I wish WCAX would pay Research 2000 to run their polls with a real sample size. 400, even parsed out as professionally as the top-notch R2K folks do, is still small, and it leaves us with a 5% margin of error, which just seems too big. Usually, 600 is considered a good floor. Ah well, at least they’re numbers, and I thank WCAX for doing it.

So how do these numbers stack up, and what do they say when juxtaposed against what we now know are numbers from an internal primary poll?

WCAX has, this time, posted most of its crosstabs, meaning I don’t have to go fishing around for them and print them here as I have in previous election cycles with their polls. So here, again, is the link.

First of all, I wish the numbers were better, of course. Statistically, the leading candidates are in a tossup with Dubie, but it’d be nice if that quantum polling edge leaned a bit more our way. The early polls show Dubie ahead against 4 out of 5 Dems – the exception being Markowitz. Although her lead is well within the margin of error, its still bragging rights which should serve to regain much of her lost momentum in recent months. Racine sits behind Dubie at the outer edge of the margin of error – 5%.

That Bartlett lags back so far (18%) is no surprise given her name recognition challenges – and certainly name recognition is going to account for much of what we’re reading here. What may be a surprise is that Dunne trails Dubie in his head-to-head by 8%, while Shumlin trails by 10%. Well within the small polls margin, sure, but that’s gotta be a drag for Shumlin, who has been so prominent in the news of late. On the other hand, Dunne has appeared on a statewide ballot more recently, so that level of recognition is likely in his favor.

Putting Pollina into the mix was an interesting exercise (link), but it seems like unlikely (woops) he’ll run for Governor this time around, so its largely meaningless. His entry does draw down numbers from both the R and the D, but tend to impact the Ds more, even drawing Markowitz’s numbers under Dubie (all of which is still within the margin of error, though – that 5% is a mighty big grain of salt).

Of the three that sit closest together on the polls (Shumlin, Racine, Dunne) one has to call them statistically tied. Here’s where that margin of error also gives you strange results. Racine can be said to be statistically in a tossup with Dubie. Shumlin and Dunne can claim to be in a statistical tossup with Racine – and yet Shumlin and Dunne cannot therefore claim to be in a statistical tossup with Dubie themselves.

Arg. 600 people next time – please?

Anyways… the fav/unfavs give us a lot more to work with:

FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE NO OPINION

Brian Dubie 46% 33% 21%

Deb Markowitz 48% 28% 24%

Anthony Pollina 38% 31% 31%

Doug Racine 38% 30% 32%

Peter Shumlin 33% 21% 46%

Matt Dunne 34% 19% 47%

Susan Bartlett 26% 11% 63%

The good news is, when you compare these numbers to the head to heads, one thing stands out: the more the public seems to know the Democratic candidate, the better they look against Dubie. In Vermont, this trend is likely to continue over time as it generally has with Democratic statewide candidates (the exception being Symington, whose favorables took a big late-cycle crash as folks came to recognize her name, introduced to her, as many were, through the kerfuffle over her tax returns).

Markowitz is the more widely recognized Dem and is the one in the strongest position. On the other hand, she has fewer “no opinions” to work with.

It’s fascinating to me that Shumlin and Dunne have polled almost exactly the same when you look at the head to heads as well as the favorables. It’s surprising, but Shumlin can certainly take comfort that, while he isn’t polling as strong as he’d like against Dubie (or as compared to Dunne), there’s a surprisingly high number of “no opinions” he has yet to be introduced to (at least I was surprised – thought his name was out there a bit more).

In fact, as a ratio, all the Dems favorables-vs-unfavorable numbers track very, very closely. They’re all on the same curve. That’s interesting. On issues, sure they have all been very similar, but they cut very different public figures. What this says to me is that this has as much to do with their identification as partisan figures, as their individual identities as candidates.

This could suggest that the trend this year will be less about individuals – more Democrat versus Republican than Dubie vs whoever. If that holds true, it could also be more bad news for Dubie.

However, Vermont has a tiny voting population, and tiny voting populations turn on a dime. Republicans often win through game-changing gimmicks – video of a bad press conference, poorly released tax returns, etc. They’ll be on he lookout for that.

On the other hand, their own candidate is going to be uniquely vulnerable to embarrassing moments, so they’d best watch out.

How does all this fit in to the leaked primary data? Well, that’s a completely different animal. Here’s a reminder of what we were told yesterday:

Its a poll of likely primary voters and will reportedly show Racine at 30%, Shumlin, Markowitz, and Dunne tied at 16%, Bartlett at 3% and the difference presumably undecided….And the pollsters apparently mispronounced Dunne’s

name as “Dune” – could it have cost him a point or 2?

Name recognition, for one, is going to be closer to universal among likely primary voters – the exception being Lamoille Senator Bartlett who still has to get to know many of the Dem voters).

Primary voters are a smaller – and more dynamic – lot, and they will be driven to support who they think is electable in the general election on the one hand, and on generally progressive issues (especially via constituency groups) on the other. Certainly all the candidates can make the electability claim (although Bartlett would have to speak very theoretically with those numbers on her back), but the WCAX poll could well give Markowitz the boost she needs to start breaking out of that second place primary pack (which she can’t be happy about being in, given the time and money already invested).

What’s interesting is that Racine’s strong showing among Dems cannot easily be written off to name recognition. It says that concerns about the “fire in the belly” passion issue will not be enough in and of themselves to keep him from winning, so his opponents will likely have to start hitting him more directly and specifically if they want to close that gap. With one candidate that significantly ahead of the others, this could well coalesce into a 2-person, rather than a 3-person race as we go through the summer. Markowitz and Dunne both come at the game from outside the legislature – Dunne even from outside Montpelier – which will make it simpler for them to distinguish themselves. Both could be well-positioned to consolidate the non-Racine primary vote and scoop up a lot of those undecideds over the coming months.

Shumlin, as the Senate President, will have to make his case on leadership and gravitas, and will more directly eat into Racine’s numbers if he gets the traction.

Bartlett clearly has work to do.

A big moral to this story? All of these name recognition numbers are already stronger than most of our non-primaried gubernatorial candidates were at this time. That’s only going to increase as the primary further heats up. And as we see above, the more the public knows the Dem, the better they fare against Dubie and that rock-solid Republican 42-46% that he can expect come November.

So as simple as 1+1=2, then, there is no question that this primary is a good thing, and could well play a vital role in a Democratic return to the Governor’s race – so long as it doesn’t get out of hand.

Let’s work hard to be sure that it doesn’t.