Thursday, December 30, 2010

Voting time for first poll of 2011

As mentioned earlier this week Nevada will be one of our first two polls of 2011 and we're letting you vote on the other one. Here are the finalists:

-Arizona. After Nevada and Massachusetts this is probably the best of the limited pick up opportunities for Democrats on the Senate front and it's also along with Missouri and Montana one of the few states Barack Obama could conceivably flip to blue in 2012 although I imagine it's one of the places where only the GOP nominating Sarah Palin would make it competitive.

-Colorado. No 2012 Senate race on the docket but certainly one of the most important states for the Presidential race- one very important to the GOP's prospects of getting back the White House. My guess after Democrats swept the two major contests in the state during a horrid year for the party nationally is that Obama would look pretty good there...but that's why we do the polls.

-Connecticut. Joe Lieberman was near the bottom of the barrel in our year end approval ratings but he's actually been pretty active the last month or so in pushing for things that Democrats like so I'm interested to see if he's had any sort of renaissance or if the damage he'd done to himself already is too much to overcome. The number of permutations we'd have to test there is almost dizzying but we'll figure it out if that wins.

-Nebraska. I sensed that Ben Nelson was the most endangered Democratic Senator up for reelection in 2012 even before two recent Republican polls found him in deep trouble, so I don't really doubt their findings but no harm in adding another voice to the table. Also interested to see if Obama has any chance at winning Omaha's electoral vote again.

-New Jersey. Multiple polling companies have shown something that we first picked up on more than a year ago- Bob Menendez is not popular. The question then becomes whether voters are so disenchanted with him that they'd actually vote for a Republican, or if it's just a case where they'll hold their nose but still vote Democratic- time to test actual names against him. It's also a good time for looking at how voters in the state are feeling about Chris Christie and Cory Booker- and a potential 2013 contest between the two of them.

-Pennsylvania. We've already gone through and taken a first look at the 2012 Presidential contest in the other two of the ultimate swing state triumvirate- Ohio and Florida- so we should finish the trio soon. And of course Bob Casey is one of the potentially vulnerable first term Democratic Senators up in 2012. My sense is that Casey's numbers are a little deceiving though, and make him look more endangered than he actually is. He's similar to Bill Nelson, Steve Beshear, and Jay Nixon in that Democrats aren't totally in love with him, which brings down his topline approval numbers, but he scores unusually well with Republicans. In a state like Pennsylvania where Democrats have a large registration advantage, if your party folks still vote for you even if they're not in love with you and you can pull something like 15-20% of the GOP vote you're going to be in pretty good shape. Anyway we can test all that if we poll it.

Voting is open until Sunday and then we'll ask you to help us flesh out the details of what we ask for whoever the winner is...and a reminder that if one person rigs this and casts hundreds of votes for a particular state it will be disqualified...voting 4 or 5 times on different computers is fair game but casting hundreds is not.

20 comments:

Bonncaruso said...

Overall, taking a look at CT will be helpful. This is one of those states that used to be considered a bellwether. It has since become a core democratic state. But nonetheless, should Obama be in trouble in CT, then he is in trouble all over. If he is landsliding in CT, then that is good news.

Andrew Carden said...

I'm dying to see how Lieberman's faring post-DADT. I won't be surprised to see him gaining big time among Democrats and Indies. Perhaps he'll even break 40% in overall approval.

Anonymous said...

My order of preference:

Pennsylvania (test Gerlach, Dent, and the actual Republican candidate against Casey)
Connecticut (can Lieberman win either primary against likely opponents; can Lieberman win a three way general election)
New Jersey
Arizona
Nebraska
Colorado

NRH said...

I'm still voting for Arizona. We've seen that Republicans in Arizona have lost the Hispanic vote in dramatic fashion (compare McCain's 2008 and 2010 numbers among Hispanics, for example), possibly by enough to flip the state. Low registration among Hispanic voters is the only thing keeping Arizona red these days.

Second place I'd go with Colorado. Connecticut will get polled to death soon enough, and might as well let some of the permutations settle out first. Nebraska seems unlikely to have any interesting numbers. NJ and PA both seem unlikely to go against the grain in a presidential year as well.

Anonymous said...

What else would you test in Colorado?

Anonymous said...

I would like see first Nebraska and Connecticut.

Later New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

DBL said...

Polls this far out aren't particularly meaningful for a Presidential race. They are meaningful for potential senate candidates, however. Jim Jordan was trailing Sherrod Brown by 8 points, with 3 others doing better than him. He was a distant 5th in the primary poll. He might just opt out of running for the senate with those numbers.

Emily said...

New Jersey

It does have Lou Dobbs being mentioned for the Republicans. Other Republicans are Bill Baroni, Jennifer Beck, Kim Guadagno, Thomas Kean Jr., Joe Kyrillos, Anna (Teabagger) Little and Jay Webber.

Of course Bob Menendez, but also wondering how Cory Booker would poll in that election.

In Arizona, Democrats are Gabrielle Giffords, Ann Kirkpatrick (more likely to go for her old seat in the House) and Janet Napolitano.

In Connecticut, lots of folks. For the Republicans: Tom Foley, Linda McMahon, Christopher Meek, John (Cliff on Cheers) Ratzenberger, Peter Schiff, Chris Shays and Rob Simmons. For Democrats: Susan Bysiewicz, Joe Courtney, Edward M. Kennedy Jr. and Chris Murphy. Also note that Rosa DeLauro, Jim Himes and Ned Lamont have all publicly declined to run. Hard to know which party or non-party to put Joe Lieberman into since he might just run as [fill in the blank].

In Pennsylvanian Republicans, Marc Scaringi has officially declared, also Jake Corman, Charlie Dent, Jim Gerlach, Glen Meakem, Tim Murphy, Mark Schweiker, Mike Turzai and Kim Ward are all in the "mulling" and "wooeing" stages.

In Nebraska, are there any other Democrats besides Ben Nelson there? Even for one of them to run for the Governor's spot or to run for congress from Omaha. Either way, Republicans looking to knock off Ben Nelson are officially declared Jon Bruning and Pat Flynn, but other names who are interested are Deb Fischer, Mike Foley Kay Off and Don Stenberg. Also important not to waste time on those who have publicly declined: Bob Bennie, Rex Fisher, Mike Flood, Jeff Fortenberry, Dave Heineman, Adrian Smith and Lee Terry.

Larkspur said...

Sen. LIEberman belongs in the dustbin of history. He's a moral fraud, a liar, and a coward. Of course, he'd support DADT. He wants more cannon fodder to man wars he won't send his kids to and that this country doesn't belong in anyway. During the health care debate he fought against the public option and Medicare for all, both of which he had supported during the 2006 campaign.

Many of us CT Democrats won't forget him cheerleading our nation into the illegal war against Iraq, raking in $$ from Bush's pioneers and rangers in 2006, him speaking at the 2008 RNC convention and being a top choice as McCain's VP as well as campaigning for the Republican ticket against the Democrats.

LIEberman is no Democrat. He may fit better with the NO Labels (no principles) group.

Rep. Courtney, Rep. Murphy and Susan Bysiewicz would be far better US Senators than Unholy Joe LIEberman.

Only a fool would vote for LIEberman for senate in 2012.

Anonymous said...

Since there are so many possibilities in CT, some will have to be left off. Christopher Meek, while he'd probably be a better candidate than McMahon, should be left off, as no one knows him. For Dems, just do Murphy and Bysiewichz. Murphy and Courtney would poll the same, as relatively generic Ds. I'm interested in seeing if Susan Bysiewichz is weaker after her issues this year. For Reps, Rell and McMahon should def be tested, and, if y'all have room, Tom Foley.

In NJ, Guadagno and Kean Jr are the Reps that should definitely be tested, and, if y'all are doing more, Leonard Lance and Kathleen Donovan.

Dustin Ingalls said...

"What else would you test in Colorado?"

Whatever you and our other readers suggest.

Anonymous said...

Jordan did bow out, saying that it is extremely unlikely that he'll run.

I find it unlikely that Connecticut will settle down any time soon. There's really no reason for Lieberman to announce a party for the primary until the end of 2011 or early 2012. Similarly, he seems unlikely to announce his retirement earlier than then.

Anonymous said...

The Presidential numbers in PA and CO will be VERY important for 2012 (for I suspect OH and FL will not easily go Blue this time around)

David said...

I want to see NJ. Dauherty, the state senator, Dobbs, Diane Allen, and Kain would all be interesting to poll. I would love to see a generic ballot for the legislature in 2011 as well a Christie numbers. NJ is one of the few states with an election.

The second poll of the year should be VA. Webb is in trouble and the state senate is up.

Anonymous said...

I would add Hawaii and West Virginia to the list of options before Arizona and Colorado.

Dustin Ingalls said...

"I would add Hawaii and West Virginia to the list of options before Arizona and Colorado."

Why Hawaii? It's blue as blue gets, especially in a presidential year where the president is the favorite son. CO will be, as it has the last two elections, one of the most crucial presidential battlegrounds beyond FL and OH.

Anonymous said...

Hawaii cause of the potential retirement of senator Akaka. It would be interesting to know if the people want a retirement, and who can be the most loved potential candidates if Akaka retires.

Anonymous said...

I can't speak for the previous poster, but while I agree that Hawaii won't matter much to the presidential election. There is the interesting question of what happens if Lingle runs against Akaka or another Democrat (Case?).

In general, I think that there is plenty of Obama polling. I'm not sure how important it is to poll his electoral chances. For Republicans, the field will change soon after Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina hold their caucuses and primaries. It's hard to poll a caucus, so that pretty much leaves New Hampshire and South Carolina as the interesting states.

I'm pretty sure that whatever state you choose to poll will offer some chance of checking the Republican presidential field (Hawaii won't go Republican in the fall but still gets a say in the primary). My suggestion would be to pick a state that also offers an interesting Senate race. You can always do the other seventeen states (without Senate races) later.

Anonymous said...

No one care about Hawaii. It's a blue state and always will be.

Anonymous said...

Arizona is red, and still will be...

In Hawaii it is interesting (for a Democrat) to know who would want the people for replace Akaka.

Shinseki? Waihe'e? Hirono? Hanabusa? Case? Who is the people's favorite? And who is most competitive against Lingle.

 
Web Statistics