Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

New Arizona Poll Has McSally Up Seven Points on Sinema

New Arizona Poll Has McSally Up Seven Points on Sinema

Don’t get *too* excited just yet…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tswvKUBng8g&feature=youtu.be

A new poll from ABC15 Arizona and OH Predictive Insights has Republican Rep. Martha McSally ahead of Democrat Rep. Kyrsten Sinema for the senate seat, 52% to 45%.

However, I am taking it with a little bit of salt because the article doesn’t reveal its methodology and it was taken October 22 and 23…yet they just now release the numbers?

From ABC15 Arizona:

The exclusive ABC15 Arizona and OH Predictive Insights poll shows McSally with a seven-point lead with 52% of the vote compared to Sinema’s 45%.

Only 2% are undecided with 1% saying they’ll vote for Green Party candidate Angela Green.

The chief pollster for OH Predictive Insights says the shift in numbers is being linked to the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh and the caravan of migrants headed to the United States.

“If Kavanaugh didn’t happen I think it’d be an extremely tight race,” said chief pollster Mike Noble. “If not, I’d actually say the edge would go to Sinema but after seeing the polling – seeing the results – everything else – I think that McSally will end up winning coming election night.”

RealClearPolitics wrote that the poll had 600 likely voters with a margin of error of 4.

However, the other polls at RCP that do not involve OHI or The New York Times/Siena, all have Sinema ahead of McSally except for Fox News, which has the ladies tied. A poll from Gravis in early September had McSally in the lead.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/az/arizona_senate_mcsally_vs_sinema-6328.html#polls

At National Review, Jim Geraghty wrote that 1,230,433 Arizonians have already voted, which is almost the total number of votes cast in the 2014 midterm elections.

Out of the 3.7 million voters in Arizona, 525,647 have registered as Republicans and 413,005 as Democrats while “8,250 are classified ‘minor parties’ and 283,531 are classified ‘other’ or unaffiliated.”

Here are the early voting stats from Thursday morning:

http://www.arizona.vote/early-ballot-statistics

Geraghty already did the math and concluded that if Sinema wants to pull ahead in the early voting counts, she needs to win “the unaffiliated and minor-party voters by a roughly 70-30 split.” That may prove difficult because Green Party candidate Angela Green more than likely grabbed votes from the 6,463 party registered members. If that’s the case, then Sinema needs to go up 71-29 or 72-28.

This leads us to Election Day, which is next Tuesday:

What we don’t know in this equation is how many Arizonans will vote on Election Day. If the turnout is low like in 2014, with about 1.5 million votes cast, Sinema would need to win the Election Day vote by an overwhelming margin, something like a 73 percent to 27 percent split. But if Arizona’s statewide turnout is higher, like in 2010, when about 1.75 million people voted, Sinema could attempt to make up that 112,642-vote margin out of another half-million voters. That would require a 62-38 split in Sinema’s favor — less difficult, but still not easy. An NBC News poll found Sinema leading among self-identified independents, 58 percent to 32 percent.

Arizona’s total turnout could end up being higher than 2010; the higher the remaining turnout, the better chance she has of overcoming McSally’s advantage in the early vote. And it’s worth keeping in mind that it’s possible that Sinema is doing better among registered Republicans than McSally is among registered Democrats; the NBC poll showed Sinema winning Democrats 95 percent to 4 percent, while McSally’s margin among Republicans was 88 percent to 7 percent.

Geraghty didn’t mention the CBS/YouGov poll, which has McSally only bringing in 1% of the support from Democrats while Sinema has the support of 9% Republicans. The poll also showed that 12% of the conservatives went for Sinema and only 2% chose McSally.

In that same poll, 46% of the independents chose McSally compared to 43% for Sinema. Despite that, 52% of the moderates picked Sinema while only 23% chose McSally.

The latest CNN poll gave Sinema the lead, 51% to 47%, and she won over the independents 52% to 44%.

Overall, RCP has Sinema with a 0.7% edge over McSally. The Cook Political Report still has the race listed as a Toss-Up.

In other words, this race will go down to the last second on Election Day.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Strange how early voting is in total contradiction to polling numbers. Basically in every battleground state this is the case. If you want to know why many think this election is going to be surprising,

go the fivethirtyeight.com and try to find some analysis of early voting trends. Go to any left of center outlet and try to find useful analysis. It is being ignored for a reason.

    CountMontyC in reply to jl. | November 1, 2018 at 10:15 pm

    The pollsters rely heavily on certain assumptions. Most pollsters have been relying on the assumption that the Democrats will have a huge enthusiasm advantage. That assumption might have been true at one point but the Democrats haven’t been able to help themselves and not act in ways that motivates the conservative base(such as the Kavanaugh hearings). Of course the other part of the problems pollsters have is that like any other human they have biases so that they make assumptions that support what they want rather than what they know will be true(such as assuming that younger voters will vote at historic highs). Both destroy the accuracy in polling.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to jl. | November 2, 2018 at 4:18 pm

    fivethirtyeight.com

    Is an ABC owned web site.

    Not gonna believe them!

Human beings always try to predict forthcoming events. They traditionally try to do so based upon previous factors which led to a certain conclusion. Gamblers do this and, unless they are the ones making the odds, they eventually lose, usually because some unforeseen or unidentified factor invalidates their models. That is what happened in 2016. Now we get to 2018. Either the odds makers [pollsters] have not identified the factors which sunk their predictions in 2016 and using erroneous data, or they are ignoring them to push the result that they want. It is unclear which of these is true. But, I would be more inclined to read that the polling numbers for any Republican candidate are probably several points low. Maybe greater than 10 points low. Of course, this should have NO bearing on whether a person votes or not. Just like with the lottery, if you do not play the game, you can not win. Of course, watch for the fix being in.

    tom_swift in reply to Mac45. | November 1, 2018 at 6:56 pm

    There were no unidentified factors in 2016. Trump was not some low-profile fellow who sneaked in at the last second while nobody noticed. The pundits and pollsters still got all the indicators wrong—I believe, deliberately, but perhaps not.

What surprises me is how Simena has any support, much less how she has anything even remotely showing a lead

Early voting is a mistake. In a close race it lets the Dems know how many votes they need to “find” in the trunks of cars and in boxes “found” on the side of the road. (see: Coleman/Franken).

    DieJustAsHappy in reply to CDR D. | November 1, 2018 at 6:19 pm

    Make election day a holiday. Other than this, absentee ballots allowed. No results released until all polls are closed.

    tom_swift in reply to CDR D. | November 1, 2018 at 6:53 pm

    With early voting, the D’rats can’t known when to spring a fabricated surprise accusation to rubbish the opponent. Too early, and there’s time to disprove it. Too late, and they miss the early voters.

    Problems, problems—crooked elections are a lot trickier to arrange than most of us assume.

McSally is running a bad campaign. If she wins, it’s going to be despite her efforts.

    As you can see from Mary’s writing about Republicans having no chance , if we lose it is because the pundit class like LI and the political consultant class who thought Romney and McCain were dream candidates, have refused to be optimistic and Trump-like in confronting an incredibly AWFUL Democrat party.

    McSally is running against a provable far-left loon and refuses to bury her because I am sure she listens to people like Mary who wrote this article and the political pundit class that think anything said by a Republican or any optimism by Republicans will be met by BACKLASH and RUNNNING to the Democrat party.

    This one as you said was so poorly done by the Democrats in nominating a lefty loon in a Red State that McSally will win and the worst part will be the pundit and consultant class will think it was their brilliant media and campaign strategy that just has to be repeated and actually only wins when the Democrat are completely disorganized and out-numbered.

unexpectedly!

Hey Mary, I remember all your posts saying the Republicans were doomed going back to July. Do you have some systemic problem for having to predict and convince others of Republican doom?

I will back Mary when you are writing after Nov 6th to remind of us how you were absolutely brutal psychologically on everyone here over polls which have established in particular after 2016 to be VERY fake far from elections and pretending to get close when the election day comes but in this case the Democrat turnout is too important and they are doing fake polls right to the end.

I am not going to let you get away with your irresponsible writing here after Nov 6th. I will be back and I will exact revenge on you for trying to drive our spirits into the ground like you work for Nancy Pelosi.

    Dude, chill. Mary is entitled to her opinion just as you are, right? If you disagree, fine, that’s one thing, but nothing she wrote was “irresponsible” or viva Pelosi.

    That said, I am, generally speaking, a bit horrified by the anger and hostility everyone out in normal America and in Trump country feel. I feel it, too, no one is immune. But the last thing that will help our cause is crazy attacks on people who don’t toe your exact party line. This is still America; we can still have any ideas we want and express them freely. Sure, that doesn’t mean free from criticism, nor should it, but attacking Mary is . . . crazy. What do you accomplish with this? Some momentary high at “challenging” her? Really?

    She’s not an authority or the man or in power; save your salvo for someone who has an actual say in . . . anything. We’re bloggers, and if you don’t like what we say, don’t read us. That does more to undermine our voice than chirping crazy in comments.

      Once again, you over-react to criticism. Mary is free to post her opinion, others are free to post theirs, no matter how wrong.

      I also read her as simply cautioning us to not get complacent. But your outrage is both unprofessional (for a moderator) and unwarranted (Mary is clearly capable of defending herself).

      In fact, she may have intended a simple “I believe you have misunderstood my meaning” downplay, but you’ve now rushed in to make a simple misunderstanding worse.

      That’s become a pattern with you.

      Why not just cut to the chase and delete our posts? So we dont waste time trying to reason with you.

        Barry in reply to Fen. | November 2, 2018 at 1:58 am

        “Dude, chill.”

        Some over reaction.

        “But your outrage…”

        Now there’s a laugher. Outrage?

      Also…

      “the last thing that will help our cause is crazy attacks on people who don’t toe your exact party line”

      …that’s rich coming from you. I’ve made it clear several times now that if you would simply apologize sincerely for your part in our little misunderstanding, all would be set right and we could go back as if it never happened.

      Instead, you chose to demonize me as a nutjob. Whatever.

      So while the sentiment is valid, you should let someone else present it. If you value the cause more than your ego.

      And my demands have now increased to a pic of you with TWO pancakes on your head.

      https://goo.gl/images/MJW43D

      Submit now Dorothy, it’s only going to get worse.

    MrE in reply to Conan. | November 1, 2018 at 10:22 pm

    The way I read Mary’s post is cautious optimism and a welcome reminder not to shrug off voting based on early returns. There is no room for complacency before the polls close on 11/6.

Out of the 3.7 million voters in Arizona, 525,647 have registered as Republicans and 413,005 as Democrats while “8,250 are classified ‘minor parties’ and 283,531 are classified ‘other’ or unaffiliated.”

These numbers—registered Republicans, Democrats, minor parties and “other”—add up to 1,230,433 voters. A far cry from 3.7 million.

At National Review, Jim Geraghty wrote that 1,230,433 Arizonians have already voted

Well, well, well . . . the number of registered voters exactly equals the number who have already voted.

What a coincidence.

    Milhouse in reply to tom_swift. | November 2, 2018 at 10:31 am

    Your premise is incorrect. Ms Chastain was sloppy in her quoting, giving a very incorrect impression. The correct quote is:

    There are currently 3.7 million registered voters in Arizona. Of those who have voted early so far, 525,647 are registered Republicans and 413,005 are registered Democrats. Of the remainder, 8,250 are classified “minor parties” and 283,531 are classified “other” or unaffiliated.

      tom_swift in reply to Milhouse. | November 3, 2018 at 4:02 am

      Ms Chastain was sloppy in her quoting, giving a very incorrect impression.

      That was Comey’s excuse for Clinton’s e-mail crimes.

      Your premise is incorrect.

      Not so. There’s no premise involved in simple addition. My addition is immaculate and my statement is correct. The stated numbers are obviously bogus. She got it wrong, not me.

    Tom, I may be wrong here but the number cited by Geraghty is the number of ‘early voters’ out of the total registered of 3.7 million eligible voters. It’s the only way the numbers make sense.

Spoke with my mother recently. I was surprised as she explained she and her friends are deliberately lying to pollsters. The general attitude is the MSM are Democrat Operatives (as per Insty) and should be blindsided.

Odd. Because pre-Trump the attitude in north Texas was to hang up on pollsters. Now it’s an active disinformation campaign on our part.

Anyone else seeing this in their neck of the woods? Because the polls aren’t making sense.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Fen. | November 2, 2018 at 4:35 pm

    And that’s a good thing!

    They have zero right to what we think – just so like Facebook, Amazon, and Google the can make lots of money off of us.

    tom_swift in reply to Fen. | November 3, 2018 at 4:21 am

    The polls make perfect sense once one realizes that they’re not supposed to supply information. They’re propaganda, nothing more. And so obviously, there’s no need for them to be an accurate measure of anything.

    People deciding which markets need more TV ads use polls to tell them that. Candidates deciding where to show up for personal appearances, ditto. They need reasonably accurate polls, though certainly to nothing like a couple of percentage points precision. But those aren’t the polls the press throws at us.

    Voters—who are not budgeting ad blitzes or scheduling rallies—gain no useful information from polls, one way or another. How somebody down the street is supposedly voting is of no consequence; it doesn’t affect my own vote in the least.

    Same thing for the breathless accounts of early voting tallies. Utterly irrelevant to anyone, whether they’ve voted yet or not.

“It was taken October 22 and 23…yet they just now release the numbers?”

I wonder if they held off printing until it (expectedly?) swung back in Media/Democrat favor, then had their hand forced when it got worse.

We already know the MSM has its thumb on the scale when releasing public polling data (as opposed to internals the campaigns have). So I suspect they also game the timing of these poll releases for maximum effect to favor Dems.

Too bad McSally is a RINO,it would bode well if Arizona had a genuine conservative senator instead of the RINO’s it been electing.
Thankfully the nuts and flakes are out as long as they are not replaced with a fresh crop.

It’s good not to put much faith in this poll. A number of reasons come to mind. First, the margin of error is four percent. What does that mean? It means the 52% to 45% could be off by four percent either way. The Repub’s numbers could range from fifty six percent to forty eight percent, while the communist’s numbers could range from forty nine percent to forty one percent.

Also, who did the pollster’s decide are the likely voters?

Basically, if you need to know the future you might as well rely on your magic eight ball as this or any other poll.

I saw a news story somewhere that claimed that early voting turnout in Texas beat total turnout for 2014. I don’t know if that’s good news or bad, except that, unlike a lot of (especially) blue states, WE have a voter ID law.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend