Last night Survey USA and KPIX CBS 5 released a new poll showing that our campaign for Congress remains largely unchanged. With 25 percent of the vote, I still lead the pack, with Senator Mark DeSaulnier at 16 percent, Assemblymember Joan Buchanan at 12 percent, Anthony Woods at 9 percent, and undecided voters at 5 percent. This largely mirrors every publicly released poll since I entered the election.

Among Democrats, my lead is even starker: 37 percent favor me, 23 percent favor DeSaulnier, 18 percent favor Buchanan, 13 percent favor Woods, and only 2 percent are undecided. Most importantly, our great team of volunteers is effectively converting the support identified in the Survey USA and other polls into actual votes cast. Among those who have already voted, our considerable lead holds: 27 percent voted for me, 18 percent for DeSaulnier, 13 percent for Buchanan, and 10 percent for Woods.

Our lead holds among all demographic groups, including Obama voters, men, women, all age groups, all races, all levels of educational achievement, and all income levels. Our support is broad based and diverse. As the only candidate who has represented all corners of the 10th Congressional District, the voters know where I stand. As CBS 5 explained, “DeSaulnier and Buchanan have failed to make inroads since CBS 5’s last poll 16 days ago.”

Clearly, with Election Day fast approaching this Tuesday, we like where we stand.

The poll explains the what, but it fails to explain the why. I’m proud of the campaign we’ve run. We’re convinced the polls are a reflection of voter support for a positive issues-based campaign that has emphasized solid Democratic principles and experience that can deliver results.

Health care over the flip…

We’ve made it clear that the 10th Congressional District will be represented by a proven Democrat unafraid to stand up to the insurance companies, unwavering in the need for a public option in health care reform, and undeniably committed to advancing single-payer Medicare for All health care as the long term solution to our broken health care system. Today our campaign released a new podcast on health care policy, and I’d encourage you to take a listen. You can also visit our health care issue page for a more thorough rundown of where I stand on the key issues surrounding health care.

I have the endorsement of the California Nurses Association, and the largest progressive weekly in the Bay Area, the San Francisco Bay Guardian, called me “California’s first and best insurance commissioner” for a reason. I took on the insurance companies and turned the agency into the best consumer protection agency in America. I was also a persistent advocate for universal health care and many of the principles I laid out in my first term in office became the health care blueprint Bill Clinton used in his 1992 presidential campaign. During the 1992 Democratic convention, I had the honor of being invited by President Clinton to be the primary speaker on health care policy, and in this campaign, I am proud to have received endorsements from President Clinton, Vice President Al Gore, and the region’s major newspapers.

On September 1st, voters in California’s 10th Congressional District will elect their new representative. For those whose passion is health care reform, it must be noted that my experience battling the insurance companies is not only unique among my competitors in this election, but it is unique among other members of Congress. We think the polls are a good reflection of where this election stands, and if so, our side in the health care fight will have a new effective advocate in Washington soon.

Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi, a candidate for California’s 10th Congressional District, is the chair of the California Commission for Economic Development and a twice elected State Insurance Commissioner. He stands with Dr. Howard Dean in demanding a robust public option. For more information, please visit http://www.garamendi.org.

(cross-posted from ATM Watch)

In Survey USA's post-debate poll of 317 California adults who watched the GOP debate on Thursday (h/t The Right's Field), a full 30% felt that Giuliani had won the debate; Romney and McCain were essentially tied for second place with 12% and 11% respectively; and 16% of respondents weren't sure who had won. The partisan breakdown of respondents was 45% Republican, 30% Democratic and 22% Decline to State.

What I find more interesting than winners and losers though is the fact that Survey USA had to poll 2,400 Californians to find 317 who'd actually seen the debate. That's a paltry 13% response rate. Compare that to the survey of South Carolina adults after the Democrats debated there a week prior. There, of the 1,250 SC adults interviewed, 403 said they had listened to the debate, or an enviable 32%. Survey USA draws an interesting conclusion:

For comparison purposes, 1 in 3 South Carolinians watched the Democratic debate, compared to 1 in 8 Californians who watched the Republican debate. Californians are far less engaged in political process than Carolinians, at this stage.

More (including a look at the poll’s crosstabs) over the flip…

On one hand this shouldn't come as too much of a shock considering South Carolina is used to being one of the early primary states and Californians are clearly electioned out after at least one election a year since 2002. But this conclusion implies that the two things are equivalent when really they're apples and oranges.

I'd argue that what Survey USA really should have concluded is that:

Californians are far less engaged in the political process when it comes to Republican field than Carolinians are when it comes to the Democratic field.

California is a blue state, Arnold notwithstanding, so it follows that we'd be less interested in the Republican field. And while South Carolina is a red state, over half the voting population is African American, so certainly a field that includes arguably the first viable African American presidential candidate would inspire more excitement there. And hell, 28% more people watched the Democratic debate nationwide anyway. There is clearly more excitement about the Democratic presidential candidates than their Republican counterparts in general, so it follows that that trend would be replicated at the state level. 

One of the key arguments in favor of the early primary has been that actually having a say in the process will increase voter engagement, something California desperately needs and I still think it will. But the extent to which there is truth to Survey USA's conclusion, we need to watch this question over the coming months. If this year's Democratic field can't excite a disillusioned California electorate, we're worse off than I thought.

An inspection of the poll's full cross-tabs reveals some interesting findings:

– Former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore showed signs of life in CA with an unusually strong 8% of the vote, beating even California's own Duncan Hunter. Gilmore was particularly strong among respondents who considered themselves "liberal" and those between 18-34 years of age. In fact, among both those groups, Gilmore's plan for Iraq ties McCain for second best behind Giuliani's. And on the question of whose immigration plan was best, Gilmore ties Tancredo, Romney and Hunter (8%) for 3rd place behind Giuliani (31%) and McCain (11%.) Does anyone even remember Gilmore's plans for Iraq or immigration?

– Giuliani enjoys more support from self-described conservatives than he does overall. While Giuliani was chosen as winner by 30% of the respondents, 32% of conservatives polled said Giuliani won the debate. Interestingly, when broken down by party affiliation, Giuliani enjoys 30+% support among both Republicans and Democrats but that number plummets to 19% among those that consider themselves Independents.

– While illegal immigration crusader Tom Tancredo only polled at 4% overall, the groups he did show strength among were conservatives (5%), Independents (9%) and, perhaps most interestingly, Asian-Americans (10%.)   

– As for the gender gap, women were more likely to support Gilmore than men were (11% to 7%) and were less likely to support Romney (10% to 13%) or McCain (9% to 12%) than their male counterparts were. But perhaps most telling, women were much more likely to be unsure as to who won the debate (25%) than men were (13%.)