By Ruy Teixeira
Public Opinion Watch, April 21, 2004
The Century Foundation
[Used by permission]
Initially, most commentary suggested that Bush's ads in the battleground states were a huge success and had Kerry on the run, driving up his unfavorables and defining him negatively in voters' eyes. But now, as the GOP steps down its ad buys, the verdict is more cautious about how well the ads worked. Ronald Brownstein's Los Angeles Times article on the topic notes that, according to Anthony Corrado, a leading expert on campaign finance, "Since March 4, just after Kerry in effect wrapped up his party's nomination, Bush has bought about as much television advertising as past presidential candidates purchased for the entire general election campaign."
Corrado's assessment: "Frankly, [the president's campaign] didn't move the [poll] numbers that much."
Recently released Annenberg Election Survey data are consistent with Corrado's judgement. Kerry's favorability rating in the March 1-15 period was 49 percent favorable/39 percent unfavorable in the "television states" (battleground states where the Bush campaign has been running ads). In the March 16-31 period, his rating in these states had changed only slightly: 48 percent favorable/40 percent unfavorable.
Other Annenberg election survey data from March 21-April 7 show that, among the general public, Bush holds statistically significant advantages over Kerry on seven out of seventeen traits, while Kerry holds such advantages on four traits. But it's interesting to note that, among "persuadable voters" (those undecided or those who said there was a good chance they might switch their candidate preference), the presumed target of these ads, the situation was the reverse: Kerry had significant advantages on eight traits and Bush on only three. In particular, persuadable voters, in contrast with the public as a whole, thought the phrase "says one thing, does another" applied more to Bush than Kerry and also thought "changes his mind for political reasons" applied more to Bush than Kerry.
Of course, it would be nice to see data for persuadables within television states, but, alas, Annenberg's sample sizes couldn't begin to justify looking at such a small group of respondents.
Other relevant data come from the new "Battleground 2004" survey conducted by Tarrance Group/Lake Sosin Perry between March 28 and March 31. (Note that this is a likely voter poll, which presents problems, but at least it's a light screen. They only toss out registered voters who say they are not very likely. to vote.)
According to an accompanying analysis memo written by Celinda Lake and her associates, while Kerry leads by a point overall, he leads by six points in the battleground states, where Bush's ad barrage was directed. (Note that, compared to the widely publicized late March figures from Gallup, this survey is more recent and bases its battleground state figures on about twice the number of "likely voter" respondents.)
The poll also shows Kerry ahead by seven points among independents and by twenty-two points among moderates.
In terms of specific issues, the poll indicates that, where Kerry is strong, he is generally farther ahead of Bush in the battleground states than among voters as a whole. For example, Kerry is ahead by twenty-five points in the battleground states on protecting the middle class, compared to nineteen points among all voters. Other examples include: improving the health care system (+24/+19); strengthening social security (+23/+19); prescription drugs (+20/+15); creating jobs (+19/+17); the economy (+12/+8); holding down federal spending (+11/+4); keeping American prosperous (+9/+6); and sharing your values (+7/+3).
It's also worth noting that Democrats lead Republicans in this poll by six points in the generic congressional contest. That lead widens to ten points among battleground state voters, seventeen points among independents, and thirty-three points among moderates.
These data suggest that, while the race between Bush and Kerry has clearly tightened since early March, the specific influence of the Bush campaign's ads in the battleground states may well have been exaggerated.