WA: Rasmussen: Incumbent Cantwell (D) lead narrows against McGavick (R) in Washington (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 20, 2024, 04:05:09 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2006 Elections
  2006 Senatorial Election Polls
  WA: Rasmussen: Incumbent Cantwell (D) lead narrows against McGavick (R) in Washington (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: WA: Rasmussen: Incumbent Cantwell (D) lead narrows against McGavick (R) in Washington  (Read 1606 times)
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« on: September 24, 2006, 01:54:01 PM »

How does this race go from +17 to +6 just like that? Strange.

I doubt it was ever +17.  Washington just doesn't go Dem +17 unless there's a very good reason.  More like +12, maybe.  McGavick DUI incident.  Now, everything has drifted backward.

A Democrat having a 6-point lead in Washington isn't something to worry about.  It's pretty much the default.

McGavick could win if he kicked butt in the debates, but I seriously doubt he will.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2006, 03:23:53 PM »

WOW. I guess the Washington punditocracy was completely wrong about McGavick. Seriously, Cantwell shouldn't have won in 2000 and is lucky that her strong opponent made a mistake with the DUI issue. Without the kerfuffle over the DUI, McGavick could've been within 3-4 points of Cantwell.

McGavick is not a particularly strong candidate.  He is a respectable candidate, and the importance of that in Washington cannot be underscored.  Politically, it's all about the east side of Lake Washington.  Rossi was competitive because he pulled big margins in the area, which is known as the eastside.  It's affluent, well-educated, and will vote for the Democrat unless there's a reason.  In many ways, George W. Bush was the perfect awful candidate for the east side.  He was just socially conservative enough, just unpolished enough, just everything enough, to make the area strongly Democratic.

But the area could flip back very easily.  Rossi racked up decent margins there.  Outside of the Seattle metro, Rossi didn't actually do much better than Bush.  In many counties, he did worse.  That's because he was a distinctly suburban candidate.  And McGavick, a Seattle businessman, has the same problem.  He needs to appeal to the suburbs, and the polls indicate he isn't.  Gregoire was able to be pegged as establishment Olympia.  It's harder to make Cantwell seem like anything but a suburban liberal (not a bad thing on the eastside, really).  Rossi also was a lot more polished than McGavick is.

What's happening to McGavick is that he lost his fundamental suburban base, and then gained it back.  But he hasn't gained the suburban swing voters.  He briefly  had some of them when he was down by only 3 or 4, but he may have permanently lost that possibility with the DUI issue.  He isn't really all that likeable.

McGavick needs to make himself look personable and Cantwell unpersonable for this to even come close.  At the moment, he's managed to save face.  But making Cantwell look as bad as Rossi made Gregoire look is going to be difficult.  McGavick would have to run a near-perfect campaign.  Somehow, I have difficulties believing he will.

(For what it's worth, Cantwell has run not so much a bad campaign as a non-campaign.  Her ads have been unspectacular and general.  It's not that the campaign is awful, it's that it is bland.  I don't expect this to last, although it's certainly doing her no favours now.)
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 13 queries.