Reuters/Ipsos. 6/25-27. Registered Voters. MoE 4% (No Trend Lines)
California Governor
Jerry Brown (D) 45
Meg Whitman (R) 39
U.S. Senate--California
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) 45
Carly Fiorina (R) 41
After a freewheeling (and free-spending) primary season, the dust has settled in the Golden State, with the Democratic nominees launching into the general election campaign with narrow leads over their Republican opponents. This Reuters/Ipsos poll mirrors other polling in the state, which has uniformly since the Spring shown both gubernatorial nominee Jerry Brown and Senator Barbara Boxer leading by margins usually in the single digits.
The conventional wisdom that has often been peddled is that leads of this size are actually a sign of weakness for the two Democrats in the field:
Ipsos poll analyst Clifford Young said the fact that Democrats are leading is not unusual since they have better name recognition but as the campaign progresses "we should see some sort of dimunition of that advantage."
This is a play off of the long-held bit of political C.W. that incumbents (or quasi-incumbents, as Brown could fairly be defined) are imperiled if they linger below the 50% threshold in election polling. The logic, such as it is, is that as their challengers become better known, they will snatch up most of the undecided voters. After all, so it is often reasoned, if the undecided voters were willing to support the incumbent, why are they undecided?
While it is undoubtedly true that unknown candidates have a certain reservoir of political upside, there is less of a reason, in this particular case, to think that Whitman and Fiorina are on the cusp of a rebound.
For one thing, Young's contention that the Democrats have a name recognition edge is certainly debatable. As Brown himself noted this morning, Whitman has carpet-bombed the state on a daily basis with advertising for months. If she has not already reached the nine-figure spending plateau (that would be $100. Million. Dollars.), it is only a matter of days before she does so. The idea that her name recognition is not pretty close to universal is laughable on its face. Carly Fiorina, while not spending the record-breaking amounts of her fellow failed executive-turned-politico, still managed to plunk down nearly seven million dollars before the primary season even ended. So, one could assume that she is hardly an unknown with some upside, either.
Indeed, if after having spent the sums that they have spent, Whitman and Fiorina are still trailing, that has to be considered something of a black mark against them.
Boxer has another thing working for her, one that I felt the need to inspect. Every time a Boxer poll is reported, a commenter here at DK inevitably says "and she always performs better than she polls." It sounded like optimistic rhetoric, but for the 2004 cycle (her last re-election bid), it also happened to be true:
Average lead for Barbara Boxer, Public Polling, 2004 cycle
January-June 2004 (six polls): Boxer +14.8
July-September 2004 (12 polls): Boxer +15.6
October 2004 (seven polls): Boxer +18.9
FINAL MARGIN OF VICTORY: Boxer +20.0
Not only did Boxer perform better than she polled, but her polling numbers became progressively better as time went along, counter to the conventional wisdom that challengers tighten the gap as we draw nearer to Election Day.
None of this is intended to suggest that Brown and Boxer are going to cruise to the finish line of course. Californians are pissed (16/78 split on the right track-wrong track metric), and pissed voters usually take it out on the party they perceive as being in power. But, given the climate, both Democrats still holding a lead has to be a little bit heartening.