Poll: Attack Ads a Negative for CHAFEE
Marc Comtois
The Club for Growth has conducted a poll here in Rhode Island (incidentally, I think I was one of those polled) on the effectiveness of the NSRC attack ad campaign against Mayor Steve Laffey. In short, it's backfired:
The poll of 300 Republican primary voters was conducted by National Research Inc. on Nov. 14-15. The poll asked whether respondents had seen television ads about Stephen Laffey. Among those who had, three out of four respondents said the ads either made them more likely to support Laffey or had no effect. Among those who reported that the ads affected their views, nearly three out of five of those (or 58%) respondents reported they were more likely to support Laffey.
“From bridges to nowhere to campaign ads that have the opposite of their intended effect, some Republicans in Washington are proving that they are simply no good at spending other people’s money effectively,” said Pat Toomey, President of the Club for Growth. “If the NRSC really wants to win the support of GOP members in Rhode Island, they should try encouraging Sen. Lincoln Chafee to vote for what the Republican party is supposed to stand for — a pro-growth agenda of limited government, lower taxes and less federal spending.” The poll produced the following results:
THE NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE IS SPENDING MONEY ON ATTACK ADS AGAINST STEPHEN LAFFEY, A FELLOW REPUBLICAN HERE IN RHODE ISLAND. DO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD BE SPENDING MONEY ON THIS NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN, OR SHOULD THEY BE SPENDING MONEY AGAINST DEMOCRATS INSTEAD?
SHOULD BE 9.3%
SPEND AGAINST DEMOCRATS 71.7%
DON‘T KNOW/REFUSED 19%
HAVE YOU SEEN ANY TELEVISION ADVERTISING OVER THE PAST SEVERAL WEEKS ABOUT STEPHEN LAFFEY?
YES 61%
NO 35.3%
DON‘T KNOW/REFUSED 3.7%
AND DID THE ADVERTISING MAKE YOU MORE LIKELY OR LESS LIKELY TO VOTE FOR STEPHEN LAFFEY IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY FOR U.S. SENATE?
MORE LIKELY 33.9%
LESS LIKELY 24.6%
NO EFFECT/UNDECIDED 39.3%
REFUSED 2.2%
“Washington-based Republicans’ elevation of incumbency protection over principle is disgusting rank-and-file GOP members. Great numbers of them are hoping for leaders who advocate returning the party to the pro-growth agenda that helped it achieve a governing majority in the first place,” concluded Toomey. “While I’m sure Mayor Laffey actually appreciates the results of the NRSC’s ads against him, it’s a sad commentary on the state of the Republican party leadership in Washington.”
Back to the drawing board, Liddy. (Tip:
K-Lo at NRO)
4:00 PM
What's missing from this poll? Oh, how about WHO the sampling would VOTE FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE!
The Club for Growth is a pro-laffey organization, and I suspect the results they released don't tell the whole story here...
where's the rest of the poll????
do you think they would simply SKIP the most important question about the race!?!!?
The Club for Growth has not taken a position on the Laffey/Chafee race. While I think it would be fairly obvious that they aren't going to support Chafee under pretty much any circumstance, it is much too soon to say that they are a "pro-Laffey organization."
They are just trying to gauge the effect of the NRSCs early efforts to inject itself into this particular race, when there are many other races across the country where the Republican is facing a strong challenge from the Democrats, and the national Republicans aren't spending nearly as much time or money to help out there (Santorum vs. Casey in PA comes to mind).
I think the results speak for themselves. If I were a Chafee supporter, which I am not, I would be very concerned about effect that the out of state negative attack ad campaign by the NRSC is having on my own.
What's so wrong with simply letting the best candidate win based on his own merits?
I am sure in due time that the horse race results of the poll will be announced and I am sure that it will show Laffey ahead -- BTW the poll sampled 300 Reg. R's
I hate to do this...but see RIFuture's posting on the "neutral" Club for Growth
http://rifuture.org/blog/?p=869
I was one of those Republicans polled and the question were definately pro-Laffey, not a neutral poll.
One of the questions was, paraphraising: "Do you support attack ads on Steve Laffey a fellow Republican?".
They also mispronounced Chafee's name. When I corrected the caller, the caller responded with "Oh that's the way we were told to say it."
Another question likened Chafee to Hillary Clinton and then asked who you vote for in a Republican primary.
I guess it will make for good propaganda for Laffey.
Anthony: Thanks for that info. I don't think this was the poll I was a part of. The pollster I talked asked questions that seemed very fair, were more pro-Chafee if anything and pronounced everyone's name correctly!
Cranston Moneyman: RIFuture has some decent stuff on the GOP primary race, though I suspect that schadenfreude is the motivation.
If we have the CfG, the NRSC, the Laffey campaign, the Chafee campaign, and various news organizations all conducting polls of likely Republican primary voters over the course of a year, do you get the feeling that every Republican in the state is going to get called by a pollster on multiple occasions?
Andrew, Good point. As the general consensus is that there enough registered Republicans in RI to fill out the roster of the average college football program, I'd say there's a shot we'll all be polled a few times over.
Instead of spending all this money on polling maybe Chafee and Laffey could send us all gift certificates to a dinner at Chelo's.
Anthony,
You need to have bigger aspirations ... gift certificates to Capriccio's for everybody!
PS I've already answered several telephone polls myself, as well as received enough mail to reconstitute a small forest. It's only Dec. 1!
How about this idea. The pollsters call all of the Republicans in the state once. Then, anyone who changes their mind over the course of the year calls them back.
Anthony, that's the best idea I've heard yet.
I bet about 90% of registered Republicans already know who they are going to vote for and not much will change their minds. Only 10% of Republicans can probably be moved one way or the other.
The rest of the election is going to depend on how many unaffiliated voters turn out.
At the start of Carcieri's race against Bennett alot of Republicans I talked with indicated that they were going to wait some time before supporting a candidate.
This race is different. Every Republican with whom I've spoken already knows who they're voting for next September.
Republicans either think Laffey is a charismatic, 'real' Republican who will usher in a new wave of conservativism in Rhode Island or they think he is an egomanical, self-centered demagogue who will cost the GOP the Senate majority.
On Chafee, they either think he is a 'RINO' who is ideologically wrong on virtually every issue and is an embarrassment to the White House or they feel he is a viable candidate who will help maintain control of the Senate while being a true moderate in the a storied tradition of past Rhode Island leaders.
As you can see, there ain't much middle ground in this race!
I would agree with Anthony, in so far as most people's minds are fairly made up at this point, and a lot of this is just a waste. There's not a lot of wiggle room in a Republican primary, because the candidates do have contrasting positions, and simply becuase there are so few voters in them. If I had to guess, some of the out of state focus from the NRSC seems to be intended to disgust the electorate to a point that they don't even want to participate in the process.
I don't "hate" Chafee by a longshot. He's a genuinely nice guy. However, based on his stands on many issues which I care about, in good conscience, I need to vote for the candidate whose positions come closest to my own, and not simply because he's the incumbent.
If Laffey does not win the GOP primary in September (though I'll be more than willing to go on the record now by saying that he not only will win, but will do so handily), then I will throw my support behind Chafee. I'm not saying I'll be knocking on doors at 5AM, but I'll support him. As bad as Chafee is, he's no Sheldon Whitebread or Matt Brownnose. HOWEVER, unless I'm forced to make that choice, I'm standing for what I think is right, and basing my support on principle and values, and not on political expediency or because the party establishment wants me to vote a certain way.
Will, That's a good example of pragmatic idealism. Vote your conscience but don't throw a tantrum if you lose. Thus, to you:
Laffey > Chafee > Democrat
If you keep to this logical progression, you will vote for the best candidate every time.
To clarify, you will vote for the best candidate "for you" every time.
Click here for the new Anchor Rising & Ocean State Current page
About Community Crier
About Engaged Citizen
Administrator
What's missing from this poll? Oh, how about WHO the sampling would VOTE FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE!
The Club for Growth is a pro-laffey organization, and I suspect the results they released don't tell the whole story here...
where's the rest of the poll????
do you think they would simply SKIP the most important question about the race!?!!?
Posted by: cranston money man at November 30, 2005 5:21 PMThe Club for Growth has not taken a position on the Laffey/Chafee race. While I think it would be fairly obvious that they aren't going to support Chafee under pretty much any circumstance, it is much too soon to say that they are a "pro-Laffey organization."
They are just trying to gauge the effect of the NRSCs early efforts to inject itself into this particular race, when there are many other races across the country where the Republican is facing a strong challenge from the Democrats, and the national Republicans aren't spending nearly as much time or money to help out there (Santorum vs. Casey in PA comes to mind).
I think the results speak for themselves. If I were a Chafee supporter, which I am not, I would be very concerned about effect that the out of state negative attack ad campaign by the NRSC is having on my own.
What's so wrong with simply letting the best candidate win based on his own merits?
Posted by: Will at November 30, 2005 6:24 PMI am sure in due time that the horse race results of the poll will be announced and I am sure that it will show Laffey ahead -- BTW the poll sampled 300 Reg. R's
Posted by: tom at December 1, 2005 8:35 AMI hate to do this...but see RIFuture's posting on the "neutral" Club for Growth
http://rifuture.org/blog/?p=869
Posted by: cranston money man at December 1, 2005 11:00 AMI was one of those Republicans polled and the question were definately pro-Laffey, not a neutral poll.
One of the questions was, paraphraising: "Do you support attack ads on Steve Laffey a fellow Republican?".
They also mispronounced Chafee's name. When I corrected the caller, the caller responded with "Oh that's the way we were told to say it."
Another question likened Chafee to Hillary Clinton and then asked who you vote for in a Republican primary.
I guess it will make for good propaganda for Laffey.
Posted by: Anthony at December 1, 2005 12:44 PMAnthony: Thanks for that info. I don't think this was the poll I was a part of. The pollster I talked asked questions that seemed very fair, were more pro-Chafee if anything and pronounced everyone's name correctly!
Cranston Moneyman: RIFuture has some decent stuff on the GOP primary race, though I suspect that schadenfreude is the motivation.
Posted by: Marc at December 1, 2005 1:20 PMIf we have the CfG, the NRSC, the Laffey campaign, the Chafee campaign, and various news organizations all conducting polls of likely Republican primary voters over the course of a year, do you get the feeling that every Republican in the state is going to get called by a pollster on multiple occasions?
Posted by: Andrew at December 1, 2005 1:26 PMAndrew, Good point. As the general consensus is that there enough registered Republicans in RI to fill out the roster of the average college football program, I'd say there's a shot we'll all be polled a few times over.
Posted by: Marc at December 1, 2005 5:00 PMInstead of spending all this money on polling maybe Chafee and Laffey could send us all gift certificates to a dinner at Chelo's.
Posted by: Anthony at December 1, 2005 11:20 PMAnthony,
You need to have bigger aspirations ... gift certificates to Capriccio's for everybody!
PS I've already answered several telephone polls myself, as well as received enough mail to reconstitute a small forest. It's only Dec. 1!
Posted by: Will at December 2, 2005 12:48 AMHow about this idea. The pollsters call all of the Republicans in the state once. Then, anyone who changes their mind over the course of the year calls them back.
Posted by: Andrew at December 2, 2005 10:31 AMAnthony, that's the best idea I've heard yet.
I bet about 90% of registered Republicans already know who they are going to vote for and not much will change their minds. Only 10% of Republicans can probably be moved one way or the other.
The rest of the election is going to depend on how many unaffiliated voters turn out.
At the start of Carcieri's race against Bennett alot of Republicans I talked with indicated that they were going to wait some time before supporting a candidate.
This race is different. Every Republican with whom I've spoken already knows who they're voting for next September.
Republicans either think Laffey is a charismatic, 'real' Republican who will usher in a new wave of conservativism in Rhode Island or they think he is an egomanical, self-centered demagogue who will cost the GOP the Senate majority.
On Chafee, they either think he is a 'RINO' who is ideologically wrong on virtually every issue and is an embarrassment to the White House or they feel he is a viable candidate who will help maintain control of the Senate while being a true moderate in the a storied tradition of past Rhode Island leaders.
As you can see, there ain't much middle ground in this race!
Posted by: Anthony at December 2, 2005 11:49 AMI would agree with Anthony, in so far as most people's minds are fairly made up at this point, and a lot of this is just a waste. There's not a lot of wiggle room in a Republican primary, because the candidates do have contrasting positions, and simply becuase there are so few voters in them. If I had to guess, some of the out of state focus from the NRSC seems to be intended to disgust the electorate to a point that they don't even want to participate in the process.
I don't "hate" Chafee by a longshot. He's a genuinely nice guy. However, based on his stands on many issues which I care about, in good conscience, I need to vote for the candidate whose positions come closest to my own, and not simply because he's the incumbent.
If Laffey does not win the GOP primary in September (though I'll be more than willing to go on the record now by saying that he not only will win, but will do so handily), then I will throw my support behind Chafee. I'm not saying I'll be knocking on doors at 5AM, but I'll support him. As bad as Chafee is, he's no Sheldon Whitebread or Matt Brownnose. HOWEVER, unless I'm forced to make that choice, I'm standing for what I think is right, and basing my support on principle and values, and not on political expediency or because the party establishment wants me to vote a certain way.
Posted by: Will at December 2, 2005 10:51 PMWill, That's a good example of pragmatic idealism. Vote your conscience but don't throw a tantrum if you lose. Thus, to you:
Laffey > Chafee > Democrat
If you keep to this logical progression, you will vote for the best candidate every time.
Posted by: Marc Comtois at December 5, 2005 7:25 PMTo clarify, you will vote for the best candidate "for you" every time.
Posted by: Marc Comtois at December 5, 2005 7:26 PM