Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

October 19th, 2012:

Friday random ten: For the ladies, part 2

More songs named for ladies, from my binder full of Friday Random Ten lists.

1. Caroline – Georgetown Chimes
2. Cassidy – Suzanne Vega
3. Cecilia – Simon and Garfunkel
4. Cindy – The Chieftains
5. Claudette – Robert Johnson
6. Clementine – Tom Lehrer
7. Daria – CAKE
8. Darlene – Carolyn Wonderland
9. Dinah – Asylum Street Spankers
10. Eleanor Rigby – Ray Charles

Full names are less common in these songs, but there are a few. More songs like these next week.

YouGov: Romney 55, Obama 41

YouGov has an updated poll of Texas.

Republican challenger Mitt Romney gets a solid majority of the votes of likely voters over Democratic President Barack Obama in Texas, 55% Romney to 41% Obama, in a YouGov poll of 958 likely voters from the Lone Star state (recontacted from an initial September poll).

In the race for Senate, Republican Ted Cruz holds a 51%-36% lead over Democratic candidate Paul Sadler in the race to replace the retiring Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.


Sampling method: Respondents were initially selected on September 7-14 from YouGov’s panel using sample matching. A random sample (stratified by age, gender, race, education, and region) was selected from the 2005–2007 American Community Study. Voter registration, turnout, religion, news interest, minor party identification, and non-placement on an ideology scale, were imputed from the 2008 Current Population Survey Registration and Voting supplement and the Pew Religion in American Life Survey. Matching respondents were selected from the YouGov panel, an opt-in Internet panel.

Respondents were recontacted on October 4-11 for the second wave of the YouGov poll. The percentage of likely voters who were successfully recontacted was 83.4%.

Weighting: The sample was weighted using propensity scores based on age, gender, race, education, news interest, voter registration, and non-placement on an ideology scale.

Number of respondents: 958 likely voters. Margin of error ±4.5% (adjusted for weighting).

The September result they refer to above showed Romney leading by a 52-41 margin. If I understand their methodology correctly, they asked the same people from September again in October, and applied a likely voter screen, the details of which they do not share. After fiddling around with a margin of error calculator, I estimate they had a weighted sample size of about 475.

Here’s their September data and here’s their October data. If you just look at the unweighted numbers on page 3 of each, the results are very similar. In September, 500 out of 1087 unweighted respondents (46.0%) said they voted for Obama in 2008, and 487 out of 1090 unweighted respondents (44.7%) said they were voting for Obama this year. Putting it another way, Obama’s 2012 level of unweighted support was 97.1% of his 2008 level of unweighted support. In the October sample, 385 out of 874 unweighted respondents (44.1%) said they voted for Obama in 2008, and 391 out of 906 unweighted respondents (43.2%) said they were voting for Obama this year. Putting that another way, Obama’s 2012 level of unweighted support was 97.8% of his 2008 level of unweighted support. How they get from there to those weighted numbers, I got no clue. I presume some of that weighting is to correct for the oversample of white voters (74.2% in September, 75.8% in October), but the final, weighted racial distribution is unknown. For what it’s worth, Obama did better among Hispanics in the unweighted October sample than he did in September (61-35 versus 55-33) but worse among independents (39-48 versus 40-40). Make of all that what you will. It’s another data point, and I’ve added it to the sidebar.

One more thing to note is that I can’t recall seeing any mainstream media coverage of either of the two YouGov polls. That crappy Lyceum poll was cited everywhere, and the Wilson Perkins poll got a lot of play, too. Of course, they’re both in-state pollsters, and they clearly did a fair amount of publicity of their efforts, whereas if it hadn’t been for the Tuesday night dKos elections polling wrap I’d have had no idea about the new YouGov numbers. To me, that says that YouGov needs to do a better job letting people (i.e., the media) know they’re out there, and the media needs to broaden their web horizons.

Maybe the fourth time will be the charm

The city of Houston is once again bidding for a Super Bowl.

If everything goes according to an ambitious plan devised by city and county leaders, Houston will host its third Super Bowl in 2017.

The NFL informed the Texans and the city on Tuesday that Houston will be one of two finalists for Super Bowl LI, to be played in February 2017.

At the conclusion of the league’s winter meetings in Chicago, commissioner Roger Goodell disclosed that San Francisco and South Florida had been selected to bid on Super Bowl L. Goodell said the runner-up will compete with Houston for Super Bowl LI.


Houston’s Super Bowl bid is a joint venture among the Texans, the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Harris County/Houston Sports Authority, and Reliant Park.

Houston wants the 2017 Super Bowl because the Final Four is here in 2016, and two big events like that two months apart is a lot. Previous attempts to land Super Bowls XLIII, XLIV, and XLVI all came up short.

The owners will vote in May on the two games. The first vote will be between San Francisco and Miami for 2016, followed by a second vote between Houston and the 2016 runner-up for the next year.

“I think the chances are really good,” said Janis Schmees, executive director of the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority.

The 50th Super Bowl in 2016 will be a special-anniversary celebration. If San Francisco wins, the game will be played at the 49ers’ new stadium in Santa Clara. That stadium is set to open in 2014. If South Florida wins, the game will be played in the Miami Dolphins’ stadium, which still faces questions about possible renovation, including a partial roof.

We know that the owners love awarding the Super Bowl to cities that have built new stadia – this is, after all, mostly why Houston got the game in 2004 – so if you want to see this happen, you should root for San Francisco to win the bid for 2016. We’ll see if the optimism is warranted this time.

Precinct 1 Constable overview

The Chron takes a look at the Constable race in Precinct 1, which will determine the successor to disgraced former Constable Jack Abercia.

Alan Rosen

[Republican Joe] Danna, 59, and a Precinct 1 deputy for 18 years, pledged to reorganize an office top-heavy with administrators and move them from offices to patrol duty. He started the constable’s first motorcycle escort service and manages escort services for other law enforcement agencies.

Danna wants to establish an undercover unit to combat street crime, as well as a group to investigate credit card fraud and identity theft.

“I’ve been in the streets protecting and serving the citizens and business owners, assisting them with what the constable’s office does best, enforce the law,” Danna said.

His opponent, [Democrat Alan] Rosen, is a private investor who has spent 21 years in law enforcement. He currently serves as a volunteer reserve major in the Harris County Sheriff’s Office, and runs the criminal warrants and fugitive warrants unit. He began his law enforcement career in Precinct 1, where he was a patrol deputy, and notes he is the only candidate with a college degree, experience as a patrol deputy, and experience supervising other law officers.

“One of the biggest things the office needs is an ethical cleansing,” Rosen said. “If elected constable, I intend to put forward a very comprehensive ethics policy to include everybody in the office, to include myself.”

Here’s the interview I did with Alan Rosen for the Democratic primary, and here’s a guest post he wrote before the runoff. Rosen has the Chron endorsement and has been a strong fundraiser throughout the cycle. By 2008 partisan numbers, he’s also the favorite to win. I think Rosen will do a good job, and I’ll be voting for him.

Endorsement watch: For the city bonds

The Chron gives its approval to the city bond referenda.

While all eyes seem to be on the presidential election, the upcoming city bond measures on the ballot this year may have more immediate impact on Houston than any federal changes.

Broken down into five propositions, the bonds will fund much-needed repairs and construction projects throughout the city. But the bond package, which will be relatively small – $410 million, in contrast to $625 million in 2006 – represents a smart, efficient and targeted program to let the city borrow money for projects where it can do the most good without having to raise taxes.

Houston voters should give their across-the-board approval to these smart investments.

They detail each of the five propositions, about which you can learn more in my interview with Mayor Parker. They did not mention the two charter amendments that are also on the ballot. Other than some caterwauling from the usual naysayers, these issues look to be in good shape. I support them and will vote for them. Just please remember to go all the way down the ballot and vote on them yourself.