Wednesday, December 19, 2007

RGA Poll Results More Favorable For Daniels

A recent Indianapolis Star poll suggested Gov. Mitch Daniels' re-election chances weren't too good as we enter next year's election season. That poll showed him with a high unfavorability rating and losing to Democratic challengers. A new poll conducted on behalf of the Republican Governors Association, however, paints a starkly different outlook for Daniels. A Bellweather Research & Consulting poll conducted Dec. 10-15 shows Daniels with a positive job approval rating of 51% and a double-digit lead over his two, potential Democratic candidates, Jill Long Thompson and Jim Schellinger.

According to the poll, voters approve of Daniels' performance as governor by a 51-41% margin. In a match-up against Jill Long Thompson, Daniels beats her 46-33%. He beats Jim Schellinger by a slightly larger margin of 46-31%. A press release from the RGA claims Bellweather has accurately polled Indiana gubernatorial campaigns for several election cycles. The press release suggests the Indianapolis Star poll over-sampled Democrats by 2%. The RGA poll over-samples Republicans 36-24%, which the pollster claims is in line with other public polls and trends since 2000.


Sir Hailstone said...

Complaints about "stratification" begin in 5....4....3....2....

Anonymous said...

The drive by media's polls are so biased towards the DemocRATs to make them as worthless as a promise from Bart Peterson.

Anonymous said...

this seems to make more sense to me. yes, i live in marion county and don't have a feel for what is going on, say, along the toll road, but there just doesn't seems to be the anti-daniels/pro anyone else mood about the governor that there was about the mayor. sorry, can't see people lining up to vote for jlt.

51% favorable. sounds about right.

Anonymous said...


I've seen you post that before, and you use the word in quotation marks. Do you realize that stratification is an actual thing? I realize that associate degree programs don't typically go into concepts like sampling and probability, but proper stratification is absolutely a requirement for accurate sampling.

Anonymous said...

9:16 just hit the ball out of the park.

Any poll is a snapshot in time--one exact moment, to be exact. And proper sample groups, or stratification, is key. The trouble is, on random-digit-dialing polls, you're likely to get 30-40% of people who still think they "register Republican" or "register Democrat" or "register Independent" in this state. Which, of course, you do not. And anything those knuckleheads say after they ID themselves is tainted.

Because, uh, they're not very smart.

But anyone who thinks this governor has broken 50% popularity or approval, is smoking rope.

Multiple media polls, for instance, have placed him at rock-bottom numbers for two years, along the Ohio River, in solid conservative country. While those results may be low, they're likely more accurate than this drive-by.

I wonder if the erstwhile RGA, whose numbers are dwindling, sampled the popularity of good 'ole W?

Mitch Daniels's 2008 last name will likely become "...Pres. Bush's initial budget director who predicted a $200 billion Iraqi war cost." Long last name, but accurate.

Democrats can and could screw this up. It's a long time to November 2008. But there's no way Mich busted 45, let alone 50, statewide. Absolutely no freaking way.

Anonymous said...

He busted 1.2 million votes in 2004. In 2009, Democrats will still be saying "I can't believe Daniels won re-election in 2008. No one I know voted for him."

Anonymous said...

it is amazing that the same people who were crowing about the accuracy of polls when it showed Ballard close....are not complaining about the media biased polls. Let's face it this gov is toast...Even the Cook Political Report has changed it from leans republican to toss up.

Anonymous said...

Remember when the coward Peterson would not release their internal polling?

Daniels has got kahunas.

Sir Hailstone said...

"I realize that associate degree programs don't typically go into concepts like sampling and probability"

Big words for an Anonymous Coward who for all we know is a high school dropout.

I took sadistics. I don't remember half of it outside of averages and medians (which there is a difference :P ) because I don't use such things on a daily basis.

I use that phrase because anytime there is a poll that favors our side, the Moonbats all cry in some unison "improper stratification" or some similar talking point handed down from upon high.