I think the mayor had better hurry up
This afternoon, The Sacramento Bee released the results of a poll of 400 Sacramento residents, mostly dealing with Kevin Johnson's performance in office, but there were also a couple relating directly to the ESC. The results are not terribly pretty.
Sort of like Paris Hilton. She gives the impression of hotness, but upon further review, you have scabies. But I digress.
Question 6 asks the respondent's opinion of various local politicians, and Mayor Johnson actually starts off pretty decently. Combined, his "strongly favorable" and "somewhat favorable" numbers combine to be 51%. "Somewhat unfavorable" and "strongly unfavorable" combine to reach 40% 6% had no opinion, and 1% had never heard of him. The poll also reveals that Councilman Robert Fong's middle name is "King."
I am not making this up. Anyway, so far, so good.
Once you get to question 24, things are a little cooler toward the mayor. "If the election were held today, would you..."
"Definitely re-elect" and "probably re-elect Johnson" total only 41%. "Probably someone else" and "Definitely someone else" total 46%. 13% remain undecided, and there is hope in that. Or the opposite of hope. I can't really see the future.
A side note: I need to blast whomever wrote and approved question 33. It is written in such a way that it clearly leads the responder to a particular response. Unsurprisingly, his re-electability numbers plummet to 35% to re-elect, 55% to get someone else, and 11% undecided. I will assume the 2% who moved out of "undecided" from question 6 must be very up for grabs, and are likely the type whose opinion aligns with the last opinion they heard. As you will see, this isn't the only question that smells funny.
Make your own Paris Hilton joke.
Questions 34 & 35 really get to the meat of the issue as far as development downtown is concerned.
#34 asks whether the respondent is in favor of or opposes "Creating a public-private partnership that would finance a new downtown arena and allow the Kings to stay in Sacramento."
The problems here are obvious. Using the word "arena" instead of "entertainment and sports complex" is somewhat leading, but tying the Kings directly to it, as though they would be the only one using it is the icing on the cake. The results are about what you'd expect:
43% "strongly favor" or "somewhat favor" this concept, 51% "somewhat oppose" or "strongly oppose" it, with 37% falling into the "strongly oppose" category. I would guess two-thirds to three-quarters of that group are likely intractable on the issue. 6% of the overall response was "no opinion."
The final question of concern is #35, which asks if you favor or oppose "Privatizing all downtown city parking operation (sic) for 50 years to provide funding for an arena for the Sacramento Kings. (Italics mine.)
Again, the "a" word, and tied solely to the Maloof property. You can guess the results.
22% "strongly favor" or "somewhat favor" the notion, 71% "strongly oppose" or "somewhat oppose" it. This issue is a little more complex than the question makes it seem, although in fairness, I doubt results would improve with the details fleshed out. The problem is still making it seem as though the only beneficiary is the NBA team.
I think Kevin Johnson has some decent things to work with, but if he can't round up more private funding, and this thing ends up going to the ballot, it's absolutely dead in the water. The good news is, there's still time to get things in place, KJ has some very bright people hammering away at it, and I still feel confident that the NBA wants a franchise in Sacramento. I also think the mayor would gladly take a beating in his re-election ballot if he can manage to leave an ESC has his legacy.
(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)
37 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Don't really need to worry too much about this
I also think the mayor would gladly take a beating in his re-election ballot if he can manage to leave an ESC has his legacy.
You have to understand, this is Johnson’s baby and it’s been that way way before the All Star Break last year. Politically, he owns it.
Granted, he might pull the “If only I had strong mayor powers” card and the “I warned everyone to hurry up on this” cards but I don’t think that will be for a lack of trying.
As for the survey, I have zero clue what the purpose of it is for and what not
but the one thing that stuck out the most is that 40% of respondents were retired.
So maybe we can get Cialis to sponsor the entertainment & sports complex.
Sounds like Sacramento could be a major market.
We could reuse the ‘Here We Rise’ banners too.
This.
by elfboy_ on Jan 31, 2012 10:30 PM PST up reply actions 9 recs
I used to call
Replying to your own post as “pooking” because pookey did it a lot.
I think I’ll now call it “wallying”.
But any time you have a survey that skews that heavily toward one demographic (really, is 40% of the population of Sacramento retired?) then the poll is completely invalid.
Even though the voices aren't real, they have some pretty good ideas!
by LeaguePassAddict on Feb 1, 2012 6:29 AM PST up reply actions
not necessarily
but then again, it depends on what they were trying to do with the poll and I honestly don’t know.
Agree.
This was a telephone poll. It doesn’t say where they got the respondents, but with the age demographic, it is likely they may have gotten them from telephone listings of land lines.
Some of these people may not even own cell phones. To your point, LPA, this poll does not appear to be a sample that represents the population of Sacramento residents as a whole and the results would be invalid.
It appears it skewed to an older population, predominately senior citizens, who are more than 50% likely to vote, which may be more likely to be Republican, who might be more likely to use land lines for their communication (if they got their numbers from land line listings) which could suggest some other aspects (income, level of education, etc.)
Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."
I can guarantee you there were two things that mattered more to the people who paid for this poll than "representing the popluation of Sacramento residents."
The fact that certain statements in the poll changed views
And
more than 50% likely to vote
by wallywagon11 on Feb 4, 2012 11:00 AM PST up reply actions
One thing's certain though,
old people VOTE.
Re-sign Josh Willingham now!
by sf drift king on Feb 2, 2012 2:54 AM PST up reply actions
I think it's key to note
That this survey was commissioned by KJ opponents, so the wording of these questions had a purpose… and it looks like they were able to achieve that purpose with some of the results they received.
There will be a SammyP wherever you go. But don't worry, it scared me at first too.
Here's the link to the corresponding story at the Bee site
A new poll commissioned by opponents of Mayor Kevin Johnson shows that fewer than half of those asked are likely to vote to re-elect the mayor. But with just five weeks left before the filing deadline, Johnson’s opposition has been unable to come with a candidate.
Matt Kelly, the head of the Building Trades, said his group did not commission the poll as an attack on Johnson, but merely to “have some information at our disposal.”
I asked him if his group was encouraging a candidate to run against Johnson, and he replied, “somebody has to make those decisions on their own.”
Sacramento Kings - helping feed NBA fans across the country since 2011
I don't know who commissioned it
But the questions ask a ton about “NAACP Chapter President Betty Williams” in a hypothetical matchup with District 8 incumbent Bonnie Pannell (who has pretty much supported KJ in the arena fight). As has been pointed out, it’s a push poll and the demographics are really skewed. Not only that, but half of the respondents polled were in District 8 (because of the whole Williams/Pannell thing) which skews the demographics even more. Oddly enough, despite the fact that at the very top of the poll it notes that there were a total of 400 interviews and 200 were in District 8, the listing of District residence in the demographics says that 8% were in District 8. I count 50%, so there’s something fishy or really sloppy with the poll off the bat.
yeah I dunno what the "interviews within District 8" means (could have been surveys done directly downtown technically but people said they were from elsewhere)
either way though, not a push poll
Not a push poll?
Some people say that Kevin Johnson has not delivered on his promises to create jobs and improve our schools. Crime is up, the homeless situation is still out of control, our city faces more budget problems and our schools continue to struggle. Instead of leading to create jobs and help small businesses expand, Mayor Johnson is too focused on improving the downtown night life and helping the Kings. When he doesn’t get his way he wants to change the rules. We need a Mayor who has the right priorities and can bring the city together.
Given what you’ve heard, if the election were held today, would you definitely vote to re-elect Johnson, probably vote to re-elect Johnson, probably vote for someone else or definitely vote for someone else?
I guess maybe I’m not 100% right on the definition of a push poll, because that’s what that question looks like to me. There were several about Pannell in that vein, too.
by Capt. Factorial on Feb 1, 2012 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
You and I have very different definitions of a push poll
look, if this was in the middle of July and the questionarre was sent out to 3,000 people don’t get me wrong I would absolutely agree.
400 people though in late January? In New Hampshire that might be considered a push poll I suppose but it’s more commonly known as message testing. To me, that’s testing campaign messages. And given we are still weeks away from having to file, it’s kind of the time when people want to do it.
Basically, whoever commissioned this is fishing.
Right
A push poll is straight-up candidate marketing under the guise of information gathering.
This is titled information gathering.
One thing is absolutely clear (if it wasn't already)
If whoever runs against KJ gets a sizeable war chest, they will absolutely be running with the “selling public assets for an arena for the Kings and Maloofs” message because it works with a strong voting demographic (40+ years of age).
by wallywagon11 on Feb 1, 2012 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
I think the issue is with the Bee running this
Sacramento Kings - helping feed NBA fans across the country since 2011
How is that an issue? And how are they running with it?
seems like Lillis covered it pretty well
by wallywagon11 on Feb 1, 2012 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
Sorry, I should have expanded a bit there
I think the headline treats it as a factual polling, when it’s pretty questionable stuff. Lillis expands on it a bit in the meat of the article – but I’m just not sure how newsworthy this poll is, other than to editorialize against KJ.
And it’s just my opinion, but if you consider push polling as “candidate marketing”, I don’t see why you can’t use the term for “anti-candidate marketing” as well.
But it’s probably a semantics discussion at this point.
Sacramento Kings - helping feed NBA fans across the country since 2011
OK, I see that I've been using "push poll" wrong for years
I guess I don’t know what to call a poll that has questions which lead the respondents to a particular answer, as some of the questions on this poll clearly do. Whatever such a poll is called, you can’t be terribly surprised that support for KJ’s reelection was tepid when asked in a question that basically spent 20 seconds calling him a poopyhead. And you sure can’t look at those numbers as accurately representing the view of the public. Not that you disagree, I’m just saying that was my point.
by Capt. Factorial on Feb 1, 2012 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
it's message testing
it’s just testing different messages on the public and seeing which ones work better to get people to vote the way you want them to. And yeah, you are correct, the numbers don’t accurately represent the view of the public at all. However, they do give an idea of what messages alter people’s views quickly in different age groups, different ethnicities, and in different districts within the city.
This will basically give you a good idea of what direction all the crappy campaign ads will be going in come November.
by wallywagon11 on Feb 1, 2012 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
I shouldn't say they don't represent the view of the public at all necessarily because it shows that something might be a contious or wedge issue
but I think you get the idea
by wallywagon11 on Feb 1, 2012 10:41 AM PST up reply actions
damn it
contentious not contious
Signing off for awhile to do some actual work
by wallywagon11 on Feb 1, 2012 10:41 AM PST up reply actions
What is this "work" that you speak of?
GREENE! You’ve been superfluously apostrophe’d! - andy sims
iashwash, you are the voice of reason - Holmdel
It probably involves a lot of talking to one's self...
"I gotta have more cowbell"
by CowbellKings on Feb 2, 2012 10:56 AM PST up reply actions
The problem is still making it seem as though the only beneficiary is the NBA team
Then somehow the correct picture needs to get out. Emphasize the jobs and economic stimulus the investment will provide. Ask the naysayers if they are ready to pack up and crawl in a hole somewhere to avoid the cost of investments?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 3:42 PM PST reply actions
What bogus polling
It serves a purpose and was pretty smart. Gets them some headlines and starts to shape a narrative around KJ that could cost him the election, but success cures all things though. If the arena plan is funded and the Kings stay then KJ is a hero and unbeatable.
"I gotta have more cowbell"
That settles it -

This one-horse town needs a new mare.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
I really hope that the Sac State Hornets will find a way to play in the new arena
We could use a little bit of college hoops action around here (baby steps, I know), and I think that the community would come out and support a winner (especially with $6-10 tickets). I’m a bit biased as a native of Syracuse, but nevertheless…it would be fun.
Something tells me that, with some success, Sac State could find a way to upgrade from the Big Sky to perhaps the WCC. Of course, they haven’t exactly lit it up in the Big Sky recently.
I’ve been to a few games at the Hornets Nest and, while alot of fun, it is so woefully short of the Division I hoops experience. I did see Geoff Petrie there once before.
Better yet, why not consolidate Davis and Sac State into UC Sacramento! Talk about a win-win for the region and the university…most people outside of NorCal have no idea where Davis is, although it has quietly become one of the top 25 engineering schools in the US.
I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.
To be honest, I would think booking the Hornets would only be if there is nothing at else remotely possible they can fill the slot with
unless a ton of people started showing up all of a sudden. Plus, would definitely need to charge more than that (likely user fee plus enough revenue to make it worth the arena operator’s time).
And I have a feeling neither the State or UC system would be a big fan of that idea.
Again, I have Orange-colored glasses on in this case
I grew up seeing 20-25K at a college basketball game (30K+ for the big games). And Syracuse is about 1/4th the size of Sacramento.
I know that it is a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum, but I can’t help but feel like you could get 5-6K out to a Hornets game on a given night if they were halfway decent and tickets were reasonably priced.
I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by 















