The 2017 Virginia Gubernatorial election (much information)

Strange you have persistently avoided the races I mentioned. Why not look at Mark Warner's polling, Terrie Mc's, Tom Perriello v. Northam? oh yeah, cherry picking.

 

SHOCKING!

Is it a lock like you said Hillary was?

Gonna be a blue wave in Virginia?

I'm sure all the collectives polls will show the collective winning, and when they don't, they'll blame Russia or something the next day.

Oh... I know, you'll blame the confederates.

 

Actually it is. There is an aspect that Numbers Geek seems to ignore. Polling is only a part of the equation. In one of the races he is ignoring, Mark Warner was poling +10 and barely survived with a +1. There is another reason for that, but I am waiting for tea leafers to figure it out. David Wasserman could tell you....

 

Like most elections that are deemed "close", it is all going to come down to turnout.

If the Dems get a healthy turnout in Richmond and the DC suburbs, they should get the win.

 

Except they don't. The democratic turn out has been down better than 3% in off-year elections which makes the polling models wrong. It is what ^^^ seems not to get with his wall of polling data on presidential year elections. It doesn't apply.

 

Except that VA is an off-off-year election cycle like NJ. The VA "curse" means that the state usually elects a governor that is from the party that is not in the Whitehouse. The only exception since 1976 was McCauliff.

https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2016/12/suburbanising-south

So it doesn't matter what the polling is for Dems in off-year elections since VA does not follow that model.

 

Except it does. If you think "well GOP being in the WH guarantees a democratic victory, why spend millions on the democrat?

 

You are erroneously conflating two entirely different topics.

Past elections of the state established that your "off-year" allegation about the Dems was utterly bogus.

The spending by the Election-Industrial-Complex is just a feeble attempt to deflect attention from your bogus allegation.

 

I said I would get to the gubernatorial races as well. Did you not read that, or do you maybe need glasses?

 

Neither candidate is worth voting for in Virginia for the Governors Race. Northam is a liberals liberal and Gillespie is a RINO. Not much choice.

 

So, in just a number of days, the VA gubernatorial election will happen (among other elections).

Virginia is an interesting and also important state to watch for a number of reasons:

1.) The state went blue in 2008 and has stayed blue for three presidential elections (Obama +6.3, Obama +3.9, Clinton +5.3)

2.) Virginia, in the gubernatorial (as indicated in the OP) is known for the so-called "Virginia curse" where usually, the other party wins the gubernatorial mansion every four years. Since Terry McAuliffe is *technically* term-limited and therefore cannot run, current Lt. Gov Ralph Northam won the primaries and is now facing Ed Gillespie, who was also the GOP senatorial candidate in 2014 (against Democratic incumbent Mark Warner).

3.) It's an off-year election, but often used (alongside New Jersey) as the "canary in the coal mine" to see how the following year's mid-term elections are shaping up.

Now, here is the current RCP aggregate for the Virginia GUB race:



There are a lot of things to be gleaned from this:

1.) the polls are not uniform as to whom is really in the lead.
2.) the polls are extremely disparate.
3.) the third party candidate (Hyra) is going absolutely nowhere: this is a VERY important detail when you compare 2017 to 2013. More on this later

With that in mind, and before I go any further, here was the final polling composite for the 2013 race:



This aggregate represents the final aggregate from 2013, which is what we will see on next Tuesday for 2017, but some important points here:

1.) the polling was more uniform in 2013.

2.) the margins were leaner.

3.) the polling numbers for software developer and Libertarian candidate Sarvis were greatly inflated. Most think that disgruntled Republicans who were initially leaning toward Sarvis changed their minds at the last minute, a scenario that is indeed plausible. This likely gave Cuccinelli a form of hidden "polster". More on this later.

4.) Both major candidates improved their toplines from the final aggregate to the actual results. Cuccinelli improved more (see point 3 above).

5.) In 2013, the poll that came the closest was Emerson and the two polls that came in second place were Qpiac and Hampton.

Now, fast forward to 2017:

1.) In 2013, the final Qpiac poll had McAuliffe up by +6. The current Qpiac poll has Northam up by +17 - a HUGE difference.

2.) This time around, with Hampton, it could not be more chaotic: in 2013, Hampton showed McAuliffe up by +2. Right now, it shows Gillespie up by +8.

One thing we know for sure is that these two polling values, from polls conducted at almost exactly the same time, cannot exist in the same universe and be true. One of these two polls is absolutely false and we will know on election day which one was correct.

Just for historical clarity it should be noted that the semi-final Hampton VA poll from the 2016 election showed Trump +3 but the final Hampton poll, just 5 days later, showed Clinton +4, a 7 point shift toward the Democrat in the final days, an interesting shift when you consider the last week of the race and the Comey letter to congress. Here the proof:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...6raswnKIyRrCl69kx3ysPU_i68/edit#gid=884775215



In all fairness, the Qpiac poll from the end of October also vastly overstated Clinton's win, it had her at +13, but note the release date of the poll: 27.10.2017, one day before the Comey letter and since Qpiac did not do an end poll in the last days, we don't have a reliable comparison.

In terms of reputation, Qpiac has the better reputation: it does live interviews with far more respondents and does no push-polling.

So, let's look at the current Qpiac poll (another one is pretty sure to come out right before election day, I assume):

https://poll.qu.edu/virginia/release-detail?ReleaseID=2495



So, the values for Northam (D), according to Qpiac, look very strong. And when you include the current approval/disapproval for Pres. Trump, there is a correlation: Northam is ahead by +20 among women, where Trump is in a hole by -33 among women. Difference: 12 points. Northam is getting 8% of the Republican vote (read that as: never-Trumpers), while 16% of Republicans disapprove of the President. Difference: 8 points. Gillespie (R) is ahead in the NON-college vote by +20. Trump has approval among non-collegers by +16. Difference: only 4 points. 79% of non-white disapprove of Pres. Trump. 72% of non-whites support Northam. Difference: 7 points. And so forth and so forth and so forth. The point here is that, especially in an off-year, the President's standing among the public indeed plays a role in elections.

Now, let's compare this to 2013:

https://poll.qu.edu/virginia/release-detail?ReleaseID=1971



In this poll, there are some important differences: here, McAuliffe lead the independent voters by +15, while Northam is ahead by +7. I find that an interesting difference which can mean a number of things - and is worthy of adult discussion. Here, McAuliffe was ahead among women by +13 (Northam is ahead by +20), while Cuccinelli was ahead among non-college voters by +11 (Gillespie is up by +20 right now). This could be solid evidence that the base electorates sides on both sides are moving more strongly to their preferred party.

In this poll, there were no approval numbers for Obama, but there were some from September, 2013, HERE.

The one point I want to make, one that is indisputable, is that in 2013, Cuccinelli (R) had a sort of 'polster' or hidden buffer in the form of third party candidate Sarvis, who is a Libertarian, and Libertarians are more likely to vote R than D when given no other realistic choice. In fact, that was very much a part of the Republican end-game in late October, 2013: to sway Libertarian voters over to Cuccinelli.

However, in 2017, third-party candidate Hyra (L) is polling so badly, this leaves Ed Gillespie with no 'polster' or hidden buffer like Cuccinelli had. Now, some may want to compare 2017 to 2014, where Gillespie came from behind and also tied with Democratic incumbent Senator Mark Warner. Remember, that was a senatorial election, not a gubernatorial, and was also in the middle of an R-wave during the 2014 mid-terms. There is absolutely no R-wave going on right now. In fact, the very opposite may well be forming right now.

There is other polling I will delve into in the next days, for instance, the current WAPO polling and also the Monmouth polling. Just so that no one will think I am cherry-picking. I am not.

Right now, I would say the following:

A +17 is a huge lead and were Northam to lose, this would look very badly for Qpiac, which has a good reputation.

But there is also enough evidence that Gillespie is very much in the running and considering the "Virginia curse", I don't think anyone should be too sure about anything right now. At the end of the day, it all comes down to GOTV, GOTV, GOTV, as usual. That is the bread-and-butter of every campaign, no matter how you slice it.

When the FINAL polling aggregate is there, we will know more. Shame that Remington (R) has not polled. Remington (R) ended up doing very well in 2016, esp in PA, MI, WI and FL, so I wish that Republican firm had done some polling here.

More soon. I know this was a lot of information, but I think it's worth it to read.

-Stat

 

I have long enjoyed your posts. Hope things are well and remain well.

 

That is very kind of you. I have an enormous amount of work in the real world and this stuff really takes time to analyse and so for this reason, I often disappear for many days on end. Right now, I have a free 1/2 day and felt like having some political relaxation....

 

A couple more things about the upcoming gubernatorial race:

both major candidates are tried-and-tested. Northam actually did far better in the Lt. Gubernatorial election in 2013 than McAuliffe did in the main attraction. Where McAuliffe won in that year by +2.5, Northam beat E.W. Jackson by +10.6. And although Jackson (R) was black, black voters in Virginia went overwhelmingly for Northam, who also took counties that are usually deep red. This means that Northam's persona and also his program played among voters of all stripes. Indeed, his bio is most compelling.

But as already indicated, Gillespie practically came back from the dead in 2014 and drew Mark Warner to a near tie. The 2014 Senatorial ended up being a nail-biter. Gillespie was one of George W. Bush's main advisors and deeply tied to his re-election campaign in 2004.

My point is that both of these gentlemen have the tenacity to run a campaign down to the very last second and they don't give up without a fight.

 

It would be YUUUUGE for the BLOTUS regime to win the VA gubernatorial election given that NJ looks like it is all but a no-brainer for the Dems. They would have to have serious voter apathy to not replace Krispie Kreme with a Dem and that does not appear all that likely given how fired up the Dems are now.

Speaking of which the Gillespie campaign has obviously noted the same thing which explains why he has gone back to the alt right base to try and ensure that they do come out and vote for him.

VA is not a foregone conclusion for either side and it will all come down to voter turnout IMO.

 

So, I promised to come back and do a more complete analysis of the end polling. This will probably stretch over two postings, because of a number of graphics.

First, here is the RCP end-aggregate:



Missing from that aggregate is, according to the Hedgehog Report, a Google Consumer Report poll showing Northam +2 (51/49), but the link he has in his report is false and Google can also be used by an internal pollster (i.e., either for the Gillespie or the Northam campaigns), which are not included in end-aggregates. Also, the WAPO poll listed last Thursday was likely their end poll, they tend to put their end-poll out early.

So, before I go into great detail, let's look at the changes since the posting of mine from last Thursday. Here is the screenshot I posted on that day:



So, in the course of 4-5 days, following changes:

The Polling Company (R), from Gillespie +2 to Northam +1, change = Northam +3
Monmouth from Gillespie +1 to Northam +2, change = Northam +3
Fox News from Northam +7 to Northam +5, change = Gillespie +2
Quinnipiac from Northam +17 to Northam +9, change = Gillespie +8

Factually, this means good news for both camps.
What is bad for the Gillespie campaign is that not one single poll shows him now in the lead.
That being said, an aggregate +3.2 lead for Northam is just within the standard MoE of +/-3.5, so in reality, this is, on paper, a tied-race. That would be the fair and impartial was to judge the numbers.
And factually, Hyra is going absolutely nowhere as the Libertarian candidate, giving Gillespie (R) no hidden puffer of votes that may suddenly appear for him as last-minute L-switchers.

Now, to the nitty gritty:

MONMOUTH:


More were polled in the end-poll than in the other polls and this Northam +2 represents a 1 point gain for the Democrat over October.
Going deeper:



Ok, in terms of party affiliation (Virginia as a state does not collect or publish voter registration stats by party affiliation), the numbers are what we expect from two major party candidates with high name recognition. In this poll, Gillespie is winning among the Independent voters, although Northam is ahead by +2. But wait, you might say that the poll is too heavily weighted to the Ds. I will get right back to that. In terms of Geography, Northam is sweeping in NOVA, which is absolutely essential for a D-win and Gillespie is cleaning up in the west, which we expect. The "east" is a mixed region for the two parties, but a +15 for Northam looks good. What does not look good for Gillespie is the Central VA stat. Here, an R should be winning by +10 or more. And if you are wondering if this race is about race, then look at the white and non-white states. One more note: 14% of Conservatives are going for Northam, a man whom the Republicans tried to recruit a number of years back. It is unusual to see this kind of statistic from the opposing party.

Now, deeper internals:



I find these demographics to be very disturbing. One half of all respondents voted in the R primary, but only 36% voted in the D primary, so a justified case could be made that the poll is already weighted to the Right, not to the left. Also, the poll shows only a D+3 party ID edge, which is possible, but not likely. And the breakdown by race is not right: about 21% of voters expected via early voting and today will be black, not 15%. And at least 6% of the vote will be hispanic, not 3%. These factors can make the argument that this poll in unintentionally weighted to the Right. Wait and see.

FOX NEWS POLL:



Fox does it by solids and leaners. In this case, both candidates only have 1% leaners, so without leaners, the margin would still be +5
It looks like gender will play a major role, here: among men, it's Gillespie +10 but among women, it's Northam +20.



The partisan idendification in this poll is D+5, but the number of independents is greatly reduced, to 15%.
I doubt that either this poll or the Monmouth poll is an accurate representation of the actual electorate in VA.

The Polling Company (R) poll posts no useful internals. Ditto for the Rasmussen poll.

EMERSON:



The Emerson poll focused more on hot-button issues. In terms of geography, it shows a different picture in Eastern VA and combines Western and Central VA into one georgraphical region.


Quinnipiac:



When you compare this to the Qpiac internals from last Thursday, some of the Republican voters who had been considering Northam (he was getting 8% of them last week) have returned to the fold, and the Independent vote has moved 1 point more toward Gillespie. But actually, among women, Northam has actually increased his statistic, which tells me that the demographics of this poll must be somewhat different than the one from Thursday, but Qpiac has not posted them yet. However, be assured, I will follow up on this. That being said, a +9 margin is still a big lead.


Christopher Newport University (CNU):



There are some interesting details in these internals. First, it is the second poll to have Northam over 50%, which is always a good sign for a candidate. It also makes an actual election day projection, which you see above.

But in the internals, it has Northam up on NOVA by only +9, which is very unlikely. It also shows a near-tie Western VA, which is also very unlikely. But as with a number of other polls, it shows him near +20 among the women's vote, which pretty much seals the deal in a state that usually votes 53F-47M.

Trafalgar Group (R):



RCP claimed that the margin is Northam +1, but that is not correct. According the the pollster himself, the margin is +1.79 which rounds, of course, to +2. This is what happens when lazy people don't actually read polls.

The the Trafalgar (R) poll, the VA electorate is almost 54% female, 46% male. And the poll sees an overly strongly component among the over 65 crowd.

That being said, Trafalgar was the only pollster to get PA, WI and MI right in the last presidential election, so the pollster had built a decent reputation for itself.

NY Times / Siena:



All of the internals in this poll are, for lack of a better word, milder.

Gravis (R):













Gravis (R) shows a slightly more than +5 for Northam and shows a far smaller Gillespie margin under those without a college education. Gillespie is getting less than 1% of the black vote.

No time now for the Roanoke or Suffolk polls, I must get to work, but as you can see, the polls are pretty much all showing one direction: Northam.

 

The Dems have a lot of Virginia voters shell-shocked. Parking a few pick up trucks around the balloting locations might greatly reduce minority turn out. Northam is a race baiting POS.

 

And now, back to cold, hard facts:

As of 10/31/17, the Commonwealth of Virginia has 5,489,530 registered voters.

https://www.voterparticipation.org/...merican-electorate-outperforming-2013-levels/

Early voting stats are far surpassing 2013, especially among certain groups:

 

Any prediction?

 

Oh, who knows, but the slender lead we see for Northam is probably bigger than thought, because two Republican pollsters also show him in the lead and Ras, which has a verifiable mathematical conservative bias of circa 4 points to the right, "only" shows a tie.

It looks as if Gov. Lt. Gov and AG will be won by the DEMS. I am just about to start a thread about election night.

 

Gillespie seems to want it both ways.

He wants the Trumpies AND the GOP "Regulars".

It will be interesting to see if he can cobble that together enough to win.

 

It's a very heated day here in Virginia. Everywhere you walk there are tons of people telling you to go out and vote, tons of Dems and Republicans out campaigning for their candidate. I had a nice conversation with a fellow libertarian/independent group outside of the metro. Don't think this will be our year though lol

 

I just hope you went and voted and I don't care whom you voted for. I cherish every fellow citizen's right to vote.
Hope you are having a good day, bud.

 

Thanks! I haven't yet. Leaving work early at 4PM our time to go to the polls. Enjoy your day as well

 

I am working my ass off today, but tonight (GMT +1) I will have time to watch events unfold....