The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll

WE'VE MOVED!

2011-08-17T16:24:00.003-04:00

Hi! For various reasons we have moved the blog to a new address. Please visit us at http://eagletonpollblog.wordpress.com.

Thanks for your interest!

Gov. Christie's Leadership: A Point of Praise and Contention

2011-05-13T20:15:00.002-04:00

In our April 2011 poll, we wanted to give voters a chance to directly express their feelings about Gov. Chris Christie, so rather than giving just a closed-ended, favorable/unfavorable, or job performance question, (reported here) we asked New Jerseyans to tell us how they feel about Christie in their own words. Respondents were prompted to tell us what they like and what they dislike about the governor in two questions, randomly ordered.

The responses we received were then coded into categories for analysis. What emerged is a leader who is “trying” – in a good way - but who is also somewhat of a “bully.”

The big picture shows that many respondents pointed to Christie’s leadership style as a reason both to like and to dislike him.

While the number of those who have an unfavorable impression of Gov. Christie is almost the same as those with a favorable impression (42 percent to 44 percent), voters are more likely to say positive things about the governor when given a chance. Nearly two-thirds offer something to like about Christie, compared to 56 percent who have something negative to say. However, only about one-third have reasons to both like and dislike the governor, while 31 percent say only positive things and 25 percent say only negative. Few voters, only 18 percent, have no reasons to like or dislike Christie.

Twenty-five percent of those who say anything positive about the governor praise Christie’s leadership, while 18 percent of those offering negative statements also mention his leadership. For those who like Christie, “leadership” is often paired with words like “courageous” while for those who dislike the governor, his leadership is often described as authoritarian by saying he is a “bully” or “dictator.”

The Governor is Trying, and New Jerseyans Like That

In addition to leadership related responses, those who like something about the governor point to how he is “trying” to do things like cut taxes, take on unions, deal with the budget, and so on. What links these, as is clear from the word cloud (ww.wordle.com) below, is that these voters like that the governor is trying to shake things up, to make changes to business as usual. “Trying” is the word that pops out here, with 19 percent actually using this word. Yet this also suggests that voters are not yet ready to give credit for actually completing any of these things. Which makes sense, since the tasks are ongoing.

Another fourteen percent mention various policies as reasons for liking Gov. Christie. The policy decisions most frequently mentioned are related to his attempt to balance the budget and to cut spending.

On the Other Hand: Lots of Dislikes

In addition to leadership related responses, Christie’s policy decisions also heavily influence how voters evaluate the governor for good and bad. In fact, for those with something negative to say about him, Christie’s policy decisions weigh heavily into their assessment. Forty-one percent of those who express a dislike mention policies as a basis for their dislike. At the same time, as the word cloud of reasons to dislike the governor makes clear, leadership related and personality statements abound.

Not surprisingly, perhaps, reasons to dislike the governor vary across party identification. Policies top the list of reasons to dislike him among Democrats. Democrats also strongly disagree with the Governor’s leadership style, which they describe as authoritarian. Republicans who have something they dislike about the Governor are more likely to talk about confrontation, rather than leadership.

Women Care More about Policy than Style

In expressing dislikes about Gov. Christie, women are much more bothered than men by his policy decisions. Among women, 51 percent mention policy decisions as reasons for disliking Christie – with educational policy heading the list. Women are far less bothered by his authoritarian style (only 5 percent), and by his authoritarian leadership. Men and women are equally likely to say they dislike his arrogance.

When asked to give reasons for disliking Christie, 32 percent of men who provide an answer mention his policy decisions, and another 14 percent say they dislike his authoritarian leadership style, while 11 percent specifically point to his confrontational tone, and 10 percent mention his character as reasons to dislike him.

Rutgers-Eagleton Poll staffers Mona Kleinberg developed most of the analysis for this post, and Ashley Koning prepared the word clouds. Both are political science graduate students at Rutgers.

Well, another academic year is ending. As we move into summer, things will slow down for the Poll in terms of our public face, but we're working hard behind the scenes to learn from what we've done - the good and the bad - and to continuously try to do a better job each year. So we'll be relatively quiet for a while, unless something really exciting happens!

Some Thoughts on Gov. Christie and NJ Politics

2011-05-09T12:10:00.001-04:00

(Lots of links in here to recent events and our most recent Rutgers-Eagleton Poll)

Governor Chris Christie is definitely a different kind of governor for New Jersey. He takes pride in being frank and forceful. His critics wouldn’t use those particular adjectives to describe him. Depending on who you speak with, he’s either a tough talking realist or an arrogant bully (PDF). Let’s take a moment here to recount a few recent highlights and what these may mean politically for Gov. Christie and the state.

The latest personal kerfuffle was when Christie asked the press corps to “please take the bat out on [Loretta Weinberg] for once.” This came in response to a tremendous amount of finger pointing regarding who is right and wrong in using a state law that allows certain elected officials to both collect a pension and a salary for the same position. Sen. Weinberg accused Christie of holding a double standard. Later it would be revealed that she was using the same provision which would spark his comment and subsequent press releases and stories discussing whether or not it was appropriate for Christie to use such language.

When he isn’t going after the Legislature or the NJEA, Christie has been hammering the courts. While the Christie-Sweeney standoff regarding the Supreme Court appears to have been resolved the governors latest salvo against the judiciary system could spark a constitutional crisis if he were to actually defy the court. We don’t think he’ll do this but he’ll be able to score political points no matter the decision. He’ll either win and claim victory, or lose and blame the court for budget cuts bolstering his argument to remake it and do away with bipartisan traditions.

Christie isn’t afraid to speak off the cuff and invites moments that most politicians would shy away from. (In fact, he’s even been referred to as a YouTube star.) We take him at his word that he won’t run for president in 2012 (Though this is turning out to be a strange year for the GOP, and recent reports are that Iowa GOP donors are courting him) but he’s been less definitive when it comes to the chatter for the number two spot. His YouTube moments and willingness to turn away federal funds have helped to make him one of the more popular politicians in the country and probably the most popular among national Republicans who see him through the lens of his press. He has a proven fundraising ability both at home and nationally. He’s also managed to focus on economic and financial issues while dipping his toes into social issues.

Yet all this must be tempered with a sense that while the governor has become a darling of Republicans, his overall ratings in New Jersey are not really all that good and may be at some risk. His approval numbers are roughly even (44% to 42%) but we can imagine big movement up ahead. We are already seeing some change, as over the past few months the governor’s approval ratings among men have declined, while women – who have disapproved of him from the beginning – remain negative. Moreover, since we began polling on Christie’s favorability rating in February 2010, he has never broken 50% in an Eagleton Poll, with his positive rating staying in the range of 44% to 49%. His negatives, however have climbed over time, from a low of 26% unfavorable in February 2010 to a high of 42% unfavorable in February 2011. Now, to be fair, New Jerseyans tend to be pretty hard on their governors, so a roughly 50/50 rating for a Republican governor in a blue state may not really be so bad.

What is one to make of a governor who seems more comfortable using a wrecking ball than a scalpel? It’s hard to tell right now, but the kinds of comments we get on the poll when we ask about Christie continue to show strong polarization. As the next election approaches, we will get a very direct test of Christie’s ability to leverage his support to influence the direction of politics in New Jersey.

Note: Rutgers graduate student Jorge Santos contributed the research behind this posting.

Quality of Life: New Monmouth Poll is Useful, but NOT Unique in Some Findings

2011-04-29T16:00:00.000-04:00

We’re always interested in other polls, but we don’t talk much about them here, since we’re normally pretty busy just trying to make sense of our own data! But the new release by the Monmouth University Poll gives us pause. The poll, run by Patrick Murray, a graduate school colleague here at Rutgers back in the 1990’s, and former key staffer with the Eagleton Poll, reported an ambitious project to understand “quality of life” issues in our state.

Quality of life is definitely worth looking at, and it’s something Eagleton has done regularly over the years. In fact, we did this in a December 2010 release which was headlined “Garden Staters Like Their Communities Better than Their State”. This release showed both new (December) data and reviewed the past 30 years of Eagleton Polls on the question. This followed up on our release from April 2010 which also asked some quality of life questions. Both polls showed that New Jersey residents like their neighborhoods, and as we reported at the time, the December one showed we like our local communities better than our state.

So we were a bit surprised to see the following in the Star-Ledger’s reporting of the Monmouth Poll:

“Overall, 73 percent had a positive opinion of their home towns. But significantly fewer, 63 percent, thought the state was a good place to live. While still a majority, it was the lowest positive reading in 30 years of polling on the question and the first time residents gave the state lower grades than the towns in which they reside.” [Italics added]

We went back and checked – this comes from the Monmouth Poll press release.

Two things are wrong here. First, Monmouth’s numbers are NOT the lowest in 30 years of polling, as the first italicized part suggests. The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll release of December 16, 2010 showed 53% rated the state as an excellent (14%) or good (39%) place to live, 10 points lower than Monmouth’s numbers. And since Monmouth used the same question and historical Rutgers-Eagleton Polls for their trend data, we would have thought they would notice this. While the data are not yet in our archive, the December press release and all details are on our website. Moreover, we know Patrick saw the earlier March/April 2010 poll (where 52% said NJ was an excellent or good place to live) since he took us to task for our analysis of that poll in his blog. Those data are in our archive. The issue here is not about trends, it's about the point estimates on this particular question.

The second claim is also incorrect, since our December poll also explicitly noted – in its title! – that NJ residents like their communities better than their state.

In any case, we are really glad to see that Patrick’s data both tracks with our own AND makes extensive (albeit uncredited in their press release) use of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll archive, available to anyone who wishes to use it. We would, however have appreciated a shout out in the release. (The full report does note the use of the archive, in a general acknowledgments, but it is not explicit about which Eagleton data was used for showing historical trends for each question.)

Having multiple survey research organizations interested in the same issues is valuable. It keeps us all on the top of our game, and gives the public multiple perspectives on the politics and issues that permeate our state. So cheers to Patrick for the extensive quality of life study, but next time it would be good to be a little more careful about the claims made for the press.

Gov. Christie and National Attention

2011-04-14T00:01:00.004-04:00

Well, continuing on what seems to be our all Gov. Chris Christie, all the time, binge, today we release results of questions about whether the governor should run for president in 2012 (NJ voters overwhelmingly say "no"), and how Garden Staters view the national attention the governor gets.

We do seem to spend a lot of time on our governor, but partly that's because he has had such an impact on our state, and partly that's simply because he is an incredibly interesting politician. Not only did he win his office in a state that is pretty Democratic, but he did it a year before the Republican sweep of 2010. Moreover, the governor continues in his efforts to make over the state, both in terms of policy, but also in terms of a highly visible, highly active, knows-what-he-wants-image kind of governor. This seems to me to be something pretty new for New Jersey, whose last few governors have certainly not been the kind of strong personality that Gov. Christie is.

So he's interesting, and we think it's worth asking a wide range of questions about how our fellow Garden Staters feel in the second year of his term.

Text of the release follows.

Click here for a PDF of the release with questions and tables.

New Jersey Voters Say No to a Gov. Christie Presidential Bid in 2012

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - Gov. Chris Christie has been adamant that he has no plans to run for president in 2012, and results from a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll suggest that if he did, New Jersey voters would not be pleased. Only 22 percent of registered voters support a 2012 presidential bid by Christie, while 65 percent oppose and 12 percent are unsure. Moreover, while 36 percent of voters think having a governor on the national stage helps New Jersey's image, 42 percent say it makes no difference and 21 percent say it hurts the state's image.

"The governor continues to deny any interest in running for president in 2012," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. "Given these numbers, that's a pretty good thing. Every time we've asked about a presidential run, New Jersey voters have overwhelmingly opposed the idea."

Results are from a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of 773 registered voters conducted with both landline and cell phone households from March 28 to April 4, with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points.

New Jersey to Christie: Stay Put

While Republicans, at 44 percent, are most supportive of a 2012 Christie presidential run, no majority of any group supports the idea. Eight percent of Democrats and 24 percent of independents are sympathetic to the proposal. And while only about a third of Republicans oppose the idea, two-thirds of independents do not support a Christie bid, along with 80 percent of Democrats.

Those with a favorable impression of the governor more strongly support a 2012 presidential bid, but even among this group, only a plurality (45 percent) back Christie, while 35 percent oppose and 20 percent are not sure. Virtually all (95 percent) with an unfavorable impression would oppose Christie for president in 2012. Those who feel more neutral about Christie also oppose a candidacy, with only 11 percent in favor and 69 percent opposed.

"Given that about as many people feel unfavorable as favorable toward the governor right now, there is simply no place outside his Republican base to find support for a Christie run," said Redlawsk. "This does not mean a future try would be opposed, just that New Jerseyans aren't joining the national media's storyline that Christie could take the nomination in 2012 if he wanted it."

Christie national presence not all that helpful to New Jersey

Most respondents say that having a governor on the national stage has no effect on New Jersey's image. While 36 percent think Christie's national presence helps the state, 42 percent say it makes "no difference." Twenty-one percent believe Christie's national presence actually hurts. Political leanings color responses.

Two-thirds of Republicans say New Jersey's image is helped by Christie's national attention; only 36 percent of independents and 18 percent of Democrats agree. Most Democrats (47 percent) and independents (46 percent) simply think Christie's national notoriety does not affect New Jersey's image. A third of Democrats think the state is hurt by Christie, but only 17 percent of independents and 10 percent of Republicans agree. Men believe the governor helps the state's image by about a 4-to-3 margin.

The 80 percent of voters who talk about Christie to friends and family have stronger opinions on this question: 38 percent say Christie's national attention helps, but 23 percent say it hurts. Thirty-eight percent say publicity about Christie makes no difference. A majority (58 percent) of those who do not talk about the governor says he makes no difference on how New Jersey is perceived

Thirty percent of respondent say they have watched an internet video of the governor. By a 3-to-2 margin, they believe the national attention helps New Jersey, although nearly 30 percent say it makes no difference. Those who have never seen the governor on the internet are less positive: 33 percent say the state's image is improved, 19 percent say it is hurt, and 48 percent say it makes no difference.

How respondents get news about Christie, and how he affects state image, matters in only one instance. The small group of voters (7 percent) who get most of their news about Christie from radio are much more positive: 54 percent say his national presence improves the state's image, while 20 percent say it hurts and 26 percent say it makes no difference.

Majority says Christie national attention does not make them proud

When asked to set aside personal beliefs about the governor and evaluate if his national attention makes them proud to be from New Jersey, only 40 percent say the attention makes them proud. More than half (52 percent) disagree. About two-thirds of GOP backers are proud. Roughly one-third of both independents (37 percent) and Democrats (31 percent) feel the same.

Men and women feel the same on this point: about 40 percent of both genders are proud, though slightly more women (54 percent) then men (50 percent) say the national attention does not make them proud. Men are slightly more likely than women to say they are not sure.

Even when personal feelings are ignored, Christie is still a polarizing figure. Not surprisingly, households with public union members were most unhappy with the governor's national attention: only 25 percent of voters in public employee union households feel proud to be from New Jersey because of Christie's national attention compared to 44 percent of non-union households.

Governor's "issue coattails" seem short

Knowing that Gov. Christie supports any particular plan "to make New Jersey better" has little effect on respondents: 55 percent say his support for a plan would make no difference in their own opinion. Christie's backing of a plan increases support among 22 percent and decreases support among 17 percent. Independent voters are most likely to assert their independence, with 63 percent reporting Christie's support for a plan would make no difference. Even 41 percent of Republicans take this position, as do 55 percent of Democrats. A plurality of Republicans (48 percent) would take their cue from the governor and be more supportive, but only 20 percent of independents and 8 percent of Democrats would do so.

"Several months ago we asked about making public employees pay more for benefits and found the plan supported by State Senate President Steve Sweeney more popular than Governor Christie's plan or even a plan supported by both party leaders," said Redlawsk. "This new question shows that while more Republicans would tend to support a generic program from the governor, support from even Republicans is not automatic.

"Moreover, few independents say knowing the governor supports something makes them more likely to support it as well. So while the governor's job performance and favorability ratings are not bad, voters want to at least think they would make up their own minds about issues, no matter what the governor supports."

Let's Look at How People Describe Governor Christie

2011-04-12T11:30:00.006-04:00

Back last August, we did a poll in which we asked people to tell us whether a series of 8 traits describe Gov. Chris Christie "very well," "somewhat well", or "not at all." That was a fun poll, and so we decided to do it again, but expand it quite a lot. So this time we asked 14 trait words (adjectives) including the original 8 plus 6 more. In addition, we added 5 emotions words: Proud, Enthusiastic, Worried, Angry, and Hopeless.

The results are in today's release, details of which are below. The short summary - Democrats and Republicans are increasingly diverging in the words they think describe the governor "very well" and most New Jerseyans do NOT feel enthusiastic or proud when they read or hear about Christie. In fact, nearly half say they feel "worried." And some 40 percent of Democrats say Christie makes them feel "hopeless."

Overall, New Jerseyans do think the governor is stubborn, with even 52 percent of Republicans saying this word describes him very well. But for Republicans, I suspect "stubborn" is a positive trait, while for the 70 percent of Democrats who ascribe it to him, stubborn is no doubt a negative thing.

The governor gets high marks for being smart and a strong leader, but low marks for effective, trustworthy, or fair.

Full text of the release is below.

For full text, questions, and tables, please click here.

NJ Voters Show Sharply Diverging Views of Gov. Chris Christie; Independents say Christie Smart but Stubborn; Many Worry about Him

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Ask a Republican, and NJ Gov. Chris Christie is a strong leader and a smart, independent reformer. But ask a Democrat, and the governor is a stubborn, arrogant, self-centered bully. Independents are more mixed: they see Gov. Christie as stubborn, but also as a smart, independent strong leader. Even so, about half of all New Jersey voters are worried about the governor, while only 38 percent say he makes them feel enthusiastic, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today.

“Since last August when we first asked people to tell us which traits describe Gov. Christie, voters have become more extreme in their positions, with nearly all positive and negative traits seeing double digit increases,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “The largest increase has been ‘stubborn,’ which 70 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of independents and even 52 percent of Republicans now say describes the governor ‘very well.’”

Results are from a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of 773 registered voters conducted with both landline and cell phone households from March 28 to April 4, with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points.

“Stubborn” best describes Gov. Christie, followed by “smart” and “independent”

“Stubborn” is the adjective voters agree best describes Gov. Christie with 62 percent saying it describes him “very well,” up 20 points from August 2010. Only 13 percent say stubborn does not describe Christie at all. Closely following is “smart” which 56 percent of voters now say describes Christie very well, while 12 percent say it does not describe him at all. In August, only 39 percent said smart was a very good descriptor. A majority of voters also say “independent” (54 percent, up 14 points) and “strong leader” (52 percent, up 16 points) describe Christie, while 43 percent say “reformer” is a good descriptor, up 13 points from August.

Many negative adjectives are up as well, with 48 percent now saying “arrogant” describes the governor very well, an increase of 14 points. Bully has increased by 13 points to 38 percent of all voters. The only adjective from August relatively unchanged is “uncaring” which only 26 percent say describes the governor very well, compared to 22 percent in August.

“As voters get to know Gov. Christie better, their opinions of him become stronger, with Democrats and Republicans both more likely to say positive and negative traits describe the governor ‘very well’ and fewer saying they don’t know.” said Redlawsk. “This makes sense: voters have learned how the Governor operates, and they are responding accordingly.”

Christie “worries” voters, and makes many “angry” with fewer “enthusiastic” or “proud”

For the first time, the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll asked voters to say how they feel when they read or hear about Gov. Christie. Nearly half (49 percent) say the governor makes them feel worried, 42 percent are angered, and 24 percent say he makes them feel hopeless. Positive emotions are much less in evidence: only 38 percent say Christie makes them feel enthusiastic and 36 percent say they feel proud.

“Emotions provide an interesting window to views of Gov. Christie,” said Redlawsk. “While people give him high marks for positive traits like leadership and independence, nobody but Republicans is enthusiastic or proud when they hear about the governor. This suggests a real disconnect. The governor is apparently respected for his intelligence and his willingness to stick to what he believes, but many are worried and even angry at what he does.”

While 70 percent of Republicans say they are both proud of and feel enthusiastic about Christie, only one-third of independents and fewer than 20 percent of Democrats express these positive emotions. Democrats are worried (70 percent) and angry (63 percent) and a significant percentage (40 percent) feel hopeless when they read or hear about Gov. Christie. About 20 percent of Republicans say they are angry or worried, while only 8 percent say they feel hopeless about the governor.

Independents, while generally assigning positive adjectives like “strong leader” and “smart” to the governor, are much closer to Democrats in their emotional responses. While 34 percent say they feel proud and 37 percent enthusiastic, 36 percent are angry and nearly half (45 percent) are worried. Few independents (19 percent) feel hopeless about the governor.

“I doubt Gov. Christie spends sleepless nights worrying how Democrats are responding to him,” said Redlawsk. “But independents, who pushed him to victory in 2009, are another story. While independents are favorable toward the governor by a 49 percent to 35 percent margin, the fact that so many are worried about Christie and so few are proud or enthusiastic might be cause for concern. It is hard to motivate voters if they are not enthusiastic about you.”

Fewer than 40 percent see Christie as effective, trustworthy, or fair

While voters say the governor is a strong leader and smart, they are far less likely to say he is “effective,” “trustworthy,” and “fair.” More voters say “arrogant” (48 percent) and “self-centered” (40 percent) describe Christie very well, than say the same about “effective” (39 percent), “moral” (38 percent), “trustworthy” (33 percent) or “fair” (30 percent). But few think that “impulsive” (32 percent) or “uncaring” (26 percent) describe him very well.

“We expanded the list of adjectives compared to August,” said Redlawsk. “Most New Jerseyans – even those who do not support the governor – think he is smart and a strong leader. At the same time they are less sure that he has been effective so far, and many simply do not view him as fair or trustworthy. It’s not surprising that 61 percent of public employee union respondents say Christie is not fair and 53 percent think he is not trustworthy. But only 27 percent of independent voters say fair describes him very well and just one-third say trustworthy does too. There is a real disjuncture for the governor in being viewed as smart but not nearly as trustworthy or fair as he is stubborn and independent.”

Partisan divide – In August and today

In general both Democrats and Republicans have become stronger in their assessments of Christie since August. Even so, the partisan gap between Democratic and Republican assessments varies across adjectives. A majority of Democrats (70 percent) and Republicans (52 percent) say “stubborn” describes Christie very well, a partisan gap of only 18 points, about the same as the 20 point gap in August.

Likewise, the gap in assessing Christie as a strong leader remains at about 40 points. In August, 22 percent of Democrats said “strong leader” described Christie very well versus 62 percent of Republicans. Today, 38 percent of Democrats say “strong leader” describes him, compared to 79 percent of Republicans.

The much wider gap in assessing the governor as smart (49 points in August, with Republicans at 71 percent and Democrats at 22 percent) has closed to 38 points, as 40 percent of Democrats now say “smart” describes Christie very well, along with 78 percent of Republicans.

In August 32 percent of Democrats said “independent” described Christie very well, compared to 49 percent of Republicans, a 17 point partisan gap. Today, 43 percent of Democrats and 74 percent of Republicans say Christie is independent, increasing the gap to 31 points.

Partisan gap increases for negative trait words

The gap between parties on negative traits has grown as Democrats ascribe negative words in much greater numbers than in August, while a only a small number of Republicans evaluate him more negatively.

In August, 49 percent of Democrats thought “arrogant” described Christie very well, but only 15 percent of Republicans agreed. Today, 64 percent of Democrats and 23 percent of Republicans feel this way, widening the partisan gap from 34 to 41 points.

While relatively few Democrats (35 percent) said “bully” described Christie very well in August, that number has climbed to 53 percent. Republicans have also become more likely to say this: 10 percent in August has increased to 16 percent today. The gap between the parties has grown from 25 to 37 points.

Few voters see Christie as uncaring, however there has been a clear partisan shift here as well. While Republicans have shown no change, with 9 percent saying Christie is uncaring in both polls, 37 percent of Democrats now see “uncaring” as a very good descriptor of the governor, compared to 25 percent in August. The partisan gap has thus increased from 21 to 28 points, due to more negative evaluations by Democrats

Gov Christie/Pres Obama Evaluations in NJ

2011-04-08T14:05:00.001-04:00

Click here for PDF with Questions and Tables.

NEW JERSEY VOTERS REMAIN SPLIT ON GOV. CHRISTIE; IMPRESSIONS OF OBAMA SIGNIFICANTLY MORE POSITIVE

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – After becoming less positive following introduction of the budget, New Jersey voters remain split on their impression of Gov. Chris Christie, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. While 44 percent of registered voters give the governor a favorable rating, 42 percent view him unfavorably and 14 percent have no opinion. In February, 46 percent viewed the governor favorably and 44 percent unfavorably.

“We’re seeing essentially the same numbers we did last month. Christie’s favorability rating has not rebounded to prebudget address numbers.” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “In December, positive views were 10 points higher than negative. Following the budget address, negatives went up and positives went down, where they have stayed.”

President Barack Obama’s favorability rating stands at 55 percent, with 32 percent viewing him unfavorably and 13 percent reporting no opinion. Obama’s position has not changed much either from the 57 percent to 36 percent recorded in late February.

Results are from a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of 773 registered voters conducted among both landline and cell phone households from March 28 to April 4, with a margin of error for the full sample of +/- 3.5 percentage points.

Christie job performance grade improves

Job performance ratings for Gov. Christie remain polarized, but improved, based on a revised question introduced by the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll in February. To validate the new question, a random half of voters was asked to assign Gov. Christie a job performance letter grade from A to F. The other half used the traditional rating scale of “excellent” to “poor.” Half samples have a margin of error of +/- 4.9 percentage points.

More of those grading Gov. Christie give him an “A” (14 percent) or “B” (32 percent) than a “D” (14 percent) or “F” (21 percent); 20 percent place him in the middle at “C”. This 46 percent positive to 35 percent negative is an improvement from the 38 (A, B) to 34 percent (D, F) rating Christie received in February.

Voters asked the traditional question seem more negative about the governor: 16 percent rate him “excellent” and 26 percent “good,” for a 42 percent positive rating. Negative ratings are higher, with 30 percent “fair” and 27 percent “poor,” totaling 57 percent negative. These ratings show little change from February.

“This shows how careful we must be in interpreting what voters are telling us,” said Redlawsk. “Traditionally we have viewed a ‘fair’ rating as bad, making it look like Christie has negative job performance ratings, but (often) positive favorability ratings. Our revised question – using a grading scale everyone understands – shows something different. While “A” and “B” are a good match for “excellent” and “good”, many who say “fair” in one version would give a “C” if they could, which is not a failing grade.”

Redlawsk noted that this changes the interpretation from “New Jerseyans are moderately favorable toward Gov Christie, but unhappy with his job performance” to “voters are moderately favorable both toward Christie himself and the job he is doing” thus creating more consistency.

Much of the polarization in Gov. Christie’s job performance grade is tied to ideology. Liberals are clearly negative about the governor while conservatives are more split than many might expect. About one-third of liberals give the governor an “F” while conservatives (41 percent) and moderates (34 percent) are most likely to give Christie a “B.” Only 27 percent of conservatives give the governor an "A," 17 percent give a “C” and 15 percent give grades of "D" or "F".

Moderates are most polarized. While 46 percent give Christie an “A” or “B”, 31 percent give him a “D” or “F” and 22 percent assign a “C”. Conservatives and Liberals are less split: 68 percent of conservatives assign an “A” or “B” and 60 percent of liberals give a “D” or “F.”

“There is little polarization within ideologues,” said Redlawsk. “Liberals rate the governor quite low, while conservatives give him good – though not great – grades. But moderates really are split, though on balance currently more positive than negative.”

Obama job performance grade mostly unchanged

President Obama’s job performance grade has remained mostly stagnant since late February. Among voters grading the president’s job performance, 14 percent give him an “A,” 32 percent a “B,” 27 percent a “C,” 16 percent a “D,” and 10 percent an “F.” Obama’s 46 percent positive (A, B) and 26 percent negative (D, F) grades compare to 43 percent positive and 26 percent negative in February.

Of voters responding to the standard question, 13 percent say Obama is doing an “excellent” job as president, compared to 11% in February. Thirty-four percent say “good” (38 percent in February) while 31 percent say “fair”—the same as February. Another 22 percent describe Obama’s job performance as “poor,” up two points from February.

On the grading scale, 60 percent of conservatives give Obama a grade of “D” or “F,” while 22 percent of moderates and 4 percent of liberals concur. Liberals are most likely to give the President a grade of “B” (57 percent), with another 20 percent giving him an “A”. Few conservatives give the president marks of “A” or “B” (8 percent total), but 48 percent of moderates do.

New Jerseyans Support Libya Action

Voters were asked if they supported or opposed Obama’s decision to use military attacks to enforce the Libyan no-fly zone: 49 percent support the decision, 38 percent oppose it, and 13 percent are unsure. Support comes men (55 percent vs. 44 percent of women), Democrats (56 percent support vs. 47 percent of Republicans and 45 percent of Independents), and liberals (57 percent support, compared to 47 percent from conservatives and 48 percent from moderates.) Among those who feel favorable toward Obama, 58 percent support the decision, while 41 percent of those unfavorable toward him also support the attacks.

“While support for the Libyan attacks is not overwhelming, the decision does not appear to have hurt Obama’s favorability or job performance rating,” said Redlawsk. “What’s interesting is that relatively large shares of those who otherwise don’t like the president are supportive of this particular action on his part.”

Sen. Menendez still relatively unknown, but more favorable than unfavorable

Fewer voters are willing to give an impression of Sen. Robert Menendez now than in late February when 38 percent had no opinion. In the new poll, 32 percent report favorable impressions and 24 percent unfavorable, but 44 percent have no opinion about the Senator. In February, 34 percent were favorable and 28 percent unfavorable.

Placed in context with Sen. Frank Lautenberg, New Jersey voters are relatively non-opinionated about senators. While 38 percent of New Jerseyans have a favorable impression of Lautenberg and 28 percent have an unfavorable view, 34 percent have no opinion.

Democrats are most likely to view Menendez favorably, with 52 percent favorable. Only 10 percent of Republicans are favorable, while 25 percent of independents agree. Forty-five percent of Republicans, 8 percent of Democrats, and 28 percent of independents view Menendez unfavorably. More independent voters (46 percent) report having no opinion of Menendez than Democrats (40 percent) and Republicans (44 percent).

“While Sen. Menendez continues to toil in relative anonymity for a U.S. Senator, his overall rating among those who venture an opinion remains positive, and not much less so that Sen. Lautenberg,” said Redlawsk. “Even so, with 2012 on the horizon, Sen. Menendez seems to have some work cut out to re-introduce himself to New Jersey voters. In particular, independents are slightly negative at this time. To win he will need to improve his standing among these voters.”

Polling on Charter Schools - Latest from the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll

2011-04-07T11:00:00.002-04:00

NEW JERSEYANS SPLIT ON CHARTER SCHOOLS;
BLACK VOTERS STRONGER SUPPORTERS, FAVOR SCHOOL CHOICE VOUCHERS

Click here for PDF of release with questions and tables

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - Voters are split on the continuing growth of charter schools in New Jersey, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Forty-four percent of all Garden State voters support increasing the number of charter schools in the state, while 42 percent oppose adding more charters. Fourteen percent say they don't know if they support or oppose an increase. Black voters are stronger supporters: 52 percent favor more charter schools.

A majority of the state's white voters would prefer to send a child to a public school, but black voters prefer charter schools by a narrow margin. While only 31 percent of whites choose charters, 48 percent of Blacks feel the same. Public schools are favored by whites, 51 percent to 43 percent.

Black voters are also more likely than whites to support school choice vouchers which would allow children to attend private schools using taxpayer funding, 54 percent to 36 percent.

"As education issues continue to make headlines here, voters are mixed on their reactions," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. "While there are traditional party-line differences, what really stands out is the difference between Black and white voters. African-Americans, while not otherwise supportive of Gov. Christie, are generally behind his plans for charter schools and vouchers."

Results are from a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of 773 registered voters conducted among both landline and cell phone households from March 28 to April 4, with a margin of error for the full sample of +/- 3.5 percentage points.

Garden Staters split on increasing charter schools

Among all voters, supporters of charter schools edge opponents, 44 percent to 42 percent. The numbers are essentially the same for those with at least one child under 18 at home: 41 percent in favor and 44 percent against. Black voters are more positive, however, 52 percent supporting the growth of charter schools and 39 percent opposing.

Those with a favorable impression of the governor also are stronger supporters, 57 percent to 29 percent. Voters unfavorable toward Christie strongly oppose more charter schools, 57 percent to 30 percent. Not surprisingly, only a minority of voters in public employee union households support increasing the number of charter schools, 30 percent to 58 percent who oppose. Support for charters is greater among those in non-union households, 46 percent in favor and 39 percent opposed.

"These data show an interesting split in traditional Democratic constituencies on this issue," said Redlawsk. "As Governor Christie pushes for more charter schools as a lynchpin in his education plan, public employee union members resist, but African-Americans appear to be on his side."

Charter schools seen equal to or better than public schools

Almost four-in-10 respondents (38 percent) say charter schools do a better job educating children than traditional public schools, while 30 percent say both types are equally good and 9 percent say charters do worse. Twenty-three percent are not sure. Among those with a child under 18, the results are similar: 36 percent say charter schools do better, 34 percent say both types do about the same, 7 percent say charter schools do worse than traditional public schools and 23 percent are unsure. Though supporting charters, Blacks are no more likely than whites to say charter schools do a better job than public schools.

By better than 2 to 1 (54 percent to 24 percent), Christie's supporters are more likely to say charters do a better job than traditional schools at educating students. Twenty-two percent of Christie supporters say the two types of schools are equally good, while 42 percent of Christie detractors believe they are equal. While 14 percent of those unfavorable toward Christie say charter schools do a worse job, only 4 percent of Christie supporters agree. Similarly, among public employee union households, 22 percent prefer charters; 41 percent of non-union households agree.

Seventy-eight percent who say charter schools do a better job, want more in New Jersey. Among those who say both types perform about the same, only 29 percent support more charter schools, while 62 percent are opposed. Most voters do not think the growth in charters has weakened traditional public schools; only 24 percent do so and 45 percent say it has made no difference

Whites prefer to send children to traditional public schools while blacks are split

Though a majority of voters says charter schools are as least as good as public schools, most white respondents would prefer to send a child to a traditional public school, 51 percent to 15 percent; 15 percent are not sure. Black voters have a starkly different view, with 48 percent preferring a charter school and 43 percent preferring a traditional public school, with only 7 percent unsure.

Christie supporters are half as likely as detractors to say they would send a child to public school; 36 percent would send a child to a public school, while 45 percent prefer a charter. However, 64 percent of those not favorable toward Christie prefer a traditional public school, and only 21 percent would use a charter school.

Black voters support school choice vouchers

Fifty-four percent of black voters support school choice vouchers, another key part of the governor's education reform plan. Christie has proposed publicly funded scholarships to enable school children to attend private schools with public funding. While black voters support this idea, only 36 percent of white voters agree. As with other parts of his education plans, those favoring the governor are stronger supporters of vouchers, 51 percent to 44 percent opposed. Among those holding an unfavorable view of the governor, only 30 percent support vouchers, while 65 percent oppose them.

"Vouchers are perceived to be of most benefit to families in failing urban school districts," said Redlawsk. "Since most white voters do not perceive their schools as failing, few seem to support the idea of using tax dollars to allow children to move to private schools where public schools are failing. These results show a clear sense of localism - if my schools are ok, then why use tax dollars for someone else?

"The governor's voucher plan is not overly popular among his core constituency. While conservatives and Republicans strongly support charter schools, they are evenly split of vouchers," said Redlawsk. "Democrats in general strongly oppose vouchers, except for African Americans, who clearly want more choice of schools. The usual political coalitions have a hard time with this issue."

Public school budget support unclear

About a month before the annual school elections, Garden State voters are not sure if they will vote for or against their local school budgets. Thirty percent say they will vote yes (34 percent in households with children, 27 percent childless households) while 16 percent say they will vote no (14 percent with children at home; 18 percent without). However, 39 percent say they are not sure how they will vote (38 percent children, 40 percent without.)

Christie backers are less likely to favor their district's budget. Only 24 percent favor their school budget, while another 24 percent plan to vote against it, and 36 percent are not sure. Among those unfavorable toward the governor, 40 percent plan to vote for their budget, 8 percent oppose it, and 41 percent are unsure.

"Signs point to another contentious season for school budgets," said Redlawsk. "As with most other things in New Jersey these days, where the governor comes down on the issue matters. If he makes another effort to defeat school budgets as he did last year, he's likely to motivate his base and see some success."

How Asking about Governor Christie's Decisions Can Change Opinions

2011-04-04T10:08:00.011-04:00

(Note: Virginia Tangel of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll staff prepared this post.)

In our December 9, 2010 Rutgers-Eagleton Poll release, we included a question that asked about the public’s support for the proposed ARC (Access to the Region’s Core) tunnel under the Hudson River to Manhattan. Governor Christie had canceled the project in October citing cost overruns, but we still wanted to measure the public’s support or opposition to the project, as well as attitudes on Christie’s decision. In order to do both of these things while attempting to avoid biasing our results, we employed a common methodological tool of the split ballot experiment. In this scenario, a random half of sampled respondents (N=447) first received a question asking their personal view of the importance of the ARC tunnel to economic development in New Jersey, followed by a question measuring their support or opposition to Governor Christie’s cancellation of the project. The other group received the question about their support or opposition to Christie’s decision first (N=436), followed by the question about their own opinions regarding the importance of the tunnel. Setting up question order experiments offers survey researchers ways in which we can see effects of context in a survey.

Here are the results of the question about the importance of the tunnel:

Note that when asked first about the importance of the proposed ARC tunnel under the Hudson River, 37% of New Jerseyans reported that they thought the tunnel was “very important.” But, respondents asked this question after offering their opinion about Governor Christie’s cancellation of the tunnel had significantly different views. In this sample, only 22% -- 15% fewer than those without the Christie context – say the tunnel is very important. Note also that the “Don’t Know’s” go down. Providing information that Christie canceled the tunnel helps people come up with an answer on its importance. Clearly, asking first about Christie’s decision had an effect on respondents’ opinions—a sign that survey respondents are willing to rationalize their own views to get behind the decision of the governor.

This pattern becomes even more interesting when breaking down by political party identification.

For respondents who were not asked first about supporting or opposing Christie’s decision, the tunnel seems pretty important – even more than a third of Republicans say it is very important, and few people say it is not at all important.

But when we ask about Christie’s decision first, the effect is huge for DEMOCRATS! Only 18% who get to think about Christie’s decision first say the tunnel is very important, a drop of 24 points among Democrats. Republicans and independents are also less supportive, but the effect is smaller. In general, opinions of the importance of the transit tunnel drop precipitously when placed in the context of Governor Christie’s decision – especially among Democrats.

Question order effects are the result of what survey researchers call “consistency effects” (Schuman and Presser 1981 in Wilson et al. 2008), in which a norm of reciprocity in responses comes into play. In this case, the comparative context exists when framed in terms of Christie’s cancellation of the ARC tunnel project. If a respondent first learns of Christie’s cancellation and is asked to provide their opinion of that, some adjust their response in the following question about the importance of the ARC tunnel because they feel obligated in light of their previous answer. So, this norm of reciprocity is why we see New Jerseyans’ opinions of the importance of the ARC tunnel decline when placed in the Christie context.

References

Wilson, David C. et al. 2008. “Affirmative Action Programs for Women and Minorities: Expressed Support Affected by Question Order.” Public Opinion Quarterly 72:514-522.

Schuman, Howard and Stanley Presser. 1981. Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context. New York: Academic Press.

Christie wades into the Abortion Issue

2011-03-15T00:01:00.005-04:00

Yes, I know that Gov. Chris Christie made his speech supporting a pro-life rally back in late January. However, it wasn't until our recent poll Feb. 24-26 that we were able to ask New Jerseyans what they thought. So we gave them a little information (that Christie spoke at the antiabortion rally) and asked if this made them feel better or worse about the governor. Not surprisingly, a slight majority (54%) says it has no effect, but 31% say it makes them feel worse, and 14% say it makes them feel better. This suggests the governor may have more to lose than gain politically from this move. But of course, it's not just about votes. It is clearly about both strongly held beliefs AND perhaps nailing down the conservative base, not all of whom are convinced of the governor's conservative bona fides.

The most interesting group in this is probably the 35 percent of strongly pro-choice voters who have a favorable impression of Christie when we ask early in the survey. Of these folks. Among these voters, 38% say Christie's rally speech makes them feel worse about the governor, while essentially none feel better (no surprise).

Contrast this to the 36% of voters who support abortion only with conditions who have an unfavorable impression of the governor. Only 8% say the governor's speech makes them feel better about him, while 35% feel worse.

The very small group of pure pro-life voters unfavorable toward Christie is also mostly unmoved. And there are not that many there to move in the first place.

So on a pure political (votes) calculation, speaking at the rally moves many "favorable" Christie folks to feel worse, while moving very few "unfavorables" toward feeling better about him.

Full test of the release follows. Click here for a PDF of the release with questions and tables.

GOV. CHRISTIE'S ANTI-ABORTION SPEECH LOWERS OPINION IN ONE-THIRD OF NEW JERSEY VOTERS

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - A small minority - 10 percent - of registered voters in New Jersey believes abortion should be illegal under all circumstances, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Just over a third (37 percent) say abortion should be legal under all conditions, and another 50 percent support legal abortion with restrictions.

Gov. Chris Christie brought abortion back into the spotlight when he spoke at an anti-abortion rally in Trenton in January, where he proclaimed himself an "ally" of anti-abortion efforts. While 54 percent of registered voters say his speech did not affect their opinion of the governor, 31 percent say it made them feel worse about Christie, while 14 percent say his participation in the rally made them feel better.

"New Jersey's attitudes on abortion have not changed much since we last asked, seven years ago," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. "Abortion rights continue to have support in the state. It's not surprising that Governor Christie's public entrance into this issue has had somewhat negative consequences for him."

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. A weighted subsample of 811 registered voters is reported here, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points.

Most New Jerseyans support legal abortion, at least in some circumstances

Nearly nine-in-10 voters (87 percent) favor legalized abortion under at least some circumstances; 37 percent want no limits on the procedure, but 10 percent want it banned with no exceptions, the poll finds.

When last asked in January 2004, 31 percent supported abortion in all instances, while another 51 percents supported abortion rights only under certain circumstances. At that time, 13 percent opposed abortion in all cases. "Few in New Jersey want to see abortion rights eliminated entirely," said Redlawsk. "We did not ask about the specific limits people support, buy there is clearly little support for a total ban on abortions."

While Democrats are more likely than Republicans to support abortion rights, even the latter generally support access to abortion under some conditions: 52 percent of Democrats and 23 percent of GOP voters say abortion should be legal under any circumstance. Another 38 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of Republicans say abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances. Independents, too, support the procedure: 32 percent under all conditions and 57 percent in certain instances. Only 16 percent of Republicans, 8 percent of Democrats, and 9 percent of independents support banning abortion entirely.

Perhaps surprisingly, nearly equal percentages of New Jersey Catholics and Protestants favor unconditional access to abortion (30 percent and 29 percent, respectively). An additional 55 percent of each group support legal abortion only under limited circumstances. The small sample of Jewish voters, however, strongly supports abortion rights; 71 percent say abortion should be legal in all cases. Only 13 percent of Catholics, 11 percent of Protestants, and 2 percent of Jews think that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances.

Attendance at religious services has some effect on support for abortion rights, according to the poll. Those who attend most often are much less in favor: 23 percent say abortion should be legal under all circumstances, compared to 46 percent of those who attend once a month or less. Only 6 percent who attend services less regularly support banning all abortion, compared to 16 percent who attend more than once a month.

There is a very small gender gap on abortion in the Garden State. Women are slightly more likely than men (40 percent to 34 percent) to support legal abortion under any circumstance. Fifty-two percent of men and 48 percent of women support limited legalized abortion. Another 11 percent of men and 9 percent of women say abortion should be completely banned.

Nearly one-third thinks less of Christie after address to anti-abortion rally

Given the small number of New Jerseyans who support a ban on abortions, the governor's January pro-life speech resulted in a negative reaction from nearly one-third of respondents (31 percent), though most (54 percent) say his remarks had no effect on their opinion of the governor. Only 14 percent say they feel more positive about Christie after the speech.

Of the 10 percent who oppose all abortions, 49 percent have a better opinion of Christie, while 40 percent say their feelings have not changed, and 11 percent say they feel worse. Those in the middle - the majority who believe abortion should be legal with restrictions - were overwhelmingly unaffected by Christie's speech, with 62 percent reporting that it had no effect on their feeling toward him. Seventeen percent of these voters have a better view of Christie following his speech, while 19 percent have a worse opinion.

Among the 37 percent of voters who support legal abortion in all cases, a majority (54 percent) feels worse about the governor and 45 percent say the speech had no effect. Perhaps more critically, 38 percent of strongly pro-choice voters who initially support Christie say they feel worse about him after his speech.

"Wading into the abortion issue was clearly not about winning additional votes in New Jersey," said Redlawsk. "The governor's expression of solidarity with the pro-life movement hurts him among many of the pro-choice voters who have been Christie supporters. On the other hand, it may be a good way to nail down the base and present conservative credentials nationally. But it comes with some risk here at home."

Predictably, GOP backers are more likely to say the speech improved their opinion of Christie: 29 percent say they feel better after the speech, while 16 percent say the speech made them feel worse. On the other hand, only 4 percent of Democrats say they feel better about the governor, while 39 percent say they feel worse. By about a 2-to-1 margin, independents say they feel worse. But across all parties, 54 percent say the speech had no effect on their feelings about the governor.

Protestants seem least swayed by Christie's speech, with 61 percent reporting it had no effect on their opinion, compared to 55 percent of Catholics and 36 percent of Jewish voters. Among Jewish voters, 58 percent reported feeling worse after the governor's remarks, while 25 percent of Catholics and 21 percent of Protestants say their opinion of the governor worsened. Eighteen percent of Catholics, 15 percent of Protestants, and 6 percent of Jews hold better opinions of the governor in light of his speech.

Is it too early to talk 2011 NJ legislative elections? What about 2012 Presidential?

2011-03-11T00:01:00.003-05:00

As we wind down the releases from our most recent poll, we turn today to the future. New Jersey holds elections for the state legislature this year, and the battle is likely to be intense. Between Republicans wanting the ability to move Gov. Chris Christie's proposals through, and Democrats who say a check is needed on the governor, both sides will be fighting hard. Add to this that all 40 Senators and 80 Assembly Members will be dealing with redistricting, the voters continuing unsettled mood, and the fact that many will view this as a referendum on Gov. Christie. Seems to us that it's never too early to talk about the next election in New Jersey!

At the same time, it is impossible to poll individual districts (well, not impossible, just impossibly expensive) and it we did that this early, it would be meaningless anyway. So we have chosen to start by looking at preference for control of the legislature among voters. We also want to get a feeling for how much anti-incumbency is out there - appears to be a lot at the moment.

Still plenty of caveats. Hardly anyone is paying attention to the fact that we will have elections this year. I would guess most voters cannot name their legislators and may not even know what party represents them. And of course, for anti-incumbency to play out, there have to be viable challengers for folks to vote for.

In any case, registered voters right now give the contradictory response that they want to retain Democratic control, but they also want to vote for someone new.

As for 2012, well what the heck, we thought we'd get a baseline. Seems that more NJ voters than not want Obama re-elected, but only by 10 points. And more than 4 out of 10 New Jersey Republicans and independents leaning Republican cannot name any Republican they want to see run against Obama. For those who can, it's essentially a three-way tie between Mitt Romney, Chris Christie, and Sarah Palin.

Text of the release follows. For a PDF of the full release with questions and tables, click here.

IN NEW JERSEY POLITICS, VOTERS PREFER CHECKS AND BALANCES; WANT DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATURE PAIRED WITH GOP GOVERNOR

Favor Obama Re-election in 2012 by nine points

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - With all 120 seats up for grabs in November, a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll finds that voters prefer to keep Democrats in control of the New Jersey Legislature. A majority (54 percent) want Democrats as a check on Gov. Chris Christie, while 37 percent want Republicans in charge to support their leader's plans for change. However, the poll finds an undercurrent of anti-incumbency: only 30 percent would vote for their "current legislators" while 54 percent would "prefer to vote for someone new."

"Though it's early, voters are quite clear they prefer divided state government," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. "They also show a limited understanding of the current environment, since throwing out incumbents would basically mean giving Republicans control in Trenton."

Looking toward the 2012 presidential election, nearly half the state's registered voters (48 percent) say President Barack Obama deserves re-election, while 39 percent disagree. Republicans are split on an opponent, with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at 12 percent, Christie at 11 percent, and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin receiving 10 percent support. Forty-two percent did not name a candidate.

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. A weighted subsample of 811 registered voters is reported here, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points.

First read on legislative elections

The majority (54 percent) of registered voters prefer a Legislature controlled by Democrats who can act as a check on the governor's plans, while only 37 percent want Republicans to be in control to support Christie, the poll finds. More than 80 percent of partisans want their own party to win in the fall, but independents prefer Democratic control by 48 percent to 38 percent, with 13 percent unsure.

Not surprisingly, a dislike of Christie correlates strongly to wanting to check his power: 80 percent of registered voters with an unfavorable impression want Democrat victories. Among those liking Christie, 66 percent want to help him by turning the Legislature over to the GOP.

"While independents generally favor the governor, their good feelings are tempered by a wish that state government remain divided between the two parties," said Redlawsk. "This seems to reflect a desire for bipartisanship and compromise between Republicans and Democrats, rather than strong endorsement of either side."

Respondents' preference for Democratic control may be offset by a persistent, underlying anti-incumbent feeling, Redlawsk said. Asked to choose their "current legislators" or "someone new," 54 percent chose the latter. Only 30 percent say they would vote for their current legislators if the election was today, while 16 percent are unsure.

"Voters often don't know their legislators names or even party affiliation, leading to this apparently contradictory result," said Redlawsk. "They do know they want change of some sort, but they also don't want to give the governor carte blanche." He added that even among voters who want someone new, 52 percent want Democrats to retain control of the Legislature. Only 39 percent of anti-incumbents want to see the GOP in charge. Among supporters of their current lawmakers, 60 percent prefer a Democratic majority compared to 36 percent pro-Republicans.

Obama re-election favored

Nearly half (48 percent) New Jersey's registered voters believe President Obama deserves to be re-elected in 2012, while 39 percent say one term is enough, the poll finds. Thirteen percent are unsure. Today, 81 percent of Democrats support a second term, while only 14 percent of Republicans agree. Among independents, opinion is split: 40 percent say Obama deserves re-election, 42 percent say he does not. Eighteen percent are unsure.

"The president is strongly supported by the state's Democrats and given their edge in voter registration, Obama can be in good shape, even if independents split down the middle," said Redlawsk. "Still, for a 'blue' state, these numbers seem pretty tight."

Women, by 53 percent to 43 percent, are more likely than men to support a second term for Obama. Members of public employee unions also are strongly in favor of re-election, with 57 percent saying Obama deserves a second term.

No clear Republican preference for a 2012 challenger

More than four-in-10 registered Republicans and independents leaning Republican could not name a preferred challenger to Obama. Among those who could, Romney (13 percent) edges Christie (12 percent) and Palin (11 percent), while only 6 percent name former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Texas Congressman Ron Paul, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty all receive minimal support.

Among the 46 percent of Republicans and Republican leaners with a favorable impression of the Tea Party movement, Romney is the preferred candidate, at 17 percent. Christie and Palin follow at 13 percent support each. The 56 percent not favorably disposed toward the Tea Party movement split support among Palin (11 percent), Christie (10 percent) and Romney (9 percent).

GOP men favor Romney (18 percent) and Christie (16 percent). Women choose Palin (13 percent) and Huckabee (10 percent). Only 7 percent of female Republicans name Romney or Christie as their candidate of choice. Among GOP men, Palin receives 9 percent and Huckabee, 3 percent.

Among those with a favorable impression of Christie, New Jersey's governor edges Romney as their preferred candidate by one percentage point, 16 percent to 15 percent. Huckabee gets 8 percent and Palin trails with 7 percent. The former GOP vice presidential nominee gets support from 20 percent of the small number of Republicans who dislike Christie.

"November is far off, but it is clear Christie is not the default choice of New Jersey Republicans," Redlawsk said. "This is probably due mostly to his continuing denial of interest in running. But were he running, I suspect many would line up behind him."

Christie and Obama Evaluations Update

2011-03-08T00:01:00.002-05:00

Here's our latest release from the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. We are continuing to analyze our results from our February 24-26 survey of New Jerseyans. This latest is on evaluations of Gov. Chris Christie and President Obama, with a quickie about Senator Robert Menendez thrown in as well.

Click here for a PDF of the release and questions and tables. Following is the text of the release.

CHRISTIE SUPPORT DECLINES SLIGHTLY FOLLOWING BUDGET SPEECH; OBAMA VIEWED MORE FAVORABLY

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - Following his Feb. 22 budget speech, New Jersey's registered voters are nearly evenly split on their feelings about Gov. Chris Christie: 46 percent have a favorable impression, another 44 do not, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today.

Voters were 10 points more positive than negative about Christie in a poll last December. They have also become slightly less positive about the governor's job performance since then.

"While some polls showed Gov. Christie's support increasing before the budget speech, reaction to the budget itself is mixed, which appears to be reflected in a decline in his post-speech favorability and job performance ratings," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University.

At the same time, the poll finds President Barack Obama's favorability rating among voters has remained consistently better than the governor's since December, at 57 percent favorable and 36 percent unfavorable.

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. A weighted subsample of 811 registered voters is reported here, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points.

New Jerseyans remain polarized over Christie

By a slim margin (48 percent to 45 percent), more registered voters say they are displeased than pleased with Christie' proposed budget. One result may be a decline in Christie's overall favorability and job performance ratings to a nearly even split, 46 percent favorable and 44 percent unfavorable, down significantly from December 2010, Redlawsk said.

Republicans are three time more likely than Democrats to have positive impressions of Christie (76 percent to 24 percent). Independents also feel more favorable than unfavorable, 50 percent to 37 percent.

The trend for Christie's job performance rating is similar. Half the respondents were asked to rate the governor on an "excellent to poor scale"; half graded him from A to F. The margin of error on these subsamples is +/-4.8 percentage points.

Forty-two percent rate the governor at least good, down only two points from December, but far fewer rate his performance excellent now, 14 percent compared to 21 percent. More rate his performance as fair (30 percent now versus 23 percent), while 29 percent say he is doing a poor job, mostly unchanged from December.

Republicans are somewhat less positive about the governor's job performance following his budget speech: Christie's 39 percent excellent rating among GOP voters after last November's election falls to 27 percent. Another 38 percent rate his performance as fair or poor compared to 26 percent in December.

Independents also are less likely to rate Christie excellent: 14 percent now compared to 21 percent in December. At the same time, they also are less likely to rate the governor poor: 19 percent now compared to 23 percent in December. Since the budget address, independents are less polarized about the governor's job performance, and registered Democrats also are somewhat less extreme. More than half of Democratic voters in November rated Christie's performance as poor. Forty-two percent rate him poor now.

Among registered voters asked to grade Christie's job performance with a letter, 14 percent give him an "A" while 24 percent give him a "B," very similar to his "excellent" and "good" ratings. Another 26 percent rate him "C," while 15 percent give a "D" and 19 percent give an "F".

"Looking at job performance with letter grades lets us examine negative feelings more closely," said Redlawsk. "While 59 percent say the governor has done a fair or poor job, the letter grades show that many would probably give a 'C' if they had that option, while only about a third give truly negative ratings. This more nuanced evaluation helps us understand why Christie's overall favorable rating is more positive than negative."

Obama favorable rating higher than Christie's; job performance similar

While New Jerseyans are split on Christie, a strong majority (57 percent) holds a favorable view of President Obama, while only 36 percent view him unfavorably. The president's favorable rating remains largely unchanged from December.

Concurrently and in a trend similar to Christie, registered voters are less happy with the president's job performance than they are with him personally. Only 11 percent say Obama is doing an excellent job as president, while 38 percent think he is doing a good job. Another 30 percent call his performance fair, and 20 percent perceive it as poor.

As with Christie, half of respondents were asked to use letter grades for Obama's job performance. Among these registered voters, 11 percent give him an "A" and another 32 percent, a "B." Both of these reflect the same responses as the excellent and good ratings. In the letter grading, 30 percent assigned a "C," again similar to the 30 percent rating Obama as "fair". Finally, 14 percent give Obama a "D" and 12 percent an "F."

"The president is doing a little better overall than the governor, according to voters," said Redlawsk. "The biggest difference is that more give Christie very negative - D or F - ratings than do for Obama. We also learn that interpreting 'excellent' and 'good' ratings is pretty straightforward, but 'fair' might not be as negative as we usually say it is, since it seems to correspond with a 'C' rating."

Menendez becoming better known; evaluation more positive than negative

U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez is viewed favorably by 34 percent of registered voters, and unfavorably by 28 percent. At the same time, 38 percent have no opinion on Menendez. In a December poll, 29 percent of voters had a favorable view of Menendez, while 27 percent viewed him negatively. Forty-four percent were neutral. In the span two months, Garden Staters have become more aware of Menendez, and are slightly more likely to view him favorably than unfavorably as they learn more about him.

While Democrats were more likely than Republicans to have a favorable view of Menendez (55 percent to 17 percent), even a third of Democrats still have no opinion, while 39 percent of Republicans and 42 percent of independents offer no impression of the senator.

Tenure and Pay Reform Package Popular

2011-03-05T12:00:00.003-05:00

Governor Chris Christie may have hit the sweet spot with his package of tenure and pay reforms for K-12 teachers in New Jersey, according to our latest polling numbers here at Eagleton. While last fall voters told us they did not think teacher pay should be linked solely to student test scores. But Garden Staters are for the most part happy with the idea of tying pay to more holistic evaluations, that include test scores as part of the rubric.

Voters do not like tenure itself, though if it exists they want it tied directly to teacher evaluations.

The full text of the release follows. Click here for a PDF of the release along with questions and tables.

NEW JERSEY VOTERS FAVOR CHRISTIE TEACHER TENURE REFORM PROPOSALS
OK with using test scores as part of teacher evaluation

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - New Jersey voters generally support key planks in Gov. Chris Christie's proposals to reform teacher tenure and pay, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Families with school-age children and those without support reforms that would eliminate lifetime tenure, change how teachers are evaluated and tie pay to performance. While public employee union households want no change, others strongly disagree.

"While some voters, especially those who feel negatively toward the governor are dubious about the proposals, for the most part New Jerseyans seem to embrace his ideas," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University.

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. A weighted subsample of 811 registered voters is reported here, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points.

Strong opposition to current teacher tenure policies

After being briefed on the current K-12 teacher tenure system, 58 percent of registered voters disapprove of the tenure policies while only 40 percent approve. In a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll last October, just 28 percent approved tenure when told some believe it prevents bad teachers from being removed, rejecting the idea that it is necessary for academic freedom.

"Taken together, these results tell us that New Jerseyans are nuanced in their response to tenure," said Redlawsk. "When tenure is presented as providing due process, it gains more support than when it is described as a choice between academic freedom and protection of bad teachers. But in either case, a majority of voters doesn't like it."

Public employee union households are stronger supporters of tenure: two-thirds approve the status quo. Private union members disagree, however, with only 40 percent approving and 55 percent disapproving. Among nonunion households, 34 percent approve and 64 percent disapprove.

There are no differences between households with school-age children and those without, but partisan differences loom large, the poll found. Democrats, by a 2-to-1 margin over Republicans (53 percent to 26 percent), support current tenure policies. Independents are closer to Republicans on tenure, with only 36 percent in favor.

Personal feelings about Christie also strongly predict opposition to tenure: 21 percent of respondents who approve of the governor agree with the current tenure system versus 56 percent of those who disapprove of Christie.

"The governor's tenure reform package is closely connected to him, since he is not only its most visible cheerleader, but has been vocal in attacking the current system," said Redlawsk.

Comprehensive teacher evaluations including test scores welcomed

The administration's proposed changes to tenure include evaluating teachers on such indicators as standardized test scores, classroom observations and schoolwide student performance. Six-in-10 voters call this a fair approach, while 37 percent say it is unfair.

As with tenure itself, party identification helps predict support for the policy. Republicans are 12 points more likely to say the proposal is fair, though even 55 percent of Democrats support the idea. But respondents' impression of Christie is an even stronger predictor once again. Three-quarters of voters who like the governor say these changes in evaluation standards would be fair. But support drops precipitously among those who view Christie negatively. These voters are distinctly opposed to the plan: 44 percent see it as fair while 53 percent say it is unfair. And among public employee union households, only 36 percent see the proposal as fair.

Voters want tenure tied to teacher evaluations

New Jersey voters also support the administration's proposal to make it harder for teachers to gain tenure and easier to lose it. Nearly two-thirds want tenure linked directly to positive or negative teacher evaluations. Again, liking Christie drives support even higher, to 81 percent, while those who dislike the governor are evenly split, 48 percent approving to 50 percent disapproving.

Concurrently, voters recognize that "one size does not fit all" when it comes to evaluations. More than eight-in-10 agree adjustments should be made for teachers who teach where "children struggle and may not perform well" on state tests. Neither partisanship nor personal feelings about Christie change this response.

"New Jerseyans clearly accept Governor Christie's claims that the current system is broken, and thus needs to be reformed," said Redlawsk. "At the same time, they want these reforms to be fairly applied, recognizing that some teachers have a tougher time than others."

Pay should be tied to scores and other indicators

Garden Staters strongly believe teachers' pay should be tied to new standards. The towns in which they teach as well as their subjects or areas of specialization also should be considered. Sixty percent of respondents approve linking pay to evaluations, while 35 percent disapprove. Almost three-quarters of Christie supporters back the measure, while only half of those with an unfavorable impression of the governor agree.

The findings are substantially different from reactions to using only test scores to determine teacher pay. Last October's Rutgers-Eagleton Poll found that only 32 percent of respondents would support a proposal to link teacher pay solely to student test scores.

"Last time, we found little support for basing pay directly on test scores," said Redlawsk. "Now a more holistic approach is clearly supported, allowing tests to play a role, but not be the only basis for rewarding teachers."

New Jerseyans warming to cuts to services

2011-03-03T00:01:00.003-05:00

We have a treasure-trove of data in this latest Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. Today we release our findings on how voters are responding to possible budget cuts in specific areas and how little they want to raise revenue. This release talks a lot about last year - that poll was done a couple weeks after Gov. Chris Christie's first budget speech. The 2010 release can be read here.

In a nutshell what we find is that fewer New Jerseyans oppose cutting across all of the budget areas we mentioned, though they remain most supportive of their schools and services for the poor. And, not surprisingly, they still don't want to raise taxes or tolls, except on the wealthy. (Our initial budget release for this year discusses this as well.)

Full text of the release follows. A PDF of the text and tables for this release can be found here.

NEW JERSEYANS WARMING TO CUTS TO SERVICES, STILL MOST PROTECTIVE OF EDUCATION

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - Despite divided opinions on Gov. Chris Christie's budget, New Jersey voters are warming to the idea of budget cutting, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Following last week's budget address, Garden Staters are less likely to want to protect a wide range of program areas than they were in March 2010.

Specifically, voters are 8 points less likely to say no cuts should be made to municipal aid, 10 points less likely to want to protect environmental programs and 12 points less likely to oppose cuts to colleges and universities than they were after the governor's first budget address. At the same time, voters continue to oppose increasing revenue through higher taxes and tools.

"Governor Christie talked about the 'new normal' in his budget speech. For voters, the new normal appears to be greater acceptance of budget cuts," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. "While Democrats still resist many cuts and are more likely to support revenue increases, independents are looking more like Republicans in their support for budget cutting."

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. A weighted subsample of 811 registered voters is reported here, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points.

Budget cuts: more protection for schools and programs for the poor

New Jersey voters are split in their reaction to the governor's budget, with 45 percent pleased and 48 percent displeased. But when asked about specific services, support varies significantly.

For the second straight year, New Jersey voters are most supportive of their schools and programs for the poor. Half say there should be no cuts at all to state aid to schools while 13 percent want school aid cut more deeply.

In his budget, Christie's proposed an increase in state aid to local school districts, though aid will remain far below pre-2010 levels. Last year, 57 percent said they wanted no cuts to school aid, while 15 percent wanted deep cuts.

Likewise, there remains significant support for programs to help less well off New Jerseyans, though support has also declined: 42 percent want no cuts in such programs, compared to 51 percent a year ago, while 16 percent want these programs cut more deeply, a 2 percent bump from 2010.

"New Jerseyans have warmed to program cuts - even to the most supported programs - to close the budget deficit," said Redlawsk. "And while most still oppose deep cuts to education and assistance to the poor, more are willing to cut at least something."

Two-thirds of Democrats are much more likely to oppose cuts in aid to school districts compared to 38 percent of Republicans and 42 percent of independents. More than half are against poverty assistance program cuts, versus about one-third of Republicans and independents. Last year, the latter were much closer to Democrats in their support of these programs.

Retired and unemployed voters see government programs for the poor more as much more important than those who are employed: 50 percent of retirees and 49 percent of unemployed New Jerseyans think that these programs should not be cut at all, compared to 39 percent of those employed full-time, and 34 percent of those employed part-time.

Large majorities OK other cuts

Garden Staters are significantly more willing to see cuts in other areas. Twenty-three percent oppose cuts to municipal aid, 29 percent to cuts in environmental programs, and 34 percent to cuts to public transportation funding. Another 37 percent oppose any cuts to colleges and universities. Voters especially seem more willing to see cuts to higher education than in March 2010, when nearly half said higher education should suffer "no cuts at all." More than a quarter of voters want aid to local government and environmental programs to be cut "more deeply" for budget balancing purposes. Overall, voters are now more likely to support budget cuts in all programs presented in the poll.

GOP voters overwhelmingly favor cuts to environmental programs (80 percent) compared to independents (71 percent) and Democrats (62 percent). They favor "deeper cuts" to environmental programs to balance the state budget by a 42 percent to 13 percent margin over Democrats.

Both Democrats and Republicans agree that state aid to local government should be cut, but Republicans and independents prefer deeper reductions. One-third of each group believes state aid to local government should be cut "more deeply" than other programs, compared to one-fifth of Democrats. Democrats also are more likely to oppose any cuts to funding colleges and universities (50 percent) compared to Republicans (28 percent) and Independents (29 percent).

Retired voters are more likely to oppose cuts to public transportation spending (42 percent), while other voters, even unemployed New Jerseyans, are more likely to support transit budget cuts.

Little support for tax and toll hikes

New Jerseyans overwhelmingly are against raising taxes or tolls to balance the budget, with the exception of a sales tax on "luxury goods," supported by 75 percent of respondents. High earners (more than $150,000 per year) are more likely to support a luxury tax than those making under $50,000 per year by 81 percent to 64 percent.

"With consistent strong support for a tax increase on 'millionaires,' and now this, New Jerseyans seem happy to ask the rich to pay more," said Redlawsk. "It is interesting that high-income voters are even more supportive. Maybe they also recognize the need to share the pain of the state's financial troubles."

In contrast, a majority of those polled oppose raising the gas tax (70 percent), the state income tax (73 percent), adding the sales tax to clothing (61 percent), higher highway tolls (57 percent), and increased business taxes (56 percent).

Looking at specific groups, high-income voters are less likely to support tax increases than those who are retired, unemployed or earning less than $50,000 per year.

"The take-home is a little different from last year," said Redlawsk. "After a year of hearing how bad things are, voters are more willing to accept program cuts to balance the budget. But for the most part they are still completely uninterested in paying more."

Wordle on Responses to Christie's Budget

2011-03-02T06:00:00.000-05:00

Just for fun, we ran the open ended responses to Gov. Christie's budget from the respondents in our latest poll through Wordle, which creates nifty pictures from text data. After asking if they were pleased or displeased with the budget, we then asked people to tell us "in their own words" why. The responses "look" very different between those who like the budget and those who don't.

First, those who are pleased with the budget:

Now those who are displeased:

Those pleased with the budget focus on how Christie is TRYING to deal with BUDGET and SPENDING CUTS. Those who are displeased on the other hand use words like EDUCATION, WORKERS, TEACHERS, while also referring to budget CUTS. Given the emphasis on budget cutting and closing the deficit, not surprising that both sides use those words, but I find it fascinating how many of the "pleased" respondents used the word TRYING, as in "Christie is trying to cut..."

I should also note those pleased with the budget use far fewer different words to describe why, compared to those who are displeased!

Just a little fun; more details on the poll itself are in the full press release.

New Jersey likes Wisconsin - or at least NJ Voters support the protests

2011-03-01T12:01:00.008-05:00

We don't usually stomp on our own poll releases with another one so quickly. However, given the timeliness of the issue, we can't help but do so. The national media has been reporting that Americans are very supportive of the public worker protests in Wisconsin. By a wide margin, Americans do not support removing the right to collective bargaining, which is at the core of the debate in Wisconsin.

We decided in our polling last week to ask our own question of NJ voters. We phrased it a bit differently: "As you may know teachers and state workers in Wisconsin have been protesting proposed cuts to benefits and bargaining rights with large rallies at their state capitol. Do you think these workers are right to protest, or should they accept the cuts and changes that are being proposed?"

The results surprised me: 65% of NJ voters say the Wisconsin workers are right to protest, while only 28% say they should accept the cuts and changes. Now NJ is of course a Democrat-leaning state, so we should probably expect support for labor, at least in general. But in this case, support runs pretty wide - even Republicans are nearly evenly split on the question.

See the text of the release below. The full release with tables is available here.

DESPITE SUPPORTING PUBLIC WORKER BENEFIT CUTS, GARDEN STATERS SUPPORT WISCONSIN PROTESTS

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – While New Jersey voters generally support cutting pension and health benefits for public workers to save money, these same voters strongly back state workers who are protesting in Wisconsin, according to results of a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today.

While more than half of voters want to see significant changes to pension and health benefits in New Jersey, 65 percent also say that workers in Wisconsin are “right to protest” against benefits cuts and changes to collective bargaining. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has proposed to cut public worker pay and benefits and to eliminate most collective bargaining rights. A bill implementing this proposal has passed the Wisconsin Assembly and is awaiting action in the state Senate.

“The big difference between New Jersey and Wisconsin is that Governor Chris Christie is not proposing to eliminate collective bargaining for public workers,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “New Jersey voters may be drawing the line. They support Christie on benefits cuts but disapprove eliminating unions’ basic reason for being.”

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. This sample, weighted to match the demographics of adult New Jerseyans, includes 811 registered voters, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points for the subsample.

Cutting public worker benefits in New Jersey

As reported earlier [http://eagletonpoll.blogspot.com], New Jersey voters generally support proposals to cut public worker pension benefits and increase their share of health costs. Depending on the details, Garden Staters support increasing the cost of health insurance for public workers with a plan presented as bipartisan by a 53 percent to 44 percent margin. Similar numbers (54 percent to 40 percent) support Christie’s pension reform.

“While not wildly popular, and distinctly unpopular among Democrats and public workers, more New Jerseyans than not think the governor is on the right track with his proposals to reform pension and health benefits,” said Redlawsk.

Support for Wisconsin workers

Despite agreeing with Christie on changes to public worker benefits here, voters are not looking for public employee unions to be destroyed in Wisconsin. Nearly two-thirds of Garden State voters support the protests. Only 28 percent say Wisconsin public workers should “accept the cuts and changes.”

“While there has been no serious discussion here of eliminating collective bargaining rights for public workers, these results should give pause,” said Redlawsk. “Though respondents believe that benefits for public workers have become too rich for the state to afford, they do appear to have sympathy for public employees.”

Protest support runs deep in New Jersey

Support for the protestors is weakest among those pleased with Christie’s proposed budget (40 percent supportive versus 52 percent not supportive). Among the plurality of voters displeased with the budget, 86 percent say Wisconsin workers are right to protest. Only 10 percent of these voters say they should accept the cuts and changes.

Not surprisingly, Democrats strongly support the protests rather than the proposed changes, 81 percent to 12 percent. Independents feel likewise, 63 percent to 29 percent. Republicans are more evenly split: 43 percent support and 47 percent do not support protests. Seventy-seven percent of voters under 30 back the workers, but only 52 percent of voters over 65 do so.

Voters in New Jersey union households strongly support the workers in Wisconsin by more than a 5-to-1 margin. The ratio is 2-to-1 in nonunion households, results Redlawsk calls surprising.

New Jerseyans Split Over Gov. Christie’s Proposed Budget

2011-03-01T00:01:00.000-05:00

After a long break for the holidays and various academic tasks, we have a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll out. We decided to wait until AFTER the Governor's budget speech last Tuesday so we could gauge reactions to it much as we did last year.

Our first release on this poll follows. Basic finding: People who like Christie like his budget (and vice versa). Those who don't, don't. No great surprise there, I suppose. But it is rather interesting how split New Jersey is over the budget. And while New Jerseyans do support increasing public workers' share of benefit costs and revamping pension, support is not overwhelming - just over half give their support and around 45% oppose the Governor's proposed changes. Oh, and NJ voters still want to increase taxes on those at the top end of the income scale, just as they did last year.

Look through the release for an interesting little experiment on how voters respond to different proposals to have state workers pay more of their health benefits. When the Governor is said to propose it, support is lower than when Senate President Steve Sweeney is the proposer. But a bi-partisan proposal gets the most support.

The text of the release follows. The full release with tables can be read here.

NEW JERSEYANS SPLIT OVER GOV. CHRISTIE'S PROPOSED BUDGET

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J - New Jersey voters are split in their evaluation of Gov. Chris Christie's proposed budget for fiscal year 2012, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. While 45 percent are pleased with the budget, 48 percent are displeased, and 7 percent are not sure. Negative evaluations of Christie's budget appear motivated both by feelings that its proposals are unfair and by a dislike of the governor's leadership style. Positive evaluations originate in the belief Christie is trying to drastically reduce spending and in favorable personal impressions.

"While the national media give the governor plaudits for making tough budget choices, Garden Staters are not completely pleased, showing the same polarized opinions that we've seen all along," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University.

The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. This sample, weighted to match the demographics of adult New Jerseyans, includes 811 registered voters, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points for this subsample, reported on here.

Most voters paying attention; reactions mixed

Nearly 70 percent of registered voters have heard or read something about the budget: 27 percent say they heard "a lot," 42 percent "some," 20 percent "a little" and 10 percent say they heard nothing at all.

"As they did last year, New Jerseyans continue to pay lots of attention to the governor's budget, whether they like it or not," said Redlawsk. "Voters recognize he shapes the debate."

Impressions of the budget are mixed from those who have heard at least a little about it. Only 11 percent say they are "very pleased" while another 34 percent are "somewhat pleased." Displeasure is significantly stronger, with 22 percent of voters "very displeased" and 26 percent "somewhat displeased."

"Reactions to this year's budget are very similar to last year's," noted Redlawsk, adding 13 percent were very pleased with Christie's first budget and 29 percent were very displeased. The extent of the polarization is stark: 87 percent of those pleased with the budget hold a favorable impression of Christie while only 8 percent have an unfavorable impression. Conversely, 8 percent of those displeased with the budget feel favorable toward the governor, while 81 percent hold an unfavorable opinion.

Reactions to the budget

Voters pleased with the budget overwhelmingly point to Christie's budget-cutting decisions (47 percent) and leadership and decision-making style (24 percent) for their favorable views. Ten percent cite his approach to taxes and 9 percent point specifically to the proposal to make state employees contribute more to their benefits packages. Fewer than 5 percent say cuts in schools/education funding is the primary reason for their approval. Three percent say the proposal pleases them because of policies targeting teachers.

Fairness is the key word for those displeased with the budget, with 29 percent saying the proposal is not fair. These voters argue the budget targets the middle class, working people, the poor, or the elderly. Even though Christie proposes increasing school funding over last year, 25 percent are displeased because of cuts to education, while 18 percent cite general cuts in spending.

Thirteen percent are critical of the governor's leadership style, but only 5 percent specifically note their displeasure with requiring state employees to pay a larger share of their benefits. Finally, 4 percent criticize the budget due to the lack of tax cuts, and another 4 percent say they disapprove because it seems to target teachers.

Voters want Christie to compromise; Legislature to protect some programs

Sixty-five percent of those who have heard about the budget want the Legislature to protect some programs from large cuts, while only 28 percent say they support the governor's budget cutting as is. In addition, only 21 percent believe the governor should stick to his beliefs during the budget debate, but 77 percent say he should be willing to compromise.

Not surprisingly, those pleased with the budget are more likely to support budget cuts and are less likely to want compromise. About 59 percent of these voters support the governor's budget cuts, while 33 percent want the Legislature to protect some programs. Even so, 59 percent of those pleased with the budget also call for compromise, while 38 percent say Christie should stick to his beliefs.

At the same time, 93 percent of those displeased with the budget are looking for compromise, while 94 percent want the Legislature to protect some programs from large cuts, compared to 6 percent who support the large cuts in the governor's budget.

"What's most interesting is how strong the desire for compromise is," said Redlawsk. "We would expect those opposing the budget to want Christie to compromise, but so do those who support his budget cutting efforts. Voters clearly want both sides to come together in making budget decisions."

More support for Sweeney health benefits proposal versus Christie proposal

As the debate over requiring public workers in New Jersey to pay a larger share of their health benefit costs grows, Christie and Democratic State Senate President Stephen Sweeney have unveiled dueling proposals; Christie calls for all public workers to pay 30 percent of health insurance costs and Sweeney proposes a phased-in sliding scale from 12 percent to 30 percent.

About one-third of respondents were asked specifically about Christie's proposal, one-third about Sweeney's, and one-third were told both had proposed similar changes. All were told these changes would triple costs for most public workers.

Among voters learning about Christie's proposal, 42 percent support the idea, while 54 percent oppose it. Sweeney's proposal fares better, with 50 percent in support and 45 percent opposed. Finally, when voters are told about bipartisan support for requiring public workers to pay more, support is highest, with 53 percent in favor and 44 percent opposed.

"New Jersey voters are ready to see public workers pay more for their health care, but the strength of their support depends on who is proposing the plan, and the small differences between them," said Redlawsk. "Christie's plan gets less support, probably because of a combination of partisan effects and his polarizing nature. Sweeney, on the other hand, is less visible and does not get as many hackles up. His proposed sliding scale may also seem a little fairer."

Across all three versions of the question, voters are evenly split, with 48 percent in support of increasing health insurance payments for public workers and 48 percent opposed. Voters' own health care situation influences their position on this issue. Those who pay the full cost of their health care strongly favor asking public employees to contribute more, with 63 percent support. But among those who pay only a portion of their own costs, 53 percent support increasing costs for public workers, while only 27 percent of those whose employer pays the full cost agree. About a third (35 percent) with no health care insurance say the same. Among those on Medicare or Medicaid, 45 percent support increasing worker contributions.

Shared sacrifice: support for public worker benefits cut and millionaire's tax

Besides cuts in health benefits, voters support the outlines of the governor's proposed overhaul of the state pension plan, raising costs and cutting benefits. More than half support his pension overhaul plan, with 28 percent offering strong support and 26 percent saying they somewhat support the overhaul. Of the 40 percent opposed, 17 percent somewhat oppose the plan, and 23 percent strongly oppose it.

At the same time, a strong majority also wants the so-called "millionaire's tax" back on the table. Of the nearly three-quarters who express support for the tax, 52 percent strongly support a legislative attempt to increase taxes on the rich to help close budget gaps. An additional 20 percent say they would somewhat support this tax. Only 27 percent oppose it, 12 percent "somewhat" and 15 percent "strongly."

Voters have become more supportive of taxing high income earners since February 2010, when 62 percent of registered voters opposed eliminating the surtax for those making more than $400,000 annually. Moreover, support for increased taxation of rich Garden Staters remains broad today, with 82 percent of Democrats, 72 percent of independents, and even 53 percent of Republicans supporting an increased tax rate for incomes above $1 million.

"While voters are more than willing to have public employees see significant cuts in pension and health benefits, they also strongly believe the sacrifice should be shared," said Redlawsk. "While the governor uses the mantra of shared sacrifice, voters specifically believe that costs should also be paid by those at the top of the income scale."

Most important priority

Asked to pick the most important proposals in Christie's budget speech, reforming the pension system is first (28 percent), followed by increasing property tax rebates (21 percent), eliminating teacher tenure (18 percent), requiring public employees to pay more of their benefits cost (14 percent) and cutting business taxes (12 percent).

Pay-to-Play and Political Corruption

2011-02-20T21:20:00.004-05:00

While we're waiting on the next Rutgers-Eagleton Poll (coming soon, I promise!) here are some thoughts on a topic that is regularly of interest in New Jersey: political corruption.

There certainly has been a lot of talk about corruption in New Jersey over the years. And Garden Staters are dubious at best about the ethics of their politicians according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll we did in late 2009. Among the efforts to deal with corruption over the past few years has been pay-to-play laws, designed to limit the ability of large campaign donors to score contracts from local government.

Recently, there has been some discussion of whether Mayor Tony Mack violated Trenton's pay-to-pay laws by in effect having money donated to his campaign through a third party.

Last June, Atlantic City law firm Cooper Levenson donated $7,200 to Partners for Progress "which donated an identical amount to Mack's campaign three days later." The city attorney feels this violated the spirit of the pay-to-play law and attempted to nullify the contract even though the firm asked for and received a refund of its campaign donation shortly after the election. Mayor Mack disagreed and stated that the contract was in good standing.

More recently, the firm asked for its contract to be terminated partly due to the negative press it was receiving.

On the other side of the state, Atlantic City is about to pass its own pay-to-play ordinance in order to quality for state assistance with its budget problems. This is the latest in a patchwork of municipal and county ordinances that are popping up sporadically.

While people may say that the passage of all these ordinances is good news, the real challenge is a lack of consistency and clarity in the laws in different places. A municipality’s mayor and attorney should not be able to reasonably disagree over whether campaign finance laws were broken, yet that is exactly the situation Trenton has found itself in. What we’re left with now is an administration that is either facing a real scandal or an innocent situation blown out of proportion.

Yet the idea of the pay-to-play laws is to address the very real sense among Garden Staters that this state is inherently corrupt. In our 2009 poll, 65% of New Jerseyans agreed that "that there is 'a lot' of political corruption in New Jersey." (PDF link) This is an increase of 20 points from 2004! This same poll found that a plurality of respondents favored citizen's groups to take the lead on ethics with 28% and only 22% choosing state and federal prosecutors. Moreover, New Jerseyans overwhelmingly would prefer ineffective honest politicians over effective dishonest ones.

It may be that the increase in perceptions of corruption in the state is partly due to headlines where it’s not entirely clear whether or not someone violated the law. And there is little doubt that the flow of money in politics both helps feed the perception, but of course also creates the reality of corruption as well.

Money is never going to leave politics and even local campaigns get more sophisticated and costly nearly every cycle. The recession and pay-to-play laws have resulted in somewhat of a decrease in fundraising lately but this is partly due to fear on the part of donors who don’t want to risk contracts. So instead other ways are found, including donating to organizations not legally running “campaigns” and thus not required to disclose where their money comes from. What we’ll be left with is donations made with no legal obligation to disclose donors. And without disclosure how do we even know if pay-to-play laws work?

Much more is going to need to e done to restore Garden Stater’s confidence in their elected officials.

(Note, Thanks to Jorge Santos for his contributions to this post.)

The Iowa Caucuses are Coming - Will Chris Christie be there?

2011-02-20T20:49:00.003-05:00

We've been away for the holiday break and then working hard to get the semester started here at Rutgers. In addition to my position directing the Rutgers-Eagleton poll, I am also a Professor of Political Science. So for the past couple months I have been dealing with the more "professorial" parts of my job - preparing and teaching classes and publishing research. With colleagues at the University of Iowa and Western Washington University, I published a new book on the Iowa Caucuses and presidential nominations called "Why Iowa?" You can learn more about the book at our website WhyIowa.org and read a chapter on how the Iowa Caucuses work.

In the book we examine how the Iowa Caucuses help determine who wins the presidential nomination. No doubt that Iowa launched Barack Obama in 2008, and the win by Mike Huckabee there opened the way for John McCain. The caucus campaigns are underway for the Republicans in 2012. One estimate is that before the end of 2010, there had already been 14 potential candidates visiting Iowa with a total of 45 visits for 65 days. Even New Hampshire has not seen as many visits. And trust me, I lived in Iowa for 10 years. It is a great place, but most people do not choose to visit there in the dead of winter without a very good reason! Those who visit may not yet have declared for president, but they are all certainly dipping at least a toe in the water.

This leads to Governor Chris Christie, currently a darling of those Republicans trying to find a candidate other than the obvious ones. The governor, of course, denies he is running, and logic would suggest he ought to be believed. After all, why run now against an incumbent president, when you've only been in office a year? It makes more sense to raise the national image while focusing primarily on New Jersey's own challenges and getting re-elected in 2013. Moreover, it would seem likely that President Obama will be a formidable opponent, and is probably a favorite for re-election even in the current environment. So if the Governor focuses on (and wins) re-election in 2013, he will be well positioned to begin running in 2014 for the 2016 nomination. Yes, that's right, the campaign starts years in advance.

History suggests that if Governor Christie were running for 2012, he would have to have begun the process by now. As noted above (potential) candidates are already active in Iowa and elsewhere, raising money, talking with activists, and signing on consultants. And he would have been in Iowa - oops, that's right, he HAS already been in Iowa! Still it takes more than showing up once or twice to nail down the Iowa Caucuses, and McCain notwithstanding, doing well in Iowa is almost always a requirement for building the momentum necessary to do well in later states. Skipping Iowa rarely (if ever) pays off - ask President Giuliani how well that strategy worked. And more importantly, winning Iowa requires building a grassroots organization. Some have tried to do it primarily with money (see Forbes, Romney, for example) but those best organized on the ground prevail. Iowa is about good old fashioned grassroots, and unless one begins soon to build an organization, the caucuses are unlikely to be fertile ground for building a winning campaign.

In 2007 Republicans were waiting for months with baited breath for former Senator Fred Thompson to officially announce his campaign. The pundits thought as soon as he announced, he would zoom to the top of the list. Instead, Thompson tried to amble his way to the White House, taking a few bus trips through Iowa but showing no real interest in the give and take with voters that defines an Iowa Caucus campaign. Thompson faded rapidly, and became a non factor. Waiting to jump in late in the caucus campaign season is not a winning strategy.

So is Governor Christie running for president? I take him at his word right now that he is not - certainly if he is, he needs to begin the campaign, even if under the radar. Doing well in Iowa probably matters, and no candidate can do well there without building a grassroots campaign. And that takes time.

How's The Governor Doing? The Latest from the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll

2010-12-20T14:18:00.006-05:00

As a wrap up to a very busy year of polling, we present one final release on our December poll. Since it's close to the end of the first year for NJ Governor Chris Christie, it seemed appropriate to take a look at his job performance ratings in some kind of context. So we went back to old Eagleton polls (available here) to see how other governors were doing at a similar point in their first terms.

Christie gets some of the highest AND some of the lowest ratings - that's right, he is more polarizing than any other governor for whom we have data (back to Brendan Byrne in 1974). And his overall job rating - which nets out negatively at the moment - is actually about the middle of the pack, equal to Tom Kean's first year rating.

New Jersey tends to be pretty hard on its governors, at least in terms of their first year ratings.

One small problem with our data - for the last two governors the poll asked the question differently than before or since. Instead of giving a four point scale - excellent, good, fair, poor - the pollsters back then asked if people "approved" or "disapproved" the job the governor was doing. So that limits us somewhat for both Jim McGreevey and Jon Corzine, but even so we have some interesting data to look at.

The press release follows. A PDF with tables and questions included can be found here.

Governor Christie Generates Divided Responses as First Year Ends

Job Rating More Polarized than Most First-year NJ Governors; Overall in Middle of the Pack

NEW BRUNSWICK – As his first year draws to a close, New Jerseyans are split about Gov. Chris Christie’s job performance with a majority rating him only fair or poor, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton poll released today. Only 39 percent of Garden State residents rate the governor’s job performance either excellent (17 percent) or good (22 percent), compared to 54 percent who rate him fair (26 percent) or poor (28 percent), and 6 percent who are unsure. Support is stronger among those who say they voted in the recent congressional election: 21 percent of voters rate his performance excellent, and 23 percent rate him as good. Another 23 percent say he is doing a fair job and 29 percent say he is doing a poor job, while 4 percent of voters are unsure.

Gov. Christie’s “poor” rating is the second highest over the history of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll in the first year of a new governor, while his “excellent” rating is also among the highest. Since Gov. Brendan Byrne, only Gov. Jim Florio has performed worse, while Christie’s overall positive job rating of 39 percent equals or beats other first-year governors except Jon Corzine (53 percent approval) and Christie Whitman (52 percent good or excellent).

“Historically, New Jerseyans are pretty hard on their governors in the first year,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “And Gov. Christie has clearly polarized the Garden State. The 45 percent of adults who rate his job at one extreme or the other is exceeded only by the 48 percent who did so with Gov. Florio during September of his first year.”

The poll of 906 New Jersey adults was conducted December 2-6. The full sample has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. The sample includes 666 respondents who say they voted in the 2010 congressional elections. This subsample has a margin of error of +/- 3.8 percentage points.

Christie job performance rating stable; middle of the first-year governor pack

Gov. Christie’s job performance rating has been consistent over the past few months. His favorable ratings (excellent and good) have generally been between 40 and 45 percent with little change despite controversies like the Race to the Top education funding, the recent ARC tunnel cancellation, and other events. Likewise negative views have generally hovered between 52 and 58 percent. Since August his job performance rating has been more negative than positive.

However, compared to Governors since 1974, Christie’s job ratings are similar to or better than most early in the first term. The highest-rated was Gov. Christie Whitman, with 52 to 56 percent giving her positive ratings in her first year, followed by 53 percent approval of Corzine’s performance at about the same point. Gov. Tom Kean’s rating of 39 percent positive in 1982 is equal to Christie’s while only 27 to 33 percent rated Gov. Brendan Byrne positively late in 1974. Gov. Jim McGreevey’s job performance was approved of by 34 percent after his first year, while Gov. Jim Florio did worst with an 18 percent positive rating in late 1990 and 21 percent in early 1991.

“One thing is clear from this historical data – we cannot make predictions on the rest of the term based on how citizens view governors in the first year,” said Redlawsk. “Both Gov. Corzine and Gov. Whitman had high positive ratings at the beginning. But in the end Whitman barely hung on for a second term, and Corzine was defeated. Likewise, Gov. Kean’s rating was middling at best, and he won a second term by an unprecedented margin.”

Governor Christie more polarizing

Christie’s ratings are more polarized than those of previous governors where data exists, with half of voters and 45 percent of all respondents giving his job performance either an “excellent” or a “poor” rating. In comparison, for most governors back to Brendan Byrne, fewer than 25 percent chose one of the more extreme categories. More Garden Staters say that Christie is doing an excellent job (17 percent of all, and 21 percent of voters) than gave an excellent rating to the next highest, Gov. Whitman (about 13 percent), early in her term.

Similarly, Christie’s “poor” rating beats everyone except Gov. Florio by a wide margin. Twenty-eight percent of adults (29 percent of voters) rate his job performance as “poor” compared to Florio’s 38 to 45 percent at a similar time in his term. No other governor is above the 20 percent “poor” given to Gov. Byrne in January 1975.

“The image of Gov. Christie as polarizing is borne out in the data,” said Redlawsk. “While many Garden Staters see him as a breath of fresh air making needed changes in Trenton, even more rank him as low as they can on our rating scale. The events of his term so far have done little to temper this polarization. If anything, polarization has increased since September.”

Christie support highest among Tea Party supporters

Christie’s job performance is rated highest among Republicans with a favorable impression of the Tea Party movement, offering a clue to why he may be so polarizing. Eighty percent of Republicans holding a favorable opinion of the Tea Party rate Christie positively with 43 percent saying he is doing an excellent job and 37 percent rating his job performance as good. Only 17 percent say he is doing a fair job and 3 percent say he is doing a poor job. Republicans who are not favorable towards the Tea Party movement feel more negative towards the governor. Overall 57 percent of this group – which makes up 45 percent of all Republicans – rate the governor as good or excellent, while 41 percent give him a fair or poor rating.

Independents and Democrats feel negatively about Christie’s job performance after nearly a year in office. While 40 percent of independents say the governor is doing an excellent or good job, 52 percent rate him only fair or poor. Democrats, not surprisingly, are very negative: 18 percent say the governor is doing a good or excellent job while 76 percent call his performance fair or poor.

“Tea Party supporters clearly form the governor’s base and are generally very happy with his performance to date,” said Redlawsk. “However, his negative ratings among independents and his less positive ratings among non-Tea Party Republicans suggests potential trouble getting support for some of his major reform proposals. The polarization in these data is unlikely to subside any time soon.”

Impressions of Christie more positive than job performance

Despite his job performance ratings, more New Jerseyans say they have a favorable impression of the governor overall. While 38 percent view him unfavorably, 45 percent express a favorable impression, with 17 percent either neutral or unsure of their feelings toward the governor.

Over the first year of his term, Christie has been seen favorably by fewer than 50 percent of Garden Staters. While in April 2010 his 33 percent favorable rating was substantially lower, in five out of six polls over the year about 45 percent of respondents had a favorable impression of the Governor. Overall his rating has been slightly more favorable than unfavorable most of the year.

“Despite qualms about the job he is doing, Garden Staters on average see Christie in a fairly favorable light,” said Redlawsk. “Even where they may disagree with his policies or see his job performance more negatively, as an individual they tend to like him more than dislike him.”

Quality of Life Followup: Garden Staters Like Their Communities Better than Their State

2010-12-16T09:25:00.003-05:00

Last April we did a quality of life type survey of New Jerseyans where we asked a series of questions about living in the Garden State. At the time we probably were a bit too positive in our assessment of the results, at least at the state level. Half of NJ residents thought NJ a good or excellent place to live, which seemed pretty good given the current economic and political environment. But looking back much further, those numbers were really rather down over prior decades.

We decided to re-ask some of the questions and to ask some new ones in our most recent survey. The results are similar - in general Garden Staters really DO like their local communities and give lots of reasons for doing so. But they are more skeptical of the state itself, and most telling, a majority thinks things have gotten worse in the last 5-10 years. When we last asked that question, back in April 2001, only 26% thought things had gotten worse. So there is much more negativity about the direction of the state these days. Even so, in the glass half full department, 80% remain at least somewhat "proud" of living in New Jersey.

Following is the text of the release. You can find the full release with questions, tables, and trends here.

Garden Staters Like Their Communities Better than Their State

NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ – New Jersey residents continue to have mixed views about living in the Garden State, continuing a trend identified in April 2010, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. While 78 percent of New Jerseyans feel positive about the communities in which they live, they are far more negative about the state itself, with a majority thinking New Jersey has become a worse place to live over the past five to ten years. Just over half feel positive about living in New Jersey, and half say they take a lot of pride in living in the state. Still, one in five says they take little or no pride in being part of the Garden State.

“New Jerseyans have a strong sense of liking their own communities even as they are less positive about the state as a whole,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. “Nine years ago when we asked about the state’s direction, only 26 percent said New Jersey had become a worse place to live. But today 52 percent believe things have gone downhill in recent years. Still, these negative feelings about the state do not translate into dislike for the local communities in which people live.”

The poll of 906 New Jersey adults was conducted December 2-6. The full sample has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points.

Local communities rate highly

Asked to rate their own community as a place to live, 37 percent of New Jerseyans say their community is excellent and 41 percent rate it as good, while 16 percent say their community is only fair, and 6 percent call it a poor place to live.
Those living in exurban areas of the state are much more likely to believe their local communities are excellent places to live (55 percent) than those living in other areas of the state. Only 20 percent of urban residents think their local communities are excellent, while somewhat more than a third of those living in suburban, shore, and Philadelphia areas agree.

Exurban residents are least likely to say their communities are only fair or poor at 11 percent, while 19 percent of shore area, 21 percent of suburban, and 22 percent of Philadelphia area residents say the same. Urban residents are most likely to dislike their communities, with 39 percent calling their community a fair or poor place to live.

Asked why they rate their community as they do, respondents have a wide range of answers. Among those feeling positive (excellent or good) about their community, 27 percent say it is the people that make it a good place to live, while 22 percent cite the safety of their community. About 13 percent say the environment, open space, and local beauty makes them feel positive, and 9 percent say the accessibility of their locale is what matters. Education is named by 8 percent.
Among those who feel more negative (fair or poor) toward their local community, the top responses include the people living there (19 percent), followed by economic hard times and unemployment (15 percent), crime (15 percent), lack of public services and problems with government (14 percent) and taxes (12 percent).

“The good news is that most New Jerseyans do like their communities and have many good reasons for doing so,” said Redlawsk. “And while ‘people’ are named as a reason to dislike a community as well as to like it, other reasons for feeling unhappy about where they live represent the litany of problems many communities do face.”

New Jerseyans remain less positive about the state; distinctly negative about its direction

While attitudes towards local communities are quite positive, feelings about the state as a whole are no better than they were when the same question was asked nine months ago. Only 14 percent say New Jersey is an excellent place to live, while another 39 percent say it is good. But 32 percent say as a place to live New Jersey is only fair, and 14 percent say it is poor.

The 53 percent who rate the state as excellent or good is about the same as an April 2010 Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, which found 52 percent giving a positive rating to the state. But this remains at the bottom of ratings over the past three decades. Archival data from the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll show that the next lowest rating was in 1990, with 59% of New Jerseyans rating the state as an excellent or good place to live while polls in the 1980s, mid and late 1990s, and 2000s reveal that more than 6 in 10 gave positive ratings to the state.

Ironically, while rating their own communities lower, those living in urban northeastern New Jersey view the state itself more favorably than in all other regions of the state. Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of urban residents say New Jersey is an excellent or good place to live, compared to 60 percent of suburbanites, 51 percent of exurban residents, 49 percent living in the Philadelphia area and 46 percent of those in shore counties. Those living in counties comprising the shore and in the Philadelphia suburbs are more likely to view New Jersey as a poor place to live, at 21 percent and 17 percent respectively.

Asked about the progress of the state over the last 5 to 10 years, only 15 percent think New Jersey has become a better place to live. A majority (52 percent) says the Garden State has become a worse place to reside, while another 29 percent say there has been no appreciable change. The last time this question was asked, in an April 2001 Star-Ledger-Eagleton Poll, only 26 percent thought the state had become a worse place to live over the preceding five to ten years, while 29 percent thought it had become better, and 39 percent reported no change.

When asked about pride in their state, 50 percent say they take a lot of pride in living in New Jersey, while 30 percent take some pride. But 13 percent say they take little and 6 take no pride in living in the state. Even so, despite more negative views towards the state as a place to live, voters are relatively positive in terms of pride in their state. The 80 percent who take at least some pride in living in New Jersey is little changed from April 2001, when 81 percent took pride in the state, though it is a decline from the 86 percent who felt that way in 1994.

“Garden Staters have a complicated relationship with their state,” said Redlawsk. “It almost seems a point of pride to complain about it. And clearly people feel things have gotten worse in the past decade. The positives are that New Jerseyans like their communities and retain significant pride in living in the state, and it is still the case that a slim majority feels positive about the state as a whole. Perhaps things will look better if and when the economy picks up.”

Race and income related to beliefs about local community; not attitudes toward state

Whites and upper income residents are far more positive about their local communities than are lower income and African Americans in New Jersey. While 84 percent of whites say their community is a good or excellent place to live, only 54 percent of African Americans agree. Likewise while 70 percent of those with household incomes under $50,000 feel positive about their local community, 91 percent of upper income respondents like where they live. On the other hand, there are no significant differences by race or income in attitudes toward the state of New Jersey itself.

Compromise? Well Maybe

2010-12-14T11:22:00.003-05:00

In our most recent poll we asked a few questions about what comes next, now that the election is over and the Republicans will control the U.S. House of Representatives. Well, not surprisingly, New Jersey Democrats and Republicans have differing opinions over what Congress should tackle first. We asked an open ended question about the first thing Congress should "fix", and found a couple interesting results.

Republicans say "fixing" health care reform is the top priority, with 23 percent, while job creation is the first priority for Democrats, mentioned by 25 percent.

The top five issues named - Economy, jobs, health care, tax cuts, and the deficit, were named by 85 percent of all Republicans, and only 67 percent of Democrats. What this suggests is that Republicans are far more focused and unified on what they see as priorities. And for Republicans, jobs are fourth on the list. Interestingly, independents, who leaned strongly Republican in voting (11 points in our survey), agree with the Democrats that jobs are job one.

And given all the focus on the deficit lately in Washington, you'd think the public cares about it. But in fact, they have much higher priorities right now - the deficit comes in a pretty distant fifth on the list.

We also asked the question about whether representatives should compromise or stick to their beliefs. Overall it looks like NJ wants them to compromise to get things done. BUT, and it's a big one, Republicans prefer their representatives stick to their beliefs (50 percent to only 31 percent of Democrats). And Tea Party supporters are even more adamant - 60 percent do not want comprise, while only 36 percent think there should be compromise.

So what does this say? Well, winners don't like to compromise, and clearly the Republicans feel like winners - even if results in NJ were far less earth shattering than elsewhere. Second, Republican legislators may feel pressure to not compromise - given their base's preferences - while Democrats will feel pressured to compromise, since their base is strongly supportive of compromise, as are independents.

The test of the release follows. The complete release with tables is here.

In the Aftermath of 2010 Elections, Republicans Want Congress to Fix Health Care Reform; Democrats Want Job Creation

NEW BRUNSWICK – New Jersey Democrats and Republicans have differing priorities for the new U.S. Congress, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. While Democrats name “jobs” as their top priority, Republicans focus on fixing the health care reform law as the most important task for Congress. Independents, while having favored Republican congressional candidates by 11 points (46 percent to 35 percent voting Democrat) agree with Democrats that jobs are the most important issue that needs to be fixed in the next Congress.

“Republicans and Democrats continue to have different priorities even after all the talk of coming together in compromise to resolve the country’s problems,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “Partisans are simply on different wavelengths – for Republicans jobs rank only fourth as a priority, while only one in ten Democrats wants to see health care re-opened.”

The poll of 906 New Jersey adults was conducted December 2-6. The full sample has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points.

The 2010 Congressional election: Independents continue to lean Republican

Of those interviewed, 64 percent said they voted and could recall the direction of their vote. Partisans did not deviate from their parties: 94 percent of both Democrats and Republicans say they voted for a congressional candidate from their party. Independents, however, continued to lean Republican as they did in last year’s gubernatorial election, with 46 percent of independents voting Republican and 35 percent voting Democrat. A surprising 19 percent of independents said they voted for a third party candidate.

“As is nearly always the case, those who identify with a party voted for a candidate from that party,” said Redlawsk. “But Democrats have to be worried that independent voters continue to show a strong preference for Republican candidates.”

Looking Forward: What Should Congress Do?

Asked in an open-ended question to name the “single most important thing” they would like Congress to “fix” in the upcoming session, 21 percent of New Jersey adults say jobs are most important, while 16 percent say the economy overall should be first. Another 16 percent say health care is the priority, while 12 percent say taxes are too high, and eight percent worry about the budget deficit.

Priorities differ widely by party however. For Democrats, jobs are the clear top priority at 26 percent, followed by the economy in general at 19 percent, and fixing health care at 11 percent. Two other issues – tax cuts and the deficit – each gather the support of 6 percent of Democrats. Republicans, however, put fixing health care at the top of their list, at 23 percent, followed by the economy (20 percent), tax cuts (18 percent), jobs (15 percent), and the budget deficit (11 percent). Independents share both parties’ priorities, though jobs (20 percent) are at the top of their list, followed by health care (15 percent), tax cuts (13 percent), the economy (11 percent) and the budget deficit (8 percent).

Redlawsk cited two key findings from the survey. “First, Republicans are just less concerned about jobs than either Democrats or independents. They focus on repealing or reshaping the recent health care reform law. Second, for all the focus in Washington on the budget deficit, it’s not what anyone wants Congress to make its top priority, given the current economic environment.”

Republicans expect some priorities to get done, Democrats and independents pessimistic

Overall, few New Jerseyans think it “very likely” that the priority they consider “most important” will “actually get done.” Their pessimism is reflected in the fact that only 7 percent say it is “very likely” Congress will address their concerns come January while another 42 percent say it is “somewhat likely” and 48 percent say it is “not at all likely.”

Republicans however, are more optimistic, reflecting their success in the election. A majority (60 percent) says that it is very or somewhat likely that Congress will accomplish what they see as the most important task, while 39 percent of Republicans think this is not at all likely. Only 46 percent of Democrats feel at all positive, while 51 percent are negative about the prospects of action on their issue. And despite leaning Republican in their votes, independents are no more optimistic than Democrats.

On specific issues, a majority of those focused on jobs and the economy think there is some chance Congress will effectively address these issues, while about 6 in 10 focused on tax cuts and the deficit think it is not at all likely Congress will fix these issues. Those who want health care fixed are also less than optimistic: 44 percent say Congress say it is at least somewhat likely Congress will act, while 51 percent say it is not at all likely.

Republicans want representatives to stick to their beliefs; Democrats want compromise

While the majority of Garden State residents want their representatives to compromise to get laws passed, Republicans are 19 points more likely than Democrats to want their representatives to “stick to their beliefs.” Across all New Jerseyans, the desire for compromise is fairly strong, with 54 percent calling for legislators to work together, compared to 38 percent who say sticking to beliefs is more important. But this is driven by Democrats and independents, and reflected in the voting results, where 65 percent of those who voted Democrat want representatives to compromise, compared to only 44 percent of those who voted Republican.

Education appears strongly related to support for compromise. While only 48 percent of those with a high school education or less support compromise, more than 60 percent of college graduates and post-graduates call for compromise in order to get laws passed.

New Jerseyans who feel favorable to the Tea Party movement are even less likely to want compromise than other Republicans. While 50 percent of Republicans want their representatives to stick to their beliefs, 60 percent of those who support the Teas Party movement hold this view.

“The desire for compromise seems a bit one-sided from a partisan perspective,” said Redlawsk. “To some extent this reflects some of the personalities of partisans, as liberals appear more read to compromise than conservatives. But also, winners are less likely to want compromise than those who lose. Even so, for compromise to work, both sides must be willing to give, as reflected in the tax cut extension bill now working through Congress.”

Tunneling into Public Opinion

2010-12-09T11:43:00.005-05:00

Yesterday we revisited the (now mostly dead) TSA security controversy that tore up the airwaves and blogs in November. Today we go back to October to look again at the Access to the Region's Core (ARC) tunnel project that Governor Chris Christie canceled saying the state cannot afford it. Back when he did this we were in the field with a poll so we asked what New Jerseyans thought. In general, they agreed with the governor, supporting his decision and expressing some dubiousness over the project's economic benefits.

We decided to ask about the tunnel again, but this time to do a little question order experiment. In October we asked people to think about the potential economic benefits of the tunnel BEFORE we asked them if they supported the Governor's decision. This time we split the sample into two groups. One was asked first about economic benefits (thus is directly comparable to October) while the other was asked about Christie's decision first.

This kind of thing is fun. And the results are instructive. People asked about the decision first - before being asked about economic benefits - are much less likely to oppose the Governor's decision than those asked about the decision before thinking about whether there are any economic benefits.

And we also find that those asked about the economic benefits after being asked about support for Christie's decision are much less likely to say the project is very important to the economy of the state. It's a classic example of priming (as were yesterday's TSA questions.) If we first ask about the decision, people are giving an answer to the economic question that is framed by first thinking about the governor's decision to cancel it. And if we ask about the benefits first, then their support of the governor's decision is primed specifically by potential economic benefits. More lessons in how important question wording and order really are to understanding the results of polls. You can't make sense of a poll if you don't know what was asked and in which order.

Read the release below for some more interesting results, including what happens if we frame questions around the potential costs of Gov. Christie's cancellation of the tunnel. You can get the PDF of the release with questions and tables here.

New Jerseyans Continue to Support Governor’s Decision to Cut ARC Tunnel

Strongly Support Proposal to Extend Subway Line under the Hudson

NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ – Controversy erupted in October when Governor Chris Christie announced that he would withdraw New Jersey’s support for the Access to the Region’s Core (ARC) tunnel project that would link northern New Jersey to Manhattan via the Hudson River. While opponents of the Governor’s plan cited stifled economic growth, supporters heralded Christie’s decision as financially responsible in a deficit-laden state.

A new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll finds that support for Governor Christie’s decision to cancel the project has grown from 51 percent to 56 percent since October’s cancellation. At the same time, a substantial majority (74 percent) supports the recent proposal by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to extend a subway line from Manhattan into New Jersey.

“It is clear that across New Jersey, residents continue to support the governor’s decision to cancel the project,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. “At the same time, there is recognition that increasing mass transit options into and out of New York – if that can be done at a lower cost – is a good idea.”

The poll of 906 New Jersey adults was conducted December 2-6. The full sample has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. Random subsamples have a margin of error of +/- 4.4 percentage points.

Thinking about economic benefits increases opposition to Christie’s decision

Supporters of the tunnel point to anticipated economic benefits, suggesting people would be more supportive of the project if they thought about its value. To test this, one group of respondents was asked whether they support Christie’s decision before being asked to consider the economic benefits of the tunnel, while the other group was asked to think about economic benefits first. The October poll asked everyone the economic benefits question first.

Asked first about Christie’s decision, 58 percent of New Jerseyans support canceling the tunnel, while 23 percent oppose it and 20 percent are unsure. But, when asked this question after a question about the economic importance of the tunnel project, opposition grows substantially, to 37 percent, while only 7 percent are unsure. Even so, 56 percent support the governor’s decision even after considering its potential economic benefits.

“Thinking about potential economic benefits does not decrease support for Christie’s cancellation of the project,” said Redlawsk. “But it does cause opposition to grow because fewer respondents are uncertain, with more taking a position – generally against Christie’s decision – if they think first about potential benefits of the tunnel.”

Overwhelming support for the extension of NYC subway line to Secaucus

In response to the cancellation of the ARC tunnel project, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed extending the #7 subway line westward under the Hudson River to Secaucus. New Jerseyans are overwhelmingly in favor of this proposal, with 74 percent supporting the plan, and 13 percent opposing it, with another 12 percent unsure. Support for this proposal holds across both political parties and independents, as well as among both commuters and non-commuters.

Most see some value to the tunnel; Asking about cancellation first makes it less valuable

When asked to evaluate the tunnel project before being asked about its cancellation, 37 percent say it is “very important” to the economic development of the Garden State, while 38 percent say it is “somewhat important”, and only 12 percent say it is “not at all important.” In October, 28 percent thought the project was very important to economic growth, while 42 said “somewhat important”, and 23 percent said “not at all important.”

“While continuing to support Christie’s decision overall, New Jerseyans have actually become more convinced that the tunnel would bring economic benefits to the state,” said Redlawsk. “A direct comparison to October with the same question order shows an increase of 9 points in how many say the project is “extremely important.”
But those asked about the tunnel’s economic value after being asked about Gov. Christie’s decision to end the project are much less likely to say the project is “very important” at only 22 percent. Forty-eight percent say it is “somewhat important”, and 22 percent say it is “not at all important”.

“This is a classic effect. Asking people to agree or disagree with the Governor’s decision first tends to make them align their opinion about the project’s value to their opinion of the decision,” said Redlawsk. “It is another warning that the way we ask questions and the order in which we ask them really matters if we want to understand public opinion.”

Support for Christie’s decision drops somewhat in light of scenarios

When asked about two scenarios surrounding the controversy around the ARC tunnel project, support for Governor Christie’s decision to cancel the project drops. The federal government has insisted that New Jersey pay back $271 million allocated for the project, but Governor Christie is suing, arguing that payback is not required. When asked about continuation of the tunnel project in light of this payback obligation, 47 percent say it should have been continued, while only 37 percent say it should have been canceled. Almost all the shift comes from Democrats and independents: 55 percent of Republicans remain in favor of cancellation while only 42 percent of independents and 29 percent of Democrats think it should have been canceled, given the payback requirement.

Similar results come from asking if the project should have continued in light of the claims by supporters that cancellation would stifle job growth in the state. Given this scenario, 48 percent say it should have been continued and 40 percent support its cancellation, with 12 percent undecided. A majority (54 percent) of Republicans again continue to support cancellation, while independents narrowly favor continuation of the project in this scenario, 45 percent to 42 percent. Considering the potential effect on jobs, Democrats say the project should have been continued, 62 percent to 28 percent.

“In the abstract, support for Christie’s decision is very strong across parties,” said Redlawsk. “But when potential effects of the cancellation are described, support by Democrats drops precipitously. This suggests that while even Democrats see some validity in canceling the project, when given specific reasons to oppose this decision by Christie, they respond.”

What NJ thinks about Airport Screening

2010-12-07T09:56:00.007-05:00

Our final statewide survey for 2010 has just come out of the field, and we'll be doing releases on it this week and next. For our first release we thought we'd look at the airport security controversy and see what New Jerseyans really think about it.

For this battery of questions, we included an experiment where we asked a general question about support for security measures either before (version 1) or after (version 2) we asked about the specific screening methods that were causing all the uproar at Thanksgiving. The idea is to see whether people have a different feeling about airport security overall when they are prompted to think about full body scans or pat-downs.

First, whether asked before or after, New Jerseyans overall are pretty supportive of security measures "no matter how intrusive". But, when we ask them to think about scans or pat downs before we ask the general question, those who are asked about pat downs are LESS likely to support "any" security measure, and they are much more likely to say the pat down goes too far. Those asked about scans however, do not see them as too intrusive, nor does thinking about scans make them less supportive of security measures overall.

The upshot? The scans are seen as OK, but the pat downs are a different story, with far less support.

We also look at those who fly regularly (at least two or three times a year or more) versus those who rarely fly (either never, or once a year at the most). This question splits the sample almost exactly in half, with 50.5% in the more frequent and 49.5% in the less frequent category. Interestingly frequent flyers are a little more supportive of the full body scans and much LESS supportive of the pat downs than are less frequent flyers, who strongly support both screening methods.

The text of the release follows. The full release with tables can be read here.

New Jerseyans Less Favorable Toward TSA Measures the More They Think about Them.

NEW BRUNSWICK – Support among New Jerseyans for new airport security measures introduced in November varies depending on how the question is asked, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. When initially asked about support for “any airport security measure” or whether some security measures “go too far violating personal privacy,” 50 percent support any security measure, while 41 percent say some measures go too far. But when asked first to think about either the new full body scans or enhanced pat-downs, support for airport security measures overall declines substantially, with only 39 percent supporting any security measure while 59 percent say some measures go too far violating personal privacy.

Garden Staters are much more supportive of the full body scans than they are of the enhanced pat-downs now used by the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) for those who refuse the scans. More than 6 in 10 (62 percent) say the scans are necessary for airport security, while 54 percent say the same about the pat-down procedure.

“In the abstract, most people think more airport security is always a good thing,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. “But it’s one thing to support security in the abstract; it is another to confront specific procedures. While New Jerseyans generally support the new TSA measures, given a chance to think about it, they are not so thrilled about the possibility of having intimate areas patted down.”

The poll of 906 New Jersey adults was conducted December 2-6. The full sample has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. Random groups of respondents were asked about either full body scans or enhanced pat-down security measures. These groups can each be generalized to the state adult population and compared. Random subsamples have margins of error from +/- 4.4 to +/- 5.0 percentage points, depending on subsample size.

Respondents find full body pat-downs more intrusive than body scans

New Jerseyans have paid a great deal of attention to the controversy over full body scanning and pat-downs implemented by the TSA. But the full body scans are perceived to be significantly less intrusive than pat-downs. When asked if full body scans “producing a nude image” are “too intrusive without increasing real security,” or “are needed to keep the public safe,” only 30 percent say scans are too intrusive, compared to 41 percent who say that pat-downs are too intrusive.

“While there is strong support for full body scans in New Jersey, the new pat-down procedures are seen as much more intrusive,” said Redlawsk. “Even so, most New Jerseyans would put up with them, believing they enhance security on airplanes.”

Differences between more and less frequent flyers

About half of New Jerseyans fly at least “a couple times a year,” while half fly only once a year or less often (including 10 percent who say they never fly). More frequent flyers are more aware of the controversy: 92 percent are very aware, compared to 61 percent of those who fly less often. And more frequent flyers are initially more supportive of “any airport security measure” at 59 percent compared to 43 percent of less frequent flyers. There is little difference between the two groups in believing full body scans are needed for safety; only about 30 percent of both groups think they are too intrusive. But 52 percent of frequent flyers say that pat-downs are too intrusive, while less frequent flyers are more supportive of pat-downs, with only 31 percent saying pat-downs are too intrusive.

Pat-downs may deter individuals from flying

When asked if knowing that flying requires respondents to go through a full body scan would affect their frequency of flying, 3 percent say that a full scan would make them more likely to fly, 11 percent say it would make them less likely and 86 percent say it would not affect the frequency of their air travel. The new pat-down procedure causes much more concern, with 24 percent saying they are less likely to fly because of it, while 69 percent say their flying plans would not be affected by this measure, and 4 percent say they would fly more often. Frequent flyers in particular are more likely to say they would fly less given the pat-downs, at 27 percent, compared to 21 percent of less frequent flyers.

“While the prospect of a full body scan has little effect on flying plans, the pat-downs bother many more people,” said Redlawsk. “More than a quarter of those who fly more often say they would cut back on their flying if they had to go through a pat-down. This should be of some worry to the airlines, since those who fly most often are the ones who bring in the most revenue. On the other hand, frequent flyers are generally fine with going through the full body scanners, and if they do so, they generally will not be subject to pat-downs. But the prospect of such a procedure causes many to think twice about flying.”

Women are more supportive of new measures

When it comes to using full body scanners or pat-downs, women are more supportive than men: 70 percent of women say the scanners are necessary for security, while only 54 percent of men agree. Only 23 percent of women think they are too intrusive, compared to 37 percent of men. The difference in opinion on pat-downs is not as great: 59 percent of women say they are necessary for security, compared to 48 percent of men, while 45 percent of men find pat-downs too intrusive versus only 37 percent of women.

Older people are more likely to say scanners are necessary: 71 percent of those over 65 compared to 62 percent of 18 to 29 year olds support the use of scanners. But younger people are far more likely to support pat-downs, with 67 percent of those under 30 saying pat-downs are necessary, versus only 53 percent of those over 65.

Thinking about new security procedures increases concern

An experiment shows that New Jerseyans are more willing to support security measures if they have not been asked first to think about the details of pat-downs or full body scans. One group of respondents was randomly selected to express their support for, or opposition against new security measures at the beginning of the series of security questions. The other group was not asked this question until after being asked specifically about support for the procedures.

When asked about their support for security measures first, 50 percent support any measure that might increase security, while 41 percent say some measures go too far. When the same question was asked only after three other questions about pat-downs or scans, support for security measures drops substantially: only 39 percent favor any measure while 59 percent say some measures go too far. Frequent flyers change the most; only 36 percent feel some measures go to far when asked before the security questions, while 64 percent say some measures go too far when asked after questions about specific security measures.

“We must be cautious in interpreting the public’s response to these new airport security measures,” said Redlawsk. “Asked in a vacuum without reference to specific measures, the public is generally supportive of almost anything they think might make airplanes safer. But when they are given information about specific measures, they are much more dubious across the board. In the abstract people say ‘keep me safe at all costs,’ but when confronted with potential invasions of privacy, they are more willing to balance their own privacy against security issues.”

The Logic of Voters: Personal Financial Situation and Vote Choice

2010-11-21T23:15:00.005-05:00

A few late thoughts on the election and voters' perceptions of their financial condition. This is not one of our regular press releases; rather it is just something I find interesting.

Many have argued that this month's election in which Republicans took the majority in the House of Representatives (winning one Democratic-held seat in NJ), was a referendum on the state of the economy. Though economists have officially proclaimed that the recession is over, our polling just before the election shows that New Jerseyans are still feeling the pinch.

When asked about their current financial situation, 44% of registered New Jersey voters said that they were worse off than they were a year ago, while 42% said that they were getting along “about the same” (and this is compared to the depths of the recession LAST year!) Only 14% of registered New Jersey voters said that they are better off financially than they were a year ago.

On our generic ballot test (vote for Republican or Democrat for Congress) the results are not surprising: among registered voters statewide who reported that they were worse off financially than a year ago, 42% chose the Republican versus 32% who chose the Democrat. On the other hand, those who said they were doing better were MUCH more likely to support a Democrat: 51% to 24%. Clearly, New Jerseyans who are feeling the pinch were more likely to want to elect Republicans, in repudiation (refudiation?) of the Democrats who were in charge.

We also saw that those who were worse off were more likely to say they would vote against their incumbent representative than those who were not doing so badly. (We asked half our respondents the generic ballot test and the other half an incumbent/challenger test.)

Those who said they are worse off now than they were this time last year were pretty evenly split, with 32% for their current congressman and 27% for a challenger. But, 42 percent of those doing “about the same” said they supported their incumbent, while 29% favored a challenger. And those who are doing better supported their current representative even more: 41% to 14%, a 27 point margin.

These results coincide with favorability ratings of the parties in Congress. Among those who report being worse off, 55% had an unfavorable view of Republicans, and 52% had an unfavorable view of Democrats. Essentially it's a pox on both their houses - but given a two party system they had to vote for someone (if they voted) and as noted above, it was against Democrats.

Among those who report being better off financially than they were a year ago, an overwhelming 76% had an unfavorable view of Republicans, while only 42% were unfavorable towards Democrats. And for those doing about the same as last year, 61% were unfavorable toward Congressional Republicans and 52% were unfavorable toward Democrats.

This all seems very logical to me and suggests that voters do not just cast votes without any sense behind them. If you know Democrats are in charge and things aren't getting better, than disliking them and voting against them makes sense. And if you are actually somehow doing better in this environment, you should want to reward those in charge. And that's what we see, with the folks doing no better, no worse, solidly in the middle. Actually gives you some hope that voters (sort of) know what they are doing.

(Thanks to Virginia Tangel, of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll staff for this analysis.)

Atttitudes Towards Education Reform

2010-11-10T12:25:00.002-05:00

In our pre-election poll we also asked NJ registered voters their attitudes towards several education reform plans. Today we release the results. The full release with tables is available here.

The test of the release follows:

VOTERS SAY NEW JERSEY SHOULD SPEND MORE ON EDUCATION

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Though harboring mixed feelings about key aspects of Gov. Chris Christie’s proposed education reform plan, a clear majority of New Jerseyans say the state is underfunding education, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Almost six-in-10 (59 percent) registered voters say not enough is being spent on schooling; 15 percent believes too much is being spent, while 21 percent thinks expenditures are adequate.

At the same time, Garden Staters are decidedly mixed on two of the governor’s key reform proposals. A large majority of registered voters (70 percent) say tenure for school teachers is mostly a barrier to removing bad teachers, but 63 percent opposes basing teacher pay on pupil test results.

“The spending results are consistent with our earlier polling,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. “New Jerseyans generally support their schools and want to see them better funded, even while they want the state to cut back on funding in other areas. While they question tenure, they do not necessarily support the governor’s plans or his spending cuts.”

The poll results are from a random sample of 885 registered voters interviewed statewide Oct. 21-27. The margin of error for the full sample is +/-3.3 percentage points.

Partisans split on funding

Almost twice as many Democrats as Republicans (74 percent to 38 percent) say state funding for education is inadequate. A majority of independents (55 percent) feel the same. Sixty-five percent of parents with children under 18 believe that New Jersey does not spend enough on its schools compared to 54 percent of adults living in households without children.

Public mixed on Christie’s ideas

In September, Gov. Christie unveiled his plan for education reforms that included eliminating tenure, basing pay on pupil performance and testing teacher proficiency in reading and math. New Jerseyans are split on his ideas: 63 percent oppose basing a teacher’s salary on test scores while 32 percent support the concept of merit pay. Respondents are likely to favor tenure reform, since 70 percent think tenure is a “barrier to eliminating bad teachers,” while only 22 percent believe teacher tenure is necessary for job protection. An overwhelming 90 percent of registered voters say teachers should be tested for their reading and math proficiency.

Virtually all (95 percent) parents of minor children support teacher testing, while 59 percent oppose merit-based pay and 73 percent see tenure as a barrier to removing bad teachers. “Those in households with children under 18 are a little less likely to oppose merit pay and somewhat more likely to see tenure as a barrier,” said Redlawsk. “Those closest to the system see its problems more directly, but still do not support key parts of the Christie plan.”

Republicans and Democrats agree: don’t base pay on test scores

Sixty-eight percent of Democrats, 64 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of independents oppose linking teacher salaries to pupil test scores. At the same time, even a strong majority (60 percent) of Democrats see tenure as a barrier to removing bad teachers, rather than an important job protection. Even more Republicans (80 percent) and independents (75 percent) agree. Just 29 percent of Democrats, 15 percent of Republicans and 17 percent of independents see tenure as an important job protection.

Support for teacher testing in math and reading also crosses party lines: 86 percent of Democrats, 92 percent of Republicans, and 94 percent of independents think teachers should be required to pass reading and math tests to be certified.

“While Democrats and Republicans may differ on state spending for education, there is remarkable agreement across parties on other issues,” Redlawsk said. “The governor’s idea for merit pay gets little support across the board, but members of both parties agree with testing teachers and are dubious about tenure.”

Diverse thoughts about problems in education

Asked to name New Jersey education’s most pressing problem in their own words – before hearing other questions on the subject – registered voters come up with many ideas, Redlawsk observed. About 20 percent says budget issues, while 15 percent names teacher-related issues, including high salaries and benefits, and teacher proficiency. In this group a small percentage (2%) says teacher shortages.

Another 8 percent call the New Jersey Education Association (or “teachers’ union”) the most important problem, 5 percent say “bureaucracy” and 4 percent focus on class size. Only 3 percent cite teacher tenure as the most important problem.

One in four parents (26 percent) sees budgets as the biggest problem in education, with another 17 percent citing teacher-related issues. Just 8 percent of parents call the NJEA the biggest problem in education.

Democrats and Republicans view the biggest problem differently: 25 percent of Democrats cite budget issues while only 16 percent of Republicans agree, along with 20 percent of independents. Twenty percent of Democrats, 14 percent of Republicans, and 11 percent of independents cite teachers as the biggest problem facing education in New Jersey. Republicans are much more likely to name the NJEA as the problem, by a 13 percent to 3 percent margin over Democrats; 11 percent of independents think the NJEA is the biggest problem facing education in the state today.

The Day before...

2010-11-01T14:08:00.006-04:00

It's the day before the Tsunami election of 2010, or whatever the pundits are calling it. There is no denying the Republican trend - certainly in New Jersey we see more enthusiams among Republicans, a swing twoard Republicans for independent voters (if they show up), and today we report that NJ voters appear to prefer some Republican solutions to issues, at least statewide.

Our polling last week gives us a sense of the overall environment throughout the state, but it not meant to describe any one Congressional district (except for the specific polling we did in CD 3.

So here's today's release - an overview of where we are right before the election. A PDF of the full release with all tables is available here.

RUTGERS-EAGLETON POLL: LIKELY VOTERS PREFER GOP POLICIES TO CREATE JOBS, AID NEW JERSEY’S ECONOMY

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Taxes, the economy and unemployment will be primary on the minds of voters as they head to the polls tomorrow. New Jerseyans believe Republican policies are more likely to fix the economy, are less favorable toward such Democratic measures as government stimulus spending and view GOP leaders more favorably than their counterparts, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll.

“In addition to a clear ‘enthusiasm gap’ where Republicans are more motivated to turn out, voters are also more favorable toward GOP officials and approaches,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “New Jersey voters are paralleling what is being seen all over the country, but most Garden State congressional districts are so one-sided that the majority of incumbents are unlikely to feel the direct effects.”

Results are from a statewide Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of 885 registered voters, including 552 likely voters, was conducted October 21-27, with a +/- 3.3 percentage point margin of error for registered voters and +/- 4.1 for likely voters. Generic vote questions were asked of random half-samples, which have a margin of error of +/-4.6 percentage points for registered and +/-5.9 for likely voters. The poll did not survey individual congressional districts and provides a general sense of the state rather than specific results for any one race.

Most important problem

Asked about the state’s most important problem, 31 percent of likely voters say taxes of some type, while 20 percent name jobs and 10 percent offer the economy. Education also draws 10 percent, followed by the budget deficit at 7 percent. Of those who name taxes, 56 percent will vote for a Republican congressional candidate and 31 percent for a Democrat.

Of those who say jobs or unemployment is most important in New Jersey, 65 percent prefer a Democrat, while 14 percent prefer a Republican. Among those who think the economy is most pressing, 48 percent will support the GOP and 39 percent will vote Democratic. Where education is the top concern, 47 percent say they will vote for the Democrat and only 20 percent will support the Republican.

“There are clear differences between the parties on theses issues, and voters recognize them,” said Redlawsk. “Voters who focus on taxes prefer Republican approaches, but those focused specifically on jobs lean Democratic. The problem for Democrats is that voters in New Jersey are more worried about taxes than they are jobs.”

More prefer Republican approach to job creation

The greater concern about taxes results in a preference for a Republican-oriented approach to job creation across all likely voters. Asked whether tax cuts or government spending would create jobs more effectively, the majority (51 percent) of likely voters say the former will help more. Only 38 percent favor government spending for creating jobs. Of those preferring tax cuts, almost three times as many say they will vote Republican as Democratic (63 percent to 23 percent). Among those who prefer government spending, likely Democratic voters far outstrip Republics by nearly 5-to-1 (71 percent to 15 percent).

Likely voters like Christie, dislike Pelosi, are split on Obama

Preference for a Republican approach to jobs is reflected in likely voters’ evaluations of elected officials. They view Gov. Chris Christie favorably, are divided on President Obama and appear decidedly negative toward Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Half hold a favorable impression of the governor, while 38 percent hold an unfavorable impression, a significant improvement since a September Rutgers-Eagleton Poll showed that 46 percent or all registered voters were favorable, and 42 percent unfavorable toward Christie. Sixty-six percent holding a favorable opinion of Christie will vote Republican, and 19 percent will vote Democratic. Of those who hold an unfavorable opinion of the governor, 79 percent will vote Democratic and only 10 percent will vote Republican.

Pelosi is evaluated much less favorably: by a 2-to-1 margin, likely voters hold an unfavorable impression of the speaker. Of these, 67 percent will vote GOP and 18 percent will vote Democratic.

Likely voters are evenly divided on Obama. Forty-four percent have a favorable impression, 45 percent unfavorable. Eighty-four percent who hold Obama in esteem will vote Democratic tomorrow, 75 percent with a negative opinion of the president will vote for the GOP hopeful.

More likely voters approve of Christie’s job performance than Obama’s

Job approval ratings for Obama and Christie show even more clearly how dissatisfied likely voters are with Democrats. Christie enjoys a 12 percentage point lead in positive job approval ratings over Obama. A majority think Christie is doing an excellent (19 percent) or good job (32 percent) job, a six-point gain since September. Fewer than 40 percent believe that Obama is doing an excellent or good job (14 and 25 percent, respectively). Almost half say Christie is doing a fair or poor job, while nearly six-in-10 say the same of Obama.

More Obama voters will defect

While 77 percent of those who voted for Obama in 2008 plan to vote for Democrats for Congress, 10 percent plan to vote for Republicans, 6 percent say they would prefer a third party candidate and 6 percent are unsure who they will support. John McCain voters are more likely to stay loyal to the GOP: 84 percent say they will vote a Republican for Congress, 6 percent support a Democrat and 9 percent say they don’t know.

Obama: Stay home and do your job

Just as last month’s poll found that New Jerseyans preferred Christie to work on issues affecting the state rather than campaigning across the country, the new poll offered similar results for Obama. Almost two-thirds think he should remain in Washington rather than support candidates out of town. Only those who believe Obama is doing an excellent job say he should campaign, with 66 percent of this group happy to have him support other candidates

Something OTHER THAN the election!

2010-10-29T13:55:00.004-04:00

Well, there IS other news in New Jersey besides the upcoming election. Wednesday Governor Chris Christie reaffirmed his decision to cancel the propsed ARC (access to the Region's Core) tunnel under the Hudson River. While some call it the tunnel to Macy's basement (or to nowhere), others argue the tunnel is absolutely needed to allow continued economic growth in NJ, as there is essentially no more capacity to move commuters via rail from NJ to NYC.

The Governor put the kibosh on the tunnel saying that the expected cost (including estimates of overruns) is just too rich for New Jersey's blood in this day or retrnechment and cuts. Never mind that the project has been under way for more than a decade and that dirt has actually been moved and properties acquired. The holes that have been dug are to be filled in and the project ended immediately. NJ may find itself paying back hundreds of millions to the federal government and foregoing billions in transit funding.

Be that as it may, since we were going into the field for the pre-election, we decided to ask a few questions about the tunnel and transportation funding.

The upshot - NJ voters support the Governor's decision, especially voters living outside of the NYC commuting area. While a pluraility thinks enough is being spent on transportation already, a signifcant share believe more needs to be spent, and these voters are much ore likely to oppose Christie's decision.

And as befitting a state with a thousand-lane turnpike (or whatever it is) running through it, New Jerseyans would prefer money be spend on roads and bridges rather than trains and buses, if they had to make a choice between the two.

The full release with tables is here.

The release itself follows:

NEW JERSEY VOTERS SUPPORT GOV. CHRISTIE’S CANCELLATION OF ARC TUNNEL PROJECT

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. – A majority of New Jerseyans support the cancellation of the Access to the Region’s Core (ARC) tunnel project announced two weeks ago and reaffirmed this week by Gov. Chris Christie, a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll finds. While believing the tunnel could be important to the state’s economic development, 51percent of Garden State voters think Christie was right to cancel the project, while 39 percent disagree with the decision, and 10 percent are unsure.

Support for canceling the tunnel varies by region. Northern New Jerseyans and commuters to Manhattan are more likely to disagree with the decision. A majority of commuters (52 percent) opposes Christie’s decision. Support for the decision is split, 46 percent to 45 percent, for those living in northern New Jersey counties.

“Across the state, voters applaud the governor’s decision,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “While those who regularly travel to New York feel differently, much of the state agrees with Christie that the project is too expensive.”

The poll of 885 registered voters was conducted October 21-27, with a +/- 3.3 percentage point margin of error.

Opinions on transportation spending split

While 40 percent of voters say “just the right amount” is being spent on transportation, nearly one-third (32 percent) believe the state needs to spend more, and about 12 percent say too much is being spent. Another 16 percent are not sure. Asked to prioritize spending, 58 percent believe funding should go toward roads and bridges rather than trains and buses while 32 percent would prioritize trains and buses. Eight percent don’t know.

Two-thirds who say the state is spending the right amount favor investing first on roads and bridges. Responses are more mixed among those wanting additional spending: 48 percent prefer a focus on roads and bridges, while 44 percent make spending on trains and buses their priority.

Respondent-advocates of mass transit oppose Christie’s decision to cancel the ARC tunnel, 48 percent to 41 percent; 11 percent are undecided. Those focused on spending for roads and bridges strongly favor cancellation, 57 percent to 36 percent, with 7 percent undecided.

“Clearly, support for Christie’s decision depends on your belief in increased state spending for public transportation infrastructure,” said Redlawsk. “Most New Jerseyans rely on their cars and would prefer spending focus on roads and bridges.”

Garden Staters question value of ARC to economic development

Across the state, New Jerseyans are dubious about the economic value of the proposed tunnel. Only 28 percent say the tunnel is “very important” to the state’s economic development, while 42 percent call it “somewhat important.” Almost one-quarter consider it not at all important to the state’s economy. Commuters and north Jersey residents are more likely to see the tunnel as important, with 38 percent of city commuters calling it very important, and 34 percent of all north Jersey residents agreeing.

Support for Christie’s position has partisan undertones

Like nearly everything Christie does, the decision on the tunnel strikes Democrats very differently from Republicans. While 71 percent of Republicans support the governor’s decision, only 32 percent of Democrats do so. However, a strong majority of independents (58 percent) side with Christie on canceling the tunnel.

While more supportive of the project, only 39 percent of Democrats say trains and buses should have priority in spending. Even fewer independents (29 percent) and Republicans (27 percent) feel the same. Thirty-nine percent of Democrats say too little is being spent on transportation generally compared to 30 percent of Republicans. Independents are least likely to think more needs to be spent, and only 26 percent say so.

“The fact that it is Christie canceling the tunnel is what seems to bother Democrats most,” said Redlawsk. “While they are somewhat more likely to support public transportation and think more needs to be spent, their opposition to Christie’s decision really goes beyond this, since many Democrats who want more roads and bridges and think spending levels are fine are also unhappy with the decision.”

NJ Congressional Races Tightening Overall; Republicans More Enthusiastic

2010-10-28T16:29:00.004-04:00

Full release with tables available here.

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – With the midterm election only days away, New Jersey voters statewide are moving toward Republicans, as the overall generic ballot tightens, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. While 41 percent of registered voters say they will vote for a Democrat, with 31 percent preferring a Republican, likely voters are leaning more Republican; a generic Democrat leads by only 46 percent to 40 percent.

This is a distinct improvement for Republicans, who trailed by 11 points in a September Rutgers-Eagleton Poll among likely voters. Only 7 percent of likely voters remain undecided.

Concurrently, there is a noticeable “enthusiasm gap” between GOP backers and Democrats. About two-thirds of Republicans are at the “top of the enthusiasm scale” compared to 42 percent of Democrats and 43 percent of independents. About half of New Jersey registered voters say they are moderately or very enthusiastic about voting.

“Partisans remain with their party,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “But independent likely voters who moved toward Democrats in September are trending back to Republicans, preferring a generic Republican by a 42 percent to 35 percent margin. If independents turn out, they could tip close races, especially if Democrats stay home.”

The poll of 885 registered New Jersey voters was conducted Oct. 21-27. The registered voters sample has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. Generic vote questions were asked of random half-samples, which have a margin of error of +/-4.6 percentage points. Results do not apply to specific districts but give a sense of the overall mood of the state.

Overall support for incumbents increasing

To test attitudes toward incumbent members of Congress, half those polled were asked if they would vote for a generic Republican versus a Democrat, while the other half were asked if they would vote for their current representative or a challenger.

While the partisan vote has tightened, voters have also become more supportive of incumbents in the final weeks of the campaign. Among registered voters, 37 percent would vote for their “current congressman,” while 26 percent would support a challenger. When faced with this choice, 16 percent say they would not vote, and 19 percent are unsure.

Likely voters also prefer their incumbent to a challenger, 44 percent to 34 percent, with 22 percent unsure. This is a large shift from September, when incumbents were favored by two points.

“We see a partisan split in the generic incumbent test,” said Redlawsk. “Likely Democratic voters statewide support incumbents by almost a 4-1 ratio, while Republicans prefer a challenger by 4-to-3. Independents also slightly prefer challengers, by a 10-to-9 margin.

Republican incumbents increasingly safer

In GOP-held districts across the state, 48 percent of likely voters say they will vote Republican, while 38 percent will vote for a Democrat. Eleven percent are undecided. This is a substantial improvement for Republican incumbents, who were losing the generic ballot test in September, 42 percent to 44 percent.

When framed in terms of “current congressman” versus a “challenger,” Republicans are doing even better: 50 percent of likely voters support their current representative, 27 percent, the challenger and 23 percent are unsure. “While we can’t speak about a specific district, we see no evidence that any of the state’s five Republican representatives is in danger next week,” Redlawsk said.

Some Democrats in trouble

Across New Jersey’s eight Democratic congressional districts, little has changed since September: 52 percent of likely voters support a Democrat, while 36 percent will vote Republican. Another 8 percent prefer a third party candidate, and 5 percent don’t know. When framed as incumbent versus challenger, likely voters favor their current congressman by only 2 points. Registered voters prefer the incumbent by nine percentage points.

“Those more likely to turn out in these districts are at least in part motivated by anti-incumbency,” said Redlawsk. “Even so, the generic party ballot suggests that most Democratic incumbents will win as usual.”

Examining the three most competitive Democratic-held seats paints a very different picture, Redlawsk observed. Across the 3rd, 6th, and 12th districts combined, a generic Democrat holds a four percentage point lead, a “tossup” when the small size of the sample is considered. Moreover, in these districts likely voters favor a challenger over their current congressman by 15 points, 49 percent to 34 percent.

“We see very tough races for incumbents Rush Holt (12th CD), John Adler (3rd CD), and to a lesser extent, Frank Pallone (6th CD),” said Redlawsk. “Our separate 3rd District polling shows a tie, while this generic across-district polling shows things tight in all three districts. The key is turnout. Among registered voters, the generic Democrat leads by eight percentage points, but by only four points among likely voters. And when we ask about incumbents, registered voters are only slightly anti-incumbent by four points, while likely voters are ready to throw them out.”

Voters mood somewhat worse with more ready for Republicans

Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of likely voters report that the country is on the wrong track, while only 30 percent think it is going in the right direction. Republicans and independents overwhelmingly feel this way, with 89 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of independents feeling things are on the wrong track. Forty percent of Democrats feel the same.

Voters seem to be less willing to give Democrats more time to do things in Washington, with 48 percent saying Democrats should get more time and 43 percent saying it is time to turn to the GOP. Support for Democrats is down substantially from September, when 56 percent would have given them more time, and only 36 percent said it is time to elect Republicans. Independents support electing Republicans by a 46 percent to 40 percent margin.

The long campaign may finally be wearing on voters, the poll found. Only 31 percent of likely voters now say they are following news about the election very closely, compared to 42 percent in September.

Of Tax Donkeys and Tea Parties: The State of the NJ CD-3 Race

2010-10-26T09:04:00.006-04:00

We are out today with our third and final poll of the NJ third congressional district race between Democratic incumbent John Adler and Republican challenger Jon Runyan. Oh, and don’t forget purported “Tea Party” candidate Peter DeStefano. The upshot? It’s tied. All locked up. 44-44. No space between the two candidates. At least among those we believe to be likely voters. And DeStefano - his 4-5 percent could be making the difference.

Our polling in this district is through live phone calls, using both landlines and cell phones. We are very comfortable that we have a reasonable sample. The trick of course is determining who is actually going to vote. I talked about that before at the beginning of our last CD3 release, so I won’t repeat it here. But even without the likely screen, things have gotten interesting. Where in September Adler was up 9 points among registered voters (while only 2 points among likelies) he has lost his lead among registered voters as well, up only 2 points (within the margin of error). No matter how we cut the data it is a tie.

We see two cross cutting currents in our data. First, overall trends are towards Runyan. Voters are more willing to support an outsider generally than last month, less positive towards Adler (and more positive towards Runyan) and at least some are annoyed by the newspaper reports that DeStefano is only on the ballot because Democrats put him there to get 5 percent. And, at least at the moment, that’s about what DeStefano is getting. Without this Democratic Tea Party, Runyan might well be ahead.

Runyan is also still benefiting from an enthusiasm gap – Republicans remain more likely to be in our “likely voter” sample than Democrats. And not surprisingly for a midterm, independents are the least likely to turn out.

On the other hand, it’s not over for Adler until the last vote is counted. Even many of Runyan's supporters find Runyan's tax donkeys to be an unfair use of the farmland assessment program. And of particular note is that Democrats are MUCH more unified that Republicans. While Alder wins the voters of 85 percent of likely Democratic voters, Runyan is only at 77 percent of Republicans, with 16 percent of Republicans supporting Adler. A bit of a push on Democratic turnout and Alder could win another squeaker. Remember, this is an historically Republican district in a very Republican year. Yet Runyan has not been able to seal the deal. That, if anything, gives Adler significant hope.

The release follows. A PDF of the release with questions and tables is here.

RUTGERS-EAGLETON POLL: ADLER, RUNYAN TIED IN THIRD DISTRICT CONGRESSIONAL RACE

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – With a week to go until Election Day, incumbent Democrat John Adler and his challenger, Republican Jon Runyan, are tied in New Jersey’s 3rd Congressional District, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Among likely voters, both Adler and Runyan get support from 44 percent, while independent Peter DeStefano is at 4 percent and 9 percent say they still are not sure. But even among those who have decided, nearly a quarter may change their mind by Election Day.

The results show a distinct tightening of the race as Adler’s September Rutgers-Eagleton Poll nine-point lead among registered voters has disappeared. Among registered voters, Adler now leads within the margin of error, 37 percent to 35 percent, with 5 percent for DeStefano, 14 percent undecided and 10 percent saying given the choices, they will not vote.

“This is anyone’s race,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. “All along, Runyan has been doing better among likely voters, while Adler held a lead with all voters. But recent events – including the news of Democratic Party involvement in putting DeStefano on the ballot – have moved things more toward Runyan.”

The telephone poll of 453 registered voters yielding 292 likely voters living in the 3rd District was conducted Oct. 23-24 and has a margin of error of 4.6 percentage points for registered voters and 5.6 percentage points for likely voters. The survey included both landline and cell phone respondents.

The DeStefano Effect

Recent reports speculating that Democratic Party workers were heavily involved in supporting independent DeStefano’s candidacy have had some effect on the race. While large numbers of registered (43 percent) and likely voters (39 percent) are unaware of the controversy, among those who have heard about it, nearly one-third say the controversy makes them less likely to vote for Adler. Among those who say they might change their mind, 32 percent say the DeStefano controversy makes them less likely to vote for Adler, while 59 percent say it has no effect and 6 percent say it will make them more likely to vote for Adler.

“The combination of a razor-thin race, the presence of an independent candidate drawing about 5 percent and the claims that DeStefano is merely on the ballot to take votes from Runyan creates a volatile situation,” said Redlawsk. “DeStefano supporters seem more likely to become Runyan than Adler supporters if they do change their minds. This small group could make the difference. At the same time, the Runyan campaign has not effectively publicized this controversy, given how many voters have heard nothing about it.”

Adler’s favorables decline and Runyan’s improve

Adler has become less favorably viewed by voters down the homestretch. His 12-point positive rating in September (43 percent favorable, 30 percent unfavorable) has evaporated (now 36 percent favorable and unfavorable). Runyan’s ratings have improved, however, from 29 percent favorable and 30 percent unfavorable in September to 36 percent favorable and 26 percent unfavorable. DeStefano’s favorability now is only 3 percent, half September’s tally, while his unfavorable standing grew from 8 percent to 14 percent. Most voters have no opinion of DeStefano.

Also in the 3rd District, fewer respondents view President Obama positively (44 percent) than Gov. Chris Christie (57 percent). Other indicators seem to favor the challenger as well. The majority of respondents (58 percent) are angry with Washington. Only 40 percent now prefer experience versus an outsider, down from 47 percent in September. Republicans remain more enthusiastic about voting (60 percent) than do Democrats (52 percent) and independents (44 percent).

Further, 41 percent of likely voters agree that “Adler is part of the problem in Washington,” while 44 percent disagree and 15 percent don’t know. Of those in agreement, 16 percent will vote for Adler, 75 percent will vote for Runyan and 7 percent will vote for DeStefano. Among those who disagree, 75 percent say they will vote for Adler, 20 percent will vote for Runyan, 1 percent for DeStefano, and 4 percent are undecided.

“Whether it is because of the news about DeStefano or other issues, Adler no longer is in the positive position he was all fall,” said Redlawsk. “While voters were positive toward Adler and strongly preferred experience, that has changed. The environment in the 3rd District has become noticeably more difficult for the incumbent.”

Tax, donkeys and other issues

Adler has accused Runyan of benefiting from New Jersey’s farmland assessment program by raising donkeys and barely qualifying for a significant property tax reduction. Likely voters seem to agree that Runyan unfairly takes advantage of the tax break, 54 percent to 33 percent, while 13 percent are unsure. Of those who believe the assessment is unfair, 66 percent say they will vote for Adler, while 25 percent support Runyan. Not surprisingly, those who see the assessment as fair are more likely to support Runyan over Adler, 72 percent to 20 percent.

Even so, many Runyan voters have some question about the assessment, with 32 percent of Runyan voters believing he unfairly takes advantage of the farmland assessment, while most (80 percent) Adler voters feel the same.

Nearly half (44 percent) all likely voters in the 3rd CD favor off-shore drilling near the New Jersey coast. Almost as many (43 percent) are against it and 13 percent are not sure. Among those who favor drilling, 27 percent will vote for Adler and 60 percent for Runyan. Two-thirds (64 percent) of drilling opponents will vote for Adler and 30 percent will vote for Runyan.

Forty-two percent of likely voters support the health care legislation passed this year, while 50 percent oppose it and 8 percent say they don’t know. More than eight-in-10 proponents (81 percent) say they will vote for Adler and 14 percent for Runyan. Among those opposed, 20 percent say they will vote for Adler and 71 percent will vote for Runyan.

Adler stronger with his base; Runyan up with independents

The latest poll found some good news for Adler: support from his base. Among Democratic likely voters, 85 percent support Adler, 6 percent Runyan, with only 2 percent for DeStefano and 6 percent undecided. Runyan does not do as well among Republicans: 77 percent support his candidacy while 16 percent support Adler and 2 percent support DeStefano. Five percent are undecided.

Independent likely voters favor Runyan over Adler, 49 percent to 40 percent.

Is Obama Muslim? Some NJ Voters Continue to Think So

2010-10-07T09:31:00.005-04:00

Today we release our polling on attitudes towards President Barack Obama in New Jersey. Recently the Pew polling folks released this poll showing nearly 20% of the country thinks Obama is Muslim. Another 43% said they do not know his religion and only 34 percent properly identified him as Christian.

Lots of coverage of this poll, and lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth. How could the American public be so dumb? How could they NOT know the president is Christian? I wrote a little op-ed on this that appeared in the Bergen Record based on my research on political evaluation. Today though we have some polling results from New Jersey on this topic.

We asked registered voters to tell us Obama (and Gov. Chris Christie's) religion. We did not give a list, just asked people to tell us what they thought it is. In a nutshell, 12 percent say Obama is Muslim, 43 percent correctly identify him as Protestant (more specific than Christian), and 38 percent say they don't know Obama's religion.

So NJ voters are a little smarter than people nationally, right? They are more likely to know Obama's religion and less likely to think he is Muslim. Yet we would expect this simply because of the level of coverage of the issue since the Pew poll. We'd also expect it because more NJ voters are Democrats, and Democrats are much more likely NOT to say Obama is Muslim.

By the way, even more voters get Christie's religion wrong - though no one calls him Muslim. About 56% say they don't know the Governor's religion, and only 14 percent identify specifically him as Catholic.

Anyway, who cares? Why does it matter? Well, it probably does not matter that people don't know Christie's religion. But thinking Obama is Muslim is related very directly to other negative attitudes towards him. For example, 40 percent of those who say he is Muslim also say that Obama's administration is "un-American" and 60% say Obama is a socialist. We also find that this is directly very personally at Obama himself (and his policies). When we ask people if they are angry at "the government in Washington", those who believe Obama is Muslim are no more likely to say they are angry than anyone else. This Obama is Muslim rhetoric is about the president and his policies, not about the general sense of frustration and anger the majority of New Jersey voters feel towards Washington.

The release follows. You can see the full release and all of the questions and tables here.

RUTGERS-EAGLETON POLL FINDS NEW JERSEYANS STILL QUESTION OBAMA’S RELIGION

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – While New Jersey voters are less likely to say President Barack Obama is Muslim compared to recent national polls, a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today finds 12 percent still call him Muslim. Obama is Protestant, and his religion is correctly identified by 43 percent of respondents; 3 percent think he is Roman Catholic, while 38 percent say they do not know. Nationally, 43 percent do not know Obama’s religion, according to a Pew Center poll released last month.

About three-in-four voters who think Obama is a Muslim claim they learned his religion from the media, 10 percent from presidential behavior or statements and 7 percent from the Internet. The remaining 7 percent are unsure or say his ancestry or name reveals his faith.

Voters in general know little about the religious beliefs Gov. Chris Christie as well: 56 percent say they do not know Christie’s religion. Only14 percent correctly identify him as Catholic, while 25 percent voters believe Christie is Protestant.

“The public’s erroneous perception about Obama’s religion has been well-documented in recent weeks,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science. “Our polling shows that misperception is still widespread in the state. The reason this matters for Obama – while not meaning much for other elected officials – is that those who identify him as Muslim do so in a negative way. Being Muslim is seen as out of the mainstream. Being identified as Protestant when you are Catholic has limited consequences.”

The poll of 912 registered New Jersey voters was conducted Sept. 23 to 26 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.2 percentage points.

Who believes Obama is a Muslim?

Almost half (48 percent) the most religious voters (those who attend services at least weekly) correctly identify Obama’s religion, while only 10 percent say he is Muslim and 33 percent say they don’t know. Less religious voters are more likely to get Obama’s religion wrong. Among those attending services monthly, 16 percent label the president as Muslim, 34 percent correctly say he is Protestant and 41 percent say they don’t know.

Partisanship plays a central role in questions about Obama’s religion. Only 8 percent of Democrats say he is Muslim, one-third the percentage of Republicans. Just 6 percent of independents believe the president is Muslim.

Conversely, 54 percent of Democrats get Obama’s religion right, twice the percentage of Republicans and 12 percent higher than independents. The latter group also is the most likely to say they don’t know Obama’s religion (46 percent). One-quarter of Republicans with a favorable impression of the Tea Party call Obama Muslim, but only 18 percent of Republicans who are unfavorable toward the Tea Party do the same.

Impressions of the President and Job Approval

President Obama has seen a five percentage point gain among registered voters in his New Jersey favorability ratings (now 57 percent) since an August Rutgers-Eagleton Poll; 34 percent hold an unfavorable view, down from 36 percent. More than half (53 percent) rate Obama’s job performance excellent or good and 45 percent judge it fair or poor. Of those with a favorable impression of the president, 83 percent think he is doing an excellent or good job. Of those with an unfavorable impression, only 12 percent call his work excellent or good; 60 percent say he is doing a poor job.

Belief that Obama is Muslim is highly correlated with attitudes toward the president: 8 percent with a favorable view say he is Muslim, 51 percent correctly identify him as Protestant, and 34 percent say they don’t know his religion. Among voters with an unfavorable impression, 18 percent say he is Muslim, 31 percent say he is Protestant, and 43 percent are unsure.

“One thing we know is that belief that Obama is Muslim is part of a package of negative feelings towards him,” said Redlawsk. “While most who disapprove of Obama do not say he is Muslim, a significant number do, while few of those who approve of him say the same.”

Obama’s “Americanism” and ideology questioned by many in New Jersey

As in February, voters were asked to agree or disagree with a series of questions, including several about Obama and his administration. Twenty-five percent of voters now agree that the Obama Administration is “un-American” (up from 18 percent in February), and 39 percent concur that Obama is a socialist (up from 32 percent). More Republicans and Democrats now agree with both statements than in February, but agreement is much stronger among GOP voters.

A perception that the administration is un-American is also related to belief that Obama is Muslim, with 19 percent of this group identifying him as such. Only 9 percent of those who disagree with this statement identify Obama as Muslim. Further, 20 percent of those who call the president a socialist also say he is Muslim, while only 6 percent of other voters think so.

The connection between Obama’s perceived religion and voters’ negative feelings about his administration and ideology is very strong. Fully 40 percent of voters who say Obama is Muslim also think the administration is un-American; 64 percent say Obama is a socialist.

Anger at Washington unrelated to beliefs about Obama’s Religion

Asked if “thinking about the government in Washington makes me angry,” 59 percent agreed and 38 percent disagreed. This anger is unrelated to beliefs about Obama’s religion, Redlawsk said. Among voters who say Washington causes anger, 44 percent know Obama’s religion. Nearly as many (42 percent) who are not angry accurately identify Obama as Protestant. Twelve percent of those who are angry at Washington say Obama is a Muslim, compared to 11 percent who are not angry.

“The ‘Obama is Muslim’ discussion is not about Washington politics as such, but is directed at Obama himself,” said Redlawsk. “For the 12 percent of New Jersey voters who say that Obama is Muslim, the issue is personal. Most think he is a socialist and many consider him un-American, but they are no more likely to be angry at ‘the government in Washington’ than anyone else.”

Governor Christie Travels; Voters Want Him to Stay Home

2010-10-05T10:15:00.011-04:00

We are up today with our more recent statewide polling on job performance and ratings of Governor Chris Christie. For fun, we included a question about his travels to support Republican candidates nationwide and another about how proud he makes New Jerseyans feel. For whatever it's worth, NJ Voters want the Governor to stay home and work on state issues. Moreover, only a minority say that Christie's national recognition makes them proud to be from New Jersey.

To me the most fun thing in this is that those who are least supportive of Christie want him to stay home, while those who like him most want him to go away! Well, not really go away, of course. These results are a reflection of course of partisanship among other things. Republicans who do strongly support the governor want to share the love and probably expect that he will help other Republicans around the country. Those who are less supportive - including both Independents and Democrats, want him to stay in stay. But I wonder if for Democrats it's also partly because they worry that he will be an effective campaigner for Republicans!

But in any case, voters who think he's doing a good job say "go ahead, leave" and those who think he's doing a bad job say "stay here and work on issues". But if he's doing such a bad job, shouldn't they want him anywhere but New Jersey? {Humor intended!}

On a more serious note, the governor's favorability ratings have tightened a bit, but his job performance ratings have actually improved by 6 points since our August Poll. This despite the "Race to the Top" controversy, for which he takes the greatest blame from voters (we asked this but don't report it below. I intend to get something up on that here on the blog soon.)

Driving positive views about Christie is the belief that taxes are the most important issue facing the state. Voters who think this (the second largest group) are very supportive of the Governor. But voters who think the economy is most important are more negative than positive, and those who rate education at the top are strongly negative about the Governor.

The release follows. Questions and tables are available here at the end of the PDF version of the release.

NEW JERSEYANS TO GOV. CHRISTIE: STAY HOME, ATTEND TO OUR ISSUES

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. – As Gov. Chris Christie continues his national tour for Republican candidates, New Jersey’s registered voters would prefer he stay home and focus on Garden State issues, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Almost two-of-three New Jerseyans (64 percent) want Christie here, while one-in-four (24 percent) support his travels.

For the 22 percent of respondents who rate Christie’s job performance excellent, a majority (55 percent) say he should campaign, while 38 percent prefer he remain in state. Others disagree: of those who think he is doing a good job (23 percent), only 22 percent want him to campaign, while 64 percent say he should stay home. Of the 52 percent who say Christie is doing only a fair or poor job, nearly three-quarters want him to stay put and work on New Jersey issues.

“The paradox is fascinating. Those who view Christie’s performance negatively nonetheless would prefer he stay in New Jersey and work on our issues, rather than campaign in other states,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science. “Those who are most supportive agree with his campaigning out of state. This is probably because his strongest supporters are overwhelmingly Republicans who believe the governor’s star power will help other Republicans. It may be those who oppose Christie’s travels – the largest group of whom are Democrats – also worry about the same thing.”

The poll of 912 registered New Jersey voters was conducted Sept. 23 to 26 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.2 percentage points.

Christie’s national reputation does not make New Jersey proud

About one-third (37 percent) of respondents say Christie’ national recognition makes them proud to be from New Jersey. The large majority (56 percent) say it does not.

Not surprisingly, partisan Republicans have a different view. While 62 percent of Republicans say Christie makes them proud to be from the Garden State, only 38 percent of independents and 20 percent of Democrats feel the same.

Support for Christie’s national campaign tour is apparently related to pride: 61 percent of those favoring his campaigning also say Christie makes them proud to be from New Jersey. Two-thirds (64 percent) of those who want him to stay home say the governor does not make them proud.

“Republicans want Christie to spread the word on behalf of other Republicans nationwide,” said Redlawsk, “but the governor seems to not be making the same impression on independents, who make the difference in his favorability ratings, as they did when he was elected.”

Christie favorability tightens, job performance improves

Voters continue to feel slightly more favorable than unfavorable toward the governor as was true in the August Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, despite the high profile controversy of the Race to the Top competition. However, the number holding an unfavorable impression has increased. Across the state, 46 percent of voters have a favorable impression of Christie, while 42 percent have an unfavorable impression and 12 percent are unsure. In August, Christie’s rating was 46 percent favorable and 39 percent unfavorable with 15 percent unsure.

At the same time, Christie’s job performance ratings have improved, with 45 percent saying he is doing an excellent or good job, compared to 39 percent in August. Fifty-two percent currently rate his performance fair or poor while 58 percent did so in August.

Issues of importance in the Garden State

When voters were asked the most important problem in New Jersey today, they are most worried about the economy and unemployment (32 percent) and taxes (24 percent). Education (13 percent), state budget/spending (7 percent) and crime/drugs (5 percent) follow. Only 2 percent call health care the most important problem, the same percentage as those who name the governor himself. Only 1 percent cites the environment and the NJEA (teachers union).

When asked to rate the importance of a specific list of issues, New Jerseyans overwhelmingly (91 percent) say the economy matters to them personally, followed by unemployment (81 percent), health care (80 percent), taxes (77 percent), the budget deficit (74 percent), terrorism (67 percent), the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (64 percent), and immigration (49 percent).

Christie finds support from voters concerned with taxes

What voters see as the most important problem facing the state conditions how they view the governor’s job performance, the poll shows.

Those who name taxes as the most important issue are more supportive of the governor, with 53 percent rating his performance excellent or good and only 45 percent fair or poor. Among voters most worried about the economy and their own financial security, a majority is negative, with 44 percent rating Christie excellent or good while 53 percent rate him only fair or poor. Voters most concerned about education are much more negative than other voters, with only 30 percent rating Christie’s performance positively, while 68 percent have a negative view of his job performance.

“Those who view Governor Christie doing a good job are much more likely to be focused on taxes, compared to other New Jersey voters,” said Redlawsk, “and it is clear he has lost voters who think education is the most important. Fortunately for him, that is currently a relatively small group. Yet given the overriding importance of the economy to voters, his negative rating with that group drags the governor down overall.”

Not a lot of Change in the Aggregate NJ Congressional Numbers

2010-10-01T08:56:00.005-04:00

We are out today with our latest statewide poll of registered voters in New Jersey. Today's release is about our generic congressional ballot test questions and is a follow up to our early August poll that found incumbents in general in pretty good shape (always excepting CD-3 where John Adler has probably the strongest challenge of any incumbent.

I should make very clear that this poll is STATEWIDE and not focused on any specific Congressional districts. This means that we have about 830 registered voters across all 13 districts. The result is that no district has more than about 65-70 or so respondents in it. Thus we cannot draw conclusions at the district level.

So why do this? Mainly because we think it is useful to judge the overall mood of the state in terms of voting for Democrats versus Republicans and Incumbents versus Challengers.

As we did in August, we randomly split our sample so that half get a traditional generic party ballot test (if the election were today would you vote for a Democrat, and Republican, Third Party, or would you not vote?") and half get an incumbent versus challenger test ("...would you vote for your current congressman or a challenger running against him?").

When asked by party, Democrats maintain the healthy partisan lead they had in August. Not surprising since there are far more Democrats in NJ than Republicans, even these days. Independents have move toward the Democrats, rather than away, and what was an 11 point margin for the Republicans among these registered voters in August is now a 5 point margin. While voters ARE in a grumpy mood overall, Democrats in NJ still support Democrats - we see no evidence of significant partisan defection in the aggregate.

On the other hand, and here is where it gets really interesting. When we ask the question as "incumbent" versus "challenger", incumbents fair pretty badly overall, no matter whether they are democrats or republicans. If voters were to go into the booth simply to vote the bums out, challengers would do very well according to our numbers. But most voters - especially the kind of partisan ones who show up in off-year elections - really don't do that as witness our question on whether the Democrats should be given more time in Washington - 54 percent say yes; only 34 percent say it is time to elect Republicans.

So for the moment I stick by my assessment that even with the unsettled electorate, incumbents of both parties in NJ are probably in pretty good shape, through partisan support and gerrymandered districts that maximize that support. Except for John Adler, in CD 3 of course, where it is a real horse race.

And of course, this is only a snapshot in time, not a prediction. A lot can change in the remaining weeks of this campaign.

The press release follows. The full release with questions and tables can be accessed here.

DEMOCRATS REMAIN STRONG IN NJ CONGRESSIONAL POLL

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – New Jersey voters seem to be moving toward Democrats in a statewide test of generic congressional candidates, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Among registered voters, 45 percent say they would vote for a Democrat for Congress, up from 38 percent in August and 33 percent in February. Republican support has stayed consistent, at 33 percent now, compared to 29 percent in August and 31 percent in February. At the same time, voters have become more certain of their choices, with only 14 percent “don’t know,” down from 25 percent in August.

Applying a “likely voter” screen – defined as those who voted in the last two elections and are generally enthusiastic about voting this time – does not change results very much. Among likely voters, 47 percent say they would vote for a Democrat and 36 percent for a Republican, while 4 percent prefer a third party and 12 percent do not make a choice.

“When we test by party, eight of 10 voters support their own party, and there are simply more Democrats than Republicans in New Jersey,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “Independents continue to lean Republican as they have all year, but the margin has dropped from 11 points in August to five points. And in any case, independents are much more likely to stay home in an off-year election.”

The poll of 830 registered New Jersey voters was conducted September 23 to 26. The registered voter sample has a margin of error of +/-3.4 percentage points. Generic vote questions were asked of random half samples, which have a margin of error of +/- 4.8 percentage points. Results do not apply to specific districts but give a sense of the overall mood of the state.

Support for incumbents vs. challengers depends on the question

To test attitudes toward incumbent members of Congress, half of those polled were asked if they would vote for a generic Republican versus a Democrat, while the other half were asked if they would vote for their current representative or a challenger.

While supporting their party, voters are more uncertain when it comes to supporting their representative. Registered voters favor their current congressperson by only one percentage point, 32 percent to 31 percent; another 24 percent are undecided and 13 percent say they would not vote. Among “likely voters” only, incumbents are ahead, 35 percent to 33 percent. Results are essentially unchanged from August, when generic incumbents held a 30 percent to 28 percent lead over challengers among registered voters, with 31 percent don’t know.

“We have consistently seen that voters readily support their own party in a generic ballot test,” said Redlawsk. “But they are much less sure if they support their ‘current congressman’ when they are not given a party cue. If voters vote by party, incumbents are generally safe. If they enter the voting booth in a ‘throw the bums out’ mood, some races could be closer than expected.”

Voters in a relatively sour mood, but give Democrats another chance

New Jersey registered voters match the mood of the nation: half think the state is on the wrong track, while only 40 percent think it is going in the right direction. Fifty-eight percent say thinking about the government in Washington makes them angry. New Jerseyans also are less than positive about both Democrats and Republicans in Congress. Forty-four percent of registered voters have a favorable view of Democrats in Congress, while only 33 percent feel the same about Republicans. While both parties have gained six points since August, Democrats are in a stronger position, with only 39 percent holding an unfavorable view, versus 50 percent for Republicans.

Reflecting their feelings about the parties and the generic ballot test, 54 percent of Garden Staters think Democrats should be “given more time to solve the country’s problems” while only 34 percent say “it is time to elect Republicans to take charge in Congress.”

In Democratic districts, Democratic margin increases as voters decide

Across current Democratic congressional districts, 47 percent of registered voters would vote for a generic Democrat compared to 31 percent for a Republican, while 15 percent of voters living in Democratic districts are still undecided. This is an increase in support for both parties since August when 41 percent of registered voters living in Democratic districts supported a Democrat and 28 percent supported a Republican.

Support for incumbents in these districts is 15 points lower when the question is asked about supporting “your current congressman” and not including political party. Among registered voters living in a Democratic district, only 32 percent say that they would vote for their current representative, while 31 percent favor a challenger. At the same time, when party is not included, 24 percent of voters are still undecided, and 13 percent say they would not vote. Support for incumbents in Democratic districts is about the same among likely voters who favor their current representative over a challenger by a 36 percent to 32 percent.

Republican Districts remain closer

Across all Republican-held districts, 38 percent of registered voters would vote for a generic Republican, while 42 percent would vote for a generic Democratic candidate; an increase of one point for Democrats since August. Republicans pick up four points among likely voters, with 42 percent siding with the Republican and 44 percent the Democrat. Another 5 percent would vote for a third party candidate and 7 percent are undecided. Likely voters in Republican districts are more certain about their choices than those voters living in Democratic districts (13 percent undecided).

Framing the question as incumbent versus challenger makes some difference across all Republican-held districts. Put this way, 32 percent of registered voters in these districts would vote to re-elect their current congressman, while 32 percent say they would vote for a challenger. As with Democratic districts, many more say they are undecided when party is not included: 21 percent are undecided, and 15 percent say they would not vote.

“While it would appear Republican incumbents face a tougher electorate than Democrats in New Jersey, this is mostly due to the aggregate nature of our statewide polling,” said Redlawsk. “We have fewer respondents in the five Republican districts than the eight Democratic districts, so we must be much more tentative with the numbers here. At this point there is no reason to believe any Republican incumbents in New Jersey are actually in trouble.”

Independents voters favoring Republicans, challengers

Independent registered voters are more supportive of generic Republican congressional candidates than Democrats. When asked if they would vote for a Democrat or Republican for Congress, 25 percent pick the Republican, 20 percent the Democrat, and 16 percent prefer another candidate. But 35 percent of independent voters are undecided, and 5 percent say that they will not vote. This shows an increase in the number of independents preferring a third party candidate, as well as an increase in support of Democratic candidates from August.

When framed in terms of voting for a current incumbent or a challenger, independents are riding the anti-incumbency wave along with their partisan counterparts: 30 percent say that they would support a challenger in a congressional race, while only 24 percent would favor an incumbent. Another 30 percent have not yet made up their minds, and 16 percent say they would not vote.

Partisans are paying attention

Republican and Democratic likely voters are following election news much more closely than independents. Among likely Republican voters, 46 percent say they are following news “very closely” along with 44 percent of likely Democratic voters. But only 31 percent of independents report that they are following the election news “very closely.”

Minor Correction

2010-09-29T13:52:00.003-04:00

Well, it is one of those days. For those of you who read the full release of our CD 3 poll this morning, including tables, we have posted a minor correction here. Despite four sets of eyes looking at the release, we inadvertently switched "Not" and "Very" in the captions for the "Enthusiasm" question on the tables on Page 4. The text of the release is correct, it was only the table that contained the error. This is now fixed. Nothing changes about our interpretation of the race in CD 3.

Adler/Runyan Race Continues Hot, But Adler Maintaining Lead

2010-09-28T10:44:00.011-04:00

If it's the end of September it must be time for another poll in NJ's 3rd Congressional District, the only one pundits think is really competitive. And our latest Rutgers-Eagleton Poll does indeed suggest the race remains close among likley voters, though incumbent Democrat John Adler holds a strong lead among all registered voters. Adler's potential problem, however, is that his supporters are less likely to be enthusiastic about voting. Thus what is a 9 point lead or so among registered voters (compared to only 6 points in August) is a within-the-margin-of-error two point lead among those we judge to be likely voters.

Still, as the release below shows, Adler is in reasonable position for an incumbent Democrat in a marginal seat given the prevailing winds of 2010. He seems to be so because most likely voters in the district actually say they prefer experience over an outsider and because he is seen somewhat more favorably than is his opponent Republican Jon Runyan. A Christie endorsement of Runyan doesn't change much, nor does an Obama endorsement of Adler. Go figure!

A quick note on "likely voters". In August we did a very simple likely voter screen, essentially asking how likely the respondent was to vote this fall, and eliminating anyone who gave a response of "50/50" or less. We know of course that people tell us they will vote, even when they won't, so this screen is kind of limited.

For this poll and for the next pre-election poll in late October, our screen is a little more detailed.

We start by asking people if they voted for president in 2008 and governor in 2009. Those who did not vote in these higher profile elections are extremely unlikely to vote this fall, so we drop them, - except if they were not old enough to vote in 2008 or 2009. We then ask a vote enthusiasm question, where respondents are asked to say how enthusiastic they are about voting on a 0-10 scale. We drop anyone who scores less than a 5 as being less than 50% likely to vote. Finally, we also give respondents a chance to say they will not vote in our vote choice questions. Those who say "not vote" are also eliminate from the likely voter pool. The result in the 3rd District is that we go from 538 registered voters to 335 likely voters in our sample, about a 63% yield. While Congressional year turnout is virtually always lower than presidential and gubernatorial, the question this year is how much lower? My guess is that 60% of registered voters (NOT of eligible voters) is still high, but probably not too bad a cut for a likely voter screen.

Following is the release.
Full Release with Questions and Tables available HERE.

RUTGERS-EAGLETON POLL: ADLER MAINTAINS LEAD IN 3RD DISTRICT

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Third Congressional District incumbent Democrat John Adler has increased his lead among registered voters to nine points over Republican challenger Jon Runyan, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. With third party candidate Peter DeStefano included, Adler leads with 40 percent (up from 31 percent in August), followed by 31 percent for Runyan (up from 25 percent) while DeStefano polls at 6 percent (up from 4 percent). Most registered voters now make a choice, with only 12 percent saying “don’t know” and another 12 percent saying they will not vote.

Adler’s lead among registered voters is at risk, however, when voter enthusiasm is considered. Only 42 percent of Democrats rate themselves as “very enthusiastic” about voting in the upcoming election, compared to 58 percent of Republicans and 49 percent of independents.

“John Adler appears so far to be bucking the tide of anti-incumbency and anti-Democratic feeling among all registered voters,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers. “However, there is significant risk for him in the enthusiasm gap evident between Republicans and Democrats. If more Democrats don’t vote, Adler will be in trouble.”

The telephone poll of 538 registered voters and 335 likely voters living in the 3rd District was conducted Sept. 23-26 and has a margin of error 4.2 percentage points for registered voters and 5.4 percentage points for likely voters. The survey included both landline and cell phone respondents.

Statistical tie among likely voters

Likely voters – defined as those who voted in the last two elections and are generally enthusiastic about voting this time – prefer Adler by two points, but this is within the poll’s margin of error. Adler leads Runyan, 41 percent to 39 percent, with DeStefano at 6 percent among likely voters; 14 percent remain undecided.

Independents will hold the key to this election if they vote, Redlawsk said. Among all registered independents, Adler leads Runyan, 32 percent to 26 percent, with DeStefano at 11 percent. But among likely voting independents, Runyan leads, 35 percent to 30 percent, with DeStefano at 9 percent.

“Independent voters’ normally low turnout in an off-year, coupled with the lack of enthusiasm by Democrats, puts Adler in a tougher place than he would be if turnout were higher,” said Redlawsk. “He still appears to have the edge, but it is a very thin edge. Nonetheless, given the uphill battle Democrats face overall, Adler seems in a better position six weeks out than may have been expected.”

Likely voters more favorable towards Adler

Likely voters feel positive about their incumbent congressman, by a 43 percent to 30 percent margin. In comparison, only 29 percent feel favorable towards Runyan, while 30 percent feel unfavorable. Another 28 percent say they have not heard enough to have an opinion on Runyan, compared to only 15 percent for Adler. Meanwhile, 6 percent view DeStefano favorably and 8 percent unfavorably. Among independent likely voters, Adler gets 39 percent favorable and 34 percent unfavorable, compared to 29 percent favorable and 24 percent unfavorable for Runyan.

Attitudes toward Democrats in Washington

Forty-six percent of likely 3rd Congressional District voters think Democrats should be given more time in office, 2 points higher than those thinking it is time to elect Republicans. About three-quarters of likely voters willing to give Democrats more time say they will vote for Adler; almost the same percentage who call for a Republican say they will vote for Runyan.

Experience versus the outsider

Registered voters prefer an experienced candidate to an outsider by 51 percent to 32 percent margin. In August’s Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, only 26 percent preferred an outsider, while 48 percent wanted experience. Among likely voters, 47 percent say they favor experience, while 34 percent would prefer an outsider. About six-in-10 likely voters calling for an experienced candidate prefer Adler; the same percentage favoring an outsider makes Runyan their choice.

“Voters’ preference for experience is helping Adler, even in the current anti-Washington environment,” said Redlawsk. “As an incumbent, Adler can obviously trade on his experience, while Runyan is forced to make the outsider claim that voters seem less interested in supporting.”

Endorsement by Obama and Christie

Endorsements by President Barack Obama and Gov. Chris Christie appear to have limited effect on voters who have already chosen their 3rd District candidate: only 37 percent of likely Adler voters said Obama’s endorsement would make them more likely to vote for Adler, while six percent said it would make them less likely. The majority (56 percent) said an endorsement by Obama would not matter. Among Runyan voters, 62 percent said an endorsement of Adler by Obama would make them less likely to vote for Adler; just 6 percent said it made them more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate.

An endorsement by Christie would make 42 percent of Runyan voters more likely to vote for the Republican candidate; 8 percent say it would make them less likely. But most likely Runyan voters (50 percent) say such an endorsement would not matter. For Adler voters, a Christie endorsement of Runyan would make 50 percent less likely to vote for the GOP candidate, while 42 percent say it would make no difference.

Voters are paying more attention

Compared to the August Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, 3rd District voters are paying more attention to the Adler-Runyan race as Election Day nears. In August, 45 percent of registered voters said they were not paying close attention, nine points higher than today. Two-thirds of voters say they are paying at least “somewhat close attention” to political news. “The more voters pay attention, the more likely they are to vote,” said Redlawsk. “Off-year turnout is normally substantially lower than presidential years, but there does seem to be a greater level of interest in this race than in the usual congressional vote.”

Shooting from the Hip doesn't always Pan Out

2010-08-29T12:33:00.002-04:00

This past week has seen a new type of story on NJ Governor Chris Christie - one in which failure figures prominently. It goes something like this: First we learn New Jersey came in 11th in the federal Race to the Top competition for school funding. Unfortunately there were only 10 winners. That's bad enough, but then it turns out there was an error in the New Jersey application that cost us 4.2 points. We apparently only needed 3 more to come in 10th and get the $400 million prize.

Governor Christie takes to the podium, three binders in hand, which he says is the thousand page application. He rails on at faceless bureaucrats in Washington, President Obama, and others, saying it's Washington's fault we lost out, that we weren't allowed to correct a minor clerical error made by some mid level staff person. It's vintage Christie, shooting from the hip.

Then we find out that the feds videotaped the presentation, and despite the Governor's claims, NJ WAS given a chance to produce the right numbers. And it's on tape. Suddenly shooting from the hip doesn't look so good. We also find out that the original version of the application that (now former) Education Commissioner Bret Schundler worked out with the NJEA had the right information. But the Governor, in a high profile, shooting from the hip slap down of both the NJEA and Schundler, rejected the compromise and (presumably) his office redid the application and introduced the error.

So in the next shot from the hip Schundler ends up directly in the line of fire and is out as Commissioner. But he insists he did nothing wrong, and in fact told the Governor not to make the claim that the Obama administration didn't let New Jersey correct the numbers.

So here we are. A Governor who has blasted to fame as a straight talking, shoot from the hip, take no prisoners, etc., kind of guy, is caught by his own style.

Is this going to hurt him politically? Will it embolden the Democrats, who seem to cower in Christie's presence? Our recent polling might give some some insight.

In our August 2010 poll we found that Christie was viewed favorably by 46% and unfavorably by 39%. Both numbers are up from last spring, when he was viewed more negatively. But interestingly, his job performance numbers are quite negative, with only 39% rating him excellent or good, and 58% only fair or poor.

So New Jersey voters like Christie overall as a governor, but do not think he's doing that good a job. What kept his favorables positive in the face of the job performance number?

I think it is because New Jerseyans have appreciated Christie's style of leadership, with 70 percent saying the words "Strong Leader" apply either very or somewhat well to him. They also think he's smart with 76 percent saying that word applies. So he's a smart, strong leader, which in times of uncertainty people like very much. Even a majority of Democrats think these words apply to him.

But, 76 percent also say he is stubborn, and 60 percent report that "arrogant" applies to the Governor. And therein lies some risk for him in this dust up.

Will this nearly half-billion dollar screw up hurt the Governor? It is likely to if it impacts beliefs about him being a smart leader, and reinforces his stubbornness and even arrogance in people's minds. But more importantly, it is likely to because Garden Staters LOVE their local schools and their teachers. They may well not love the teacher's union, but that's a lot like hating congress but liking one's own congressman, which time and time again is the case. And here was a chance to get a lot of money for our schools. A chance that was bungled.

In all our polling on the budget, one thing comes out clearly. The cuts to school funding are not popular and many people want the funding restored. In our August poll we asked whether overall budget cuts should be reversed when times get better, or taxes cut. While we haven't published the results, we found that 41 percent want programs restored (while 53 percent want tax cuts). We then asked those who want programs restored, which should be the top priority, and school funding blew every other option away, with 51 percent. Second was restoring programs for the poor at only 16 percent. This tracks with our polling in April where there was strong desire to protect education.

So the numbers tell us that Christie's support from the public is based not so much on job performance, and definitely not on the budget (only 30 percent support the budget in our August poll) but instead on perceptions of Christie the smart strong leader, who comes across as taking on the entrenched interests. And this 400 million dollar misstep may well erode that image the longer it is talked about. If so this could be the beginning of a new perspective on the rookie Governor. Votes may well begin questioning whether it is the leadership or the stubbornness and arrogance that drives what Christie does. As a leader people respect him even if they disagree. But if his leadership results in such high profile failures, they may begin to wonder what else they should question about his approach to running New Jersey.

Governor Christie may continue to shoot from the hip, but he will need to be more careful where he's pointing when he does so.

An Overview of NJ's Congressional Races

2010-08-17T07:19:00.010-04:00

Today we follow up on a survey we ran way back in February, trying to get an overall feel for the upcoming Congressional races in New Jersey. There are no statewide races on the ballot this fall, so it is likely to be a low turnout election, if history is any guide. On the other hand, a surprising number of people claim to be paying at least some attention to news about the election, and we all keep reading about how certain groups are energized and others are not. So maybe we'll see more coming to the polls than usual for this off-year election.

In any case, we did a statewide survey where we split the sample into two groups. With one group we asked the standard generic Republican vs. Democrat ballot test for Congress. With the other we asked about voting for "your current congressman" versus a "challenger running against him". (YES, all of NJ's members of Congress are male.)

These aggregate results give us an overall picture, but of course do not tell us about individual districts, since we have only about 55-60 respondents per district. So we aggregate by whether the district is currently held by a Republican or a Democrat to look a little more deeply at the results.

I should note too that these statewide aggregate results do NOT include the 3rd district, where we specifically polled the Adler/Runyan race. The release on that race is available here.

Following is the release. A PDF with the release and questions and tables is available here.

NEW RUTGERS-EAGLETON POLL SHOWS DEMOCRATIC INCUMBENTS SAFE, BUT REPUBLICANS SAFER

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. – Will New Jersey voters support their incumbent congressional representatives in this fall’s contentious midterm elections?
Their answers depend on how the question is asked.

If the question is framed in terms of incumbency – will you vote for your current congressman? – voters who have made up their minds are split nearly evenly between incumbents and challengers.

But, if the question is framed purely partisan terms – will you vote for a Democrat or a Republican this fall? – voters who have made up their minds are favoring Democrats.

When registered voters statewide are asked about voting for their current member of Congress or for a challenger – without identifying either by party – they give incumbents a 30 percent to 28 percent lead, while 31 percent say they do not know how they would vote and 11 percent say they definitely would not vote. This compares a February, 2010 Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, which showed incumbents supported 32 percent to 25 percent, with 27 percent undecided and 17 percent not voting.

“We have seen tightening of the generic incumbent versus challenger results since February,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “Among those making a choice, it is now a statistical dead heat statewide, where incumbents had a seven-point margin six months ago. No question that the environment is more risky than usual for incumbents, though it still seems likely that most, if not all, New Jersey incumbents will survive.”

Half those polled were asked about voting for their “current congressman” versus a challenger; half were asked about voting for a generic Republican versus a Democrat. Among these latter voters, 38 percent said they would vote for a Democrat and 29 percent supported a Republican, with 4 percent “other,” 25 percent don’t know and 4 percent saying they will not vote. In February, 33 percent favored Democrats, 31 percent Republicans and 7 percent someone else, with 20 percent saying didn’t know and 10 percent not voting.

The poll of 751 registered New Jersey voters was conducted Aug. 5 to Aug. 8. The full sample has a margin of error of +/-3.6 percentage points. Vote questions were asked of random half samples, which have a margin of error of +/- 5.0 percentage points.

Democratic “incumbents” fare badly, but “Democrats” do just fine

Across all districts held by Democrats, voters support a generic Democrat over a Republican 41 percent to 28 percent. But when party is not named, voters in these same districts appear more ready to toss their incumbents, with 29 percent supporting their “current congressman” and 31 percent supporting “a challenger.” The story is the opposite for Republicans. When party is named, voters in GOP-held districts support an unnamed Democrat 34 percent to 31 percent for the Republican, a -3 margin for Republicans. In February a generic Republican led by 15 points in these same districts. But when asked about supporting their “current congressman” over a challenger, voters support the incumbent 33 percent to 23 percent, a 10 point margin, compared to 7 points in February.

Republicans are hurt when their party is named because voters are very unhappy with Republicans in Congress. While only 37 percent of voters feel favorable towards Congressional Democrats, Republicans are liked by even fewer; only 27 percent hold a “favorable” impression.

“Still when we ask voters about supporting their current congressman or voting for a challenger, Democratic districts suffer the most, reflecting that voters are unhappy and know that it is Democrats who are in charge,” said Redlawsk. “Voters in GOP districts overall are more supportive of their ‘current congressman’ than those in Democratic-held districts, when party is not named. Anti-incumbency, such as it is, is more directed at Democrats than Republicans.”

Independents leaning Republican

Independent voters are more supportive of Republicans then Democrats. When asked whether they would vote for an unnamed Democrat or Republican for Congress, independents pick the Republican 25 percent to 14 percent for the Democrat with 8 percent preferring someone else. But 46 percent of independents are undecided, and another 7 percent say they will not vote. This is a slight drop for both parties from the February Rutgers-Eagleton Poll when Republicans led Democrats 30 to 17 percent.

When asked if they would vote for their current congressman or a challenger, independents statewide support a challenger 30 percent to 22 percent, with 34 percent undecided and 15 percent saying they would not vote. Challengers have gained since February when independents were evenly split 28 to 28 percent.

“But, as indicated by the very large undecided and not voting groups, turnout by independents in off-year elections is usually much lower than partisans,” Redlawsk said. “So while Republicans and challengers generally may gain from independent voters, the gain will be limited unless turnout by these voters is much higher than usual.”

There is some evidence independents may turn out in larger than usual numbers. More independents than Democrats say they are following news about the election somewhat or very closely, 63 percent to 52 percent. Republicans are paying even more attention, with 72 percent claiming they are following election news somewhat or very closely.

Obama and Christie have influence

Voters’ opinions about President Obama and Gov. Christie have some bearing on how voters see the congressional races. President Obama is seen favorably by 52 percent of New Jersey votes, and unfavorably by 36 percent, compared to 56 to 31 percent in March. Meanwhile, Gov. Christie is viewed favorably by 46 percent and unfavorably by 39 percent, up from April, when his rating was 33 percent favorable and 37 percent unfavorable.

Support for Obama appears to have a stronger partisan influence on registered voters, than Christie. Statewide, voters who view Obama favorably say they will vote for a Democrat for Congress, 61 percent to 8 percent for a Republican, while those favorable to Christie support a Republican 55 percent to 14 percent.

In districts held by Democrats, Christie support increases the vote for a challenger over the incumbent. Voters favorable towards Christie say they will vote for a challenger, 39 percent to 20 percent, while those unfavorable towards the Governor support the incumbent, 42 percent to 24 percent, a 37 point shift away from the Democratic incumbent based on Christie favorability in Democratic districts. Obama’s influence in Republican districts is not as strong. While support for Obama also leads to support for a challenger, 28 percent to 24 percent, those unfavorable towards Obama support the Republican incumbent, 40 to 19 percent. This is a shift of only 25 points from the incumbent based on favorability towards Obama in GOP districts.

“Voters in Democratic districts are more easily moved by support for Christie than are voters in GOP-held districts by support for Obama; Republicans are just less likely to defect,” said Redlawsk.

Statewide results do not include the 3rd Congressional District, where a Rutgers-Eagleton poll released Aug. 10 shows incumbent Democrat John Adler leading Republican Jon Runyan 31 to 25 percent.

Governor Christie continues to Fascinate

2010-08-12T11:41:00.009-04:00

There seems little doubt that NJ Governor Chris Christie is different from any governor most New Jerseyans can remember. He is supremely self confident, willing to express what he appears to really believe, and ready to take on whomever appears tob e standing in his way. Like his policies or not, the Governor is something different in recent New Jersey politics.

And Garden State residents are not completely sure what to make of him. As the results we are releasing today (below) show, the Governor's favorability rating is net positive by 7 points, meaning more people are favorable towards him (46% of registered voters) than unfavorable (39%). While we don't publish them in today's release, this compares well to President Obama (+16, 52% to 36%), and is far better than the state legislature (18% - 44%) with a whopping -26.

But at the very same time, Christie's job performance rating in our poll is negative. Only 12% say he is doing an excellent job, and 27% say a good job. But a majority, 58% rate his performance as fair (33%) or poor (25%).

So they seem to like him as a guy, but are not overly happy with the specifics of what he is doing. This is borne out by the negative reaction to the budget, with only 30% supporting it, while 63% think more could have been done to protect programs from cuts.

We wanted to dig more deeply into these attitudes towards the Governor, so we asked how well a series of "trait words" describe Gov. Christie. There were four positive and four negative words, randomly presented. The positives were: smart, independent, strong leader, and reformer, while the negatives were stubborn, uncaring, arrogant, and bully. Some fancy statistical analysis (Factor Analysis) shows that there are two dimensions to these eight words, a positive and a negative one, and each group fits into the factor we expected. So "Stubborn" which might be a positive trait to some people, fits better with the other negative traits statistically.

You can see the release below for the details. Most interesting to me is that Democrats are very mixed - majorities see EVERY word as fitting Christie either very or somewhat well. They see both good and bad in the guy. They are willing to say he is a smart leader, but they also think he is an uncaring bully. Republicans on the other hand, see only the positives, with 85-94% of them saying the positive words describe the Governor very or somewhat well. But most reject the negative words, except for "stubborn", which 69% of Republicans say describes the Governor. Independents are a little more positive and a little less negative than Democrats, but they look more like Democrats than Republicans in their beliefs about these traits.

Overall the order of the traits thought to describe Governor Christie either very or somewhat well is: Smart (76%), Stubborn (76%), Independent (74%), strong leader (70%). Following these are Reformer (66%), Arrogant (60%), Bully (49%) and Uncaring (47%). Note that of the top four words, three are positive (and stubborn may have positive connotations). Of the last four, three are negative. Even with the job performance rating sitting in negative territory, Garden Staters are more positive than negative towards the Governor, at least given this list of descriptors.

Of course, public employee union members are somewhat more negative towards the Governor but they also see his positive traits as well, especially as a strong leader. Given the high profile battles between Governor Christie and public employee unions, especially the New Jersey Teachers’ Association, it is not surprising that members of these unions are more negative. Yet they also perhaps begrudgingly recognize that he is clearly leading and perhaps a smart politician even if he is going where they don’t want to go.

There is also a gender difference in the trait words. This reflects both partisanship, in that women are more likely to be democrats, but also suggests different takes on Christie’s style as governor. Women see him as stubborn and independent first, with many also saying "arrogant" describes him very well, while men characterize him as smart and a strong leader, though also recognize that stubborn can describe the governor as well.

Here's the actual release. Tables and Questions available here.

New Jersey Voters Think Gov. Christie is Stubborn but Independent and Smart

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J –New Jersey’s registered voters think Gov. Chris Christie is “stubborn,” but they also see him as “independent” and “smart,” according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. About 4 in 10 Garden Staters think these words describe Christie “very well,” while fewer than 2 in 10 say they do not describe him at all. Given a set of four positive and four negative character traits, slightly more voters say the positive traits describe Christie very well.

The telephone poll of 751 registered voters statewide was conducted Aug. 5 to 8 and has a margin of error of +/-3.6 percentage points.

“New Jerseyans describe the governor as a smart leader, but they are also quite willing to call him stubborn,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science. “Many who say he isn’t doing a good job, describe him in positive terms.”

Positive and negative views of Christie

Asked how strongly they agree with a random list of four positive (smart, independent, strong leader and reformer) and four negative traits (stubborn, uncaring, arrogant and bully) to describe Christie, three-quarters say stubborn “very” (42 percent) or “somewhat” well (34 percent). About the same percentage call him “very” (39 percent) or “somewhat” smart (37 percent). Seventy-four percent agree Christie is at least somewhat independent; 70 percent view him as a strong leader. Sixty-six percent call him a reformer, 60 percent arrogant, 49 percent a bully and 47 percent uncaring.

“That both the positive and negative descriptors fit is striking,” said Redlawsk, “that some of this is driven by partisanship is not. But a majority of Democrats say that all the positive traits are at least somewhat applicable, while a majority of Republicans (69 percent) agree that one negative – stubborn – applies. Republicans are very positive about the governor. Democrats see both positive and negative.”

Independents are mixed; a majority agrees that all the positive traits apply at least somewhat to Christie, as well as two negatives – stubborn (76 percent) and arrogant (59 percent).

“Stubborn can be seen both ways,” said Redlawsk. “The governor does seem to make it a virtue, but its possible coupling with arrogance in independent voters’ minds could suggest there is a thin line between a positive and negative assessment of such a trait.”

Favorability is positive, but job performance negative

According to the poll, Christie’s favorability among registered voters has returned to February’s level (46 percent), but his unfavorable rating during the same stretch has increased 13 points to 39 percent. Only 15 percent of respondents today say they don't have an opinion of Christie, down from 29 percent in February.

At the same time, though almost half the voters say they have a favorable opinion of the governor, a majority think Christie is doing only a fair or poor job. Thirty-nine percent say he is doing a good job, but 33 percent say he is doing a fair job and 25 percent rate him poor. The state budget is the issue that most strongly influences attitudes toward Christie – 63 percent of voters think more could have been done to alleviate program cuts. Only 30 percent say they support the budget as passed.

Public employee union members are more negative

Public employee union members (about 12 percent of respondents) are significantly more likely to say the negative traits describe Christie “very well.” More than half (57 percent) agree he is stubborn, while 49 percent call him arrogant, 41 percent a bully 34 percent uncaring. At the same time they are relatively likely to agree Christie is independent (41 percent) and smart (34 percent). Fewer see him as a reformer or leader (each 26 percent).

Perceptions of Christie as leader vary by employment status

Among unemployed New Jerseyans, only 27 percent call Christie a strong leader, compared to 36 percent of registered voters; 35 percent of the jobless disagree with the description. However, more than half of retired New Jerseyans think Christie a strong leader, while 15 percent disagree. The evaluation of part-time or full-time workers is more mixed: about one third from each employment category think him a strong leader. About one-quarter from each disagree.

A gender gap in perceptions

Men and women hold different perceptions of Christie and his job performance. More men – 51 percent to 42 percent – feel favorable toward Christie and his job performance; 36 percent of men compared to 31 percent of women rate his work performance as fair.

Nearly 80 percent of women agree Christie is stubborn, 75 percent call him independent and 71 percent say he is smart. He is called smart (82 percent), a strong leader (76 percent) and independent (73 percent) by men. Almost half the men, compared to one-third of the women, think the bully label does not apply to Christie. By a 10-point margin, women are more likely to say Christie is not a strong leader.

Hot Race in CD-3. Adler leads among registered voters; Runyan among those paying attention

2010-08-10T09:27:00.009-04:00

As promised, we are releasing our first poll of the congressional campaign season, and we are focusing on the 3rd District, and the pitched battle between incumbent John Adler and challenger Jon Runyan. Results are interesting. Among all registered voters, Adler holds a pretty strong lead, and among those who claim they are at least somewhat likely to vote, the lead jumps to 10 points. But, among those who say they are actually paying attention, Runyan is up by 1 point, an 11-point swing.

These numbers actually include an option to "not vote". If the people who choose that option are then dropped from the totals, Adler's overall lead is an additional point higher. We reported the "Not Vote" in the head-to-head because there is an interesting pattern when we include Peter DeStefano, the (maybe) self-identified Tea Party independent who Runyan says is a plant for Adler. What happens is that DeStefano takes more votes from Adler than Runyan [though we're only talking about a handful of actual people], and the number who say they will not vote drops dramatically. But DeStefano doesn't get them, they move to undecided rather than any candidate. In our poll, DeStefano, who we did NOT label as "Tea Party", gets only 4 percent of the vote.

The bottom line seems to be that this race is as competitive in August as people thought it would be. Whether it stays so depends on who is paying attention, the extent to which Runyan can minimize Adler's much larger cash-on-hand advantage, and what the political environment looks like by November 3.

Here's the press release:

ADLER HOLDS LEAD IN NEW JERSEY 3RD DISTRICT CONGRESSIONAL RACE

But Runyan Catches Adler among Voters Paying the most Attention

NOTE: This release with Questions and Tables can be found here.

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – In the already heated battle for Congress in New Jersey’s 3rd Congressional District, incumbent Democrat John Adler holds a narrow lead over Republican challenger Jon Runyan, among all registered voters according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. With third party candidate Peter DeStefano included, Adler leads 31 percent to 25 percent, while DeStefano polls at 4 percent, and 34 percent say “don’t know”. Another 6 percent say they will not vote in the Congressional race. Without DeStefano on the ballot, Adler leads Runyan 35 percent to 28 percent, with 23 percent don’t know and 13 percent not voting.

The telephone poll of 421 registered voters living in the 3rd Congressional District was conducted August 5-8, 2010 and has a margin of error of +/-4.8 percentage points.

While Adler leads among all registered voters, Runyan pulls ahead 36 to 35 percent among voters who are paying the most attention to the campaign.

Adler Support Higher among Self-Identified Likely Voters; Small lead with Independents

Among registered voters who say they are “very” or “somewhat” likely to vote in November, Adler’s lead grows to 10 points, 40 percent to 30 percent, with 22 percent don’t know and 8 percent saying they would not vote in this race. The 10 point lead holds when DeStefano is included in the list of candidates.

Among Republican voters, 60 percent say they will vote for Runyan, while 56 percent of Democrats will support Adler. At the same time 19 percent of Republicans and 29 percent of Democrats don’t know whom they support. Among independents, Adler has a small lead, 23 to 19 percent, but 45 percent say they don’t know who they will support.

“It is hard in August to predict who will really vote in November,” said David Redlawsk, Director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and Professor of Political Science. "Thus, while a simple likely voter screen suggests that Adler does better, more people say they will vote than actually turn out.”

Runyan Stronger among those Most Paying Attention

While likely voters give Adler a lead, his advantage disappears among the 54 percent of registered voters who report following the election “very” or “somewhat” closely, Runyan outpolls Adler from this group, 36 percent to 35 percent, while DeStefano receives 4 percent; 24 percent don’t know. About 1 percent say they will not vote in this race. However, Adler has a strong lead among those following the election “Not too closely” or not at all, 24 percent to 11 percent for Runyan, and 3 percent for DeStefano, The majority of these registered voters either answer “don’t know” (49 percent) or that they will not vote (13 percent).

“While likely voters put Adler up strongly, it’s more realistic to analyze those who follow the election news,” Redlawsk said. “In a midterm election, these are the voters most likely to turn out. If that pattern holds, then the race is essentially a dead heat.”

Experience verses the Outsider

By a 22-percentage point margin, registered voters say they prefer an experienced candidate over a political outsider. Among those who favor experience, Adler is preferred to Runyan, 38 percent to 18 percent, with 4 percent choosing DeStefano. Among voters preferring an outsider, DeStefano polls 9 percent, while Runyan gets 36 percent and Adler 14 percent.

The DeStefano Effect

Respondents were given two ballot tests: the first with candidates Adler and Runyan (with “don’t know” and “will not vote” options), and a second test that included DeStefano. Among registered voters, Adler’s support was more adversely affected than Runyon’s by DeStefano, who picked up 6 percent of initial Adler voters, but only 2 percent of Runyan supporters. DeStefano also added 14 percent of those who initially said they would not vote. These effects are relatively small however, given the low level of support for DeStefano overall.

“Despite the debate over the DeStefano candidacy, our polling suggests that he is not currently much of a factor, and if anything, affects Adler slightly more,” said Redlawsk. “Interestingly, when he is included on the ballot test, the number saying they will not vote plummets, and the ‘don’t knows’ grow. This suggests that at least some voters may be open to an alternative to the two major party candidates. Even so, it seems unlikely that DeStefano’s presence on the ballot would greatly affect the dynamics of the race.”

In the Adler internal campaign poll reported in the press, DeStefano was tagged as a “Tea Party” candidate. However, given the controversy and uncertainty over his connection to the Tea Party movement, the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll simply labeled him as an “independent candidate.”

“We chose not to label DeStefano as a Tea Party candidate, and this no doubt lowered his support in the poll, compared to the internal Adler campaign poll,” said Redlawsk. “However, given the level of debate over his status, even labeling him as Tea Party would most likely have had a limited effect, especially among those voters most paying attention.”

State of the Race in the 3rd District

“As a well-funded incumbent, John Adler could be expected to start off with an advantage in the election,” said David Redlawsk. “Even so, given the general sense of frustration voters are expressing, Adler’s very close win two years ago, and the competitive nature of the 3rd District, he has a fight on his hands.”

It may be the dog days, but at least one NJ Congressional race is hot!

2010-08-09T19:47:00.003-04:00

It has been a while since I have updated this blog, primarily because I have been traveling to research conferences and the like for much of the summer. It's also the case that most people say that political polling in August is not worth the effort.

I would usually agree, but this year it's not only the weather that has heated up. In the midst of this sweltering New Jersey summer, the 3rd Congressional District race has been even hotter. Incumbent freshman Democrat John Adler, who won the traditionally Republican seat two years ago, is fighting to hold onto it in the face of a challenge from former Philadelphia Eagles offensive lineman John Runyan. Runyan won the Republican primary, and has been racing money at a decent clip. Most observers assume the race will be a close one, given the Republican leanings of the district (Gov. Christie won it handily) and the general negative environment for Democrats.

Adding early excitement was an Adler campaign poll, released (leaked) to the press showing the Congressman up 17 points over Runyan. What made this interesting was not the margin, but the addition of a third candidate who was not on anyone's radar. Peter DeStefano was included as a "Tea Party Independent" in the poll and according to Adler's pollster, got 12 percent when no one seemed to even know he was running. No doubt the "Tea Party" label made the difference.

The question is what is the real state of the race in these early days of August? It is a truism that November is still a long way off, but it seems worth getting a baseline to work from.

So we are doing that. Tomorrow (Tuesday) we will release a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of the 3rd district, gauging the race as it stands right now. It is a simple poll - a head-to-head and a few other questions. What makes it potentially interesting is that we initially do not include DeStefano in the mix, and then follow up with a second ballot test including him.

We also ask if people are paying much attention - and 54% say they are paying a lot or at least some attention to news about the campaign. That seems pretty high for August, but suggests that this really will be the race to watch in New Jersey. Not to give too much away before we do the actual release, but the results among those paying attention are quite different than among the rest of the CD-3 registered voters we surveyed.

Also, we simultaneously did a statewide survey of registered voters focusing on questions about Gov. Christie, the state budget, and generic Congressional ballot tests. We will be releasing those data over the next week.

Finally, we made a very small foray into calling cell phones on the statewide survey, with about 10% of our completes coming from cell phone only households and the remaining 90% from a traditional landline RDD sample.

Stay tuned for more soon.

Not much to see, let's move along... Well not quite yet!

2010-06-09T11:26:00.003-04:00

Well, the Tea Party surprises in the Congressional primaries were few and far between yesterday in New Jersey, suggesting as our polling has shown that the Tea Party movement in the state is 1) primarily a within-Republican Party movement, and 2) not all that strong. No Congressional incumbent lost, and Leonard Lance (R-7th) thought by some to be at risk, pulled off a handy victory over three challengers claiming the Tea Party mantle. His majority win suggests that even if there had been only one, Lance would have won. John Runyan, set to challenge incumbent John Alder (D-3rd), looked early on like the challenge by Justin Murphy would be tight (at one point about 54-46, but in the end Runyan won 60-40. In the 12th District, Scott Sipprelle had to fend off a challenge from David Corsi, which he did 54%-46%.

So the NJ Congressional race that looks like it will be the most competitive is the 3rd, where Adler now faces the presumably stronger challenger in Runyan. And given a certain amount of voter dissatisfaction with incumbents this year and the nature of the district, Adler is likely in for a real fight. But Runyan will have to actually raise a lot more money than he has so far to compete effectively with the incumbent. It may be an anti-incumbent year (though that really remains to be shown in NJ) but incumbents start with lots of advantages, even in a bad year. Remember, in 1994, when the Democrats got slaughtered by Newt Gingerich and the Republicans, 89.8% of incumbents who sought reelection won.

And Rush Hold (D-12) will face the clearly stronger Republican challenger in Sipprelle, which might well make the race interesting.

But of course that doesn't mean there was NOTHING interesting going on yesterday that. In fact, as of this writing, we do not know whether the establishment Republican Diane Gooch or Tea Party favorite Anna Little will be the nominee in the 6th District to face Democrat incumbent Frank Pallone. Little is up by about 60 votes, with 1 precinct not reported and provisional votes to count. If she should win it would be a stunning blow to the Republican establishment in the 6th District, and Pallone's re-election may have gotten a little easier. Where Gooch raised over $400,000 so far, Little has raised all of $22,000. This does not suggest she will be a fundraising powerhouse if she wins.

Why is the race so close in the 6th? Well, the turnout was abysmal. A total of about 13,500 votes were cast in the primary. (Congressional districts have 300,000 plus voters of all parties/independents). With such a tiny turnout, a small number of committed activists can make a big difference as rank and file voters stay home on primary day. And that certainly seems to be what happened here. But it doesn't suggest that the same will happen in a general election.

There is no doubt there is a dedicated element of the Republican Party that is fed up. We have seen this clearly in our polling on the Tea Party in NJ and others have seen it nationally. But I still stand by the evidence that this is a small group in New Jersey and despite what I heard pundits saying on NJN last night, it is almost entirely populated by Republicans. Our polling showed only 10% of of Democrats and 29% of Independents reporting a favorable impression of the movement. Now that the primaries are over, the action is not with the Tea Party but with NJ independent voters. They usually vote Democrat where there are Democratic incumbents and Republican where there are Republican incumbents. And our early polling last February suggested they plan to do the same this year. But will they?

The elections this fall come down to the question of which way independents will swing (if they even vote). Will Republican challengers be able to ride on the Chris Christie coattails that brought him victory by convincingly winning independents? If so, maybe a couple Democrats will get a scare (and Adler will have a real fight in any case.) If not, then the fall is likely to be mostly business as usual at the Congressional level in New Jersey.

Primary Day in NJ - Will it be time to Tea Party?

2010-06-08T09:59:00.002-04:00

It's Tuesday June 8, 2010. Primary Day in New Jersey. As we've learned from various media reports, there are many more candidates than usual throwing their hats in the ring to challenge apparently entrenched incumbents.

Around the country - if the pundits are to be believed - there is a sense of frustration, outrage, and activism that puts the old guard of both parties at risk. Look at Pennsylvania, where party-switcher Arlen Specter was knocked out by upstart (well, ok, he's a Congressman, not exactly and outsider) Joe Sestak. And there's Kentucky where libertarian and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul knocked off Mitch McConnell's favored son. And today we'll see if Blanche Lincoln, Democratic incumbent in Arkansas gets run over by the "outsider" express (actually the liberal express, which seems a bit odd in Arkansas.)

There is no question there is a sense of unease around the country. Numerous polls have picked it up and many pundits are trying to get a handle on what it means. In New Jersey last February (a lifetime ago in politics) The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll looked at support for the Tea Party movement. (see our releases here and here). What did we find? First, across all NJ voters, there was limited support for the Tea Party, with only 27% expressing a "favorable" opinion, while another 44% had no opinion. Not exactly a rousing call to arms at the time, after a year of rallies, debates, and media attention. New Jersey would not seem a hospitable state for Tea Partying.

But underneath that we also found that HALF of Republicans had a favorable impression, more than enough to put fear into non-Tea-Party establishment Republicans. And maybe more interestingly, we found that Tea Party supporters were MORE likely to also say they support the two party system, rather than seeking a third party to run against Republicans and Democrats. And Tea Partiers were really angry - about two-thirds said that Democrats made them angry (compared to 32% of other voters) and even one-third said Republicans made them angry (compared to 50% of non-Tea-Party voters).

So this plays out today in the New Jersey Congressional primaries. Politickernj.com reports that Tea Party challengers to Republican establishment candidates have not raised large amounts of money. Moreover, in one high profile case (Rep. Leonard Lance's challengers in the 7th district) the presence of multiple insurgent candidates claiming the Tea Party mantle will make it harder to overcome the incumbent's natural advantages.

The wild card though is that voters don't pay much attention to primaries, as witness the latest FDU poll. But you can be sure the activists do! So the key question is (as always) about turnout. If Tea Party Republicans are more likely to turn out and to be in slash and burn anti-establishment mode, there could be some surprises tonight in New Jersey. But given the huge imbalance in campaign funds - with all of the incumbents and establishment candidates well funded, and all of the challenges far less so - even the fury of Tea Party supporters may not be enough to overcome an entrenched establishment in New Jersey.

A couple thoughts as summer is almost here

2010-05-28T10:35:00.002-04:00

The academic year cycle is one that I have never gotten completely used to even after 11 years of doing it as a professor (and way too many years of doing it as a student!) Just as things are gearing up suddenly it is time for exams, papers, presentations, and grading. I've done all that now, and my students have gotten their grades. I taught one of my favorite classes this spring - Survey Research. Students in this class do the "book learning" on survey work, but they also actually do a survey. But not a political one. Instead they do survey work on behalf of community organizations. The class is a lot of work for them, and great fun for me.

In any case, as things wind down for the summer in the academic world (though I stay just as busy given my various research projects) politics in Trenton continues to heat up. The latest polling from Fairleigh Dickinson shows Governor Christie's support improving from where we found it two months ago after his budget speech. At the same time, his favorite whipping organization, the NJEA seems to be losing its battle. Why? Well, even though Christie comes across to many as bullying at times, voters may be happy to see some leadership - ANY leadership - coming from politicians in this day and age. And like his positions or not, Christie IS leading. I think voters are giving him credit for that, and for his willingness to take on entrenched interests. And the NJEA has done itself no favors with its approach. In a difficult economic environment, the union leadership has seemed strangely out of touch.

When we polled in late March, voters did not want to see school and teacher cuts. But then came the school budget elections and the NJEA battles. Now it appears things are different. While we are not polling right now (and won't over the early summer) I bet if we did we'd see much more support for Christie's position and less support for teachers compared to where we were right after the budget speech. The FDU poll certainly suggests this is the case.

So what's next? The legislature needs to produce a budget by the end of June, and it seems likely that the budget will be a lot more like what Christie wants than what the Democrats want. Partly this is because he can just veto whatever he doesn't like and throw it back to the legislature. But also partly because while he may seem to be blustering and bullying to some, Governor Christie's approach right now is resonating more with voters than might have been expected. This pretty much gives him the upper hand. Unless, of course, something changes in the next few weeks. But it isn't clear what that something might be.

It's all a matter of perspective

2010-04-27T13:42:00.002-04:00

Patrick Murray at Monmouth points out that in the latest Rutgers-Eagleton poll the numbers of those saying NJ is an excellent or good place to live at pretty low compared to historic numbers. And of course that is what the data show, so Patrick is correct. But there is more context to this than simply that number and its trend over time. As Patrick also points out, the percentage who say they take pride in the state and who say they would move out of state if they could have changed little.

But here's the context. This latest poll was asked in the middle of the the worst recession since the depression 80 years ago, and in the middle of one of the most acrimonious debates over the state budget and the future of the state in a long time. Frankly it is fascinating that the numbers look as good as they do in this context.

Of course trends can give useful information. But trends are meaningless without the context in which they operate. And our focus for this poll was on where we are right now, which seems pretty good in light of all of the "stuff" going on around the state and all of the personal challenges individuals are facing.

Not long ago, kind of buried in this Rutgers-Eagleton release we listed some questions about how worried NJ residents are about various economic issues: 36% worry a lot about credit card debt, 36% worry a lot about the availability of good housing, 62% worry a lot about health insurance coverage, and 64% worry a lot about the availability of a good job. Yet in spite of all these worries, most like it here in NJ and most take pride in the state.

So yes, the "place to live" question shows a decline over time, especially recently. But put that decline in the context of right now - and in the context that other indicators are stable - and frankly I was surprised that as many people were positive as there are. But then maybe I am too much of an optimist about things.

And I will bet that once the economy picks up and whatever changes Christie brings about have time to settle in (which could be a while, I suppose), the "good place to live" numbers will move back up.

Believe It or Not - Most New Jerseyans Like it Here!

2010-04-26T10:29:00.002-04:00

Newsflash! New Jerseyans mostly like NJ! While there are certainly things to complain about - taxes in particular top the list - the latest results from the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll show that most residents of New Jersey would stay put in their neighborhood even if they could move (though 23 percent would move out of state), and a majority has at least some (or a great deal) of pride in the state. There is of course a sense among some that most people in New Jersey would leave if they could, and feel little connection to their state. Our results suggest this isn't really true. There is lots to like about living in New Jersey, though maybe ironically one of the top reasons people gave us was the state's proximity to New York City. But other top reasons include the Jersey Shore, the environment in general, and the state's diversity.

So for those of you who think the reason bridge tolls in New Jersey are only on the outbound side is charge people who want to leave, the reality is that people in New Jersey do take pride in the state and in the many things that make it a good place to live. There are problems, of course, including high property taxes, but it seems in most New Jersey residents' minds those problems are outweighed by the positives of such a diverse and interesting place.

The press release follows. Questions and tables can be found here.

NEW JERSEYANS LOVE THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, ARE PROUD OF STATE

While somewhat critical, residents find many good things about Garden State

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – New Jerseyans are simultaneously very proud of their state and somewhat critical of it as a place to live, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. Only 13 percent say it is an excellent place to live, but 39 percent call it a good place to live. Fully half say they take a lot of pride in living here, and less than a quarter say they would move out of the state if they had the opportunity to do so.

The poll of 953 New Jersey adults was conducted March 31 – April 3 and has a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points.

“While New Jerseyans certainly find things to complain about, a majority still see the state as a good place to live,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “What we see is that the many good things about the state seem to outweigh frustrations for most residents.”

Best and worst of New Jersey

Asked to name the best thing about living in New Jersey, respondents gave a wide range of answers, including its proximity to New York and other major centers, the beaches and the shore, the natural environment generally and the state’s diversity. “New Jerseyans have many reasons to like their state, and no one reason really dominates,” said Redlawsk.

About the state’s negatives, taxes were named by 37 percent of respondents, far outpacing any other dislike. Other common negatives were the cost of living here, significant traffic congestion and the existence of political corruption.

“It is no surprise that taxes led the negatives,” said Redlawsk. “This reflects both the sense that taxes are high, but also the ongoing debate over the state budget, which was well underway when we did this survey.”

Lots of pride in New Jersey

Half of New Jerseyans say they take a lot of pride living in the Garden State, while only 8 percent say they don’t take any pride living here. Given the opportunity, 23 percent of respondents said they would move out of state. A large majority (63 percent) would continue to live in their neighborhoods, while another 14 percent would move within their town or elsewhere in the state.

“While some people clearly have frustrations, most would stay here even if they could leave,” Redlawsk said. “This really suggests a sense of stability, even while there are plenty of issues the state needs to address.”

Overall, New Jersey seen as a good place to live

More than half of those polled called New Jersey an excellent (13 percent) or good (39 percent) place to live. Fifteen percent say it is a poor place to live; one in three rates it fair. The 63 percent of residents who would stay in their neighborhoods even if they could move are more positive: 16 percent call the state excellent, and 48 percent good. Sixty percent of this group takes lots of pride in their state, but of the 23 percent who would leave if they could, 80 percent rate New Jersey as only a fair (48 percent) or poor (32 percent) place to live.

Contentment varies with region, party identification, income, race, and age

A closer look at attitudes towards life in New Jersey shows most strikingly that where people live has a great effect on their happiness with the state. Urban residents are more likely to rate New Jersey as an excellent place to live (21 percent) compared to suburban and exurban/northwest residents (13 percent). Ten percent of those at the shore and 8 percent near Philadelphia grade the state excellent. Conversely, 20 percent of Philadelphia area residents call the state a poor place to live, higher than in any other region.

Almost six in 10 urban residents take a lot of pride living here, but only 46 percent of those near Philadelphia feel the same. Given this, not surprisingly Philadelphia area residents are the most likely to say they would move out of state if they could (29 percent). More than two-thirds of exurban residents would remain in their neighborhoods, even if they could move.

Democrats are much happier with life in the Garden State than Republicans, despite the election of a Republican governor last fall; 60 percent of Democrats rate New Jersey as an excellent or good place to live, compared with 45 percent of GOP backers. Independents are also less likely than Democrats to assess New Jersey positively as a place to live.

Wealthier residents are somewhat more content with life in New Jersey. Of those with household incomes over $150,000, 60 percent say the Garden State is an excellent or good place to live, while 50 percent of those making less than $50,000 feel the same.

Asians and Latinos (both 20 percent) are most likely to grade the Garden State as an excellent place to live. Only 12 percent of white respondents and 10 percent of blacks do the same. Black respondents also are more likely to say they would leave the state if they could, with 30 percent ready to move, compared with 24 percent of whites and less than 10 percent of the small samples of Asians and Latinos.

The poll’s youngest and oldest respondents are most proud of New Jersey. More than half (56 percent) of 18-to-29 year olds say they feel a lot of pride in New Jersey compared with 46 percent of 30-to-49 year olds, and 45 percent of 50-to-64 year olds. Fifty-seven percent of those older than 65 said they feel a lot of pride.

Attitudes Towards Local Government Consolidation

2010-04-19T10:46:00.004-04:00

Among the other issues we covered in our recent polling in new Jersey is the question of consolidating local government. New Jersey has an amazing number of municipalities and school boards, and a very strong tradition of home rule. But this fragmentation comes with a presumed cost - duplication and inefficiency in particular. In a time of massive state budget cuts and increasingly difficult local budget problems, it may be that merging some of NJ's local governments could have some positive impact.

But the assumption is that consolidation would not be popular with residents of towns that would be merged. The evidence seems to support this in the sense that the few attempts to do so by ballot have generally failed. But it turns out that at least in the abstract New Jerseyans today support local government consolidation, believing it would improve efficiency while maintaining or improving the quality of services provided by local government.

Following is today's release on attitudes towards municipal consolidation. The detailed tables and questions can be found here.

NEW JERSEY RESIDENTS SUPPORT MUNICIPAL CONSOLIDATION, EXPECT INCREASED EFFICIENCY WITH SAME OR BETTER QUALITY SERVICES

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – A majority of New Jerseyans favor consolidating local governments, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Support for consolidation is driven by the 50 percent of residents who say there are too many local governments and the 70 percent who believe the quality of local services would stay the same or get better under consolidation.

While believing there are too many local governments, Garden Staters remain more committed to their local schools, with only 36 percent saying there are too many school districts. The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, conducted March 31 to April 3, included 953 New Jersey adults. The full sample has a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points.

“New Jerseyans feel overtaxed at the local level, and believe one solution is to increase efficiency by consolidating local governments,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “As we reported earlier, this same poll shows strong support for cuts in state aid to local government, and making it easier to fire municipal workers. Given what is sometimes called the ‘hyperlocal’ focus of residents, to see a majority support doing away with their own local government is fairly surprising. But it is another reflection of the difficult financial times facing the state.”

Redlawsk also noted that the school district findings are supported by other results showing residents do not want to cut state aid to schools or to lay off teachers. “Residents make a clear distinction between support for their schools and support – or a lack of it – for local government,” he said.

Most Support Local Government Consolidation

Fifty-four percent of respondents favor government consolidation, while 38 percent would prefer to maintain their own local government, the poll found. Half believe there are too many municipal governments, while 40 percent say the number is just right. Nearly three-quarters who say there are too many local governments support consolidation and only 21 percent would prefer to keep their own local officials. Among those who do not think there are too many local governments, 36 percent still support consolidation while 55 percent would keep their own government.

Regional support for consolidation is strongest among Philadelphia area residents (66 percent) and in the exurban areas of New Jersey (67 percent), with 53 percent from shore counties and fewer than half of suburban and urban residents in favor. Resistance to consolidation is strongest in the suburbs: 46 percent oppose the concept compared to 26 percent opposition in exurban areas, 33 percent in the Philadelphia area, 38 percent in shore counties and 39 percent in urban areas.

The prospect of lower property taxes reduces opposition to consolidation, Redlawsk observed. Forty-five percent of opponents said they would favor consolidation if guaranteed a 10 percent tax cut; 54 percent would become proponents with a 20 percent cut. With a 10 percent cut, 47 percent of respondents continue to prefer their own local government but support falls to 36 percent with the enticement of a 20 percent rollback “While consolidation does not guarantee lower taxes, if residents thought merging local government would save money, they would be even more in favor than they are now,” Redlawsk said.

Quality of Services Expected to be Maintained

One-in-four New Jerseyans believe the quality of local services would improve under consolidation, but another 25 percent think services would worsen. Almost half (45 percent) envision no changes in quality. These results are similar to a 1994 Eagleton Poll where 24 percent thought they would see an improvement in quality, 27 percent anticipated a drop in quality and 40 percent thought the quality of services would not change.

“Little has changed between polls,” Redlawsk said, “but there has been virtually no actual consolidation. One reason may be that the state has provided few incentives or mandates to consolidate, and when push comes to shove, the pressure to maintain a sense of community seems to win out, even when residents say they would support consolidation in theory.”

Those favoring consolidation also think it will increase the efficiency of local government by nearly a 6-to-1 margin (62 percent to 11 percent), with 24 percent anticipating not much change.

Among those who approve the current number of municipal governments, most (47 percent) still say not much would change if consolidation were to occur, while 31 percent believe municipal government would be less efficient, and 16 percent say it would be more efficient.

Overall, New Jerseyans think the quality of local services would not be impacted negatively by consolidation, with almost two-thirds of those in favor also believing greater governmental efficiency would result. “Given the economic conditions of the state, there may be more openness to consolidation as a way to get a handle on ever rising costs and property taxes,” Redlawsk said.

Local Government is about Police, Schools, and Garbage Collection

When asked to name their most important local government service, 27 percent of respondents named police services, followed by local schools (23 percent), garbage and recycling (10 percent), roads (9 percent) and fire and rescue (5 percent). No other service drew more than 5 percent of responses.

“Local government is mainly about providing basic services to residents, including police and fire services,” said Redlawsk. “At the same time schools are clearly important to residents. They are reluctant to make cuts in school aid or to lay off teachers but are happy to make it easy to fire municipal workers.”
Redlawsk said that Garden State residents are much less likely to say that there are too many school districts than too many local governments. Only 36 percent say there are too many school districts, while 41 percent say the number of districts is just right, and 14 percent believe there are actually too few school districts.

The NY Times is Right about Tea Party Supporters

2010-04-15T12:07:00.004-04:00

The New York Times has it Right
Supports February Rutgers-Eagleton Poll of New Jersey Residents

Rutgers-Eagleton Poll releases on Tea Party in New Jersey:
February 25, 2010
March 2, 2010

Today's New York Times Report

Today’s (April 15) New York Times reports on what they call the first ever national poll of Tea Party supporters. Methodologically they over sampled supporters of the Tea Party movement in order to ensure a large enough sample from which to draw statistically valid conclusions with a reasonable margin of sampling error. This strategy allows them to report the demographics of Tea Party supporters nationally: “mostly white males, over 45, more wealthy and more conservative than the norm.”

This poll goes a long way towards helping us understand who feels affiliated with the tea Party movement and some of their beliefs. And these national findings track well with our earlier poll of New Jersey. We reported on March 2 that

50 percent of [New Jersey] voters who view the Tea Party favorably are Republicans even though Republicans make up only 27 percent of the registered voter sample. Independents comprise 35 percent of tea party supporters, while 15 percent are Democrats.

We also stated that in New Jersey:

While 27 percent of all New Jersey voters have a favorable impression of the Tea Party, this rises to 31 percent of exurban residents, compared to only 21 percent of urban dwellers. Very few blacks (only 5 percent) have a favorable impression of the Tea Party movement, but more than half (54 percent) of the very small sample of Asian voters express a favorable view, compared to 29 percent of all whites and 24 percent of Latino voters. Tea Party supporters are more likely to be male, with 31 percent of men favorable, compared to 24 percent of women. Higher income also defines those who view the Tea Party movement favorably. While only 18 percent of voters making less than $50,000 have a favorable view, 30 percent of those making more than $50,000 do.

It looks like New Jersey Tea Party supporters are a lot like what the Times finds nationally: whiter, more wealthy, and male, as well as heavily Republican (and thus more conservative) than the norm for the state of New Jersey.

The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll also found that in New Jersey Tea Party supporters have very extreme views of Barack Obama – with 75% of Republican Tea Party supporters calling him a socialist and 49% calling his administration un-American.

But as befits a group that is generally more wealthy than the public at large, GOP Tea Party supporters in New Jersey are less worried than most about their own personal situation, with few worries about housing, health insurance, jobs and retirement. The difference is stark for housing, where just 18 percent of Republicans favoring the TEA Party worry “a lot” about the availability of good housing compared to 33 percent to 42 percent from other groups. While 45 percent of these Republicans worry “a lot” about health insurance coverage, 62 percent to 75 percent from other groups worry a lot about coverage.

While our numbers are based on much smaller samples because the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll did not over sample for Tea Party supporters (and thus our results have a much higher margin of sampling error) it is interesting and instructive to see that our findings for New Jersey are essentially replicated in a national survey.

EVEN IN TIMES OF BUDGET CUTS, NEW JERSEYANS WANT EDUCATION PROTECTED

2010-04-13T12:10:00.003-04:00

Continuing our releases of data on the budget, today we have more details on what NJ residents are willing to cut and what they are not. Quick story: By a large margin they are not supportive of cuts to K-12 education or to laying off teachers, they are mixed (49% oppose - 48% support) on cuts to higher education, and they do not want cuts to assistance to the poor.

What do NJ residents want to cut? They strongly support cut to state aid to local government, and strongly support making it easier to lay off municipal workers.

And they do not support raising taxes or fees to balance the budget.

Here's the release. Tables and details available here.

EVEN IN TIMES OF BUDGET CUTS, NEW JERSEYANS WANT EDUCATION PROTECTED

Residents support cuts to municipal aid, environmental programs, public transportation and property tax rebates, Rutgers-Eagleton Poll finds

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Despite recognition that the state budget needs to be balanced, New Jersey residents believe cuts should be avoided in the areas of education and poverty relief, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Majorities want no budget reductions at all in state aid to local schools (57 percent) and programs for the poor (51 percent), while 49 percent oppose cuts to state colleges and universities. A large majority (72 percent) also opposes making it easier to lay off school teachers.

At the same time, majorities of New Jerseyans reject raising additional state revenues through increased taxes or fees to solve the budget problem and especially oppose raising the gas tax and raising state income tax rates generally (72 percent opposed for each).

Residents are willing to accept cuts in some areas, however, with only 31 percent opposing cuts to municipal aid, 39 percent opposing cuts to environmental programs and 42 percent opposing cuts to property tax rebates.

The poll, conducted March 31 – April 3, included 953 New Jersey adults. The full sample has a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points.

“Our recent poll showed that half of New Jerseyans are displeased with Governor Chris Christie’s proposed budget,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “These new results give a good sense of residents’ priorities in this difficult time. Laying off teachers or significantly cutting school aid are not seen as solutions. On the other hand, given today’s economic challenges, people do not want to see their own costs increase either. The state is between a rock and a hard place, with clear support for a limited number of solutions, one of which is cuts to municipal government.”

Unwilling to make cuts to public education or aid to the poor

Garden State residents strongly oppose funding cuts for their schools; 57 percent are against any cuts, while 15 percent want such aid cut deeper and 26 percent want lesser cuts. Higher education also fares well, as 49 percent oppose any reductions in college and university funding while 18 percent want deeper cuts and 30 percent want more modest cuts. “Though overall there seems to be little stomach for deep school aid cuts, this is driven by Democrats and independents, nearly two-thirds of whom oppose reducing school aid, while only 38 percent of Republicans oppose cuts,” said Redlawsk. He added that independents side with Republicans on cuts for higher education, with a minority of each groups opposing cuts. Conversely, 65 percent of Democrats oppose higher education cuts.

Independents favor protecting local schools and teachers, but are less supportive of state funding for higher education in the current economic environment.

New Jerseyans also want to protect the poor – 51 percent want no cuts in state programs to aid the poor, and 76 percent do not want to balance local budgets by making it easier to decrease assistance to the needy. There is broad agreement on protecting such help at the local level, with only 33 percent of Republicans, 23 percent of independents and 10 percent of Democrats supporting cuts. Republicans, however, are much more likely to support reductions to programs for the poor at the state level, with only 34 percent opposing any state cuts, compared to 53 percent of independents and 62 percent of Democrats.

“There is great sympathy for the poor, probably driven by the broad effects the recession has had on people at all economic levels,” said Redlawsk. “At the same time different political philosophies come into play, with conservatives supportive of local efforts but ready to cut statewide programs, while liberals do not want cuts to the poor at any level.”

New Jerseyans willing to fire municipal workers, but not teachers

Given options on how the state could make it easier to balance local budgets, 57 percent of those polled favor making it easier to fire municipal workers; 38 percent oppose this approach. About one-in-four wants to ease restrictions to lay off teachers and police, and one-in-five favors making it easier to cut assistance to the poor.

“New Jerseyans appear to think there are too many municipal workers and that layoffs in this area could help close local budget gaps,” said Redlawsk. He observed that in addition only 31 percent oppose cutting state aid to local governments. “Clearly if there are to be state aid cuts, most residents want them to hit municipal budgets, not school budgets,” he said.

Raising revenues through taxes and fees nixed by most

New Jerseyans overwhelmingly oppose increasing taxes or fees to close the state budget gap, with resistance strongest to raising the gas and state income tax. Seventy-two percent of respondents oppose either measure. Only 25 percent support an increase in the gas tax and 24 percent support a general increase in state income tax. Residents also oppose raising highway tolls (58 percent) and are against fare hikes on buses and trains (57 percent).
Garden Staters are least resistant to an increase in business tax. Just over 51 percent oppose an increase in business tax, while 43 percent express support for such a measure.

“The challenge to the state is how to make the necessary cuts and revenue enhancements to balance the budget,” said Redlawsk. “New Jerseyans are not completely unrealistic, but they do not want across the board cuts. Yet they do not want to pay more in taxes and fees.

“In a late February Rutgers-Eagleton poll, 61 percent opposed eliminating the surtax on high income residents. Even Republicans were more in favor of the surtax (47 percent) than opposed (46 percent). There is no reason to think this has changed over the last month. Taken together with today’s results, this suggests Garden State residents want to protect school funding and poverty programs, are willing to cut municipal funding and want the pain spread around to include high-income New Jerseyans.”

NJ Supports Health Care Reform Bill

2010-04-08T12:00:00.003-04:00

NEW JERSEYANS SUPPORT HEALTH CARE LAW PASSED BY CONGRESS

Release and Tables here

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. – New Jerseyans generally support the health care reform law passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll shows. While a late February Rutgers-Eagleton Poll found that two-thirds believed then that Congress should start over with the bill, 48 percent of New Jersey residents now support the law, while 40 percent oppose it, and 12 percent don’t know. Support is slightly lower among registered voters at 47 percent, with 41 percent opposing the bill.

The poll of 953 adults was conducted March 31 to April 3, with a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points. The poll includes a subsample of 845 registered voters.

“New Jerseyans have been supportive of some kind of health care reform all along,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “But many were confused by the process and as a result polling seemed to say they would oppose the bill that ultimately was passed. However, this turns out not to be the case.”

Not surprisingly, Republicans do strongly oppose the law, with only 9 percent saying they support it, and 83 percent opposed. The remaining 8 percent are not sure. In turn, 76 percent of Democrats support the law, and only 16 percent oppose it, with 8 percent unsure. Independents are more mixed, with 43 percent in support and 40 percent opposed, while 17 percent are unsure. Ideological moderates, regardless of party, support the new law, 51 percent to 35 percent, while 14 percent don’t know.

Support for health care reform is strongest among those with household incomes under $50,000 at 59 percent, while 38 percent of those with household incomes over $150,000 support the legislation.

“Support for this health care reform law is solid among moderates, and among people who are most likely to benefit,” said Redlawsk. “While there is significant opposition, it generally comes from those less likely to support Democrats, suggesting that passage of health care reform is unlikely to hurt Democratic candidates significantly in New Jersey.”

Opponents of the new law were asked if their opposition is because the bill is “too liberal” or because it is “not liberal enough.” Three-quarters of opponents say the law is too liberal, but 14 percent said they oppose the law because it is not liberal enough. Most Republican opponents (87 percent) say the law is too liberal, while a majority of the relatively small number of Democrats opposed (57 percent) also say it is too liberal. Among independents who oppose the law, 66 percent call it too liberal and 21 percent not liberal enough.

“Digging deeper into the opposition to this law, we see that while most opponents are driven by the belief the bill is too liberal, not all are,” said Redlawsk. “In the end, only 30 percent of New Jerseyans oppose this bill because it is too liberal, far less than it appears when the reason for opposition is not probed.”

NEW POLL: Christie Budget Splits Garden Staters

2010-04-07T12:27:00.004-04:00

NJ Governor Chris Christie gave his budget address on March 16 and it was an address like no other. Christie told the state that is is broke and that the solution is cuts nearly across the board. He made clear that he intends to depart from business as usual and spent a good deal of time laying the blame for the budget problems at the feet of predecessors, the legislature and both parties in it, and public employee union benefits and pension plans.

The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll decided to wait a couple weeks to let the realities of the budget sink in, and then to see what Garden Staters think about it. So we went into the field March 31-April 3 to find out, and today we are releasing the first set of results. There is a lot of information here, but the quick story is that New Jerseyans are split on the budget, in some predicable ways, and as he himself predicted, Christie's favorables have taken a significant hit.

One of the cornerstones of the proposed budget is "Proposition 2 1/2" which would place a hard cap on property tax increases of 2 1/2 percent annually. Local voters could allow higher increases, but the governing bodies could not go higher without voter approval. This proposal is patterned on a Massachusetts law.

We asked New Jerseyans what they think about this. Not surprisingly it is wildly popular, but such caps usually are when people do not think about any consequences. So we split our sample, and for half we laid out some consequences that some observers in MA have noted. When we did this, the results are exactly the opposite. Thinking about potential consequences changes opinion - instead of strong support, there becomes strong opposition.

Interesting fodder for whatever campaign materializes around this issue.

The full release follows. Questions and tables can be found HERE.

CHRISTIE BUDGET PROPOSAL SPLITS GARDEN STATERS

50 percent of New Jerseyans are displeased with budget while governor’s favorability rating drops 12 points since March 16 address to Legislature

As he himself predicted, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s new budget has not won him many friends, according the latest Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. The Poll finds impressions of Christie dropped from 45 percent favorable and 26 percent unfavorable in February 2010 to 33 percent favorable and 37 percent unfavorable following his March 16 budget address. This 12-point drop in one month comes on the heels of a budget proposal that displeases 50 percent of New Jersey residents while pleasing only 43 percent. Even so the Governor is seen much more favorably than either party in state government, where only 26 percent view Democrats and 25 percent see Republicans favorably.

“Three weeks after the budget speech, the impact is starting to sink in,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “The result is a recognition that the proposed budget cuts are going to hurt and a significant decrease in favorable impressions of Christie.”
The poll, conducted March 31 – April 3, included 953 New Jersey adults. The full sample has a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points. Specific questions about the budget were asked of a subsample of adults who had heard at least “a little” about the budget.

New Jerseyans are Paying Attention

Governor Christie’s budget proposal has garnered a great deal of attention from Garden Staters, with nearly 4 in 10 who said they had heard at least a little about the budget saying they watched or listened to at least part of the budget speech itself, and 65 percent saying they have heard or read at least something about the budget. “That more than a third of New Jerseyans saw or heard the budget speech first-hand is a testament to how seriously people take the state’s economic situation,” said Redlawsk. “It is also recognition of how visible Christie himself has been on the budget issue. There are very high levels of awareness across all demographic groups.”

Reaction to the Budget Mixed at Best

Of those who have heard about the budget, 43 percent say they are very or somewhat pleased with it, while 50 percent are somewhat or very displeased. Another 8 percent are unsure of their response. Not surprisingly, opposition is centered among those who view Christie unfavorably, with 90 percent displeased. Of those who view Christie favorably, 88 percent say they are pleased with the budget. “Support for Christie is tied directly to the budget proposal,” said Redlawsk. “How this budget process proceeds and the ultimate impact on New Jersey residents may well define Christie’s next few years in office. Of particular note is that the 30 percent of New Jerseyans who have neither a favorable nor unfavorable impression of Christie are displeased by the budget by a 50 percent to 30 percent margin.”

Predictably, Democrats are strongly displeased by the budget (48 percent very displeased) while Republicans are pleased (73 percent either very pleased or somewhat pleased). Independents are evenly split, with 45 percent either very or somewhat pleased and 44 percent very or somewhat displeased. Women are less likely to be pleased by the budget, with 55 percent displeased compared to 44 percent of men.

High-income residents are much more pleased with the budget than any other income group, with 54 percent of those earning $150,000 or more saying they are pleased, while 43 percent are displeased. On the other end of the scale, only 31 percent of those making under $50,000 are very or somewhat pleased. “Those who expect to feel less impact of the budget cuts are much happier with the proposed budget than those who expect to feel the brunt,” said Redlawsk. “Since Christie’s budget does not reinstate the surtax on high earners, which New Jerseyans strongly support according to our February 2010 poll, better-off New Jerseyans are more likely to support it.”

Homeowners are also more pleased with the budget, with 46 percent very or somewhat pleased, compared to 35 percent of renters,.

Budget Cuts Expected to Affect Most

Nearly one-third (31 percent) of Garden State residents aware of the budget expect Christie’s proposed budget cuts to affect them “a great deal,” while another 42 percent expect some impact from the cuts. Fewer than one in 10 expects no impact. “New Jerseyans know that these budget cuts are wide and deep,” said Redlawsk.

Those who expect the budget cuts to affect them a great deal are altogether unhappy with the Governor’s proposal; only 15 percent are at all pleased with the budget proposal, while 59 percent are very displeased. On the other hand, 60 percent of those who expect the cuts to affect them “very little” are pleased with the proposal. “There is a clear sense of self-interest in these results,” noted Redlawsk. “While people may be mistaken in their expectations, those who expect little impact profess to be quite pleased with the plan.”

Christie Favorables now Upside Down

Governor Christie is viewed significantly less favorably now than he was when the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll surveyed New Jerseyans in late February. The February poll gave the Governor a +19 rating, with 45 percent favorable and 26 percent unfavorable. The new poll has him upside down at -4, with 33 percent favorable and 37 percent unfavorable, a swing of 23 percentage points.

“The primary event that occurred between our February Poll and the post-budget poll was the budget address,” said Redlawsk. “While Christie has taken a number of actions that might bother some groups, the budget was the most visible, and it has clearly resulted in a major negative shift in opinion about the Governor.”
Christie has lost support across all parties, but most notably among independents, whose positive feelings dropped from 48 percent in February to 34 percent in March. Even so, Christie comes out ahead when compared to how residents feel about their representatives at the state capitol. Only 26 percent say they feel favorably towards the Democrats in Trenton and 25 percent towards the Republicans.

The Governor draws more support from men more than women. Only 30 percent of woman report a favorable impression, compared to 36 percent of their male counterparts. Additionally, those with household incomes more than $150,000 annually are the only group in which the majority views Christie favorably. Of high earners, 50 percent feel favorable toward the Governor, compared to 38 percent with incomes from $100,000-150,000, 34 percent of those between $50,000-$100,000 and 22 percent with household incomes less than 50 thousand dollars per year.

Constitutional Amendment to Limit Property Taxes Supported -- Or Maybe Not

Governor Christie also proposed what he calls “Proposition 2 ½,” based on a Massachusetts constitutional requirement that property taxes increase no more than 2 ½ percent annually. Public opinion on the proposal at this early stage varies widely depending on how the question is phrased when the idea is described. Half of the respondents to the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll were asked as if they would support a constitutional amendment proposed by the governor to limit property tax increases. Not surprisingly, nearly two out of three (64 percent) said “yes”. Support for such an amendment is wide, with majority support from Republicans, Democrats, and independents, as well as all income groups and all races.

The other half were asked the same question, but told that Massachusetts had a similar law that “some say resulted in closing fire stations, libraries, and senior centers, and cuts in school programs.” When put this way, a majority oppose the property tax limits the Governor advocates, with 57 percent opposed and 34 percent in support. Only Republicans reach 50 percent support when potential consequences are presented, while 78 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents oppose the measure.

“These stunning results suggest that while there is a great deal of concern about property taxes in New Jersey, there is equal concern about what passing Proposition 2 ½ might do,” said Redlawsk. When asked to limit taxes without being made aware of any consequences, New Jerseyans across the board respond with a rousing ‘Yes!’ But when they consider the loss of services that might come with such limits, support dries up considerably. Both supporters and opponents of Proposition 2 ½ might take a lesson from these results.”

New Poll Results Coming

2010-04-06T16:05:00.003-04:00

Earlier this year we decided that we could run two polls during the academic semester, one in late February after our new Governor, Chris Christie had been in office a short time, and another in late March/Early April following his March 16 budget speech. The first poll resulted in releases on the 2010 Congressional Elections, two releases on the Tea Party in New Jersey (1, 2), and some interesting data on initial support for Christie (positive) and his unwillingness to reinstate the income tax surcharge on high earners (which most New Jersey residents want). We also took a look at health care reform before the bill passed Congress.

We're now ready to begin releasing results from our second poll, the one after Christie's budget speech. This one focuses on reactions to the budget (mixed), and where the budget cuts should come. We also asked some questions about municipal consolidation as one way to cut costs of government in New Jersey.

We expect to begin these releases tomorrow, with the budget front and center followed by views on budget cuts. Next week we'll have something on consolidation and also a little bit on how New Jersey residents view their state.

We think there is some interesting stuff in all of this, so stay tuned!

An UPDATE on Health Care Reform Attitudes in NJ

2010-03-11T16:27:00.002-05:00

In our most recent poll at the end of February we asked a couple questions about health care reform. One was a version of the question we asked in November about whether or not reform is needed. Little has changed - most Garden Staters think reform is needed. We also asked whether the current bill should be passed, and here New Jerseyans give a big NO. Given the choice between starting over or passing the current bill, they want to start over, even though reform is important to them.

For the press release with tables, click HERE. The press release itself is below.

GARDEN STATE RESIDENTS SUPPORT HEALTH CARE REFORM BUT ARE UNHAPPY WITH PROPOSED BILL BEFORE CONGRESS

81 percent of respondents support change for a broken system that Congress should fix

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Support for health care reform remains strong in New Jersey, according to the latest Rutgers-Eagleton Poll that finds 81 percent of residents say the health care system needs to be changed. Only 17 percent believe the current system works well enough.

At the same time, given a choice between passing the current health care bill and starting over, more than two-thirds believe Congress should start crafting new legislation.

“Despite the limited progress that health care reform has made in Washington, the desire for change remains very strong in New Jersey,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “The vast majority sees the need for change, but has soured on the bill under debate in Congress.”

The poll of 953 New Jersey adults was conducted Feb. 19-22 with a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points.

Change Worth taking a risk

Most New Jerseyans (70 percent) believe changing the health care system is worth whatever risk it may carry, while only 25 percent say that change is too risky. Five percent are not sure. Of those favoring change, 82 percent believe the risk is worthwhile; only 13 percent think it would be too risky to do so. Among the small group of adults who think the system works well, 75 percent say making a change would be too risky.

“There is real pressure for health care reform,” said Redlawsk. “A solid majority believes the current system needs to be fixed and it is worth the risk to pass a bill. There has been remarkably little change in opinion on the need for reform since early November, despite the debate inside and outside of Washington.”
That Rutgers-Eagleton Poll reported that 63 percent of New Jerseyans thought the health care system “could work better” and 88 percent said “change is needed.”

Change yes, current bill no

While Garden Staters are willing to risk health care reform, they feel strongly that Congress should and come up with a new bill. Only 22 percent say Congress should pass the current reform proposals, while 68 percent want the lawmakers to start over. More than half of Democrats want to begin anew, along with 60 percent of independents and 91 percent of Republicans. Only 37 percent of Democrats want passage of the current proposal. Of those favoring a fresh look at reform by Congress, 62 percent think the risk is worthwhile. Almost a third (31 percent) calls it too risky.

Two-thirds of those backing health care system reform, however, still say Congress should start on new legislation. Only 24 percent think the bill should be passed as is. A larger group (74 percent) of those who say the current health care system works well enough believes lawmakers should introduce a new bill, compared to only 18 percent favoring the proposed legislation.

“The interesting finding is despite the strong interest in change and the willingness to say change is worth the risk it brings, New Jerseyans still want Congress to start over,” Redlawsk said. “To most New Jerseyans, the current health care process has resulted in a bill they just do not believe is worth passing.”

Reform continues to be important to Garden State residents

Compared to the November Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, Garden State residents are just as likely to say health care reform is very or somewhat important to them now. The new poll finds 58 percent call health care reform very important, and 27 percent say it is somewhat important. In the November poll, 60 percent said reform was very important and 26 percent said it was somewhat important.

An overwhelming majority – 90 percent – of residents who call health care very important also believe the system must be changed. Similarly, respondents who feel health care reform is very important value the potential payoff, with 76 percent thinking the risk is worthwhile. At the same time, nearly two-thirds of this group is just as likely as others to think Congress should propose new legislation.

Support for Chris Christie in New Jersey

2010-03-08T14:39:00.003-05:00

Continuing with our releases from the February 22-25 Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, today we report on support for Governor Chris Christie. The quick story is that his favorables are pretty good - not as good as Obama's, but a lot better than Palin's! And way up from when he was elected. At the same time, voters do NOT support cutting taxes for high income earners, and they are skeptical that sweeping change will actually come to New Jersey. But they have some sense that it might happen. Of course, Christie's budget address on March 16 will really make clear where things are going.

Click HERE to get the full release, questions, and tables.

NEW JERSEY VOTERS GENERALLY FAVORABLE TO CHRISTIE BUT DON’T LIKE HIS TAX CUT FOR THE WEALTHY

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – As Gov. Chris Christie prepares to give his budget address March 16, he has significant support from New Jersey registered voters, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Christie is viewed favorably by 45 percent, and unfavorably by 26 percent. Another 26 percent feel neither favorable nor unfavorable toward him. Christie’s positive rating comes though few voters say it is “very likely” he will be able to make the sweeping changes he proposes, and most oppose his call for cutting tax rates for wealthy New Jerseyans.

The telephone poll of 953 New Jersey adults conducted Feb. 19-22 included 886 registered voters out of 953 randomly selected adults. The registered voter sample reported here has a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points.

“Governor Christie has managed to solidify a strong net positive rating among New Jersey voters in a short time,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “While Democrats predictably view him very unfavorably, independents view Christie favorably by a 2-to-1 margin. Continuing support among independents will be important to Christie’s ability to make changes in Trenton, since Democratic legislative leaders are likely to pay close attention to that.”

Redlawsk also observed that more than a quarter of voters are not ready to give an opinion and may be swayed by what they see in the weeks following the budget address.

Christie’s favorability rating falls between two national politicians. President Barack Obama is viewed favorably by 56 percent and unfavorably by 31 percent. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, however, has little support in New Jersey, viewed favorably by only 27 percent and unfavorably by 52 percent. Thus Christie’s net positive rating of 19 percent, though not quite as high as Obama’s 25 point margin, is far above Palin’s 25 point negative rating.

Christie is viewed particularly positively by Evangelical Christians, 52 percent to 20 percent, and men, who give him a 54 percent to 22 percent favorable rating. Women are much less positive, supporting Christie 37 percent to 29 percent. Voters living in union households are also slightly positive, 42 percent to 35 percent. Black voters are negative, 40 percent to 22 percent. Voters over 65 are much more favorable than younger voters under 30. The former group views Christie favorably, 52 percent to 18 percent, while the latter group splits, 35 percent both favorable and unfavorable.

New Jersey’s future looking better? Voters are not sure

Asked if the future of New Jersey is better, worse, or the same since Christie’s defeat of former Gov. Jon Corzine, most believe prospects are about the same (42 percent), while 27 percent say “better” and 18 percent say “worse.” Not surprisingly, Democrats and Corzine voters are much more likely to think the future will be worse, while half of Republicans and Christie voters say the future will be better. Evangelical Christians are not as positive, with only a quarter saying the future will be better, while 43 percent expect it to be the same.

Views of the future vary greatly by age. Registered voters under 30 are much more likely to say the future will be worse (29 percent) than better (14 percent), while 31 percent of voters 65 and over believe the future will be better, while only 9 percent think it will be worse. Likewise, high-income voters are twice as likely as lower-income voters to say the future will be better (40 percent to 20 percent).

Voters skeptical about sweeping changes

Significant skepticism that Christie’s plans for a sweeping change in Trenton ever will come about appears to be softening voters’ optimism for the future. A November post-election Rutgers-Eagleton Poll showed that only 5 percent of those who wanted Christie’s top priority to be cutting taxes thought it was very likely to happen.

The new poll shows that voters still are not sure change is really coming – only 7 percent think the “sweeping changes” proposed by Christie are “very likely” to happen, while 55 percent think they are “somewhat likely.” More than one- third (36 percent) say sweeping changes are not likely at all. Even Christie voters are somewhat skeptical, with only 17 percent saying sweeping changes are “very likely.”
“Voters recognize that while Governor Christie has an agenda of change and reform, politics in Trenton is complicated,” said Redlawsk. “They have seen governors come in before promising change and still their taxes go up, roads remain in terrible shape and state government doesn’t seem to change.”

No to tax cut for wealthy

Most voters agree that tax rates for New Jerseyans making $400,000 or more per year should not be cut, despite Christie’s support for allowing the surcharge imposed on high earners to expire. A majority of virtually every demographic group opposes the cut, and even Republicans are not sure, with 46 percent supporting and 47 percent opposing the tax cut. Independents strongly oppose the tax cut, by a 2-to-1 margin, the same ratio among voters who are unsure of their opinion about Christie.

Interestingly, even voters making more than $150,000 per year oppose the tax cut, with only 35 percent supporting the cut and 64 percent opposing it.

“Governor Christie has built up a lot of favorability since he took office, but cutting taxes for high-earning New Jerseyans is very unpopular, even when we made clear that Christie supports the expiration of the surcharge on high-income filers,” said Redlawsk. “At the same time, there has been much less focus on this, and a lot more on his moves to cut costs, so overall the tax rate issue does not seem to be hurting him directly.”

2010 Congressional Elections in NJ: 8 Months Out

2010-03-05T07:52:00.004-05:00

At some level it may seem pretty silly to poll on elections eight months from now. But on the other hand we are always curious about the state of public opinion and the general mindset of the voters. So in our recent poll we asked tow voter intent questions. For half of our sample we asked the standard (and familiar) "generic ballot" test. Respondents are asked "If the election were today would you vote for the Republican, the Democrat, someone else, or would you not vote?" (We added the "not vote" option to allow people to opt out.) The other half of the sample received a question about voting for their current congressman (all House members in New Jersey are men at the moment) or for a "challenger running against him". The not vote option was given here as well.

Why did we ask only half samples these questions? First, asking one might well confuse a respondent about the other. One might also influence the other. But our main reason was simply to keep our costs down. As usual we had so many things we wanted to ask about that we had to make decisions about what we could actually get done under budget and without over burdening respondents. While we'd like to have more cases for each question, we're pretty comfortable that what we have is meaningful.

So what do we have? Statewide Republicans are essentially at parity with Democrats on the generic ballot. In a state considered pretty blue (although NJ did just elect a Republican Governor) this suggests Democrats are in real trouble. But it's not so simple. First, nearly 40%of respondents answered something other than the two parties - someone else, not vote, and don't know. And second, looking at the incumbent question, "incumbents" hold a lead over "challengers".

But much more persuasively - at least for a poll that does NOT look at individual districts - when we aggregate results by which congressional district respondents live in, we find a very different outcome in the generic test. In districts held by Republican incumbents, "a Republican" has a large lead over "a Democrat". And in Democratic districts, the opposite is true. Except for the case of 3rd District Democratic incumbent John Adler (which we did not poll specifically, but simply looking at the challenge developing against him), incumbents of both parties appear in pretty good shape this early on. Having said that, there are lots of undecided potential voters out there, and a lot can happen in eight months.

The incumbent-challenger ballot test also supports this. Aggregating the results by party of incumbent, in Republican districts "Current congressman" beats "challenger" by 31% - 24%, while in Democratic districts the margin for the current member of congress is 38% - 22%.

So there we are. New Jersey registered voters are unhappy with both parties in Washington, but they support Barack Obama. Obama's coattails are limited however, and lots of folks simply don't know yet what they will do. As always these generic ballot tests are limited - voters will actually see names when they do vote, and in competitive races they will hear an awful lot about both sides before November. Still, most races will not be competitive, if history and these results are any guide.

Here's the press release on this poll. Click HERE to get the full release with questions and tables in PDF format.

2010 CONGRESSIONAL VOTE IN NEW JERSEY EIGHT MONTHS OUT; MOST INCUMBENTS IN GOOD SHAPE BUT MANY VOTERS UNDECIDED

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Despite voter dissatisfaction with Washington politics, most incumbent members of Congress in New Jersey do not appear in great danger of losing their seats, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today.

While 33 percent of registered voters say they will vote for a Democrat for Congress, and 31 percent say they will vote for a Republican, statewide results are misleading. Across the five congressional districts held by Republicans, voters plan to vote for Republicans by a 40 percent to 25 percent margin, while across the eight Democratic districts, voters intend to vote for Democrats by an even larger margin, 41 percent to 22 percent. Significantly, however, nearly 20 percent do not know how they will vote, and 10 percent say they do not plan to vote at all.

The poll of 953 New Jersey adults conducted Feb. 19-22 included 886 registered voters. The full registered voter sample has a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points. Vote intention questions were asked of half samples which have a margin of error of +/- 4.8 percentage points.

“The overall picture statewide seems to suggest that Republicans are at parity with Democrats in 2010, but this is misleading,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “While the statewide vote may be close, it is less likely to be so in most congressional districts. We did not poll at the district level, and in the 3rd district Democrat John Adler is likely to face a very difficult challenge. Still, at the aggregate level incumbents of both parties start the year with an advantage over potential general election challengers.”

When voters were asked about voting for their current member of Congress or for a challenger – without identifying either by party – they gave incumbents a 32 percent to 25 percent lead statewide. Across GOP-held districts, incumbents hold a 7-point lead while overall, Democratic incumbents are ahead by 16 points across their districts. At the same time, voters asked about their 2010 voting plans were much more likely to say they “don’t know” or that they do not plan to vote.

“The wildcards this early in the year are not knowing how many challengers will mount strong campaigns and how undecided voters will feel in eight months.” said Redlawsk. “Historically Rutgers-Eagleton Polls have shown large numbers of undecideds until quite late in an election year. A strong anti-Democrat or even anti-incumbent sentiment could have a base to build on, but it will also need well-funded candidates who appeal to independents.

Independents present a mixed picture

Statewide, it appears that independent voters lean towards Republicans for the 2010 election as they did in the 2009 gubernatorial election when Chris Christie outpolled Jon Corzine with independents, 60 percent to 30 percent. Independents asked about their congressional vote by party choose Republicans, 30 percent to 17 percent. But another 12 percent say they will vote for someone else, 32 percent say they don’t know, and 9 percent say they will not vote. Without labeling candidates by party, independents are evenly split between incumbents and challengers, 28 percent each, while 30 percent don’t know and 14 percent say they will not vote.

More importantly, independents with a preference living in Democratic districts are slightly more likely to vote for a Democrat while those in Republican districts strongly support a Republican. While based on very small samples, the independents’ pro-Democratic margin in districts with Democratic incumbents is 26 percent to 22 percent. In Republican districts, independents vote Republican 30 to 14 percent. According to Redlawsk, this suggests that unless a strong anti-incumbent campaign develops, independents may be mostly drawn to the party of their incumbent congressman, but there are risks for Democrats in the current environment.

Obama voters less certain to vote Democratic in 2010

Not surprisingly, a large share of John McCain voters (75 percent) plan to vote for a Republican for Congress, while 5 percent will vote for a Democrat. But just 57 percent of Barack Obama voters say they will vote for a Democrat this time around and 8 percent choose the GOP. Only 11 percent of McCain voters say they are undecided about November’s vote; twice as many Obama voters (23 percent) have no preference for Congress, and another 8 percent say they will not vote. Virtually all McCain voters claim they will vote in 2010.

Corzine voters are more likely to vote for a fellow Democrat for Congress (68 percent) than Chris Christie voters are to vote for a Republican (58 percent.) According to Redlawsk, the larger overall support for Obama in 2008 compared to Corzine’s in 2009 accounts for the difference. Many Obama voters had already defected from Corzine in 2009, leaving only stronger Democratic voters remaining. Among registered voters who did not vote for governor, twice as many support a Democrat for Congress (41 percent) than a Republican (21 percent.)

Obama approval does not mean long coattails

While 57 percent of New Jersey registered voters approve of President Obama’s job performance, only 51 percent say they will vote for a Democrat for Congress in 2010. Twelve percent say they will vote for a Republican, 10 percent say they do not expect to vote and 22 percent are undecided.

Of the 37 percent who disapprove of Obama’s job performance, 61 percent say they will vote for a Republican while 8 percent will vote for a Democrat despite their disapproval of Obama. Another 8 percent say they will not vote, and 15 percent are undecided.

Those approving of the president’s job performance are much more likely to say they will vote for their incumbent congressman, 42 percent to 15 percent for a challenger. Another 22 percent say they will abstain and 22 percent don’t know. The opposite is true of those who disapprove – 40 percent say they will vote for a challenger, compared to 19 percent for an incumbent. But one-third don’t know and 8 percent will not vote.

Worried voters say they will vote for Democrats; less worried support Republicans

Fifty-one percent of registered voters who worry “a lot” about aspects of their personal financial situation say they will vote for a Democrat for Congress in 2010, while 42 percent of those who do not worry a lot plan to vote for a Republican. Across five concerns – housing, credit card debt, heath insurance, jobs and saving for retirement – 16 percent of voters say none of these worry them “a lot,” while 36 percent worry “a lot” about four or all five concerns. Yet this does not translate to voting for challengers against incumbents. Across all levels of worry, voters pick incumbents by 3 to 10 point margins. Those who worry most are actually more likely to say they favor an incumbent.

Looking specifically at concerns about health insurance coverage, 62 percent of registered voters worry “a lot,” 20 percent worry “a little,” and 18 percent worry “none at all.” Democrats running for Congress have an advantage among those who worry a lot, 38 percent to 26 percent, while those who worry only a little support Republicans, 36 percent to 32 percent. Those without concerns about health care strong support a Republican candidate, 44 percent to 17 percent. Similar patterns hold for other personal financial worries.

Change in the air?

A majority of registered voters in New Jersey (52 percent) believe the change Obama promised in his campaign is happening too slowly. Only 32 percent of these voters say they will vote Democratic in 2010, while 30 percent say they will vote for the Republican for Congress. But 20 percent are undecided.

Of the 13 percent who say change is happening too quickly, 71 percent say they will vote Republican, while 12 percent plan to vote for the Democrat. Only 8 percent do not know their candidate preference and 4 percent say they will not vote.

Thirty-one percent of New Jersey voters think the pace of change in Washington is “about right.” Of these, 49 percent say they will vote Democratic while 13 percent will vote Republican. Twenty-two percent don’t know and 12 percent say they will not vote.

More on the TEA Party Movement in NJ

2010-03-02T15:28:00.001-05:00

We are releasing more on our polling on the TEA Party movement in New Jersey. No time to write about it right now other than to post the press release. To get the TABLES and QUESTIONS, click on the post title, or HERE to get a PDF of the release.

Here's the release:

NEW JERSEY TEA PARTY REPUBLICANS SEE OBAMA AS SOCIALIST, UN-AMERICAN AND DISCONNECTED

Movement a complex mix of beliefs – most are anti-Obama, but many are more moderate

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – Seventy five percent of New Jersey Republicans with a favorable impression of the TEA Party movement think President Barack Obama is a socialist, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Republicans who do not favor the movement disagree, with only 38 percent calling Obama a socialist.

Similarly, while 84 percent of pro-TEA Party Republicans say Obama is disconnected from people like them and 49 percent call the Obama administration un-American, other Republicans have very different opinions: 20 percent call Obama un-American and 51 percent say he is disconnected from people like them.

“We find that Republicans who favor the TEA Party movement are driven, at least in part, by an antipathy towards Obama which is simply less prevalent among Republicans who are not favorable toward the TEA Party,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political Science at Rutgers University. The poll of 953 New Jersey adults including 886 register voters was conducted Feb. 19-22, 2010 and has a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points for the registered voter sample.

Registered voters in New Jersey have a less favorable impression of the TEA Party movement than other states, as shown in recent national polls. Statewide, only 27 percent of New Jersey voters have a favorable impression of the movement, while 29 percent view it unfavorably and 44 percent express no opinion either way.

Not surprisingly, there is a strong partisan split, with 48 percent of Republican or leaning Republican voters expressing a favorable impression of the TEA Party movement, while 10 percent are unfavorable, and 42 percent have no opinion.

At the same time, 30 percent of independents and 11 percent of Democrats and leaning Democrats have a favorable impression of the movement. Overall, 70 percent of those with a favorable view of the TEA Party are Republicans, while 30 percent are independents and Democrats.

TEA Party Republicans differ from Democrats and independents favoring group

The relatively small sample of pro-TEA Party independents and Democrats diverges from the movement’s Republican supporters in several ways, according to Redlawsk. While Republicans favoring the TEA Party movement are strongly negative toward Obama by an 84 percent to 8 percent margin, two-thirds of non-Republicans who favor the movement also view Obama favorably, and only 20 percent have an unfavorable impression of him. Moreover, 60 percent of the non-Republicans favoring the TEA Party do not believe that Obama is a socialist and 65 percent do not consider his administration un-American.

TEA Party supporters less extreme on issues than on Obama

TEA Party supporters agree with other New Jersey voters about New Jerseyans’ lack of personal fiscal responsibility. More than 68 percent of the state’s voters believe that Americans are not personally fiscally responsible. This includes 73 percent of GOP TEA Party supporters, and 65 percent of those who are not; 62 percent of non-Republican TEA Party supporters, and 69 percent of Democrats and independents who do not favor the movement.

On the government bailout of large financial institutions TEA Party Republicans look more like other Republicans, with 85 percent disagreeing that the “financial bailout was a good use of money” compared to 75 percent of Republicans without a favorable impression of the movement. Among Democrats and independents, 53 percent oppose the bailout regardless of their views of the Tea Party.

Asked to react to the statement, “Our country used to stand for something; it doesn’t anymore,” TEA Party supporters are more likely to agree, regardless of party preference; 62 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of Democrats and independents concur. The statement is supported by only a minority of those who do not view the TEA Party favorably: 49 percent of Republicans and 37 percent of Democrats and independents.

Republicans who favor the TEA Party are less likely to believe that “Government should do more to help middle class people,” with 65 percent in agreement. Still, when action is focused on the middle class, a majority of TEA Party supporters see a role for government. All others groups of respondents were even more likely to agree, with 79 percent of Republican Tea Party detractors, 86 percent of Democrats and independents who favor the TEA Party and 89 percent of all other Democrats and independents agreeing with the statement.

“Taken together, we see that those with a favorable view of the TEA Party movement cannot be cast as a single group marching in lockstep,” said Redlawsk. “In some ways Republicans favorable towards the movement are completely different from their fellow Republicans, or from non-Republicans who also favor the movement. But in others, TEA Party supporters of all stripes differ from those without a favorable view of the group. And in still other ways, TEA Party supporters are directly in the opinion mainstream.”

“Ultimately, our analysis suggests that among Republicans TEA Party supporters there is great motivation in their negativity towards Obama,” said Redlawsk. “But pro-Tea Party Democrats and independents have more general concerns about the state of America today.”

TEA Party Republicans less worried about their personal situation

Differences between TEA Party Republican supporters and other voters are very clear when asked how much they worry about their personal financial situation. Pro-TEA Party GOPers are much less worried than other voters about housing, health insurance, jobs and retirement. The difference is stark for housing, where just 18 percent of Republicans favoring the TEA Party worry “a lot” about the availability of good housing compared to 33 percent to 42 percent from other groups. While 45 percent of these Republicans worry “a lot” about health insurance coverage, 62 percent to 75 percent from other groups worry a lot about coverage.

That Pro-Tea Party Republicans are financially better off than counterparts from other groups, explains different levels of concern, Redlawsk said.

Demographics of TEA Party Movement

GOP TEA Party movement supporters are clustered in the $50,000 to $100,000 income range and are somewhat older than the average New Jersey voter. They are also significantly more likely to be male, white, and to consider themselves born-again Christians. Democrats and independents favoring the TEA Party are more likely to have incomes under $50,000, are much younger, and less likely to be white males.

“There appear to be two demographic bases for the TEA Party movement,” said Redlawsk. “One is a higher income, older, male, Republican, anti-Obama group. The other is a lower income, younger group who are not Republicans and who like Obama. These voters are attracted to the TEA Party because of worries about their own financial situation and feelings that something is wrong in America. With more than a quarter of New Jersey voters favorable towards the TEA Party, it is possible that the movement could have real impact on politics. The question is whether it can provide what both groups want at the same time. If the focus is on impacting the Republican Party, it may lose the 30 percent who are not Republicans. But to keep that group happy may require a focus that is much broader than Republican Party politics and an intense dislike of the Obama administration.”

Time to Tea Party in NJ? Latest Rutgers-Eagleton Poll

2010-02-25T08:04:00.003-05:00

Tea Parties are all the rage right now. Presumably disaffected Americans are banding together to express their frustration with the government, with large corporations, with bankers and Wall Street barons and pretty much anything else that comes their way. These groups have the potential to disrupt politics as we know it, at least if you read the various media accounts of their potential influence. Tea Partiers appear to have had an effect in the NY 23 special election, pushing out the mainstream Republican and allowing the Democrat to win. On the other hand, some think the Tea Party movement was part of the key to victory for Scott Brown in Massachusetts. And here in good old New Jersey there is a movement afoot to try to recall US Senator Robert Menendez, with a petitioning effort planned by Tea Party leaders. (This effort is on hold right now until the courts decide if a recall can be mounted against a federal elected official in New Jersey.)

Obviously it seems worth knowing more about who these folks are. So our most recent Rutgers-Eagleton Poll is trying to do exactly that. Today we are releasing results of a survey of 953 New Jersey adults (886 registered voters) in which we asked a number of questions related to the Tea Party. In this release we focus on who the Tea Partiers are and the extent to which the movement is supported in New Jersey. The full press release is below (and tables are available online at my Rutgers website). The short story is that 27% of NJ voters have a favorable impression of the Tea Party Movement, while 29% have an unfavorable impression. The rest have no opinion or don't know.

In this release we look more closely at the 27% with a favorable impression and we find they are heavily Republican (no surprise). Independents however are much less taken with the group here in New Jersey. The upshot is that this looks much more like a branch of the Republican Party than any real attempt to form a sustainable third party movement. In fact, Tea Party supporters in New Jersey are more likely to support the current two party system than are those who do not have a favorable view of the movement. Go figure!

Next week we will release more on this group, including their sense of anger, trust, and efficacy towards various institutions. Stay tuned for that.

RUTGERS-EAGLETON POLL FINDS NEW JERSEYANS HAVE LESS FAVORABLE VIEW OF THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT

CLICK HERE FOR FULL RELEASE AND TABLES

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. – New Jersey registered voters have a less favorable impression of the Tea Party movement than other states as shown in recent national polls, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton poll. While CNN recently reported that more than one-third of American voters support the Tea Party movement, only 27 percent of New Jersey voters have a favorable impression of the group. While it is no surprise that Democrats do not view the movement favorably, New Jersey independent voters are not very supportive as well, with 29 percent expressing a favorable opinion, compared to 49 percent of Republicans and 10 percent of Democrats.

The poll of 953 New Jersey adults was conducted February 19-22, 2010 and has a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points. The registered voter sample of 886 has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points.

“The Tea Party movement has become somewhat of a force in American politics over the last year,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. “Our polling shows that in New Jersey, this force is primarily coming from Republicans, with independents significantly less favorable towards it.”

Not surprisingly, given its origins in opposition to President Barack Obama and the Democratic health care plan, the poll shows that 50 percent of voters who view the Tea Party favorably are Republicans even though Republicans make up only 27 percent of the registered voter sample. Independents comprise 35 percent of tea party supporters, while 15 percent are Democrats.

Many Tea Party supporters not active

A favorable impression of the Tea Party does not necessarily mean that voters plan to be active in the movement. Only 19 percent of those with a favorable view say they are very likely to volunteer or attend a rally, with another 33 percent saying they are somewhat likely to do so. But nearly half say they are not at all likely to be active in the movement.

“The effect of Tea Party supporters on the political system will be at least partly dependent on how active individual voters are,” said Redlawsk. “Our results suggest that while organizers of Tea Party events can count on some very dedicated supporters, many who say they support the Tea Party do so in name only.”

Concerns about Republican Party

While Tea Party support is strongly related to support for the Republican Party, Tea Party supporters also have their concerns with Republicans. Only 45 percent of those who view the Tea Party favorably also have a favorable view of Republicans in Congress, 53 percent say they mostly trust Republicans generally and 34 percent say Republican actions have made them angry. Even so, this is a much more positive view than those who do not support the Tea Party have of Republicans, with only 17 percent holding a favorable view, 25 percent expressing trust, and 50 percent expressing anger.

“The Tea Party movement in New Jersey is primarily Republican, but not in lockstep with establishment Republicans,” said Redlawsk. “It’s significant that more than one-third express anger at Republicans generally, and less than half view Republicans in Congress favorably. This suggests that Tea Party supporters are more of a risk to incumbent Republicans in a primary than to Democrats, who they would be unlikely to support in a general election whether or not there was a Tea Party movement.”

Tea Party supporters more favorable towards two-party system

Reinforcing the idea that Tea Party supporters are not necessarily looking outside the two-party system, these voters are more likely to favor the existing two-party system than are those who do not view the Tea Party favorably. While about 38 percent of both groups of voters say they would like nonpartisan elections, 39 percent of Tea Party supporters think the current two-party system works reasonably well, compared to only 26 percent of nonsupporters. Only 23 percent of those viewing the Tea Party favorably see a need for more than two political parties.

“The fact that voters who like the Tea Party movement are even more supportive of the two-party system than those who do not should give the media pause in how they represent this group, at least in New Jersey” said Redlawsk. “This is not a breakaway movement as much as it seems like an effort to define the direction of the Republican Party.”

Demographics of New Jersey Tea Party supporters

The Tea Party movement in New Jersey is viewed most favorably in the exurban northwest of the state and much less likely to come from urban New Jersey. While 27 percent of all New Jersey voters have a favorable impression of the Tea Party, this rises to 31 percent of exurban residents, compared to only 21 percent of urban dwellers. Very few blacks (only 5 percent) have a favorable impression of the Tea Party movement, but more than half (54 percent) of the very small sample of Asian voters express a favorable view, compared to 29 percent of all whites and 24 percent of Latino voters. Tea Party supporters are more likely to be male, with 31 percent of men favorable, compared to 24 percent of women. Higher income also defines those who view the Tea Party movement favorably. While only 18 percent of voters making less than $50,000 have a favorable view, 30 percent of those making more than $50,000 do.

After a break for the Holidays

2010-02-01T10:10:00.003-05:00

Welcome back! Well, you might have not gone anywhere, but I did - at least in the sense that the academic cycle with it semester break in December and early January meant I spent most of my time getting ready for the classes I am teaching this semester at Rutgers. After teaching 10 years at the University of Iowa, I should be an old hand at this, but it is always different adjusting to a new place.

The result is not a lot of work on polling here at Eagleton since our post election survey. But we did spend a lot of time looking at the results on Gay Marriage in particular, given the debacle in the NJ Legislature over the issue. Our polling (and other polling over the past few years) makes clear that the Democrats failed a major constituency by not moving the issue forward before the election. While New Jerseyans are split pretty evenly on support for gay marriage overall, a small plurality appears to be in favor. More importantly, as we showed, for most New Jerseyans this is not a burning issue. For some on both sides, of course, it is, and we saw that in the intensity of those at the statehouse during the debate. But it seems pretty clear that despite the intensity of a relatively small group of opponents, had the bill passed, I suspect there would have been no long term political consequences for those who supported it.

With the bill's defeat it will be interesting to see if there now are consequences, in the form of primary challenges or withdrawal of financial support against some of the Democrats who refused to support it. There are certainly deep frustrations on the part of supporters who clearly would have had the votes to pass this in the legislature before the election of Chris Christie as governor.

The funny thing is that we mostly heard two reasons for opposing the bill from those who might have voted in favor originally. One was that the election of Christie signaled that voters wanted more conservative government and that somehow this was a sign against social issues like gay marriage. There is, of course, no support whatsoever for this position. Marriage equality was never an issue in the election and I would venture to say no one really voted on that issue. Christie's election says nothing about support for this issue. In fact, our Rutgers-Eagleton Poll showing plurality support was done AFTER the election. And our numbers were not much different from those of polls over the past couple years. The election of Christie did nothing to change attitudes on this issue.

The other thing we heard a lot was that Catholics - who represent the largest single religious denomination in the state - oppose gay marriage and therefore legislators with large Catholic populations felt they had to represent the wishes of their constituents. But the reality is that Catholic voters support marriage equality in our poll, 48% - 40%. Ironically, perhaps, it is protestant voters who oppose, 55% - 34%, driven by heavy opposition among evangelical protestants. Legislators may have been agreeing with the position of the Catholic Church hierarchy, but their Catholic constituents are a different matter.

In any case, the question seems likely to head back to the courts. When the NJ Supreme Court ruled on marriage equality and sent it to the legislature, it made clear that it expected true equality. Given the testimony of many at the Senate hearing, it may well be that the Court will ultimately do like the Iowa Supreme Court and simply rule the civil unions are not equal enough.

We are now working on another Eagleton Poll for later this semester, focusing of course on the new Christie administration and what should be done to address the challenges the state faces. More on that in the coming weeks.

Gay Marriage in New Jersey - What about Religion?

2009-12-09T16:57:00.004-05:00

Listening to the Senate committee hearing the other night, it was interesting how many of the opponents to the gay marriage bill focused on religious beliefs and a traditional definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Even more interesting to me was this quote in Politickernj.com from Democratic State Sen. Paul Sarlo, who chaired the hearing and voted against the bill. He said he is opposed to the bill "personally because of my religious beliefs as a Roman Catholic, and as senator of the 36th District, which is mostly made up of Irish and Italian Catholics, and Orthodox Jews."

This got me thinking that we had never released our polling results on gay marriage by religious preference and frequency of attendance at religious services. But we do have that data.

The results are pretty interesting. Catholics, the single largest religious group in New Jersey actually SUPPORT gay marriage, 48% - 40%. It is Protestants who oppose - 55% are against gay marriage compared to 34% who support it. This Protestant opposition is driven by Evangelicals who are 67% - 24% opposed. Non-Evangelical Protestants actually support gay marriage, 47% - 37%.

Regardless of religious preference, the issue remains "unimportant" - even Evangelicals mostly say it is "not at all important" as issues go in New Jersey.

See http://eagletonpoll.rutgers.edu/polls/release_12-09-09.pdf for the full release on religion and gay marriage in New Jersey.

Health Care Reform and NJ

2009-12-06T11:47:00.002-05:00

We released some data on attitudes towards health care reform from our Nov 6-10 post election poll the other day. The most interesting thing to me is that most NJ residents support some kind of change - even those who think the system "works well". And there is widespread support for a public option, when it is terms "like Medicare". There is also a lot of support for a public option called "government run" but support goes up by about 9 points if the word "Medicare" is included.

Not all that surprising, but simply another data point suggesting the Democrats might have been much better off it they had started this who reform effort by calling what they were doing "Medicare for all". Obviously others have pointed this out too. But in NJ we find that Medicare recipients are more satisfied with their coverage than those who have private insurance, and are more supportive (although just a bit more) of a public option of some type.

Click on the title to this post to get the full press release on health care.

A Daggett Wrap Up

2009-12-03T07:09:00.002-05:00

I have done a wrap up of sorts on Chris Daggett which is posted on NJ.COm at http://blog.nj.com/njv_guest_blog/2009/12/what_happened_to_chris_daggett.html. The main thesis is that most voters who told us in October they would support him, decided by November to vote for someone else. That seems obvious from the outcome, but we were fortunate in that we were able to ask the same people both before and after the election why they supported or did not support Daggett. Not surprisingly, but showing how effective the Republican attacks on him were, the overriding reason was the perception that he just could not win. When the race became very close between Jon Corzine and Chris Christie, people just did not want to throw their vote away. You can read more of this analysis at NJ.com.