Posted on 10/17/2005 4:27:22 PM PDT by dangus
I keep reading that stories that support for the ballot propositions backed by California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is very weak. Even the Washington Times claims two are failing ("in the polls"), as if that finding represented a concensus of polls (Oct. 17, "For Arnold stakes are high"). I had thought I had seen them doing well, so I looked it up on the internet. The most recent poll I could find was done by Survey USA, released October 2nd. Its results:
Proposition 73: Physicials must notify a parent of a pregnant minor 48 hours before performing the abortion. Yes, 59%. No, 39%
Proposition 74: Delays probationary period for new teachers from 2 years to five years, making it easier to terminate teachers with unsatisfactory performance evaluations. Yes, 55%. No, 44%
Proposition 75: Prohibits unions from spending money on political campaigns without the consent of their members. Yes, 60%. No, 37%
Proposition 76: Constrains spending growth to revenue growth. Yes, 58%. No, 36%
Proposition 77: Removes authority for designing congressional boundaries from state legislators. Instead, voters must approve plans drawn up by a panel of retired judges. Yes, 59%; No, 36%
Now, these results may be rather skewed to Republicans; I don't know. I do know that the poll's demographic sampling has a very balanced number of Republicans and Democrats (39% to 38%), and that the state votes considerably more heavily Democratic than that. On the other hand, many of the registered Republicans are "Clinton Republicans" who never came back to the Republican party, so maybe many Californians consider themsleves Republican even though they vote Democratic in national (presidential and congressional) elections.
But even if the sampling is horrendous, the results are strong enough to stand up; The propositions the Washington Times claims are losing are winning by 22 or 23%.
It's not uncommon for populist initiatives to fade a little down the stretch. Many polls show initial high approval ratings, which are bent downward by relentless, well-funded attacks by leftist groups such as unions, ethnic lobbies and other special interest groups. But the campaign is mature, and these initiatives are still leading... and it's just plain wrong to suggest that polls show otherwise.
Survey USA does report its results as registering a boost in support. The previous poll, which the Washington Times probably referred to, was by the Public Policy INstitute of California, for the Los Angeles Times. The LA Times predicted a Bustamente would easily win, just days before Bustamente was trounced by Schwarzenegger in the election. The LA Times poll showed Prop 75 winning with 58% of the vote, but 76 losing 28-61 and 77 losing 34-49. Perhaos tipping their bias, the LA Times did not report results of Prop 75 in their vote summation.
I don't think much of the questions they asked, but they're probably representative of the general public consciousness on the topic, which is why democracy is so scary.
Still not as bas as when a vanity is posted to a state topic and the author acknowledges it (#17).
the perfect example of an oxymoron
Try keyword: SurveyUSA
Arnold Resurgent? (Survey USA, Five propositions are all leading comfortably with likely voters)
California Special Election: Arnold Winning on All Initatives
New! Poll Shows Overwhelming Support for Reform (California Propositions 73-77)
The 2005 elections (Barone on NYC, New Jersey, Virginia, and CA Referendums) [Same poll--and same Barone article]
Michael Barone on 2005 Elections...... [same Survey USA poll]
They all look like pretty reasonable policies to me.
How can that be? We were told many years ago that CA was done, finished, and bankrupt.
Wheew! I guess we still have a chance.
Each time these sort of things come to the ballot they do better than the time before, so eventually the union bosses won't be able to fool enough joe sixpacks. The Red Davis recall of 2000 flopped, but we finally drove a stake through his heart, it was just a matter of time. I think time is up for the opponents of 73, 75, 76, & 77.
It's not called the land of fruits and nuts for nothing.
It seems to be some sort of mass delusion. This belief that the well will never dry up.
Good! I'm voting for all of them.
OK, thanks. No harm in repeating a little good news, though, is there? And hopefully I've added a little worthwhile commentary. :^)
See post #19, or better yet, read the second half of that thread.
The SurveyUSA poll is more than suspect--it has no credibility. Those commissioning it didn't even publish it. It had misleading questions, questionable poll techniques, questionable participation percentages, etc.
I agree with those that say the only poll that counts is the one when we put our votes in the ballot box. The rest is pure propaganda, imo.
Looks like I CAN add new information with this post:
The Questions by the PPIC were ridiculously leading, and in fact, they seem to be a test of how best opponents can frame the issue. For instance, they asked whether voters felt the current system of drawing boundaries needed to be replaced. A majority voted "yes." But they didn't report those results.
The first question focused on how much the new system would cost, citing figures in the million dollar range for the state, and county. It was ambiguous whether the dollar figures were per county of for the whole state; it read as if it were per county, but reason tells me it must have been for the whole state. When worded this way, a majorityt rejected the proposal. These were the only results reported by the press. (They probably justified because this question refered to the proposition by number.)
Likewise, when asked whether they liked the general principle behind Proposition 86, a comfortable plurality said "yes." But they didn't report those results. What they reported was what they described thusly:
"It limits state spending to the prior year’s level plus three years’ average revenue growth. It changes state minimum school funding requirements under Proposition 98. It permits the governor, under specified circumstances, to reduce budget appropriations of the governor’s choosing.
State spending is likely to be reduced relative to current law, due to the additional spending limit and new powers granted to the governor. Reductions could apply to schools and shift costs to other local governments. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 76?"
Additional spending limits? (Does that mean more spending, or more limits?) New powers? Shifting costs? Reductions to local schools? Ee-gads! No wonder their question flunked.
UGH! So many errors, let me just re-post:
Looks like I CAN add new information with this post:
The Questions by the PPIC were ridiculously leading, and in fact, they seem to be a test of how opponents can best frame the issue. For instance, they asked whether voters felt the current system of drawing boundaries needed to be replaced. A majority voted "yes." But they didn't report those results.
They only reported the previous question, which focused on how much the new system would cost, citing figures in the million dollar range for the state, and counties. It was ambiguous whether the dollar figures for the counties were per county or for the whole state; it read as if it were per county, but reason tells me it must have been for the whole state, since it was comparable to the statewide costs. When worded this way, a majority rejected the proposal. These were the only results reported by the press. (They probably justified in doing this because this was the question which refered to the proposition by number.)
Likewise, when asked whether they liked the general principle behind Proposition 86, a comfortable plurality said "yes." But they didn't report those results. What they reported was what they described thusly:
"It limits state spending to the prior year’s level plus three years’ average revenue growth. It changes state minimum school funding requirements under Proposition 98. It permits the governor, under specified circumstances, to reduce budget appropriations of the governor’s choosing.
State spending is likely to be reduced relative to current law, due to the additional spending limit and new powers granted to the governor. Reductions could apply to schools and shift costs to other local governments. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 76?"
Additional spending limits? (Does that mean more spending, or more limits?) New powers? Shifting costs? Reductions to local schools? Ee-gads! No wonder their question flunked.
Have at it!
The PPIC questions are directly from the voter pamphlet.
SurveyUSA didn't even bother to mention "education" when asking about Prop 76. It's in the TITLE for goodness sake.
Which is misleading?
I mentioned in my analysis that the participation looked suspect. However, I think the questions were much fairer than the LA Times. As for the TV stations not reporting SurveyUSA, the LA Times also only reported the questions that said what they wanted to hear (as I explained in my previous post). The simplest explanation is that the TV stations didn't like the results: They knew the metholodly going in.
The PPIC questions are NOT from the voter pamphlet. They use chosen exerpts from the voter pamphlet, designed to cause confusion. The voter pamphlets can be found here:
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm#2005Special
Whether they're winning or losing, *I* will be voting for them.
I'm hoping this is the first step toward the eventual abolition of the state legislature. California can have a board of directors (Governor, Attorney General, etc) and stock holders (the voters) and all legislation can be created and accepted (or rejected) by the voters through the initiative process.
Actually, the link you gave is to the petition language.
The voter guides, which include the Ballot Title and Summaries, are here:
http://www.voterguide.ss.ca.gov/
The PPIC Poll and questions can be viewed here:
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/S_905MBS.pdf
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.