AZ03: Crunching the PPP poll.

***cross-posted at DailyKos***

If you haven’t seen it yet, yesterday DailyKos presented a poll that was conducted for us by Public Policy Polling, a North Carolina-based Democratic polling firm. Despite it’s affiliation with the Democrats, PPP doesn’t have a big noticeable House effect though.

The poll’s results were an absolute shocker: (relatively conservative) Democrat Jon Hulburd leads the former Vice President’s son Ben Quayle 46-44 in the district that is still held by retiring Republican Representative John Shadegg, one of the most conservative Republicans in the House, in a district that has a Cook PVI of R+9- that means that in the last few election cycles it voted on average 9 points more Republican than the nation as a whole.

John McCain, who admittedly stems from Arizona, won 57% of the vote there, Bush got 54% in 2000 and 58% in 2004.  

Another note: The huge paragraph breaks are intentional. They don’t look very aesthetically pleasing, but I think that without them the numerical density of the diary would pretty much kill every reader.

In such a bad cycle as 2010, where the general consensus is that Democrats are going to lose about 50 House seats, you’d expect a Democrat to be down at least by 15-20 points here- if not more.

So understandably lots of people questioned the validity of the poll. I’m going to dig a bit into the raw data, that’s provided for all joint DailyKos/PPP polls. A big hurrah to transparency!

Still, unless you like to see a lot of numbers, you can just skip to the conclusion, in the main part of the diary (and it will be long, I guess) I describe how I got there.

Basically, the analysis will have three steps:

1) We will look at several crosstabs that PPP/DailyKos didn’t provide in their tables in the release.

2) We will look at where Hulburd and Quayle fall short of the potential ceiling for Democrats and Republicans respectively in the district.

3) We will take a sophisticated look at undecided voters and how they might break down.

Raw Polling Data  and the Question Key.

Okay, the first thing we can use this for is to provide a couple of crosstabs that PPP/DailyKos didn’t release.

They’re not very surprising: Across the board, Hulburd does a better job holding on to voters for other Democratic candidates/people who approve of Democratic politicians than Quayle does with Republicans.

Hulburd wins 91-7 among the people who vote for Terry Goddard, Quayle wins 79-10 among Gov. Brewer’s supporters. Gubernatorial undecideds break 32-10 for Hulburd.

Hulburd wins Rodney Glassman’s supporters by an almost identical 90-7 margin, Quayle wins Sen. McCain’s supporters, but only by a 72-19 margin. The support that Senator McCain still has left among moderates who don’t rubberstamp all Republicans is not transferring to Quayle.

Senatorial Undecided voters break for Quayle 36-29- fueled by some people who don’t back McCain but most other Republicans- I guess some JD Hayworth supporters are still out there.

Not very surprisingly, Hulburd wins people who see him favorably, 88-8, and loses people who don’t like him 85-11. People who are still undecided about him go for Quayle by a 55-30 margin- maybe Hulburd has some room to grow here as people make up their minds about him and Quayle.

Quayle wins people who like him by a whooping 97-2 margin. That is mostly because almost no one likes him, and if you do, you’re such a hardcore supporter that you certainly will vote for him too. He loses people who view him unfavorably 8-85, and is saved by the fact that people who don’t have an opinion on him go for him 54-11.

I’m somewhat hoping that these are low-information voters who haven’t read much about the race and just went by the Party name provided: The Republicans are strong here, so their brand isn’t as much in the gutter here as elsewhere. As media coverage will ramp up in the last two weeks, hopefully some of these will learn about Quayle’s scandals.

I’m skipping how the people who view Brewer/McCain/Goddard/Glassman/Kyl favorably/unfavorably/not at all break down, because it is totally unremarkable: People who like Democrats vote for Hulburd, people who like Republicans vote for Quayle, people who don’t have a clue vote for Quayle by a lesser margin. If you’re interested though, ask in the comments, I have the data lying around.

Now, as for Obama… Obama’s image in this district is terrible, with his approval at 38% and his disapproval at 55%.

It’s no big surprise that Hulburd managed to shore up all supporters of President Obama, he wins them 95-2: That’s a better predictor than even how people view him or Quayle!

Hulburd also manages to win over 13% of people who disapprove of Obama, a (in today’s times) relatively huge amount of cross-over. Quayle gets 75% here. Among the few people who are still undecided on how they view Obama, Hulburd wins 57-19. I guess that if in such a red district you don’t hate Obama you’re pretty much a Democrat-leaning guy.

Not very surprisingly, Hulburd wins people who disapprove of the broadly popular SB-1070 90-7, because this mostly comes down to Liberals and Hispanics. He manages to win over almost a quarter of people who LIKE the law though, losing them only 22-67. This is what keeps him alive here, as 59% of voters like the law, just 34% don’t.

It’s no big surprise that Hulburd came out in favor of the law- we might not like it, but if he came out against it, he’d probably be down by 6-7 points despite of Quayle’s weaknesses.

On a related note, this is also why Raul Grijalva seems to be in a bit of trouble. If you call for a boycott of your own constituents because of a law that is supported by a majority of voters, that will not play very well with anyone, really.

Summary: Hulburd is competitive because he does much better with otherwise Republican-leaning people than Quayle does with Democrat-leaning people, and because he supports SB-1070, which enables him to win over a good chunk of the 59% of people who support it too.

Okay, great. But this was not really in-depth analysis so far.

The next step is looking at the potential that Democrats and Republicans have in the district, and where Hulburd and Quayle fall short of it.

I did this already for my first analysis of a PPP/Kos poll, and I was pretty satisfied with the interpretative value it provided.

The potential for Democrats and Republicans is defined as follows:

People who support at least one of Hulburd, Glassman, Goddard, or Obama in 2008, or who identify themselves as Democrats are among the reachable voters for Democratic candidates. A perfect Democratic candidate without weaknesses running against a flawed Republican could win them all. Roughly 58% of voters in the district belong to the this category, which could be termed the Democratic Persuadable Voter Universe (DPVU.. okay, I love appreviations).

People who support at least one of Quayle, McCain, Brewer, McCain in 2008 or who identify themselves as Republicans are in the RPVU universe (Republican Persuadable.. okay, you know the drill). That works out to a bit less than 70% of voters in this district.

Or, put another way, 30% of voters usually vote a straight Democratic ticket, 42% of voters usually vote a straight Republican ticket, and 28% of voters are swing voters who can be persuaded by both parties.

What are the characteristics of the people who are open to Democrats, but don’t support Hulburd, and what are the characteristics of the people who are open to Republicans, but don’t support Quayle?

Let’s clarify first that the latter group is much bigger than the former. Quayle reaches only about 62% of the many voters who might have supported a good Republican candidate, Hulburd gets almost 80% of his potential supporters.

Now let’s look at the potential Dems who don’t support Hulburd.

They support Brewer over Goddard, 55-35, McCain over Glassman, 57-36, dislike Hulburd 17-26, like Quayle 58-20, Brewer 61-27, McCain 57-34, Kyl 51-23, dislike Goddard 32-53, Glassman 12-27, and Obama by a whooping 16-74 margin.  They like SB-1070 69-19 BUT they only supported McCain over Obama by a 48-40 margin.

10% of them are liberal, 41% moderate, 49% Conservative, 61% female, 31% of them still identify as Democrats, 47% as Republicans, and 22% as Independents. 79% are White, 16% are Hispanic and 5% something else. Age breakdown is pretty irrelevant because largely similar to everyone else.

Okay, I think we can put these people into a three groups.

About 55% of them are Republicans or Republican-leaning Independents who happened to like one of Glassman, Goddard or Obama in 2008.

About 25% of them are Democrats or Democratic-leaning Independents who are now in the Obama disapproval camp, but still support some statewide Democrats like Glassman or Goddard. They don’t like Hulburd, or are still undecided on the race (Remember, we’re talking about ‘NOT SUPPORTING HULBURD’-Dems, not about ‘SUPPORTING QUAYLE’-Dems. The Undecided Dems are in here, too).

The last 20% are liberal or moderatish liberal Democrats who still like Obama, and statewide Democrats, dislike SB 1070 and are generally party-line Democrats, but still don’t support Hulburd.

These are the people he can’t afford to lose- he doesn’t have to get to his ceiling of 58%, but these last 20% of people Hulburd HAS to convince.

He should also try to firm up at least a bit of support among the Dems who have soured on Obama. If he does that, he’ll get closer to the 50% mark.

Okay, let’s do the same thing for the Republican-leaning group that doesn’t support Quayle: A much larger group.

They back Goddard over Brewer, but just barely, 48-43, and McCain over Glassman, by a huge margin, 61-30.

Here we already see a key difference: The Democrats who don’t support Hulburd soured on the WHOLE ticket, voting for Brewer and McCain.

The Republicans who don’t like Quayle draw a line there, but still are relatively open to people like McCain and to a lesser extent Brewer, suggesting that they don’t want to vote for very conservative wingnuts, but are open to supporting moderate and potentially sane conservative (Kyl) Republicans.

They like Hulburd, who’s a quite conservative Democrat, by a 45-8 margin. And they fucking HATE Quayle, with 7% viewing him favorably, and 76% unfavorably. Contrast that 7-76 rating with Hulburd’s 17-26 rating among his own defectors. Quayle’s defectors hate him, Hulburd’s defectors are merely ‘Meh’ about him.

They’re split on Brewer, giving her a 42-47 rating, and Kyl, who gets a 42-44 rating from them, but like McCain, 58-31. They also like Goddard, 53-32, and are not sure about Glassman, giving him a 20-19 rating.

Even though they don’t support Quayle and like many more moderate Democrats like Goddard and Hulburd, they’re not too fond of Obama though, who gets a 40-48 rating from them. Also, they back the SD-1070 bill, though to a lesser extent than the electorate as a whole, 53-34.

They voted for McCain in 2008, giving him 57% of their votes to Obama’s 31%.

10% are liberal, 57% moderate, and 34% Conservative, 56% female, 24% Democrats, 57% Republicans (!) and 19% Independent. 80% are White, 14% Hispanic, 6% Other, age breakdown is unremarkable once again.

So… essentially we have similar groups here, but the breakdown is a bit different. And we have one new group.

30% are essentially Democrats who happen to like a Republican (mostly McCain) but generally vote party-line on most cases.

About 40% are Republicans who generally support the party line, like Kyl and Brewer and SD-1070, but are disgusted by Quayle and therefore don’t support him. These are the people who like Brewer and Kyl and McCain, but not Quayle.

About 15% are moderates who generally support the middle-of-the-road candidate everywhere. They supported McCain in 2008, still love him, but they also like Goddard and back him over Brewer. They’re not really down on Glassman, but would never back him over McCain. They don’t like Obama, but they do like Hulburd, who’s running as a moderate Democrat supporting SB 1070, which they also like, and against an inept wingnut like Quayle.

And about 15% are Democrats who have soured on Obama, and vote much like the moderates.

All of these people have one thing in common: They hate Dan Quayle, which is why he’ll have a very hard time winning them over. He’ll get some of them because a lot of these people still don’t want a Democratic Congress and will- disgusted- still back him, but not that many.

Here’s an interesting statistic:

Looking at all moderate AND liberal Republicans, who make up about 18% of the sample, Quayle wins just by a measly 48-42 margin. That means that almost half of the moderate Republicans have abandoned him, that is huge.

As a comparison, looking at all moderate and conservative Democrats, a subsample that’s about the same size as the moderate and liberal Republicans, Hulburd wins 84-10. If the candidates were equally appealing, these numbers should be roughly the same. There you can see the huge difference between the candidate’s qualities.

Summary: While Hulburd still has some work to do with winning over some Democrat-leaning voters who still hold out on him, especially those who still like the other Democrats on the ticket, the main point here is just how unpopular Quayle is. Lots of conservative Independents and moderate Republicans and even conservative Republicans who usually are very open to Republican candidates have left his campaign. Some of them are already on board with the Hulburd campaign, some are still out there and thinking about their choice.

Okay, the last thing we’ll do is look at the Undecided voters. For that we need an advanced tool, a so-called Logistic Regression.

The short story is, without going into the math details, we’re looking at the voters who already have decided, and try to discern WHY they voted that way. We do that by looking at the other responses they gave in the poll. If they disapprove of Obama, voted for McCain, and are Conservative Republicans, who support Brewer over Goddard, we can be pretty sure that they will support Quayle: And we can quantify that and give them a certain probability that they will support Candidate A or B.

The result of this is some output that probably few of you would understand, so I’m not going to copy it here. If you want to see it, leave a message in the comments and I’m going to post it there.

The model has an adj. r² of .81 though, for the stats guys, which means that it explains 81% of the variance in the dependent variable (If the voter supports the Democrat).

Okay, the results here are not as good. The model projects that Hulburd will draw only 42% of the remaining undecided voters, with 58% going to Quayle. The main reason for that is that there are many people like #648 among the Undecided voters: She’s a white, conservative Republican aged 65+, voted for McCain and still likes him. She dislikes Obama, likes SB1070, and she doesn’t like Goddard- she doesn’t like Gov. Brewer either though. That’s why she’s undecided on the Gubernatorial race while she’s voting for McCain. She doesn’t like Quayle, and has no opinion yet on Hulburd.

The model assigns her a 76% chance that she finally will come home and vote for Quayle though, voting party line over her personal feelings.

For others the choice goes the other way. #644 has a similar profile: She, too, is a female senior white Conservative who dislikes Quayle and likes SB1070. But, she likes Hulburd too, while #648 was just undecided on him. And, she’s different on the gubernatorial race. While #648 disliked both Goddard and Brewer, she likes them both- still, she’s voting for Brewer. OTOH, she’s not as warm towards McCain anymore, having no opinion about him and still being undecided on the Senate race.

For her, the model thinks, her high opinion of Hulburd and her dislike of Quayle could make a difference, so the model gives her a 75% chance of voting for Hulburd and 25% for Quayle.

Still, among all undecided voters, on average 58% will break for Quayle and 42% for Hulburd. That almost erases Hulburd’s lead. Allocating the undecided voters results in a result of 50.1% for Hulburd to 49.9% for Quayle.



Summary: The demographics and responses of the remaining undecided voters suggest that Ben Quayle will gain the majority of their votes, 58-42. Allocating the undecideds that way results in a essentially tied race, 50.1-49.9% in favor of Hulburd.

Conclusion: The results of the PPP poll look pretty reasonable. Voters of all colors dislike Quayle and many of them follow this up by voting for Hulburd. Almost half of moderate Republicans vote for Hulburd, as do many voters who favor the SB-1070 bill. Hulburd’s conservative profile makes him a viable alternative for Republicans and conservative Independents who dislike Quayle, while he still holds the liberal part of his base together. Hulburd wins over many Conservatives and Republicans, while Quayle gets almost no cross-over support. That makes Hulburd competitive in this race where the fundamentals favor Quayle: 42% of voters here usually vote straight-ballot GOP– compared to 30% who do the same for the Democrats. But Hulburd wins over most swing voters.

The upside for Quayle in this poll is that the Undecided voters in this poll largely favor him, I project 58% of undecided voters to break for Quayle and 42% for Hulburd. This makes the AZ-03 election an absolutely tied race, with outprojecting the undecideds 50.1% voting for Hulburd and 49.9% for Quayle.

This race should come down to a couple of thousand votes, unless Quayle succeeds in making an argument that GOP voters and Conservatives should somehow forget their feelings for him in the ballot box.

PA-Sen: Joe Sestak Flips the Electability Argument (Rasmussen Part Two)

{Originally posted at my blog Senate Guru.}

Following its PA-Sen Democratic primary numbers released yesterday showing Congressman Joe Sestak closing the gap on recent Republican Arlen Specter, Rasmussen Reports released general election match-up numbers:

Pat Toomey (R) 48

Arlen Specter (D) 36

Other 4

Not Sure 12
Pat Toomey (R) 43

Joe Sestak (D) 35

Other 5

Not Sure 18

Two obvious takeaways here.  One, Toomey has taken the lead.  Is it discontent over the protracted health care reform debate?  Is it burgeoning discontent with Specter himself harming the Democratic brand in Pennsylvania?  And how temporary will this lead be?  Unclear.

Two, the “electability” argument in the Democratic primary has flipped.  In previous polls, Specter matched up against Toomey better than Congressman Sestak did (no doubt relying largely on Specter’s strong name ID).  In this poll, however, Congressman Sestak matches up better.  His deficit against Toomey is only 8 points (and, remember, Congressman Sestak has never run statewide, unlike Toomey, and is still working to build name recognition across the state, which should improve his numbers significantly), while Specter’s deficit against Toomey is 12 points.  This is probably due to a plummetting favorable-unfavorable rating for Specter, as Rasmussen points out; Specter’s is down to 43-54.

While the numbers against Toomey are nothing to celebrate, this poll further cements the notion that Arlen Specter would not serve Democrats well as the Party’s Senate nominee.

By the way, want integrity?  Congressman Sestak went on Fox News to promote that he is “a strong proponent of the public health care plan option.”  He’s not going to pander or sugar coat.  He’s going to fight for Democratic values everywhere.  (And you can help Congressman Sestak’s fight with a contribution via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page.)

CT-Senate: Simmons increases his lead in poll.

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) got mix of good but mostly bad news with the latest Quinnipiac University Poll testing his long held Senate seat.

Overall, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, former Congressman Rob Simmons (R-CT) has increased his lead over Dodd and now leads him 48%-39%. In May Simmons had only lead Dodd 45%-39%

Dodd also polls poorly for a longtime incumbent against poorly known Republicans in the race. Dodd is tied with former ambassador (and not former US House Speaker) Tom Foley with 42% each, and barely leads state Sen. Sam Caligiuri and investor Peter Schiff.

The poll also tested the primaries on both sides of the isle. Dodd still has some strengh left, at least with Democrats, leading former aide to Vice President Al Gore Merrick Alpert 52%-18% in the primary. On the GOP side, Simmons holds a strong 37 point lead over Foley and Caligiuri, both of whom didnt break 5%, and Schiff, who got a whopping 0%.

The best news for Dodd perhaps? Its still only 2009.

Check out the CQ story here: http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/po…

NY-Sen/Gov – Gillibrand behind, Paterson -still- dead meat

NY-Gov should be completely uninteresting for most poll junkies by now – another day, another poll showing Paterson getting creamed by Cuomo.

Quinnipiac (HTML – June 16-21, registered voters)

David Paterson: 20%

Andrew Cuomo: 57%

MoE: +3%

Here’s the slightly more newsworthy bit – Sen. Gillibrand is behind Rep. Carolyn Maloney for the 2010 Senate nomination:

Quinnipiac (HTML – June 16-21, registered voters)

Kirsten Gillibrand: 23%

Carolyn Maloney: 27%

Jonathan Tasini: 4%

Don’t Know:: 44%

MoE: +3%

Don’t Know still winds in a landslide, naturally – but I’m wondering what is keeping Gillibrand’s numbers so far in the pits, considering that she’s fairly smoothly transitioned from upstate conservative Democrat to the liberal New York mainstream. My thought was a sort of “throw the bums out” mentality, considering how badly Paterson is doing.

The fav/unfav of Gillibrand and Maloney are pretty similar – not many people have heard enough about them yet to really form an opinion one way or the other.

Gillibrand’s, among Democrats:

Favorable: 29%

Unfavorable: 8%

Haven’t Heard Enough 63%

And Maloney’s, among Democrats

Favorable: 34%

Unfavorable: 2%

Haven’t Heard Enough 63%

I think Gillibrand will be fine in the primary in the end. I don’t know that any of the attacks from the downstate Democrats will necessarily stick as her voting record in the Senate gets fleshed out over the next year or so, and Upstate Democrats adore her, so she really just has to win a plurality of the NYC vote to carry the primary (or even a close second).

Bonus question from the Q-poll:

DavidNYC’s favorables, among Democrats:

Favorable: 63%

Unfavorable: 10%

Haven’t Heard Enough 27%

Obviously DavidNYC should be the Democratic Party’s choice for this one. Peter Fucking King stands no chance.

PA-Sen: Toomey Gets Closer to Specter

Quinnipiac University (5/20-26, “Pennsylvania voters,” early May in parens).

Primaries:

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 50

Joe Sestak (D): 21

Undecided: 27

(MoE: ±4.1%)

Pat Toomey (R): 38

Jim Gerlach (R): 10

Peg Luksik (R): 3

Undecided: 47

(MoE: ±4.3%)

General:

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 46 (53)

Pat Toomey (R): 37 (33)

Undecided: 14 (10)

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 45

Jim Gerlach (R): 36

Undecided: 15

Joe Sestak (D): 37

Pat Toomey (R): 35

Undecided: 23

Joe Sestak (D): 36

Jim Gerlach (R): 30

Undecided: 30

(MoE: ±2.8%)

I still gag whenever I have to put a (D) after Arlen Specter’s name, and I don’t think I’m the only one. Specter’s approval margin among both Dems and independents dropped a dozen points over the last month. And the ratio of Dems willing to vote for him fell from 85-4 to 73-10. These numbers are still pretty high, though, so is there enough discontent for Joe Sestak to get in?

Interestingly, Sestak & Jim Gerlach have almost identical approvals, yet Sestak starts with a six-point lead. That points up the natural advantage Dems hold over Republicans in Pennsylvania these days.

P.S. In a move sure to anger wingnuts already steamed about the NRSC’s endorsement of Charlie Crist, Big John Cornyn said it was “premature” for the GOP to back Toomey, even though there are no other Republicans in the race (and the prospects of any getting in look slim).

Swingnut Demographics

The discussion regarding “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” surprised me in that a number of people volunteered their age and were, on the whole, younger than I imagined the members of this site to be.  To test this hypothesis, (since the Bueller sample may have been self selecting, for obvious reasons) I’ve created a poll.  The age spreads are a bit narrower for the younger ages.  If people enjoy this, I will perhaps do more demographic polls in the future.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Paterson is toast, part II

This time the news comes from Marist:

New Yorkers are sending a strong message to Governor David Paterson, “Shape Up!”  Just 26% of registered voters report the governor is doing either an excellent or good job in office.  That’s a drop of 20 percentage points since the Marist Poll last asked this question at the end of January.  In fact, Governor Paterson’s approval rating is the lowest approval rating a New York State governor has received in the Marist Poll’s nearly thirty year history of statewide surveys.  Has the governor lost favor within his own party?  Here’s the party breakdown.  Among registered Democrats in New York State, 30% think Paterson is doing an above average job while 65% disagree.  Across the aisle, Republicans also overwhelmingly disapprove of Paterson’s performance.  Just 26% of members of New York’s GOP approve of the job Paterson is doing as governor while 72% think he is doing a fair or poor job.  Only 20% of non-enrolled voters agree that Paterson is doing well in the position.  Opinions across the state are consistently low.  24% of upstate voters approve of the job Paterson is doing as governor.  26% of suburban voters say he is doing an above average job, and 30% of New York City voters share this position.

The poll isn’t all doom and gloom: Schumer is as popular as ever, and Gillibrand seems set to be reelected. But my bottom line is this,  if Democrats don’t find a new Gubernatorial candidate, we will very likely lose the office.

SUSA: Paterson is in deep trouble

The short version, which is all I have time for: David Paterson under water in New York, according to SUSA’s latest tracking poll.

By 2:1 Margin, New York Disapproves of Paterson Performance as Governor: 66% of New York State adults today say they disapprove of the job performance of Governor David Paterson

[. . .]

One month ago, 54% of New York adults approved of Paterson’s performance as Governor.

This could just be a one time polling error, but given some of the other polling we’ve seen out of New York recently, I’m inclined to think that it’s the real deal. Bizarre tax/budget schemes and the Senate appointment process appear to have done deep damage to New York’s Governor.  

FL-Sen: Strategic Vision Polls the Race

Strategic Vision (R) has a new poll of the Florida Senate race, with some different names being polled than past polls.  The poll results are based on telephone interviews with 1200 likely voters in Florida, aged 18+, and conducted February 6-8, 2009. The margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

2010 Senate Democratic Primary

Ron Klein 12%

Kendrick Meek 10%

Pam Iorio 8%

Dan Gelber 4%

Undecided 66%

2010 Senate Republican Primary with Crist

Charlie Crist 54%

Connie Mack IV 16%

Vern Buchanan 10%

Alan Bense 7%

Marco Rubio 4%

Undecided 9%

2010 Senate Republican Primary without Crist

Connie Mack IV 21%

Vern Buchanan 11%

Alan Bense 8%

Marco Rubio 5%

Undecided 9%

2010 Senate General Election

Crist 58%, Klein 24%

Crist 60%, Meek 26%

Crist 57%, Iorio 29%

Crist 58%, Gelber 27%

Mack 32%, Klein 27%

Mack 35%, Meek 25%

Mack 32%, Iorio 30%

Mack 33%, Gelber 20%

Buchanan 24%, Klein 28%

Buchanan 29%, Meek 23%

Buchanan 26%, Iorio 30%

Buchanan 23%, Gelber 20%

Bense 22%, Klein 27%

Bense 28%, Meek 21%

Bense 24%, Iorio 30%

Bense 27%, Gelber 25%

Rubio 18%, Klein 29%

Rubio 26%, Meek 24%

Rubio 19%, Iorio 32%

Rubio 22%, Gelber 17%

Not sure if this poll tells us too much.  Clearly, Crist dominates if he runs.  If he doesn’t, then the race is wide open.

Among the Democrats, Iorio consistently polled best in the general election match-ups, followed by Klein, then Meek, with Gelber last.  Of course, there are huge numbers of undecideds, so it’s impossible to say who would be the strongest general election candidate for the Democrats this far out.  When the primary is this open, I hope the DSCC stays out, as I think the strongest candidate tends to emerge from the primary.

GOP Internal: Russell leads Murtha 48-35 in PA-12

Heinous wingnut Michelle Malkin is breathlessly reporting a leaked GOP internal poll in PA-12 showing incumbent John Murtha (D) losing by approximately 13 points to GOP challenger Bill Russell.

Dane and Associates (R) (10/22, 800 likely voters)

John Murtha (D-inc): 34.8

Bill Russell (R): 47.6

Update: I should point out that we don’t have a full press release on this, and as one commenter pointed out, for all we know this could be a message-testing poll. In other words, they might be preceding the poll question with negative information about Murtha and/or positive info about Russell. If more info is released, I will update further.

Murtha had a reverse-Macaca moment recently when he called western Pennsylvania a “racist area” and said that the area until recent years used to be “really redneck”. Predictably, these comments have not been received well, much as Michelle Bachmann’s “anti-American” comments changed the dynamic in her district. Another poll by Republican pollster Susquehanna Polling & Research conducted a day prior for consevative rag the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (the Mellon Scaife outfit) showed Murtha up by 5 points but very vulnerable.

Susquehanna POlling & Research (R) (10/21, 400 likely voters)

John Murtha (D-inc): 46

Bill Russell (R): 41

(MoE: ±4.9%)

It should be noted that Russell used BMW Direct for fundraising, a scam company that raises huge amounts of money for longshot candidates and keeps most of the money for itself. In the 3rd quarter, Russell raised an eyebrow-raising $1.592 million, and “spent” $1.529 million (ie, about 95% went to BMW Direct from the looks of it). Murtha, on the other hand, raised $457k and spent all of it presumably on defending his seat. The CoH picture is not really confidence-inspiring – Murtha reported $591k to Russell’s $333k. The PVI of this district is D+5, so if we do lose this seat, it will become a top priority challenge next cycle. Bill Russell is way more conservative than this district (Malkin has been pumping for him all year), but his millitary-hero story is likely to win him some points.

Unfortunately for Murtha and Kanjorski, the fierce anti-incumbent mood that has been playing in Pennsylvania since 2006 (causing huge turnover in state legislative races) can topple Democrats as well as Republicans.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...