Since taking office in 2005, Republican Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri has had a bumpy ride in his first term. He started off with a thud by cutting Medicare coverage to nearly 90,000 people, decimating a crucial service to many of his state's most vulnerable citizens. Things were slow to improve for the boy Governor, but the startlingly high disapproval ratings that he attracted throughout 2005 and 2006 have begun to subside a bit, and, for the first time in the last two years of SurveyUSA's monthly polling, he has a net positive approval rating of +2 (48% approve, 46% disapprove).
If Democrats are getting anxious that Blunt may be rehabilitating himself into a second term, they should take comfort by today's SUSA poll gaging support for Blunt's re-election against his likely Democratic challenger, Attorney General Jay Nixon (registered voters; 07/24-07/25):
Jay Nixon (D): 57%
Matt Blunt (R-inc.): 38%
MoE: ±4.4%
So maybe Missouri voters don’t despise Blunt with the same intensity that they did two years ago, but they’re still primed to return the Governor’s office to Democratic control.
anyone know our status on our other prime offense seat, Indiana, and our prime defensive seat, Washington?
If we can take back both IN and MO, we’ll be back to where we were after the 2000 election, just minus Vermont but plus Montana.
In other words, this is the eleciton for these governorships that regards redistricting. If we want AT LEAST similar maps we need to hold Washington, and retake Missouri and Indiana.
Montana and Vermont are one seat states, no effect on redistricting.
I thought only Arizona and Iowa had those.
You are right. Arizona, Washington, New Jersey, Idaho, and Hawaii use bipartisan panels. Iowa and Maine have panels submit plants to legislatures.
Of those states, only Arizona, Washington, New Jersey, and Iowa have politically significant districting. (Idaho, Hawaii, and Maine are small one-party states.)
New Jersey is the shocker on that list. It’s too bad, cause it would be nice to redistrict the hell out of that one. New Jersey Dems don’t seem like the kind to give up that kind of power.
Also, shouldn’t we have a large number of states with no apportionment changes, and therefore presumably no redistricting?
man, I just spent an hour and a half writing a post on this, i’m like five minutes from posting it, dang.
this is a sign of ballot strength from the Democrats. We have a chance to pick up the sixth district and could return the state to the Democratic column.
I never write off the potential for a recovery. But these are some great numbers.