* These numbers from BSP Research are not only old, but the poll was taken over an unusually long period, March 15-23. It sure took them long enough to release the results…

With one week remaining until Chicago’s mayoral runoff election on April 4, Northwestern University’s Center for the Study of Diversity and Democracy (CSDD) and a coalition of Black and Latino nonprofits released the results of a second nonpartisan poll showing candidates Brandon Johnson and Paul Vallas in a neck-and-neck race to the finish line.

Overall, the choice among voters is evenly split between Vallas and Johnson, with each candidate earning 44% of the overall vote, with 12% undecided.

When broken down by race/ethnicity, Black registered voters favor Johnson by a wide margin. Fifty-five percent have decided to vote for or lean toward Johnson, versus 28% favoring Vallas. Among Latino registered voters, 46% favor Vallas, while 35% prefer Johnson. Registered white voters are the most split between candidates with 51% voting for or leaning toward Vallas and 42% for Johnson. One interesting finding is that one-third of Latinos think Vallas also may be Latino.

It was 40-40 without including leaners.

Methodology is here.

* Because the horserace numbers are relatively old, let’s look beyond them to some issues…

The poll found that reducing crime is far and away the most important issue, with 50% of registered voters saying it is an important issue. Likewise, across race/ethnicity, 49% of Latino, 53% of Black and 50% of white voters cited crime as the most important issue. There were substantial differences across age, with 80% of registered voters over 65 years of age saying reducing crime is an important issue and 31% of 18- to 29-year-old voters saying it is an important issue.

Despite the concern over crime, 30% of Black voters said police reform was the second most important issue. Among Latinos and whites, 35% of Latinos and 31% of whites said the rising cost of living was the second most important issue.

* Vallas voters and leaners were asked: “Here is a list of reasons why people may vote for Paul Vallas. For each, tell us whether this factor was VERY important, somewhat important, or not important at all in your decision to support him”…

* Same question for Johnson voters and leaners…

* Never underestimate the voters’ desire to want two seemingly opposite things at once…

Still very odd, though. And if that second result is even close to accurate, it upends everything we’re supposed to believe about this contest.

* Back to the press release…

Preferred characteristics: The survey also asked about important characteristics in supporting a candidate for mayor. For voters overall, the top two characteristics were being progressive and fighting for progressive issues (37%) and experience as an elected official (36%). Another strong preference among Latinos is that “the candidate truly understands their community (35%).”

Lastly, the poll shows high levels of perceived commonality by Black and Latino voters. When asked how much they think Latino and Black voters have in common, 75% of Latino registered voters said they had a great deal or a fair amount in common. Among Black registered voters, 73% said they have a great deal or a fair amount in common.

       

15 Comments - The Truth - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 12:46 pm: So…defunding the police is…popular??? - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 12:47 pm: “one-third of Latinos think Vallas also may be Latino” The new ad in Spanish should be Pablo Vallas. - Arsenal - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 12:47 pm: ==Still very odd, though. And if that second result is even close to accurate, it upends everything we’re supposed to believe about this contest.== I think part of the issue is that in political campaigns we talk about crime in a very muddled way. Like, “Cops will stop crime but not hurt innocent people” is what we all want, but the conversation is all about funding. - Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 12:57 pm: ===The poll found that reducing crime is far and away the most important issue=== I think it has been a lot of fun watching people interpret what this means into how they convince voters that they’ll reduce crime and how several of those approaches suggest that the people behind the messaging, mailers, and ads have what I might describe as a condescending attitude towards their audience. Voters may be more sophisticated than “just let the police do whatever they want to address crime” especially when Chicago has a history of detaining and torturing people until they confess to crimes and attempting to bait people into breaking the law in black neighborhoods. - Goodson Oddman - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 1:08 pm: Some theories how folks can opt for the seemingly counter intuitive “more cops” and “less cop funding” at the same time, since I sorta land there. 1. Investment in dealing with the root causes is a long term solution, but more officers are needed short term. 2. Belief that there are or so many upcoming or current vacancies will be need to be filled even if the budget drops. 3. The department needs “new blood” to ultimately reduce the costs of expensive lawsuits and settlement over misconduct. 4. Hiring more new officers means less overtime pay for older officers. 5. Cuts in police budgets can come from shiny toys (Shotspotter, military surplus gear) - bored now - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 1:11 pm: == Never underestimate the voters’ desire to want two seemingly opposite things at once… == it’s like you’ve you’ve done campaigns before… - low level - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 1:21 pm: Not atypical. Voters often say they want to cut the deficit but dont want to cut any programs or pay more in taxes to actually reduce the defecit. - Anon324 - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 1:21 pm: In addition to the issues Rich pointed out, their poll wasn’t particularly accurate in the first round (Johnson at 9%, Vallas at 19%), yet they didn’t do anything to adjust their methodology. Something positive for team Johnson, but ultimately not particularly meaningful as a useful data point. - SaulGoodman - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 1:43 pm: ** their poll wasn’t particularly accurate in the first round** Dated when? - Techie - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 2:03 pm: I agree with Goodson Oddman that, despite what is often said about voters and nuance, there actually is some nuance going on here. While voters surely realize something has to be done in the short term to address crime, many also know that long-term solutions are also needed. Short term requirements might be to hire more officers and train them differently/better. But long term, there must be efforts to address the reasons people commit crimes. That means investing in people who lack the resources they need to succeed and take care of themselves and their families. This is what I think many supporters of “defund the police” really have in mind; by investing in social programs and services aimed at the poor and middle class, over time crime will naturally decline because there will be fewer people who want to commit crime. And thus in the long term society will be able to divert funding from police to social programs. - Tim - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 2:14 pm: The previous Northwestern CSDD poll was released in mid-February. It obviously didn’t account for the Johnson surge, but I wonder who else they missed. https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2023/02/new-poll-reveals-common-ground-on-key-issues-among-black-and-latino-voters-in-chicago-mayoral-race/ - Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 3:21 pm: investing in social programs and services aimed at the poor and middle class, over time crime will naturally decline because there will be fewer people who want to commit crime. Do you have a study you can cite that illustrates how spending more on social programs reduces violent crime and gang violence over drugs? - Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 3:34 pm: ==how spending more on social programs== It can’t hurt. We should be spending more on programs such as mental health services (yes, that is a social program). I really hope you don’t have a role somewhere in setting public policy. And I really hope you never get anywhere near such a role. - Cricket - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 3:55 pm: Regarding “Never underestimate the voters’ desire to want two seemingly opposite things at once…” I think I understand what people saying: a) Crime is rampant and we want more police to get the criminals off the street. b) But, we should also invest in addressing the root cause of crime because one we address the root cause, we won’t need to hire and keep so many police officers. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 28, 23 @ 5:45 pm: Rich, thanks for the post, To this post, to be honest I’ve looked at it seven ways to Sunday and this… ===And if that second result is even close to accurate, it upends everything we’re supposed to believe about this contest.=== … I’ll tell ya, the postmortem after will be more fascinating then the end results Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.