How We’re Doing: First Polling Numbers (Lawson (R), NC-4)

Lawson for Congress ^ | September 16, 2008 | BJ Lawson

[MitchellC]

How We’re Doing: First Polling Numbers
By: BJ Lawson

As you know, I’m a big believer in transparency in government. That translates into transparency in campaigns, as well — especially since our campaign is supported by so many people. Many have asked for insight into how we’re doing, and tonight we received results from our first poll.

We called a sample of 1,105 households across the district, stratified by precinct. Before we hit the results, let’s review our district’s demographics:

Democrats: 46%
Republicans: 28%
Unaffiliated: 26%

As you can see, while Democrats far outnumber Republicans, Unaffiliated voters and any swing Democrats can provide a margin of victory.

Here is the sample that we polled:

Democrats: 57%
Republicans: 26%
Unaffiliated: 17%

So our sample had significantly more Democrats than the overall district, with slightly fewer Republicans, and significantly fewer Unaffiliateds.

Here are our results:

Price: 56%
Lawson: 31%
Undecided: 13%

Considering that our ten-term incumbent typically wins this district with 65% of the vote, he’s off from his typical pace. Furthermore, the presence of 13% undecided is not exactly bullish for a ten-term incumbent who advertises liberally with taxpayer-financed mailings.

At this point, it appears we have reason to redouble our efforts towards this election. Not only are we maintaining our base, but we picked up five percent from Unaffiliated and Democratic voters — only 26% of our sample was Republican, and we’re polling at 31%. While our incumbent is polling at 56%, the sample was 57% Democratic — and the overall district is only 46% Democratic.

We know it’s time for change. I wouldn’t want to run against change this year. Nor would I want to run against a federal government that follows the Constitution.

[MitchellC]

BJ Lawson is a Paulite running against David Price in the NC-4 district (Chapel Hill, Durham, Raleigh, Cary).

I would LOVE to see Price go. I'm not holding my breath here, but it was done once before in 1994, so I'm not absolutely pessimistic either. Lawson is sure to do better than the token GOP challengers.

His sampling is interesting. I have to wonder if he gave Democrats the high number he did because of all the new registrations, or expected turnout? Or just to be safe?

Past results: 2006 David Price (D) 65.0% Steven Acuff (R) 35.0%

2004 David Price (D) 64.1% Todd Batchelor (R) 35.9%

2002 David Price (D) 61.18% Tuan Nguyen (R) 36.15%

2000 David Price (D) 61.6% Jess Ward (R) 36.6%

1998 David Price (D) 58% Tom Roberg (R) 42%

Hope he has a strong GOTV. And I hope those numbers are LVs.

[MitchellC]

NC *Ping*

Please FRmail MitchellC if you want to be added to or removed from this North Carolina ping list.

[MitchellC]

Your libertarian list might be interested in this.

[MitchellC]

I hope those numbers are LVs.

Now that I rethink that, maybe it would be better if they're Registered Voters. Who's flakier when it comes to actually turning out to vote... Democrats, or libertarians?

[Night Conservative]

http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/

Great candidate.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Unfortunately, that district is moonbat central in NC and includes Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Price got caught with his pants down in ‘94, and still only lost by an inch to Fred Heineman, and that’s not likely to happen again under the current lines, sad to say. :-\

[traviskicks]

thnx

[Impy]

Yeah this one is a safe demrat. Not even on the radar screen. Nice to see a vigorous challenger though.

I wish Heath Shuler would go down, not likely either.

[bamahead]

bookmarking...

[Galactic Overlord-In-Chief]

It seems obsene that we can’t win it, as Kerry won the district by only 55%-45%, and we have a lot of Dems sitting in seats Bush won by even greater margins.

[CPT Clay]

Is this so?

[fieldmarshaldj]

It’s becoming nearly impossible to get a Republican win in districts that favor rodents in Presidential races, yet tons of Democrats manage to get elected in GOP districts. It tends to discount one of the many big lies about “Republican intolerance.” Republicans and GOP districts are far more likely to cross over and support a Democrat if they believe them better or they get more out of them, while Democrats would rather chop off a body part before ever considering voting GOP for any office (yet those Dem districts are the ones most badly lacking for leadership, reform, and all-around-help that the Republicans could offer them).

[Impy]

Sorry, is what so??

[MitchellC]

It’s becoming nearly impossible to get a Republican win in districts that favor rodents in Presidential races, yet tons of Democrats manage to get elected in GOP districts. It tends to discount one of the many big lies about “Republican intolerance.”

So true. There are a large number of districts with Dem incumbents that 'ought' to be competitive. The GOP has failed to break free of the Dem narrative and field good candidates in these places, even though they're competitive or favorable for GOP presidential nominees. Get rid of the crooks and queers in our party, and link the Dems to the lib agenda of their party.