MO-06: Barnes Closing in on Graves in New Poll

SurveyUSA (7/30-31, likely voters, 5/16-18 in parens):

Kay Barnes (D): 44 (39)

Sam Graves (R-inc): 48 (49)

(MoE: ±4.2%)

Some very nice movement for Kay Barnes, the former mayor of Kansas City, since we last checked in on this race in May. The biggest volatility is among women voters, who broke evenly (43-43) for both candidates in May, but now favor Barnes by a 54-37 margin in the R+4.8 district.

This race has already been eventful, with Graves famously airing over-the-top ads hitting Barnes for attending a fundraiser with Nancy Pelosi, and Barnes responding accordingly.

SSP currently rates MO-06 as Lean Republican.

10 thoughts on “MO-06: Barnes Closing in on Graves in New Poll”

  1. I really think that with some extra DSCC funding and more support, this race could actually be winnable, and I think it will be, Kay barnes is the best Dem recruit in this district for a long time.

  2. I had a feeling this race would narrow soon.  Barnes is already well-known and raising a ton of cash.  Just wait till that DCCC money starts kicking in.

  3. it didn’t toss out a twelve term incumbent in 1996, like MO-09. And, unlike MO-09, we have a much a better candidate with more money. The district is only two points less Republican Presidentially, but it’s better for state Democrats, Montee, McCaskill, Carnahan, both won it in their close elections. Barnes was a popular mayor, and Kansas City is a major part of this district and it and its suburbs, (which are trending more Democratic as seen by McCaskill and Montee’s margins in 2006), amount to some 40% of the district and Barnes is well known there. Not to mention, the other major population center, St. Joseph, is also traditionally Democratic and provided previous margins of victory for statewide Democrats. The only problem is the other counties are solidly red-dog Republican, and some of the outer suburbs are also very conservatve. This district is still considered a swing district in state elections whoever, and before Bush’s two wins it was a swing district in presidential elections and probably will be again. The only reason we lost this district narrowly in 2000 was likely because the previous four term incumbent tried to hand the seat over to her son, and since then Graves has not been given much of a challenge. He’s not much of a campaigner, as seen byu his ads, andBarnes has been running a great campaign, outhustling and out fundraising Graves, (outraising him three quarters in a row). I’m very optimistic about this race, and I currently rate it as a toss up.

  4. http://www.surveyusa.com/clien

    MO-GOV:

    Nixon (D)- 48

    Hulshof (R)- 42

    MO-GOV Republican primary:

    Hulshof – 45

    Steelman – 33

    That is a huge swing from recent polls that had Nixon up 20 or so points.  A 6 point lead is damn near tossup status.  And here I thought this was one sure-fire pickup

    🙁

  5. http://www.surveyusa.com/clien

    Republican Primary for Johnson County, Kansas District Attorney:

    Phill Kline – 44

    Steve Howe – 52

    Who would I bother posting such a low level race you ask?  Well because this is the same wingnut Phill Kline who was once Kansas AG and forced abortion clinics to give his office the names of women having abortions.  Nice to see him fall so far so fast.

  6. This is pretty awesome. I’m always cautiously optimistic about races in the South, even though I know that Missourah is fairly borderline, but this is definately optimistic. And I had forgotten those adds of Graves… How retarded.

  7. In analyzing races alphabetically from Alabama to Montana this was one of six races featuring an incumbent which I rated as a toss-up.  The other five are Cazayoux (LA), Knollenberg (MI), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL), Mahoney (FL), and Shays (CT).

    Here’s my summary of this race:

    6th – Graves (R) – Chillicothe, Maryville, and North Kansas City.

    The last competitive race that Sam Graves had was in 2000, narrowly defeating the son of Pat Danner, his predecessor.  The district is best described as being moderate to conservative.  Moderate areas include the counties bordering Kansas City.  Conservative areas include rural counties, which include the cities of Chillicothe and Maryville.  Kay Barnes, former mayor of Kansas City, is the Democratic nominee.  Sensing the threat early, Graves has begun airing ads classifying her as a liberal with “San Francisco values,” favoring gay marriage and amnesty.  The ad is an attempt to alienate Barnes from moderates in the Kansas City suburbs.  While a majority of the district is rural, a majority of the voters are moderates.  In a district that includes twenty-six counties, 70% of the voters reside in just five (Buchanan, Clay, Clinton, Jackson, and Platte).  In 2004, Kerry won 43% of the districtwide vote, whereas in 2006, Senator McCaskill won 51% of the vote.  Kerry was seen as too liberal, therefore he not only lost the district, but every county within the district (only part, not all of Jackson County is included in the district).  In contrast, McCaskill, viewed as a moderate candidate, lost the rural conservative counties, yet won comfortably in the five vital counties of Kansas City.  In order to succeed here, Barnes will need to adopt a similar strategy.  Both candidates have raised an equal amount of funds for this race, yet individual donations for Barnes far exceed those raised by Graves.  This race promises to be very aggressive, with much of the attacks coming from Graves.  He will base this race on two things: social issues (immigration and gay marriage) and energy.  He will try to link Barnes with Pelosi and Obama as much as he can (McCain will win this district).  Barnes will respond equally by linking Graves to Bush’s failed policies.  However, she will concentrate more on the economy, war in Iraq, and linking Graves to Big Oil (he has certainly received a lot from oil companies).  Graves will call on McCain to visit the district (however, it may make the immigration argument a little weak in the process), and Barnes will rely on McCaskill.  Graves may be taking a serious risk with the energy issue.  If energy prices continue to drop, without any drilling, then the issue becomes less relevant to voters, yet the PAC donations received while prices were high still remains on the radar.  Graves television attacks against Barnes, in attempts to brand her a liberal, could also backfire (Nancy Johnson will be able to inform him firsthand).  If he overplays the issue then moderates may defect sensing him ignoring important issues.  A clear advantage for Barnes is that she seems to be running a better campaign, concentrating on the important issues at hand.  She has also been competitive against Graves in the fundraising arena (and this doesn’t even include the millions that the DCCC will pour into the race).  Barnes also has McCaskill, who has the proven ability to win not only in liberal cities, but also the moderate suburbs which outline them.  Further hurting Graves is a libertarian candidate, which is likely to take at least 1.5% of the vote.  A fight until the end is the best way to describe what is going to transform.

    Rating: Too Close to Call

Comments are closed.