Washington-watcherscontinue sort through the rubble of data from the Massachusetts specialelection. As I postedyesterday, some consensus has emerged that Coakley underperformed consistently,within her own base as well as with independents. And the consensus on cable news suggested oppositionto both Obama and health care reform drove the election. But the data this week was far fromconsistent on this latter point. Beforewe use the recent election to inform the health care debate and 2010 campaign strategy,it's worth examining the data more closely.
Some polls show "sending amessage" or "stopping" Obama not the most powerful driver
Democraticpolling firm Hart Research conducted an election daysurvey that showed stopping Obama to not be front-and-center. They found fewer than half (42%) of votersfelt "sending a message" about Obama going too far was either the single mostor a very important quality they looked for in a Senator, far behindstrengthening the economy and "controlling health care costs and covering theuninsured." Further, as the memo pointsout, "Even Brown voters were more are more concerned about a lack of change(50%) than about trying to make too many changes too quickly (43%)." Further, by a margin of 2-to-1, voters saidthey were voting "for the best candidate" instead of "to send a message toWashington."
Many polls show voters turningout to support health care
This electionnight poll by Coakley's pollster Celinda Lake asked specifically aboutwhether one's vote was to show support for health care or to showopposition. A plurality (46%) said itwas to show support. The Hart surveyalso said those who knew Brown's position on health care were just as likely tovote against him because of it (39%) as vote for him (41%).
And theHart poll, thisRasmussen poll, and the Lake poll, all showed that voters who named healthcare as their top concern were more likely to support Coakley. And all three of these polls showed voters forwhom the economy was most salient gave Brown the advantage.
One Republican poll, however,disagrees on both points
Republicanpollster Fabrizio also conducted an election night survey,and as noted here,differed from his colleagues as to what drove the vote. His poll shows Brown voters responding in anopen-end that health care was the single biggest factor in their vote. For Coakley voters, health care came in aftera more vague "I'm a Democrat." He alsofinds a plurality (46%) of Brown voters saying their vote was to "send amessage to Washington," with about as many (43%) claiming it was "forBrown." But interestingly, moreDemocratic and independent Brown voters claim their vote was to send a message(50% and 52%, respectively), while a majority of Republicans (56%) were voting"for Brown."
A progressive-sponsored poll lookedat different questions altogether
Aconsortium of progressive groups (PCCC, MoveOn, and Democracy for America) alsocommissioned an electionnight survey, conducted by Research 2000. Their survey had a unique methodology; they surveyed Obama voters whostayed home, and Obama voters who voted for Brown. They found a plurality of Obama/Brown votersfeel Democrats are not "fighting hard enough to challenge the Republicanpolicies of the Bush years." And likemany of the surveys above, they found these Obama/Brown voters, across allparties, to say the economy was more important to their vote than health care.
Andwhile the poll shows a plurality of Obama/Brown voters oppose health carereform (48% oppose), more of those who oppose think it doesn't go far enough(18% of all Obama/Brown voters) than think it goes too far (11% of allObama/Brown voters). However, even morehealth care opponents aren't sure whether it goes too far or not far enough(20% of all Obama/Brown voters).
So what are the lessons fromTuesday?
Here aresome takeaways from the post-election polling this week.
Exit polls make iteasier to form a consensus about what happened. For all the perennial complaints about the shortcomings of exit polls,the fact is they do provide us with an unbiased source of data to help distillmeaning from election results. In their absence, we are left withcompeting claims from surveys conducted by mostly partisan pollsters. In this case, the claim that opposition tohealth care defeated Coakley, while widely adopted, is not a consistent findingin public post-election polling.
Protecting healthcare was important to Coakley voters. Whether itwas the most or second-most important issue to Coakley voters, it's clearacross surveys that it was indeed important. So attitudes toward health care motivated both Coakley and Brown voters. It's a data point that might have helpedHoward Dean in this debatewith Chris Matthews this week.
Many thingsmotivated Brown voters. Brown voters were motivated by amyriad of factors. While pollstersdisagree as to how much health care or "sending a message" drove Brown voters, thereis consensus that he was simply more popular than Coakley. The Hart and Rasmussen surveys both foundBrown to be substantially more popular than Coakley. Brown also consistently had the advantageover Coakley among voters concerned about the economy.
Confusion abouthealth care begets opposition. The Research 2000 survey shows those opposedto health care are not quite sure why they are opposed.
Question wording onhealth care continues to evolve. The Fabrizio survey used open-ended questionsto determine what the most important factors to the vote. This may produce different responses than theclosed-ended questions in the Hart, Rasmussen, Lake, and Research 2000 polls. And maybe Washington shorthands like "goingtoo far" and "not going far enough" have different meanings to voters stillsorting through health care reform's specifics.
UPDATE: Thisnewly released Washington Post/Kaiser/Harvard poll, conducted after theelection is consistent with some of the findings discussed above. First, it shows opposition to Obama was not thebiggest motivator for Brown voters. Overhalf (52%) said "Obama was not a factor" compared to 43% who saidtheir vote was "to express opposition to Obama." Brown voters are also evenly divided betweenwhether Brown should work with Democrats on health care reform (48%) or stopchanges to health care from happening (50%). Also worth noting, a full 37% of Brown voters said they are dissatisfiedor angry about the "policies offered by the Republicans inCongress." hardly a national mandatefor Republican takeover.
This newpoll also shows health care to be salient to both Coakley and Brownvoters. In fact, it appears that healthcare is the singularly most dominant issue with Coakley voters (compared to theeconomy, "the way Washington is working," candidate personal qualities,government handling of banks, and others), while Brown voters are a bit moredivided amongst their top-tier of issues.