New AJC Poll: Gov Race Tight; Perdue Slight Lead

:: Update from Jon ::

The AJC has now released the crosstabs, and as Chris suggested in the comments, the African American percentage of the vote was held to 24% due to a tight voter screen.

Original Post:

The AJC has released the top line of a new poll this afternoon, and it looks similar to this one from Survey USA/11Alive Wednesday:

Nathan Deal:  43%
Jason Carter: 42%
Andrew Hunt: 7%

David Perdue:  45%
Michelle Nunn:  41%
Amanda Swafford:  6%

Cross tabs are not yet available.  Seems like what most of us are looking at these days are the African American sample size, and how that affects the top line numbers.

Usual disclaimer about polls being for strippers and cross country skiers, only poll mattering being election day, y’all are still going to argue over it, blah blah blah…


    • gcp says:

      Agree much of the libertarian vote melts away by Nov. Many of those polled that say they will vote libertarian don’t know much about libertarian party stance on issues and others that say they will vote libertarian just want to legalize drugs and don’t care about anything else.

      • Three Jack says:

        I don’t recall ever seeing a poll with the Libertarian candidates getting so much support. I think it is indicative of the frustrations felt by so many voters showing up in all polls and will continue through election day.

        Get you beer buying bucks ready Chris!

      • TheEiger says:

        I also doubt the libertarians get above 6%, but some of those people voting libertarian could care less what they stand for. They are just sick and tired of a corrupt governor. I can’t stand libertarian’s national views on the military and foreign affairs, but that doesn’t apply to a state race. That’s why they will be getting my vote for governor.

  1. gcp says:

    Probably more accurate than Landmark. Lets not forget on July 16 Landmark showed Kingston 48% and Perdue 41% but of course black vote was insignificant in repub. primary.

  2. Rumor has it this poll is only 25% black – but that’s just a rumor.

    But one thing to keep in mind any time you see a poll that’s only 25% black or 24% black – last time that happened was respectively 2004 and 2006 when Bush got 58% and Sonny got 59%. So if you’re seeing 43-42…

    • dsean says:

      The poll earlier this week with essentially the same results (45-44 Deal; 47-44 Perdue) used a 29% likely black voter demographic. Given the ground-game efforts, I’d expect to see something similar to 2010’s 28.25%, but I doubt it gets much higher than that.

      And yeah, neither libertarian candidate is going to get 6%. Hunt might actually pull 4% as a protest vote against Deal, but I doubt it.

  3. Harry says:

    As a GOP supporter, I’m frankly not too concerned about the black voting percentage. I believe it will be suppressed because I’m convinced many black Democrats are conflicted about Dem policies. I’m also not too concerned about the millennial vote, for the same reason.

    What concerns me is the white female vote. The GAGOP has become alienated to many white women, not due in most cases to their social/family policies but rather because the party is perceived as being too male-centric and sort of tone deaf to female voter concerns, of which one concern is the perception of an exclusionary insider game being played in the state capitol as well as the ethics issues. I think these things are being exaggerated and played up by the media, but the fact is the perception is there. Also, the women often do the ground work but are not sufficiently rewarded with primary nominations and appointments to state boards.

    • caroline says:

      Re primary nominations: I’m not going to defend the so called GOP elite but in all honesty they could put up female candidate after female candidate and if the voters won’t vote for her the result is going to be the same. The real problem is the types of voters the GOP primary atracts not the fact that not enough women were running. This became obvious to me in 2010 with Handel vs. Deal where the primary voters would have had an ethically challenged hack like Deal vs. a female candidate who had some flaws but nearly the number Deal had.

  4. Jon Richards says:

    If indeed the AJC used “an extremely tight voter screen” to select the likely voters in its poll, what does that say about the support for Libertarian candidates? Would that screen add credence to the likely strength of the Libertarian vote?

  5. FranInAtlanta says:

    In at least two cases, I have voted Libertarian as a protest, knowing I would get a second chance. Once was deliberate – 1992 for Senate – in the runoff I planned to vote for the one who was not the Party of the President.

  6. Bobloblaw says:

    The best poll that tells the entire story was the most recent SurveyUSA poll that polled the down ticket races. All the GOP down ticket races were 50% or better. This means the undecideds in the Sen and Govs races are GOP voters. Perhaps angry over the primaries and their preferred candidate didnt win.

    Nunn and Carter arent polling any better than Dems poll in GA. It is Deal and Perdue that are polling worse than the GOP usually polls.

    Deal and Perdue will win. Question is will there be a runoff. I think so at this point.

    • I think you moved here somewhat recently but of course the default vote in the state is Republican. It has been for at least 10 years. And no one has spent any money changing the dynamic of those races.

      But Jason Carter and Michelle Nunn have spent millions actually defining their race.

      It’s kind of like in 2002 when Sonny Perdue beat Roy Barnes but Mark Taylor, Cathy Cox, Thurbert Baker, Tommy Irvin, and Michael Thurmond all got re-elected.

      But if you had been around then and had been analyzing a poll and it had shown Barnes and Perdue both getting less than 50% would you have said well Barnes will win because the down ballot Democrats are winning?

      • Bobloblaw says:

        I moved here in 2003.

        So you think Blacks are voting for the down ticket GOP?

        The down tickets Dems in 2002 were probably getting a higher percent of the white vote than Barnes and Clleland. As southern states went from Dem to GOP, it started at the top of the tickets first.

        But if Carter and Nunn are getting a higher percent of the white vote (than down ticket Dems), then we should see that with Nunn and Carter outpolling the down ticket Dems, But they arent.

        “”But if you had been around then and had been analyzing a poll and it had shown Barnes and Perdue both getting less than 50% would you have said well Barnes will win because the down ballot Democrats are winning?””

        No because whites split their tickets, blacks dont.

      • Bobloblaw says:

        Question is was Perdue in 2002 running equal to the down ticket GOP or ahead of them?
        Was Barnes running equal to the downticket Dems or behind them?

        There are two possibilities:
        1. My theory that the primaries hurt Deal and Perdue
        2. Whites are splitting their tickets voting for Carter and Nunn but down ticket GOP

        The third possibility that there are more minorities isnt credible unless downticket GOP is getting 25% of the black vote versus 5% for the top two.

        #2 is not likely the reason because if it were, we’d see Nunn and Carter running a few points ahead of the rest of the Dem ticket, but they arent. What were are seeing instead is Deal and Perdue running behind the rest of the GOP. But why? The only explanation is weak GOP support for Deal and Perdue.

        • I can’t find a public poll similar to the Survey USA poll from then but my memory is most of the private polling was showing Barnes up about 45-40 on Perdue and the downticket Dems up something like 49-35.

          In the Survey USA poll I see the incumbent Republicans in down ticket races getting a higher share of the white vote and black vote.

          I don’t know why it’s so hard for you to understand this – but let’s just look at what the incumbents are getting…
          Deal 45-44
          Cagle 51-40
          Kemp 52-39
          Olens 49-41

          I would argue that of the incumbents, Deal has obviously gotten the most attention/negative advertising against him, with Olens a distant second and until Kemp opened his mouth about black voting this week he and Cagle were essentially tied for a distant third.

          You really believe that the 6%+ of people currently supporting Cagle and not Deal are really just waiting to snap back to Deal? What’s taking them so long?

          Oh and to answer your question, Perdue was running ahead of the down ticket Republicans who didn’t win in 2002, the same way that Jason Carter is running 3-5 points ahead of the downticket Dems this year.

          • Bobloblaw says:

            “”You really believe that the 6%+ of people currently supporting Cagle and not Deal are really just waiting to snap back to Deal? What’s taking them so long?””

            No, that is my point. They may not vote at all. But there is more upside for Deal than for Carter. It also helps my point that it was a bad primary that is hurting Deal and Perdue.

            2002 is a bad example. Dem turnout was supressed by the Iraq War vote. Dems under performed their poll numbers not just in GA but all over the country. Example: in MI Jennifer Granholm was leading in all the polls by about 10 and won by 4. It happened in a lot of places. No one was predicting the GOP would take the Senate and gain House seats.

Comments are closed.