NJ (Monmouth): Murphy +11
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 26, 2021, 06:33:28 PM

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections
  2021 & Odd Year Gubernatorial Election Polls (Moderators: Brittain33, Gass3268, Virginiá)
  NJ (Monmouth): Murphy +11
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: NJ (Monmouth): Murphy +11  (Read 952 times)
Roll Roons
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,335
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 27, 2021, 10:01:04 AM »

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_nj_102721/
Logged
Matty
boshembechle
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,953


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2021, 10:05:06 AM »

Very reasonable
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,880
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2021, 10:14:16 AM »

Maybe it will be a little closer than that (+8-9) if Republicans are having a really good night, but an upset is not in the cards here. This one will be more interesting because of the demographic swings.
Logged
wbrocks67
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,398


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2021, 10:28:20 AM »

Just for fun, comparing this to the 2017 exits. This is the same thing we're seeing with the VA polls - Males surging towards R compared to 2017. Interested to see if it bares out.

Also it appears Murphy consolidating more Ds this time, while Ciatarelli consolidating less (as of now) than Guadagno did.

MEN
2017: D+15
2021: R+4

WOMEN
2017: D+12
2021: D+25

WHITES
2017: R+8
2021: R+9

BLACKS
2017: D+90
2021: D+77

DEMS
2017: D+87
2021: D+90

REPS
2017: R+85
2021: R+78

INDS
2017: D+4
2021: R+1
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,675
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2021, 10:29:24 AM »

A double digit win here and a loss in Virginia probably show that the candidate quality was a huge issue in that race.
Logged
wbrocks67
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,398


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2021, 10:37:10 AM »

It's really interesting that CA and NJ might end up looking nearly identical to their 2017/2018 numbers but VA is the one that will be the farthest off. Or will it? Wink
Logged
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,662
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2021, 10:51:13 AM »

Very reassuring to Murphy. All eyes on Virginia now.
Logged
Vaccinated Russian Bear
Russian Bear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,921


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2021, 11:07:49 AM »
« Edited: October 27, 2021, 01:10:28 PM by Vaccinated Russian Bear »

A double digit win here and a loss in Virginia probably show that the candidate quality was a huge issue in that race.
My thoughts as well.


More info:




So per Monmouth, the race has gone
April - Murphy +16
September - Murphy +13
October - Murphy +11
Logged
Mr. MANDELA BARNES
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,712
Jamaica


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 27, 2021, 01:11:56 PM »

Rs said on Fox news they were gonna win NJ, Sen Cotton D's id
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,143
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.23, S: -7.48

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 27, 2021, 04:48:00 PM »

This is clearly a very accurate poll from a reputable and accurate pollster that should not be questioned.  But Monmouth's poll in Virginia shouldn't be believed at all because some crosstab finding and 2017.
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,880
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 27, 2021, 05:28:16 PM »

This is clearly a very accurate poll from a reputable and accurate pollster that should not be questioned.  But Monmouth's poll in Virginia shouldn't be believed at all because some crosstab finding and 2017.

In all fairness, Monmouth was spot on in NJ in 2017 (final poll: Murphy +14, 53-39; election result: Murphy +14, 56-42) but off in VA (final poll: Northam +2, 47-45; election result: Northam +9, 54-45), but I agree with you that all polls should be treated with caution regardless of whether we like the result or not or find it "credible" or not.
Logged
KoopaDaQuick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.50, S: -5.74


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 27, 2021, 05:56:54 PM »

I would point out that Biden won New Jersey by +16 and that Democrats performing 5 points worse than they did last year would be a disaster, but it's also worth considering that off-years have much lower turnout, and Biden's approvals could be much higher by '22 and '24. Not worth dooming yet.

Well, that and I haven't trusted polling since November 8, 2016. Tongue
Logged
wbrocks67
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,398


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 27, 2021, 06:00:30 PM »

I would point out that Biden won New Jersey by +16 and that Democrats performing 5 points worse than they did last year would be a disaster, but it's also worth considering that off-years have much lower turnout, and Biden's approvals could be much higher by '22 and '24. Not worth dooming yet.

Well, that and I haven't trusted polling since November 8, 2016. Tongue

Murphy won by +13.5 in 2017 during the Trump presidency, so +11 would actually be pretty good for a Dem Gov during a Biden midterm.
Logged
Progressive Pessimist
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,595
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -7.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 27, 2021, 06:17:01 PM »

I just recently accepted Murphy+9 as the potential result, and then this, somewhat more in line with what I thought about the race before recently comes. Thanks a lot! But still 9 to 11 points is reasonable. 11 especially is about what Menendez received in 2018 as an unpopular incumbent, so perhaps that is the Democratic floor here. I just think that turnout could make the difference to Ciatarelli's benefit. It certainly won't be a 2018 electorate. So I'm still going to say Murphy+9, also to keep my expectations low so that there is the possibility of me being more impressed if Murphy exceeds them.

I would point out that Biden won New Jersey by +16 and that Democrats performing 5 points worse than they did last year would be a disaster, but it's also worth considering that off-years have much lower turnout, and Biden's approvals could be much higher by '22 and '24. Not worth dooming yet.

Well, that and I haven't trusted polling since November 8, 2016. Tongue

Our off-year elections almost always have very weak turnout, and typically that helps GOP candidates.

Don't forget that a Democrat has never been re-elected Governor here since the late 1970's. So that also complicates how this election can be deciphered as relating to 2022.
Logged
emailking
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,194
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 27, 2021, 08:13:03 PM »

I would point out that Biden won New Jersey by +16 and that Democrats performing 5 points worse than they did last year would be a disaster, but it's also worth considering that off-years have much lower turnout, and Biden's approvals could be much higher by '22 and '24. Not worth dooming yet.

Well, that and I haven't trusted polling since November 8, 2016. Tongue

Well Obama won it by 16 in '08 and then Corzine lost.
Logged
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,662
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 27, 2021, 09:14:27 PM »

This is clearly a very accurate poll from a reputable and accurate pollster that should not be questioned.  But Monmouth's poll in Virginia shouldn't be believed at all because some crosstab finding and 2017.

In all fairness, Monmouth was spot on in NJ in 2017 (final poll: Murphy +14, 53-39; election result: Murphy +14, 56-42) but off in VA (final poll: Northam +2, 47-45; election result: Northam +9, 54-45), but I agree with you that all polls should be treated with caution regardless of whether we like the result or not or find it "credible" or not.

Monmouth has been spot-on in NJ since around 2012 and extremely solid going back to 2005. Their reputation there is on par with Selzer's.

RaceMonmouthActual
2005-GOVD+9D+10.4
2006-SEND+3D+9.0
2008-PRESD+21D+25.5
2008-SEND+16D+14.0
2009-GOVD+2R+3.6
2012-PRESD+15*D+17.8
2012-SEND+15*D+19.5
2013-SEND+10D+10.9
2013-GOVR+20R+22.1
2014-SEND+14D+10.9
2017-GOVD+14D+13.5
2018-SEND+9D+11.2
2020-PRESD+16*D+15.9
2020-SEND+23*D+16.3

Asterisks are for polls before October 1.

Their only real misses were (a) thinking the 2006 Senate race would be much closer, which I think pretty much everyone in the country did and could have been due to underpolling the Hispanic vote in the only race it ever really mattered in and (b) the 2009 miss, which can't be explained but wasn't really that bad.
Logged
The Pieman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 833


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 03, 2021, 12:26:58 AM »

well then
Logged
Buzz
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,082


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2021, 01:51:46 AM »

Monmouth was trash in 2020…. It’s time we quit giving them kudos
Logged
2016
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,711
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2021, 11:53:41 AM »

Monmouth should quit polling IMO!
Logged
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,662
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: November 04, 2021, 05:25:42 PM »

Murray has now publicly apologized for this poll and hinted at an end to the Monmouth poll and the entire polling industry:

https://newjerseyglobe.com/polling/murray-apologizes-for-inaccurate-monmouth-polling/

Quote
“I owe an apology to Jack Ciattarelli’s campaign – and to Phil Murphy’s campaign for that matter – because inaccurate public polling can have an impact on fundraising and voter mobilization efforts,” Murray wrote. “But most of all I owe an apology to the voters of New Jersey for information that was at the very least misleading.”

The final Monmouth poll of the race, released last Wednesday, found Murphy with an 11-point lead over Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli. Two earlier polls from September and August gave Murphy 13- and 16-point leads, respectively.

“Monmouth’s conservative estimate in this year’s New Jersey race was an 8-point win for Murphy, which is still far from the final margin,” Murray wrote. “More than one astute observer of polls has pointed out that the incumbent was consistently polling at either 50% or 51% against a largely unknown challenger. That metric in itself should have been an indication of Murphy’s underlying weakness as an incumbent.”

Murray’s op-ed went on to question the usefulness of political polling when the potential for error is so high.

“If we cannot be certain that these polling misses are anomalies then we have a responsibility to consider whether releasing horse race numbers in close proximity to an election is making a positive or negative contribution to the political discourse,” he wrote.

“Most public pollsters are committed to making sure our profession counters rather than deepening the pervasive cynicism in our society,” Murray continued. “If election polling only serves to feed that cynicism, then it may be time to rethink the value of issuing horse race poll numbers as the electorate prepares to vote.”
Logged
CookieDamage
cookiedamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 06, 2021, 11:43:17 AM »

Murray has now publicly apologized for this poll and hinted at an end to the Monmouth poll and the entire polling industry:

https://newjerseyglobe.com/polling/murray-apologizes-for-inaccurate-monmouth-polling/

Quote
“I owe an apology to Jack Ciattarelli’s campaign – and to Phil Murphy’s campaign for that matter – because inaccurate public polling can have an impact on fundraising and voter mobilization efforts,” Murray wrote. “But most of all I owe an apology to the voters of New Jersey for information that was at the very least misleading.”

The final Monmouth poll of the race, released last Wednesday, found Murphy with an 11-point lead over Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli. Two earlier polls from September and August gave Murphy 13- and 16-point leads, respectively.

“Monmouth’s conservative estimate in this year’s New Jersey race was an 8-point win for Murphy, which is still far from the final margin,” Murray wrote. “More than one astute observer of polls has pointed out that the incumbent was consistently polling at either 50% or 51% against a largely unknown challenger. That metric in itself should have been an indication of Murphy’s underlying weakness as an incumbent.”

Murray’s op-ed went on to question the usefulness of political polling when the potential for error is so high.

“If we cannot be certain that these polling misses are anomalies then we have a responsibility to consider whether releasing horse race numbers in close proximity to an election is making a positive or negative contribution to the political discourse,” he wrote.

“Most public pollsters are committed to making sure our profession counters rather than deepening the pervasive cynicism in our society,” Murray continued. “If election polling only serves to feed that cynicism, then it may be time to rethink the value of issuing horse race poll numbers as the electorate prepares to vote.”

Interesting. I mean, what would a world be like without (public) polling?
Logged
G
gracile
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,678


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -7.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 07, 2021, 12:58:48 PM »

Interesting. I mean, what would a world be like without (public) polling?

I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing; most election results today are fairly predictable based on the fundamentals + adjusted for the expected national environment.
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,143
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.23, S: -7.48

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2021, 09:47:54 AM »

This is clearly a very accurate poll from a reputable and accurate pollster that should not be questioned.  But Monmouth's poll in Virginia shouldn't be believed at all because some crosstab finding and 2017.

In all fairness, Monmouth was spot on in NJ in 2017 (final poll: Murphy +14, 53-39; election result: Murphy +14, 56-42) but off in VA (final poll: Northam +2, 47-45; election result: Northam +9, 54-45), but I agree with you that all polls should be treated with caution regardless of whether we like the result or not or find it "credible" or not.

Monmouth has been spot-on in NJ since around 2012 and extremely solid going back to 2005. Their reputation there is on par with Selzer's.

RaceMonmouthActual
2005-GOVD+9D+10.4
2006-SEND+3D+9.0
2008-PRESD+21D+25.5
2008-SEND+16D+14.0
2009-GOVD+2R+3.6
2012-PRESD+15*D+17.8
2012-SEND+15*D+19.5
2013-SEND+10D+10.9
2013-GOVR+20R+22.1
2014-SEND+14D+10.9
2017-GOVD+14D+13.5
2018-SEND+9D+11.2
2020-PRESD+16*D+15.9
2020-SEND+23*D+16.3

Asterisks are for polls before October 1.

Their only real misses were (a) thinking the 2006 Senate race would be much closer, which I think pretty much everyone in the country did and could have been due to underpolling the Hispanic vote in the only race it ever really mattered in and (b) the 2009 miss, which can't be explained but wasn't really that bad.

Well, so much for that.
Logged
Roll Roons
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,335
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: November 25, 2021, 11:23:49 AM »

I still don’t understand how virtually everyone (except Trafalgar) botched this race so badly. Even the RGA’s internals apparently never showed a particularly close race.

And it wasn’t just pollsters. Cook always had the race at Safe D.
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,880
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 25, 2021, 03:42:49 PM »

I still don’t understand how virtually everyone (except Trafalgar) botched this race so badly. Even the RGA’s internals apparently never showed a particularly close race.

And it wasn’t just pollsters. Cook always had the race at Safe D.

Yes, we’re beginning to see a pattern in which polls are underestimating Republicans even in states in which they have historically been very accurate (NJ) or have tended to underestimate Democrats (NV, AZ, TX). This is quite a remarkable development, and I don’t think it’s ever been as uniform or pronounced as today. If (college) education and (to a lesser extent) income become better determinants of electoral outcomes than race or even geography and the GOP keeps running up margins among working-class, non-college-educated voters (while winning over more non-white voters of those same groups), I don’t expect this to improve any time soon. There are probably other factors as well which contribute to this — I’m by no means an expert on polling, but I suspect the Democratic base having become more politically engaged than during any decade I can remember has something to do with it. It’s also never been more 'socially accepted' to be a Democrat/liberal than today (see, e.g., the increasing equation of science/reason with liberalism), and it seems like pollsters are having serious trouble reaching less 'traditional' Republican voters (Ann Selzer has addressed this quite extensively). It wasn’t that long ago when the 'landline bias' was working in the Republicans' favor, but I think this has changed dramatically.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 13 queries.