Rothenberg political report and Senate ratings

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/2006/08/2006-senate-ratings.html

[Eraserhead]

Some of those are pretty off. NJ is not a toss up and I would say Ohio is leaning towards a Dem. takeover at this point.

[Boris]

Some of those are pretty off. NJ is not a toss up and I would say Ohio is leaning towards a Dem. takeover at this point.

I dunno...I haven't seen a poll that shows Kean leading, but he's polled within the MoE several times.

Kean's not going to win, being that he's running in New Jersey, but still, he'll make it very competitive.

[MarkWarner08]

Some of those are pretty off. NJ is not a toss up and I would say Ohio is leaning towards a Dem. takeover at this point.

This guy's one of the best in the business. He nailed the '00 and '04 Senate results and came real close in '02.

[Boris]

How does he list Bill Nelson as being more vulnerable as Joe Lieberman? Nelson will probably beat his opponent by at least 20 points; the best Lieberman can do will probably be fifteen.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

But the name of the game is that he has AZ, TN, and VA all republican favored, and has not one either in leaning or tossup. That says something.

[Eraserhead]

But the name of the game is that he has AZ, TN, and VA all republican favored, and has not one either in leaning or tossup. That says something.

It says hes a hack! Ok, maybe thats a bit harsh.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I don't think someone who has correctly predicted Senate races is a partisan hack, and by the way, we have yet to see MD polls on most of these races, I think the percentages of the Dems will go down after we see them in the next six weeks or so.

[Keystone Phil]

DeWine and possibly Menendez should be under "Narrow advantage for Incumbent party" and Byrd and Nelson should be under "Currently Safe."

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

DeWine under narrow advantage, he is currently trailing Brown by 8. I think Talent should be under narrow advantage, he is leading Claire by 2 points in the latest poll.

[Smash255]

DeWine and possibly Menendez should be under "Narrow advantage for Incumbent party" and Byrd and Nelson should be under "Currently Safe."

Someone who has trailed in the last 3 polls, two of them by 8 points should not be in the narrow advantage to win category...

[Eraserhead]

DeWine under narrow advantage, he is currently trailing Brown by 8. I think Talent should be under narrow advantage, he is leading Claire by 2 points in the latest poll.

I can agree with that.

[Smash255]

DeWine under narrow advantage, he is currently trailing Brown by 8. I think Talent should be under narrow advantage, he is leading Claire by 2 points in the latest poll.

You can't just take one poll into consideration.  Have to look at several polls.  I agree with you on Dewine because he has been up in several polls.  Talent is only up in one poll, and McCaskill has been up in the majority of the polls (albeit narrowly).

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Yea, but if you look at the last several polls her percentages have gone down, Research 2k 6 pts, Rasmussen a tie, then 2 points, then Survey USA 1 point, and now a 2 point deficit. While Brown and Whitehouse and Casey and Tester's leads have remain constant. That's why I give a narrow advantage to Talent. And the others have lead in Zogby polls, she has lead in zero.

[Smash255]

Yea, but if you look at the last several polls her percentages have gone down, Research 2k 6 pts, Rasmussen a tie, then 2 points, then Survey USA 1 point, and now a 2 point deficit. While Brown and Whitehouse and Casey and Tester's leads have remain constant. That's why I give a narrow advantage to Talent. And the others have lead in Zogby polls, she has lead in zero.

The Survey USA & Rasmussen polls were within the same period (both last week).  The Research 2000 poll may have been a bit of an outlier, but over the last 5 polls you have McCkaskill ahead in 3, Talent in 1, and a tie.  You have to go back almost 3 and a half months to find the last poll Talent was leading in.  The race is very close, but it is exactly where its rated a tossup.  No way leading in one out of the last 5 polls gives someone an advantage.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Well we will see when the Mason Dixon polls come out in the next six weeks or so if that lead holds up.  Right now, she got caught with illegal drugs, and it is driving her poll numbers down. As stated on the Rothenberg Report, it will very difficult for the Dems to when all five vulnerable seats.

[Smash255]

Well we will see when the Mason Dixon polls come out in the next six weeks or so if that lead holds up.  Right now, she got caught with illegal drugs, and it is driving her poll numbers down. As stated on the Rothenberg Report, it will very difficult for the Dems to when all five vulnerable seats.

I don't think the drug story will reall have much of an impact.  The Research 2000 poll was a bit of an outlier, and this is a race which McCaskill has had a very slight lead throughout most of the race.  One poll doesn't change that.  Now if we start seeing several polls showing Talent ahead than you may have an argument, but he has led in only one poll over the last 3+ months.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

You keep saying that she has had a lead. By the way Zogby hasn't shown her a lead, and Mason Dixon hasn't shown a poll yet. By the way, the reason why Talent is winning because his approval ratings have gone up. And by the way, the Survey USA polls use hand surveys they don't use telephone surveys, that can also, give a false lead like it did earlier this month.

[Smash255]

You keep saying that she has had a lead. By the way Zogby hasn't shown her a lead, and Mason Dixon hasn't shown a poll yet. By the way, the reason why Talent is winning because his approval ratings have gone up. And by the way, the Survey USA polls use hand surveys they don't use telephone surveys, that can also, give a false lead like it did earlier this month.

Zogby is crap, probably the single worst state pollster out there.    Survey USA has actually had one of the most accurate state polling of any pollsters.  I might put Mason-Dixon aboe them , but in a similar category as Mason-Dixon when you look at overall accuracy.  Prior tothis poll McCaskill has led in the last polls of 3 sepaerate polsters (Survey USA< Research 2000 & the last rasmussen one.  Other than resarch 2000 (which margin I think was a bit of an outlier) she led in those polls albeit by a close margin. 

Again leading in one poll of the last 5 doesn't make it a lean in your direction.  I think McCaskill is leading slightly at this point and will win in a close race, but I'm not trying to argue that the race leans McCaskil at this point, but simply this is a very close race that can only be described as a tossup.  One lead in 5 polls is not leaning in your direction, its as simple as that.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

You say Survey USA is the most accurate. That's kind of ironic. They had Kerry leading in all the polls leading up to election day and Kerry lost OH, in OH. I am saying that the race is a tossup and just like you say one poll doesn't matter in this race the same can be said about the VA race that all the polls have had Allen up and one poll doesn't make a difference.

And you said Zogby is crap they had online polls similar to the election data they had Bush and Kerry tied.

[Smash255]

You say Survey USA is the most accurate. That's kind of ironic. They had Kerry leading in all the polls leading up to election day and Kerry lost OH, in OH. I am saying that the race is a tossup and just like you say one poll doesn't matter in this race the same can be said about the VA race that all the polls have had Allen up and one poll doesn't make a difference.

And you said Zogby is crap they had online polls similar to the election data they had Bush and Kerry tied.

But you didn't say it was a tossup, you said it should be in the lean Talent category, thats how the whole argument started..

Zogby's national polls are generally sloid, their state polls are completley all over the place. 

Kind of ironic that you pick Ohio to make your comparison here....
the last poll of Survey USA had Bush up by 2, the last poll by Zogby had Bush up by 6.  He won by two.
Senate race, Survey USA had it a 28 point win by VoVoinovich, he won by about 28

regarding VA all the polls do have Allen up, but we now have two polls showing things getting a bit closer.  In my post i said I would like to wait for one more poll to confirm it before I state that race was competitive, but you are dealing with more than one poll in that situation.  Here with Talent your dealing with one out of 5 giving him the lead.  Tats why i said it was a bit silly to cinsdie this race in the lean Taelnt category at this point.

made a correction on the Senate race.  Survey USA's last 2004 Ohio poll was dead on in both cases.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The last OH poll had Bush up by 2 but they had Kerry winning all summer long and Mason Dixon had before them Bush winning. So, MD had Kerry losing OH before Survey USA is. They could be misleading on this OH poll too with Brown. I just saying their way of conducting interviews should be questioned, and they shouldn't always be taken seriously as other should.

[Smash255]

The last OH poll had Bush up by 2 but they had Kerry winning all summer long and Mason Dixon had before them Bush winning. So, MD had Kerry losing OH before Survey USA is. They could be misleading on this OH poll too with Brown. I just saying their way of conducting interviews should be questioned, and they shouldn't always be taken seriously as other should.

MD also had Bush up by 7 at one point, which was actually further from the final result than most the polls Survey USA had in which kerry was up (which was generally 1-3 points).  And if you look at Zogby, hell they had Kerry winning TN, at SEVERAL points throughout the campaign, and well we saw how well that turned out.

Anyway my whole point was no pollster is perfect.  However overall SURVEY USA is one of the most accurate pollsters around, and while I might not exactly put them in the same category as MD they are very good & very reliable, and a far better state pollster than Zogby is.  Also you can't make much off one poll.  Take a look at several polls, and make a decsion based off that.  Leading in ONE poll by two points is not nearly enough to say the race leans in that candidate's direction, especially when that is the only poll that candidate has led in of the last 5 polls.

regarding the Senate poll.  I have my doubts if its an 8 point margin, but keep in mind another pollster (Columbus Dispatch) also had it at an 8 point margin,  And that was the third consecutive poll showing brown ahead in the Senate race and fourth of five showing brown ahead.  Their is a big differece from believing a candidate is ahead based off the results of one poll to thinking a cadidate is ahead based off several polls.  And also a big difference between being ahead in 1 of the last 5 polls (as Talent is) and being ahead in 4 of the last 5 polls (as Brown is)

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I was saying in response to the republican, that if you can put OH in a republican lean category why don't you put MO in the republican lean category. I was trying to contradict her point. I wasn't trying to affirm it. Both racist are tossups, but with the incumbancy advantage of Talent and DeWine you must take that into consideration. It is tough to win in red states, and in the last three elections, they have been unsuccessful so far, get zero in 2000 by Gore, losing all the competetive races in 2002 in the midterms and getting zero in 2004. Winning in red states like VA, OH, and MO is tough for the Dems.

[Smash255]

I was saying in response to the republican, that if you can put OH in a republican lean category why don't you put MO in the republican lean category. I was trying to contradict her point. I wasn't trying to affirm it. Both racist are tossups, but with the incumbancy advantage of Talent and DeWine you must take that into consideration. It is tough to win in red states, and in the last three elections, they have been unsuccessful so far, get zero in 2000 by Gore, losing all the competetive races in 2002 in the midterms and getting zero in 2004. Winning in red states like VA, OH, and MO is tough for the Dems.

Ahh ok, but you should have been more clear about that.  In your original post you seemed like you were tring to say MO was lean GOP, especially because you stated OH was lean Dem at the same time (which it is)

I agree that its hard to win red states, but we also have to take a look at the way things are unfolding in these states.  neither Ohio or Missouri are hard Republican states by any stretch of the imagination.  Both have very low opinions of Bush & the National GOP at the moment, both have unpopular Republican Govenor's in Ohio's case an extrememly unpopular one.  You also have what appears to be a blowout on the other major statewide race in Ohio in the Dem's favor.  Things are very different from these states than they were in 04, 02 and even 2000.  Much MUCH less friendly to the GOP.