New C-SPAN/PSB Survey

Timed for #SunshineWeek & Gorsuch hearings: New Poll Shows Strong Public Support for Cameras in the Court

  •  90% Say Supreme Court Decisions Affect their Lives
  •  82% Say Supreme Court Appointments Were Important in Presidential Vote
  •  71% Following News About President Trump’s Nominee

In conjunction with Sunshine Week and timed for the opening of confirmation hearings for President Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court, the public affairs TV network C-SPAN asked strategic research firm PSB to examine public attitudes on several topics related to the Court.

Here are some of the findings:

  • Nine in ten likely voters (90%) say “decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court have an impact on their everyday life as citizens”
  • 82% say U.S. Supreme Court appointments were an important issue when considering their 2016 presidential election vote
  • Nearly three in four likely voters (71%) are following the news concerning President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch

Thinking about recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, a nearly two-third majority (62%) say they believe that “Supreme Court justices are split on political grounds like Congress.” By comparison, just over a third (38%) say they believe the Supreme Court “acts in a serious and constitutionally sound manner.”

Meanwhile, 42% say that President Trump’s criticism of sitting judges is appropriate – including 20% of Democrats and 22% liberals.

Television news is the top source of the public’s information about the Supreme Court — seventy percent say they get their information about the high court from TV, followed by newspapers (37%) and online media (35%).

Fully three quarters (76%) say the U.S. Supreme Court should allow TV coverage of its oral arguments. PSB has tracked this particular metric over several years on behalf of C-SPAN, and public support for cameras in the high court amid the current video-rich news media environment is presently 15 percentage points higher than when PSB first measured this topic starting in June 2009.

“Three in five Americans believe the high court is split into parties because they are presented no evidence to the contrary,” says Robert Green, Principal at PSB, which has conducted 11 national public opinion studies on the high court, including six studies commissioned by C-SPAN. “The absence of TV cameras inside the Supreme Court for oral arguments has allowed others to define the court. Cameras would provide a counterbalance to what voters are constantly hearing about the judiciary from Presidents, Congress, and the media.”

Green adds, “The public’s perception of the Court as partisan, political entity did not form overnight. A direct line can be drawn between President Obama lecturing Justices during his State of the Union address and later President Trump openly criticizing decisions and judges by name. The high court’s decision to remain literally out of sight has hurt rather than helped their reputation and the legitimacy of many of their most controversial decisions.”

The C-SPAN/PSB Supreme Court survey is timed for both Sunshine Week (March 12- 18), an annual campaign for greater access to government and public information, as well as the upcoming Supreme Court nomination hearings for Neil Gorsuch.

Watch live coverage of the confirmation hearings on the C-SPAN Networks beginning the morning of March 20, 2017.

Download the complete poll results here >

Methodology

PSB conducted online interviews from March 7-9, 2017, among n=1,032 U.S. likely voters. The margin of error for this study is +/- 3.05% at the 95% confidence level and larger for subgroups.

About C-SPAN: Created by the cable TV industry in 1979 and now in nearly 100 million TV households, C-SPAN programs three public affairs television networks in both SD and HD; C-SPAN Radio, heard in Washington DC at 90.1 FM and available as an App (Android, iPhone, Blackberry); and a video- rich website offering live coverage of government events and access to the vast archive of C-SPAN programming. Visit http://www.cspan.org/

About PSB: PSB is a global strategic communication advisory rooted in the science of public opinion that specializes in messaging and strategy for blue-chip political, corporate, and entertainment clients. For over 40 years, PSB has provided actionable insights and advice to help client win in highly competitive situations. PSB serves Fortune 100 corporations and has helped elect more than 30 presidents and prime ministers around the world. PSB is a part of Y&R and WPP. Visit http://psbresearch.com

Kyley McGeeney Joins PSB as Senior Director, Survey Methods

PSB is thrilled to announce the hire of Kyley McGeeney, Senior Director of Survey Methods, as of November 2016. In this role she serves as a methodology consultant to researchers company-wide and works closely with the firm’s Census Bureau team. She’ll also be working to design the firm’s 2018 likely voter screens and modeling.

McGeeney’s expertise includes overall research design, pre-election polling, sampling, questionnaire design, data collection protocol, weighting and analysis, and new survey technologies. She is as a member of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) Pre-Election Polling Task Force, convened to examine the performance of polls in the 2016 presidential election.

Her past work includes Pew Research Center reports “Can Likely Voter Models Be Improved?” and “Why 2016 Election Polls Missed Their Mark” as well as Gallup’s 2012 Presidential Election Polling Review, analyzing why Gallup’s 2012 presidential prediction was inaccurate. She is co-author of numerous publications, studying online panels, comparing web to telephone surveys, examining the use of technology for surveys (mobile, texting, apps) as well as reviewing more traditional telephone survey methods.

Prior to joining PSB, McGeeney has nearly a decade of experience as a methodologist at Pew Research Center and at Gallup. McGeeney is a graduate of The New School, and she earned her Master of Professional Studies degree in Applied Statistics at Cornell University. McGeeney is a member of AAPOR (Education and Standards Committees), DC-AAPOR, European Survey Research Association, Washington Statistical Society and Marketing Research Association. She is based in Washington, D.C.

Trump’s Base Begins To Soften

 

To:         Interested Parties

From:    Margie Omero, PSB Research

Re:         Recent Polling on President Trump

Date:     March 13, 2017

 

Methodology

PSB conducted online interviews with 800 general population respondents in the US. Interviews were conducted from March 6-9, 2017. February polling was conducted in the same way (February 6-8, 2017).

Our recent national poll shows Trump to be falling short of Americans’ expectations, even more so than in February. “Going too far” seems to be a driver, particularly for so-called Trump Regretters who have moved from Trump somehow since November. In this climate, Clinton voters are more poised to take politically-motivated consumer actions.

Compared to February, Clinton voters have grown slightly more enthusiastic, and Trump voters slightly less so.

 Clinton voters say they were about as enthusiastic for her in November as Trump voters were for him (48%, 52% very enthusiastic, respectively). This enthusiasm gap has closed some since our February poll (46%, 55%). In fact now more Clinton than Trump voters say they’d support their candidate strongly if the election were held again today (58%, 51% very enthusiastic, respectively).

Trump is weak relative to expectations. (Figure 1)

Trump is falling short of expectations. In fact, three of the four traits on which Americans rate him as doing “more than they expected” are negative. He is particularly weak on “going too far,” and “getting sidetracked by things that aren’t important.” Meanwhile he falls well short of expectations on “unifying the country,” “draining the swamp of Washington politics as usual,” and “surrounding himself with the best people.”

Trump is weaker on expectations compared to February, particularly with his base. (Figure 2)

To be sure, Trump voters give Trump better ratings than do everyone else; his voters are more likely to say he’s exceeding rather than falling short of expectations. Yet much of the decay in Trump’s image from February comes from his own base. For example, in February half of Trump voters felt he was “surrounding himself with the best people” more than they expected. Now only 39% of Trump voters have that view.

About one in ten could be called “Trump Regretters” who have moved from Trump in some way. For them, Trump has been going farther than they expected.

As in February, we found about one in ten Americans to have moved away from Trump—either in their vote or in intensity (becoming less enthusiastic Trump voters or more enthusiastic Clinton voters). These voters only identify one dimension on which Trump is doing more than they expected, and that’s “going too far” (54% more than expected, 35% about as expected, 11% less than expected).

Partisans disagree on how they imagine CEOs view Trump.

Our survey also covered a short series of questions about the impact of businesses’ engaging with Trump on politics. And as a level set, we asked voters how much they thought CEOs generally supported Trump. Voters are divided on this; about half of Clinton voters assume most CEOs disapprove of the President (36% approve, 47% disapprove) while about eight in ten Trump voters think CEOs generally approve of Trump.

Clinton voters are more likely to support the idea of CEOs criticizing a president (any president). (Figure 3)

Perhaps different perceptions of CEOs’ views toward Trump leads to differences in the appropriate political voice for a CEO. Even when we framed the question as “regardless of how you feel about President Trump,” Clinton voters were twice as likely to say it’s appropriate for business leaders to criticize a president if “personal values or those of their customers are being threatened.” A slim plurality of Trump voters agree.

Prioritizing a company’s political values may be more important to Clinton voters than to Trump voters. (Figure 4)

Clinton voters also seem more likely to prioritize a company’s politics and values themselves in their own purchasing decisions. Majorities of both Clinton and Trump voters say they prioritize “a fair price” over a company that “shares my own values”—but Clinton voters were more closely divided (57% fair price, 43% share values) than Trump voters (68%, 32%). Note we made it not so easy to prioritize a company’s values with the question language “even if it’s sometimes inconvenient or more expensive,” since that is how customers frequently perceive the tradeoff they must make.

And Clinton voters are backing that up with twice as many politically-motivated purchases as Trump voters.

Clinton voters are more likely to have taken a variety of recent political actions since January of this year. A fifth of Clinton voters have stopped using a product, or changed their habits because of a company’s political values (21%) or a CEO or business leader’s statements on Trump (21%). Similar numbers of Clinton voters have contacted a Member of Congress (20%) or donated to a political organization (18%). About one in ten Trump voters have taken these actions (12%, 11%, 10%, and 10%, respectively).

(Figure 1: Trump is Weak Relative to Expectations)                                                                                               (Figure 2: Trump’s Ratings Have Softened With His Base)

   

 

(Figure 3: Clinton Votes Are Far More Likely to Say It’s Okay…)                                                                           (Figure 4: More Clinton Voters than Trump Voters Say…)

   

Our Award-Winning AdLab

 

When you need to…

  • Find the direction for a new campaign
  • Test creative
  • Understand the impact of your ads

We specifically designed our award-winning AdLab to provide the data and predictive analysis to provide speed, deep insight and customization. Our research tools equip your team to make insightful, fact-based decisions at each stage of the creative development process: from early-stage concepting to final execution.

Television. Digital video. Print. Interactive display. Out of home. Communications intended to convey your brand proposition, personality, and purpose to your audience. High-visibility evidence of your organization’s most consequential ongoing investment. This content shouldn’t advance a hunch – it should advance brand and business objectives. It should perform. That’s where AdLabTM comes in.

PSB understands that the communications development process is all about choices and decisions. AdLab helps clients realize the full potential of their production & media investment by ensuring that critical communications decisions are as well informed as possible.

AdLab is a suite of communications research methodologies applicable to each stage of the creative development process, providing paths to optimization and/or validation from early-stage concepting to final execution. The AdLab approach mirrors the customer journey, aligning data and analysis into six essential pillars; brand recall and breakthrough, education, emotion, perception, behavior, and advocacy.

Client Research/Insights leaders value the speed, deep insight, and customization capabilities of AdLab – as well as the best-in-class transparency of AdLab’s data outputs. Marketing leaders and agency planning and creative teams appreciate PSB’s understanding of the creative process, and AdLab’s sensitivity to the distinctions between message and execution.

AdLab, which was recognized with the Advertising Research Foundation’s David Ogilvy Award in both 2013 (Gold) and 2014 (Silver) – can be applied globally and is used by PSB clients across a wide variety of categories, including but not limited to technology, CPG, automotive, healthcare, public policy, and travel.

 

“Trump Regretters” Say He’s Going Too Far

PSB’s recent polling (800 interviews of adults, conducted online between 2/6-2/8) shows Trump just meeting or falling short of expectations. While Trump receives some of his best ratings on “getting things done,” and “keeping promises” generally, he is more likely to fall short of than exceed expectations on more specific promises like “draining the swamp” or even “making America great again.”

Further, approximately 11% of adults are Trump Regretters in some way—they voted for Trump but now would change their mind, or have moved away from him (or toward Clinton) in intensity. For these voters, the perception Trump is “going too far” may be a big driver.

Some key findings from the poll:

  • On none of the 14 dimensions we tested did Trump exceed expectations more often than not.
  • Over a third (35%) say he is “going too far” more than expected, with identical ratings for “getting sidetracked by things that aren’t important.”
  • Yet Trump earns nearly identical marks for two positive traits: “keeping promises” and “getting things done” (34% more than expected for each).
  • He receives particularly low marks on “unifying the country,” with even his own voters giving him lukewarm marks here (18% more than expected, 58% as much, 24% less). 
  • Trump underperforms on some of his key campaign promises. On measures like “surrounding himself with the best people,” “draining the swamp of Washington politics as usual,” and “making America great again,” more say he’s done less than expected than more.
  • About 11% of adults are what we call Trump Regretters. They were Trump voters who wouldn’t vote for him today, or have become unenthusiastic in their Trump support. Unenthusiastic Clinton voters who have grown enthusiastic toward her, and non-voters who now would vote for Clinton are also included in this group.
  • These Trump Regretters are particularly likely to say Trump has been “going too far” more than they expected (58%). And regression analysis shows it is one of the best predictors of being a Regretter.