Tag: Polls

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (1/5-7, likely voters):

Roy Cooper (D): 43

Richard Burr (R-inc): 45

Richard Moore (D): 40

Richard Burr (R-inc): 46

(MoE: ±4%)

If you were to ask me, I’d point to Richard Burr as the Republicans’ most endangered incumbent Senator in 2010. He’s kind of a back-bench non-entity up for his first re-election, he made it into office in a strongly Republican year (2004) against an underwhelming opponent (Erskine Bowles), and North Carolina underwent a pretty dramatic blue shift in 2008, although that may dissipate a bit by 2010.

So it’s nice to have some polling data to support my intuition. Roy Cooper, North Carolina’s Attorney General who was just re-elected by a convincing margin, polls very well against Burr, losing by only two points. R2K also tests Richard Moore, the former Treasurer who lost the 2008 gubernatorial primary to then-Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue, who doesn’t poll quite as well (perhaps he’s still tarnished from that acrimonious primary). However, six points back from an incumbent two years out is still a fairly good place to be, too.

Burr’s favorables are only 47 favorable/46 unfavorable, while Cooper’s are 41/21 and Moore is at 37/27, which looks especially nice for Cooper. While media speculation tends to focus on Cooper, it’s not entirely sure whether Cooper will get into the race, and there are a few other top-tier Dems seemingly mulling the race (Rep. Brad Miller comes to mind, as well as Rep. Heath Shuler). But this race easily looks to be a Tossup with Cooper in it (and probably even with Moore or Miller instead).

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (1/5-7, likely voters):

Barbara Boxer (D-inc): 49

Arnold Schwarzenegger (R): 40

(MoE: ±4%)

First, here’s the bad news: Barbara Boxer is under the 50% mark that represents relative safety for an incumbent. The rest of the story is pretty good: that’s against Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is the best-known and probably most popular Republican in California, a guy who many people have feared would convincingly defeat Boxer or at least turn this expensive blue-state seat into a top-tier tossup.

And that presumes that Schwarzenegger even runs, which may not be likely at this point, as his popularity (which enjoyed a resurgence just in time for his re-election in 2006) seems to be waning again. The same sample gives him 42/51 favorable/unfavorable ratings (note that almost everyone in the state has an opinion, meaning he’d have to start changing minds instead of just winning over undecideds).

Californians aren’t that red-hot about Boxer either (she has a lukewarm 48/46 favorable/unfavorable). But if Arnold says ‘hasta la vista’ to electoral politics, with the other potentially strong statewide California Republicans (Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner and ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman) eyeing the governor’s seat, and with probably none of the GOP House members willing to give up their safe seats on a fool’s errand, it’s possible she might only draw second- (or third-) tier opposition again.

ARG (12/27-29, registered voters):

Paul Hodes (D): 40

Judd Gregg (R-inc): 47

Undecided: 13

Carol Shea-Porter (D): 35

Judd Gregg (R-inc): 54

Undecided: 11

(n=569)

ARG! takes a first look at the prospective matchups in the 2010 New Hampshire Senate race. No one has declared yet, although both of NH’s Democratic representatives have expressed some interest, and it’s not even certain whether Gregg plans to run for re-election, considering that he’s likely to race his first tough race in, well, forever.

Of the two representatives, Paul Hodes fares much better, coming within 7 points of Gregg, which is a pretty good place to be, two years out from taking on an entrenched incumbent. Carol Shea-Porter, who had a shakier 2008 re-election than Hodes, falls short by a somewhat wider margin. Although Hodes and Shea-Porter are the Dems getting the lion’s share of attention right now, it might be interesting to see a poll matchup between Gregg and popular Democratic Governor John Lynch; while Lynch seems comfortable in Concord and doesn’t seem likely to run, maybe he’d change his tune if he saw polls giving him an edge.

PPP (1/3-4, registered voters):

Andrew Cuomo (D): 58 (23)

Caroline Kennedy (D): 27 (44)

Undecided: 14 (8)

(MoE: ±3.7%)

Something big has happened over the last few weeks in the “race” to succeed Hillary Clinton as New York’s junior senator, according to the trendlines set by the new PPP poll. The Kennedy boomlet seems to have crested and is receding, suggesting that her awkward media rollout and halting answers to questions has prompted something of a backlash. (In fact, 44% of those surveyed state that their opinion of Kennedy has become less favorable since she started publicly campaigning for the seat.)

However, there is one important apples ‘n’ oranges problem here. The month-old PPP poll was a) only of Democrats, rather than all New York voters like this one, and b) included a whole raft of other candidates instead of just the big 2, although none of them polled above the single digits. The month-old Marist poll (which was of registered voters, and found Kennedy and Cuomo tied at 25%, with 26% undecided and the balance going to other candidates) might be a better reference point, although even if you use that as a benchmark, you still have a pretty significant Kennedy collapse. Another approach is to delve into the crosstabs, which indicate in the current sample that Cuomo leads Kennedy 54-34 among Democrats only (with 12% undecided)… again, a pretty steep turnaround.

Of course, there’s only one voter in this race, and if there’s any substance to the trial balloons floated by the Paterson camp last Friday, he may well be on track to pick Kennedy anyway.

This is pretty interesting: Public Policy Polling takes a look at two potential Senate appointees, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper and 3rd CD Rep. John Salazar, and finds that Hickenlooper would start in a stronger position against two potential GOP foes (12/16-17, registered voters):

John Hickenlooper (D): 54

Bill Owens (R): 40

John Hickenlooper (D): 54

Tom Tancredo (R): 37

John Salazar (D): 52

Bill Owens (R): 43

John Salazar (D): 53

Tom Tancredo (R): 40

(MoE: ±3.7%)

In other state news, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter just named ex-state Rep. Bernie Buescher as the state’s new SoS, meaning that outgoing state House speaker Andrew Romanoff’s is still on the table for the Senate job. Also possibly in the mix: former state Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald, who has contacted Ritter recently to express her interest in the appointment.

Research 2000 for the Great Orange Satan:

Dan Inouye (D): 53

Linda Lingle (R): 42

(MoE: ±4%)

Make no mistake, in many ways, this poll represents something of a high water mark for Hawaii Republicans. They have literally no one else on their bench who could possibly give Inouye a scare, and even with popular outgoing GOP Governor Linda Lingle on the ballot, Inouye still starts off with a clear lead. Perhaps a strong campaign combined with some “senior moments” by Inouye could make this one a tight race, but does Lingle really have it in her to pull the trigger and run against one of the most popular politicians in Hawaii?

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (12/8-10, likely voters):

Arlen Specter (R-inc): 43

Pat Toomey (R): 28

Undecided: 29

(MoE: ±5%)

Chris Matthews (D): 24

Patrick Murphy (D): 19

Allyson Schwartz (D): 15

Undecided: 42

(MoE: ±5%)

Chris Matthews (D): 28

Patrick Murphy (D): 21

Undecided: 51

Chris Matthews (D): 30

Allyson Schwartz (D): 18

Undecided: 52

Patrick Murphy (D): 23

Allyson Schwartz (D): 20

Undecided: 57

Chris Matthews (D): 44

Arlen Specter (R-inc): 45

(MoE: ±4%)

Patrick Murphy (D): 36

Arlen Specter (R-inc): 48

Allyson Schwartz (D): 35

Arlen Specter (R-inc): 49

Chris Matthews (D): 46

Pat Toomey (R): 35

Patrick Murphy (D): 44

Pat Toomey (R): 36

Allyson Schwartz (D): 42

Pat Toomey (R): 36

Every possible configuration of the 2010 Pennsylvania Senate race you can imagine is here, courtesy of Research 2000 for Daily Kos. Arlen Specter can’t be liking what he’s seeing. Thanks to Rasmussen last week, we already knew that Specter was vulnerable against Chris Matthews (they found Specter up 46-43). R2K finds an even closer race in that configuration, with Reps. Patrick Murphy and Allyson Schwartz trailing Specter by 10+ points but holding him below 50%. (Consider this mostly a measure of name recognition at this point; Matthews has a national platform, but Murphy and Schwartz are little known outside their districts and right now are basically “generic D.”)

But guess who else is holding Specter below 50%? Pat Toomey, who looks to be taking the controls for yet another kamikaze mission by the Club for Growth. If the free-market fundamentalist Toomey wins the primary, the general is effectively over, with even Murphy and Schwartz thumping him in head-to-head matchups.

Considering that Specter won the primary against Toomey in 2004 by only 2 points (with a slightly different-looking Pennsylvania GOP, where many of the remaining moderates hadn’t yet jumped ship), Toomey winning the primary this time is a distinct possibility, given a Republican base with an even purer, less diluted conservatism. Specter pulls in only 43% in the primary matchup, which points to the balancing act he’ll have to negotiate in the next two years: either burnish his RINO credentials and support most of the Obama agenda in order to survive the 2010 general, or join the southern GOP rump’s obstructionist efforts in order to survive the 2010 primary. I believe the technical term for such a situation is “damned if you do, damned if you don’t.”

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (12/8-10, likely voters):

Tom Vilsack (D): 44

Chuck Grassley (R-inc): 48

(MoE: ±4%)

The Great Orange Satan continues to test the temperature of 2010’s Senate races, and it gives us a pretty surprising result out of Iowa: Chuck Grassley, the longtime and popular GOP Senator, is surprisingly vulnerable to a challenge from ex-Gov. Tom Vilsack.

In the diaries recently, desmoinesdem nicely laid out the contours of this race, and identified the basic conundrum facing Democrats here:

And that brings me to the paradox in the title of this post. Clearly Grassley’s retirement would give Democrats the best chance (some might say only chance) to win this seat. However, Grassley is more likely to retire if Tom Vilsack or another major-league Democrat jumps in now, instead of waiting a year or longer to see whether the incumbent will decide to step down for some other reason.

Challenging Grassley means embarking on long and exhausting uphill battle. But putting Grassley on notice soon that Democrats will not give him a pass is one of the few things we could do to improve the odds that he will retire.

Polls like this one may give the ‘Sack some encouragement to actually pull the trigger — and possibly precipitate a retirement from Grassley, who will be 77 years old on election day.

PPP (12/8-9, Democrats)

Caroline Kennedy (D): 44

Andrew Cuomo (D): 23

Kirsten Gillibrand (D): 6

Tom Suozzi (D): 3

Byron Brown (D): 3

Carolyn Maloney (D): 3

Nydia Velazquez (D): 4

Brian Higgins (D): 5

Not sure/someone else: 8

(MoE: ±3.2%)

PPP’s poll of New York Democrats shows a wide showing of support for Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Clinton (to the seat once held by Robert F. Kennedy). Now, it could certainly be argued that this is simply a test of name recognition, seeing as how there isn’t any public campaigning for the position; this really isn’t any different than a poll of vice-presidential preferences, since there’s really only one voter that decides the race (David Paterson, in this case). But it suggests that not only is Paterson safe in appointing elective neophyte Kennedy, but that he’d likely receive widespread support for doing so.

Second choice for NY-Sen

Caroline Kennedy (D): 24

Andrew Cuomo (D): 35

Kirsten Gillibrand (D): 4

Tom Suozzi (D): 4

Byron Brown (D): 5

Carolyn Maloney (D): 9

Nydia Velazquez (D): 6

Brian Higgins (D): 5

Not sure/someone else: 9

As an added bonus, PPP also asks respondents their second choices. It looks like Kennedy-then-Cuomo and Cuomo-then-Kennedy are by far the most common configurations (again, assumedly because of their high name recognition), although Carolyn Maloney puts together a surprisingly strong showing (probably thanks to her presence in the NYC media market).

Marist (12/8, registered voters)

Caroline Kennedy (D): 25

Andrew Cuomo (D): 25

Byron Brown (D): 6

Nydia Velazquez (D): 4

Kirsten Gillibrand (D): 4

Carolyn Maloney (D): 3

Tom Suozzi (D): 3

Adolfo Carrion (D): 2

Steve Israel (D): 1

Unsure: 26

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Marist, by contrast, polls registered voters instead of Democrats only, and seems to push leaners less. They find a much closer contest between Kennedy and Cuomo, suggesting a lot of Democratic loyalty to the House of Kennedy. Breakdown by party shows Democrats supporting 31 for Kennedy vs. 21 for Cuomo, while Republican support is 34 for Cuomo and 21 for Kennedy. Kennedy leads in NYC, while Cuomo gets the plurality of support in the suburbs and upstate.

Rasmussen (12/4, likely voters)

Creigh Deeds (D): 39

Robert McDonnell (R): 39

Some other candidate: 4

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Brian Moran (D): 41

Robert McDonnell (R): 37

Some other candidate: 5

Terry McAuliffe (D): 36

Robert McDonnell (R): 41

Some other candidate: 5

Rasmussen has polled the 2009 Virginia governor’s race, and every configuration points to a close contest. Attorney General Robert McDonnell seems to be locked in as the Republican candidate, but the Democratic field is very much up in the air, with three credible candidates in the mix: Rep. Creigh Deeds (who narrowly lost to McDonnell in the 2005 AG’s race), Rep. Brian Moran, and former DNC chair Terry McAuliffe. In the three head-to-heads, Moran fares the best, beating McDonnell by 4, while the nationally-known McAuliffe fares the worst, losing by 5. There is no poll included of the Democratic primary.

Although Deeds ran for statewide office four years ago, this may be primarily a case of name recognition; Moran is from Alexandria, so voters throughout the DC media market are likely to be familiar with him, while Deeds is from rural Bath County in southwestern Virginia. This creates an interesting strategic question: nominate Deeds and try to put into play another whole region of the state that otherwise wouldn’t be (even if it’s one that’s vote-poor and shrinking), or nominate Moran and try to maximize Dem performance in northern Virginia, which is by far the biggest concentration of Democratic strength (but still can’t, by itself, win a statewide election). As for McAuliffe, who, judging by his TV appearances this summer appears to be attempting to represent Margaritaville, name recognition may not be the problem so much as a perception of carpetbagging and/or sleazy insiderness.