Foster McCollum White & Associates & Baydoun Consulting Michigan Poll (June 2012)

Foster McCollum White & Associates

______________________________________________________________________________________

1

Michigan General Election Polling Study for

Presidential Preference

Wayne County Executive Ficano Scandal Impact

Collective Bargaining Rights

Public Act 4, the Emergency Manager Law Ballot Test

Automated Poll Methodology and Statistics

Aggregate Results

Conducted by

Foster McCollum White and Associates

And

Baydoun Consulting

June 12, 2012

By: Eric Foster – Chief Pollster

President – Foster McCollum White and Associates

By: Tarek Baydoun

President – Baydoun Consulting


______________________________________________________________________________________

2

Methodology

- Foster McCollum White & Associates, a Political and Governmental Affairs and

Organizational Development consulting firm based in Troy Michigan and Baydoun

Consulting, a political communications consulting firm based in Dearborn, Michigan

conducted a telephone-automated polling random survey of Michigan registered and

most likely November 2012 general election voters to determine their voting and

issue preferences on the issue of Presidential preference, collective bargaining rights

support, Public Act 4 ballot initiative and the impact of Democratic Wayne County

Executive Robert Ficano’s FBI investigation and criminal indictments on President

Obama and Democratic candidates across the Michigan November ballot.

- This ten question live call poll survey was conducted on the evening of June 12, 2012

between the hours of 6:30 pm and 8:30 pm.

- A list-based sample of traditional Michigan high participation registered voters.

These voters have participated in a minimum of 70% of the available primary and

general election and odd year municipal and county elections in Michigan since 1993.

- An initial qualifying statement was read to respondents asking them to participate

only if they were very likely to vote in the November General Election.

- Forty-four thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine (44,999) adults were called, and

1,783 respondents participated in the survey. The response rate for this survey was

3.96%.

- Our list-based sample pool was pre-weighted to the geographical regions and political

participation regions and the congressional districts in Michigan. For reporting

purposes, we will focus our findings on the following issue-based categories:

A. Baseline for Michigan Presidential campaign preference.

B. Impact of Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano’s scandals on

President Obama and Michigan Democratic candidate campaigns

C. Collective bargaining and public employee compensation reform

support measurement

D. Michigan Public Act 4 ballot test question.

- The margin of error for this polling sample is 2.32% with a confidence level of 95%.

Our polling study produced sub-populations within each of the surveyed election

contest. Results within the sub-populations will be reported with respect to the

individual cross-tab and sub-population group as it exist.


______________________________________________________________________________________

3

Cross tabulation groups for comparison purposes Age

Gender

Michigan Geographical Voter Regions

Major 17 voting counties (Counties combined that traditionally represent

75% to 83% of the total voter participation rate in Michigan’s State-wide

elections)

Next 7 Michigan County and Other 59 Michigan County regions

Race/Ethnicity

Religious affiliation – Evangelical Christian, Catholic, Baptist, Non

Evangelical Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other religious affiliations

Voter Political Party Preference – Democratic, Republican and Independent

Michigan Congressional Districts

Urban market communities (Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, Saginaw and

other urban population centers in Michigan)

Vote Region (Counties in parentheses) – Upper Peninsula Region - 311,361 Residents

(Gogebic, Ontonagon, Houghton, Keweenaw, Baraga, Iron, Marquette, Alger, Dickinson,

Menominee, Delta, Schoolcraft, Luce, Chippewa, Mackinac)

15 counties -18.1% of counties, 3.15% of state’s population 89.3% White, 2.18%

African American, 0.72% Asian American, 4.49% Native American, 1.09% Latino

American & 2.20% Other Ethnic American.

Projected weight of November General Election Population – 3.5%

The Upper Peninsula is traditionally a competitive region. Historically the voters tend to

swing between both parties in state and federal election. None of the major 17 counties

are located in the Upper Peninsula.

Northern Lower Peninsula Region – 756,056 Residents

(Emmet, Cheboygan, Presque Isle, Charlevoix, Antrim, Otsego, Montmorency, Alpena,

Roscommon, Crawford, Oscoda, Alcona, Iosco, Arenac, Gladwin, Kalkaska, Leelanau,

Grand Traverse, Benzie, Manistee, Wexford, Mason, Lake, Osceola, Mecosta, Isabella,

Clare, Missaukee and Ogemaw)

29 counties – 34.9% of counties 7.65% of state’s population, 93.84% White, 0.96%

African American, 1.27% Native American, 1.84% Latino American, 0.84% Asian

American & 1.54% Other Ethnic American.


The Northern Lower Peninsula region of Michigan is traditionally a Republican voting

pocket. None of the major 17 counties are located in the Northern Lower Peninsula.


______________________________________________________________________________________

4

Southwest Michigan Region – 1,881,212 Residents

(Oceana, Newaygo, Muskegon, Kent, Ottawa, Barry, Allegan, Van Buren, Kalamazoo,

Berrien, Cass, St. Joseph)

12 Counties – 14.5% of counties, 19.03% of population, 80.9% White, 7.67%

African American, 1.68% Asian American, 7.17% Latino American, 0.45% Native

American & 2.13% other Ethnic American.


This region of Michigan is traditionally a strong Republican voting pocket. It is home to

three of the major seven Republican voting counties (Kent, Ottawa and Berrien) and one

of the four major swing counties (Kalamazoo). The Southwestern region is home to one-

of the major six Democratic counties (Muskegon); and has significant minority voting

constituencies in the major Republican and swing counties (22.2% of Kent County,

21.2% of Berrien County, 13% of Ottawa County and 16.4% of Kalamazoo County).

Central Michigan Region – 1,457,225 Residents

(Montcalm, Gratiot, Ionia, Clinton, Eaton, Shiawassee, Jackson, Calhoun, Branch,

Hillsdale, Livingston, Midland, Lenawee and Ingham)

Fourteen (14) Counties – 16.9% of counties, 14.74% of State’s population, 86.0%

White, 5.50% African American, 4.37% Latino American, 1.77% Asian American,

0.40% Native American & 1.96% Other Ethnic American.

Projected weight of November General Election Population – 15%

The Central region of Michigan is a very competitive region that tends towards

Republicans, but has one of the major six Democratic counties (Ingham) and a traditional

Democratic voting county (Calhoun) that helps make the region competitive. It is home

to three of the major seven Republican counties (Eaton, Jackson and Livingston).

Thumb Region – 954,010 Residents

(Huron, Bay, Saginaw, Genesee, Lapeer, St. Clair, Sanilac, Tuscola)

Eight Counties – 10.8% of counties, 9.65% of State’s population, 79.30% White,

13.41% African American, 4.29% Latino American, 0.77% Asian American, 0.41%

Native American & 1.82% Other Ethnic American.

Projected weight of November General Election Population – 13%

The thumb region of Michigan is traditionally a Democratic voting pocket. It is home to

two of the major six Democratic counties (Genesee and Saginaw), a traditional

Democratic voting county (Bay) and other counties where Democrats are competitive.


______________________________________________________________________________________

5

Southeast Michigan Region – 4,360,736 Residents

(Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Monroe)

Five Counties – 6% of counties, 44.12% of State’s population, 66.52% White,

23.24% African American, 4.01% Latino American, 3.82% Asian American, 0.28%

Native American & 2.13% Other Ethnic American.


The Southeastern region of Michigan is home to two- of the major six Democratic

counties (Wayne and Washtenaw) and three of the four swing counties (Oakland,

Macomb and Monroe) in the major 17 communities. This region is the most diverse

voting region and home to the largest block of Michigan voters.


______________________________________________________________________________________

6

Michigan Political Geographical Regions

Major 17 Michigan County and Next seven Michigan Counties Parameter -


Upon review of Michigan’s general election contest dating back to 1970, we found an

interesting voter population trend that is a predictive indicator of the outcome of partisan

and ballot question campaign success. Over this time period, Michigan’s voter turnout is

weighted disproportionally to a small number of counties, 17 of the 83 with the state. In

each election since the 1992 Presidential election cycle, these 17 counties have produced

a consistent range of 75% to 84% of the total state-wide vote. These 17 counties are not

always reflected among the top 17 Michigan counties in voter registration, yet

consistently, they produce voter turnout results that lead the state’s turnout numbers per

county.

In these 17 counties, six are consistently strong Democratic voting communities in

state-wide elections. The counties are Wayne, Washtenaw, Muskegon, Ingham,

Genesse, and Saginaw.

Six Counties – 7.2% of counties, 33.8% of state’s population, 71% White, 18.9%

African American, 4.8% Latino, 3.1% Asian American

Seven of the top 17 counties are consistently strong Republican voting communities

Berrien, Eaton, Jackson, Kent, Lapeer, Livingston, and Ottawa.

Seven Counties – 8.4% of counties, 15.7% of state’s population, 86.3% White, 5.7%


Notable stat, five of these seven counties have a significant non-white voting population.

Kent County – 22.4% of total population (Latino American & African American are

largest two voting groups).

Berrien County – 21.2% of total population (African American and Latino American are

largest voting groups).

Eaton County – 13.7% of total population (African American and Latino American are


Jackson County – 12.8% of total population (African American and Latino American are


Ottawa County – 11.8% of total population (Latino American and Asian American are

largest voting group.

Four of the 17 have become the swing counties, the harbinger to predict success in a

partisan election. These counties are Oakland, Macomb, Kalamazoo, and Monroe.

Four Counties – 4.8% of counties, 24.3% of State’s population, 84.5% White, 8%


Next Seven Michigan Counties Parameter - Projected weight of November General


______________________________________________________________________________________

7

Election Population – 8.0%

Next Seven Counties:

(Bay, Calhoun, Marquette, Allegan, Lenawee, Midland, and St. Clair. Seven Counties – 8.4% of counties, 7.7% of state’s population, 90.3% White, 2.9%

African American, 4.0% Latino, .9% Asian American

Three of these counties consistently lean or strong are Democratic voting counties (Bay,

Calhoun and Marquette) and four consistently lean or/are strong Republican voting

counties (Allegan, Lenawee, Midland and St. Clair). Calhoun has the largest non-white

voting population at roughly 18.4% with 10.2% of that population being African-

American. Allegan and Lenawee also have non-white populations (Allegan – 10.2% of

the total population, Lenawee – 11.6% of the total population).

Congressional Districts

1st Congressional District Region

Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.45%

2nd

Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.19%

3rd


4th


5th


6th


7th


8th


9th



______________________________________________________________________________________

8

10th


11th


12th


13th


14th



______________________________________________________________________________________

9

Data Analysis Statement

The data has been separated analytically into cross tabulation results that are statistically

significant with respect to Michigan November election cycle. Any sectional analysis

within the aforementioned categories can be useful when inferring strengths and

weaknesses and possible strategy. For the purposes of this poll, we have included voters

who responded no, leaning no and undecided to questions numbered eight and twelve, as

a key cross tab for consideration.

For the assessment of individual cross tabulation categories, we use a correlation

coefficient model based on the Pearson r correlation, also called linear or product-

moment correlation. Pearson correlation (hereafter called correlation), assumes that the

two variables are measured on at least interval scales and it determines the extent to

which values of the two variables are "proportional" to each other. The value of

correlation (i.e., correlation coefficient) does not depend on the specific measurement

units used. Our proportional model for correlating the statistical relevance of a

geographical region, age grouping or congressional district is based on the random

proportionality of our respondent pool to the specific proportionality of the group’s

weight to the aggregate model. The correlation coefficient (r) represents the linear

relationship between these two variables (aggregate and cross tabular category).

The aggregate Michigan sample size of 1,783 respondents has a 2.32% margin of error,

any review of the polling report can allow for the statistical relationship between the

aggregate and cross tabulation margin of error for the reported clusters. The poll sample

was pre weighted for gender and ethnicity based upon Foster McCollum White and

Associates Predictive Voter Behavior Analysis Model for historic November

participation demographics throughout Michigan. This poll was commissioned by Foster

McCollum White and Associates & Baydoun Consulting and not commissioned on

behalf of or by any candidate or political organization. We strive to adhere to the

principles and standards of the National Council on Public Polls in the gathering and

reporting of polling data.


______________________________________________________________________________________

10

State - Wide Aggregate Results – 1783 Respondents MOE +/- 2.32%

Question 1: The 2012 United States Presidential election will be held on November 6, 2012. Who are

you more likely to vote for in the election??

1- President Barack Obama, 2- Mitt Romney, 3- Another candidate or 4- Undecided

(Barack Obama): 46.89%

(Mitt Romney): 45.48%

(Another candidate): 3.56%

(Undecided): 4.07%

46%

4%4%

46%

Barack Obama

Mitt Romney

Another Candidate

Undecided


______________________________________________________________________________________

11

Question #2: The ongoing scandal of Wayne County Government and the Democratic County

Executive Robert Ficano has dominated the news for the past 10 months. Does this

continuing scandal impact your view of President Obama and Democratic candidates for

the general election?

1 - It makes me view President Obama and Democratic candidates very unfavorably, 2 -

For it makes me view President Obama and Democratic candidates somewhat

unfavorably, 3 - it does not impact my view of President Obama and Democratic

candidates or 4 - unaware of the issue.

(View President Obama/Democratic candidates very unfavorably): 27.43%

(View President Obama/Democratic candidates somewhat unfavorably): 9.84%

Total Unfavorable 37.27% (It does not impact my view of President Obama/Democratic candidates): 53.45%

Total Awareness factor 90.72% (Unaware of the issue): 9.28%

27%

54%

9%

10%

View President Obama &Democratic candidates veryunfavorably

View President Obama &Democratic candidatessomewhat unfavorably

Does not impact view ofPresident Obama andDemocratic candidates

Unaware of the issue


______________________________________________________________________________________

12

Question #3: Considering the negative attention toward Wayne County government and its possible

impact on the Democratic party and President Obama's campaign, should Wayne County

Executive Robert Ficano resign from office, be removed from office, or remain in office?

1- If you believe he should resign from office, 2- If you believe should be removed from

office or 3- If you believe he should remain in office.

(Resign from office): 57.96%

(Be removed from office): 19.93%

(Remain in office): 21.71%

Resign from

Office

58%

Remain in

Office

22%

Be removed

from Office

20%

Resign from Office

Be removed from Office

Remain in Office


______________________________________________________________________________________

13

Question #4:

Governors and legislatures in states like Wisconsin and Ohio have passed laws to reduce

employee salary, pension and health care benefits and limit public employee unions'

collective bargaining rights to fix budget deficits. Do you support Governor Snyder and

the Republican legislature’s efforts to limit the collective bargaining rights and reduce

salary and employee benefits for Michigan’s public employees?

1- Yes, 2-No or 3- Undecided

(Yes): 40.07%

(No): 49.04%

(Undecided): 10.90%

Undecided

11%

No

49%

Yes

40%

Yes

No

Undecided


______________________________________________________________________________________

14

Question #5:

Michigan Public Act 4, also known as the Emergency Manager Law, allows the State to

put an emergency manager in charge of cities, townships, school districts and counties

that are financially distressed. Democrats, labor unions and civil rights organizations

oppose it because they believe it violates local voting rights and eliminates fair workplace

bargaining to protect workers. Republicans, Tea party activists, taxpayer groups and

business groups support it because it forces governments to stop wasteful debt spending,

reduces unsustainable pension and health care cost and can bring consolidation to

redundant governmental bodies. If Public Act 4 was on the ballot for a vote to maintain it

or repeal it, how would you vote?

1- Vote to maintain Public Act 4, 2- Vote to repeal Public Act 4, 3- Undecided on Public

Act 4’s merits, 4- Would skip voting on Public Act 4

(Vote to maintain Public Act 4): 35.32%

(Vote to repeal Public Act 4): 27.30%

(Undecided on Public Act 4’s merits): 35.04%

(Would skip voting on Public Act 4): 2.33%

27%

2%35%

36%Vote to maintain Public Act 4

Vote to repeal Public Act 4

Undecided on Public Act 4

Skip voting on matter


______________________________________________________________________________________

15

Question #6:

In Which Age Range Do You Fit?

1- Between 18 to 30 years old, 2- between 31 to 50 years old, 3- between 51 to 65 years

old, 4- ages 66 and older

(Between 18 to 30 years old): 3.73%



(Ages 66 and older): 45.93%

Age Distribution of Aggregate Poll Respondents

45.93

3.73

37.1

13.24

0

10

20

30

40

50

Ages 66 & older Ages 51 to 65 Ages 31 to 50 Ages 18 to 30

Age Dist.

Linear (Age Dist.)

Question #7: What is your gender?

1. Male 40.41%

2. Female 59.59%

Female Voters60%

Male Voters40%

Gender of Aggregate Poll Respondents


______________________________________________________________________________________

16

Question #8 Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Democrat, an Independent, a Republican

or a Tea Party member?

(IF DEM) Do you consider yourself a solid Democrat or leaning Democrat?

(IF REP) Do you consider yourself a solid Republican, leaning Republican or a Tea

Party Republican?

Response Code 1 (Solid Democrat): 31.69%

Response Code 2 (Leaning Democrat): 10.36%

Response Code 3 (Independent): 25.58%

Response Code 4 (Solid Republican): 16.75%

Response Code 5 (Leaning Republican): 8.89%

Response Code 6 (Tea Party Republican): 6.68%

7%

10%

9%

17%

26%

31%

Strong Democrat

Leaning Democrat

Independent

Solid Republican

Leaning Republican

Tea Party Republican


______________________________________________________________________________________

17

Question #9 What is your nationality/heritage?

Response Code 1 (African American/Black): 9.32% Response Code 2 (White/Caucasian): 83.58%

Response Code 3 (Hispanic/Latino): 1.02%

Response Code 4 (Arab American/Chaldean): 0.63%

Response Code 5 (Asian/Pacific Islander): 0.68%

Response Code 6 (Native American): 1.65%

Response Code 7 (More than one racial/ethnic identity): 3.13%

Black Percent of 18+ population, 9.32

White Percent of 18+ population, 83.58

Hispanic Percent of 18+ population, 1.02

Asian Percent of 18+ population, 0.63

Native American Percent of 18+

population, 1.65

Other Ethnic Percent of 18+ population,

3.76

Ethnic Concentration for Aggregate Poll Responders


______________________________________________________________________________________

18

Question #10:

Which of the following most accurately describes your religious background?

1- Evangelical Christian, 2- Catholic, 3- Baptist, 4- Non Evangelical Christian, 5- Jewish,

6- Muslim 7- Other religious affiliation or 8 - No religious affiliation

(Evangelical Christian): 17.25%

(Catholic): 30.76%

(Baptist): 11.18%

(Protestant/Non Evangelical Christian): 24.40%

(Jewish): 1.65%

(Muslim): 0.79%

(Other religious affiliation): 4.43%

(No religious affiliation): 9.53%

Other Religious

Affiliation

4%

Baptist

11%

Jewish

2%

Muslim

1%No Religious

affiliation

10%

Evangelical

Christian

17%

Non Evangelical

Christian

24%

Catholic

31%


______________________________________________________________________________________

19

Geographic considerations of polling study respondents

Southeastern Michigan 39.09%

Southwestern Michigan 18.34%

Central Region of Michigan 15.31%

Thumb Region of Michigan 12.00%

Northern Lower Peninsula 11.27%

Upper Peninsula 3.98%

39.09

18.34 15.3112

11.27

3.98

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Southeast Southwest Central Thumb Northern

Lower

Upper

Peninsula


______________________________________________________________________________________

20

Geographic Electoral Weight considerations of polling study respondents

Major 17 Counties 68.54%

Next 7 Mid-Major Counties 8.41%

Rest of Michigan (Other 59 Counties) 23.05%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Major 17 Counties Next 7 Mid Major Counties

Other 66 Counties

68.54

8.41

23.05


______________________________________________________________________________________

21

Major 17 Counties partisan historical considerations of polling study respondents

Republican 7 Counties 22.42%

Democratic 6 Counties 45.34%

Swing 4 Counties 32.24%

22.42

45.34

32.24

05

101520253035404550

Republican 7Counties

Democratic 6Counties

Swing 4 Counties


______________________________________________________________________________________

22

Urban Market Community weight based on historical considerations of polling study respondents

Urban Market Communities 16.15%

All other Michigan communities 83.85%

16.15

83.85

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Urban Markets All other communities


______________________________________________________________________________________

23

Michigan Congressional Districts

C.D. 111%

C.D. 27%

C.D. 37%

C.D. 48%

C.D. 58%

C.D. 67%

C.D. 710%

C.D. 85%

C.D. 96%

C.D. 107%

C.D. 117%

C.D. 126%

C.D. 136%

C.D. 145%

Michigan Congressional District Respondent Participation Weight

C.D. 1

C.D. 2

C.D. 3

C.D. 4

C.D. 5

C.D. 6

C.D. 7

C.D. 8

C.D. 9

C.D. 10

C.D. 11

C.D. 12

C.D. 13

C.D. 14


______________________________________________________________________________________

24

Demographic Sample Report

Our polling sample was very consistent with the projected voter demographic

considerations for a Michigan November General election. We have a number of

variance items that we will report.

Age:

Our study skewed significantly higher with voter cluster of persons over the age of 51.

This sampling was 83.03% of all polling study respondents. Despite efforts to adjust the

call volume to move the weight of this group closer to the projected 59% weight that they

will have in the General election, we were not successful. Our data also skewed

significantly lower among the voter cluster of persons ages 18 to 30. This cluster was

roughly 12 points lower than their projected November General turnout weight. One

challenge could exist from the disconnect from younger respondents using

communication tools outside of traditional landline and cell phone. Despite the variance,

we believe the overall polling study’s quality of pooling sample and reporting

effectiveness will not be hampered. The potential exists for a higher weight of persons

over the age of 51 in the 2012 November General election.

Gender:

Our aggregate respondent pool skewed slightly higher for female respondents. Our

predictive voter behavior analysis model projects that typical Michigan Presidential

election turnout is 54% female and 46% male. Our polling study results produced a

59.59% female and 40.41% male respondent pool. Traditionally, this is the most sensitive

question for respondents to answer and typically has the highest refusal rate of any

demographic question.

Nationality/Heritage:

Our aggregate respondent pool skewed higher for White voters then our predictive voter

behavior analysis model projects for the 2012 Michigan November General election. Our

respondent pool was 83.58% white, while our predictive voter behavior analysis model

projects that 74.5% of Michigan’s Presidential General election will be white. African

American respondents were correspondently skewed lower than our predictive voter

behavior analysis model projects for the 2012 Michigan November General election. Our

respondent pool was 9.32% African American, while our predictive voter behavior

analysis model projects that 17.5% of Michigan’s Presidential General election will be

white. In spite of these two variances, we believe the quality of the sample pool and

quantifiable data derived is statistically accurate to the 2.32% margin of error factor.

Major 17 County population distribution:

Our aggregate respondent pool skewed higher for Major 17 Democratic Counties and

lower then predictive voter behavior analysis model for the 2012 November general. In

spite of these two variances, we believe the quality of the sample pool and quantifiable


______________________________________________________________________________________

25

data derived is statistically accurate to the 2.32% margin of error factor.

Please contact Eric Foster of Foster McCollum White & Associates at either 313-333-7081 or

[email protected] or Tarek Baydoun of Baydoun Consulting at either 313-729-

3737 or [email protected] for a more detailed summary of our polling report.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Foster McCollum White & Associates & Baydoun Consulting Michigan Poll (June 2012)

Documents

Transcript of Foster McCollum White & Associates & Baydoun Consulting Michigan Poll (June 2012)