Gary Johnson Polling Numbers and Favorability Ratings Drop in New Mexico

Former two term New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, who is the leading candidate for the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination, has seen his polling numbers and favorability ratings drop in his home state according to Public Policy Polling.

Gary Johnson’s third party Presidential bid may be hurting his image in his home state. In December his favorability rating was on positive ground at 45/39 and 23% of voters said they’d choose him in a three way contest with Obama and Romney. Now his favorability numbers have flipped negative to 37/42 and he gets only 15% as a third party candidate. Obama leads Romney 48-35 when Johnson’s included so it doesn’t look like he’d have a real strong spoiler effect one way or another.

This was a state-level poll, so there are no corresponding national numbers. Thanks to Public Policy Polling for including Gary Johnson in the polling at IPR’s request.

46 thoughts on “Gary Johnson Polling Numbers and Favorability Ratings Drop in New Mexico

  1. Trent Hill Post author

    If I were a libertarian activist who liked Johnson and was looking to maximize his vote, or a member of his campaign staff, I’d spend my limited funds in New Mexico.

    Well, not in New Mexico per se. I’d spend my money on online advertising (google ads or Facebook ads) which were targeted towards New Mexico voters. That’s where his name ID is best.

  2. Thomas L. Knapp

    Interesting. PPP considers a 39% negative rating “favorable?”

    Back in 2000, Dick Morris’s argument against Hillary Clinton running for president was that it’s stupid to run for anything with negatives higher than 35%.

  3. Trent Hill Post author

    Question–is it likely the LP will make it on in 50 states? I’ve been seeing questions about Oklahoma already.

  4. Robert Capozzi

    2 tk, I read that to mean his favorable exceeded his unfavorable rating.

    It may or may not be “stupid” to run for office TO WIN with an unfavorable rating of 35%+, but the calculus of running for office to raise consciousness seems different to me.

  5. paulie

    Trent,

    Richard Winger seems to think that the Oklahoma lawsuit has a good chance based on precedents. Richard is the expert on that, of course, but he also tends to be overly optimistic at times. Unfortunately, Scott K continues his vendetta against us and thus we were not welcome to work in Oklahoma, which we offered to do when it started (or pre-offered before it started, actually). They only fell short by 10,000 valid signatures, so we could have easily made the difference. The smart thing would have been to have us go in there as soon as Arkansas ended last year, since we were right next door.

    As for the remaining states, I am mostly optimistic, but Scott is being put in charge of Connecticut again, which failed last time and led to Maine failing, again completely as a result of his vendetta against us (among other things, I was in Mass literally a mile and a half from the Connecticut border and working as a team with a Connecticut resident but was sent to work in Alabama instead; Jake, who was experienced in Connecticut, was about to head there from WV when Scott told him to not go there, and ended up in Alabama as well, where we had more than enough people).

    Whether the same type of poor decisionmaking will cause the LP to fail in any states this year, I guess we’ll see. They would have already failed in ND if not for us acting “without authorization,” although they could have still gotten Johnson on as independent later had that happened. For details see discussion thread at http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/04/22/north-dakota-approves-party-status-for-americans-elect-constitution-and-libertarian-parties/

  6. Robert Capozzi

    5 p: …his vendetta against us…

    me: Who is “us,” P? Your firm? You and Andy?

  7. paulie

    Me, Andy, Jake Witmer, Bob Lynch, Mark Pickens (although he rarely petitions anymore), and would also include Fincher, although we no longer associate with him for other reasons. Also anyone Scott associates with us.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie,

    I don’t have all of the details at my mental command, but is it really a one-way “vendetta?”

    My recollection is that one or more of the people you name above claim that Kolhaas stiffed them for pay owed while lining his pocket on a signature campaign.

    I have no way of knowing whether that claim is true or not, but if it’s true why the hell would the stiffed workers or their associates be willing to work for him and risk getting stiffed again?

    And if it’s not true then him not being willing to work with the people saying it, or those closely associated with them, would hardly fall into personal vendetta territory.

  9. paulie

    My recollection is that one or more of the people you name above claim that Kolhaas stiffed them for pay owed while lining his pocket on a signature campaign.

    I have no way of knowing whether that claim is true or not, but if it’s true why the hell would the stiffed workers or their associates be willing to work for him and risk getting stiffed again?

    It’s true, and I was there when it happened. http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20070721.pdf page 14-15.

    It’s also true that we are not really interested in working with him again.

    Fact is, there is no need to hire him as a fundraiser for any state ballot access, because he is just calling around to the LP national membership lists (which he kept for using multiple times even though his original contract was for one time use, from what I understand). The LP could actually hire people to do that without paying them a high 40% commission like what Scott charges, but the same donors would be getting hit up.

    And even if he does raise money for any state, it does not mean he has to have anything to do with hiring petitioners or keeping petitioners from being hired or with paying anyone. On the vast majority of campaigns I have worked on, I have no idea who the fundraiser is, and don’t care – and the fundraiser has no idea who the petitioners are and doesn’t care either. Even if there was a reason to hire Scott as a fundraiser all he would have to do is raise the money, have it sent to the states in question, and get his cut of it every week. There is absolutely no reason for him to then be telling states that they should or should not hire so and so petitioners, or have anything to do with the disbursement of any of the money raised other than his commission.

    For example, in Arkansas Scott did raise the money and despite him and Dondero’s throwing a fit, myself, Andy and Bob did get hired as petitioners, did get the bulk of the job done (Darryl Bonner did most of the rest, and Eric came in for a week or two and left for no good reason), the job did get completed, we did get paid, and Scott did make a bunch of money as well. No problems with that and no reason that couldn’t have worked in Oklahoma, except that there Scott did succeed in convincing the state LP that we are just a bunch of drug addicts and whoremongers who don’t get good numbers or good validity and all the other crap that we have had multiple state LPs tell us he tells them so that they don’t hire us.

    We can work for state parties or for the national party; why would the fundraiser be the boss, especially when other fundraisers can do the same thing for less?

  10. Robert Capozzi

    Wasn’t the “open thread” created to allow petitioner grievances to be aired?

    Just sayin’…

  11. paulie

    Yep. I was just answering Trent’s question and followup question. If anyone wants to continue this aspect of the discussion take it over there.

  12. paulie

    No, he’s right. I went into more detail than I should have here and should have taken it to the appropriate thread after the first round.

  13. paulie

    The latest email from Gary Johnson’s campaign again presumes 50 state ballot access – not yet impossible, but hardly a safe bet – and ignores Americans Elect:


    Friends of Liberty,

    All over the country, liberty-minded activists are preparing to converge next week to nominate the Libertarian Party candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States.

    With those nominations, the 2012 history-making begins. There are only three candidates for President who will be on the November ballot in all 50 states. The Republican candidate – most likely, Mitt Romney; the Democrat candidate, Barack Obama; and the Libertarian Party nominee. Essentially a three-way race for the White House. And as you well know, I hope to be that ‘third’ choice as the Libertarian nominee.

    In poll after poll, large majorities of voters are making it clear that they are, more than ever before, open to the idea of a fiscally conservative, socially tolerant candidate – a choice that will not be offered by Mitt Romney or Barack Obama. Those voters are also making it clear that the business-as-usual represented by the tired two-party duopoly is not what they want in 2012.

    You and I have worked long and hard to get where we are today. Our goal has been – and remains – putting liberty, truly smaller government, and individual freedom on the American political agenda. Well, friends, we are on the verge of doing just that. Thanks to your support and hard work, we are within a few short days of achieving what the elite media and the political establishment never believed could happen: An election in which Gary Johnson will be on the ballot – in every state – as a very real alternative to Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

    Then, it gets extremely interesting. But only with your help. Yes, we have done the work, we have traveled far to get here, and we are on the verge of making history. We are giving America the choice they want and deserve. But that choice will only be real if we are able to get our message out. The Republican and Democrat establishments are amassing hundreds of millions of dollars to flood the airwaves, the phone lines and the Internet with their ever-shifting appeals.

    Without your help, our message of liberty and freedom will be lost in the two-party noise. We have earned our place in the national debate, but we won’t be heard without the financial resources to take our campaign to every corner of the nation – to build on the base that has been built by Ron Paul, by our campaign, and by you.

    With the nominating convention coming up next week, there are only a few days left to have your contributions ‘matched’ – or essentially doubled from the Presidential Campaign Matching Fund. Every one of those dollars is critical. Please go to GaryJohnson2012.com today and help seize the amazing opportunity we have, together, created for liberty, freedom and real prosperity. Ending needless wars, balancing the budget, getting the government out of boardrooms and bedrooms alike. We must tell America there is a candidate who will do those things, if given a chance. Your contribution will let us do just that.

    Go to GaryJohnson2012.com today and send that message. We ARE about to make history – and it begins in Las Vegas next week.

    Thank you,

    Gov. Gary Johnson

    P.S. Don’t forget, every dollar contributed, up to $250 per person, between now and May 5 will be matched. Double down!

  14. paulie

    Even if Johnson does wind up on all the ballots, it will take until August or even September to finish that; it will not happen in just a few days.

    And AE will also likely be on every ballot. If it’s a three way race, that third will be AE. At best Johnson can hope for a four way race, which seems highly unlikely at this stage.

  15. Trent Hill

    Johnson is wise to optimistically say he will be on all 50 state ballots until it’s impossible for him to do so. It makes him campaign seem more credible.

  16. Oranje Mike

    @Paulie

    I don’t see AE having much of an impact. The declared candidates for their ticket are lackluster. They could also find themselves dealing with legal issues. Some are keeping an eye on them in AZ. They have ballot access yet have recorded to expenses. If they’re not spending money how are they getting on the ballot here? A dedicated army of volunteers? No one I talk to knows what AE is? There could be some fishy business going on.

  17. Joe Buchman

    I note with considerable interest that Steve Kubby posted on his facebook page that Gary Johnson’s VP Choice called him today — and that he (Kubby) approves of that choice. I wonder how that will impact polling once it’s formally announced (according to Kubby) on Monday.

  18. paulie

    Trent,

    It sounds less credible to those of us who are up on the details. Granted that is not a lot of people. He should say on “50 ballots or close to it” and discounting AE is not sensible either.

    I don’t see AE having much of an impact. The declared candidates for their ticket are lackluster.

    I see them having a huge impact, far above and beyond the LP, and maybe even winning.

    They could also find themselves dealing with legal issues. Some are keeping an eye on them in AZ. They have ballot access yet have recorded to expenses. If they’re not spending money how are they getting on the ballot here?

    Elementary, dear Oranje Mike. A non-Arizona company was hired to get them on the ballot, thus no expenditures in Arizona. No, it was not volunteers.

    No one I talk to knows what AE is?

    They will.

    I note with considerable interest that Steve Kubby posted on his facebook page that Gary Johnson’s VP Choice called him today — and that he (Kubby) approves of that choice.

    Too bad no one has told me. Oh well, I guess I’ll wait. 415-690-6352 if someone wants to clue me in.

  19. Phillies for Treasurer

    AE’s impact will be tempered by outspending — [perhaps] Obama and Rmoney. Combined.

    There seems to be a lack of attention except by Paulie to their sponsors and their pockets.

  20. paulie

    irregulartimes.com is the best resource on them I’ve seen. Pretty negative though, so Ballot Access News and the horse’s mouth make good additional reading.

  21. Steven R Linnabary

    I would think that Johnson’s polling numbers could be better if the LP had a full slate of Congressional candidates in NM.

    But judging from the LPNM website, it doesn’t appear they are all that active.

    PEACE

  22. Thomas L. Knapp

    @25,26,

    I’m standing by with my random number generator in case the petition honcho insists on SSNs 😉

    GP @21,

    Last time I noticed, AE had raised about $30 million, but was supposedly going to pay most of that back to its “seed donors” with incoming small donations (presumably within the FEC limits).

    Unless the actual candidate or veep is a multi-billionaire (cough …. Bloomberg … cough), I don’t think they’ll match Romney or Obama. Some predict that Obama will hit $500 million, Romney half or more as much.

    BUT — if they are on the ballot in nearly every state, and have tens of millions to spend, they will still probably do well. They’ll be media darlings, and even if they don’t get beyond their “base” vote, that “base” is probably 20% or more.

  23. paulie

    I’m standing by with my random number generator in case the petition honcho insists on SSNs

    VRs ask for SSNs. Fortunately petitions don’t, at least in NM or most states.

    Speaking of that individual latest intel is that he is off the “bucket circuit” (info on that off IPR if anyone wants to know), returned briefly to petitioning to help get Rick Perry on the ballot, and is now in Southern Indiana either having had or about to have a large portion of or all of a leg amputated due to diabetes related sores.

    AE:

    Bloomberg is not the only rich guy in play. Huntsman, Trump, Meg Whitman among many possibilities.

    If none of the candidates are rich, AE backers can form a separate superpac or 527 or whatever and fund the race while keeping their promise not to fund it through AE directly and of course observing all campaign contribution limits.

  24. Andy

    “VRs ask for SSNs.”

    They can only ask for the last 4 digits (as a result of law suits), and they are not mandatory (inspite of what many people mistakenly believe).

    “Fortunately petitions don’t, at least in NM or most states.”

    I recall hearing that petitions in Virginia and Hawaii ask for SSN’s, but they are not mandatory and a signer can put their date of birth instead.

    I know that petitions in Kentucky used to ask for SSN’s or date of birth, but the eliminated the SSN box, and I don’t think that they ask for date of birth anymore either.

    Petitions in Pennsylvania used to ask for the occupation of the signers, but fortunately that box was eliminated.

  25. Andy

    “50 ballots or close to it”

    Americans Elect should be on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC.

  26. Andy

    “Trent Hill // Apr 26, 2012 at 3:29 am

    If I were a libertarian activist who liked Johnson and was looking to maximize his vote, or a member of his campaign staff, I’d spend my limited funds in New Mexico. ”

    The Badnarik for President campaign in 2004 targeted some of their limited resources to advertising in New Mexico due to New Mexico being a swing state (they tried to target a few swing states to see if they could have an effect on the outcome of the election). Although it didn’t really translate to a lot of votes in New Mexico it did have a positive effect. I petitioned for LP ballot access in New Mexico in 2005 and I encountered a suprising number of people who told me that they had seen/heard the Michael Badnarik for President ads and they all signed the petition enthusiastically.

    Maybe Gary Johnson will get more votes in New Mexico (assuming he gets the LP nomination) due to his name recognition.

  27. Andy

    “I note with considerable interest that Steve Kubby posted on his facebook page that Gary Johnson’s VP Choice called him today — and that he (Kubby) approves of that choice.”

    I wonder if it’s Jesse Ventura. Then again, would Jesse Ventura have Steve Kubby’s phone number? I wonder who it could be…

  28. Trent Hill Post author

    Who thought targetting a swing state was a good idea? It’d minimize votes due to “wasted vote syndrome”.

    I like the idea of targetting safe states. It’s tougher for Libertarians. But like, Goode ought to campaign heavily in Utah, Idaho, North California, Tennessee, Alabama, Illinois–states that are safe one way or the other–in addition to Virginia.

  29. Trent Hill Post author

    I had heard good things about the Like Wine Initativ in the last couple days–like that fundraising was ahead of where it was at this time during the 215 and 19 props. And that the polling was extremely positive.

  30. Andy

    “Trent Hill // Apr 27, 2012 at 1:30 am

    I had heard good things about the Like Wine Initativ in the last couple days–like that fundraising was ahead of where it was at this time during the 215 and 19 props. And that the polling was extremely positive.”

    Unless they have recently come up with a whole lot of money of which I’m not aware, I don’t see how they can make it on the California ballot this year. I keep up with what’s going on with the California petition scene and I know that none of the paid people are working on the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act. I see this as a sign that it’s not going to be on the 2012 ballot.

  31. Andy

    I also heard several weeks ago that they were way behind with their funding and that they were going to pull the plug on the idea of getting it on the 2012 ballot and that they were going to shoot for the 2014 ballot instead.

  32. Thomas L. Knapp

    Regulate Marijuana Like Wine’s plan was:

    1) To get some signatures using volunteers to show that people would be eager to sign. They managed that.

    2) To use (1) as promotional juice to raise some “seed money,” which would be used for a second round of signature gathering and for polling to gauge support, both of which would be used to pitch the measure to “major donor” prospects. They managed that as well. But …

    3) The “major donors” didn’t come on board.

    I’ve seen two reasons cited for that:

    a) There were competing initiatives, and it wasn’t until the last minute that most of the prominent cannabis activists came together around this one; and

    b) By the time Regulate Marijuana Like Wine demonstrated it could collect signatures, demonstrated 62% support in a legitimate poll, and got most of the state’s cannabis activists behind it, most of the major donors had already put the money they wanted to spend on the issue into initiatives in other states that looked good to pass and managed to get all their shit in one bag earlier.

    The plan now, as I understand it, is to shoot for 2014, and to plan to go 100% grassroots instead of hoping for the big money (not that it would be turned down, but the plan won’t depend on it so much).

    Disclosure: I’m familiar with the narrative above because I did some work for the initiative.

  33. Trent Hill Post author

    Well, that’s disappointing. I was looking forward to the success.

  34. Bill Wood

    The suspense builds on the mystery VP. Don’t think its Root, because Kubby likes the choice. In GJ townhalls his answers on who a good VP should be someone who can spread the Libertarian message, be well know and has money. Jennifer Aniston, Drew Cary, Penn Jillet come to mind. 😉

  35. paulie

    They can only ask for the last 4 digits (as a result of law suits), and they are not mandatory (inspite of what many people mistakenly believe).

    Some state forms ask, or used to ask, for the whole thing. They are not mandatory, but the registration can be made “provisional” without an SSN or DL number meaning the person will have to show their ID if they actually go vote. Back in the 90s when this happened there was still some controversy over whether the SSNs on VRs were mandatory or not.

    Leaving the box blank would have been OK but that means Gary would not have been paid, and he painted himself into a corner financially and needed the money even just to leave. “Guessing” SSNs…well, that has about as much chance of working as fedexing signatures to a coordinator after the state deadline. Ultimately the state did accept those VRs and Bill Redpath retroactively paid Gary for them, but in the meanwhile there was a slew of bad publicity for LPNM due to “guessing” SSNs.

    As with so many other things Gary does, he created a lot more drama and problems than needed. Most people fill in their SSNs like good little sheep (I’ve worked with VRs that asked for the whole things and it was not a huge problem). Every once in a while someone balks. If Gary was too principled to push them on it he could have let it go, I bet it would have affected less than 10% of his pay, but to him that’s like a scratch off and you know he can’t have that.

    Not that we really want to open up that can of worms again, do we? (Thanks, Tom and Andy!)

  36. paulie

    “50 ballots or close to it”

    Americans Elect should be on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC.

    True. I was referring to LP/Johnson.

  37. paulie

    I wonder if it’s Jesse Ventura.

    The rumor that I have heard is that Ventura will be at the LP convention on behalf of a VP candidate, but that candidate is not himself. Weird.

  38. Thomas L. Knapp

    I dreamed last night that the delegates amended the platform to call for the US Constitution to be amended to allow for the election of non-natural-born-citizens to the presidency, then nominated Julian Assange by acclamation.

    Pretty cool, but if I’m going to remember my dreams I’d much rather they had Christina Hendricks in them.

  39. Robert Capozzi

    This is actually pretty good politics here. Buzz about who the VP might be (assuming nomination) is something the LP doesn’t usu. engage in. And the names we’re seeing are all interesting choices.

    Doing a trial balloon with Kubby is an interesting move, too. Assuming someone said, “Hey, let’s get Kubby in the loop,” was smart, given that Kubby is a fair-minded “radical.”

    That tells me there’s a recognition that GJ could be taking things to another level. We don’t know what that level is just yet, which is part of the excitement.

    But the narrative holds together for me. Sure, it’s remote, but if I can get in the debates, I am qualified and the Rs and Ds are SO bad, who knows? Most people are fiscal cons and socially tolerant, I want to give the REAL silent majority a voice.

    And if I DON’T win, maybe we have a shot at 5%. Either way, I’m going to carry the flag as best I can. He’s even now calling for a “consumption tax” and seems to be backing off the FAIR tax in his public appearances.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *