Among Democrats who voted in two or more previous primaries -- the most likely voters -- Leslie Byrne is leading Gerry Connolly 44%-37%. Among Democrats who voted in ANY past primary, it's Connolly 37%-Byrne 35%, a statistical dead heat.
Among Democrats who voted in two or more previous primaries -- the most likely voters -- Leslie Byrne is leading Gerry Connolly 44%-37%. Among Democrats who voted in ANY past primary, it's Connolly 37%-Byrne 35%, a statistical dead heat.
Among the "two or more" previous primary voters, Leslie has a net favorable of +53 points, while Gerry has a +41. Among Democrats who voted in ANY past primary, it's Connolly +47% and Byrne +45.
More discussion by the pollster on the "flip."
UPDATE: Just to clarify, since the trolls seem to be out in force, this poll covered all four candidates in the 11th CD race, but only Gerry's and Leslie's numbers were included in the polling memo.
Three weeks out from election-day, the race for the Democratic nomination in Virginia's 11th congressional district is a statistical dead heat. Leslie Byrne garners the support of 34% of likely voters to Gerry Connolly's 37%. The race has tightened considerably since Byrne has begun to communicate with voters. Byrne has an advantage with the voters most likely to turnout this year, with no other major contest on the ballot. She bests Connolly by seven percentage points (Byrne 44%, Connolly 37%) among voters who have voted in multiple past primary elections. Byrne also leads among women. However, more than one-in-four likely primary voters remains undecided. As a result, the race is likely to hinge on effective communication in the final weeks.At this point in the race, almost all likely primary voters are familiar with both major Congressional candidates: 96% recognize Byrne's name, and an equal percentage know Connolly. Perhaps more surprising is that most likely primary voters have favorable impressions of both candidates. Connolly's favorable and unfavorable ratings are both slightly higher than Byrne's (Byrne: 50% favorable/10% unfavorable, Connolly: 54% favorable/13% unfavorable). Byrne is viewed most favorably by repeat past primary voters. Connolly fares better with young men than among any other major demographic subgroup. There is a marked gender gap: women favor Byrne, and men favor Connolly, by similar margins.
The gender component is also evident in vote support. Byrne leads by 5% among women, while Connolly leads by 12% among men. Among those under 40 and those over 60, Byrne and Connolly are tied (under 40: 35%-35%, over 60: 32%-33%). Soft and undecided voters are more likely to be women and older, two groups that favor Byrne, suggesting she still has room to grow among those who deciding in the final days of the campaign.
Conclusion. Leslie Byrne is well positioned going into the last weeks of the primary campaign. The race is a statistical dead heat 34%-37%, with Byrne poised to gain support as the groups with which she's strongest formulate their opinions on the race. With nearly three-of-ten (28%) likely voters undecided and almost half (46%) not firmly committed to the candidate they currently support, the race is likely to hinge strongly on effective communication with voters.
Hopeful voters, and as Barack Obama has demonstrated, there's a lot to be hopeful about, will turn out and will favor Byrne, because Byrne can more convincingly make the case that she's the candidate for change, especially on the number one issue, the war.
Women voters, especially those who are looking to express their frustration at Hillary Clinton falling short in her race, will turn out and will favor Byrne for obvious reasons.
There may be some, primarily men, who favor Connolly for sexist reasons, but perhaps Byrne will get a little lucky and:
1) sexist attitudes will correlate with stupidity and laziness and these voters won't turn out; or,
2) older men in this category will turn out, but they'll tend to be married, and their wives will cancel out their votes.
If Webb v. Miller could only bring out 20,000 voters in the 11th District in the 2006 primary, I don't think we can expect much more this year.
I still believe that the oft-stated reasons for voting against Byrne - "I have a problem with her personality," or "She lost the seat in 1994," or, "she lost the Lt. Gov. race" (this is the lamest of all reasons, primarily because she did really well in the 11th District) - mostly are politically correct cover stories for sexism, and that won't be motivation enough for these voters to turn out in numbers great enough to counter both the angry and hopeful voters.
"I still believe that the oft-stated reasons for voting against Byrne - "I have a problem with her personality," or "She lost the seat in 1994," or, "she lost the Lt. Gov. race" (this is the lamest of all reasons, primarily because she did really well in the 11th District) - mostly are politically correct cover stories for sexism"
It's the "Bitch" meme cloaked in more palatable language, and it's gross.
I really think there's something to the notion that Dems who got stuck in the ice storm in February and couldn't vote for Clinton, and even those who favored Obama and then and still do, but see a chance to express gratitude and admiration for Clinton's hard fought race and her new found populist message will see a real opportunity to show up on June 10 and vote for Byrne.
I also think that the more savvy voters, who are the type who will make an effort to show up for a primary like the one on June 10, are pretty sure that the winner of the Dem primary will be our next Congressperson. It may not be fair, but psychologically, Connolly will be viewed as the ugly male Republican, like Bush and McCain, and certainly not either as the attractive male Democrat, like Obama, or like the attractive female Democrat, like Clinton.
On top of the motivated voters who show up to vote for Byrne, there may be motivated voters who show up still undecided, and when they do a gut check, they'll probably go with Byrne.
What annoys me about this argument ( and by extension, the Hillary/Sexism and the Obama/racist argument) is that you can't have a valid critism about someone without it become about Gender or Race.
Bryne... she has lost several races in her political carreer. To bring that up is not sexist, nor is is lazy. She has had an issue with maintaining an office after she has been elected to it. She was re-elected twice in the 1980's and in 1991 for her Delegate seat, but since then she has had trouble maintaining her job either through re-election defeats, or by re-districting. To put it in another light... In her 22 years of public service, she has a 7-3 win/loss record... and since 1992, she is 3-3.
Also, she may have won the 11th-CD in 2005 while running for Lt. Govenor, but Davis was re-elected in 2006 by the same group of people, so by simply saying she is a shoo-in based on three year old numbers is dangerous.
Whether Bryne wins or lose this race will not be based on her gender, but how she runs her campaign. That is why Hillary lost her race, not because of her gender, but because she ran a poor campaign.
And for me... the fact that she couldn't win in 2005 is important. Because the tactics that lead to her defeat in 2005 could come back again.
Bill Clinton lost races in the past as well... so I am not someone who thinks you need a perfect record in order to win. However, in the last 16 years, she is 3-3, and it is worrying. There is a way to defeat her, and it has been done three times.
I also have no clue who Creigh Deeds is... I would have to research him first.
As has been previously noted, Connolly's perfect record is tarnished by the fact that he's been cherry picking his battles.
Leslie has lost by large and small margins in the past. She has also ran very clean, and dirty campaigns as well. But I agree, it is something you look at.
Do you think another go-along-to-get-along Democrat in the House is going to help with that problem? The Senate is/was chockful of people that always put political expediency first, with absolutely no accountability for how their votes and actions have led to disaster -- including many Democrats.
Leslie lost her seat in '94 in no small part because she voted for the Clinton tax increases to balance the budget AND she voted against NAFTA. Those were the right votes, and yet she got tossed out of office in the Republican wave of '94. So was she right? I'd say unequivocally, yes. And if the Congress had more people like her, people willing to stand up for what they believed, consequences be damned -- well, we'd be in a far different place in this country, wouldn't we?
We know where Leslie stands, and know how she'll operate. Can we say the same thing about Gerry?
I also believe that a person needs to be able to compromise, because there are times that even if you cannot get what you want, there is something grander and more important in supporting than exactly what you want. Bipartisanship is NOT a dirty word, and your words can easily be skewerd into "If he bends he's no good." I think that, as a Government, if we compromised more, we'd be better off.
My perception of Byrne is that she is much happier in not compromising at any level and refusing to work in a bi-partisan fashion. That may be great for a lot of people who agree with her on 90% of all issues, but I am just hesitant. I am sure I am wrong and people will show me the various ways she has worked with Republicans (outside of voting against NAFTA), but my perception is that her campaign has been anti-biparitsanship.
And I am not saying that Gerry is a Messiah either, I don't care much for him either and hasn't really shown me anything novel or worthwhile to go and vote for him in a primary.
...
This argument is great... but it does pivot away from the original point, that Gerry chose his battles in terms of elections and he won them pretty easily, and that is not entirely a bad thing.
My only issue really is with your statement that: "That is why Hillary lost her race, not because of her gender, but because she ran a poor campaign." I don't dispute her campaign was not run well earlier on in this process, but I don't think you can eliminate sexism as a factor in her performance.
Otherwise, I agree that critiques in and of themselves are not inherently racist or sexist.
I was simply responding to the comment that any critism against Byrne is sexist and lazy.
I have voted for women before, and I will vote for women again, and I really hope to see a female president in my lifetime (for what's it worth). I just don't know if I will vote for this woman.
My overall point is... she has lost three times, and that her opponents (both Republican and Democrat) know this, and will use the same (or similar) tactics that lead to her defeat in 1994, in 1996, and in 2005 to try and beat here again.
Gerry has NEVER won this district. Leslie isn't a shoo-in, but neither is Gerry. There's more evidence that Leslie can win than there is that Gerry can win.
And the most important point is that it's Gerry (who has no proof he can win in this district)who keeps running around saying Leslie has an electibility problem.
It's BS.
She may have the advantage, but the "evidence" is muddy at best.
Oh God, I don't even LIKE Gerry... ugh.
Let's hit the ground. 20 days left.
Me, personally -- I'm unavailable through next weekend, but hereby promise to average at least 2 hours a day for Leslie on the phone or on the trail once the calendar turns to June.
[ot: Populista, whereabouts are you from?]
This race was always going to tighten, everybody knows that.
But if the Connolly campaign wants to force the issue, I think the Byrne camapaign would be perfectly willing to concede the point. Sure, Connolly has "surged ten points!"
The bottom line is that with three weeks to go this race is a dead heat and that's a problem for Connolly considering that he's been running around town claiming to be winning by 20 points.
What this poll actually shows is that according to the population sample, the more often someone votes the more likely they are to vote for Leslie.
That can't make the Connolly camp very happy at all, especially considering there will probably be pretty low turnout on June 10.
But let's dig down to the cross tab for voters who have participated in more than one primary election. Gerry clocks in with a very respectable 62% favorability rating compared to Byrne's statistically-similar 64%. His unfavorables are highest in this cross-tab and are 10 points higher than Leslie Byrne's--but it's still only 20%. That means that among the most politically engaged Democrats living in the 11th District, only one in five has anything bad to say about him. The overwhelming majority likes him just fine--even a lot of Dems who are probably going to vote for Leslie anyway. Likewise a lot of Connolly's voters also like Leslie just fine, too.
Just go along with it, man. You're going to be a much happier person when you realize your hatred is out of place and just let it go. Lots of good Democrats support Byrne but respect Gerry, and they probably have better blood pressure.
And yes, there are plenty of voters who like both Gerry and Leslie just fine. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I have hatred of Gerry Connolly. I don't.
I think he's an opportunist and will be a milquetoast Democrat in Congress and would much prefer Leslie. But I certainly don't hate him.
I would like to know how he reconciles being against the war with his employment with a company like SAIC, though.
just curious.