It's just the most dramatic example of something plaguing Democratic candidates in all of this year's most competitive Senate races though. Currently Nate Silver has 9 seats in the 25-75% probability of either side winning category. Obama won all 9 of those states in 2008. But he now has negative approval numbers in 6 of them. Beyond that his approval number is at least 7 points lower than the percentage of the vote he received in every single one of those states, and in 7 of the 9 it has dropped by a double digit margin.
There's not much doubt that Barack Obama is the biggest reason why most of these blue state Senate races are looking so competitive and getting 15-20% of the vote from people who disapprove of Obama is going to be critical to the victory chances of many of these Democratic candidates.
Here's the full data:
| State | Obama Approval | Obama 2008% | Decline |
| Delaware | 46/48 | 62 | -16 |
| Illinois | 49/46 | 62 | -13 |
| Florida | 39/55 | 51 | -12 |
| Nevada | 44/52 | 55 | -11 |
| Wisconsin | 45/50 | 56 | -11 |
| New Hampshire | 44/52 | 54 | -10 |
| Colorado | 44/50 | 54 | -10 |
| Washington | 49/47 | 57 | -8 |
| California | 54/39 | 61 | -7 |
23 comments:
When does PPP admit that Republicans likely take both houses of congress?
The two of the biggest drops are IL and DE because they were artificially inflated Dem in '08 because of Obama/Biden
"When does PPP admit that Republicans likely take both houses of congress?"
When pigs fly. Now that DE looks like a lean Dem if not certain Dem seat, Angle, Buck, Johnson, Rossi, Fiorina, Toomey, Kirk, Hoeven, and Coats would all have to win, plus either McMahon or Raese. As of now, it looks like only Toomey, Hoeven, and Coats will win, though Angle, Buck, Rossi, Fiorina, and Kirk could ride the wave. So you're looking at as little as 3 pick-ups to, at most, 9. You guys need 10.
Dustin, you mean as few as 9 and as many as 14.
You forget Boozeman.
Still, if Castle goes down, the task becomes significantly harder. Good move Tea Partiers.
If wanting to win the most number of races possible for the GOP makes me part of the establishment, call me Mr. Establishmentloverforever.
It's pretty obvious that America (especially Delaware) is rejecting the Obama/Progressive agenda. That's why the country is sliding back to the right. That's why O'Donnell and other conservative R's can win in states like DE that are labeled Democrat strongholds.
"Obama's initiatives could only be considered moderate on the skewed ideological scale of the Democratic Party. They are not only unpopular; they have made it impossible for him to maintain the pretense of being a unifying, healing, once-in-a-generation leader. It is the agenda that has undermined (public approval)." (Michael Gerson, Washington Post)
Admit it, Democrats. Obama IS THE PROBLEM. The sooner you throw him overboard, the sooner Democrats have the slightest chance of being a respected minority again (instead of being a permanent laughingstock).
"Dustin, you mean as few as 9 and as many as 14."
Oh, yes, that's what I mean...
...in that fantasy land where all evil comes from the left and all good from the right and where all intelligent, rational adults are Republicans and where all Republican candidates are Christ-like figures.
of course this is with the likely voter model, I believe. Wouldn't Obama's approval ratings be higher if all registered voters were counted? In 2010 the intensity is with the GOP which is why they are doing well in several polls, though it's not a forgone conclusion that they will take the house and/or senate. Bottom line is that Obama is not on the ballot in 2010 and if he were the intensity level among dems might be higher and so pollsters would be taking into account a higher turnout among dems: African-Americans, hispanics, the young, and Obama's approval ratings would probably be higher.
Definite: ND, AR, IN
Probable: PA, CO, NV, CA, IL, WA, WI
In a Wave: WV, DE, CT, NY, OR
Republicans likely gain 9-14 seats in the senate, 45-60 in the house, 8-10 in the governor mansions, 400+ state legislators.
The Democratic platform is a massive liability. Americans are rejecting Democrats wholesale and will enthusiastically support the Tea Party candidates in massive numbers.
Don't worry, Dustin. I'll be here in November so you can tell me I was right.
"You forget Boozeman."
Ah, you're right. So a minimum of 4 and, at most, 10. The GOP would have to sweep the board.
Looking to the future, Democrats' refusal to allow individual investment accounts as a reform to the evil pyramid scheme that is socialist Insecurity is a massive liability to Democratic politicians. A majority of Americans want privatization, especially key Democratic-courted groups like youth and college-educated. Private accounts would also greatly benefit minority groups because of their lesser life expectancies and larger families. But once again, the corrupt Demoncrats are oppressing the very voters they fraudulently pretend to represent. Demoncrats' corrupt refusal to privatize Socialist Insecurity will only increase republican gains in 2012-2014... and will hopefully hasten the awakening of a new generation of voters, so they can get off the Demoncrats' plantation and receive the blessings of liberty and prosper that conservative policies offer them.
Chuck, African-Americans, hispanics, and the young and especially college educated will ABANDON the Demoncrats' plantation in droves when they realize that Demoncrats oppress them through the evil pyramid scheme that is Socialist Insecurity. The more Americans learn about Democrats' policies, the more they reject Democrats and usually became Republicans.
Chritian Liberty: I doubt even in a "wave" election Dems will lose the NY or OR Senate races, the incumbant dems are pretty strong there. WVA--is possible I'll grant you that (in a wave). DE it depends on who the nominee is. If it's Castle it's probably leaning GOP, if O'Donnell unless something quite drastic happens it's likely Coons win. CT maybe in a wave but even that I think would be 50-50. The East is the strongest portion of country for Dems.
My guess is that Dems pull out and win CA Senate (Governor is another matter), I think they also win WA Senate (unless a wave). That SUSA poll that had Murray down by 7 was crap since it showed Rossi tied with her in Seattle. The respected Elway poll seems more reliable.
WI will definitely be tough, I think Feingold is in a tough fight, but can pull it out unless there is a wave.
The Dems pick up Govs in CT, MN, HA, FL. TX and CA are toss-ups but I actually think White has a better chance in TX than Brown in CA, only because Brown is old hat. Dems should have put up somebody fresh. Dems hold CO governorship. OH, PA, MI & probably IL go GOP. WI is too close to call, I think Barrett can win.
Folks,
This idea of Christine O Donnell loosing in November elections is so inflated and it is going to be closer then the present polls. DE is a small state and like any other state in the country the Unemployment rate is above 8 %. People are very mad and if the republican wave engulfs the state in association with the massive spending from tea party and outside groups, it will make this another scott Brown or chris christie.
Bless your heart Christian Liberty. If you trust my rankings below, the GOP would need a full-blown wave if Castle loses Delaware.
Very likely: ND, AR, IN
Probable: PA
Will go GOP if nothing changes in terms of enthusiasm: CO, NV, IL
Will go GOP if turnout is better than expected: WI, CA
In a huge wave: WV, CT, WA
Depends on tonight: DE
New York and Oregon would be nice, but I think that's too rosy a picture. Let's stay realistic.
How does this break down between "different people turning out" vs. "people souring on Obama"?
ACCORN has one mission. To skew the ballot box in favor of socialism. Socialists simply don't believe in democracy unless their guy gets in. MN Norm Coleman already made a victory speech when, the jester (douche bag Al Franken) stole his thorny crown.
The lie that ACCORN is for little guy was exposed when ACCORN got busted for facilitating slavery.
And who are the slaves serving the Democratic party this time? Not not African Americans, but children to please their white masters, Heffner type Democrats.
It is funny that you left West Virginia off of the battleground states and included Florida.
WV, WI, WA, CA, NV, CO, IL, CT
GOP needs 6 of 8 in a wave year. A definite possibility.
"Very likely: ND, AR, IN
Probable: PA
Will go GOP if nothing changes in terms of enthusiasm: CO, NV, IL
Will go GOP if turnout is better than expected: WI, CA
In a huge wave: WV, CT, WA
Depends on tonight: DE"
Small quibbles, but personally, I'd rank them as follows:
Certain GOP: ND, AR, KS, SD, UT, GA, AL, ID, OK, SC
Likely GOP (from least to most likely GOP): NC, LA, IN, AZ, IA
Leans GOP (from least to most likely GOP): MO, OH, PA, KY, FL, AK
Toss-up(from least to most likely Dem): NH, CO, NV, WA, IL, WI, CA
Leans Dem: WV
Likely Dem: DE, CT
Certain Dem: both NY, OR, HI, MD, VT
If I had to guess now, and I'm speaking only personally, not for PPP, I'd say Dems retain WV, DE, CT, CA, WI, IL, NV, and WA, very narrowly for the last four and somewhat narrowly for CA, and that we lose CO, PA, AR, ND, and IN. Of the ones we retain, I could most easily see us losing WA, followed by NV. So that's a GOP pick-up of 5 to 7 seats for a Dem majority of 52 to 54 seats.
So you see most of the tossup races break the Democrats' way in a Republican wave election.
Theoretically possible. But not likely.
West Virginia could be very interesting. Machin may not be as strong as previously thought, and if WV is competitive, that could send a few shock waves.
Post a Comment