: Erik on January 28, 2005 11:05 AM
14. Erik,

What are the odds that a polling firm is going to spend money to perform a poll and not have a sponsor? And do you think the Democrats would sponsor a poll of this type at this time?

The only neutral polls that you might find would be done by the newsmedia. Unfortunately, the local media have not shown much interest in capturing the mood of the electorate recently.

Posted by: Larry on January 28, 2005 11:09 AM
15. Funny that the republicans think sponsored polls are ok...when they have results they agree with. Otherwise, governing by polls has been considered evil by the right.

Also, even Rossi people don't say he won the election. They say it's too close to call so we need a revote. This poll has 53% beleiving Rossi won to only 37% Gregoire. If any reasonable person looks at this, they can tell the poll bias.

The republicans have done a great job of PR - as evidenced in this poll. That is also evidenced by the huge numbers of people who believe Iraq was behind 9-11 (if that's not great PR creating a false impression, I don't know what is!)

Here's that poll (I know, note this is from a Harris poll which is obviously biased):

* 41 percent believe that Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001.
* 38 percent believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded.
* 37 percent actually believe that several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11 were Iraqis.

Poll taken in October 2004, see http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=508.

Posted by: jim on January 28, 2005 11:20 AM
16. jim,

Another example of fine liberal logic. Your statements on public opinion of 9-11 can be found in the dictionary as examples of 'non sequitur'. They have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Posted by: Larry on January 28, 2005 11:39 AM
17. Jim:

So are you disputing the results of the poll we are discussing? Do you believe that the polling numbers are innacurate? If so, please show us some evidence that indicates this. Perhaps you could show us a poll that indicates most Washingtonians do not want a revote, or that most Washingtonians believe Gregoire is a legitimate governor, or that most people think Gregoire won the election.

I doubt you'll be able to provide evidence of this because it does not exist. Washingtonians want a revote, Washingtonians think Gregoire is illegitimate and Washingtonians think Rossi won.

Posted by: Greg on January 28, 2005 11:45 AM
18. Vexorg - The reason the left holds Sweden and it's neighbors so high is because they can. Most people know nothing about Sweden.

For those who aren't familiar with Sweden- Sweden is the blob next to Norway that hangs off of Russia (with Finland in between). They are not the clock and cheese experts, Volvos are crummy cars, there are no penguins living there, some Vikings did reside there but the strong & smarter ones left to live elsewhere leaving behind the current population.

The liberal Dems hold Sweden so high because they can - few of their followers would actually do the research on it, IF they even know where it really is.

Posted by: manderson on January 28, 2005 11:51 AM
19. Jim,

Would you care to share with us your analysis of the poll? Would you share with us how you believe their methodology is flawed? Would you show us anything that substantiates what you claim the real "pulse" of the electorate is?

Posted by: Scott in Carnation on January 28, 2005 12:00 PM
20. jim - your bring up polls about Iraq, 9-11, etc...
I love it that people are so incredibly narrow-minded and short-sighted. The whole Iraq thing goes way deeper than the simplistic "weapons of mass destruction" and "Saddam is mean and blew up stuff"

After 9-11, how about a 10-11, 12-11, 9-11 2002, and varying parts of the country? In your city? Your backyard?

Big changes need to be made over there, and the changes have to be forced, enforced, and everyone has to suck it up that it'll be unpleasant for a while.

Another experience gained in Sweden was meeting many 'refugees'from middle east & Bosnia, some of which were obviously my 'enemy' and some of which were friends - you cannot imagine how different their thinking and beliefs are while sitting over here with latte in hand, spewing off crud about how dumb we are for not be satisfied with the seriously flawed election we all just experienced.

Polling is as selective as the integrity and honesty of those conducting the poll. In my personal experience I am lead to believe that the poll shown here was conducted by fair people with a higher degree of integrity.
I challenge you do conduct a fair poll of diverse groups and present your results, if you think it can be done better.

Posted by: manderson on January 28, 2005 12:01 PM
21. Posted by manderson at January 28, 2005 09:35 AM

I don't think we will be having a state income tax any time soon in Washington. Rich people in this state, unlike almost all other states in the country, prefer Democrats over Republicans by a substantial margin.

Just look at the November 2004 exit polls. Here is a link where you can look at the whole gamut of them:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

Nationwide, voters earning less than $100,000 per year (82%) preferred Kerry over Bush by 50% to 49%, while voters earning at least $100,000 per year (18%) preferred Bush over Kerry by 58% to 41%. Rich people preferred Bush nationwide by a 18% larger margin than low and middle income people.

The results were quite different in Washington. voters earning less than $100,000 per year (78%) preferred Kerry over Bush by 51% to 48%, while voters earning at least $100,000 per year (22%) preferred Kerry over Bush by 63% to 37%. Rich people preferred Kerry in Washington by a 23% larger margin than low and middle income people.

So basically in Washington there is a 41% swing in voting preferences of rich people relative to low and middle income people in favor of the Democrats, as compared with the relative preferences of rich people nationwide.

Washington state Democrats get their voting margins and campaign contributions from those people earning more than $100,000 per year. If rich people in Washington had the same voting patterns as they did in the rest of the country, Washington would be a solidly red state. And King County would be a red county.

The Democrats are not going to promote a state income tax, since they don't want to alienate their most important voters. Instead, they will promote increases in sales taxes, beer taxes, and other regressive taxes that consume a higher percentage of income for low and middle income people, than they do for rich people.

Posted by: Richard Pope on January 28, 2005 12:14 PM
22. So Afghanistan voted without widespread fraud. Now, this week Iraq will be voting ,and alot of our military that didn't get to vote here in Washington, will be making sure that as many people as possible get to vote there......
Now all we need to do is be able to have a real election HERE....is that too much to ask for???
NAH.......at least it shouldn't be!
Let's keep the pressure on the "Powers That Be"[for now...LOL]....and get a REVOTE here!

Posted by: christmasghost on January 28, 2005 01:43 PM
23. Greg wrote: "So are you disputing the results of the poll we are discussing? Do you believe that the polling numbers are innacurate? If so, please show us some evidence that indicates this."

When preenting poll numbers, it is imperative that any potential bias of the pollster be made clear. One of the things Stefan couild have done is identify the pollster as most of the rest of the media did during the presidential election "Strategic Vision LLC, an Atlanta-based Republican polling firm".

That at least makes the bias of the pollster clear, and in this case, Strategic Vision is known to having a clearly Republican polling bias.

Posted by: dok on January 28, 2005 02:26 PM
24. jim is right.

The only polls I care about are the election results - especially the one for President...4 more years, and hopefully the ReVote coming soon near you.

Posted by: Shaun on January 28, 2005 02:32 PM
25. I don't have any different polls -- I don't know that anyone is bothering to pay for them other than the people who want a revote. There isn't much interest in independent monies being spent on this issue.

Posted by: jim on January 28, 2005 02:34 PM
26. So Afghanistan voted without widespread fraud. Now, this week Iraq will be voting ,and alot of our military that didn't get to vote here in Washington, will be making sure that as many people as possible get to vote there......
Now all we need to do is be able to have a real election HERE....is that too much to ask for???

Spare us the comparisons with an election in a country where the citizens could be killed for voting for candidates that they've never heard of before because the candidates haven't been able to campaign because they themselves might be killed.

Whatever problems our election had, stating the Afghanistan election and the upcoming Iraqi elections were/are less fraudulent and/or better run is truly ridiculous.

Posted by: Daniel K on January 28, 2005 03:05 PM
27. what i find amazing (and positive) is the consistency. look at the numbers from their poll released 1/13...
who do you believe won?
CG 37%, DR 52%,
the poll released 1/28, CG 37%, DR 53%

also, the do you favor a new election (REVOTE)

on 1/13's poll, 50% said YES, 39% NO.
on 1/28's poll, 53% said YES, 35% NO.

also i find it interesting that the wa state public believes it is the right thing to have a revote but they don't have confidence in the judicial system in wa state.

Posted by: Ken O on January 28, 2005 04:30 PM
28. The people are with Dino!

Posted by: Michele S on January 28, 2005 05:20 PM
29. The people are with Dino!

This goofy guy: http://home.earthlink.net/~theseeker3/pics/d1n0.gif ?

Posted by: Daniel K on January 28, 2005 05:31 PM
30. Daniel K:

By the same token, assuming that Washington's election was better run and/or less fraudulent than Afghanistan or Iraq is ridiculous as well, right? We can't compare the situations, so neither situation can be better or worse, right?

Every media outlet in the world will be watching the Iraq elections; every media outlet seems content to ignore the incompetence, neglect, and/or fraud that happened in Washington.

They can't be compared - ergo, there is no better nor worse.

Posted by: Larry on January 28, 2005 05:38 PM
31. Keep fighting on ! It is high time to stop the left machinery (in a figurative sense) in the urban(e) counties from running roughshod over the process. Integrity needs to be restored and even if Dino's popularity ratings have slipped since the last poll - he said that didn't need to be governor, as opposed to Luda-Chris who desperately has shown that she is needy there.

Dino Rossi appears to be selfless here - in spite of what the opposition sees because the CG supporters feel like their comfy status quo is being threatened. They are correct, it is !
So, I say - keep up the fight - dare not to be Politically correct if that's what it requires and make this a better place !

Posted by: KS on January 28, 2005 06:36 PM
32. Larry - Sorry, your BS has reached new bounds.

I'm willing to agree that Washington State had some problems during the last election, but you cannot make the insinuation that they are worse than the problems that have and will afflict the upcoming Iraqi elections. And that is what you and christmasghost are doing.

Nor can you claim every media outlet is ignoring the issues in this State. Your own Shark has been on various radio and TV shows. The newspapers have daily articles about one thing or another. Obviously it isn't enough for your liking, but it isn't zero coverage.

Posted by: Daniel K on January 28, 2005 06:47 PM
33. Daniel K,

You're the one who said 'Spare us the comparisons.' So if you can't compare, you can't say Washington's election was better. That's simple logic.

Back to the topic - any comment on the fact that both candidates got 48%, yet now 53% believe Rossi won, 53% support a revote, and Gregoire is viewed unfavorably by 57%?

I believe a comparison is justified in this example, oh Danny boy.

Posted by: Larry on January 28, 2005 07:37 PM
34. Larry,

Your arguments are baseless. Check out the Seattle Times from the past two weeks...every other day is a front page headline about Republicans claiming things.

Comparing Washington state unfavorably to Afghanistan and/or Iraq removes all reaonsableness to arguments.

Posted by: jim on January 28, 2005 10:08 PM
35. Larry,

on the poll...it was a republican pollster calling whom??????

geez....

Posted by: jim on January 28, 2005 10:09 PM
36. jim,

If you think my arguments have no 'reasonableness', then they must be logical and well-founded. Thanks for the complement.

You probably think the CAO is a good idea.

Posted by: Larry on January 29, 2005 09:53 AM
37. Richard Pope -- You say the WA Democrats won't support a state income tax because they don't want to alienate their rich supporters. In truth, some Democrats (Ron Sims most recently) have supported a state income tax, and it's been about as popular as supporting the plague. Most Democratic leaders won't support a state income tax because they don't want to commit political suicide. This is a tax-averse state, as Tim Eyman has demonstrated, and taxpayers (rightly or wrongly) don't trust that an income tax would be accompanied by a corresponding reduction in other taxes.

Posted by: Bruce on January 29, 2005 02:36 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?