Independent gubernatorial candidate Bill Walker released the results of a poll that he commissioned by Anchorage-based Hays Research Group that shows that if the choice were between Walker and Gov. Sean Parnell, Walker would be beating Parnell by 2 points. The spread is even wider if those “leaning” toward Walker are included. Democratic candidate Byron Mallott was not mentioned in the survey.
The poll of 474 voters was conducted August 20 – 22. It says that about 39 percent would vote for Walker, and that 4.4 percent are leaning Walker. Parnell would get about 37 percent of the vote with another 2.7 percent leaning Parnell. The margin of error is 4.5 percent. Fifteen percent of the electorate is still undecided.
From a Walker statement on the results:
These poll results reflect the 16 hour days I and others have invested in every corner of the state. We’ve been in nearly every parade and had a booth at most fairs where I have shaken thousands of hands and answered every single question posed to me. Ours is a grassroots campaign and the energy and commitment of our largely volunteer team is unparalleled.
It is true that so far, Walker has run a more energetic race than has both Mallott and Parnell. However, if one of the purposes of commissioning this poll is to push Mallott aside—and there has been talk that an effort to do so is underway–it’ll likely not work. Both Mallott and Hollis French, who is running for lieutenant governor on the ticket, have made it clear that he’s staying in the race and that there will be a Democratic candidate on the ticket. Walker is Republican.
Contact Amanda Coyne at amandamcoyne@yahoo.com
I am not ready to build any statues to Sean Parnell. Parnell needs to stick around now that he has obligated us for at least 53 to 67 million plus 7.1% AFUDC (Allowance for Funds Used During Construction) if this project dies at the end of Pre-Feed after another year or so. We are now in that first step the AKLNG project (Pre-feed) which, according to DNR testimony presented on 7 February 2014, will be completed in 12-18 months. Then if the legislature approves the contracts the game gets very expensive. If then we don’t proceed to FID (Final Investment Decision)after the additional 2-3 year “Feed” process we are obligated to pay TC (Trans Canada) 183 to 337 million dollars development costs plus 7.1% AFUDC. The Department of Revenue forecast shows in final year of Parnell’s term (FY21) the AKLNG project alone will consume(depending on our contractual obligations) anywhere between 41% and 59% of General Fund Unrestricted Revenues. This is before we realize a dime from the AKLNG project.
So we had better see a lot more revenue from oil, tax ourselves, or prepare to consume the corpus of the Permanent Fund. Of course by then all those who won re-election on this promise while spending us into deficit back in 2014 will be long gone…..
“I have no reason to believe that the annual decline in TAPS (Trans-Alaska Pipeline System) volumes will reverse in 2014 or the foreseeable future,” ConocoPhillips commercial supervisor Josepth Falcone said Aug. 6 in testimony presented to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. He is responsible for the business and economic analysis of the pipeline branch of the firm.
Jeffrey Ray, an executive of ExxonMobil, made a similar statement in a July 31 document filed with the RCA.
“Do you expect that the decline in TAPS throughput will reverse in the foreseeable future?” Ray was asked as part of his testimony.
“No, I have no reason to believe that this trend will reverse itself in the foreseeable future,” said Ray, who is TAPS coordinator in the business development and joint interest department. ” http://www.adn.com/article/20140818/alaska-oil-production-continue-decline-company-officials-testify
Sandy,
The quotes from Jeffrey Ray of ExxonMobile and Joesepth Falcone of ConocoPhillips appeared in the following Anchorage Dispatch News article.
“ALASKA OIL PRODUCTION TO CONTINUE DECLINE, COMPANY OFFICIALS TESTIFY”
Dermot Cole, Alaska Daily Dispatch, August 18, 2014
Sandy, should we expect you now to claim Dermot Cole also made “this stuff up”. Here is the link where you can read the verbatim quotes if you choose: http://www.adn.com/article/20140818/alaska-oil-production-continue-decline-company-officials-testify
the producers haven’t provided any testimony to the RCA. you make stuff up
I’m not buying it. No question that Governor Parnell has much better odds with the bookies by having two opponents instead of one. Accordingly, Knowles would never have come close to winning had Jack Coghill not run; Jim Campbell lost by only 500 votes even with two Republicans in the race. But neither Mallott nor Walker are saying anything substantive or substantial, and I am not sure they have it in them to do so. They are not saying what real decisions they would make. It’s fine for Byron to say he would place a high priority on education, but what candidate for office doesn’t say that?
Absent some earth shaking event or revelation Governor Parnell will easily win. If he gets us a gas line – construction under way, financing completed, etc. – in the coming 4 years he will be the greatest governor Alaska has had. If he really did jump ship and run for Congress in 2 years it would likely be a sign there will be no gas line. He might then run into Joe Miller and others in that contest.
But right now we are in 2014. Walker and Mallott haven’t shown us anything yet, either in this campaign or in prior lives. Moreover, Byron has a terrible record of failure in every circumstance, and voters would demand answers if he began to gain traction. Governor Parnell has an uncommon ability to pull in Christian Conservatives and moderate independents without losing support of outdoors and gun types. He did better in Juneau than any other Republican gubernatorial candidate, at least in recent times, yet he didn’t lose the conservatives. I cannot imagine much drama regarding the gubernatorial race on Tuesday, November 4.
Can you say, GOVERNOR WALKER ?
Let’s be clear, we aint talking about Wisconsin here.
The lady doth protest etc. etc.
Alaskans are getting nervous about the deficit spending, the recent released testimony to the RCA by the producers that they see no stoppage of the decline in oil production over time and the passage of a law that only requires the producers consider producing more oil and certainly no guarantee that falling oil prices will decrease state revenue regardless of increased production.
Governor Parnell supported the AGIA project to Canada long after shale gas discoveries made that project untenable and then brought Trans Canada along on the AKLNG project perhaps to avoid litigation. He brags about the “Cook Inlet Renaissance” yet consumers have seen increasing prices for gas either directly or in other utility costs and we have supply contracts that expire in 2018 which will be here before any pipeline can be built. Fairbanks lost the refinery and inherited a legacy of pollution that was not at all adequately addressed over Parnell’s term. And now apparently Parnell wants to be Governor just long enough to run against Lisa Murkowski and then leave us as did his predecessor Ms. Palin.
Too much has happened over the last five years to allow the avoidance tactic favored by Parnell to work this time around. He is going to have to defend himself. I respect Bill Walker for choosing to run as an independent thereby not allowing Parnell to avoid him during the short Republican primary. Can Parnell hide until November? I don’t think so because the majority of Alaskan voters are not registered party members so now Parnell must debate Mallot and Walker and those debates will tell the story.
The comments, presumeably by Mallott supporters, are almost laughable. Dems have a very difficult time in the 49th state and he can’t get labor. He’s toast at best. More likely, burnt toast. The Dems will have themselves to thank for electing Parnell. I will concede that Fleener creeps me out.
The Walker campaign unequivocally states that no one at Hays Research asked what result was anticipated. As is the case with any poll, the Walker campaign’s experience with Hays Research has been that the poll results don’t always show the desired result. Obviously the campaign is pleased with the recent polling, but that result was in no way manufactured or even suggested.
Ok ok ok, Byron has a fair argument that he’s the party nominee and his party has a right to have a candidate, and he has to live up the responsibility. But if he actually believes that– then why did he help Lisa run against Joe Miller (and McAdams) a couple years back? Where’s the consistency or moral backbone?
Mallott– do the right thing by your state, check your pride, and be Lt. Gov. If you do, we’ll all wish you had been governor instead. If you don’t, we’ll wish you hadn’t run at all.
Bill Walker, the man who made his mark on the backs of unions and federal money during the pipeline construction days, now wants the government gravy train to keep running, regardless of the long term cost. No thank you.
If Walker wanted Parnell in a two way race, it was called the Republican primary.
He missed it. No use crying about spilled milk after the primary.
In the general election, it is a three way race if you are an independent candidate – because you will be running against a Republican and a Democrat.
If you can’t figure out the basic logistics of a primary and general election, then don’t run for political office.
If the Democrats really cared about Alaska, they would vote for Walker… however due to old and traditional protocols, they will vote for Byron out of blind allegiance and Alaska will suffer…
The question is does Byron actually have to withdraw before the Democrats think or act in the best interest of the the non-Parnell State? Vote for Bill Walker and Craig Fleener, if you really care about the Great Land, Alaska!
Considering Anne Hays’ first question to anyone commissioning a poll with her is, “What do you want the poll to say?”, then reasonable people will see this for the propaganda that it undoubtably is.
The results of this poll should be chilling to the Parnell campaign. After six years of incumbency, the Governor appears to be vulnerable and remains a front runner only because it is a 3 – way race. He also has a record that can and will be used against him. What’s worst, is the breadth of the Governor’s support is wider than it is deep. What that means is that the Governor’s supporters are not committed supporters and could possibly be easily attracted to another candidate. As long as I’m on the subject of the negatives of Parnell’s chances of re-election, one has to roll their eyes at his campaign organization. Several state House races have more political experience and acumen than the Parnell campaign team offers. Parnell’s campaign manager, who is a very nice guy, has little if any campaign experience. The rest of his team has less. It is an organization surviving off one thing, the power of incumbency.
Walker could still emerge as a powerful challenger. It would probably require some self-funding to demonstrate his commitment, the creation and funding of a SuperPAC and a few resonating attacks on Parnell. Brad Keithley’s independent expenditure committee could help. Likewise, the 3 initiatives on the ballot could all serve as negatives for the Governor too, especially Pebble where the public’s attitude has turned on the governor’s position. Probably the single greatest thing that Walker has going for him is Parnell’s lackluster approach to the office. The public is crying for more.