NV-Sen, NV-Gov, NV-03: We’re Just Mild About Harry

Mason-Dixon (8/9-11, likely voters, 7/26-28 in parens)

Harry Reid (D-inc): 46 (43)

Sharron Angle (R): 44 (42)

Other: 2 (2)

None of these: 3 (7)

Undecided: 5 (6)

(MoE: ±4%)

OK, I can’t claim credit for the title (I stole it from mysterious but apparently hilarious pollster We Ask America, whom I just found out put out a poll of this race last week too: Reid led Angle 46-41). At any rate, in the most recent Mason-Dixon poll for the Las Vegas Review-Journal, it’s a duel to see which candidate can be less unappealing to Nevadans. Harry Reid’s favorables are 40/51, while Angle’s are 37/45.

Also troublesome for Reid: the poll’s finding that, by a 51 to 45 margin, Nevadans don’t think that his seniority is too valuable to give up. Good for Reid, though: 41% say Angle’s positions are too extreme for them (compare with 36% for Reid). Also good: Reid keeps inching closer and closer to the 50% mark as undecideds and NOTAs get off the fence; this is the closest he’s come in a M-D poll, even the one where he was up by 7.

One more thing Angle is also going to have to explain away: she outed herself last Thursday as a big fan of SSP. No, not this SSP: social security privatization. But no, it’s OK, she said, as Chile’s already done it (the last remaining vestige of the Pinochet regime). By Friday, her helpers were already trying to unspin what she’s spun, saying the federal government should manage a system where workers pick their own retirement plans.

Gubernatorial numbers (7/26-28 in parens)

Rory Reid (D): 36 (31)

Brian Sandoval (R): 52 (50)

Other: 1 (2)

None of these: 2 (3)

Undecided: 9 (14)

(MoE: ±4%)

Things aren’t looking up for Reid the Younger, at least not so much. Reid has gained some significant ground since the previous Mason-Dixon poll, as undecideds make their move, but Sandoval is already past the 50% mark. Reid, at 29/41 favorables (Reid’s new campaign slogan: “My Dad went to the Senate and all I got was these lousy favorable ratings”) will be hard-pressed to turn that around against Sandoval’s 48/18.

NV-03 numbers (7/12-14 in parens):

Dina Titus (D-inc): 43 (42)

Joe Heck (R): 42 (40)

Other: 3 (5)

None of these: 4 (4)

Undecided: 8 (9)

(MoE: ±5%)

Dina Titus’s 2-point lead from last month is down to a 1-point lead, all float within the margin of error. I have a feeling the race in NV-03 is going to stay this close consistently for the next few months, all the way through Election Day. While it’s good to see Titus holding her own, she’s at 42/44 favorables while Heck has lots of room to grow 35/16, so she needs to start defining him ASAP.

29 thoughts on “NV-Sen, NV-Gov, NV-03: We’re Just Mild About Harry”

  1. At least they are believable.  The undecideds seem reasonable, the “none of the above” seem reasonable.

    Slight Dem leads in the 2 competitive races (sorry Rory).  And I’d think they might be slightly larger.

    Dems just can’t get complacent and expect Angle (and Paul in KY) to hang themselves.  Even some of their crazy appeals to a large part of their respective electorates.  And their crazy may not seem so crazy within their own states.

    Vigilence is needed in both these races

  2. I’m not sure the 51-45 split on “is his seniority too valuable to give up” is that bad of news.

    Let me put it this way: if you think it IS too valuable to give up, then logically, you’re going to vote for him. But even if you think it ISN’T too valuable to give up, you might not vote for Angle. You might not think much of clout in Washington, but still think Angle is too extreme. Indeed, I imagine most Americans DON’T think too much of clout in Washington, but entrenched incumbents keep winning re-election. So, I think 45% is Reid’s floor of support- and in a race that probably only needs 48% to win (with NOTA being an option), that’s not that bad.

    Of course, I understand that voters don’t always logically think out their answers to poll responses, but I think the topline numbers here back me up- Reid’s getting 46%, and Angle’s getting no where near that 51%. So clearly, some of that 51% that isn’t impressed by Reid’s clout can be convinced to vote for him for some other reason.

  3. Did anyone else find the last question a bit odd.  It asks voters identified as white if they are evangelical/born again.  23% said yes and 77% said no.

    Then right below this question, there is an asterisk that states that “*White evangelical Christians account for 18% of all state voters.”

    I’m curious how that compares to prior elections.

  4. of the tough votes and how our vulnerable incumbents voted?  I really like Titus and want to see her stick around so Im curious about how she voted.  Gotta love a poli sci prof making it Washington instead of another lawyer!  😉

  5. If Reid holds on, I think Titus holds on to. If she pulls it off this year, Dina Titus will be able to breathe easier, because in 2012 she’ll have a smaller and safer district.

  6. After he loses his old state senate seat in 2008 running as incumbent I see not him winning a US house seat in a D+ district. I think he will lose.

  7. he won by just over 300 votes (48%).  The year was 1998 and his opponent was John Ensign.  1998 was a very good year for Democrats because opposition to Republican plans to impeach President Clinton.  Although Angle is no Ensign (i. e. the pre-scandal Ensign), this race is going to be extremely close.

  8. I think I figured it out.  Although the CoC hate Reid for HCR and Wall Street Reform, they know that if Angle is elected, there will be no more pork for Nevada.  Therefore, they’ve compromised by staying out.

    I think it would be wise for the NRA to endorse Reid.  He has a B- lifetime score, but if he loses, Schumer or Durbin will become Majority Leader, and they’re big supporters of gun control.  For now, they’re neutral.

Comments are closed.