Margie Omero

Mother's Day Is Over, and Many Moms Still Struggling

2012-05-18T15:26:28-04:00

New Gallup polling suggests the joys of motherhood can bring added challenges. Employed women without kids at home experience less worry, sadness, stress, and anger than moms of kids at home, be they currently employed or not. Moms, by contrast, report more struggles.

But the most striking finding is how much stay-at-home moms in particular suffer. They are particularly more likely to experience worry, sadness, stress, anger, and depression than both employed moms and women without kids at home. And when asked about the previous day, stay-at-home moms were the least likely of the three groups to say they smiled or laughed a lot, learned something interesting, or experienced enjoyment or happiness. Unsurprisingly and unfortunately, stay-at-home moms are more likely to say they are struggling than the other two groups of women.

These findings don't seem to be driven by income. Gallup took care to make sure their stay-at-home mom definition did not include those unemployed but looking for work. And when Gallup looked just at women from households earning less than $36,000, stay-at-home moms continued to struggle more on all dimensions than the other two groups.

That all moms face difficulties is consistent with what my firm has seen in bipartisan qualitative and quantitative work on Walmart moms. (Read more about this work here and here. Walmart is the sponsor of all Walmart mom research, conducted jointly by Momentum Analysis and Public Opinion Strategies.) The moms we've talked to (both stay-at-home and working) often feel overwhelmed by the daily struggles and worries that come with parenthood, leaving them little time to focus on politics. And recall other recent Gallup findings show stay-at-home moms tend to be politically independent. Taken altogether, these data suggest candidates hoping to reach moms will need to reach out to them more frequently, and specifically address how policies can directly improve their lives.

Marriage Equality: Can Polling Tell Us What It Means for Obama?

2012-05-15T16:34:38-04:00

In the wake of Obama's recent announcement on marriage equality, a few outlets have tried to identify how, if at all, voters might react in November. And while polls show the issue might affect how some vote, all three outlets found this to be far more true of Republicans. But Obama's support is already in the single digits with Republicans. How much less likely to vote for him can Republicans be? To me, these results confirm that fewer voters are truly likely to change their vote than the resulting coverage might suggest.

In last week's Gallup poll, a majority (60 percent) said the President's announcement wouldn't make a difference in their vote. Of those remaining, more say Obama's position makes them less likely to vote for him than more likely, with Republicans disproportionately in the "less likely" camp (52 percent). Yet Obama doesn't have much support to lose with Republicans, as in Gallup's other recent polling Obama doesn't even garner double-digit support.

Pew, in this survey, also shows about half (52 percent) say the President's announcement won't change their vote. Republicans, again, are far more likely to say they'll be swayed (negatively) by the President's position (53 percent), while independents are most likely to say it doesn't matter to them (60 percent). In past Pew polling, 7 percent of Republicans supported Obama, suggesting few voters for Obama to actually lose.

A New York Times/CBS poll from Monday also shows similarly high numbers reporting Obama's position won't change their own vote this November (58 percent no effect). Again, Republicans are particularly likely (43 percent) to say they are now less likely to vote for Obama. But only 5 percent of Republicans in their poll are voting for Obama.

This poll also created some news by finding two-thirds (67 percent) feel Obama's announcement was "mostly for political reasons." While this question is interesting, I'm not sure it tells us much about how this issue will play out in November. It's probably more of a reflection of broader attitudes of Obama, and of elected officials in general, than a reaction to the timeline and nature of Obama's announcement. (It's also interesting that more feel Obama's position is politically motivated than actually agree with his position.)

As Huffington Post senior polling editor Mark Blumenthal showed here, attitudes toward marriage are moving quickly and steadily in just one direction. Former President Bush's own pollster agreed in his recent memo, found here. We're unlikely to see a reverse of this trend before November, no matter what either candidate says.

But changing views toward gay marriage doesn't make it a vote driver, and measuring its ability to move votes is more complex than asking a single question. Internal polling for candidates would include far more breadth (comparing the impact of a series of issues), and depth (adding multivariate analysis to glean respondents' views). In my view, this debate is more likely to increase voter enthusiasm and turnout for both candidates, than it will move voters from one column to the other.

A Different Kind of Mommy War

2012-05-01T10:07:43-04:00

Moms are on our minds. A single comment a few weeks ago erupted into a full-scale battle in the so-called "Mommy Wars," where moms, allegedly, stew in ready-to-boil tensions between those who work outside the home and those who don't. But my firm's recent bipartisan qualitative work suggests the only "Mommy War" is the one all moms fight every day -- the battle to take care of their families, their homes, and themselves, all at the same time.

This month my firm, Momentum Analysis, along with Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies, conducted a qualitative bulletin board focus group of Walmart moms, defined as moms with children under 18 living at home and who have shopped at a Walmart at least once in the last month. (The group was sponsored by Walmart; my firm's previous work on Walmart moms can be found here, here, here and here; and you can read more about this project here.) The moms in this study were eager to to participate and have a few lessons to teach candidates from either party hoping to reach moms like them this November.

These moms are not fighters in the Mommy Wars, or the War on Women. Of our 29 mom participants, only one participant brought up the "War on Women," and nobody mentioned any of the recent media skirmishes on women's issues. Some might assume swing voting moms are paying close attention to the Rosen/Ann Romney debate, the Foster Friess comments, Rick Santorum's views on birth control, the Blunt Amendment, the Violence Against Women Act, or the Komen vs. Planned Parenthood battle; our Walmart moms suggest that's simply untrue.

In fact, their Mommy War is one they're all in together -- battling tough times, busy schedules, and worries about the future. Regardless of whether they work outside the home or not, and regardless of their own personal finances, these moms are struggling. They spoke passionately about caring for sick children, going through chemotherapy, having an unemployed husband, or finishing up their college degree. The women commiserated about not having a safe, reliable car to transport their kids. And many worried about the job market their kids would graduate into, and what student loans they might have when they get there.

A bickering Washington overly focused on social issues reinforces how out of touch politicians are with these moms. Moms feel Congress is out of touch, and out of control. One schoolteacher compared Members of Congress to her middle-schoolers, and another called them "bickering children." Said another, "If they [Congress] had to think about how to pay for food and gas, the tone in Washington might change."

Some moms also pointed to debates over abortion and other social issues as a further sign that politicians have lost sight of the most important issues. Said one mom, "I believe the issues I worry about are being addressed but [they....] are being far overshadowed by topics such as abortion and religion. I have heard very little about the ways the candidates plan to improve the economy, but I have heard many things about different candidates' opinions on abortion, birth control and gay rights."

This means moms could again to be up for grabs this November. Our mom participants aren't sure yet how they're going to vote this November. But so far at least, Obama seems a bit more in touch with women than does Romney, because of Obama's young family and Romney's wealth. Our past polling of Walmart moms shows they voted for Obama in 2008, and then voted decidedly Republican in 2010.

Both parties can learn a lot from these moms. First, neither party should assume swing moms are paying close attention to these debates right now. Second, politicians overly focused on social issues strike these moms as out of touch with the daily challenges they face.

"Controlling" the Gun Debate: An Open Letter to All Pollsters

2012-04-27T13:56:09-04:00

These days, the gun debate is not about whether one has the right to own a gun, but about how to balance those existing rights against the need to prevent gun violence. But while the debate has changed, polling questions have not. Pew released some tracking this week showing movement to the left on gay marriage, along with movement to the right on guns. However, the Pew question on "gun control," whose wording goes back about twenty years, is both over-broad and an anachronism. And many outlets use similar language.

(Disclosure: my firm, Momentum Analysis, has done numerous projects for the bipartisan group Mayors Against Illegal Guns. You can read my previous posts on guns here and here, and on my work for the group here, here and here.)

Gun "Control" is an anachronism. Look at the exact wording of the Pew question: "What do you think is more important -- to protect the right of Americans to own guns, or to control gun ownership?" This question uses the language of the gun lobby (rights), not the language of those working for stronger gun laws (safety). And it pits a right versus simply "control" for its own sake.

I don't assume nefarious motives on Pew's part. When this question was first written, "control" was indeed part of the gun debate vernacular. But it is no longer. Using the word "control" is a poor description of that side's position. (While the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence was once called Handgun Control, Inc., the group hasn't had` "control" in its name in over ten years.)

What if there was decades of tracking of something like "what do you think is more important -- to protect the rights of gun owners, or to protect the safety of everyone from gun violence?" Results would, to be sure, be different from the current question.

"Gun control" is overly broad. What do respondents think of when asked whether they support "gun control"? Are they thinking about a ban on all guns, including hunting rifles? Or are they thinking about preventing people accused of domestic violence from getting a gun at a gun show without a background check and then bringing that gun across state lines? We simply don't know. Not that a broad question on attitudes toward gun laws can't be useful, but we should simply understand its limitations.

By comparison, a gay marriage question is more straightforward. While there are, of course, nuances to the gay marriage debate (a civil union alternative, recognition by other states, etc.), we can be reasonably sure all participants are responding to roughly the same concept. A question about "gun control" could mean just about anything.

All outlets could use a gun question rewrite. Pew is not the only polling outlet using outdated language. CBS, ABC/Washington Post, Time Magazine, and Gallup all have used the word "control" in their recent national surveys. In many of these questions, the word "control" can easily be cut, such as in the ABC/Washington Post question, "Do you favor or oppose stricter gun control laws in this country?" However, I prefer a three-way question about whether laws should be made stronger, weaker, or "kept the same." Gallup, NBC/WSJ, CBS/NYT, and Time Magazine have all asked a three-way question, although the latter two, again, include the word "control." (The Polling Report has a good collection of gun questions across outlets.)

But pollsters should also follow-up a broad question with questions about specific, relevant proposals up for debate. Gallup, as I wrote here, continues to ask decades-old questions on a handgun ban, producing headlines like this one. Many other outlets, such as ABC/Washington Post and CBS, continue to test handgun bans and high-capacity magazine bans that are simply not part of the legislative debate. As our polling has shown, huge numbers support recent proposals to strengthen gun laws by requiring background checks for all gun purchases, or allowing states to decide concealed gun permit requirements laws for themselves.

For some time, Americans have recognized private gun ownership as a right; the debate is now about how (or whether!) to keep guns out of dangerous hands. Polling outlets should reflect this change by adjusting their broad question, and adding (or changing) their specific proposal questions. By not revisiting their question language, polling outlets are actually influencing the debate by suggesting there is less support for stronger gun laws than actually exists.

Republicans Alienating Both Men and Women on Birth Control

2012-04-02T17:09:33-04:00

It's a mistake to assume birth control is solely a "woman's issue." As others have pointed out (even Rush!), men participate in birth control, too. And as I've written before, nearly every gender/party group supports full coverage of birth control. Now polling released today by USA Today/Gallup confirms recent Republican missteps threaten to damage them with voters of both genders. While women are more interested in the issue, both men and women disagree with Santorum's and Romney's position. (Gender and gender/age breakouts kindly provided by the good folks at Gallup.)

Women are more interested in the issue of birth control. A majority (55 percent) of women and only 35 percent of men say "government policies concerning birth control" is either extremely or very important to them. Similarly, two-thirds of women (68 percent) and fewer men (59 percent) say they are following recent birth control debate very or somewhat closely. There are more age differences among women than among men. Younger women are particularly likely to say birth control issues are important, older women are most likely to say they are following the issue closely.

But disagreement with the GOP field on birth control transcends gender and age. Gallup/USA Today asked respondents whether they agree or disagree with each candidate's position on birth control. Across all gender/age groups, more disagree with Santorum's and Romney's position than agree. In fact, aside from older men (see below), the differences between the other groups are not so stark. This "agreement gap" spells trouble for the eventual Republican nominee. And not just with women.

While agreement with the President also transcends gender and age (mostly). By contrast, more agree with the President's position than disagree. Only older men are more likely to disagree, and as the table below shows, older men also disagree with the Republican field.

Large numbers don't know where the candidates stand. Irrespective of gender and age, majorities (or near-majorities) don't know enough about the candidates' position on birth control to know whether they agree with them or not. This is a reminder of how much work is needed to highlight the sharp contrast between the President's position and that of the GOP field.

On Social Issues, Mississippi and Alabama Primary Voters Not as Extreme as You Might Think

2012-03-12T16:51:40-04:00

Never mind Romney's hackneyed caricature of the South being only about grits and y'all. Recent PPP polling might tempt some to unearth other hackneyed caricatures about Southerners and social issues. But in fact, there are fewer differences between Southern Republicans and voters overall than you might think.

Republican primary voters in Mississippi and Alabama are far more likely to think the President is Muslim (52 percent, 45 percent, respectively) than Christian (12 percent, 14 percent, respectively). A not-insignificant number in each state say interracial marriage should be illegal (29 percent, 21 percent). And majorities don't believe in evolution (66 percent, 60 percent). To be sure, these voters are socially conservative.

But don't be too startled by these numbers. Most Americans believe in creationism of some sort. Gallup tracking on this question shows only 16 percent believe "humans evolved, but God had no part of the process" and twice as many believe creationism is "definitely true" as believe the same about evolution (39 percent, 18 percent). Similarly, in 2005 Pew showed a third believe evolution is the "explanation for the origin of human life."

On interracial marriage, PPP's April 2011 poll, also with Mississippi Republicans, showed far more (46 percent) wanting to see these marriages illegal. And the new polling suggests Mississippi and Alabama Republicans are not necessarily that far removed from voters overall. Gallup tracking on this question shows huge movement since 1958, when only 4 percent "approved" of interracial marriages. But even at its new high of 86 percent in 2011, it falls short of unanimous. And this recent Pew poll shows a plurality say interracial marriage has had "no effect" as opposed to a "change for the better." (This wouldn't be the only example of Americans having seemingly antiquated views toward marriage; this suggests a majority feel women should be legally required to change their last name to their husband's.)

National polling on Obama's perceived religion suggests there is plenty of confusion, not just in the South. This Pew poll from 2010 showed a shrinking number of Americans believe Obama is a Christian, with a plurality (43 percent) unsure. While Republicans in the Deep South are more likely to say Obama is a Muslim than punt with a "don't know," either way these polls show the "network of misinformation" has muddied the waters.

Regardless of how far (or not) these southern primary voters are from the mainstream on social issues, one thing is clear. The Presidential candidate winning the most delegates will be far outside the mainstream on economic issues, whether it's tax fairness, income inequality, environmental regulations, the value of a college education, or coverage of birth control. Instead of extolling the virtues of grits, or pandering on social issues, the candidates would be better-served addressing voters' economic concerns.

Super Tuesday Surprise! Santorum Now Has a Woman Problem

2012-03-07T15:41:30-05:00

Republican women may have flirted with Rick Santorum, but they're now less interested in going all the way. In the early contests, Santorum did better with women than with men. And he did better relative to Romney with women than with men. As Republican leaders have become increasingly extreme on women's issues, Santorum's chief backer made an outrageously offensive comment, and Santorum's own extreme social views came under close scrutiny, Santorum's standing with women worsened. Now, his early strength with women has become a weakness.

The table below shows the gender gap in Santorum's vote share in each contest, according to exit polls. The third column is the difference between Santorum's vote share among men and women. A positive number means women voted in larger numbers for Santorum than did men. The last column shows the gender difference in Romney's advantage over Santorum. A positive number means Romney did better against Santorum with women than with men, but it doesn't necessarily mean Romney beat Santorum with women in that state. States without exit polls (CO, MN, MO, ME, WA, ID, AK) and without a real contest (VA) are omitted. Everything below the line took place after Santorum began to falter on women's issues.

In the first three states, Santorum did better with women than men (a +4, +3, +6 gender gap), and the Romney-Santorum gap was larger with men than women (-2, -2, -3).

But Super Tuesday these two patterns reversed. Yesterday Santorum only did better with women than men in two states, Georgia and Oklahoma, not coincidentally the two states where Gingrich fared best. (Gingrich, for obvious reasons, does less well with women than men, and has in just about every state so far with available exit polling.) And in all the Super Tuesday exit polling (again, aside from Georgia and Oklahoma), the Romney minus Santorum gap was larger with women than with men.

This woman problem is not just Santorum's burden, though. While women make up a majority of the general electorate, they have only been the majority of Republican primary voters in two states so far -- Oklahoma and Arizona. Santorum may be losing ground with women, but the Republican Party as a whole isn't doing much better.

Yep, Birth Control Is Still Popular

2012-03-05T15:21:58-05:00

As I wrote about here and here, birth control coverage may be controversial in Washington, but it's not controversial with voters overall. Subsequent polling continues to show this to be true. While Politico incorrectly calls the polling "closely divided," any differences are due to question wording, and not actual controversy about birth control.

The Kaiser Family Foundation released a survey showing nearly two-thirds (63%) support "the new federal requirement that private health insurance plans cover the cost of birth control." Recall these numbers are not that different from a NYT/CBS poll from a few weeks ago.

Similarly, Quinnipiac released a survey showing even stronger support (71%) for the following: "health insurance plans should cover birth control as preventative care for women." Even majorities of Republicans (50%) and white born again Christians (52%) support coverage for birth control. A more detailed question about Obama's "adjustment" to a rule about "religiously-affiliated employers" still garners majority support (54%).

So where does this talk of a mixed polling come from? Perhaps from this CNN poll showing just half (50%) disapprove of Obama's birth control policy. But note the question language doesn't actually say what the policy is: "As you may know, the Obama administration has announced a new policy concerning health insurance plans provided by employers, including religious organizations, and how they handle birth control and contraceptive services for women. Based on what you have read or heard, do you approve or disapprove of this policy?" While we may be following this issue's twists and turns closely in Washington, we shouldn't assume voters are, too. These results probably say as much about views toward Obama generally, or even health care reform, than they do about coverage of birth control specifically.

There is only one new poll that truly shows some division, although released after the "closely divided" Politico description. Today's MSNBC/WSJ survey shows a majority (53%) favor "offering free birth control coverage as part of health insurance plans." Yet more oppose (45%) than support (38%) full birth control coverage for employees at religiously-affiliated institutions. But the question wording here -- while not incorrect -- explains the Obama Administration's compromise using stronger terms like "the federal government requiring," and "mandate." The question seems to emphasize the government's actions more than the coverage it would create. Whatever the reason, this poll is the one real outlier. Other polls showing more opposition than support either don't explain the policy, or aren't asked of all voters.

Despite all this, there is one thing that's abundantly clear -- birth control use is not taboo. In the Quinnipiac poll, 82% say it's "not wrong" to use contraceptives, including 80% of Born Again Christians and 77% of Republicans. The CNN poll, despite showing half disapprove of "Obama's (unspecified) policy," also shows 81% disagree that "birth control is wrong." The Rush-led Republican position on this is far, far outside the mainstream.

What Do Women Want (in a Candidate)? Don't Ask Men!

2012-02-22T16:27:50-05:00

The War on Women is burning on a few fronts (even including a War on Girls), with some Republicans charging up the hill and others wisely quitting and running. But a Quinnipiac Poll released today shows men more likely to think the GOP candidates understand the problems and needs of women. Women, however, know better.

When asked if the President "understands the needs and problems of women," men and women agree he does, with no gender gap (63 percent of men, 65 percent of women). But there is real disagreement about the GOP field's ability to understand women. Half of men say Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum understand women's problems (48 percent for each), but among women only about a third agree (34 percent Romney, 36 percent Santorum). And while even men feel Newt Gingrich doesn't understand women's needs and problems (48 percent does not understand), women are more sure (55 percent does not understand).

Despite all this, it's probably still a bit early to tell how voters are reacting to Santorum's recent anti-woman bender, even in the primary. In the same Quinnipiac poll, he has a slightly larger lead over Romney among Republican men. And as this New York Times blog story notes, Arizona polling shows Santorum losing ground with Republican women. Some (but not all) recent Michigan polling shows a similar gender gap opening up, with women moving away from Santorum.

It's important to remember voters are going to move a bit slower than political junkies. And women in particular may be less engaged. In the Quinnipiac poll, Republican women are more likely than men to be undecided in their primary, and overall, women are less likely than men to know enough about Santorum to have an impression (independents are even less familiar with him).

While women haven't yet enlisted in the culture war raging on cable news all day, those who have can already sense the President is almost twice as likely to understand their needs and problems. The next step is to convince men what it means to understand women's problems, and why that's important.

On Birth Control, GOP Male Leaders Woefully Out of Touch, Except With Other GOP Men

2012-02-16T15:37:53-05:00

Republican male leaders have become sneeringly, cartoonishly out of touch with women, even those in their own party.

Today a Congressional hearing ignited when House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (CA) refused to seat a female witness after hearing an all-male panel of birth control coverage opponents, calling the witness unqualified.

Not to be outdone, Foster Friess, the financial backer of Republican Presidential candidate (and known contraception-hater) Rick Santorum, wistfully recalled the days when "gals" held "Bayer Aspirin between their knees" as a method of contraception.

You would be right to wonder, "What are they thinking?" Well, they do not seem to be thinking with an eye to the general election, as only Republican men oppose full coverage of birth control. In yesterday's CBS/NYT poll, two-thirds of voters support this coverage. The kind folks at the New York Times provided us with breakouts by gender and party, which appear in the chart below. Note that Republican women support full birth control coverage, and independents feel more like Democrats. [UPDATE: a chart error was corrected.]

Yesterday I wrote about the consistent support for birth control coverage and basically all (99 percent) women who have had sex have also used birth control. If Republicans think it is politically advantageous to mock women, shut them out of the political process, and deny access to care that 99 percent of them use, then they are in even worse shape headed into November than we thought.

The Birth Control Debate That Isn't Happening

2012-02-15T15:10:54-05:00

It's 2012, but to hear the Right talk about birth control, and "emotional" women in the workforce and the military, one might think we're trapped in Downton Abbey's 1914. Is this another example of Republicans staking out positions far outside the mainstream? Or do voters oppose coverage of birth control? In last week's debate over birth control, everyone in Washington seemed to have an opinion. But polls show the public's opinion is fairly consistent.

Today's New York Times/CBS News poll shows nearly two-thirds (66 percent) support requiring private health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control. About as many (61 percent) want to see the same coverage for women employees at religiously-affiliated institutions. Greg Sargent has some demographic breakouts, showing even half of Republicans support full coverage of birth control.

Yesterday's Pew Research Center poll showed somewhat different results, with slightly more voters wanting to give religiously-affiliated institutions exemption from coverage requirements (48 percent) than not (44 percent). However, there is an important difference between the two surveys. The Pew poll only asked this question of those who had heard at least some about the issue. Republicans were more likely to have heard about the issue than either Democrats or independents. And Tea Party aligned Republicans were far more likely to have heard a lot about the issue than other Republicans, liberal Democrats, or moderate/conservative Democrats. No doubt this yields a more conservative result.

Last week the Public Religion Research Institute released a survey showing a majority of voters say employers should provide contraception coverage at no cost. Even a majority of Catholics (58 percent) agreed. In fact, even a majority of Catholics (52 percent) agreed that religiously-affiliated institutions should have to provide that coverage.

None of this is surprising, given that 98 percent of Catholic women who have ever had sex have also used birth control, according to the Guttmacher Institute. So it's also not surprising that Obama has not taken a hit with Catholics in the wake of this debate.

Further, there seems to be no mandate for heavy-handed government involvement in social issues. The NYT/CBS poll showed two-thirds of voters overall and of Republicans say economic issues will drive their vote more than social issues. And this Gallup trend line suggests fewer voters want to see government "promote traditional values" than in the 1990s. It's also worth mentioning that many surveys have shown major movement in recent years on other social issues, such as gay marriage.

On Downton Abbey, daughter Sybil challenges her father by wearing pants and going to political rallies. As she laments the lack of women's suffrage, chauffeur Branson observes, "Politicians can't often recognize the changes that are inevitable." But these days it seems many Republican politicians can't even recognize changes that have already happened. Much to the chagrin of Downton's Lord Grantham and some Republican leaders, women wear pants, work, and use birth control.

Questioning the Question Order in the Latest Horserace Poll

2012-02-06T13:07:36-05:00

Today the Washington Post/ABC News released a survey showing Obama over majority support among registered voters (51% Obama, 45% Romney). But as Romney's pollster Neil Newhouse (a partner in the firm Public Opinion Strategies) pointed out in a blast email, the poll asked about a few of Romney potential liabilities just prior to the vote question. This goes against polling best practices, and it's possible the survey shows elevated Obama numbers as a result.

In the full questionnaire, respondents were asked a few questions about Romney's wealth, his 14% tax rate, whether he cut or create jobs, and whether his Mormon religion is a reason to support or oppose him. Then came the general election vote question. Respondents were primed to think of some of Romney's potential liabilities, without similar questions about Obama's personal liabilities. However, it's worth noting a series of Obama job approval ratings on the economy, the deficit, taxes, and others also appeared before the vote. To avoid all these potential complications, the horserace should come quite early in a questionnaire.

Now, to be clear, the individual questions about Romney's liabilities were balanced. They were not the message-testing questions typical in internal campaign polling. And I don't think (nor did Newhouse mean to imply) that the poll is deliberately skewed. Lastly, this is not a "push poll," a term referring to negative persuasion calls masquerading as polls (but frequently--and incorrectly--used to describe any negative message testing).

However, I do think Romney is now facing a likability problem nationally, even as he excels in the Republican primary. In this particular poll, over half of voters say the more they learn about Romney, the less they like him (a question that appeared before the series of questions on Romney's liabilities). Familiarity is breeding contempt, as I wrote about here, and pollster.com tracking shows Romney's unfavorables continue to surge while Obama has opened up a larger lead. But I'm not fully convinced this particular poll adds as much to the discussion as some might think. And it's also a good reminder to watch out for methodological quirks--no matter which candidate benefits.

[Disclosure: I've worked with Neil Newhouse on a series of bipartisan research on Walmart Moms.]

In Targeted Republican Districts, Voters Turn on Congress and Their Own Members

2012-01-26T16:48:49-05:00

It's long been a truism of polling that voters hate Congress, but like their own Congressperson. Well, in targeted Republican-held Congressional districts, that's no longer true. Yesterday PPP released a flurry of surveys commissioned by House Majority PAC, and in nearly every district, the Republican members were very nearly as unpopular as "Republicans in Congress" as a group.

In the eight districts surveyed, "Republicans in Congress" received net disapproval ratings, and in all but two districts, over half disapprove of the majority party. Similarly, six of the eight Republican members tested have net negative approval ratings. And three (Joe Walsh in IL-8, Dan Benishek in MI-1, and Robert Gibbs in OH-7) have approval ratings perilously close to their party as a whole. None of the eight look strong.

The table below shows the approval numbers made public by PPP. (UPDATE: PPP is a Democratic-leaning firm, and House Majority PAC is a Democratic group. No disapproval for King was released.)

Congressional approval is at historic lows, driven largely by Republicans in the House. As a result, in top Democratic pickup opportunities Republican members suffer.

Who Is a Florida Primary Voter? The Latino Decisions Survey

2012-01-25T17:51:05-05:00

Today, Univision/ABC/Latino Decisions released a national survey of Latinos, with a larger sample of Florida Latinos. The poll shows Romney besting Gingrich in the primary (both in Florida and nationally) and Obama trouncing both in the general.

But the poll has a clear flaw in how primary voters are defined. Respondents are asked whether they'd vote in the Republican primary as a yes/no question. But frequently pollsters ask voters to estimate their likelihood of voting in an election (only considering those most likely as potential voters). And importantly, Florida's primary is closed, meaning one already needs to be registered as a Republican in order to be eligible to vote in that contest. So a strong vote screen question in Florida would ask if voters were registered Republicans, and then only ask likely primary participation of those respondents.

As a point of comparison, the Washington Post/ABC national poll and the CNN/Time/ORC poll each use a two-pronged approach of identifying Republicans, and then further identifying likely primary voters. In the NBC/WSJ survey, respondents are asked if they would vote in the Democratic or Republican primary, "or wait for the general." But all three require respondents to clear a higher hurdle of simply yes/no to a Republican primary question.

We can tell the Latino Decisions poll's screen let in too many voters in a few ways. First, in the Florida subset, 26 percent of Democrats and 37 percent of independents say they will vote in the Republican primary, which seems high for a closed primary. Further, while 52 percent of Florida Latinos say they will vote in the Republican primary, Obama beats Romney overall by ten points (50/40), and Gingrich by 14 points (52/38). It simply doesn't make sense that an electorate where 52 percent are voting in the Republican primary, Obama exceeds majority support.

In the national survey, the same pattern holds. Latinos are divided on whether they'll vote in the Republican primary (45 percent yes, 44 percent no) with nearly a third (30 percent) of Democrats saying they will. And when asked for whom they'll vote in their state's primary, a fifth (20 percent) of Latinos nationally say they will vote for someone other than the four remaining candidates. Among Latinos in the general, Obama crushes both Romney (67/25) and Gingrich (70/22). Again, it seems unlikely that in a group giving Obama such a strong lead nearly half are Republican primary voters.

Polling for primaries is tricky. That makes it even more crucial to closely examine each state's contest, and each question's wording.

Black Americans: Less Stress, More Self-Esteem, Yet More Worries?

2012-01-25T13:39:45-05:00

Are there racial differences in self-reported stress and self-esteem? Perhaps, suggests a great survey released this week by the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation. (There's a lot of great data in the extensive survey, and it's worth checking out the multiple articles and full toplines.)

Both black women and black men have higher self-esteem than their white counterparts, the study shows. Nearly three-fourths of black men and two-thirds of black women "strongly agree" with the sentence "I see myself as someone who has high self-esteem." By comparison, 59 percent of white men, and fewer than half of white women strongly agree.

Similarly, black men and women say they're less stressed. Fewer than a third of black men say they "frequently" experience stress, compared to 44 percent of white men. Four in ten black women frequently experience stress, yet just over half of white women say the same.

But despite higher self-esteem and less stress, black men and women actually report more worries. From a list of nine worries, more black men and women are "very worried" than white men and women about nearly every one. More than any other group, black men are worried about "having enough money to pay bills" and "providing a good education to your kids."

However, the list of nine is limited, as worries like HIV/AIDS are ultimately not top-tier for any group. Given the importance of having a good relationship to white women and black men in particular (as seen elsewhere in the survey), the list should include worries such as divorce and not finding a partner.

Nonetheless, the survey raises some interesting questions for future study. Are there cultural differences in self-esteem and stress, and if so, why? And to what extent are daily worries related to broader feelings of stress? Kudos to the Post and Kaiser for providing enough data to get started.