Casey's opponent unknown to most prospective voters, poll finds
By Jeremy Boren
Published: Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2012, 11:54 p.m.
Most Pennsylvania voters don't know enough about Armstrong County businessman Tom Smith to determine if they should support the Republican's bid to unseat U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, according to Franklin & Marshall College opinion poll released Thursday.
“It's a huge state, and it takes a lot of time and a lot of money and effort to get your name recognition up, and that's Smith's most serious problem right now,” said G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs.
Nationally, political analysts believe Casey, a Scranton Democrat, is likely to win re-election — a perception that has limited Smith's ability to raise money from conservative groups outside Pennsylvania, Madonna said.
“If (Smith) were to dump $5 million to $8 million into name recognition commercials” he could raise his profile among voters, Madonna said.
Smith, 64, is a self-made millionaire who spent $4 million of his own money in the Republican primary. He said his campaign began buying time this week to air ads in Philadelphia, the state's largest TV market.
The poll showed Casey, 52, is leading Smith 35 percent to 23 percent, with 39 percent of voters undecided. When voters who are leaning toward a candidate are included, Casey had 43 percent, Smith had 28 percent and 24 percent remained undecided.
President Obama leads in the poll with 44 percent against Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who had 38 percent. Fifteen percent were undecided, according to the poll of 681 registered Pennsylvania voters. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 3.8 percentage points.
Franklin & Marshall conducted the poll before Romney announced U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., as his running mate.
Corrine Hopkins, 86, of Glassport said she plans to vote for Smith because his personal story of rising from a coal miner to a mining company owner shows he has the ability to lead.
“He seems like the type of person who would be able to help create jobs for people,” said Hopkins, a retired bookkeeper and registered Republican.
Reducing the nation's 8.3 percent unemployment rate and reversing Obama's signature health care law are her top priorities.
Hopkins said she agrees with the Catholic church's opposition to Obamacare because it doesn't exempt Catholic institutions such as charities, hospitals and schools from covering contraceptives under employee health benefits.
Frank Conti, 83, of Sharpsville said he will vote to re-elect the Democrats.
The Korean War veteran and former millwright said Obama's health care plan will make America more competitive with other nations.
Conti said he doesn't know enough about Smith to determine if he's a better Senate candidate.
He's not alone.
Sixty-eight percent of voters surveyed said they “don't know” Smith; 27 percent said they weren't familiar with Casey.
“These are dismal numbers for Casey, a well-known career politician,” said Jim Conroy, Smith's campaign manager. “As voters learn more about Tom Smith, a self-made job creator with a plan to grow the economy, the polls will only continue to tighten.”
“We aren't paying attention to public polls,” said Larry Smar, Casey's campaign manager.
Smar said Casey has “a long record of delivering for Pennsylvania.”
Jeremy Boren is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7935 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.