MO Senate: Talent, McCaskill tied in new Rasmussen Poll

[Alcon]

None of those are reasons why Talent is vulnerable. They are reasons why you think McCaskill will win.

If McCaskill wins, Talent loses.

If there's reasons why McCaskill can win, there are reasons why Talent can lose.

I'm not sure I understand what you're going for here?

[Alcon]

What are his vulnerabilities? Why would Missouri throw him out of office? Scoonie has provided nothing more than approval ratings which are low across the board because of a general disapproval of Congress.

Generally, the only reason is if the challenger is significant more popular.  It's not common, but it's not like it never happens that a reasonably popular incumbent is kicked out by an even more popular challenger.  Just ask William Roth (but don't expect him to answer).

[Alcon]

What are his vulnerabilities? Why would Missouri throw him out of office? Scoonie has provided nothing more than approval ratings which are low across the board because of a general disapproval of Congress.

Generally, the only reason is if the challenger is significant more popular.  It's not common, but it's not like it never happens that a reasonably popular incumbent is kicked out by an even more popular challenger.  Just ask William Roth (but don't expect him to answer).

That's the point. McCaskill is not a more popular challenger.

I would seriously doubt Rasmussen is off more than 6 points, and even if she's just six behind, she has to be reasonably popular to be competing with Talent.

Unless there is some other reason you see, or you think this poll is just totally out there...and Rasmussen is never that wrong.

[Alcon]

What are his vulnerabilities? Why would Missouri throw him out of office? Scoonie has provided nothing more than approval ratings which are low across the board because of a general disapproval of Congress.

Generally, the only reason is if the challenger is significant more popular.  It's not common, but it's not like it never happens that a reasonably popular incumbent is kicked out by an even more popular challenger.  Just ask William Roth (but don't expect him to answer).

That's the point. McCaskill is not a more popular challenger.

I would seriously doubt Rasmussen is off more than 6 points, and even if she's just six behind, she has to be reasonably popular to be competing with Talent.

Unless there is some other reason you see, or you think this poll is just totally out there...and Rasmussen is never that wrong.

It makes no sense to me how she can be tied with Talent. Talent is pretty well liked and is not facing an above average opponent. I don't buy that this race is tied.

State Auditors are generally not polled for approval ratings, but what's to say she is not popular in the state?  Where are you getting the information from that she is not above average?

After all, she beat Matt Blunt.

[Alcon]

State Auditors are generally not polled for approval ratings, but what's to say she is not popular in the state?  Where are you getting the information from that she is not above average?

After all, she beat Matt Blunt.

Not above average in that I highly doubt her name is that powerful in the state. I don't see how someone with mediocre name ID can beat a popular incumbent.

And, no, she didn't beat Matt Blunt.

Wow, I'm truly stupid today.

I meant to say that she only lost to Blunt 51-48.  That isn't a bad showing.

I think she is losing, too, but you never know.

I'll wait for another poll.

[Alcon]

State Auditors are generally not polled for approval ratings, but what's to say she is not popular in the state?  Where are you getting the information from that she is not above average?

After all, she beat Matt Blunt.

Not above average in that I highly doubt her name is that powerful in the state. I don't see how someone with mediocre name ID can beat a popular incumbent.

And, no, she didn't beat Matt Blunt.

Wow, I'm truly stupid today.

I meant to say that she only lost to Blunt 51-48.  That isn't a bad showing.

I think she is losing, too, but you never know.

I'll wait for another poll.

That isn't a bad showing, I agree, but it's nothing amazing. She has to be a Casey-like candidate to beat a popular candidate. I'd say right now it looks like...

Talent - 52%
McCaskill - 47%
Others - 1%

She doesn't necessarily need to be Casey-like.  One major factor to consider is that Talent is a first-term Senator, and opinions about him are less likely to be cemented as with Santorum.  In addition, Missouri has less risk in replacing Talent because he is a freshman and doesn't have much power in Washington.

It would, however, take a very popular candidate, which McCaskill may theoretically be.

[Alcon]

She doesn't necessarily need to be Casey-like.  One major factor to consider is that Talent is a first-term Senator, and opinions about him are less likely to be cemented as with Santorum.  In addition, Missouri has less risk in replacing Talent because he is a freshman and doesn't have much power in Washington.

It would, however, take a very popular candidate, which McCaskill may theoretically be.

That's still no reason to get rid of Talent who, as I keep saying, remains popular.

McCaskill is not popular enough to take down Talent.

What do you base this on what?  She's a known entity and Blunt was very popular when elected (much moreso than Talent is now, if I recall correctly)...so I don't think it's a total longshot.

But I'll wait for another poll.

[Alcon]

If they are already tied in a Republican-leaning poll with 14 months to go until the election, it is ludicrous to think that she can't win.

Stop it, stop it, stop it!

Rasmussen is not Republican-leaning!  It has virutally no bias, and if it does, it's less than a point toward the GOP, which is not considerable enough to be considered bias.

Just because it is owned by a Republican does not make it Republican-leaning.

[Alcon]

Chill out, Alcon.

OK, a non-partisan poll. Happy now??

NO!!!!!!!!

YOU WILL FEEL MY RAGE FOR INSUILTING THE LOVE OF MY LIFE, JOHN RASMUSSEN!!!