MO Senate: Talent, McCaskill tied in new Rasmussen Poll (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 07, 2024, 01:45:02 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  MO Senate: Talent, McCaskill tied in new Rasmussen Poll (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: MO Senate: Talent, McCaskill tied in new Rasmussen Poll  (Read 4974 times)
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


« on: September 06, 2005, 10:19:41 AM »

This will be a top-tier race. Republican-leaning pollster Rasmussen has the two candidates tied at 46% in a new poll of 500 likely voters:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2005/Missouri%20Senate.htm


Considering all of the disease there is, currently, with Republican leadership all around the country, these numbers are pretty damn good.  If things start to pick up again, Talent should have no real problem winning this seat.  I predict that you will see his numbers rise once this whole Roberts thing has come to a head.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


« Reply #1 on: September 06, 2005, 10:20:18 AM »

Its gonna' come down to money.  Talent will outspend McCaskill somewhere in the range of 2 to 1 or posibly even 3 to 1.  I hope Im wrong, but I think a lot of Republicans will be saved by the dollar in 2006.

Yeah, that makes sense, considering that pro-Kerry and anti-Bush groups massively outspent their counter parts in 2004.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2005, 10:25:49 AM »

Yeah, that makes sense, considering that pro-Kerry and anti-Bush groups massively outspent their counter parts in 2004.

I guess you havent been paying attention to Talents fudraising numbers thus far.  They happend to be outstanding.

I didnt know Bush was up for re-election in 2006?

They are rather impressive, however, it won't be long before 527's start pouring money into Senate races.  Your theory that the Republican will massivly outspend Democrats is quite flawed.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2005, 10:26:51 AM »

Considering all of the disease there is, currently, with Republican leadership all around the country, these numbers are pretty damn good.

Not for an incumbent in a Republican state. McCaskill hasn't even started campaigning yet.

Which is precisely why I am not worried.  None of these guys have started campaigning yet.  Once they do, you will see a totally different dynamic to this race and all the other Senate races.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2005, 11:12:54 AM »

Considering all of the disease there is, currently, with Republican leadership all around the country, these numbers are pretty damn good.

Not for an incumbent in a Republican state. McCaskill hasn't even started campaigning yet.

Which is precisely why I am not worried.  None of these guys have started campaigning yet.  Once they do, you will see a totally different dynamic to this race and all the other Senate races.

You also said you weren't worried about the Colorado Senate seat either and it was a case where Democrats "were making a big deal out of nothing"

At the time, I had no idea that Pete Coors was going to run such an ineffective campaign.  In the final weeks, I stated that it looked like we would probably lose the seat.  The final outcome was, in no way, certain even on election night.

I also did not foresee the effect that MADD would have on the campaign.
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 0.019 seconds with 11 queries.