Newsweek has a somewhat misleading poll-related story.
Colin Allred
Ted Cruz’s lead over his Democratic challenger Colin Allred in the Texas Senate race has narrowed, one recent poll shows, as voters appear to view the senator less favorably.
A Public Policy Polling/Clean and Prosperous America survey of 759 registered Texas voters showed Cruz is ahead of Allred by 47 percent to 46. In a previous August poll, the incumbent led Allred by 2 points (47 percent to 45). The poll was carried out on September 25-26. The results have a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent.
The survey adds Cruz has a negative net favorability rating, and has fallen from a minus 6 in August to minus 8 points (41 percent favorable and 49 said unfavorable).
Allred has a plus 5 net favorable rating (40 percent favorable and 35 percent unfavorable), down from a plus 7 net rating in August.
The PPP poll data is here; they also polled the Presidential and Senate matchups in Florida. The 47-46 number was in answer to the question “If the candidates for US Senate this fall were just Democrat Colin Allred and Republican Ted Cruz, who would you vote for?” The answer to that was 45 for Cruz, 43, for Allred, and 3 for the Libertarian. As that is the actual contest on the ballot, that’s the result they should have reported. The two-candidate result is sexier, but it’s not a race that actually exists.
They also didn’t report on the Presidential result in the story. That was 49-44 for Trump over Kamala Harris, with 1% for Jill Stein and 0 for independent Cornel West. Given that West is a write-in, and therefore won’t be on the ballot, and there is a Libertarian who will be on the ballot but wasn’t included, this is another result for a non-existent race. I expect better than this. Be that as it may, it’s another example of Trump doing better than Cruz in the polls for us to ponder.
What about Latino voting in Texas? Would you like another poll of Latinos in Texas? You’re in luck.
Vice President Kamala Harris and Democratic Senate candidate Colin Allred have made inroads with Hispanics in Texas, growing their lead over their Republican opponents among likely Latino voters in a recently released Televisa Univision poll.
In a Sept. 12-15 survey of 1,193 likely voters, 46% of Hispanic respondents answered they’d definitely vote for Harris in the Nov. 5 presidential election and another 15% said they probably would. About 24% of Hispanic pollees said they’d definitely vote for former President Donald Trump, with another 11% saying probably.
Allred, looking to unseat two-term U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, led among Hispanic likely voters, with 43% saying they’d definitely vote for him. Cruz garnered 19% definite Latino support in the poll, down from 17% in a Televisa Univision survey from April.
The most recent results marked an improvement for Democrats among this crucial bloc, which makes up about a third of Texas’ eligible voter population. The April survey had President Joe Biden polling at 39% among likely Latino voters in Texas before he dropped out of the race this summer, and Allred had 33% Latino support.
The home page for this poll is here and the Texas results can be found on this page – it’s the “2024 Media Predict Tracker – Texas” downloadable PDF you’re looking for. I don’t know why they only gave a partial result for Allred and Cruz in the Chron story, but the numbers in Texas are Harris 61 (as noted, 46 definite and 15 probable) to 35 for Trump (24 def, 11 prob), and 60 for Allred (43 def, 17 prob) to 29 for Cruz (17 def, 12 prob). Note that these are better numbers for Harris and Allred than in the UnidosUS 2024 poll I cited above. The Texas numbers for President are also right in line with the national poll, which you can get to from this page, the “2024 Media Predict – Swing State Polling” file. I’m not sure if this is all of the US or just the states they highlight on the home page, but either way it’s a larger sample than of just Texas. That one also has Harris up 61-35, with 48/13 def/prob for Harris and 25/10 def/prob for Trump.
No great insights to any of this. Just thought I’d throw some more data at you. Enjoy!
Actually, there are TWO write-ins in the Senate race, so if one wants Newsweek to be truly accurate ….
And, it’s flat out untrue to say that because Cornel West is a write-in, he won’t be on the ballot. To put it another way, that’s election disinformation.
I don’t mean that metaphorically; I mean that literally. This is election misinformation at a minimum, disinformation at a maximum.
Beyond that, people who know the SoS website know where to look for the names of write-ins.
AND, I’ve run them in my newspapers.
I suggest you edit.
“And, it’s flat out untrue to say that because Cornel West is a write-in, he won’t be on the ballot. To put it another way, that’s election disinformation.”
I’d agree, and posit that anyone who thinks Cornel West has a snowball chance in (cat and dog-eating) Haiti of being elected to any electable postion is both metaphorically, metaphysically, and literaly disinformed.
Write-in candidates are irrelevant. In 2020 there were 4 candidates on the Texas ballot and 9 write ins:
Donald J. Trump Rep 5,890,347
Joseph R. Biden Dem 5,259,126
Jo Jorgensen Lib 126,243
Howie Hawkins Grn 33,396
Write Ins totaled only 5944. Most voters have no idea how to use the machines to vote for a write-in, and no idea who these people are/were, except maybe the infamous Robert Morrow from Austin:
President R. Boddie 2,012
Brian Carroll 2,785
Todd Cella 205
Jesse Cuellar 49
Tom Hoefling 337
Gloria La Riva 350
Abram Loeb 36
Robert Morrow 56
Kasey Wells 114
If one looks at the big picture, Earth and all its inhabitants are irrelevant.
Technically or logically, SocFly is right.
C.L.? I never made THAT claim. Either personally or professionally.
That said, personally? In the last Texas Progressives Roundup, I said I would be voting for one of the write-in candidates for president.
Democrats don’t own my vote, and neither do ballot-qualified third parties.
And, Mainstream? Duopoly candidates are irrelevant to the people of Gaza, and to the pro-Palestinians here in Texas whose arrests Kuff doesn’t talk about either.
I disagree with SocraticGad on the “on the ballot” statement.
Texas deliberately blocks “official write-in” candidates from appearing on the ballot because of their love-of-the-duopoly (to use your term). It’s puts high barriers for the 3rd parties to maintain their access too.
If Cornel West changes his name to “Write-in Escribir en” then he would literally be on the ballot.
At most you have an English squabble, a style guide disagreement, or perhaps a philosophical disagreement.
Pingback: Texas blog roundup for the week of October 7 | Off the Kuff