« Right Wing Horror Show: Susana Martinez, Steve Pearce, Jon Barela, Tom Mullins AND Karl Rove | Main | Nonpartisan Hotlines Available for New Mexico Voters with Questions or Problems on Election Day »
Sunday, October 31, 2010
NM Democrats Beating Republicans in Early Voting by 8000+ Votes
If you read or listen to the spinners of the pro-right-wing consortium that consists of the Albuquerque Journal-Brian Sanderoff-Joe Monahan-KKOB radio-Jim Villanucci-KOAT-TV (oh hell, lump in the rest of the TV "news" outfits) and others, you know that it's been proclaimed from on high, er low, that this election is a done deal. It's over even before election day has arrived. Right-Winger Message to Democrats: Don't even bother to vote on Tuesday.
It's a civic-minded bunch, isn't it? Having failed to do their duty in exposing the outright lies in so many GOP campaign ads, fully reporting the huge money flow to right-wing candidates, attending Dem candidate press conferences, asking why Susana Martinez refuses to be interviewed in the last weeks before the election or providing what used to be known as fair journalistic oversight of the campaigns, this bunch now appears to be on a coordinated campaign to hold down the turnout of Democrats.
We've all heard ad nauseum about the so-called "enthusiasm gap" of Democrats, and witnessed the dedicating slant feeding that myth and trying to make it a reality. Today there was even a headline on a Journal article by the always obedient "reporter" Sean Olson blaring that "Voters Face Long Ballot on Tuesday," even though the article itself only touches on that at the end. Hey potential voters -- don't bother because even the ballot, you know, is a bummer.
Dems Lead in Early Voting
I could go on down the twisting and turning path of collusion and slant provided by the main media machine in New Mexico, but let's just focus on one aspect of the spin for now: early voting turnout.
Here are the facts:
- 8,000 more Democrats than Republicans have voted early, according to the most recent data provided by the Secretary of State. This data does not include Early Voting that took place on Saturday, traditionally the busiest Early Voting day of the cycle, which is expected to increase the Democrats’ early vote margin considerably.
- Democrats also have a lead among “infrequent voters” -- those who typically don’t vote in non-presidential year elections -- a group that most experts consider a key turn-out target in order to win in 2010.
- Early vote and absentee data from New Mexico show that Democrats in the state are outperforming Democrats in other states with competitive Governor races, such as Florida and Colorado. [Denver Post, 10/30/10; Palm Beach Post, 10/29/10]
- And internal polling from just a week ago showed a much closer governor race -- 45-46 -- among likely voters. The internal polling in other campaigns also shows tight races, not romps.
As Denish campaign manager Chris Cervini explains:
Actual votes matter a lot more than polls, and there’s a reason that more Democrats than Republicans have already cast their ballots in this race. Democrats have a candidate who is a fighter for our families, while the Republicans are stuck with a nominee who sides with the powerful interests every time. Tuesday is the only poll that matters and we remain confident New Mexicans will vote for the candidate whose focus is on creating jobs, protecting public education, taking on predatory lenders, and making sure the wealthy out-of-state corporations pay their fair share. That’s Diane Denish.
DPNM Chairman Javier Gonzales adds:
Polls will go up and down, but at the end of the day, the only numbers that matter are at the ballot box -- and that’s where Democrats hold an unquestionable advantage going into Election Day. Democrats are energized, excited and getting to the polls in big numbers to support Diane Denish and their other Democratic candidates across New Mexico. That’s exactly what we expect to see on Election Day, which is the only poll that truly matters.
The Democratic message to Democratic voters? Keep on keepin' on! If you didn't vote early, be sure to vote on November 2nd between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM (find your polling place here). If you still have an absentee ballot, complete and hand deliver it to your county clerk or to your precinct by 7:00 PM on November 2nd.
Volunteer for Get Out the Vote (GOTV) efforts with Dem candidates, the party and OFA today through the end of election day on Tuesday, when the polls close at 7:00 PM. Urge your friends, neighbors and family members to vote and vote straight ticket Democrat.
Very good point. I believe Sanderoff has finally exposed that he knows who butters his bread the most.
His credibility may be seriously on the line come Tuesday evening ... and let's make sure he loses it.
To do that DEMS need to VOTE, not cower to the equivalent of push polling by the Journal.
It appears Sanderoff is at least allowing his reputation to be used by and for the Journal and the Journal's politically right wing agenda.
Posted by: Bruce | Oct 31, 2010 1:00:12 PM
Any supposedly neutral pollster who allows the entity it polls for (the Journal) to have a financial stake in his company and who is fine with that entity (the Journal) releasing only select data, no crosstabs and no info on how the data is weighted, cannot be taken seriously.
It's even worse that Sanderoff provides the ONLY analysis allowed on the polling on TV, radio and in the Journal. Perhaps the very worst is that he now spins about the debates (and other aspects of campaigns) on TV, radio and in print -- influencing people's opinions that he will later poll.
These are clearly conflicts of interest on the part of Sanderoff yet not one reporter or journalist will confront that fact.
Posted by: barb | Oct 31, 2010 1:06:54 PM
AND all of the money that pours into the campaigns and is then spent mostly on TV media is going to the same big money interests who spout this crap. It is a terrible cycle.
I hope the people turn on these corporations who are moving ever closer towards the slave master roles they feel they deserve.
Rise up. VOTE!
Posted by: bg | Oct 31, 2010 1:43:27 PM
All the people I canvassed today said, "No effing way! I'm voting!"
Posted by: Proud Democrat | Oct 31, 2010 5:00:06 PM
You commenters who accuse Brian Sanderoff of sleeping with the GOP are so full of it I can't hardly stand it.
This is paranoia on a level with the Tea Party wackos.
Posted by: Jim Baca | Oct 31, 2010 6:06:30 PM
So Mr. Baca, you think it's ethical for Sanderoff to have the Journal holding a financial interest in his polling company without it being revealed every time poll results are published and analyzed by him in the Journal? Do you think it's ethical to allow the Journal to publish only selective results and to refuse to release cross tabs and methodologies, including the weighting of various demographics? Just about every reputable pollster does so.
Do you think it's ethical for the Journal to provide poll analysis ONLY by Sanderoff in the paper, on TV and on the radio, with no opportunity for campaigns or others to comment? How do you feel about Sanderoff also providing those sources with analyses of debate performances and other aspects of campaigns, while also being the pollster for these races?
Isn't it a conflict of interest to lead potential voters down an opinion path and then be the one polling and analyzing the poll results on those same races?
Why should we be forced to take Sanderoff's or the Journal's word (or your word) on how the polls are conducted and what the complete results suggest? Why is that kept secret, and why would Sanderoff agree to work under those limitations?
It's not about "sleeping with the GOP," but about having a mostly undisclosed financial dependence on the Journal and the secretive manner in which poll results and methodologies are not fully revealed.
You can call it paranoia, but I think the public deserves answers to these questions. Sanderoff's polling may or may not be effective, but I don't believe that we should have to "trust" that the polling is done effectively and properly. We should be provided with the information that most respected pollsters offer so that we can make up our own minds.
This is especially true given the Journal's increasingly biased reporting and its growing propensity to mix news and opinion without clearly identifying which is which. Having closely followed the Journal's coverage of this election cycle, I can say without a doubt that their right-wing bias has dramatically increased this year.
Headlines don't match the content of articles. Candidate press conferences and releases of policy proposals are ignored. Lies exposed elsewhere are ignored in the Journal's coverage. Articles that favor Dems are buried. Old stories that favor Republicans are resurrected and put on the front page. And the Journal's endorsement process has clearly been compromised. Can anyone seriously think the Journal endorsed Tom Mullins or Rep.Mimi Stewart's Repub opponent because they were the better and more experienced candidate?
All of this naturally sheds doubt on everything the Journal is involved with, including the polling operation in which it has a financial interest.
It's a matter of the Journal having an opportunity to apply financial and other pressure on its pollster, just as it is known to apply pressure on its political reporters to conform to owner demands on what stories to cover and not cover, and how to cover them. It's the reason many political reporters have left the Journal, and is a well-known fact.
In other words, the situation is ripe for manipulation, especially when the polls' innards are kept secret.
Posted by: barb | Oct 31, 2010 8:28:35 PM
I'm going out on a limb and saying a lot of those dems are voting for Martinez.
Posted by: Sid | Nov 1, 2010 12:34:22 AM
@Sid, Sure, most of us Dem's just can't wait for Corporate America's useful idiots, as Bill Maher calls them, to take over the Round House and set the State back 50 year, NOT!
Posted by: VP | Nov 1, 2010 9:01:02 AM
Sid, we can only hope that Democrats have suddenly lost their minds and now believe that taking money from swiftboat liars, hating on immigrants and gays, cutting education and medicaid and polluting everything in sight are good things. That is what it takes to be a republican like Martinez.
Posted by: Al | Nov 1, 2010 9:14:50 AM
I voted early and except for one local race, voted Democrat right down the line. I remember the antics of the GOP from 1992 up to this year. No way I'll vote Republican ever again.
Posted by: AllThingsConsidered | Nov 1, 2010 12:45:49 PM
Keep in mind that a lot of those Democratic votes and Republican votes are going to lean heavily towards their respective candidates because most of them are the result of get out the vote action on both sides. If you assume voters from both sides voted 100% with party affiliation (or nearly so) and arbitrarily give 80% of the independent/absentee vote to Martinez, the numbers are quite consistent with Denish's internal numbers.
Posted by: AMG | Nov 1, 2010 4:53:35 PM
@Sid -- early voters tend to be partisan.
Posted by: AMG | Nov 1, 2010 5:03:30 PM
I remember a time not so long ago when Republicans ran our nation into the ditch. So I voted a straight Democratic ticket!
Posted by: Ejército Libertador del Sur | Nov 1, 2010 7:08:28 PM
Maybe it wasn't much of a limb.
Posted by: Sid | Nov 2, 2010 9:19:04 PM
I think I will be moving. A state with no gay rights and a lunatic right winger running it will attract zero jobs because nobody creative or intelligent will want to live here, especially with the film industry and train gone Congratulations dumbbells. You put NM back into the backwater yokel category in one fell swoop.
Posted by: bw | Nov 2, 2010 10:35:09 PM