From Today's Hotline:
Conducted 10/8-11 by Ayres, McHenry & Associates (R); surveyed 600 RVs; margin of error +/- 4% (release, 10/17). Party ID Breakdown: 30%D, 34%R, 36%I. Tested: Sen. Lamar Alexander (R) and ex-Gov. McWherter son/businessman Mike McWherter (D).
General Election Matchup Alexander As Sen.
All Dem GOP Ind All Dem GOP Ind
L. Alexander 60% 22% 91% 63% Approve 68% 46% 87% 69%
M. McWherter 29 65 4 22 Disapprove 19 35 6 19
Undec 11 na na na
Fav/Unfav
L. Alexander 60%/19%
M. McWherter 9 / 9
Because the election is not held today, but rather a little over a year from now, mcWheter will lose but he’ll pump up his own numbers and soften Alexander up a bit.
probably finish somewhere arond 55-45 (maybe 56-57 for Alexander), never get into the toss up area, but it will be “competitive.” Probably resemble Arizona from last cycle.
(I’ve been traveling for the past two weeks, so I’ve been away from the internet – my own blog will be updated again this weekend. With the traveling, I haven’t seen much in the news…)
Ummm… with McWherter’s favorable-unfavorable at 9/9 – in other words, with McWherter’s UNKNOWN or NO OPINION at 82%, I don’t know if the Lamar lead is such a big deal.
An argument can be made that the McWherter name isn’t as strong as some had hoped – but, even then, with such low name ID as evidenced by the low fav-unfav, one could argue that people might just not know he’s the son of the former Gov – but this is hardly cause for alarm.
Maybe when more than 18% of Tennesseeans have formed an opinion, we’ll have something substantial to go on.
These are numbers we are seeing in Virginia with a former governor against a former governor. Except in this case, the weaker candidate has 18% of the people saying they know who he is instead of 70%. It’s a good place to start.
I didn’t make any comment; I just posted the poll. If you think the poll was premature, then talk the people who conducted it or paid for it.
I would imagine that Mike McWherter’s name ID is relatively high for a neophyte, maybe around 35% to 45%, but no one has formed an opinion of him yet.
Although I found it very interesting that of the people that have formed an opinion, as many people don’t like him as do. That doesn’t bode well for people who are counting on his father’s popularity to ride into office.
but I’d really like to see a LV poll. In any event this shows that McWherter has a lot of work to do to make this at all competitive. The most intesting numbers to me are Alexander’s fav / unfav and approve disapprove numbers. If his approval among LV’s is in fact 60% and 68% of Dems approve of the job he is doing it is hard to see how he loses.
The formatting isn’t mine, so its hard to gauge how the spaces will pan out, even with “WYSIWYG”.
Let’s compare numbers. Mark Warner scores 55-60 while his opponents barely overtake 30%. That looks like a backwards Tennessee. Here, the Democrat is barely reaching 30% while Alexander is sitting at 60%.
Seems the same, doesn’t it? Well? Then what was the point of this diary?
The big difference is that Mike McWherter has 18% of respondents saying they know enough about Mike to give an opinion of it. What’s Gilmore looking like in Virginia?
Of course of all times to not be able to grab one of the many recent polls… I can tell you, I remember Gilmore sitting around 70%+ name recognition.
My point is, Mike McWherter can only go up from here. He hasn’t even *started* campaigning. He’s still in the Exploratory Committee phase.
Like Kentucky I’ve never truly bought into this race as being competitive. Obviously if Bredesden or Harold Ford got into this race that could change. But without a truly top-tier candidate I just don’t see any reason to believe this race will be competitive
I’m not Newred. The only reason I have a different name here and at MyDD is because the account “Va Blogger” was banned at both sites. I still use that name at your site, at DKos, and at Not Larry Sabato (a VA blog); I used to use it at Raising Kaine, but they’ve repeatedly banned my account (Lowell Feld apparently takes criticism of any Democrat very personally). There is no reason for me to sign up a new account as “newred”.
Second, I don’t understand what my motivation has to do with anything. Whatever reason I have for posting this doesn’t affect the results, nor the newsworthiness of the poll. Furthermore, since you can’t *prove* my intent, you’re aiming simply to get into a meaningless tit-for-tat argument, which I’d rather not do. Political junkies of all stripes have been able to co-exist with my presence here. I recommend you learn from their example.
Thirdly, your reasoning doesn’t even make sense in this scenario:
1) This is the first poll released in this race, which fairly or not is used as a lens to view further developments in the state (much like similar “first polls” in Virginia, Colorado, Maine, and other states were used).
2) I checked; the only outlet I could find the poll was from the National Journal’s Hotline, which is subscription-based and not availible to everyone.
3) Much speculation has been given to Mike McWherter’s strength due to his last name and his father’s popularity. This poll dispells that McWherter would be particularly stronger than any other political novice running for office, and his equal fav/unfav rating is also very interesting.
4) Its a poll about a political race. Why would I need any other reason to post it on a site that covers political campaigns?
You can continue to be sarcastic and hostile towards me, even though there is absolutely nothing in this diary that warrants it. I do hope you reconsider, though. Like me or not, disagree with me or not, I bring something to the table. There’s no reason to be narrow-minded about it. This site is a great resource and its participants, for the most part, offer civil discussion. I welcome you to follow suit.