Star-Tribune Minnesota Poll: Both Dayton and Coleman approvals below 50%

[Sam Spade]

http://startribune.com/stories/784/5213310.html

Dayton's has had the bigger drop, from 58% to 43% since the January 2004.

Coleman's has dropped from 54% to 47% since January 2004.

Obviously, this is a bigger concern for Dayton.  Not only is he up for re-election sooner, but historically, Star-Tribune polls lean about 5-8% Democrat anyway.

Charlie Cook, at the independent Cook Report says that Dayton is now the most vulnerable incumbent now for 2006 (even more than Santorum, Chafee or Nelson (FL)).

I tend to agree with his analysis.

[The Duke]

Maybe somethings off with the poll to show wuch a shift, they get a disproportionately ornery batch of voters.  Seems a little fishy to see two Senators go off the cliff for no apparent reason.

[ATFFL]

Maybe somethings off with the poll to show wuch a shift, they get a disproportionately ornery batch of voters.  Seems a little fishy to see two Senators go off the cliff for no apparent reason.

Possibly a general discontent with the government following Bush getting re-elected.  General discontent flowing over on to both Senators.

Or, it could be because the Star-Tribune poll is less reliable than my dog.

[AuH2O]

That's basically a poll showing Dayton at about 35% approval given the source, with Coleman over 50%.

Granted, the Star Tribune is a worthless pile of propaganda masquerading as a merely arrogant and dishonest tabloid, but still.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yeah I saw that poll but the drop made me skeptic which doesn't take much since Star Trib are basically just worthless. Even shifting them doesn't work always since they often throw a curve ball. Hell they had one poll showing Kerry up by 5 which was actually fairly accurate and within the MOE, not that this means much besides luck.

Hell, I love the StarTrib as a paper and think it's the best newspaper in the country but even I'll admit the polls are worthless. But if you want to to pay any attention, note that Coleman's dissaproval is higher as well.

[Rob]

Dayton and Coleman are both going to lose when their seats come up.

[12th Doctor]

http://startribune.com/stories/784/5213310.html

Dayton's has had the bigger drop, from 58% to 43% since the January 2004.

Coleman's has dropped from 54% to 47% since January 2004.

Obviously, this is a bigger concern for Dayton.  Not only is he up for re-election sooner, but historically, Star-Tribune polls lean about 5-8% Democrat anyway.

Charlie Cook, at the independent Cook Report says that Dayton is now the most vulnerable incumbent now for 2006 (even more than Santorum, Chafee or Nelson (FL)).

I tend to agree with his analysis.

I spoke face-to-face with Cook a couple of months ago.  I think he greatly over-exagerates the treat that Santorum faces.

[Akno21]

If Bush tanks, then Dayton survives. If Bush does well, Dayton is seen as obstructionist, and loses.