Tag Archives: North Carolina

The Latest Numbers

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 23, 2020 — Polls are being updated daily in the competitive Senate races. Below are the most recent two surveys from each major contest. Some states provide disparate results, others more consistent. The data source is FiveThirtyEight Polls.


ALABAMA

Moore Information (OCT. 11-15; 504 likely Alabama voters, live interview)
• Tommy Tuberville (R) – 55%
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 40%

FM3 Research (Oct. 11-14; 801 likely Alabama voters; live interview)
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 48%
• Tommy Tuberville (R) – 47%


ALASKA

Public Policy Polling (Oct. 19-20; 800 Alaska voters, interactive response system)
• Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) – 44%
• Al Gross (D/I) – 41%

Siena College/NYT (Oct. 9-14; 423 likely Alaska voters, live interview)
• Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) – 45%
• Al Gross (D/I) – 37%


ARIZONA

Ipsos/Reuters (Oct. 14-21; 658 likely Arizona voters, online)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 51%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 43%

Rasmussen Reports/Pulse Opinion (Oct. 18-19; 800 likely Arizona voters, automated)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 48%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 44%


GEORGIA-A

Emerson College (Oct. 17-19; 506 likely Georgia voters; interactive voice response)
• Sen. David Perdue (R) – 46%
• Jon Ossoff (D) – 45%

Garin Hart Yang Research (Oct. 11-14; 600 likely Georgia voters; live interview)
• Jon Ossoff (D) – 48%
• Sen. David Perdue (R) – 43%


GEORGIA-B – Special Election

Siena College/NYT (Oct. 13-19; 759 likely Georgia voters, live interview)
Jungle Primary; top two advance to Jan 5 runoff
• Raphael Warnock (D) – 32%
• Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) – 23%
• Rep. Doug Collins (R) – 17%
• Matt Lieberman (D) – 7%
• Ed Tarver (D) – 2%

Emerson College (Oct. 17-19; 506 likely Georgia voters, interactive voice response)
• Raphael Warnock (D) – 27%
• Rep. Doug Collins (R) – 27%
• Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) – 20%
• Matt Lieberman (D) – 12%
• Ed Tarver (D) – 2%


Continue reading

“As Goes North Carolina,
So Goes the Senate”

First-term Sen. Thom Tillis’s campaign ad branding opponent Cal Cunningham as not trustworthy.

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 22, 2020 — It looked like North Carolina Democratic US Senate nominee Cal Cunningham was building a strong lead over first-term Sen. Thom Tillis (R) as the two candidates headed into October after what had already been a long campaign. Though the revelations coming forth at that time about extra-marital affairs that Cunningham was having didn’t immediately affect the campaign’s course to a great degree, we are now seeing significant movement in Tillis’ direction.

Since the end of September until last week, 18 polls were conducted of the Tar Heel State Senate race and Cunningham was averaging a lead of just under six percentage points. This included a range of a 13-point spread in one survey (Hart Research Associates; Sept. 24-27; 400 likely North Carolina voters, live interview — Cunningham, 54 percent; Tillis 41 percent) all the way to Tillis’s one-point edge (East Carolina University; Oct. 2-4; 1,232 likely North Carolina voters, interactive voice response system & an online panel — Tillis 47 percent; Cunningham 46 percent).

A new series of four polls, from a quartet of individual survey research entities, find the Cunningham lead being cut by almost two-thirds, down to just over two points. The most recent survey, from Ipsos/Reuters (Oct. 14-20; 660 likely North Carolina voters, online interview) projects that the two candidates are tied at 47 percent apiece.

Much of the reasoning behind the movement back toward Tillis’ direction is associated with the Cunningham affairs and how the two campaigns have handled the scandal. Cunningham has stopped holding virtual events and refuses to answer questions about whether there are more women than the two situations that have been already identified. In the one news availability that he held for reporters since the extra-marital scandal broke, Charlotte television reporters stressed several times that the candidate refused to answer four separate times whether he is involved with more women.

Continue reading

The Trafalgar Effect

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 15, 2020 — The Trafalgar Group is the polling firm that came to national political notoriety four years ago when they correctly predicted a Donald Trump victory in both Michigan and Pennsylvania and were the only survey research firm to do so. Since that time, they have forecast at least four other wins when the active polling community was arriving at opposite conclusions.

Yesterday, Trafalgar released its latest Pennsylvania data (Oct. 10-12; 1,034 likely Pennsylvania voters) and finds former vice president Joe Biden leading President Trump 47.4 – 45.1 percent — just over a two-point spread. In October, not counting the Trafalgar number, we see 12 other pollsters returning Pennsylvania data and they average a pro-Biden forecast of just under seven points.

Routinely, Trafalgar’s data shows President Trump in better position than most pollsters because they attempt to quantify what is termed the “shy Trump voter,” i.e., those who are actually voting for the incumbent but won’t admit it to a pollster. In most cases, the Trafalgar calculations, derived from a proprietary algorithmic formula, have been reliably accurate.

From 2016, we remember that, generally, the polling community missed badly in the Trump-Clinton presidential race. While their national count was accurate – predicting a tight plurality for Hillary Clinton (final result: 48.2 – 46.1 percent) – many state projections were off, particularly those in the Great Lakes region.

In the previous presidential election cycle, a total of 62 surveys were conducted in the state of Pennsylvania, and only three found a lead for President Trump, including the Trafalgar pre-election survey. In Michigan, 45 polls were publicly released, and Trump led in just two, one of which was Trafalgar’s final 2016 study. In Wisconsin, 33 polls were taken, and none found President Trump running ahead. Yet, in all three cases, he won the state.

The Great Lakes/Mid-Atlantic region was not the only area where 2016 polling missed the mark. In North Carolina, the margin average looked to be dead even heading into the election, but President Trump won with a 3.6 percent spread. The cumulative polling missed Arizona by two points, and Florida by 1.2 percent. In all of these instances, the Republican voted was under-estimated.

Continue reading

Where the Senate Stands

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 13, 2020 — Now, less than a month before the official Election Day, we see multiple polls coming regularly in almost every competitive Senate race. Democrats need a net conversion of three Republican seats if Joe Biden is elected president and four seats if he is not. With 16 races now on the competitive board, we look at where they each stand. At least two surveys are included for each race.

Looking at the current trends, we see a tightening Senate from the current 53R-47D majority. Under the current swing, Democrats could reach 51, but with several races remaining as toss-ups or in range where they still could go either way. It’s conceivable, at this point, that both parties could claim 49 seats with a fight for the remaining two that would decide the next majority.

All of the polling data is from late September and early October:


ALABAMA: Sen. Doug Jones (D) vs. Tommy Tuberville (R)
• Trend: Tuberville

POLLS:
• University of Auburn @ Montgomery (Sept. 30-Oct. 3; 1,072 registered Alabama voters)
  Tommy Tuberville (R) – 54%
  Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 42%

• Morning Consult (Sept. 11-20; 658 likely Alabama voters)
  Tommy Tuberville (R) – 52%
  Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 34%


ALASKA: Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) vs. Dr. Al Gross (I/D)
• Trend: Slightly Sullivan

POLLS:
• Alaska Survey Research (Sept. 25-Oct. 4; 676 likely Alaska voters)
  Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) – 48%
  Al Gross (I/D) – 44%

• Harstad Strategic Research (Sept. 20-23; 602 likely Alaska voters)
  Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) – 46%
  Al Gross (I/D) – 45%


ARIZONA: Appointed Sen. Martha McSally (R) vs. Mark Kelly (D)
• Trend: Kelly

POLLS:
• Latino Decisions (Sept. 28-Oct. 6; 600 likely Arizona voters)
  Mark Kelly (D) – 47%
  Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 42%

• Ipsos (Oct. 3-5; 550 likely Arizona voters)
  Mark Kelly (D) – 48%
  Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 44%

• Data Orbital (Oct. 3-5; 550 likely Arizona voters)
  Mark Kelly (D) – 49%
  Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 44%

• HighGround, Inc. (Sept. 28-Oct. 5; 400 likely Arizona voters)
  Mark Kelly (D) – 50%
  Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 44%


Continue reading

NC: First Post-Sexting Poll

By Jim Ellis

North Carolina Democratic Senate candidate Cal Cunningham’s recent involvement in a sexting scandal has seen polling numbers drop.

Oct. 7, 2020 — On Friday, it came to light, after the announcement that North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis had been diagnosed with COVID-19, that Democratic nominee Cal Cunningham who has been leading for most of the race is involved in a sexting affair with a married woman. The story was carried heavily in media reports on Friday.

Almost immediately, Public Policy Polling went into the field to assess the damage, and while they find Cunningham still holding the advantage it is half the size of the double-digit margin he enjoyed in the previous two surveys.

The North Carolina Senate race has been heavily studied. Just since Sept. 15, we have seen no less than 13 polls released of this Senate contest with Cunningham leading in all.

The new Public Policy Polling survey (Oct. 4-5; 911 North Carolina voters via interactive voice response system) sees Cunningham holding a 48-42 percent lead over Sen. Tillis. Though the margin is six points, the spread is down significantly from the 13- and 12-point advantages he recorded in the two most recent polls from Hart Research Associates (Sept. 24-27; 400 likely North Carolina voters via live interview) and ALG Research (Sept. 22-28; 822 voters, online), respectively.

The PPP data reveals that Cunningham is taking a hit over the budding scandal. When asked whether “the information about Cal Cunningham having a relationship with a woman who is not his wife make you more or less likely to vote for him, or does it not make a difference,” 37 percent answered they are less likely to support him versus three percent who said they were more inclined. A total of 58 percent said the breaking story would make no difference in how they decide to vote.

Continue reading