Wikileaks - Major Concern About Clinton Email Scandal Polling Data

[ABX]

            
            
RE: Clinton email toplines

            

               From:matt@algpolling.com
               To: john@algpolling.com, Jim.Margolis@gmmb.com
               Date: 2015-03-12 17:30
               Subject: RE: Clinton email toplines
               
            


         

            

               To Mandy's question on who the 7% are that mentioned "emails" in the open-ended q on what concerned them most:

Partisan-wise they are basically the same as the electorate overall.

Demographically, they are more likely to be female (61%), skewing towards older, college educated women.

They are a little more likely to be Fox News watchers (31% vs. 26% voters overall)

Regionally they are less likely to live in the south than voters overall but otherwise don't differ much.

-----Original Message-----
From: John Anzalone
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 10:00 AM
To: Jim Margolis
Cc: Mandy Grunwald; Robby Mook; Joel Benenson; Jennifer Palmieri; John Podesta; Kristina Schake; Huma Abedin; David Binder; Teddy Goff; Elan Kriegal; Mona Thinavongsa; Jeff Liszt; Matt Hogan; Pia Nargundkar
Subject: Re: Clinton email toplines

We will be able to profile the 7% once we get some tabs.

To Jim's inquiry, the construct of the  question was designed to weed out those who would never vote for who so that 7% is probably a real number and not insignificant but also not overwhelming.  When you add it to the 10% who are still processing this issue and maybe waiting if there is more too it then it shows this is a pretty big chunk of voters.  Winning over those 10% becomes our challenge.  If there is no new twist to the story naturally we probably win them over on other issues

John Anzalone
Anzalone Liszt Grove Research
334-387-3121. Office
@AnzaloneLiszt

> On Mar 12, 2015, at 8:10 AM, Margolis, Jim <Jim.Margolis@gmmb.com> wrote:
>
> And is 7% starting to mean something if it is among up for grabs?
>
> Jim Margolis
> Sent from my iPhone.
> Please excuse typos.
>
>> On Mar 12, 2015, at 8:56 AM, Mandy Grunwald <gruncom@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> Any idea who that 7% is -- demographically and geographically?
>>
>> Mandy Grunwald
>> Grunwald Communications
>> 202 973-9400
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 12, 2015, at 8:47 AM, John Anzalone <john@algpolling.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am on a board of a company called Civic Science that does about a half a million internet interviews a day nationwide across multiple platforms.  They asked a question yesterday to gauge the impact the email story might be having on voters.  as you see below about 7% say it bothers them enough to reconsider their vote.  Another 10% are still trying to sort it out.  We will keep it up for a couple of days to see if we see any movement.  Interestingly enough 7% is about the number who "volunteered" the email controversy in our nationwide polls as something that bothers or concerns them about HRC.
>>>
>>> Raw results are below but we will be getting some crosstabs later.
>>>
>>> John Anzalone
>>> Anzalone Liszt Grove Research
>>> 334-387-3121
>>>
>>> PLEASE NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS: john@ALGpolling.com
>>> www.ALGpolling.com
>>>
>>> twitter: @AnzaloneLiszt
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here you go. 70% of Dems said the issue is being blown out of proportion, 15% said they haven't made up their mind yet, and 5% weren't familiar with the issue. Almost half of people under age 30 said they were unfamiliar with issue altogether, for whatever that's worth.
>>> <image.png>
>
            



         
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36122