Day of the Dead?

Nov 1, 2005

The beginning of November brings with it a new Field Poll, which finds that the "no" side leads the "yes" side in each of the governor's ballot measures.

Here are the numbers among likely voters, interviewed October 18-30:

Proposition 74 - Tenure
Yes: 44%
No: 50%

Proposition 75 - Union Dues
Yes: 40%
No: 50%

Proposition 76 - Budget Control
Yes: 32%
No: 60%

Proposition 77 - Redistricting
Yes: 32%
No: 61%

Proposition 80 - Electricity Regulation
Yes: 24%
No: 48%

(Today's release did not include stats on Props. 73, 78 or 79)

The poll was conducted in two sample frames, October 18-24 and October 25-30, reports Gary Delsohn in the Sacramento Bee. "The only one of Schwarzenegger's four proposals that fared better the second week was Proposition 76, the spending initiative."

"The "yes" votes on that measure increased from 28 percent to 32 percent from one week to the next. But even that news was muted, because the opposition was at 60 percent in both surveys."

Aside from little support from Democrats, the governor is not convincing the critical non-partisan voters. "'He's negatively perceived, and his endorsements are negatively viewed by Democrats and nonpartisans," [Field Poll director Mark] DiCamillo said. 'And that has been the trouble for the governor throughout this campaign.'"

"'Last year he had a good rapport with those voters. This year they've changed their view of the governor, and it's been reflected in every poll we've seen.'"
The Mercury News reports "The non-partisan Field Poll released today found the governor has become a drag on his own ticket, with just under half saying his support for a measure was more likely to make them vote no. A quarter said it was likely to make them vote yes. A third said the governor's endorsement had no effect."

Let's see, a half, plus a quarter, plus a third is ... Moving on...

Get ready for more poll madness tomorrow when the Los Angeles Times is expected to publish their first, and last, special election poll.

The Chronicle reports that the governor is again using the threat of a tax increase to try to woo voters.

"Schwarzenegger appeared Monday morning at an Ontario (San Bernardino County) junkyard with an actor dressed as "Count Cartaxula." The governor made the case that Gov. Gray Davis had raised the vehicle licensing fee (car tax) to increase state revenues, and that without Prop. 76, taxes might go up again."

"A commercial his campaign began airing statewide Monday ends with the statement, 'Say yes to 76, say no to a tax increase next year.'"

Dan Weintraub, for one, ain't buyin' it. "I actually think it is highly unlikely that Schwarzenegger will raise taxes next year. He won't need to. He's facing a projected $6 billion gap in the operating budget, but he'll have a year-end surplus approaching $3 billion plus $3 billion still in the bank from his bond measure. Thus, unless there is a terrorist attack, an earthquake or a pandemic, the 2006 budget should be the easiest in years."

Famous last words...

Robert Salladay reports in the Times that, the governor's hoping that selective voter turnout can turn the polling numbers into a victory on Election Day.

"The governor's plan -- "micro-targeting" voters, advertising in selected markets to reach them and conducting daily polls to augur the political mood -- is guided by a single premise: If every Democrat and every Republican in California votes next week, Schwarzenegger's measures are likely to lose."

"'The world is run by those who show up,' said Ron Nehring, vice chairman of the California Republican Party, who is helping Schwarzenegger get GOP supporters to the polls."

That's just a slight change of message from "let the people decide."

As if to make Nehring's claim, the governor's schedule today looks like a conservative to-do list, with talk radio interviews in the morning, and events in Bakersfield, San Luis Obispo and Palm Springs.


The Merc's Laura Kurtzman reports "The election that almost no one wanted has turned out to be something voters are taking rather seriously.

The Bee's Andy Furillo begins writing the rationale for failure that we'll hear a lot from the governor if the polling results prove true on Election Day -- labor outraised and outspent the proponents.

"Badly outspent seven years ago when they tried to curtail union money in state politics, supporters of "paycheck protection" are getting thrashed once more when it comes to the fundraising and spending wars."

"The public employee union-driven No on 75 campaign had banked $42.6 million and spent $41.2 million by Oct. 22, according to the most recent reports. The Yes on 75 side, meanwhile, raised only $2.3 million and spent $1.6 million."

Add the governor's committee's $6.1 million and another $1 million from the California Republican Party, and you'll find opponents of Prop. 75 are likely to outspend proponents 4 to 1.

Haven't we already been hearing a lot of this line?

Meanwhile, Dan Walters talks up Proposition 77, albeit with a futile tone. "Proposition 77 may be destined to join the lengthy list of failed redistricting reforms, but if it does, it merely continues a dysfunctional status quo."

And a special Roundup thank you to CBS News, whose White House reporter yesterday referred to Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito as "sloppy seconds" after the White House's Harriet Miers debacle. It's not the comment we're thankful for, just the fact that it led Matt Drudge to publish the dictionary definition of the phrase:

From a British dictionary of Slang: "Noun: A subsequent indulgence in an activity by a second person involving an exchange of bodily fluids. This may involve the sharing of drink, or more often it applies to a sexual nature. E.g. "I'm not having sloppy seconds, I want to shag her first."