As McJoan points out over on Daily Kos, much of the conventional wisdom about U.S. Senator Patty Murray’s presumed vulnerability has been driven by Republican pollsters, but according to the latest Research 2000 poll, not so much:
What R2K found? Patty Murray is the most popular Democrat in the state, with (contra Rasmussen) a 52 percent approval, and a 51 percent approval among all-important Independents. Only Obama is more popular with Washingtonians.
What’s more, she handily beats the leading conventional-wisdom contenders Rossi and Rep. Dave Reichert (WA-08).
Patty Murray (D) 52
Dino Rossi (R) 41Patty Murray (D) 51
Dave Reichert (R) 43
While Republican pollsters and consultants have made an awful lot of money over the past 18 years underestimating Murray, Republican challengers haven’t done nearly so well, with the diminutive Democrat ending the the political careers of three sitting Republican congress-critters in a row. I suppose Dino Rossi or Dave Reichert might be dumb/arrogant enough to take a shot at Murray and hope for a Big Red Wave, but if I were them I’d wait to see a little more post-health-care-vote polling before counting on a right-wing surge to sweep them into the Senate.
Though as a liberal blogger, I gotta admit that a Rossi, Reichert or Susan Hutchison candidacy would make for an awful lot of fodder and fun.
Good, that means you KLOWNS can relax…just like Gregoire did in 2004….and Coakley did in Massa2shits.
Research 2000-
I couldn’t even find out their polling criteria. What is it? Is it polling anyone…or likely voters like Rasmussen.
The fact that the DailyKos and P-I jump all over this poll tells you what it is worth.
But hey…be over-confidant.
That’s what Coakley did against Brown!
Until it was too late.
One other question Goldy.
Since you referred to this Research 2000 Poll, you should know the answer to the above question and this–
WHO COMMISSIONED THIS MURRAY POLL?
Research 2000 is paid by proponents to do polling. Did Murray or Democrats commission this? If so, it’s meaningless.
I’ve got it!
It’s been bothering me – cynical’s rantings have been remiding me of something, his syntax and cadence vaguely familiar.
It like a bad impersonation of a Dr. Bronner’s bottle!
“Dr. Bronner’s bottle”
I don’t know what that is but if it’s dumber than a stump then you’re probably spot on.
“Massa2shits”
Why does the KLOWN hate America?
@3
Except Dr. Bronner’s stuff smells like peppermint and Cyn’s stuff smells like horse shit.
Cynical demonstrates his lying assholery @1:
Assuming you actually looked at Goldy’s link, and assuming that you’re capable of scrolling to the bottom of the webpage — I know, I know … to “assume” makes an ass of “u” and “me” — you would have seen this text (emphasis added):
Likely voters, “like Rasmussen”.
N in–
So who commissioned the poll??????????
Mention anything having to do with statistics, and you can rely on Cynical doing his world famous “Rasmussen Dance”.
Yeah, Cynical, Markos asked them to run the poll. He may have even given them the names to consider (who the hell is Paul Akers?).
But R2000 did the rest — worded the questions (which are right there in the link), randomized the voter list, made the phone calls, determined and applied the demographic weights (which are right there in the link).
If anything, it’s biased in Republican favor — land lines rather than cellphones. I don’t know about you, but I can’t imagine that Patty Murray would beat Rossi in WA-07 by a margin as tiny as 63-31, which is what’s shown in the crosstabs. Hell, Chris Gregoire won WA-07 by 73-25 in 2004 (it was 77-20 in 2008).
And remember, the closer it gets to Election Day, the worse Dino Rossi looks in the polls. This crushing is his high-water mark.
Oh, before Cynical tries to weasel his way out of his lies — if, that is, the coward ever shows his face in this thread to be schooled again — I’ll note that my source for the two WA-07 Gregoire-Rossi percentages is the Washington Secretary of State.
I didn’t link to them because both data points were found on large PDFs of General Election Results by Congressional District. They’re pretty easy to find under the SoS’s Previous Elections page.
How many times must Rossi lose an election before he tries to do something else with his life? The GOP should get a candidate voters don’t associate with losing campaigns. Perhaps you could also find someone from a more reputable line of work than real estate? These days people don’t have positive associations with real estate….
sdstarr-
How many elections did Abe Lincoln lose before he won one?
Something like 10.
It’s about timing.
Gregoire has mangled the Budget & economy.
Democrat is a bad Brand Name these days…although not as bad as Progressive.
Cynical, lying through his teeth again @13:
Both are way, way ahead of the increasingly-toxic Republican.
Though, on reflection I withdraw the term “lying”. He’s only misrepresenting, selectively sampling, overlooking additional evidence … because it doesn’t fit his pre-determined position. No wonder he quotes almost exclusively from Rasmussen (except when even they don’t fit his goal … how’s that daily tracking poll on Obama going, Cyn?).
Dino is no Abe Lincoln.
The economy was mangled at the national level by the R’s.
Democrat may be a bad Brand Name, but it’s still running about 10 points higher than Republican.
DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 39 (40) 55 (56) 6
REPUBLICAN PARTY: 30 (29) 66 (67) 4
“how’s that daily tracking poll on Obama going, Cyn?”
Even Rasmussen can’t save the KLOWN.
3/25/2010 -10
3/24/2010 -11
3/23/2010 -10
3/22/2010 -12
3/21/2010 -16
3/20/2010 -21
3/19/2010 -21
Gawd, it must really suck to be a Konservative KLOWN these days.
To answer Cyn’s other misrepresentation @13:
Well, sure, if ONE is something like 10.
From HistoryPlace (emphasis added):
Might Lincoln have won in 1832 if he hadn’t volunteered to do some soldiering? Who knows? Also, between the 1832 and 1834 elections, he was appointed to two important government positions.
Hmmm, I note a small error in the above item from HistoryPlace. Born on February 12, 1809 — same day as Charles Darwin, as we all know — Lincoln was 25 on August 4, 1834.
@1
As much as it may shock you Sen. Patty Murray is no Coakley. But then Rossi is no Brown either.
The Washington GOP is like the Man of La Mancha always tilting at the four armed giant (or windmill) known as Sen. Murray.
@1
Cyn…
The methodology was clearly stated at the end of the poll. You couldn’t find it? Clicked the link did you? Used the google maybe?
Rossi will always get over 40%, and never much more.
Rossi might have hope, if he were a relative unkown and was only eleven points behind an established encumbent before he even began campaigning.
But he’s not. He’s ran for statewide office twice in two very visable races, one resulting in a recount challenge which was in the news daily for several months. I dare say there is hardly a voter in Washington State who doesn’t recognize his name and know his party affiliation. His name-recognition factor is probably equal to that of the encumbent, Patty Murray.
And this poll was taken as the HCR was being signed into law, so any anti-encumbent bump as a result of that action, which the wingnuts here promise to be in effect, is already taken into account in the poll.
Absent some incredible scandal or incapacitation, both very unlikely, I don’t see how Murray loses this election to the likes of Rossi.
The only way Murray loses is if the French company in Alabama gets that refueling aircraft contract. Why announce Boeing’s win too soon in the election cycle? Anyone challenging Murray might as well shut down their campaign that day.
# 23: I’d be astonished if the refueling contract went to EADS. Northup-Grumman has pulled out of the deal, leaving EADS without a U.S. partner.
EADS’s strategy was to take advantage of the U.S. political situation in the mid-2000’s. They assumed that the Republicans had control over the Pentagon’s procurement process, and EADS would have an advantage if they located “final assembly” in a southern “red state”. This would enourage the Republican politicians in that state every reason to pressure their colleagues in the White House and Congress to give EADS the advantage. Similarly, Boeing would be a “blue state” manufacturer, and not politically connected to those in charge in the White House and Congress.
It worked, because with the assistance of Sen. John McCain, they got the Defense Dept. to informally and secretly change the bid requirements and scoring after the RFQ is submitted. Under these new requirements, EADS got points for having a bigger multi-purpose airplane (like the A350), even though the formal RFQ favored a smaller airplane like the Boeing 767.
The bid award didn’t survive the challenge, as the Pentagon had changed the rules in the middle of the bidding process. Instead of comparing apples-to-apples, the Boeing and EADS bids were comparing apples to oranges.
The only real question is whether the Defense Dept. gives EADS another 90 days to find another U.S. partner. I doubt the Pentagon wants to wait any longer, they’ve waited long enough as it is. But the pressure on the U.S. to give the only other potential bidder every opportunity to submit a bid might grant them the extra time.
But I doubt it will do any good, and I think EADS knows it. They may be simply trying to make it look like they will enter a bid, only to fail to do so at the final hour. The only reason this works for them is it forces Boeing to submit the lowest possible bid in anticipation of a competing bid from EADS, thereby depriving Boeing of more revenues from the contract (but giving the taxpayers a break in the process).
But it will be intersting to see if Murray joins Boeing in the celebration after it gets the Tanker contract. She’s still steaming about the Charleston deal, and the way Boeing didn’t even bother to call her to explain their decision until after the press conference in Charleston.