[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers

View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
Web Calitics

New CA-36 Poll Shows Race Tied Between Bowen and Hahn, Winograd at 6%

by: Marta Evry

Tue Apr 19, 2011 at 08:25:13 AM PDT

An internal poll released by the Bowen campaign shows the candidate tied with Councilwoman Janice Hahn in the CA-36 primary. Marcy Winograd - who received 41% of the vote against Jane Harman in the 2010 primary race - is only polling at 6%, putting her in 4th place behind Republican Mike Gin.
Marta Evry :: New CA-36 Poll Shows Race Tied Between Bowen and Hahn, Winograd at 6%
The Feldman Group conducted the poll among 451 registered likely voters in California Congressional District 36 from April 4-7, 2011. The sample consisted of 401 registered likely voters and an oversample of 50 DTS voters. The margin of error for a sample of 401 is ± 4.9%.

In an initial match-up between all of the declared candidates, Bowen and Hahn are tied at 20 percent each, with the closest candidate, Mike Gin, at 8 percent.  Marcy Winograd, another  Democrat in the race, receives only 6 percent support. Twenty-four percent of the electorate remains undecided.  Bowen dominates in the Beach Cities and Venice with a double digit lead  over both Hahn and Winograd, and leads in all geographic regions except the Harbor area..  

In a run-off matchup between Bowen and Hahn, Bowen (40 percent) pulls ahead of Hahn (36 percent) without any messaging.  Sixteen (16) percent are currently undecided.  While Hahn may have an advantage of name recognition in the district it is not translating into an advantage in votes, perhaps because her unfavorable rating is double that of Bowen.  

Democrats continue to hold an advantage in this district. Voters in the district are more  likely to prefer a Democrat (41 percent), and 29 percent say they would prefer a Republican with another 27 percent say that the candidates party doesn't really matter. Bowen shows her strength over Hahn among Decline-to-State voters, receiving 47 percent of the vote.  

Bowen's lead over Hahn grows even after voters are informed about key endorsers for  each candidate (including Feinstein, Lieu, Nakano, Firefighters and others for Hahn) and positive arguments being used by the respective campaigns.  

With a July 12th runoff virtually assured, a couple of points jump out at me. At 24% in the primary and %16 in the general election, the number of undecideds in this race will be a huge factor. Hahn has high name recognition, but she also has relatively high negatives - twice that of Bowen - and Hahn's endorsements don't seem to have had much effect on her polling.

Hahn's campaign manager pushed back with an impressive bit of verbal gymnastics,

"We're stunned that Bowen would release a poll that shows 80% of the voters she represented for 14 years rejecting her." said campaign manager, Dave Jacobson.

Forgetting the fact Jacobson apparently can't do math (24% of voters are undecided about anyone yet),  did he really mean to highlight Bowen has already represented most of CA-36 for 14 years, and that an equal number of Hahn's current constituents have rejected the LA City Councilwoman?

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

result of poll Apr 4-7 2011 (4.00 / 1)
As a supporter of Marcy Winograd, I have contacted her former supporters to determine whether they still plan to vote for her. 9 out of the ll former supporters in my own precinct in the south end of Torrance still support her; that's about 80%.  One is now choosing Hahn and the other possibly Bowen, though her spouse is staying with Winograd.  If 41% of Democrats chose Winograd vote last time and 80% of them stayed with her, then one might expect at least 30% for Winograd this time, so I question how people sampled in Evry's poll were chosen.

stategicly focus (0.00 / 0)
The Feldman Group, who did the poll, proudly advertise, "We have years of experience of helping clients' success by providing strategic focus research."  They say they are experts in helping people get "elected".  Don't you just love those "non-partisan" polls.

Just like the oil people who took short cuts.  This poll seems to have taken one too: they did not make a truly random selection of their sample of 400 prospective voters.      

Do you have any evidence that this isn't a scientific poll? (5.00 / 1)
Look, it's clearly an internal poll, so it should be taken with a grain of salt.  That being said, to accuse this polling firm of hand picking people is a pretty big accusation, the kind of thing that blocks people from ever getting work again.  

All polling firms are in business to help make their clients successful.  While a shoddy poll showing good numbers might make your client feel good for a time, it doesn't actually really help make them successful.  They work with some pretty big names, so if they are just blowing smoke, I have to imagine the house of cards would crumble at some point.

In the end, this is most likely what it purports to be: an internal poll (with the associated concerns.)  

I think?

[ Parent ]
The reaction to this poll is predictable (0.00 / 0)
and demonstrates a lack of knowledge about how and why internal polls are commissioned. Good pollsters don't want to make their candidate's look good, they want to give them accurate information so they know how best to allocate their resources.

It's up to the candidate, not the pollster, on whether to release the report. For instance, Hahn's people released their own internal poll, claiming Hahn was 5 points ahead. I have no doubt the poll was accurate at the time. However, they didn't release any other information, including who they polled against, so it was hard to get a handle on the shape of the race.

Bowen's campaign released info about the top 4 candidates and the percentage of undecides - that's a lot of information to work with. Based on how muted the reaction has been from Hahn's camp, I suspect their internal polls reflect much the same information.

Look, any way you slice it, both Gin and Winograd have a lot of work to do in the next 4 weeks. There are many undecided to sway. Supporters have a decision to make - is it better to make phone calls and canvass or spend all your time tweeting and commenting on blogs?

[ Parent ]
Walk in my shoes (0.00 / 0)
Funny I do not recall you coming over and seeing what I do or do not do.  

Pollsters that work for a candidate and don't know how to make their candidate look good do not stay long on the candidate's employment.

This is the dawn of a new era when people can tweet and blog and have their voices heard.  People like Mubarak of Egypt wanted the tweeters silenced, but the days of citizens' having only candidates' pollsters and PR people telling them what to think are over.

People think for themselves and share their thoughts. Here is one though:  People that call themselves progressives and vote blue-dog are being exposed for what they are "sheep in wolves clothing": Death plenty, three strikes, and of course corporate money.

[ Parent ]
Be nice to him (8.00 / 1)
We Bowenistas (Bowenites?  Bowenians?) are going to want the votes of Winograd supporters in the runoff.  At this point, so long as Bowen is in the top 2 (with Hahn under 50%, which is a given), I like her chances in a runoff.  Right now one of the most important things to do is not to alienate people of good faith who disagree.

[ Parent ]
Yes. We should leave the BLOGGING to you? (0.00 / 0)
Will this self-proclaimed "community organizer" tell us how many people are "members" of her so-called group, "Venice for Change?"

The author is a text book model of the pot calling the kettle black as she alienates more Democrats than flies and ants at a Fourth of July picnic!

Her disdain for Winograd is hurting the Bowen effort big time. He insults, condescending opinions and naive world view to say nothing of her next to nothing knowledge of politics and campaigns makes these rants all the more laughable.

Debra, when you lose you can point to one of your own as the reason for your defeat.  

[ Parent ]
Evidence (0.00 / 0)
Use your own words "It should be taken with a grain of salt" "All polling firms are in business to help make their clients successful".

You see that is the proble: people can say it new and improved but we all know that is it the same old product.

[ Parent ]
Why Bowen will lose (0.00 / 0)
If there is a signal indiviudal mobilizing support for Marcy Winograd is the author of this propaganda.

This Bowen fanatic knows next to nothing about reading polling data or the incomplete results being posted to create a false positive which has been the author's intent for weeks!

Why is it that 52% of those apparently polled have no stated preference? Where are the numbers for Hughey or Webb?

This self-manufactured, political nonsense has no place in a serious discussion or a legitimate poll. The data makes no sense and the margin of error is nearly 5%, Which casts overall doubt on the whole poll itself.

But the Bowen Blogger goes on with potificated talking points she's being fed by the Bowen camp to taint Winograd as a loser when this so-called front runner can't garner more than 20% of the stated support of likely voters?

Get real people.

Bowen's obsession with this dismissal of Winopgrad has destroyed any chance of Marcy's supporters ever endorsing Bowen under any circumstances due to the volume of anti-Winograd rhetoric generate by this author.

Please, continue to attack Winograd on a daily basis. It will backfire as you avoid your Enron connection and personal financial support of organized labor's biggest enemy, WAL-MART!

please quote the "attack" on winograd (5.00 / 1)
one can contest the poll's findings (indeed, nate silver has made a business of doing that), but taking a poll result as an attack is absurdly thin-skinned. and again, i find it bizarre that you jump on every diary marta does and denounce bowen, while never saying boo about the more conservative candidate hahn, much less positively making a case for your purported candidate winograd (who is a genuinely nice person and someone i enthusiastically supported against harman).

weird way to win a primary, if you ask me.  

[ Parent ]
It's a pattern I've seen with some online Winograd supporters... (0.00 / 0)
here and on my own blog. They invariably go after Bowen, but not Hahn. The rationale, I believe, is they see Bowen as Winograd's direct competition. I believe they're correct.

Bowen and Winograd draw from some of the same voting pool, both in terms of demographics and geographical location within the district. Anecdotally, during my canvassing walks in Venice, I found a fair amount of people who had voted for Winograd in the past (against Jane Harman) but now say they'll vote for Bowen.  On the other had, I've yet to meet anyone who once voted for Winograd who now plans to vote for Hahn.

[ Parent ]
Pattern? (0.00 / 0)
Are you now a self proclaimed political handicapper?

How many races have you actaully managed or made a difference?

BLOGGING doesn't count.

Making phone calls doesn't count.

It's amazing to me the Bowen people haven't put a leash on her nonsense.

[ Parent ]
"BLOGGING doesn't count" (8.00 / 1)
says the guy trolling comments on a blog.

[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads

Support Calitics:

Buy on Amazon through us.


Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary

Powered by: SoapBlox