Subject: Regressions and targets
From: "Andrew Baumann" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], "Tara McGuinness" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Begala, Paul" <[email-masked]>, "Susan McCue" <[email-masked]>, "John Podesta" <[email-masked]>, "ic2008" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:22:30 -0500

Tom,

We ran two sets of regressions.  In the first set we modeled the
relationship between the attacks on McCain and shifts in his various
attributes.  These results were mostly inconclusive.  Whereas with the
other three candidates we saw clear indications that certain attacks
were effective across a range of attributes, this did not occur with
McCain. 

In order to dig deeper, we then ran a second set of regressions looking
at the relationship between the six attributes and McCain's favorability
rating and the vote.  This was much more revealing.

We found that bringing the "right kind of change" was a VERY STRONG
predictor of McCain's favorability ratings.  Being seen as "too close to
Bush," a "strong leader" and "in Washington too long" were also
significant predictors, but not to the same level as bringing the "right
kind of change."  Conversely, "willing to say or do anything" and
"honest and trustworthy" do not have a significant impact on McCain's
favorability ratings.

On the vote, we again saw that bringing the "right kind of change" was a
strong predictor.  Being "too close to Bush" was not quite as strong,
but is also clearly significant.  None of the other four attributes
proved to be significant.

These are hopeful results.  Our most important task seems to be
convincing voters that McCain will represent more of Bush and can not
bring the kind of change we need.  Thankfully, these are the areas were
we had some success in generating a shift in the survey.

Moreover, the first round of regressions did show that attacking McCain
for his support for Bush on the economy had a strong impact in shifting
voters on McCain bringing the "right kind of change" while attacking
McCain for his support for Bush on Iraq had a smaller, but still
significant, impact in shifting voters on McCain being "too close to
Bush."  

Taken together, this presents a pretty clear picture that attacking
McCain on his support for Bush on the economy and Iraq have the greatest
ability to move voters on the attributes that are most critical to his
overall support.  This, of course, concurs with what we saw in the
crosstabs - that the Iraq and economy attacks are our strongest avenues
of approach.  Weaving both of these attacks together into a narrative
that ties McCain to Bush and presents him as a defender of the status
quote, in our opinion, is the strongest tack at this point.

Conversely, this data shows that going after McCain on ethics or honesty
is unlikely to pay real dividends at this juncture.  For one, our
attacks generally fail to have a large impact in convincing voters that
McCain is dishonest or unethical.  For another, even if we could move
voters on these attributes, this would have a smaller impact on McCain's
overall standing or the vote.  

Also, we have attached some tables that show the groups that were the
largest shifters against McCain on the vote and on the attributes for
use by the media folks in targeting.

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Andrew

 

 

Andrew Baumann

Analyst

10 G Street NE, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20002

Phone: 202 478 8300 / Fax: 202 478 8301

[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>  

www.greenbergresearch.com <http://www.greenbergresearch.com>