HoCo Executive Survey – Topline Observations

As a pollster/strategic communications counselor, I will probably be writing about survey research frequently this year.  Here are my thoughts on this new HoCo Exec Poll. 

-          If Calvin Ball (D) is down only 3% against Allan Kittleman (R) on an initial head-to-head ballot test, despite Kittleman leading on Name Identification by a whopping 41% margin (87% to presumably approximately 46% based on the data reported), then Ball is quite well-positioned to expand his electoral base.

-          Statistically, they are in a dead heat right now.

-          This poll indicates that Kittleman (at 42%) is far closer to his ceiling than Ball (at 39%).

-          It would have been better to release the results in mid-December.

-          I am not a huge fan of automated phone surveys conducted for political campaigns. I greatly prefer live interviewer studies.  Yes, they are more expensive, but they are worth it, especially if the interviewers are well-trained in data collection methods and best practices.

-          Sean Murphy, HoCo’s answer to Stephen Miller, tried to launch an attack, but he stumbled. Not exactly an A-game message.   Sade was not singing about him, as he is not a Smooth Operator.

-          I would love to see the geographic breakouts.  Assuming the study was conducted proportionate-to-probability, the subsample sizes for that race from each of the Council Districts are large enough to yield statistically significant data, albeit with a high(er) margin of error compared to the overall MoE (4% at the 95% level of confidence).

-         Would be great to see how the 19% Undecided broke out (by ideological affinity, by partisan affiliation, by geography, by gender, by race, by age, and by voting propensity and/or interest in voting in the upcoming 2018 elections).

-         As I said in 2013 – 2014, the County Executive race is one where the Democratic candidate can win with up to 58% of the vote, and the Republican candidate can win with up to 52% of the vote.  His path was narrower but Kittleman ran in a favorable GOP cycle.  Despite the increased Democratic registration since then, Kittleman enjoys incumbency in a (generally but far from universally) OK economy.  And 2018 (like 2014) is a non-presidential election cycle, where Democratic turnout tends to be lower. Perhaps frustration with Kittleman’s Republican Party will help send more Ds to the polls and lead more Unaffiliated (read: Independent) voters to vote D.  That said, I will stick with that 58% D – 52% R range from the last cycle.

-         Putting myself in their shoes, I would be mildly pleased with the findings if I was Ball and I would be slightly nervous if I was Kittleman.  In short, it was a good day for Dr. Ball.

In solidarity.

Give ‘Em the Ol’ 2, 3

Back to the County Council races. - Edited Edition (12:52 pm Eastern).  3rd Edition (2:26 pm Eastern).

Let's just call this a living document.

The potential Democratic fields for the Second and Third County Council Districts are aces and pears.  Aces and pears, I tell ‘ya.

In marked contrast to District 4, where the list grows almost weekly, I am hearing fewer names for District 2 as time goes on.  As of this writing, there are five “potentials” on the Democratic side for District 2.  In no particular order, they are:

-       Bill Woodcock.  I have already discussed his possible candidacy for another office in my recent County Executive post.  I think he would have an easier time running for the Democratic nomination in District 2 than seeking a Countywide office, bearing in mind the resources involved. 

-       Opel Jones, mathematics lecturer, member of the Howard County Human Rights Commission, Democratic Central Committee Alternate.  This author is hearing a great deal of buzz surrounding his potential candidacy for the seat.  He has an event scheduled for January 19 at the AIDA Bistro & Wine Bar at 5 pm where more information about his intentions may become known.  Of the five, he is the most likely to seek the Democratic nomination. 

-       Dr. James Howard, mathematician, raconteur, member of the Board of Appeals (Chairperson). Half of the lethal Basu-Howard combination, Dr. Howard has recently bolstered his public profile by joining up with the aforementioned Mr. Woodcock on the renowned “Do It Live!” podcast.  Question: would he get more than one vote in his household?    

-       Nina Basu, litigator, long-time Long Reach Village Board member. A staunch progressive with deep roots in the community, Ms. Basu is well-positioned to be a formidable candidate for the seat.   Also, like Mr. Woodcock, she has the experience of running for elective office previously.  That cannot be discounted.

- Olga Butler, small business owner and community activist.  Ran a good campaign for the Board of Education in 2014.  Also from Long Reach.  Candidly, I thought she might try for the BoE in '18 but since the Great Mentioner spoke, I am including her name here. Would be a serious candidate if she sought the office.

Frankly, I expect no more than two of those five will run for the 2^nd District seat in 2018.  

Turning to County Council District 3 (Democratic field only), again in no particular order:

-       Steven “Steve” Hunt, Corporate Services Manager at Abt Associates and member of several local boards, including his current service on the Board of Appeals.  If asked, “Who is the odds-on favorite to be the next Councilperson from 3?” I would choose Mr. Hunt.  He is well-qualified with an impressive record of community involvement.  If he runs, he will be tough to beat.

-       Alice Giles, Technical Specialist at the Howard County Public School System who has served on multiple local boards, including current engagements with the Howard County Conservancy, HopeWorks, the Commission for Women and the Public Transportation Board. Well-connected and well-liked, Ms. Giles has great credentials.  I don’t believe her mother’s loss in the Board of Education primary damaged the “Giles” brand, frankly the name should be a net plus in the Third.  On paper, an extremely formidable candidate.  Question: where does she stand on issues of importance to local Democratic primary voters?  Understanding that Council races tend to be less ideological than, say, state legislative races, her long service on the League of Women Voters gave her a non-partisan profile for many years.  How would she fare on the campaign trail?

-       Shari Zaret, long-time member of the Kings Contrivance Village Board and Democratic activist.  A good profile with an identifiable geographic base, she could emerge as a serious candidate. Question:  if both Hunt and Giles run, where is the Zaret constituency?

-       Christiana Mercer Rigby, former Senior Relationship Manager of the United Way of Central Maryland and current member of the Kings Contrivance Village Board.  An intriguing possibility from Southern Columbia who describes herself as a “passionate community advocate,” Rigby possesses decent credentials.  Question: similar to Zaret’s challenge, how can she position herself favorably in a race against better known names?

-   Jonathan Branch, Registered Nurse and Democratic Central Committee Alternate.  A Democratic activist, his name has popped up as someone interested in making a run. That said, the HoCo Echo Chamber at the present moment, seems more focused on the other possibilities. 

- Greg Jennings, Assistant State's Attorney at the Baltimore City State's Attorney Office, long-time political operative and current member of the Democratic Central Committee.  Serious credentials.  He reads more "Annapolis" to me but has the potential to be a top-tier candidate for County Council.  

I expect four of the six to run for the 3^rd in 2018.   

Of course other candidates may jump in, for either seat.

So what next?  I will most likely look ahead to the 2018 Board of Education race.  Also, the tip line remains open…for any and all offices.  Hear something, say something.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

No Slats, Just Stats

2016 Howard County Primary Election Fun Facts – Presidential Candidate Electoral Performances at the County Council Level:

-       Trump won in four of the five County Council districts, losing only in the Fightin’ Fourth to Kasich by a 64 vote margin (2,884 to 2,820).

-       Trump’s biggest margin was in the 5^th County Council district, where he outpolled Kasich with 7,550 votes compared to 5,300 for the Ohio Governor.  He also won rather handily in the 1^st District, with 4,250 votes compared to 3,494 for Kasich.  In short, Trump performed best in the West HoCo GOP stronghold and ran quite well in the swing-ish 1^st.

-       Kasich kept it reasonably close in the 2^nd District (losing to Trump 2,716 to 2,602 votes) and in the 3^rd District (again placing second to Trump by 2,512 to 2,272 votes).  In short, Kasich fared best in the more Democratic County Council districts.

-       Cruz had his strongest showing in the 5^th, with 2,968 votes.  He placed third in all County Council Districts.

-       The only other GOP presidential candidate who broke three figures at the County Council level?  Ben Carson (148 votes in the 5^th). 

-       Worst showing?  A tie between Huckabee (8 votes in the 1^st) and Santorum (8 votes in the 4^th).  Don’t stop believing.

-       On the Democratic side, Clinton won in all five County Council districts. The margins of victory were somewhat narrower in the 1^st District and the 5^th District, slightly over 2,100 votes in both cases.  She crushed it in the 4^th, with 10,126 votes compared to 6,218 for the Vermont Senator. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

"Time Keeps On Slippin'"

I will keep this brief.  The 4:05 pm to Saskatoon is boarding soon and my sprint from Parking Garage A to the ticket counter resulted in four exclamations to “Watch out,” two muttered apologies and one spilled latte. Thankfully, the coffee wasn’t mine.

Anyone who believes they can run for President, seeking the nomination of a major party, and wait on announcing until the summer of 2015 is either a complete dolt…or Hillary Clinton, because she could get away with it.   She wouldn’t tarry to that extent, but she has advantages that none of her likely Democratic rivals can match: astronomically high name recognition & solid Fav/Unfav numbers among likely D primary voters/caucus attendees, a broad network of supporters (ranging from top-flight operatives to keyed-in local elected officials and activists), massive fundraising potential, a spouse who (when on his game) is probably the most persuasive advocate for Democratic candidates and causes since JFK, and a personal biography that seems ideally suited for the Challenges of Today.  Do you think Bernie Sanders is going to stop that juggernaut?  Extremely unlikely.

She could afford to wait, if she wanted to. That said, she won’t. I would wager dollars to doughnuts, that Clinton will most likely announce her intentions in early 2015...at some point between January 1 and March 31...most likely in the first half of that window.

For the record: I am not, viscerally, a huge fan of HRC.  Intellectually, I admire her accomplishments and respect her brainpower and toughness.  Genuine heavy mettle.  I think she would be a good president, perhaps even very good.

Perhaps I just find the Clinton family saga a little tiresome.  Maybe my thinking on the matter will evolve, and it is all about making the best choice from the available options.  That said, my last votes for a Clinton occurred back in ’92 (once in March, again in November).  Pissed off on how he handled the Lani Guinier nomination, I decided I would not vote for his re-election in 1996.  I ended up casting my ballot for Steve Forbes in the GOP primary, and for Senator Bob Dole in the General. 

But that was the other Clinton.  Fast forward to late 2007, I favored then-Senator Obama’s stance on the War and his overall positioning, slightly to the left of then-Senator Clinton… a good mainstream progressive from the Heartland. 

But now, deep into the second term of the Obama Presidency, with Official DC turning its critical, menaced and slightly rum-soaked eyes to 2016 and whispering of Iowa, of New Hampshire…and facing the near inevitability of yet another Clinton campaign.  One must ask, is this her time? 

In the post WWII era, few candidates who aren’t sitting Presidents, incumbent Vice Presidents or Bushes have had such a clear road to the nomination of a major party. Adlai Stevenson’s second run in ’56 comes close, and even he had to contend with Estes Kefauver, who was no slacker.

So who will step up on the D side?  I have a list of 38 names.  Many of the other 37 won’t run.  Some might explore it, then opt against such an arduous campaign.  A handful will get into the race, I would estimate no more than four or five serious candidates in addition to former Secretary of State Clinton. In short, a small field by modern standards. 

There will be a challenger from the Far Left (right this way Senator Sanders), a slot for a conservative Democrat who wants to over-correct based on one interpretation of the 2014 election results (greetings Senator Manchin), a couple of candidates who want to be in the mix because a) they believe they have a compelling story to tell and b) Hillary might stumble…let’s just put in former Senator Webb and current Governor Martin O’Malley in this category….for now.  The former is an interesting possibility, given his populist inclinations and swing state geographic base.   Potentially very interesting.  O’Malley was dinged, probably not irreparably, based on last week’s election outcomes in Maryland…but he remains a decided long-shot.

Oh yes, and let us not forget Vice President Joe Biden.  First, I don’t believe he will run again.   He had two decent opportunities. I recall his 1988 campaign vividly and his 2008 effort recently.  Second, he is a fine public servant but he is not the future of the Democratic Party.  

The progressive wing will long for Senator Elizabeth Warren, some of the unreconstructed will want the ageless Jerry Brown to saddle up once more, Rahm may practice speeches in his bathroom mirror, and Senator Booker will keep his calendar open for 2024.

Me? I will probably spend the Holidays pondering the possibility of a Cuomo, the reemergence of Feingold or Dean, the potential of Gillibrand, or if John Cusack is ready to take a break from this acting nonsense and get into politics in a serious way.   

That said, I will most likely be wearing a Clinton button on 12/31/2015…just like many of you will too. 

But who knows? 

In any event, it is all coming sooner than you think.  The calendar demands it.  Beware those who jump in late, history has not been kind to them.

With that in mind…up next…a look at the Republicans.  And yes, they will probably go Establishment again in 2016, in case you were wondering.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Surface Tension: A Topline Post Election Wrap-Up

There will be time for a deep dive into the numbers.  Now is not the moment.  Here are some initial observations regarding last night’s Election results:

The recent high-water mark for a Maryland gubernatorial race is Governor Martin O’Malley’s 56.2% in his 2010 re-election bid.  (Side note: what is he going to say in Des Moines? In Cedar Falls? In Sioux City?).   In 2006, he won with 52.7% and four years prior to that, the Democratic nominee for Governor obtained only 47.68% of the statewide vote.

My point is that Maryland has witnessed some competitive Governor’s races, four of the last six being won by single-digit margins. So even with the demographic trends of recent years, the 2014 gubernatorial election was unlikely to be a cakewalk. But any serious Democratic nominee for that office would have to be considered a significant favorite going into a general election contest.

Yet Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown lost, to a B-tier Republican candidate.  I believe this occurred because:

1)   Maryland was not immune from the Democratic shellacking that occurred nationwide.

2)   Biography aside, his campaign was uninspiring.  Yes, I was a Mizeur voter in the primary but I cast my ballot for Brown in the general; even though the campaign didn’t communicate much in the way of a positive rationale for such an act.

3)   Democratic turnout in MD was lower than expected. I don’t have the final or even penultimate numbers in front of me, but there was an enthusiasm/activation gap…and the Republicans ran a stronger than expected GOTV operation.  Also, the GOP brand seems to have recovered a bit from the earlier post-Bush 43 years, even though voters still show high dissatisfaction levels with both parties and with the both the President and Congress.

4)   “Articulation”-oriented campaign (covered elsewhere in this blog) can be tough.  You find yourself running against your opponent and the perceived sins of the affiliated incumbent administration.  I don’t believe the Brown campaign pulled together a truly compelling/cohesive narrative when discussing the O’Malley record.

Senator Allan Kittleman, apparently Howard County Executive-elect, would have been Governor-elect had he tossed his hat into that ring instead.  I am guessing he knows I am right on this matter.

How bad was it for Democrats locally?  Congressman Cummings' GOP opponent garnered 43.89% of the vote in the Howard County portion of the 7^th Congressional District and said opponent would, charitably, be called a perennial candidate. 

It appears as though Jon Weinstein pulled off a victory in Councilmanic District 1, a true swing constituency.  How did he accomplish this? I believe he did an excellent job of localizing the election, framing the race on local issues and concerns.  That appealed to a majority of voters in the First.

I still maintain that Courtney Watson ran a strong campaign for County Executive.  Look, had they not attempted to reposition Kittleman, he probably would have won with 55% of the vote in an election cycle such as this.  The comparative effort was necessary and generally decently executed.  Moreover, Watson provided numerous reasons to vote for her, not just against Kittleman.  She had a good narrative but it just wasn’t enough in a Rejection Election cycle (you can read more about that concept here: http://www.michiganliberal.com/diary/7278/).

The biggest bummer of the evening, for me, was 9B.   From a technical perspective, it would be hard to find a Maryland campaign better run than Tom Coale’s.  Running a positive citizen-neighbor-legislator style effort that was focused on local issues and finding practical solutions for the present and the future…it simply wasn’t enough to overcome a well-known GOP opponent in a highly competitive single-member House of Delegates district.

On the Howard County Board of Education, the results were not a huge surprise.  I voted the Apple Ballot because I believe they would have been an effective team.  In terms of intensity, I was primarily concerned with electing Altwerger (who won) and Beams (who did not…which was very disappointing).  That said, I am not displeased that Christine O’Connor won a seat.  I was not thrilled when she allied herself with Mike Smith, that decision dropped her to the fifth position on my list, but she was in the running for a while.  And thank goodness that neither Smith nor Dyer finished in the top four.

At some point, I am going to talk about people who sought public office this cycle that were unsuccessful...but who should run again.  But I am too cranky to write about 2016 or 2018 right now.  Let’s call it a post.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Vote Democratic

Entrenched, conservative interests in America have often condemned, or at least looked warily upon, citizen activism.  In the early days of our Republic, they castigated those who participated in “self-created societies.”  They believed that the people’s voice on affairs of state should be expressed primarily when casting ballots for public office, and infrequently (and quietly) otherwise.

These societies facilitated the ability of citizens to discuss public policy matters; and to organize.  Our first party system evolved out of these debates.

Our Republic, our Democracy, has changed a great deal since the Washington Administration.  Parties have appeared and vanished, issues have risen, been resolved, or transformed, rights have been recognized, extended and curtailed.

With that said, I would maintain that one animating principle remains constant…the interests of a conservative elite who wish to preserve their socioeconomic clout.  Not every conservative is so motivated; nor is every member of the elite conservative.  The point is that there are many who belong to a class that could best be described using Teddy Roosevelt’s classic phrase, “malefactors of great wealth.”  And, many elements of this particular grouping seem to have found a home in today’s Republican Party.

If voter turnout was 100% in Maryland, the forces allied with these reactionary interests would be in full retreat.  They rely upon a combination of citizen disinterest, and generous financial contributions to like-minded candidates and organizations, to advance their agenda.  Sometimes they can cloak their plans under the guise of fair-sounding populist verbiage.  When they have a losing hand, they go on the offensive in the hope of sowing fear and confusion.

That is why it is so important for the average citizen to participate in the electoral process.  It offers an opportunity to rebuke the narrow interests of this conservative elite while ensuring that the voice of the people will be heard, and not just during election season.

Chances are, if you are reading these words, you have already cast your ballot or you plan to do so via absentee or at the polls on Election Day.  This post serves as a reminder then, for you to talk with your friends and family members who may be occasional voters.  Ask them: who do you think wants you to vote and who do you think wants you to “forget” to vote…and why?   Which party and candidates best represent your values, and which are more inclined to work against them?

Stay tuned, as more will follow.