1
00:00:01,435 --> 00:00:04,404
The Madison office of the
Independent Police Monitor

2
00:00:04,471 --> 00:00:08,041
will also investigate.
Turning to election news in

3
00:00:08,108 --> 00:00:11,612
the topsy turvy Democratic
primary for governor, some

4
00:00:11,678 --> 00:00:14,414
insights from this week's
Marquette Law School poll.

5
00:00:14,481 --> 00:00:17,351
Even though it was in the
field before Lieutenant

6
00:00:17,417 --> 00:00:20,187
Governor Sara Rodriguez
dropped out, and Milwaukee

7
00:00:20,254 --> 00:00:23,156
County Executive David
Crowley got back into the

8
00:00:23,223 --> 00:00:25,759
race. Poll director Charles
Franklin is here with more.

9
00:00:25,826 --> 00:00:28,395
And thanks for being here.
>> Thanks for having me.

10
00:00:28,462 --> 00:00:31,098
>> So even in the midst of
this upheaval, what are

11
00:00:31,164 --> 00:00:33,133
your takeaways from your
latest poll?

12
00:00:33,200 --> 00:00:36,403
>> I think the biggest
thing is that even with

13
00:00:36,470 --> 00:00:40,440
Rodriguez in the race, in
our poll, Francesca Hong

14
00:00:40,507 --> 00:00:43,343
was still in first place.
That's the fourth poll in a

15
00:00:43,410 --> 00:00:46,847
row that she's led. Mandela
Barnes was in second place.

16
00:00:46,914 --> 00:00:49,449
Also the third poll that
he's been in second place

17
00:00:49,516 --> 00:00:52,152
since he got in the race.
And of course, we didn't

18
00:00:52,219 --> 00:00:54,855
have David Crowley because
he was not a candidate at

19
00:00:54,922 --> 00:00:58,425
that moment. The other
thing that's really

20
00:00:58,492 --> 00:01:01,795
important is that 45% of
Democratic primary voters

21
00:01:01,862 --> 00:01:05,265
said they hadn't decided
who they would vote for. So

22
00:01:05,332 --> 00:01:10,137
even before the turmoil of
changing candidates, still,

23
00:01:10,204 --> 00:01:12,806
almost half of the
Democratic electorate said

24
00:01:12,873 --> 00:01:16,109
they hadn't settled on who
they would support.

25
00:01:16,176 --> 00:01:20,280
>> So Hong's supporters are
really strong supporters.

26
00:01:20,347 --> 00:01:23,784
>> They are quite strong.
They're a little more

27
00:01:23,851 --> 00:01:25,886
likely to say they're
absolutely certain that

28
00:01:25,953 --> 00:01:29,256
that's who they're going to
vote for. And when we ask

29
00:01:29,323 --> 00:01:33,327
for second choices, she
doesn't get that many

30
00:01:33,393 --> 00:01:36,263
second choices, which
suggests in one sense, that

31
00:01:36,330 --> 00:01:40,167
her supporters are already
behind her. But it also

32
00:01:40,234 --> 00:01:42,669
suggests that folks that
are looking at candidates

33
00:01:42,736 --> 00:01:46,306
other than her are not as
likely to come to her if

34
00:01:46,373 --> 00:01:49,376
their first choice goes
away.

35
00:01:49,443 --> 00:01:52,012
>> If two thirds of
Democratic voters say

36
00:01:52,079 --> 00:01:55,082
winning in November is
extremely important, as

37
00:01:55,148 --> 00:01:57,384
according to your poll. How
does Tony Evers endorsement

38
00:01:57,451 --> 00:02:00,687
of David Crowley factor
into that?

39
00:02:01,455 --> 00:02:04,525
>> Thus, the importance of
winning in November was

40
00:02:04,591 --> 00:02:07,094
uniform. No matter which
candidate you were

41
00:02:07,160 --> 00:02:09,596
supporting, all of them
gave that high rating to

42
00:02:09,663 --> 00:02:13,800
say it was extremely
important. But Evers is

43
00:02:14,701 --> 00:02:18,705
remarkably popular among
Democrats. He has an 89%

44
00:02:18,772 --> 00:02:22,943
job approval with Democrats
right now. The question is

45
00:02:23,010 --> 00:02:27,047
whether his endorsements
and activity in the

46
00:02:27,114 --> 00:02:30,617
campaign moves people on
that decision, as opposed

47
00:02:30,684 --> 00:02:33,387
to they like the job he's
doing as governor. But

48
00:02:33,453 --> 00:02:36,290
maybe they're not going to
be influenced by his

49
00:02:36,356 --> 00:02:38,859
recommendations that we
really don't know at this

50
00:02:38,926 --> 00:02:41,395
point.
>> So the Rodriguez Lane

51
00:02:41,461 --> 00:02:45,566
was moderate Democrat who
picks up most of her vote.

52
00:02:45,632 --> 00:02:48,068
>> When we asked second
choices of people that

53
00:02:48,135 --> 00:02:52,439
supported her about an
equal number, went to

54
00:02:52,506 --> 00:02:56,176
Mandela Barnes and went in,
went to Joel Brennan

55
00:02:56,243 --> 00:02:59,446
smaller percentage, a good
bit smaller, went to Hong

56
00:02:59,513 --> 00:03:01,415
and a small percentage went
to Kelda.

57
00:03:01,481 --> 00:03:05,819
>> Roys so you described
the undecideds at 45%.

58
00:03:07,754 --> 00:03:11,458
Would voters sit this one
out and not vote because of

59
00:03:11,525 --> 00:03:15,529
all of this confusion?
>> It's possible we do

60
00:03:15,596 --> 00:03:20,067
still see a high professed
intention to vote. It

61
00:03:21,435 --> 00:03:23,670
certainly won't be the
level of a midterm election

62
00:03:23,737 --> 00:03:26,974
because primaries are much
smaller than that. But I

63
00:03:27,040 --> 00:03:30,244
think the Democratic
coalition is pretty well

64
00:03:30,310 --> 00:03:34,581
mobilized. The issue is,
does this turmoil in the

65
00:03:34,648 --> 00:03:38,085
list of candidates take
some people who were in

66
00:03:38,151 --> 00:03:41,488
that undecided category and
make them just throw up

67
00:03:41,555 --> 00:03:44,725
their hands and say, I'm
not going to bother or and

68
00:03:44,791 --> 00:03:48,629
this is, I think, a real
possibility. It's focusing

69
00:03:48,695 --> 00:03:51,565
attention on a race that
had been pretty low key up

70
00:03:51,632 --> 00:03:55,769
until now. And so it may
have the effect of actually

71
00:03:55,836 --> 00:03:58,338
energizing Democratic
voters, but we're also

72
00:03:58,405 --> 00:04:03,310
seeing a significant split
across, especially Hong

73
00:04:04,378 --> 00:04:07,748
Barnes and Crowley,
potentially Crowley

74
00:04:07,814 --> 00:04:10,884
supporters, about how does
that split the vote, and

75
00:04:10,951 --> 00:04:14,154
does it coalesce around one
candidate, or does it just

76
00:04:14,221 --> 00:04:17,424
splinter the vote evenly?
>> So even with Hong

77
00:04:17,491 --> 00:04:20,360
continuing to lead among
Dems, your numbers show

78
00:04:20,427 --> 00:04:23,564
Barnes leads Tiffany while
the rest of the field does

79
00:04:23,630 --> 00:04:25,432
not.
>> That's right. When we

80
00:04:25,499 --> 00:04:28,702
asked the general election
question, Barnes is the

81
00:04:28,769 --> 00:04:32,272
strongest Democrat, leading
Tiffany by four percentage

82
00:04:32,339 --> 00:04:36,610
points, whereas Hong trails
Tiffany by three points.

83
00:04:36,677 --> 00:04:39,379
When we shift it to likely
voters, the people who say

84
00:04:39,446 --> 00:04:42,082
they're certain they'll
vote in the fall, Barnes

85
00:04:42,149 --> 00:04:46,753
lead goes up to five and
Hong then ties Tiffany. So

86
00:04:46,820 --> 00:04:49,756
I think my take away from
this is that there is a

87
00:04:49,823 --> 00:04:52,693
little bit of a
differentiation between the

88
00:04:52,759 --> 00:04:55,662
candidates, but it's a
fairly close race, whether

89
00:04:55,729 --> 00:04:58,498
it's Barnes or Hong or any
of the other Democrats that

90
00:04:58,565 --> 00:05:02,236
we asked about. So guess
what? It looks like another

91
00:05:02,302 --> 00:05:05,038
probably close election in
Wisconsin.

92
00:05:05,105 --> 00:05:07,107
>> Yeah. Does the shakeup
at the top of the ticket

93
00:05:07,174 --> 00:05:10,077
inform the legislative
races?

94
00:05:10,511 --> 00:05:13,981
>> And maybe we asked about
who would you vote for for

95
00:05:14,047 --> 00:05:16,250
the legislature. And
Democrats had a small lead

96
00:05:16,316 --> 00:05:19,720
there about a four point
lead. But that's about just

97
00:05:19,786 --> 00:05:23,056
general voting. We don't
ask about individual races

98
00:05:23,123 --> 00:05:27,794
there. I do think that for
Democrats chances in the

99
00:05:28,395 --> 00:05:32,666
fall, they certainly would
benefit from a strong

100
00:05:32,733 --> 00:05:36,637
gubernatorial candidate and
a winning Democratic

101
00:05:36,703 --> 00:05:39,139
campaign, because that
support at the governor's

102
00:05:39,206 --> 00:05:44,211
level can trickle down to
the legislative races. I

103
00:05:44,278 --> 00:05:47,481
think it's way too early to
have any sense about

104
00:05:47,548 --> 00:05:52,352
whether whoever the nominee
is will emerge as a very

105
00:05:52,920 --> 00:05:56,156
strong candidate or not.
>> So meanwhile, you're in

106
00:05:56,223 --> 00:05:59,860
the field again with a new
poll to share with us next

107
00:05:59,927 --> 00:06:02,029
Wednesday.
>> Things keep changing, so

108
00:06:02,095 --> 00:06:05,332
you have to keep doing new
polls. This poll that will

109
00:06:05,399 --> 00:06:09,336
come out next Wednesday is
only about Democratic

110
00:06:09,403 --> 00:06:12,973
primary voters and only
about them. And we'll

111
00:06:13,040 --> 00:06:17,277
certainly ask about
opinions of Crowley vote

112
00:06:18,412 --> 00:06:21,682
again in the primary. And
also Governor Evers

113
00:06:21,748 --> 00:06:23,217
endorsement, and whether
people think that makes

114
00:06:23,283 --> 00:06:27,588
them more or less likely to
support David Crowley. We

115
00:06:27,654 --> 00:06:30,357
will also be
re-interviewing the people

116
00:06:30,424 --> 00:06:33,594
we've interviewed this past
week. So we'll be able to

117
00:06:33,660 --> 00:06:37,397
see whether those undecided
folks last week have moved

118
00:06:37,464 --> 00:06:40,667
any further towards
decision making this week.

119
00:06:40,734 --> 00:06:43,270
The only drawback to this
is it's a fairly short

120
00:06:43,337 --> 00:06:47,241
period of time, so we'll
still have two more weeks

121
00:06:47,307 --> 00:06:51,979
to Election Day when this
to Election Day when this