A recent poll – Governor Dannel Malloy has called it,
dismissively, a survey – shows Republican gubernatorial prospect Tom Folly
leading Mr. Malloy by nine points.
The poll by YouGov,
a survey firm that has partnered with The New York Times and CBS News, is a bit
different than the usual survey. Unlike
the more traditional Quinnipiac poll, YouGov derives its nonpartisan data from
an online panel of more than 100,000 respondents nationwide.
In Connecticut, the poll shows Republicans favoring Mr.
Foley 81-5, while Democrats favor Malloy 72-12. But one of the most alarming
takeaways from the poll is Mr. Foley’s 50 to 15 percent lead among Independents. That gap is
huge, and unaffiliated voters in the state outnumber both Republicans and
Democrats. These figures should alarm Democrats. Further, the majority of
respondents said that they disapprove of Malloy’s performance as Governor.
For some reason Independents have been driven in large
numbers into the Foley camp. A 50 to 15 percent gap is a wide river to cross.
A more traditional poll also found Mr. Malloy trailing Mr.
Foley among Independents. In the VoxPopuli poll,
Mr. Foley led Mr. Malloy 36 to 24 percent among Independents.
Mr. Malloy has greeted these surveys with the usual
unflappability of the politician left in the polling dust. Mr. Malloy said he
was unconcerned with polls; his mind was focused like a laser on “doing the
right thing,” even though his actions may adversely impact his electability.
Such is the world-weary courage of the highly moral, goal driven
politician.
What accounts for the Independent gap? Is it the coffee
drunk by those who are likely to respond to internet inquiries? Has Mr. Malloy
done anything in the last four years to alienate Independents – anything at all?
Who are the
Independents anyway? Are they
refugees, people nursing some secret wound who have been driven from the
parties? Or are the Independents simply party averse, hearty Thoreauians each
of whom considers himself “a party of one” and who does not wish to be drawn into
the vortex of party politics? Have the Independents grown in number for much
the same reasons those who used to belong to clubs and civic groups have
dwindled in number? In Connecticut and national politics, Independents tend to
be treated by decision makers in both parties as the crazy uncles in the attics: If we leave them in peace, we may lay a claim
to their affections. Uncle Independent’s eccentricities have not been
sufficiently explored by major universities. Most politicians would like to go
a‘courting them, but they are all blind dates.
We know next to nothing about them – nothing, nothing,
nothing. It makes a fella wonder: Why do we have political research facilities
in universities at all?
Largely owing to the absence of hard, reliable data, we are
left to speculate. But we in Connecticut may not speculate away this
datum: There is something in the Independent that does not like a Malloy.
What could it be?
If we view the Independent as a sort of rebel with a cause,
even though the cause remains indistinct – owing, once again, to lethargic
political research universities – the polling figures would seem to suggest
that the general population among Independents parallels that among the
parties. Among Independents as a whole, Democratic defectors may outnumber Republican
defectors by a margin of two to one. Independents are not born; they are made
Independent. They leave or decline to join parties either because the parties
have pushed them away or because they are party averse, reasoning, as did
Groucho Marx on one occasion when a group solicited him for membership, that he
would decline to associate with any party that would have him as a member.
If this analysis is even close to correct, the slip-sliding-away
of Democrats to Independent ranks is likely to hurt Democrats twice as much as
Republicans, a gap that cannot be backfilled with women who have yielded to
propaganda reports that Republicans are making war upon them, or voters
bewitched by spells cast upon them by politicians who have promised to
radically change the nature of the nation and state (Where’s my magic wand?) or
illegal aliens who, a decade hence, may be inclined to vote in favor of the
party responsible for making borders disappear.
As the Democratic Party in Connecticut has become more and
more progressive, it may have alienated, perhaps permanently, more and more
Democratic centrists. Unwilling to join Republican Party ranks, the dissenters
may be drifting into the Independent battalions. That is bad news for the party
of William O’Neill and Ella Grasso, both centrist Democratic governors. And the worse news is that the defectors may
be sufficiently irritated to vote in future elections for some Republicans from
a sense of impotent resentment.
It’s a problem.
Update
A more recent August 2 Public Policy Poll finds Independents disapproving of Mr. Malloy by mothan a 2-1 margin: Malloy only barely gets over 50% approval even with Democrats, at 52/33. Independents disapprove of him by a more than 2:1 margin, 25/53, and with Republicans he's at 15/73. Malloy would trail a hypothetical GOP opponent for reelection right now by a 46/39 margin.
Comments
----
My sense is that not many people pay attention. Makes this fella wonder why we who settled here in 1634 allow ourselves to be governed by the demos to such a degree. In fact, this fella has gone past wondering, and would appreciate less democracy, more constitutional limits on what the Malloys of the world can do.
I also wonder why the Republican Party's Nutmeg affiliate has its convention and nomination/endorsement before the Republican demos has spoken, particularly before all the newspapers endorse McKinney/Walker. If you're going to engage in messy democratic procedures, give them time. Can';t the Party promote early debates, rather than having clandestine ones in a smoke-filled room at the Courant's office? It appears at this point that the elephant Party is backing the wrong horse.