From what the Louisiana State University Public Policy Lab’s latest survey tells us, not only is the 2015 governor’s race all about Sen. David Vitter, but that also it’s going the way he hopes as long as the field remains as is.
The organization today released
its information concerning this contest, which probes a number of
attitudinal questions but, as by its intent, did not ask voter preferences.
Conducted over a considerable time span encompassing two to three months out from
the election, about the only things a majority of voters knew were how they evaluated
Vitter, what he stood for, that the state was headed in the wrong direction,
and that they weren’t paying attention to the contest.
Over three quarters of respondents
could give a favorability opinion on Vitter, with three-fifths of them seeing
him favorably. By contrast, only half that number could give such an opinion on
Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne, where over
three quarters of them saw him favorably, less than a third of that could opine
about Public Service Commissioner Scott
Angelle, whose favorability ratio was about like Dardenne’s, and barely a
quarter of that had any opinion about the race’s only Democrat state Rep. John Bel Edwards, who also had
the worst favorability ratio.
This lack of thinking about the
candidates is reflected in survey participants’ assessments of candidate ideology.
Vitter is seen as the most conservative, but not that conservative, closely
followed on this scale by Angelle and Dardenne in that order, with Edwards,
despite his party affiliation and voting record in the Legislature, as pretty
close to a middling moderate. However, whereas Vitter could be placed by
two-thirds of voters, fewer than half felt they could place any of the others,
with the most mystery surrounding Edwards. Only in the case of Vitter could
more assign him a favorability rating than identify his ideology.
Such widespread vapidity about the
candidates comes directly from the lack of interest in the race, where 71
percent admit a minimal amount or none of this, and points to certain
explanations and opportunities. Clearly in the case of Edwards, he benefits
from being an empty vessel, particularly as over half the sample called
themselves conservatives. His campaign strategy seeks to obfuscate his ideology
using the recent Democrat playbook of shouting to the rafters conservatism on
social issues, adopting the rhetoric of reformism in government management, yet
off to the side reassure the left that he will go full bore to expand government,
increase spending, and empower special interests. Were he to become more
closely defined with his liberal roots, his favorability ratio likely would
deteriorate even more as the numbers on both sides of it increase.
While it’s tempting to conjecture
that increased definition of Angelle and Dardenne might have the opposite
effect, because they are right of center ideologically and carry the best
favorability ratios, this ignores that an ability to rate in favorability terms
at this point connotes a good chance of voting for or against a candidate.
Reviewing Vitter’s number on this account, they tell us that his ceiling
appears to be 70 percent as 30 percent dislike him. But of that potential, 45
percent already say they like him, and other opinion polls that almost
universally have his numbers doubling up or better on the other two Republicans
translates into probably two-thirds of that total like him more than any other
candidate. Thus, he’s already got 30 percent of the vote locked in.
In other words, Vitter has far more
votes in the hand while Dardenne and Angelle are looking for these in the bush.
It may be that of those who haven’t formed an opinion about the pair will do so
disproportionately in their favor and think one of them as more favorable than
anybody else, but as they start so much farther behind – 16 fewer percentage
points for Dardenne and 27 fewer for Angelle than Vitter – things have to break
exceptionally their way to have a chance to surpass Vitter.
And, as is becoming increasingly
clear, just for one of them. If indeed both Vitter and Edwards already are
locked in each at 30 percent (with the latter being an extraordinarily
low-information candidate, for by election day he still may have a majority of
the electorate unable to rate him in any way, yet because he looks to run as
the only Democrat in the field he will have many of these otherwise-ignorant
voters vote for him only because of his label), only 40 percent remains up for
grabs – if that many. That means one of Angelle or Dardenne must win a huge
proportion of the intended voters that in the past month signaled they didn’t
know enough about either. Realistically, that is likely to happen only if one
voluntarily defers by exiting the contest.
This dynamic could change if
another Democrat candidate, particularly a credible black Democrat, enters
the race as, particularly in the latter case, this would suck votes from
Edwards and relatively improve the positions of Angelle and Dardenne. If a new
credible candidate does not emerge nor either GOP also-ran drops out, Vitter,
by virtue of these numbers and his campaign’s
superior financial position, by far controls this contest.
That’s because he has defined
himself in a way significantly more voters like than don’t, and he has the
resources to continue that trend while making it difficult for opponents to
alter that negatively or to promote themselves positively. Had by now his
opponents made much more progress in getting themselves favorably judged by a
greater portion of the electorate, there wouldn’t be so much of a pool of
voters that they would have to persuade positively against whatever tide he can
activate.
Ironically, why they were unable to
get further name recognition from a largely detached set of voters in order to
combat Vitter is precisely because Vitter is in the contest. Having been relevant
in Louisiana politics for a quarter of a century, with over a decade now in a
statewide office far more consequential than any of his competitors, he’s has a
long time to earn unshakable support from a significant portion of the
electorate. For them, they know that Vitter’s in the race, and that’s it, they
need not hear nor know more about it. They’re not following it much because their
mind is made up – and the same goes for those Democrats who bitterly oppose
him, who have the one additional piece of information they need, that there’s a
Democrat running against him.
This explains the paucity of
election interest and curiosity about the other candidates. Probably for well over
half the electorate, all they need or care to know is if Vitter is in it, and
additionally for some, knowledge of the presence of credible Democrat. It’s all
about Vitter, factors suggest that making the election with its current
candidates about him sets it up so he can win it, and he has the resources to
do it. Failure of other campaigns to factor in these dynamics assures that he
defeats their candidates.
No comments:
Post a Comment