Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Michigan General Election Polling Study for Presidential Preference Wayne County Executive Ficano Scandal Impact Collective Bargaining Rights Public Act 4, the Emergency Manager Law Ballot Test Automated Poll Methodology and Statistics Aggregate Results Conducted by Foster McCollum White and Associates And Baydoun Consulting June 12, 2012 By: Eric Foster – Chief Pollster President – Foster McCollum White and Associates By: Tarek Baydoun President – Baydoun Consulting

1

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Methodology - Foster McCollum White & Associates, a Political and Governmental Affairs and Organizational Development consulting firm based in Troy Michigan and Baydoun Consulting, a political communications consulting firm based in Dearborn, Michigan conducted a telephone-automated polling random survey of Michigan registered and most likely November 2012 general election voters to determine their voting and issue preferences on the issue of Presidential preference, collective bargaining rights support, Public Act 4 ballot initiative and the impact of Democratic Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano’s FBI investigation and criminal indictments on President Obama and Democratic candidates across the Michigan November ballot. This ten question live call poll survey was conducted on the evening of June 12, 2012 between the hours of 6:30 pm and 8:30 pm. A list-based sample of traditional Michigan high participation registered voters. These voters have participated in a minimum of 70% of the available primary and general election and odd year municipal and county elections in Michigan since 1993. An initial qualifying statement was read to respondents asking them to participate only if they were very likely to vote in the November General Election. Forty-four thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine (44,999) adults were called, and 1,783 respondents participated in the survey. The response rate for this survey was 3.96%. Our list-based sample pool was pre-weighted to the geographical regions and political participation regions and the congressional districts in Michigan. For reporting purposes, we will focus our findings on the following issue-based categories: A. Baseline for Michigan Presidential campaign preference. B. Impact of Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano’s scandals on President Obama and Michigan Democratic candidate campaigns C. Collective bargaining and public employee compensation reform support measurement D. Michigan Public Act 4 ballot test question. The margin of error for this polling sample is 2.32% with a confidence level of 95%. Our polling study produced sub-populations within each of the surveyed election contest. Results within the sub-populations will be reported with respect to the individual cross-tab and sub-population group as it exist.

-

-

-

-

2

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Cross tabulation groups for comparison purposes
          Age Gender Michigan Geographical Voter Regions Major 17 voting counties (Counties combined that traditionally represent 75% to 83% of the total voter participation rate in Michigan’s State-wide elections) Next 7 Michigan County and Other 59 Michigan County regions Race/Ethnicity Religious affiliation – Evangelical Christian, Catholic, Baptist, Non Evangelical Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other religious affiliations Voter Political Party Preference – Democratic, Republican and Independent Michigan Congressional Districts Urban market communities (Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, Saginaw and other urban population centers in Michigan)

Vote Region (Counties in parentheses) –
Upper Peninsula Region - 311,361 Residents (Gogebic, Ontonagon, Houghton, Keweenaw, Baraga, Iron, Marquette, Alger, Dickinson, Menominee, Delta, Schoolcraft, Luce, Chippewa, Mackinac) 15 counties -18.1% of counties, 3.15% of state’s population 89.3% White, 2.18% African American, 0.72% Asian American, 4.49% Native American, 1.09% Latino American & 2.20% Other Ethnic American. Projected weight of November General Election Population – 3.5% The Upper Peninsula is traditionally a competitive region. Historically the voters tend to swing between both parties in state and federal election. None of the major 17 counties are located in the Upper Peninsula. Northern Lower Peninsula Region – 756,056 Residents (Emmet, Cheboygan, Presque Isle, Charlevoix, Antrim, Otsego, Montmorency, Alpena, Roscommon, Crawford, Oscoda, Alcona, Iosco, Arenac, Gladwin, Kalkaska, Leelanau, Grand Traverse, Benzie, Manistee, Wexford, Mason, Lake, Osceola, Mecosta, Isabella, Clare, Missaukee and Ogemaw) 29 counties – 34.9% of counties 7.65% of state’s population, 93.84% White, 0.96% African American, 1.27% Native American, 1.84% Latino American, 0.84% Asian American & 1.54% Other Ethnic American. Projected weight of November General Election Population – 9.5% The Northern Lower Peninsula region of Michigan is traditionally a Republican voting pocket. None of the major 17 counties are located in the Northern Lower Peninsula.
3

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Southwest Michigan Region – 1,881,212 Residents (Oceana, Newaygo, Muskegon, Kent, Ottawa, Barry, Allegan, Van Buren, Kalamazoo, Berrien, Cass, St. Joseph) 12 Counties – 14.5% of counties, 19.03% of population, 80.9% White, 7.67% African American, 1.68% Asian American, 7.17% Latino American, 0.45% Native American & 2.13% other Ethnic American. Projected weight of November General Election Population – 18.5% This region of Michigan is traditionally a strong Republican voting pocket. It is home to three of the major seven Republican voting counties (Kent, Ottawa and Berrien) and one of the four major swing counties (Kalamazoo). The Southwestern region is home to oneof the major six Democratic counties (Muskegon); and has significant minority voting constituencies in the major Republican and swing counties (22.2% of Kent County, 21.2% of Berrien County, 13% of Ottawa County and 16.4% of Kalamazoo County). Central Michigan Region – 1,457,225 Residents (Montcalm, Gratiot, Ionia, Clinton, Eaton, Shiawassee, Jackson, Calhoun, Branch, Hillsdale, Livingston, Midland, Lenawee and Ingham) Fourteen (14) Counties – 16.9% of counties, 14.74% of State’s population, 86.0% White, 5.50% African American, 4.37% Latino American, 1.77% Asian American, 0.40% Native American & 1.96% Other Ethnic American. Projected weight of November General Election Population – 15% The Central region of Michigan is a very competitive region that tends towards Republicans, but has one of the major six Democratic counties (Ingham) and a traditional Democratic voting county (Calhoun) that helps make the region competitive. It is home to three of the major seven Republican counties (Eaton, Jackson and Livingston). Thumb Region – 954,010 Residents (Huron, Bay, Saginaw, Genesee, Lapeer, St. Clair, Sanilac, Tuscola) Eight Counties – 10.8% of counties, 9.65% of State’s population, 79.30% White, 13.41% African American, 4.29% Latino American, 0.77% Asian American, 0.41% Native American & 1.82% Other Ethnic American. Projected weight of November General Election Population – 13% The thumb region of Michigan is traditionally a Democratic voting pocket. It is home to two of the major six Democratic counties (Genesee and Saginaw), a traditional Democratic voting county (Bay) and other counties where Democrats are competitive.

4

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Southeast Michigan Region – 4,360,736 Residents (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Monroe) Five Counties – 6% of counties, 44.12% of State’s population, 66.52% White, 23.24% African American, 4.01% Latino American, 3.82% Asian American, 0.28% Native American & 2.13% Other Ethnic American. Projected weight of November General Election Population – 40.5% The Southeastern region of Michigan is home to two- of the major six Democratic counties (Wayne and Washtenaw) and three of the four swing counties (Oakland, Macomb and Monroe) in the major 17 communities. This region is the most diverse voting region and home to the largest block of Michigan voters.

5

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Michigan Political Geographical Regions Major 17 Michigan County and Next seven Michigan Counties Parameter Projected weight of November General Election Population – 81.5% Upon review of Michigan’s general election contest dating back to 1970, we found an interesting voter population trend that is a predictive indicator of the outcome of partisan and ballot question campaign success. Over this time period, Michigan’s voter turnout is weighted disproportionally to a small number of counties, 17 of the 83 with the state. In each election since the 1992 Presidential election cycle, these 17 counties have produced a consistent range of 75% to 84% of the total state-wide vote. These 17 counties are not always reflected among the top 17 Michigan counties in voter registration, yet consistently, they produce voter turnout results that lead the state’s turnout numbers per county. In these 17 counties, six are consistently strong Democratic voting communities in state-wide elections. The counties are Wayne, Washtenaw, Muskegon, Ingham, Genesse, and Saginaw. Six Counties – 7.2% of counties, 33.8% of state’s population, 71% White, 18.9% African American, 4.8% Latino, 3.1% Asian American Seven of the top 17 counties are consistently strong Republican voting communities Berrien, Eaton, Jackson, Kent, Lapeer, Livingston, and Ottawa. Seven Counties – 8.4% of counties, 15.7% of state’s population, 86.3% White, 5.7% African American, 4.9% Latino, 1.4% Asian American Notable stat, five of these seven counties have a significant non-white voting population. Kent County – 22.4% of total population (Latino American & African American are largest two voting groups). Berrien County – 21.2% of total population (African American and Latino American are largest voting groups). Eaton County – 13.7% of total population (African American and Latino American are largest voting groups). Jackson County – 12.8% of total population (African American and Latino American are largest voting groups). Ottawa County – 11.8% of total population (Latino American and Asian American are largest voting group. Four of the 17 have become the swing counties, the harbinger to predict success in a partisan election. These counties are Oakland, Macomb, Kalamazoo, and Monroe. Four Counties – 4.8% of counties, 24.3% of State’s population, 84.5% White, 8% African American, 3.3% Latino, 2.9% Asian American Next Seven Michigan Counties Parameter - Projected weight of November General
6

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Election Population – 8.0% Next Seven Counties: (Bay, Calhoun, Marquette, Allegan, Lenawee, Midland, and St. Clair. Seven Counties – 8.4% of counties, 7.7% of state’s population, 90.3% White, 2.9% African American, 4.0% Latino, .9% Asian American Three of these counties consistently lean or strong are Democratic voting counties (Bay, Calhoun and Marquette) and four consistently lean or/are strong Republican voting counties (Allegan, Lenawee, Midland and St. Clair). Calhoun has the largest non-white voting population at roughly 18.4% with 10.2% of that population being AfricanAmerican. Allegan and Lenawee also have non-white populations (Allegan – 10.2% of the total population, Lenawee – 11.6% of the total population).

Congressional Districts 1st Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.45%

2nd Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.19%

3rd Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 6.97%

4th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 6.68%

5th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.25%

6th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.09%

7th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.12%

8th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 8.06%

9th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.60%

7

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

10th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.07%

11th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.87%

12th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.20%

13th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 5.86%

14th Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 6.55%

8

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Data Analysis Statement The data has been separated analytically into cross tabulation results that are statistically significant with respect to Michigan November election cycle. Any sectional analysis within the aforementioned categories can be useful when inferring strengths and weaknesses and possible strategy. For the purposes of this poll, we have included voters who responded no, leaning no and undecided to questions numbered eight and twelve, as a key cross tab for consideration. For the assessment of individual cross tabulation categories, we use a correlation coefficient model based on the Pearson r correlation, also called linear or productmoment correlation. Pearson correlation (hereafter called correlation), assumes that the two variables are measured on at least interval scales and it determines the extent to which values of the two variables are "proportional" to each other. The value of correlation (i.e., correlation coefficient) does not depend on the specific measurement units used. Our proportional model for correlating the statistical relevance of a geographical region, age grouping or congressional district is based on the random proportionality of our respondent pool to the specific proportionality of the group’s weight to the aggregate model. The correlation coefficient (r) represents the linear relationship between these two variables (aggregate and cross tabular category). The aggregate Michigan sample size of 1,783 respondents has a 2.32% margin of error, any review of the polling report can allow for the statistical relationship between the aggregate and cross tabulation margin of error for the reported clusters. The poll sample was pre weighted for gender and ethnicity based upon Foster McCollum White and Associates Predictive Voter Behavior Analysis Model for historic November participation demographics throughout Michigan. This poll was commissioned by Foster McCollum White and Associates & Baydoun Consulting and not commissioned on behalf of or by any candidate or political organization. We strive to adhere to the principles and standards of the National Council on Public Polls in the gathering and reporting of polling data.

9

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

State - Wide Aggregate Results – 1783 Respondents MOE +/- 2.32% Question 1: The 2012 United States Presidential election will be held on November 6, 2012. Who are you more likely to vote for in the election?? 1- President Barack Obama, 2- Mitt Romney, 3- Another candidate or 4- Undecided (Barack Obama): (Mitt Romney): (Another candidate): (Undecided): 46.89% 45.48% 3.56% 4.07%

4%

4% 46%

Barack Obama

Mitt Romney

Another Candidate

Undecided

46%

10

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #2: The ongoing scandal of Wayne County Government and the Democratic County Executive Robert Ficano has dominated the news for the past 10 months. Does this continuing scandal impact your view of President Obama and Democratic candidates for the general election? 1 - It makes me view President Obama and Democratic candidates very unfavorably, 2 For it makes me view President Obama and Democratic candidates somewhat unfavorably, 3 - it does not impact my view of President Obama and Democratic candidates or 4 - unaware of the issue. (View President Obama/Democratic candidates very unfavorably): (View President Obama/Democratic candidates somewhat unfavorably): Total Unfavorable (It does not impact my view of President Obama/Democratic candidates): Total Awareness factor (Unaware of the issue): 27.43% 9.84% 37.27% 53.45% 90.72% 9.28%

9%

27%

View President Obama & Democratic candidates very unfavorably View President Obama & Democratic candidates somewhat unfavorably Does not impact view of President Obama and Democratic candidates

54% 10%

Unaware of the issue

11

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #3: Considering the negative attention toward Wayne County government and its possible impact on the Democratic party and President Obama's campaign, should Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano resign from office, be removed from office, or remain in office? 1- If you believe he should resign from office, 2- If you believe should be removed from office or 3- If you believe he should remain in office. (Resign from office): (Be removed from office): (Remain in office): 57.96% 19.93% 21.71%

Remain in Office 22%

Resign from Office 58%
Resign from Office

Be removed from Office

Remain in Office

Be removed from Office 20%

12

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #4: Governors and legislatures in states like Wisconsin and Ohio have passed laws to reduce employee salary, pension and health care benefits and limit public employee unions' collective bargaining rights to fix budget deficits. Do you support Governor Snyder and the Republican legislature’s efforts to limit the collective bargaining rights and reduce salary and employee benefits for Michigan’s public employees?

1- Yes, 2-No or 3- Undecided (Yes): (No): (Undecided): 40.07% 49.04% 10.90%

Undecided 11%

Yes 40%
Yes

No

Undecided

No 49%

13

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #5: Michigan Public Act 4, also known as the Emergency Manager Law, allows the State to put an emergency manager in charge of cities, townships, school districts and counties that are financially distressed. Democrats, labor unions and civil rights organizations oppose it because they believe it violates local voting rights and eliminates fair workplace bargaining to protect workers. Republicans, Tea party activists, taxpayer groups and business groups support it because it forces governments to stop wasteful debt spending, reduces unsustainable pension and health care cost and can bring consolidation to redundant governmental bodies. If Public Act 4 was on the ballot for a vote to maintain it or repeal it, how would you vote? 1- Vote to maintain Public Act 4, 2- Vote to repeal Public Act 4, 3- Undecided on Public Act 4’s merits, 4- Would skip voting on Public Act 4 (Vote to maintain Public Act 4): (Vote to repeal Public Act 4): (Undecided on Public Act 4’s merits): (Would skip voting on Public Act 4): 35.32% 27.30% 35.04% 2.33%

35%

2% 36%

Vote to maintain Public Act 4

Vote to repeal Public Act 4 Undecided on Public Act 4

Skip voting on matter

27%

14

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #6: In Which Age Range Do You Fit? 1- Between 18 to 30 years old, 2- between 31 to 50 years old, 3- between 51 to 65 years old, 4- ages 66 and older (Between 18 to 30 years old): (Between 31 to 50 years old): (Between 51 to 65 years old): (Ages 66 and older): 3.73% 13.24% 37.10% 45.93%

Age Distribution of Aggregate Poll Respondents
50 40 30 20 10 0 Ages 66 & older Ages 51 to 65 Ages 31 to 50 Ages 18 to 30 45.93 37.1 13.24 3.73 Age Dist. Linear (Age Dist.)

Question #7: What is your gender?

1. Male 2. Female

40.41% 59.59%

Gender of Aggregate Poll Respondents
Male Voters 40% Female Voters 60%

15

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #8 Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Democrat, an Independent, a Republican or a Tea Party member? (IF DEM) Do you consider yourself a solid Democrat or leaning Democrat? (IF REP) Do you consider yourself a solid Republican, leaning Republican or a Tea Party Republican?

Response Code 1 (Solid Democrat): Response Code 2 (Leaning Democrat): Response Code 3 (Independent): Response Code 4 (Solid Republican): Response Code 5 (Leaning Republican): Response Code 6 (Tea Party Republican):

31.69% 10.36% 25.58% 16.75% 8.89% 6.68%

9% 17%

7% 31%

Strong Democrat Leaning Democrat Independent Solid Republican

10% 26%

Leaning Republican Tea Party Republican

16

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #9 What is your nationality/heritage? Response Code 1 (African American/Black): Response Code 2 (White/Caucasian): Response Code 3 (Hispanic/Latino): Response Code 4 (Arab American/Chaldean): Response Code 5 (Asian/Pacific Islander): Response Code 6 (Native American): Response Code 7 (More than one racial/ethnic identity): 9.32% 83.58% 1.02% 0.63% 0.68% 1.65% 3.13%

Ethnic Concentration for Aggregate Poll Native American Responders Other Ethnic Percent Percent of 18+
population, 1.65
Hispanic Percent of 18+ population, 1.02 of 18+ population, 3.76 Black Percent of 18+ population, 9.32

Asian Percent of 18+ population, 0.63

White Percent of 18+ population, 83.58

17

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Question #10: Which of the following most accurately describes your religious background? 1- Evangelical Christian, 2- Catholic, 3- Baptist, 4- Non Evangelical Christian, 5- Jewish, 6- Muslim 7- Other religious affiliation or 8 - No religious affiliation (Evangelical Christian): (Catholic): (Baptist): (Protestant/Non Evangelical Christian): (Jewish): (Muslim): (Other religious affiliation): (No religious affiliation): 17.25% 30.76% 11.18% 24.40% 1.65% 0.79% 4.43% 9.53%
Other Religious Affiliation 4%

Non Evangelical Christian 24%

Jewish 2%

Muslim 1%

No Religious affiliation 10% Evangelical Christian 17%

Baptist 11%

Catholic 31%

18

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Geographic considerations of polling study respondents Southeastern Michigan Southwestern Michigan Central Region of Michigan Thumb Region of Michigan Northern Lower Peninsula Upper Peninsula 39.09% 18.34% 15.31% 12.00% 11.27% 3.98%

40 39.09 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Southeast Southwest Central Thumb Northern Lower

18.34

15.31 12 11.27 3.98
Upper Peninsula

19

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Geographic Electoral Weight considerations of polling study respondents Major 17 Counties Next 7 Mid-Major Counties Rest of Michigan (Other 59 Counties) 68.54% 8.41% 23.05%

68.54
70

60
50 40 30 20 10 0

23.05

8.41

Major 17 Counties

Next 7 Mid Major Counties

Other 66 Counties

20

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________ Major 17 Counties partisan historical considerations of polling study respondents Republican 7 Counties Democratic 6 Counties Swing 4 Counties 22.42% 45.34% 32.24%

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

45.34 32.24

22.42

Republican 7 Counties

Democratic 6 Counties

Swing 4 Counties

21

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________ Urban Market Community weight based on historical considerations of polling study respondents Urban Market Communities All other Michigan communities 16.15% 83.85%

83.85 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Urban Markets All other communities

16.15

22

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Michigan Congressional Districts

C.D. 13 6% C.D. 12 6%

Michigan Congressional District Respondent Participation Weight
C.D. 1 11%
C.D. 14 5%

C.D. 2 7% C.D. 3 7%

C.D. 1 C.D. 2 C.D. 3
C.D. 4 C.D. 5 C.D. 6

C.D. 11 7%

C.D. 7

C.D. 10 7%
C.D. 7 10%

C.D. 8

C.D. 9 6% C.D. 8 5%

C.D. 6 7%
C.D. 5 8%

C.D. 9

C.D. 4 8%

C.D. 10
C.D. 11 C.D. 12

C.D. 13 C.D. 14

23

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

Demographic Sample Report
Our polling sample was very consistent with the projected voter demographic considerations for a Michigan November General election. We have a number of variance items that we will report. Age: Our study skewed significantly higher with voter cluster of persons over the age of 51. This sampling was 83.03% of all polling study respondents. Despite efforts to adjust the call volume to move the weight of this group closer to the projected 59% weight that they will have in the General election, we were not successful. Our data also skewed significantly lower among the voter cluster of persons ages 18 to 30. This cluster was roughly 12 points lower than their projected November General turnout weight. One challenge could exist from the disconnect from younger respondents using communication tools outside of traditional landline and cell phone. Despite the variance, we believe the overall polling study’s quality of pooling sample and reporting effectiveness will not be hampered. The potential exists for a higher weight of persons over the age of 51 in the 2012 November General election. Gender: Our aggregate respondent pool skewed slightly higher for female respondents. Our predictive voter behavior analysis model projects that typical Michigan Presidential election turnout is 54% female and 46% male. Our polling study results produced a 59.59% female and 40.41% male respondent pool. Traditionally, this is the most sensitive question for respondents to answer and typically has the highest refusal rate of any demographic question. Nationality/Heritage: Our aggregate respondent pool skewed higher for White voters then our predictive voter behavior analysis model projects for the 2012 Michigan November General election. Our respondent pool was 83.58% white, while our predictive voter behavior analysis model projects that 74.5% of Michigan’s Presidential General election will be white. African American respondents were correspondently skewed lower than our predictive voter behavior analysis model projects for the 2012 Michigan November General election. Our respondent pool was 9.32% African American, while our predictive voter behavior analysis model projects that 17.5% of Michigan’s Presidential General election will be white. In spite of these two variances, we believe the quality of the sample pool and quantifiable data derived is statistically accurate to the 2.32% margin of error factor. Major 17 County population distribution: Our aggregate respondent pool skewed higher for Major 17 Democratic Counties and lower then predictive voter behavior analysis model for the 2012 November general. In spite of these two variances, we believe the quality of the sample pool and quantifiable
24

Foster McCollum White & Associates ______________________________________________________________________________________

data derived is statistically accurate to the 2.32% margin of error factor.

Please contact Eric Foster of Foster McCollum White & Associates at either 313-333-7081 or efoster@fostermccollumwhite.com or Tarek Baydoun of Baydoun Consulting at either 313-7293737 or baydounconsulting@gmail.com for a more detailed summary of our polling report.

25

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful