New Florida poll shows vindication of Eastwood Strategy
posted at 10:01 am on September 1, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
Feel lucky, punk? When Republicans chose Tampa as the site for the 2012 national convention, they didn’t do it for the weather, obviously. They saw Florida as a key to their hopes of winning the presidential election and hoped to make an impact on voters with their week-long argument for Republican control of the White House. According to a snap poll from Survey USA of 754 registered voters who watched the final night of the convention, they may have switched 10% of the vote with the effort:
1,211 adults were interviewed statewide 08/31/12, after Romney, Florida’s Marco Rubio and Clint Eastwood spoke to the convention 08/30/12. Of the adults, 1,100 were registered to vote in Florida. Of the registered voters, 754 heard the convention speeches. Of the convention speech watchers:
* 66% did not change their mind.
* 16% switched from “undecided” to Romney.
* 6% switched from Obama to Romney.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 22% who switched TO Romney.
* 10% switched from “undecided” to Obama.
* 2% switched from Romney to Obama.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 12% who switched TO Obama.
* Comparing the 2 aggregate numbers: 22% switched TO Romney, 12% switched TO Obama.
There is, however, a big caveat in this figures, which is that the people who watched the convention on the final night were still more Republican than the general population. The D/R/I of this sample was 24/48/27, and the D/R/I of the 2010 midterms was 36/36/29. That’s still significantly less Republican than I would have thought for a convention audience, and this might well be the first datum of success for the Clint Eastwood strategy. Another data point would be the saturation among registered voters in Florida for the final night; in this survey, nearly 69% of registered voters in Florida tuned in. That’s a pretty remarkable reach, and if that’s the case around the country, I’d say that Team Romney and the RNC won big.
Here’s another data point, too: the split among Florida voters to Eastwood’s speech was 49% positive to only 24% negative by the next day — presumably even after the avalanche of criticism for it. The overall split is positive in almost all demos except Democrats (30/45) and liberals (26/58). Majorities of independents (51/26), seniors (54/20), men (54/24) approved of it, but the biggest positive response came from Hispanics, 62/21 — even better than Republicans (58/12). Even women (44/25) and black voters (43/37) liked Eastwood’s extemporaneous riff on President Obama.
The ultimate question, though, is whose minds were changed — and that looks bad for Obama almost along the same lines. The aggregate numbers are shown above, but here are some key breakdowns in the demos, which we’ll calculate by adding those switching from either undecided or Obama to Romney, and those switching from undecided or Romney to Obama, in that order:
- Men: 32/16 (Romney/Obama switchers)
- Women: 15/9
- 18-34YOs: 29/15
- Black: 38/19
- Hispanic: 25/17
- Independent: 37/23
One last caveat: those tuning in among those demos would tend to be a little self-selecting as having an open enough mind to be convinced to switch. Still, it’s pretty clear that at least in Florida, Eastwood not only got people to tune in, he got them to enjoy the evening and perhaps open their mind to support Mitt Romney. If I’m Mitt Romney, I’d say that this makes my day.
Update: I should probably also mention some of the reaction to the speeches of Romney and Rubio. Let’s start with the positive/negative of Romney:
- Overall: 64/23
- Women: 62/26
- 18-34YOs: 51/39
- Black: 54/36
- Hispanic: 65/19
- Independent: 54/24
And for Rubio, the numbers are even better:
- Overall: 67/19
- Women: 66/20
- 18-34YOs: 57/31
- Black: 55/37
- Hispanic: 76/15
- Independent: 61/21
If Eastwood did indeed drive viewership, these numbers will be key in the weeks ahead for this swing state.
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Yes. Now please tell us why you believe she was telling the truth when she said those words. And why you are desperately bending over backwards to give her and O’bama the benefit of the doubt in this matter, when we know you would have never done had this tragedy happened on Bush and Rice’s Watch.
But before doing so, please remember that many folks here on the Right Side of the blogosphere confirmed last fall that when she said those words, youtube’s own records (the view count for the video) showed that hardly anyone had viewed that “evil video” at the time she Lied about it on TV. You are familiar with the mechanics of youtube view counts, aren’t you?
F-
Del Dolemonte on May 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM
verbaluce on May 7, 2013 at 5:29 PM
You’re a sad figure for typing that comment. If you don’t know it, you can’t be helped.
I told you immediately after it happened what was behind it. Amb. Stevens should have been in the bunker of the main embassy, in Tripoli, that day. It’s the MO of all major embassies, on such days. All else went sour from there and is a huuuuuge cover up, to keep Obama in power.
It’s very sad that you, of all the trolls, are as insane as all the others on this topic.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM
Paul Mirengoff at Power Line:
Del Dolemonte on May 7, 2013 at 5:36 PM
Media, most of you, suffocate from consuming Obama’s shit. It ain’t Beluga caviar and you all deserve to be depleted of oxygen over such dereliction of duty.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM
Why, you are already here. Your histrionics continues to amuse. You aren’t interested in a genuine investigation. You’re a pathetic little hack with your head so far up Obama’s azz it’s comical. Oh, and who is going to lead a genuine investigations? The democrats? The State Dept? The media? ROFLMAO!!!!! Your pathetic attempts to chastise commenters here who want the truth are a laugh riot.
Now phuck off and go back to blowing your Obama doll.
HumpBot Salvation on May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM
Petraeus should burn in Hell on Earth, and then some.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM
verbie you lost your 2% of credibility on this thread. You are now the same as all the others, sadly.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:38 PM
Obama, McCain and Rubio were fully pushing the Libya invasion.
Obama owns Benghazi.
Hillary owns Benghazi.
Benghazi proved, without a shred of doubt, that Hillary is as dumb at 3:00a.m., when the phone rings, as is Obama.
Obama flew to Vegas to campaing, the next day, after he’d gone to sleep after being told the embassy was on fire.
Some caring characters they are.
Most derelict are the parents of Amb. Stevens. Were they not so leftist they’d have pushed for answers before the election. How derelict are they?
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:41 PM
verbie, you’re needed on the Sheila Jackson Lee thread.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:44 PM
Yeah sorry no. Based on the various revisions to the “talking points” out there, it’s pretty clear they were edited in a way that made it possible to push the patently false youtube video narrative, i.e. removed all references to AQ, Ansar al-Sharia, weapons and militants in Libya. To say their later statements reflect what they got from the CIA … lol.
rightmind on May 7, 2013 at 5:45 PM
You’re lying, verbaluce.
blink on May 7, 2013 at 5:57 PM
And as I offered back then, a valid point to question why Stevens wasn’t more secure…or provided with more security.
(And thanks…but I’ll leave you to whatever i going on re: Shelia Jackson.)
verbaluce on May 7, 2013 at 6:01 PM
Yea…everyone’s lying.
/sarc
verbaluce on May 7, 2013 at 6:02 PM
You clearly lied. You falsely claimed that they didn’t knowingly provide false information.
Even the admin itself is now admitting that it knowingly provided false information (while justifying it by saying that they were protecting classified info).
You just decided to blatantly lie.
blink on May 7, 2013 at 6:07 PM
Benghazi Embassy:
The official told story, as of now seems to be falling apart at a fast and ferocious paced. Just thinking about some things that may not mean anything but here goes!
Looking back to the internet posting of 11-13 September 2012, there are literally 10,000′s posting stating in one manner or another that Sam Bacile and his film caused the riots that caused the deaths. Then almost nothing until he is arrested and gets 1 year in federal prison for parole violation. Then nothing after that he seems to completely disappear of the grid. There seems to be some indication that he may be out and under Federal protection but nothing provable.
The internet acts fast BUT 10,000′s postings all pointing to a film, with in 24 hrs, look a lot more like a mass mailing then news and opinion reporting. There is very limited evidence of any sustainability of outrage.
Next thing I fine most interesting is: If all this was outrage caused by the film, then why is the film still available on Youtube and no one in the world cares anymore?
Just all seems a bit strained of ones imagination.
jpcpt03 on May 7, 2013 at 6:23 PM
Nope. Go back and read the thread.
Um, it would bother me if ANY Commander-in-Chief did it. I was and still am bothered about what was said in the lead up to the Iraq War.
Um, it means that he was NOT acting as a Commander-in-Chief should when the first Ambassador in 33 years has gone missing – he wasn’t told until the following morning that Stevens had died even though it was known before then.
Why would any President not be concerned enough to about a missing Ambassador and an attack on the Benghazi consulate? Why would he NOT being in touch with the Secretary of Defence?
And, we deserve the TRUTH about it.
A sitting American President lied to the American public, his fellow citizens, for political reasons about a terrorist attack and, therefore, was actually covering up the real reason behind the attack: Islamists militants and Al Qaeda in a country that he decided to destabilise by acting militarily without the consent of Congress and during an election when his narrative that ‘GM is alive, OBL is dead, and AQ is on the run.’
See Bob Scheiffer and Salon mag, to name two, about that.
Resist We Much on May 7, 2013 at 6:37 PM
What genuine investigation?
The Mullins-Pickering investigation that failed to interview Hillary Clinton?
The one that would not allow – think how Orwellian that is – Congress access to the survivors and went so far as to change the names of them in their own medical records?
The one that didn’t interview the people on the ground?
The one where the Obama administration said ‘No comment pending the report of the ARB’ and then started squawking that ‘Benghazi happened a long time ago. We need to move on…’?
Resist We Much on May 7, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Nice attempt at lowering expectations.
J/K Verbie, that was actually a pathetic attempt.
JusDreamin on May 7, 2013 at 7:15 PM
ted c on May 7, 2013 at 7:17 PM
I have known a number of federal agents. Up to a point, most feds just do as they are told and they have good days and bad and weak sisters (excuse the sexism) in different jobs.
As indicated above, the entire video and spontaneous protest meme was absurd from the start. So the obvious question is who was selling it or ordering people to include it in the narrative?
It certainly lived long enough. It was publicly cited by the two Dem POTUS candidates in statements. Money was spent on TV ads in Pakistan.
Repeat, slowly…“money was spent on TV ads in Pakistan”.
LOL
And these people control nuclear weapons and a billion rounds of ammo in DHS!
IlikedAUH2O on May 7, 2013 at 7:20 PM
So I see not Bret hair, or bill o idiot is talking about the whistleblowers.mwell there you have it. No big deal mova along
Conservative4ev on May 7, 2013 at 8:04 PM
Pretty sure the sign on Obama’s desk reads, “The Buck Stops …. uhhhh, in the Bush Administration.”
There Goes the Neighborhood on May 8, 2013 at 12:23 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3