WA: Rasmussen: Sen. Murray (D) now down by 3 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 04:14:01 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2010 Elections
  2010 Senatorial Election Polls
  WA: Rasmussen: Sen. Murray (D) now down by 3 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: WA: Rasmussen: Sen. Murray (D) now down by 3  (Read 1593 times)
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

« on: July 16, 2010, 01:19:09 PM »

Question for our Washingtonians,

Why is Murray so vunurable? I mean, this is an anti-Democratic year, but, she really should be in a beter position then she is. What gives?

Patty Murray stomps on children: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37K5Q3yTlH0&feature=player_embedded
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2010, 01:21:12 PM »


Hey, if this makes Republicans think Didier actually has a chance, I say "Go Scott, go!"
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2010, 04:14:13 AM »

I love how the liberals try to rationalize Rasmussen's polls.  Earlier this week it was, "Hey, look, Scott is changing his likely voters screen to make it more accurate in time for the general!"  Now it's back to "lol Rasmussen".

I never said that. Just because one Democratic poster expresses an opinion doesn't mean we all share it. We aren't some sort of alien hive with one mind.

As for the race, I'm willing to conceded that it's competitive and close right now. I don't think Rossi's ahead though. If more polls come out contradicting that then I'll be willing to change my mind.


Quiet, you delusional liberal!
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2010, 06:38:23 PM »
« Edited: July 17, 2010, 06:40:28 PM by bgwah »

Washington flipped to Republican in 1994. Hard.

I don't completely disagree, but it's important to remember that a combination of an open seat + several freshmen Democrats might make it look a bit more "hard" than it really was. Cantwell (her seat was won by a Republican in 1990), Krielder (his district was new in 1992), and Inslee (his seat was won by a Republican in 1990) were all freshmen. Swift retired.

Additionally, Eastern Washington moved to the Republican Party for good during the 1990s, and the fact that the Democrats had both seats in the East after 1992 was impressive, but also kind of an anomaly. Tom Foley losing was certainly upset for obvious reasons (and Unsoeld to a lesser extent, though I don't fully understand SW WA's bizarre voting patterns), though I really don't know how Jay Inslee ever got elected in the 4th district (the district voted 71% R in 1990, 51% D in 1992, and then 53% R in 1994, and now is reliably >60% R). Are there any Democratic districts that I think will trend Republican permanently like Eastern Washington did? Not really--the seat here Republicans will probably gain (the 3rd) already has a slight Republican lean and is open. I will be very surprised if such a seat doesn't fall in a wave election.

Of course we're talking about a Senate seat here, and of course the Senate seat up in 1994 was an incumbent Republican so it's a more difficult comparison, but I suspect your "hard" comment was inspired by the House seats, hence my reply.
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 0.024 seconds with 14 queries.