Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

NJ: Corzine 43 Christie 38 (Quinnipiac 10/20-26)


Quinnipiac
10/20-26/09; 1,267 likely voters, 2.8% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Quinnipiac release)

National

2009 Governor
Corzine 43%, Christie 38%, Daggett 13% (chart)

Asked of Daggett voters: Who is your second choice for governnor?
Christie 43%, Corzine 27%

Favorable / Unfavorable
Chris Christie: 37 / 42
Jon Corzine: 41 / 52 (chart)
Chris Daggett: 21 / 16

Job Approval / Disapproval
Jon Corzine: 39 / 54 (chart)
Pres. Obama: 55 / 39 (chart)

 

Comments
tjampel:

I'll take this poll over PPP' latest for several reasons

1. Huge sample size 2.8% MOE
2. Obama's fave's are about right for NJ3. They were clearly skewed in PPP poll
3. Daggett's 2nd choice metrics look more realistic here than in PPP's findings
4. Favorability for all three candidates pretty much sqares with overall trends of past month for each; very slight increase for Corzine, steady drop for Christie, rise followed by slow fall for Daggett

____________________

jmartin4s:

I want to a general statement about PPP. They are usually a very accurate poll but at the same time they are a new poll. 2008 was the first election PPP did polls for and they never did any polls in NJ last year so this race is the first time PPP is getting any experience polling NJ. That being said NJ is probably one of the most difficult states to poll in the entire and thus polling companies who have been polling New Jersey the longest have to be taken more seriously. QU has been polling New Jersey since at least the 1980s and also has a much bigger sample size. The comeback Corzine has made since being down double digits is absolutely amazing and given New Jersey's blue DNA I predict that Corzine will win on election day by less than 20,000 votes.

____________________

RaleighNC:

Live phone? Interesting.

____________________

The Moderator:

Looks pretty solid with the sample size and the fact that this samples likely voters over the phone. I can only imagine that some folks in our little community will have problems with Obama's approval rating as compared to the PPP poll. Remember: when reality does not conform to your expectations, start spinning.

____________________

Polaris:

I am not sure how you can say this is anywhere close to a reasonable poll. I know that Quinn has a normally decent reputation, but they seem to have gone off the deep end on this one.

Read the internals. Christie has improved his margin with Independants to +15 in this latest poll (from the last Quinn poll), yet we are supposed to believe that he's lost five in the overall top number? Really?

A look at the partisan split confirms this: Quinn used a D-49/R-27/I-23 sample. This would mean that Corzine at the top of the ticket would generate more Dem turnout and enthusiasm than Obama himself! Does anyone really believe that? Really? I know NJ is a blue state, but it's not THIS blue.

Also live interviews bother me and bother me a lot in polling because it introduces surveyer bias into the results (as compared in voting where you make your choice on a ballot that doesn't interact with you). It's very easy (even unintentionally) to influence your respondant with just your tone let alone choice of words. This is why I strongly prefer robo-polls.

Sorry guys, but Quinn seems to have gone off the deep end today. Let's see what SUSA has to say. If SUSA is in line with Ras and PPP (which I suspect they will be), then this particular poll should be looked at particularly skeptically.

-Polaris

____________________

Field Marshal:

Good analysis Polaris.

I still think this is going to come down to Daggett voters actually pulling the lever for him or for Christie when they get into the booth.

____________________

Stillow:

Polling on this race is out of control. How can you have so many polls showing oppositte results.....I think next Tuesday is goign to be real messy in NJ.

____________________

Polaris:

Field Marshal,

Good point about Daggett and when you look at the trends on this site, you see that there is nearly a 1:1 correspondance between Daggett's rise in the polls as an Indy and Christie's fall. Corzine's number has been nearly flat.

Thus Corzine hasn't recovered at all in absolute terms.

It is my strong guess based on past NJ elections (where no Indy in the Gov race has ever garnered more than 6% of the vote) that Daggett is going to have your typical third party collapse and I have him penciled in as taking about 5-7% of the actual vote which is much less than what several polls have him at now.

If this turns out to be so, Christie should win relatively handily.

-Polaris

____________________

Polaris:

Everyone,

Actually Quinn is now claiming that the partisan split is 40D/25R/29I and I checked it out independantly and it now checks out algebraically at least.

However, my above points still apply since that is still fewer republicans and a better turnout for the Democrats than when Obama was on top of the ballot in 2008, and I don't believe that.

-Polaris

____________________

Wong:

Quinn is poll I would put my money on. The internals are solid with a large sample and importantly, it follows the trend line.

This is not an embrace of Corzine so much as a rejection of Christie

____________________

lat:

Field Marshall and Stillow,

I am sorry the 2 of you may be very disappointed on election night, but it's ok you are going to win in VA and you should take that as a consolation. As for NJ once again us wealthy northeastern elitist snobs that you look down on with disdain are going continue in our tradition of voting blue. Maybe next time you won't run someone who has the social politics of Mississipi? It doesn't work here change the playbook.

____________________

conspiracy:

Polaris

PPP had it at 43-30-27. 13% more Democratic to Quinnipiac's 15% more Democratic. Not statistically significant difference. That is cancelled out anyway by more indies in the PPP sample.

Anyway, the 2008 exit poll in New Jersey pegged turnout at 44-28-28 so Quinnipiac also has fewer Democrats. Again, cancelling out the lack of Republicans. So neither of the polls are much different than than 16% Dem partisan advantage from a year ago. In fact both are slighly less than Obama's turnout as you would expect.

____________________

conspiracy:

Apologies. More indies in the Quinnipiac sample.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

This is a rejection of the fat man and nothing else. I hear Obama will campaign for him this weekend. There's no way Christie is going to win this thing. He should start thinking about 2013. The bust has left the fat man, period. I'm very confident for Corzine because democrats are usually under=polled in NJ.

____________________

Stillow:

The fact the left has resroted to name calling and making fun of someone's weight is the best indicator they are scared to death of being humilited by losing a solidly blue state. Usually when you lose a debate or are losing a campaign you go negative and start the name calling. Its a natural defense mechanism.

As I suspect, Dagget voters will not vote for Dagget on election day, they will go with Christie, because the goal is to get Corzine out. 4 point Christie win looks more and more like its goign to happen.

Again, you know you have them scared when the name calling begins....not a good sign at all for the Dems.

____________________

tjampel:

I wouldn't be so confident if I were Corzine. Getting people to the polls is going to be very tough. Overall people seem to support Corzine marginally more than Christie but the one's who have stuck with Christie are angry and motivated; many of those polled who respond Corzine will stay home.

GOTV will win this race

____________________

Polaris:

Guys,

You are also neglecting other big yellow (if not red) flags in this poll. This is a poll that supposedly has a 2.8 MoE but has a DNR/RR rate of 6%. That alone makes the poll suspect. It was also taken over a period of 7 days including a weekend (and weekend polling is particularlly difficult) AND there is the distinct possibility here of interviewer bias.

Also, the Daggett number is going to collapse based on past NJ history and on the fact that most people in the state do not believe that Daggett has a legit shot.

I am calling it as Christ +3 to +5 because without Daggett (who will collapse on election day), Corzine can't win (because the people of New Jersey do NOT want to reelect Corzine).

Also when two reputable polls say one thing, and one says the other (and Ras and PPP are reputable), I'm inclined to take the other polls. Like I said, let's see what SUSA says tomorrow.

-Polaris

____________________

Polaris:

tj brings up an excellent point. Right now the enthusiasm edge is towards the conservative electorate (note I say conservative not republican). This is verified by the latest Gallup ideological polls that have coservative voters near an all time high (about 40% of the national electorate).

Given this change of enthuisiasm, I don't see how you can expect even a 2006 partisan split let alone a 2008 one. Basically (as prior posters have already indicated), it looks like Quinn got a very bad sample (and the very high DNR number at 6% is a dead giveaway).

-Polaris

____________________

conspiracy:

Polaris

Quinnipiac is a reputable poll. They have been polling Jersey for years. They know what they are doing. They were closer than Rasmussen to the actual result in 2005.

Yeah, the Q poll is partly over the weekend but the PPP and Ras polls were almost entirely the weekend so I don't see how you can dismiss it that way.

Also, the two polls you prefer suggest the collapse of Daggett actually helps Corzine now.

Bottom-line to me is that the polling suggests this is total tossup and anybody making a firm prediction right now is doing so through partisan blinkers.

____________________

conspiracy:

I also think you should take more notice of the final Jersey based polls over Survey USA, particularly Monmouth.

____________________

Stillow:

There is also still a chunk of undecided voters...and typically when there are undecided voters this late i na race, they break against the incumbant. If the outstanding indy's break to Christie along with a collapse in Dagget votes on election day, it does indicate Christie is in prime position to pick this seat up.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Lat,

How did i get into this? Go back and look at my NJ posts from the summer and you will see i was saying that Corzine would probably win because he will outspend Christie and load the airwaves with lies, etc.

Why would Christie want this position to begin with. The state is on the precipice of a free fall. Top earners are already fleeing the state. Luckily, they live next to NYC which is even more ineptly run that NJ.

I think we will see some of the first failed states in the country since the early 19th century. NY and CA are the obvious first contenders but MI and NJ are certainly up there in possibility. If the GOP were smart, they wouldn't want to run these states!

This is what caused Arnold to lose so much popularity. He is getting blamed for the what the state legislature has been doing for 2 decades, destroying the state.

Again, i still think Christie will pull it out as it all depends on Daggett voters and turnout. If its raining in metro philly/NYC like it is today, Christie wins easily. If not, it may be a Franken/ACORN steal at the buzzer!

____________________

Xenobion:

I think all rules are out the window when a 3rd formidable contender is in the works. Dagget is Ross Perot and can shake anything up it seems.

____________________

Polaris:

Conspiracy,

Even reputable polls go over the edge occassionally, and I have STRONG issues with the fact that Quinn is using live interviewers since that is not the way people vote. I am not the only one with such strong issues. Jensen at PPP has similiar concerns (and he is hardly a republican):

"In the time we’ve been polling nationally I’ve never seen a race where the IVR and live interviewer polls told two stories as different as the New Jersey Governor’s race.

All 9 IVR polls this month have shown Chris Christie in the lead. 6 out of the 9 live interviewer polls have shown Corzine in the lead.”

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/10/new-jersey-polls.html

Seems to me that people are saying one thing in public and doing another in private which in New Jersey suprises me not at all.

Look, all I'm saying is that Quinn got this wrong because he's using a suspect technique. There are other problems too...and as you say any one of them is probably minor at worst but when taken in toto raises serious doubts about this poll especially in light of two robopolls (and robopolling is instrinsically a superior technique) that contradict this poll (and one of the robopolls tends to lean Dem, i.e. PPP).

-Polaris

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

PPP routinely gets the age and minority votes all screwed up with regard to Obama approval. Ie: I've seen them say that youth are split on Obama while at the same time winning a plurality of seniors. Their VA poll showed that hispanics have swung 60 points - from favoring Obama by 30 points to disapproving by 30 points. Worse than VA whites. I don't have a lot of confidence in them.

Rasmussen, on the other hand, was very accurate in NJ polling last year, and Qunnipiac was off by net 6 points, although they didn't poll NJ after 10/19/08, which might explain their overesitimation of the margin. They were very consistent in gauging R support, however.

The Ras poll shows the highest level of support for Christie in a month, he's anywhere from 38-46 while Corzine's support in this poll and others is consistently between 39-43.

Having finally watched the candidates in action, I actually like Christie a little better. I don't like the way Corzine is trying to win by humping Obama's leg. Daggett I'm neutral on.

____________________

Polaris:

Xenobion,

Even Ross Perot in 1992 collapsed at the very end (from nearly 30% in late October to about 19% on election day) and Daggett is no Ross Perot. All the surveys seem to show that Daggett's negatives are rising fast and most in the state do not believe he will win (and most do not want to reelect Corzine).

Also don't forget in 2000, Nader polled consistantly from Labour Day up to the last week in October at a constant 7ish percent. On election day he collapsed to about 2 and a half percent.

That's with national elections that make it relatively easy (when compared with New Jersey) to vote for a strong third party candidate.

I am predicting based on prior races in New Jersey that Daggett will collapse to about 5 to 7% on election day.

-Polaris

____________________

lat:

Polaris,

You are ignoring the fact that the dems have a huge registration advantage in NJ, in addition to the fact that no republican has won statewide in NJ for 12 years. Christie Todd Whitman was the last to do so and she was a much better candidate that Chris Christie, but even with her moderate views and crossover appeal she barely won both times. This was especially true the first time she ran because she was running against Jim Florio who was the most hated governor I have seen in a while (take the dislike for Corzine and multiply it x 10 and you have Florio) and even with all of Florio's huge negatives she won by less than 1%. John McCain got his butt kicked in NJ (by almost 16 points). This is not a GOP friendly state and I have said it a hundred times until the GOP actually runs moderates who are not extreme on social positions (like Christie Whitman) they can kiss states like NJ goodbye for a long time to come, but somehow the modern day GOP seems to think it's better to fall on their swords with conservative "principles" rather than run someone who might actually win. It is truly sad that moderate republicans are basically no more with very few exceptions.

____________________

Stillow:

lat, obama also won easily in VA and look whats happening there. Your underestimating the power of the vote againsters. When someone is doing as bad a job as Corzine is, people, regardless of party vote you out. They want Corzine out. He cannot get above 43 in polling. Christie has been as high as 49 I have seen. If Dagget voters do indeed do what 3rd part voters often do and go back to an R or a D...Corzine is toast. In addition energy for corzine is low....conservatives have the mojo going for them and will get out to vote. There is no enthusiasm for Corzine.

Party ID won't save Corzine. Based on your thinking, this race shoud not even be competitive...Corzine should be winning by 15 points....and its a basic tie going into the election.

____________________

jmartin4s:

Advantages Christine Todd Whitman had over Chris Christie:

-Florio's approval rating was 18%
-Whitman was a woman and got a lot more woman to crossover.
-She was extremly moderate and a very likeable candidate.
-Florio didn't have the kind of money Corzine had.
-Whitman had already ran in one statewide election.
-The year was 1993 which was a much more favorable climate for GOP than 2009.
And with all this the results were:
49% Christine Todd Whitman
48% James Florio

____________________

Xenobion:

Ouch jmartin. :)

____________________

Polaris:

Lat,

I am forgetting no such thing. I expect that mroe Dems will vote than Republicans in New Jersey. How could I not? However Corzine's approval ratings are in the cellar and NOTHING has changed that during the past month or several months. Christie is also not all that conservative either. Is he a bit too conservative for New Jersey in a normal year?

Probably, but this is not a normal year. The D+16 you saw in 2008 (and 2006) was with a national historic tailwind favoring the democrats. The situation is now significantly different than that.

Also bear in mind that most Daggett voters that decide to vote at all will vote Christie over Corzine (and every survey I've seen with the sole exception of yesterday's PPP poll) confirms that. Combine that with the fact that NO third party candidate has ever gotten more than 6% of the vote for governor and you should be able to do the math.

I am predicting Christie by about 3-5 points and I am not pulling that number out of thin air. Daggett won't poll double digits in the only poll that counts.

I also think it's very instructive to note that anonymous (i.e. Robopolls) show Christie with a consistant lead. Since voting is also anonymous, I view the robopolls as a better predictor.

-Polaris

____________________

jmartin4s:

It has been established that Christie is just as conservative as someone like Mark Sanford. He is not moderate at all. He said on national television he would reject stimulus funds. Do you research!!!

____________________

Polaris:

Oh as for 2009 vs 1993, from what I am seeing here, NY-23 (and Hoffman is really a republican), VA and even CA-10, this looks like it might be at least as favorable a year to be a republica as in 1993. So far, I'd say that 2010 is looking to be a repeat of 1994 as well.

-Polaris

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

Given what has happened to GM and other people that have taken stimulus funds, you will find that he is in good company. Sure not taking them means you're not a liberal, but I think you are underestimating just how much Corzine is loathed in NJ. When a sitting governor fouls up this badly, the challenger gets the nod....even in a state as blue as NJ.

This election won't be any different in that regard.

-Polaris

____________________

jmartin4s:

First of all 2010 will be more like fools gold for the GOP, like 2002 was for the Dems. Sorry

Second here's PPP and Q.U. without Daggett based on people's second choice
PPP
46% Christie
44% Corzine
Quinnipiac
47% Corzine
44% Christie
So Daggett collapsing really doesn't change the dynamic of the race.

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

You are once again incorrect. Here is the money quote from Quinn's own poll:

"Among Daggett supporters, 38 percent say they might change their mind: 43 percent say Christie is their second choice, while 27 percent say Gov. Corzine is number two. "

Thus the Daggett influence is a large one, and Christie leads here by 16 points.

Also don't forget that a full 6% were DNR/NR which is huge in a poll that supposed to only have an error of 2%.

You are whistling in the dark IMHO. As for 2002, this was after 9-11 and if the Dems were predicting a good year after that, they wree not paying attention (and honestly I think that applies to a few Dems right now as well).

-Polaris

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

If the above quote weren't enough, look at the polling composites on this very site for this race during the past month. While it's true that Christie has gone from a double digit lead to effectively a tie, it is not because Corzine has made any statistically significant gains. He has not.

Rather you see a very close to a 1:1 correspondance with an increase of Daggett support to a loss of Christie support. New Jersey does not want to reelect Corzine and in the end that will be decisive, but Christie left himself vunerable in a center-left state in that he didn't give the voters a positive reason to vote for him....thus making him vunerable to Daggett.

However, Daggett looks to collapse and with it the "gain" that Corzine has made in this race.

-Polaris

____________________

jmartin4s:

I did the math AND YOUR WRONG DO THE MATH
Corzine 43+(27%*13)=43+4=47
Christie 38+(43%*13)=38+6=44
Meaning
Corzine 47%
Christie 44%
Seriously, do the math and back up your facts POLARIS, otherwise I will call you out on it. There is not disputing these numbers. Sorry you don't like it but there is not politics behind and and multiplication. Seriously, Polaris thing before you post something that rediculously absurd.

____________________

jmartin4s:

Also for all those who are claiming Christie is more moderate guess what, JOE WILSON IS CAMPAIGNING FOR CHRIS CHRISTIE.
Source: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/joe-wilson-to-appear-at-unauthorized-rally-for-chris-christie.php

Christine Todd Whitman probably wouldn't be caught in the same state as Joe Wilson.

____________________

Stillow:

Isn't Joe Wilson the k Street whore? Oooops, nevermind.

I perosnally find it hilarious you Dems have beenreduced to actually defending Corzine. My liberal freinds tell me they feel Corzine will eeek it out, but if he does lose, its going to send a shockwave thru the Democratic party. If Corzine goes down, the moderate Dems make make an effort to reclaim the party from the liberals.

Christie is fiscally conservative, socially not so conservative, espeically on things like abortion where he favors abortion under certain criteria.

Like I mentioned above, I know the Dems are scared to death on this race because they started the name calling........that is sign #1 your in big big trouble.

____________________

Stillow:

Dems defending Corzine are like those republicans defending Bush.....not many of them, but the ones that are there ya just gotta feel kind of bad for.

____________________

conspiracy:

Polaris

"Thus the Daggett influence is a large one, and Christie leads here by 16 points."

Daggett gets 13% total in the poll. Of the 38% of that 13% that might change their mind (about 5%) you have the 16 percent Christie advantage. 16% of 5% is less than 2% so jmartin4s has the correct math here.

Also, Corzine gained more in Rasmussen's reallocation of Daggett voters matching PPP.

And , while I agree IVR has a good record it isn't infallible and live question has a long history of being accurate. Quinnipiac being one of the proponents of that when they were closer to the actual margin than Rasmussen when Corzine won in 2005.

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin et al,

That wasn't what JMartin said. What he said was, and I QUOTE:

"PPP
46% Christie
44% Corzine
Quinnipiac
47% Corzine
44% Christie"

I just pulled the direct quote from Quinn that proved him wrong.

Furthermore, you STILL don't account for that 6% DNR number which is very high in a poll of this size (too high).

FUTHERMORE, you ignore the evidence over multiple polls all linked to this site and plotted that show beyond a shadow of a doubt that almost the entire drop of Christie is due to Daggett's increasing number. Don't take my word for it....look at the front page of this very site!

In short, some of you are defending the indefinsible and if you don't think Daggett is the difference between Corzine winning and losing, then you are either blind, partisan, or not paying attention.

-Polaris

____________________

jmartin4s:

You did not prove me wrong, you just have no intelligence. Christie's 16 point lead is with the THIRTEEN PERCENT that claim they are voting for Daggett. Sixteen percent of thirteen percent isn't the same thing as 16% of the vote. Seriously, look at the math I did out for you that any third grader could understand. Corzine is still ahead with people's second choice. That 16% lead for Christie among Daggett voters gives him a net gain of 2% overall. Seriously, you want to disagree with my politics, thats fine, but dont call me wrong when I have the plain and simple numbers in front of you. POLARIS YOU ARE WRONG.

____________________

Stillow:

All this back and forth. The bottom line is Corzine if he wins will have to do it with 43 percent of the vote. It was not that long ago Bush got 46.25 percent....and in a year where ther was no anti Dem mood like there is now. Christie has a much higher watermark than Corzine does. If history is wrong and Dagget does get 15 percent or so the nthe race is a total tossup between Corzine and Christie. If Dagget voters defect, they will break more towards Christie giving him the victory by about 4 points. This could very easily be a 46-47 for Christie and 42-43 for Corzine with Dagget bringing up the rear.

Polling shows Christie with a much higher watermark, that means if Dagget voters think twice, Christie gets help. The only way Corzine can win this is if Dagget gets 15 percent of the vote or more. Which is highly unlikely....and if he does, he will win by a super thin margin. Like its been stated, numbers don't lie and they are not partisan.

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

One more flaw. While your math now that you've explained it is correct as far as it goes, it also flies in the face of ALL the other polling.

The fact is (except for Suffolk and I hope we agree that that was a fatally flawed poll not worthy of further comment) Corzine can't poll above 42% or so. That seems to be his absolute ceiling.

Do you really think that will change on election day? The reason Daggett got the support he did was a lot of socially liberal people in New Jersey were not about to vote for Corzine but couldn't stomache voting for a republican.

Given the choice based on the entire polling history of this race, I will predict here and now that most of the Daggett vote will:

1. Vote Christie

2. Stay home

This likely dooms Corzine. I think it is very noteworthy that when respondants can reply anonymously (which is why I dislike live interview polling), they poll for Christie everytime (at least this past month). Voting booths are anonymous last time I checked.

-Polaris

P.S. In general live interviewing can be accurate, but I question it strongly in these highly polarized times especially when the interviewers are likely to be poli-sci grad students and thus likely highly liberal themselves. Even Jensen (no republican) commented on the difference and I think we have to trust the IVR polls more especially given NJ's unfortunate sordid political history.

____________________

jmartin4s:

Corzine can't poll over 42%???? He is polling at 43% in the poll right above!!!!!!!!!

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

Explain again why Corzine has NEVER gotten more than 42% of the vote, anhd then explain to me why you are wrong.

I have said your math is correct. It's just irrelevant (and yes that means people LIE to pollsters about second choices....it's an old problem in polling).

To get a feel for how the electorate will really behave look at the body of polling over the past several months. When Daggett goes up, Christie goes down and vice versa. Corzine is stuck at about 40-42 percent more or less (no poll other than the fatally flawed Suffolk poll has shown Corzine with anywhere near the numbers you project which makes your math questionable at best).

These polling trends and results simply don't lie. If Daggett's support collapses on election day (which is the norm in New Jersey), then Christie will win....by 3-5 points is my offhand predicion based on the trends.

-Polaris

____________________

conspiracy:

Polaris, you are reading what you want into the polling. Again, the two polls you like best show CORZINE doing better with reallocation of support. Jensen is obviously going to back his own poll. Look, you have to take ALL the polling into account and it says pure tossup. You are being partisan in reading only the data that supports the guy you obviously want to win.

____________________

conspiracy:

"...which makes your math questionable at best".

That is rich considering your claims upthread.

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

43% is his high however and he has been stuck at about this level (39-43).

Look at the darn graph on the front page of this very site! Corzine is at his ceiling right now!

-Polaris

____________________

conspiracy:

Polaris, look at the same graph for the trend. You see who leads now?

____________________

jmartin4s:

Corzine was actually at 44% in a Ras poll and an FD poll. In addition to the fact that in 2005 Corzine performed on election day above his ceiling in polls in 2005. The lowest two scores that a Dem has gotten in NJ in the last 20 years has been 48% and 46% and that was when Christine Todd Whitman won by a point each time. So I would be careful with the word ceiling when referring to Corzine.

____________________

Polaris:

conspiracy,

I am reading what's there. BTW the difference between 42 and 43 percent is stastically insignificant.

I am not reading what I want. Jensen makes a cogent point. There are two different sets of polls that give drastically two different sets of results. When this happens, you can't meaningfully just lump them all in together like you're trying to do. The fact is that when people are allowed to poll anonymously, Christie has come out ahead in 9 polls out of 9.

That's not an accident.

It's also not an accident that in ALL polls, when you look at the polling history, Corzine's support has been nearly flat. Any Christie loss has been directly due to Daggett and vice versa. Don't take my word for that....the data doesn't lie!

So before you cast the beam from my eye, perhaps you need to cast the mote of partisanship from your own.

-Polaris

____________________

conspiracy:

And Rasmussen and FD have both had Corzine as high as 44. With undecideds and the collapse of Daggett he will likely get at least 45 next Tuesday. The question is will Daggett drop enough for Christie to get over that. Anything is possible. Only the purely partisan are predicting either way right now.

____________________

jmartin4s:

As Barney Frank would say, Arguing with Polaris and Stillow is like having an argument with a dinning room table.

____________________

Polaris:

conspiracy,

No one leads according to that graph outside of margin of error. However, that's because this site is making the mistake of adding apples and oranges. In New Jersey, it seems to make a huge difference if the poll is IVR or live interview and that means you should not graph them together.

It still also shows what I said about Daggett...but you don't want to see that.

-Polaris

P.S. Corzine's overall average ceiling is 42% which is consistant with his abysmal approval rating. That is consistant with some polls as low as 39% and some (only a couple) as high as 44%. I note you don't say how high Christie got. When an incumbant polls this badly near the end of the race, he's toast because Jersey is not kind to third party candidates.

____________________

conspiracy:

Partisan moi? As I said I'm not predicting anything. What you suggest could very well come to fruition. I am merely pointing out there is another story in the data which is just as if more valid. And looking at the polling history says that other than Rasmussen (who has a clear GOP lean of at least a couple points in all his polling) Christie hasn't been above 43% this month. So though Corzine may be flat (actually the trend is a minor climb) Christie is down and not going up when you take the totality of polling into account. I suggest again you wait for the Jersey-based pollsters which should give the most accurate picture. Particularly Monmouth who nailed it closest in 2005. Also remember there is a clear pattern this decade and even beyond of Dems in Jersey outperforming the polls by at least a couple points.

____________________

Polaris:

Conspiracy,

Yes, partisan vous. If you look at the total history of the polling on this site, Corzine has been flat. In the last month there seems to be a slight curve up, but it is stastically insignificant.

Christie's number and Daggett's are inversly correlated. Also it was Monmouth that destroyed the Suffolk poll.

What I am saying is:

1. Trust the IVR polls given Jersey's political history.

2. Daggett will collapse given Jersey's political history.

3. When he does (based on the polling history), Christie will directly benefit.

We'll see shortly who is right, but I am very confident in what I am saying. I am not guessing from thin air here.

-Polaris

____________________

conspiracy:

The dining room table doesn't shift the goalposts/cutlery.

____________________

conspiracy:

The last month and the last week or so is what matters since the election is next week. Incidentally, what evidence do have of trusting only IVR polls in New Jersey when the IVR polls in the last gubernatorial race (Rasmussen and Survey USA) pegged the race at 5 and 6 points respectively while the live caller polls from Quinnipiac and Monmouth reported Corzine by 7 and 9. He won by 10.

____________________

conspiracy:

Also, Obama carried NJ by 15 points (57-42)last year.

Rasmussen nailed it yes, but Survey USA was way out with their final poll showing a ten point margin which doesn't suggest the prescience of IVR. Particularly when the live caller method got Marist, Research 2000, FD and Monmouth within three points of the actual result. And you will notice two of those are based in-state.

____________________

Stillow:

Irrelevant what Obama did in NJ, he is not onthe ballot. If Obama winning a state was a lock, then deeds should be ahead of mcdonnel.

This whole argument is moot...its all about Dagget voters and undecideds. We know undecided typically break largely against the incumbant. And we know 3rd party candidates do not perform as well as there polling.....typically anyway. In what is virtually a tie race heading into the election, thw two variables I mentioned swing in favor of Christie....conspiracy mentioned look at the trend, well look at the histoical trend on what undecideds and 3rd party voters do on election day......its favoring Christie.

____________________

lat:

You folks just do not want to face reality. You are talking about a state that the last gop candidate won for president was 20 years ago, the last gop senate candidate was 35 years ago and the only 2 gop governors in the last 35 years (Tom Kean and Christie Whitman) were reviled among conservatives in their party for being too moderate (Christie Whitman did not write "It's my party too" for nothing). NJ used to be a white flight state that often voted republican in presidential elections, but that is not the case anymore and has not been for years. NJ has a large minority population combined with an extremely well educated and affluent population (NJ is the 2nd wealthiest state in the union behind CT and it has the highest percentage of people with post graduate degrees)all of which has been a disaster for the gop in recent years. We don't take kindly to white southerners trying to stick their hands inside a woman's body through government legislation (amazing what hypocrites these people are they don't want government involvement except when it comes to one of the most personal decisions a person can make, in other words when it suits them to have the government interfere that is ok), gay bashing, imposing their "values" as being holier than holy (just for the record the region of the country with the highest divorce rate is the bible belt. What happened to those "values"?), etc. Like I said change the playbook.

____________________

Stillow:

Again with the racism......lat you always fall back to your racist positions....get out a bit more, try and overcome your hatrid and racist views....there's a whole world out there, enjoy its diversity and all that it has to offer...please drop your racist nonsense and join the real discussions going on...its racists who are buried in there own hate and buried in the past who cannot let it go.

Thanksfully you racists are dwindling in numbes, but there is still a few of you around like lat who spoilthe debate by once again making it all about race.

What a shame.

____________________

jmartin4s:

WTF Stillow, LAT didn't say anything racist. This is the same thing as you equating predicting a football with intrade predicting an election.

____________________

Polaris:

Let me educate some of you as to why I am saying we should trust IPV polls now. In the races that were mentioned, the IPV and live interviewing polls were about as predictive.

In this race, however, that is not the case. Either the IPV polls are all wrong OR the live interview polls are all wrong. That is because if you (as Jensen of PPP did) seperate out the two classes of polls they each give statistically equivalent results. In the case of IPV polls, they predict Christie. In the case of live interview polls, they predict Corzine.

GIVEN that a voting booth is an anonymous place to vote and GIVEN that interview bias in polling (of any sort) is a very real problem, the nod needs to be given to the IPV polls.

I also note that some of you neglect the other problems in this Quin poll. The quinn poll was taken over a period of 7 days which is a criminally long sample time in a race in it's last few days (when the final shifts of opinion are taking place). It's like trying to measure rainful in a hurricane with that long a sample period. I also note that none of you has defended the very large (6%) DNR figure which is almost a dead giveaway for a poor sample.

That along with the points I've already made should make you wary of this Quinn poll.

As a final note, while it's true that D+15 is consistant with 2006 and 2008 in New Jersey, both those years were extremely strong democratic years nationally. In 2009 if anything the opposite is the case. IMHO you're dreaming if you see D+15 this coming Tuesday in Jersey. I expect it will be more like D+8 to D+10 which is where it was early this decade.

-Polaris

____________________

Polaris:

When I mentioned Jersey's political history, I was referring to the fact that historically New Jersey politics have been some of the most corrupt in the country (which is why the anti-exit polling law was passed there).

Given Corzine's record with those that have been proven to be corrupt, it wouldn't suprise me in the slightest to see many in NJ support Corzine publically but not privately.

-Polaris

____________________

Stillow:

jmartin4s

white flight....blah blah, claims minoirites only vote liberal, blah blah...same racist crap he always posts....sheep likeyou eat it up. The fall back position for liberals is to go racist. bring up how NJ has a large miniority population so there's no way a GOP can win...once again libs make an assumption that miniorities are to stupid tothink for themselves.

Eventually society is going to get tired of you liberal racists making everything about race. There's more to life than white, balck and brown. But you guys are so buried in racism you cannot even see your own hate. Its very very sad...I genuinely feel bad for you. to live with that level of hate towards people must be very heavy on you.

If you wish to slam me for my politics, feel free, you want to slam the GOP for their politics, fine by me, but once again you make it all about race......that is what racists do. Talking about those evil white southerners....blah blah. Its northeastern libs who ar ethe racists left in this country. Always talking down miniority groups as though they are stupid, and cannot function without a nice enlightened liberal to help them thru life...give me a break.

Stop the racist crap and keep the debate on topic, christive vs. corzine.

____________________

Polaris:

Everyone,

Really it boils down to this:

If Daggett collapses to the usual support that third party candidates get in New Jersey (top in the Gov's race was 6%), then Christie will win this race by a narrow but respectable margin.

If Daggett gets double digit support on election day, then Corzine may win this.

Given the history of not only NJ elections but elections as a whole, I think the first scenario is a lot more likely than the second.

-Polaris

____________________

jmartin4s:

First, Stillow you brought up racism, so don't tell me to stop the racist crap. Second, Polaris, based on the history of NJ elections Corzine would outperform his poll numbers on election day. This would not a good scenario for Christie.

____________________

Polaris:

jmartin,

Sure Corzine will outperform his average polling number....by about two points. This always happens for any candidat (or almost always happens).

You can put it in blank ink now. Corzine gets 44% of the vote next Tuesday. That's what in sports betting we'd call a lead pipe lock.

The key is how much support Dagget gets. If Daggett falls into single digits which history strongly suggests he will, then Christie wins this. If he gets solid double-digit support then Corzine wins.

The race really does boil down to that and pretty much only that.

-Polaris

____________________

Polaris:

Ack I meant to say you can put it in black ink now. Corzine's election day number will be 43 or 44 percent (or about 1-2 over his average polling number).

-Polaris

____________________

Rasmus Pianowski:

Polaris, you should read this post before you say that Democrats 'can't' hold such a big PartyID advantage in New Jersey.

http://monmouthpoll.blogspot.com/2009/10/understanding-unaffiliated-voters.html

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR