GA: InsiderAdvantage/Fox5: Perdue +10

[Adam Griffin]

Perdue 50
Nunn 40

MoE +/- 2.9%


Like I said for the Gubernatorial one, these crosstabs look funny. They actually had to take them down earlier today after publishing them, then threw up an altered version a couple of hours later.

[KCDem]

Insider Advantage is garbage, throw in trash.

[Adam Griffin]

Insider Advantage is garbage, throw in trash.

I've always maintained this (even if I may take their D-leaning polls a bit more seriously, given how they are usually ridiculously R-leaning). For the snafus in this particular poll, here's the jist from PP and IA:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Panda Express]

Georgia polls are all over the place.

[Adam Griffin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So a InsiderAdvantage poll has a 33% black sample with Perdue winning by 10, while the AJC has a 24% black sample that shows Perdue ahead by 4?

[Lief 🗽]

You know, for a state that gets polled constantly, you'd think we'd have a clearer idea of what's happening here. At least with Kentucky we know that McConnell is leading by exactly 4%.

[Adam Griffin]

You know, for a state that gets polled constantly, you'd think we'd have a clearer idea of what's happening here. At least with Kentucky we know that McConnell is leading by exactly 4%.

If you throw out the garbage polls produced by InsiderAdvantage & YouGov, the polling isn't that wacky, but certainly not as consistent as KY's. A fairly wide fluctuation, but most polls are within MoE to suggest that it's statistically tied.

I honestly don't think this poll should even be entered into the database, considering all the hoopla and mistakes IA made in releasing it (you can also inspect the comments on PP).

EDIT: Maybe I forgot about how many polls are truly all over the place in this race. It is pretty bad.

[GaussLaw]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

[KCDem]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

[SPQR]

You know, for a state that gets polled constantly, you'd think we'd have a clearer idea of what's happening here. At least with Kentucky we know that McConnell is leading by exactly 4%.

[GaussLaw]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

[KCDem]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

[GaussLaw]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

Turnout in Georgia drops off like a rock....take a look at 2008 GE results vs the runoff.   This will almost certainly favor Republicans.  As most forumites have pointed out, it would be very hard for Nunn to win a runoff.

[KCDem]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

Turnout in Georgia drops off like a rock....take a look at 2008 GE results vs the runoff.   This will almost certainly favor Republicans.  As most forumites have pointed out, it would be very hard for Nunn to win a runoff.

Obviously true, but if she finishes ahead of Perdue in November she is in better shape than if she finishes in second.

[Hamster]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

Turnout in Georgia drops off like a rock....take a look at 2008 GE results vs the runoff.   This will almost certainly favor Republicans.  As most forumites have pointed out, it would be very hard for Nunn to win a runoff.

Obviously true, but if she finishes ahead of Perdue in November she is in better shape than if she finishes in second.

If it goes to a run-off, they'll be close enough it won't matter who was 'first.' The Dems can't allow either race to go to a runoff.

[KCDem]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

Turnout in Georgia drops off like a rock....take a look at 2008 GE results vs the runoff.   This will almost certainly favor Republicans.  As most forumites have pointed out, it would be very hard for Nunn to win a runoff.

Obviously true, but if she finishes ahead of Perdue in November she is in better shape than if she finishes in second.

If it goes to a run-off, they'll be close enough it won't matter who was 'first.' The Dems can't allow either race to go to a runoff.

Not if the result is 49-46-5 Nunn-Perdue-others.

[free my dawg]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

Turnout in Georgia drops off like a rock....take a look at 2008 GE results vs the runoff.   This will almost certainly favor Republicans.  As most forumites have pointed out, it would be very hard for Nunn to win a runoff.

Obviously true, but if she finishes ahead of Perdue in November she is in better shape than if she finishes in second.

If it goes to a run-off, they'll be close enough it won't matter who was 'first.' The Dems can't allow either race to go to a runoff.

Not if the result is 49-46-5 Nunn-Perdue-others.

You can't be that sure dude

[henster]

Georgia has a polling problem like Michigan a lot of firms with a lot of bad records, it gives us a very poor understanding of whats really going on.

[Flake]

Yeah this is a lean R firm, but it looks like Perdue's in decent shape.

My case for you being an idiot just got stronger.

Well, when Perdue also led in several other polls by margins of 3 or 4, that indicates that Perdue is in decent shape.  I consider decent shape for Perdue being able to keep Nunn under 50.  It seems very unlikely he can't at least do that.

How does that mean Perdue is in decent shape? Sure they'll be a runoff, but if she ends up ahead of Perdue in November, that's not good news for Perdue. You're basically assuming Nunn has the edge in November.

Turnout in Georgia drops off like a rock....take a look at 2008 GE results vs the runoff.   This will almost certainly favor Republicans.  As most forumites have pointed out, it would be very hard for Nunn to win a runoff.

Obviously true, but if she finishes ahead of Perdue in November she is in better shape than if she finishes in second.

If it goes to a run-off, they'll be close enough it won't matter who was 'first.' The Dems can't allow either race to go to a runoff.

Not if the result is 49-46-5 Nunn-Perdue-others.

Martin was only behind by three in the general, but with the runoff he lost by 15.

[Adam Griffin]

I don't believe there will be such a huge drop-off this time, if only because we're not dealing with a landmark election year with the highest black turnout in history and historically unstable electoral performance. The people who vote in mid-terms are much more likely to come back out to vote in a run-off when compared to a presidential electorate. I'd expect a 49-46 Nunn lead in November to become a 53-47 Perdue victory in January (although the fact that there'll be two run-offs - one for Gov and one for Sen - could throw a wrench into that).

The national party also won't completely forego Georgia in a 2014 runoff like they did in 2008 (which in hindsight, turned out to be a really stupid decision, no?).

[JRP1994]

I don't believe there will be such a huge drop-off this time, if only because we're not dealing with a landmark election year with the highest black turnout in history and historically unstable electoral performance. The people who vote in mid-terms are much more likely to come back out to vote in a run-off when compared to a presidential electorate. I'd expect a 49-46 Nunn lead in November to become a 53-47 Perdue victory in January (although the fact that there'll be two run-offs - one for Gov and one for Sen - could throw a wrench into that).

The national party also won't completely forego Georgia in a 2014 runoff like they did in 2008 (which in hindsight, turned out to be a really stupid decision, no?).

No. Bill Clinton and Al Gore did campaign for Jim Martin, and didn't do any good. Obama would have wasted political capital by investing in a losing Senate race 3 weeks after becoming President-elect.

[Adam Griffin]

I don't believe there will be such a huge drop-off this time, if only because we're not dealing with a landmark election year with the highest black turnout in history and historically unstable electoral performance. The people who vote in mid-terms are much more likely to come back out to vote in a run-off when compared to a presidential electorate. I'd expect a 49-46 Nunn lead in November to become a 53-47 Perdue victory in January (although the fact that there'll be two run-offs - one for Gov and one for Sen - could throw a wrench into that).

The national party also won't completely forego Georgia in a 2014 runoff like they did in 2008 (which in hindsight, turned out to be a really stupid decision, no?).

No. Bill Clinton and Al Gore did campaign for Jim Martin, and didn't do any good. Obama would have wasted political capital by investing in a losing Senate race 3 weeks after becoming President-elect.

It wouldn't have cost him any political capital - it was Georgia, after all. The DSCC did spend - I suppose I shouldn't have been so hyperbolic - but they spent as much in the final week of October on Georgia as it did during the entire run-off. The President that put Jim Martin so close to winning in the first place was who was needed to turn those voters back out; Bill Clinton and Al Gore didn't get Jim Martin to within three points of Chambliss.

[Adam Griffin]

Someone please add to database (even though this one is garbage).