KY: Switch from Mitch

[Brittain33]

Rasmussen has Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell trailing his Democratic challenger, Bruce Lunsford, 49%-44%.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_senate_elections/kentucky/election_2008_kentucky_senate

McConnell has a 52%-42% favorability rating, not bad for a party leader, so this looks to be a wave result more than anything else.

[Keystone Phil]

Are we finished considering Rasmussen a credible polling firm?

[Verily]

Lunsford might as well be McConnell, so I'm not sure what anyone is cheering about.

[Brittain33]

Lunsford might as well be McConnell, so I'm not sure what anyone is cheering about.

Lunsford won't be a skilled fundraiser and legislative tactician for the Republicans.

[Brittain33]

Are we finished considering Rasmussen a credible polling firm?

After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
--Bertolt Brecht

[Keystone Phil]

Are we finished considering Rasmussen a credible polling firm?

After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
--Bertolt Brecht

Maybe you can
Tell me what you mean
When you post
A Poem of some sorts
In response
To
My comment. Many
Thanks.

-- Phil

[Brittain33]

Maybe you can
Tell me what you mean
When you post
A Poem of some sorts
In response
To
My comment. Many
Thanks.

-- Phil

It was an allusion in response to the question of who is at fault for a response like this, the people asking the question or the people who refuse to give the answer that is expected.

Certainly some polls misfire--but given the results for Dole and Cornyn in other polls, it seems as if voters nearly everywhere outside of Wyoming and Utah are willing to consider ditching their established senators for generic alternatives.

[Keystone Phil]

Maybe you can
Tell me what you mean
When you post
A Poem of some sorts
In response
To
My comment. Many
Thanks.

-- Phil

It was an allusion in response to the question of who is at fault for a response like this, the people asking the question or the people who refuse to give the answer that is expected.

Certainly some polls misfire--but given the results for Dole and Cornyn in other polls, it seems as if voters nearly everywhere outside of Wyoming and Utah are willing to consider ditching their established senators for generic alternatives.

So how did McConnell lose the twelve point lead he had two weeks ago?

[Brittain33]

So how did McConnell lose the twelve point lead he had two weeks ago?

The primary happened, Lunsford became the nominee.

I see this like Kerry's big lead over Bush immediately after he secured the nomination--he's the repository of all the potential anti-incumbent vote. We'll see if it lasts, but it likely won't.

[Keystone Phil]

So how did McConnell lose the twelve point lead he had two weeks ago?

The primary happened, Lunsford became the nominee.

So wait...

We have a poll from two weeks ago showing McConnell's favorability at 48% and winning re-election with 48% of the vote. Now we have a poll showing his approval is above 50% (at 52%) yet he somehow loses support and only 44% will vote for re-elect McConnell. Interesting. We won't point out that this poll is probably trash because saying this is a "wave election for the Dems" is just a lot more fun.

[Franzl]

So how did McConnell lose the twelve point lead he had two weeks ago?

The primary happened, Lunsford became the nominee.

So wait...

We have a poll from two weeks ago showing McConnell's favorability at 48% and winning re-election with 48% of the vote. Now we have a poll showing his approval is above 50% (at 52%) yet he somehow loses support and only 44% will vote for re-elect McConnell. Interesting. We won't point out that this poll is probably trash because saying this is a "wave election for the Dems" is just a lot more fun.

Why weren't you there to call the Rasmussen poll showing Clinton winning Kentucky be several points trash, too?

[Keystone Phil]

Why weren't you there to call the Rasmussen poll showing Clinton winning Kentucky be several points trash, too?

Probably because I don't feel the need to comment about polling a candidate who won't make it to the General election.

[Brittain33]

We have a poll from two weeks ago showing McConnell's favorability at 48% and winning re-election with 48% of the vote. Now we have a poll showing his approval is above 50% (at 52%) yet he somehow loses support and only 44% will vote for re-elect McConnell. Interesting. We won't point out that this poll is probably trash because saying this is a "wave election for the Dems" is just a lot more fun.

So your claim is that it is impossible, or unacceptable, for a senator to poll below his favorability? Collins has favorability in the 60s or higher. Does anyone seriously believe she's going to win with 67% in November?

That was my point. In a normal election, a candidate's personal approval can trump the unfavorability of his party or the perceived direction of the country. In a wave election, the party becomes an anchor around the candidate's neck. McConnell is a creature of the national party more than a senator from his own state in a way matched by few other senators. Like Mike DeWine, he is also collateral damage from a scandalized and ineffective state party--although unlike DeWine, he had a hand in its governance.

[Keystone Phil]

We have a poll from two weeks ago showing McConnell's favorability at 48% and winning re-election with 48% of the vote. Now we have a poll showing his approval is above 50% (at 52%) yet he somehow loses support and only 44% will vote for re-elect McConnell. Interesting. We won't point out that this poll is probably trash because saying this is a "wave election for the Dems" is just a lot more fun.

So your claim is that it is impossible, or unacceptable, for a senator to poll below his favorability? Collins has favorability in the 60s or higher. Does anyone seriously believe she's going to win with 67% in November?

No, I'm saying it's highly unlikely that a Senator would go from being below 50% approval two weeks ago yet winning his race by twelve points to suddenly being above 50% approval yet trailing in his race by five points.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, I got that. I'm saying that calling it a wave election and seeing McConnell as a victim of it based on this one poll is premature.

[Brittain33]

No, I'm saying it's highly unlikely that a Senator would go from being below 50% approval two weeks ago yet winning his race by twelve points to suddenly being above 50% approval yet trailing in his race by five points.

Ok, then;

First, I'd say that McConnell's changes in approval rating are close to within MOE, so there's nothing meaningful in that change nor is there anything magical about the 50%. It's usually 50% in horse race numbers that people cite as the safe number.

Secondly, I'd ask, on what basis can you decide the first poll is the real one and the second one is wrong? They are two data points, and they aren't even from the same environment in time. If we had three other polls taken post primary showing Mitch leading by big sums, that would make this a true outlier, but it isn't.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do not think it is premature to call it a wave election, not if the election were held today, not with the results we're seeing everywhere and the predictions from pundits like Stu Rothenberg. Republicans are getting slammed in the Senate, and they know it. Not only that, but it's hard to see what could change that.

I think it follows that McConnell is affected by it. Whether he'll be a victim remains to be seen, and Lunsford hasn't proven himself.

[Meeker]

Well hot damn. Clearly this is an outlier affected by primary advertisements... but this is at least vaguely competitive.

Solid Dem really.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Rasmussen is weird.  At one stage it was definitely exaggeratedly Republican - now it seems that it is favouring every Democratic challenger across America in a competetive race.  I do not believe this, though I want to.  My predictions (at this stage as meaningless as a Ramussen poll?) -

KENTUCKY PRESIDENT -
59% (R) McCain
38% (D) Obama


KENTUCKY SENATE -
54% (R) McConnell
43% (D) Lunsford


Subject to change of course. 

[Sam Spade]

hmmm...  McCain down 9 to Clinton in Kentucky, McConnell down 5 to Lunsford.  Makes total sense, actually.

Too bad Obama would still lose to McCain even if this was merely a poll of Democrats.

[Sam Spade]

Are we finished considering Rasmussen a credible polling firm?

Why are you bashing polling companies?  They are mere providers of information.

[Josh/Devilman88]

Hey Phil, I agree with you that something is fishy with this poll, but lets wait until another polls comes out to see if it backs this up or not.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I've been kinda expecting a poll like this for a while now.  If every other Republican in the damn country is endangered, why not Sen. McConnell too with a mediocre approval rating?

Dems kinda shot themselves in the foot by going with a weak challenger here.

[Keystone Phil]

Secondly, I'd ask, on what basis can you decide the first poll is the real one and the second one is wrong? They are two data points, and they aren't even from the same environment in time. If we had three other polls taken post primary showing Mitch leading by big sums, that would make this a true outlier, but it isn't.

I think you're kind of making my point. I'm saying that we shouldn't strongly believe either of them since they show such drastic swings within such a short period of time (and nothing significant has happened).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As of...May. Check back in September.

Are we finished considering Rasmussen a credible polling firm?

Why are you bashing polling companies?  They are mere providers of information.

When they start to get goofy with results, "providing information" isn't good.

[Tender Branson]

Ahhh Goood ! :-)

That makes their extremely Clinton-biased GE poll shine in a new light ...

[Rococo4]

I think McConnell wins, but ticket splitting isnt that far fetched here.....Kentucky went big for Bush in 04 and Bunning nearly lost his Senate race.  Sure he ran a bizarre campaign, but it shows it could happen.

[Tender Branson]

McConnell up 11 points in internal polling

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) holds an 11-point lead over his Democratic opponent, businessman Bruce Lunsford, according to the McConnell campaign’s internal polling released today.

The poll shows McConnell leading Lunsford 50 to 39 percent in a head-to-head matchup, The numbers are unchanged in McConnell’s internal polling since Lunsford won the Democratic primary this month.

The poll also shows McConnell holding a strong job approval rating: 57 percent of respondents said they approved of McConnell’s job performance while 30 percent disapproved.

Fifty-five percent of voters had a favorable impression of McConnell, while 32 percent had an unfavorable impression. Lunsford had a lower net favorability rating: 34 percent held a positive impression of him, while 20 percent had an unfavorable impression.

The poll surveyed 600 likely voters between May 21-22, and was conducted by the GOP firm Voter/Consumer Research. The poll has a four percent margin of error.

It contradicts the numbers from a newly-released automated Rasmussen poll, which shows Lunsford leading McConnell, 49 to 44 percent.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0508/McConnell_up_11_points_in_internal_polling.html