The new Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) poll is extremely good news for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and extremely bad news for his trailing challenger, Treasurer Phil Angelides. Despite showing Democrats clearly preferred over Republicans in congressional preference, and President George W. Bush highly unpopular, Schwarzenegger leads Angelides by 18 points, 48% to 30%.
Schwarzenegger’s lead has actually gone up by one point in the last month, even though he has been outspent on TV advertising during the period by pro-Angelides forces. In addition, the poll shows the big bipartisan infrastructure bonds are on the bubble. The PPIC poll results reflect what has been long reported on NWN. Nine percent support minor party candidates, about half those choosing Green Peter Camejo.
The former action superstar is seen here in this NWN video of the landmark global warming bill signing on Treasure Island in San Francisco Bay.
Schwarzenegger leads among all important independent voters by a nearly two to one ratio. Among the men’s respective parties, Schwarzenegger has 86% of the Republican vote, despite his center/left tilt this year.
Angelides is still struggling to break 60% of the Democratic vote, which explains why he is still spending most of his time campaigning in Democratic strongholds. But he’s not running well there. In the PPIC poll, Schwarzenegger actually leads in the San Francisco Bay Area and is in a statistical tie in the Los Angeles area. Everywhere else in California, he leads by huge margins.
Crossover voters are going for Schwarzenegger, virtually none for Angelides. The former Mr. Universe has 21% of the Democratic vote; Angelides has only 4% of the Republican vote, which is just outside the poll’s margin of error of 3%.
Overwhelming majorities of voters say they are concerned about California’s infrastructure. But the infrastructure bonds seriously lag this general sentiment. None has improved in the last month. The transportation and education facilities initiatives have only 51% support. The levee bond has 53% support, with affordable housing, benefiting in the abstract from a favorable ballot description, has 56%. Proposition 84, the water and parks bond initiative placed on the ballot by petition, has only 42% support.
While Republicans are split or opposed to the measures, Democratic support lags what it should be. For example, the lynchpin $20 billion transportation initiative has only 57% support among Democrats. Among independents, support for the four bond initiatives emerging from the Legislature ranges from just over 50% to 55%, proving that the so far lagging bipartisan campaigning for the measures is greatly needed.
One reason that Schwarzenegger is holding up so spectacularly well with Republican voters despite his move back to the center/left on some key issues is that Republican voters are actually not so conservative as is usually supposed. Strong majorities of Republicans favor the moves against global warming and for raising the minimum wage.
As for Angelides, he has been successfully defined — and has defined himself — as a hyperpartisan Democrat unacceptable to any grouping of Republicans and not all that many independents. And with less than two weeks left in the campaign, he is, ironically, struggling with Democratic voters. Even though his entire campaign has been pitched to Democratic voters.
While an overwhelming majority of of Schwarzenegger supporters are satisfied with the choices in the governor’s race, Angelides supporters are far less satisfied. Republicans are much happier with their seemingly apostate candidate than Democratic voters are with their avowedly true blue standardbearer. 66% of Republicans say they are happy with the choices in the governor’s race; only 44% of Democrats say the same.
Read 
| Comments (49) |
Your Democratic leaders in California sound like lunkheads.
No, they are geniuses, they insisted on Angelides as the candidate and they are now happy to be with him. lol
Schwarzeneger was outspent on TV and his lead went up. Who came up with the ideas for those stupid ads for Angelides?
Dem leadership should recognize that Angelides is a lost cause and get out and campaign for those bonds with Schwarz.
Today’s PPIC results confirm weeks of private numbers showing a blowout in progress. Dan Lungren’s self-absorbed, self-managed 1998 gubernatorial campaign earned only 38.38% of the vote, losing by 19.59%.
I think the Angelides campaign will beat that low standard, but will they get more votes than abandoned Bustamante or pathetic Parrish? We already know more people will vote for right wing nuts McClintock and Strickland.
It must be humiliating for life-long politicians Angelides and Maviglio to fail so miserably with such a strong Democrat tailwind blowing across the nation. While Phil can go back to developing more homogenous urban sprawl, Steve will no doubt go back to helping Nunez keep the Legislature’s approval rating below 30%.
I hope this entire campaign team does its best for Hillary.
I can only dream that Hillary will do as worse as Phil is doing. As much as I hate Hillary’s politics, she is much smarter politically than Phil could ever hope to be.
So far, the sycophantic, Koolaid drinking partisans at the California Majority Report can’t come up with even weak, pathetic spin on today’s PPIC results for Angelides.
Maybe Maviglio will entertain us later in the day…
I bet Bill is embarassed he promoted the California Plurality report.
I can tell you write now that the CMR will have someone write Arnold is still not at 50%…it’s their theme song…meanwhile, whoever is telling John Chaing to appear as a “victim”… STOP IT! It was the chatter at my latte water hole.!..WHO is going to elect a victim to anything! My cops were laughing about the Bee headlines “I am being targeted”and jokes about the Indians coming after Asians were rampant!..One said for “crying out loud he is in a political race!” “What a wimp” stuff like that!Hyper partisans do not get it how just bizarre some of their arguments hit voters that are not particularly partisan…
And stop having him run around with Phil…according to the Bee even Jerry Brown who has safely won his seat is running from Phil! I think Jerry Brown Garamendi and Chiang should have their own road show!
Why isn’t John Chiang J. Garamendi ahead …are there many undecided voters? It does not make sense to me…
Ah, yes, the “not at 50%” business.
You’ll notice that the 18-point margins in the PPIC poll today and the private Democratic poll reported yesterday are identical. The difference is each candidate is 5 points higher in the Dem poll than in the PPIC poll.
That’s because the Dem poll includes leaners, as most private polls do but public polls frequently do not.
The Angelides campaign knows that Schwarzenegger is over 50%.
Do any of these recent polls have results for the down ballot races?
The current PPIC does not have down ballot Cali statewide numbers.
I do have some other numbers.
For example, Jerry Brown has a nearly 2 to 1 edge over Chuck Poochigian.
There are other numbers but I will report them as I report on those races.
How interesting that your column says that voters are concerned about the state of their infrastructure but don’t want to spend any money to fix it. I guess people feel that freeways, schools, levees & parks are built for free and that we can defer maintenance on them until they fall out from under us. The real irony here is that the cost of these bonds is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of rebuilding after the big quake hits. But I guess voters are to stupid to factor that into the equation. The dream of the free lunch lives on!
Yep, this horse is dead.
Aside from the props the only exciting statewide races our there are for Lt. Gov and Controller.
McClintock may be the only candidate to ever run on a campaign pledging to regress by 50 years.
Strickland doesn’t seem to have a plan but win or lose he will probably find a way to make money off the campaign.
Well, I think Chiang and Garamendi are ahead…all those voters for Jerry Brown must be voting for DEMS…why wouldn’t they…anyway I can’t worry about this anymore, I have to worry about the Senate races and I have a horse show starting today thru Sun and I am adopting an Apricot Standard Poodle from the Poodle Rescue!…I am so nervous, I shall just stay busy! I am going to name my new poodle “Jacqueline Bouvier” call her Jacqueleen! …There are so many great photos of Jackie, and she was a legendary horsewoman! I love all the photos of her with her sunglasses on her head! My new dog led led to my girlfriends and I having a whole discussion about Jackie, Princess Diana, Madonna and Heather Mills…we can’t love Diana but she played the victim and look what happened…Heather Mills, of course we can’t abide her…but Jackie and Madonna, we adore ..they never play the victime always in control! we were on Madonna’s side about this adoption before her interview with the Oprah! She was incredible in that interview and I glad she was not apologetic…for what!? providing a loving home to child in need!!!. It is such an anti-Child time!…women everywhere have to fight this!…if the housing and education infrastructure bonds votes go down it is very much an anti-Child vote!
PA can shed some of his hyperpartisan image if he would join AS to promote the infrastructure bonds. It’d be a great news story, and most importantly, it would illustrate the bipartisan message that has yet to stick with voters.
That might help Phil Angelides. As for the bonds, well, probably not.
Barbara, you were right! The jokey California “Majority” Report has poor Maviglio writing Why Can’t Arnold Get Over 50?
TOO funny!
http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&aid=1117&ptid=9
Free lunch? Dream on. I pay taxes which pay on bonds whose money has yet to be spent.
The problem isn’t that we’re looking for a free lunch. It’s do we trust state policymakers to actually spend the money they way they’re supposed to?
You know sometimes I go back and re-read CADTS post to try to figure out what the DEMS are doing because at times it is seems so counter productive behavior.. BUT Cadts made a big deal about the need for Arnold not to win with a sizable margin that would make him feel like he has a mandate to do anything he wants…so maybe for insurance they decided to let the infrastucture bond package which is identified so much with him play out knowing that it probably would fail without a high profile bi-partisan campaign…therefore, when he wins, it’s a win where they can say “Big deal look who his opponent was” and “he still can’t deliver on anything” and point to the bonds going down…and his claim to fame in the enviro world is that he has co-opted and stolen ownership of AB32…and we don’t like what he has done with it…anyway, now Iamreally out of here.Toodles!
No I just knew it! I was going to originally say “Steven Maviglio will write…” but I was typing and thinking so fast I was sure Iwould miss-type his name and he does not like that one bit! I think he is cute with all this Phil stuff!!!…predictable.. but cute!
Of course, Iam not amused that he must be telling Antonio and the Speaker and now poor John Chiang to hang out with Phil! YUKK!
These poll numbers bear out the point in the PPIC study a couple months ago highlighting the growing gap between the California population as a whole and those who vote. If every eligable voter went to the polls, the bonds would win in a walk. But they don’t and even more ironic is the people who would benefit the most from the bond investments are the ones most likely not to go to the polls on Election Day.
I also find it that the one bond measure where there is a distinction between the PPIC poll and the Field Poll is Prop. 84. The Field Poll shows Prop. 84 with a 20 point lead but the PPIC poll shows the voters are spilt. Also why is there no polling on what is probably the most consequental initiative on the ballot, Prop. 90?
That Field Poll is fairly old now, which might account for some of the difference with PPIC on Prop 84. Also liberal candidates and causes have often done somewhat better in the Field Poll than elsewhere.
I don’t know know why there is so little polling on Prop 90.
The three most established California public polls are Field, PPIC, and LA Times.
Field reacts to the needs of a group of media subscribers that is small in absolute numbers — newspapers and TV stations. Their budgeting for polling expenses, as I understand it, has been cut back.\
PPIC is supported by foundations. They tend to long polling explorations of topic areas. The horse race numbers are not infrequently secondary to that.
LA Times Poll has been cut back by the out of state corporado bean counters in Chicago who are doing such a swell job of running the paper …
I’ve only skimmed a few of the highlights on your blog, Mr. Bradley, but there are a few ominous signs for me that have farther reaching ramifications than this gubernatorial election…one of them is the significant undervoting of one of the most important demographics in teh state: Latinos/Hispanics. Despite having a 17% lead (almost as large as GAS’ lead among whites), PA is still down by 18%. This shows me that gulf illuminated by the August PPIC statewide survey on CA voting trends between likely voters and voters is widening.
At some point, shouldn’t we begin to become more concerned about the lack of political participation than amusing ourselves by tearing down our local/state politicians?
Latino underparticipation, if you will, is a longstanding phenomenon. The Anglo and Latino populations are not at parity in California. I had a history of overpredicting Latino participation dating back to my UFW days.
Elections are decided by those who participate. Participation is also a factor of motivation. If the politicians seeking to turn out the Latino vote are not turning it out, that’s not really a function of NWN. It certainly has less to do with this web site than it has to do with the Angelides campaign.
Incidentally, Sully, in case you have not guessed, I am for the bonds.
However, I don’t believe that if every California adult were voting that they would win in a walk. That’s an old canard of the left, which I have heard for decades and got over fairly quickly.
When people actually make decisions, they then consider consequences. They take a stake in the outcome, and consider what it might mean for them.
In terms of costs, not just benefits, most of which will go to others.
“PA can shed some of his hyperpartisan image if he would join AS to promote the infrastructure bonds. It’d be a great news story, and most importantly, it would illustrate the bipartisan message that has yet to stick with voters.”…I have PA’s speech right here.
Hi I’m PA and I’m not going to be governor by a longshot, but I’m standing here with Apartheid supporting, women groping, Democrat idea stealing, NRA backed Guv AS to show my support for bonds that will vastly improve the way of life for you and your children. At least he would get his face in the news before Ahnold benchpresses him.
Maybe the theme of this election is the growing distance between the state population and the political elite of both parties. Both are dominated by powerful interests and tend to be at the far ends of the political spectrum. Bill notes “Republican voters are actually not so conservative as is usually supposed.” And we have a front row seat for Mr. Angelides’ inability to overcome the disconnect with his own alleged base as shown in the PPIC poll. Team Arnold 3.0 seems to have done a good job of reading the political landscape and adjusting accordingly. But where does that leave our politics long-term, when an obvious good idea like the bonds finds itself on the bubble? Damnit!
I read Chiangs’s Sac Bee article. He needs to man up, he’s in politics, everyone gets targeted. If he doesnt’ expect that kind of attention then he’s naive. Suck it up, put out why you’re the best candidate and stop complaining about the competition.
I have been saying this all year.
California government spends a megaton of money. Education spending is up sharply. People’s costs of living are up.
Most are for government, But they want to see results from all this money, not just pay more and more on an endless escalator with no accountability.
Most politicians in this state do not address this reality. They either want MORE (Dems) or they want LESS (Reps). Neither position is on point.
The voters sent a message in June with the Reiner initiative and the library bond. No one should act surprised now.
That’s what I said!
Have the fools “running” the Angelides campaign never heard of Clint Reilly?
Well, just wait till Prop. 90 passes. If you think California has problems now, as the saying goes “you ain’t seen nothin yet.”
It’s also interesting the Prop. 90 is the one ballot measure that Arnold has not taken a position on. Given that its probably the most consequential initiave on the ballot his silence is not exactly a stellar example of leadership.
Bonded indebtedness has been growing rapidly in California, both at the state and local levels, but no matter how many bonds the voters approve it never seems to be enough. (LAUSD school bonds are a perfect example.) It’s no wonder that voters get a bit concerned, especially when faced with the biggest set of bond measures ever on the November ballot.
If these infrastructure projects are truly necessary (and there’s no doubt that California has short-changed maintenance expenditures and allowed our infrastructure to deteriorate) then why doesn’t the Legislature prioritize requirements and start working through that list using the annual amount which would otherwise go to servicing the principal and interest on the bonds?
The answer, of course, is that a large portion of the bond money isn’t really for long-term capital improvements, it’s for short-term non-infrastructure spending. It’s just another way for politicians to spend lots of money now (while they’re still in office) without facing the future fiscal consequences.
For those politicians who think Californians are under-taxed, this is a feature rather than a bug. Not only do they get to spend money now, they then get to point to the resulting budget crunch as proof of the need to raise taxes.
I can only hope that voters have gotten so fed up with this on-going racket that they’ll reject all the bonds and tax hikes on the November ballot. I’m moderately encouraged by the polling data I’ve seen so far.
Bill, I can’t dispute what you say. We have a alliance of officials and leaders of various organizations who in tandem have hewed for decades to the themes of bashing government and pushing tax cuts even when it is counter-productive. And the leadership to argue what government does and could do if we plan well is absent. Why did we allow the levees to be at such a point of dis-repair, much less our freeway system etc.? Even Schwarzenegger blanches at taking on Prop 13 and the other robo-measures that dominate the ad-hoc fiscal framework created by various interests via the initiative process, etc. When I say damnit, I am not surprised but frustrated how far wrong we have been led and the difficulty of correcting the situation.
Having once worked w/ Sir Clint, what’s your thoughts Ann?
And, let me tell you, it was an experience I’ll never forget…
Yes, Sully, it will most assuredly be ALL ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER’S FAULT.
Let me ask you something.
If Prop 90 is the most humongous threat, where is the campaign against it?
You know what I have gotten this year from the arguably liberal side of the spectrum? An enormous deluge of spin for Angelides. Which has been useless.
Where is the Democratic leadership on 90? Where is labor on 90?
I hear nothing from them. Instead it’s been all about how Angelides is really doing well.
Its my understanding that both Angelides and labor both came out against Prop.90 some time ago. In fact I have received numerous mailings from the Democrats and labor urging a No vote on 90. But at least they have taken a position on Prop. 90, which Arnold hasn’t. In regard to the No on 90 campaign I’m not involved with them but I have read on other political websites that the tobacco and oil companies have been spending tens of milions of dollars on TV ads since Labor Day against Props. 86 & 87 substantially pushing up the cost for TV ads for everybody else. That may explain the lack of TV ads on Prop. 90 and others. I do know that over 40 newspapers from Eureka to San Diego have come out against Prop. 90 but I have a feeling that most people will voting for it thinking its just about saving grandma’s house from eminant domain. But the people in Oregon will tell you a very different story.
You haven’t gotten my point, Sully. If Prop 90 is the biggest threat, where is the crusade? Why is the push all for Angelides, instead?
Incidentally, you are implying that I haven’t been reporting about the TV stations jacking up advertising rates and that you read it on “other web sites.
I wrote that first.
Among other things, I pointed out that that was a major reason why the spin that Angelides and ABC and the Democratic Party with those silly Bush=Schwarz ads FINALLY getting back on the air (pro-Angelides forces were on the air most of the summer) would not make much impact in the race.
Clint Reily’s “management” of the Kathleen Brown for governor campaign wrecked his credibilty. Nobody believed him. He had to get out of politics till he ran a pathetic campaign for mayor of SF. The same thing can happen to the Angelides crew.
I never meant to imply that you weren’t reporting on the TV ad rates going up. I did read it on other websites and wasn’t aware that you wrote it first. If your did, fine, I wasn’t aware of that.
I sense the Democratic denial turning to angst and rising to a flood tide.
Herr Hemlock, I shudder to envision the gnashing of teeth and reruns of the stolen election theme should the democrats fall short of the goal in taking back the House of Reps.
Wasn’t Clint Reilly the consultant that “fired” Diane Feinstein?
Just heard that this weekend Tom McClintock wants to turn back the clock 50 years. Go Tom!
Hi, Danny Curtin. Clint Reilly was indeed the consultant who “fired” Dianne Feinstein when she ran for governor the first time.
He said that she lacked “fire in the belly.”
She had just had a hysterectomy.
Bill,
I was looking at the dcpoliticalreport.com site and found an LA Times poll taken late in September that had McClintock leading Garamendi 42-41. What’s your sense of that race?
Pretty much what I’ve been reporting right along. A tight race, Democrats are scrambling late to support Garamendi after losing a 10-point lead, we’ll see what the resource situation ends up being.
Hey, Wonderful job! This is my first time i visit here. I discovered so numerous fascinating stuff in your blog.