Two days ago, Quinnipiac released a stunning poll finding New York Governor David Paterson trailing Attorney General Andrew Cuomo 55% to 23% in a hypothetical Democratic primary. Now, a SUSA survey finds an unbelievably quick collapse of the Governor’s popularity:
- On January 22nd, 54% approved of Paterson’s performance while 39% disapproved. The next day, Paterson appointed Kirsten Gillibrand to the U.S. Senate. In SUSA’s newest poll, a whooping 66% of respondents disapprove of Paterson, while only 30% approve. That’s a 51 point turnaround!
- The reason: registered Democrats. 62% of them approved Paterson’s job last month; only 33% do today. The change among Republicans and independents is far less dramatic. In fact, all three groups now have a similar perception of their Governor.
- And take a look at New York City’s voters. Last month, they approved of Paterson’s performance by a 68-23 margin; now, 62% disapprove, versus only 35%. That’s an unheard of 62% turnaround.
This poll’s trendlines are so shocking that we should be tempted to dismiss it as an outlier if it wasn’t for the fact that Quinnipiac and Marist also showed that something awful has happened since the beginning of the year to New Yorkers’ perception of Paterson. Such an epic collapse cannot be explained simply by the state’s budgetary woes or by the saga of Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat. Rather, it looks like Paterson’s public image - that of a competent, no-non-sense politician whose personal story attests to his hard-working habits and to his devotion for public service - has been entirely shattered.
This is best illustrated by The New York Post’s editorial urging Paterson to right the ship. The piece goes where the New York press has not gone before: describing the Governor’s blindness as an impediment to his work. “Paterson’s blindness severely constricts his ability to acquire basic information,” the Post writes. Such a sentence would have been unimaginable a few months ago. “His administration is adrift; he is inconsistent, imprecise and often contradictory in his public statements,” The Post continues.
Cuomo’s plans remain unclear. But if Paterson continues to post such anemic numbers, it seems certain that someone will rise to challenge him.
—
Meanwhile, Public Policy Polling has released its third poll of North Carolina in as many months. Each survey tests Republican Senator Richard Burr against a different opponent. In December, PPP found Burr trailing Attorney General Cooper by 5%; in January, another poll had him leading Rep. Heath Shuler by 11%. Each time, Burr was stuck under 40%, however.
This time, PPP treats us to two match-ups against low-profile Democrats:
- Burr leads investment banker Jim Neal 44% to 30%; against former state Sen. Cal Cunningham, Burr is up 46% to 27%.
- Burr’s approval rating should reassure the GOP that he does not face a huge challenge: 41% of respondents approve of his performance, while 33% disapprove.
By testing Burr against Neal (who lost the 2008 Senatorial primary to Kay Hagan) and Cunningham, PPP appears to have purposefully chosen two little-known Democrats in order to look what a best case scenario would look like for Burr. The numbers obviously cut both ways. On the one hand, Burr has large leads and, while he is under 50%, PPP does not look to have pushed undecided respondents too hard. On the other hand, if all Burr can muster against Neal is a 14% lead, his 5% deficit against Cooper does not sound surprising.
We won’t know enough much more about this race until the DSCC manages to recruit some candidates.
Patterson saga in one word - wow!
Burr - he is eminently beatable and he will have a very tough fight since he is unknown to a lot of Tar Heels. He may learn from Dole’s terrible campaigning (and length of stay in the state each year) but I think the Dems have a great bench to call upon and this should be a top target outside of the open seats.
The numbers are horrible for Patterson, but lucky for him the primarys are not until next year and there is little chance that a top tier opponnet will challange him in a primary unless his numbers are so disastrious that the NY democrats start to worry about losing the gubernetorial mansion to a Republican. If Patterson is still this weak at the beginning of 2010 I think Cumuo will take a chance and challange him.
On NC, Burr is definitly beatable, and the Democrats would have a chance even if they don’t get their top tier candidates. Remember that Hagen wasn’t the Dem’s top choice but look at where she is now.
I would say that NC is the most vulernable of the incumbent seats for the GOP, being outranked by Kentucky.
Jaxx - speaking of Hagan, I heard her on the radio at the end of last week touting the stimulus package and doing a very good job of selling it and debunking some of the myths around it. She is a loyal, progressive Democrat and a great asset to North Carolina. Just a shame New York couldn`t have had someone as good appointed.
I admit that I am continually surprised at Hagan myself. I expected her to take on a more conservative profile, first in the election and then in the Senate; she hasn’t really done so.
Barack Obama did win North Carolina in 2008, so perhaps that helps to give her cover to have a more progressive oriented lean.
She won by a bigger margin than Obama who squeaked by 14,000 votes (still a great achievement). I, like Taniel, expected Hagan to be more Conservative but she has continued to suprise me in a positive way.
What does it say when the elected Democratic senator from North Carolina is much more progressive than the Democratic appointed Senator fron New York? Whether that be on guns, gays, immigration, economic etc. Patterson and Gillibrand both deserve to go down to defeat.
Hagan is a great Senator and I am even more proud to be a resident of North Carolina.