Monday, September 13, 2010

Comparing Delaware and Alaska

One thing that really struck me in our Delaware polling numbers was that on a lot of measures Mike Castle actually appeared to be in even worse shape than Lisa Murkowski:

-55% of primary voters said they thought Castle was too liberal. For Murkowski on our post primary poll in Alaska that was only 47%.

-Castle's favorability was a negative 43/47. On the similar although not identical measure of approval we still found Murkowski on slightly positive ground even after her primary loss at 48/46.

-35% of primary voters in Delaware said they were positively influenced by a Sarah Palin endorsement, only 26% said the same in Alaska.

-25% of Delaware Republicans say they consider themselves to be members of the Tea Party movement. Only 18% said the same in Alaska.

A lot of these differences can probably be chalked up to Delaware having a closed primary and Alaska an open one. 64% of primary voters in Delaware identified themselves as conservatives to 59% in Alaska.

There's a pretty wide range of outcomes that would not surprise me tomorrow given the difficulties of polling a Republican electorate in a small blue state. It would be no shock if Castle hangs on to win but when you look at the internal numbers and compare them to Murkowski I also wouldn't be all that surprised if O'Donnell ends up winning by 10.


winston said...

Is it me or does it seem like Castle really doesn't want the seat? O’Donnell is more hungrier and fighting hard to win. I think the GOP DC establishment like McCain and Graham pushed Castle to run, but you can sorta tell his heart is not in this. Maybe he retires after losing tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

castle wanted the trifecta: governor, congressman, senator. he had only planned on serving one term in the senate before retiring. there's no doubt he would retire if he loses.

wt said...

Winston, it is you. Castle is actually pretty fired up and hasn't stopped campaigning for weeks. I met him last week and he was on his 7th event of the day.

I think he's doing a lot more local stuff -- going to parks, restaurants, and picnics, talking to citizens, etc. O'Donnell is focused on out-of-state endorsements from Palin, Demint, and the Tea Party, so you're probably seeing those more-prominent influences.

DBL said...

Mike Castle is no Jane Norton, Sue Lowden, or even Lisa Murkowski when it comes to campaigns. None of these had run more than one statewide campaign. Delaware is a small state. Mike Castle has been winning statewide elections since 1980. He probably knows most of the Republican primary voters by first name. If he can't win a statewide primary now, then he really doesn't deserve the nomination.

He's been a RINO for a long time. And he's heard the criticism for a long time. It should be unfathomable that he doesn't have a convincing enough conservative Delaware GOP voters to vote for him.

NRH said...

Castle may well be recognizing that there's no place for moderates in the modern Republican Party. He's already had to make a number of votes in the House this year under leadership pressure that run counter to his previous positions, and he's found out that a complete lunatic like O'Donnell is able to compete with him just by screaming the right buzzwords. It has to be disheartening.

Christian Liberty said...

NRH, you mean there's no place for morons in the Republican Party. The Republican Party is for INTELLIGENT, PRINCIPLED candidates like Christine O'Donnell.

It is the left and the RINOs who are screaming meaningless buzzwords and attacking principled candidates for having principled positions.

NRH said...


'Intelligent' and 'principled' are two words that really don't belong in the same state as O'Donnell. The one who claimed she won two of three Delaware counties in losing to Biden by 26, only to backtrack and claim she 'tied' when she actually lost all three handily? The one who claims that Mike Castle has spies hiding in the bushes at her house? That O'Donnell? She's a completely incoherent nutjob.

Web Statistics