Skip to comments.
North Carolina Senate - Erskine Bowles with double-digit lead over Richard Burr.
Roll Call ^
Posted on 10/17/2003 6:53:38 AM PDT by UCAL
In the North Carolina Senate race, Erskine Bowles (D) "has a double-digit lead" over Rep. Richard Burr (R) "in a hypothetical Senate matchup, according to an independent poll taken last month for a nonpartisan North Carolina business group,"
(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...
TOPICS: North Carolina; Campaign News; Polls; U.S. Senate
KEYWORDS: bowles; burr; northcarolina; poll; race; senate
You can't read the rest of this unless you have a Roll Call password. I wonder how much truth there is to this and what methodology was used.
1
posted on
10/17/2003 6:53:39 AM PDT
by
UCAL
To: UCAL
So what's the password?
2
posted on
10/17/2003 6:59:40 AM PDT
by
Coop
(God bless our troops!)
To: BlackRazor; Pubbie; deport; LdSentinal
Flag
3
posted on
10/17/2003 7:00:07 AM PDT
by
Coop
(God bless our troops!)
To: Coop
I wish I knew. I used to enjoy reading Roll Call each week. They went to a password required (subscriber only) system last year. If you'd like to set me up with a subscription ($380.00 per year), I'd be happy to share the password with you.
4
posted on
10/17/2003 7:04:20 AM PDT
by
UCAL
To: UCAL
A month ago another poll had it like this..
ClickWhen asked whom they preferred in the 2004 Senate race, likely voters said they preferred Burr over Bowles by a 43 percent to 37 percent margin with 20 percent undecided. They said they liked Burr over Blue by a 45 percent to 33 percent margin, with 22 percent undecided.
The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. That means that the Burr-Bowles race could be a toss-up or Burr's edge could be as much as 14 percentage points and that Burr could lead Blue by as few as 4 percentage points or as many as 20 percentage points.
5
posted on
10/17/2003 7:48:02 AM PDT
by
deport
(The Many, The Proud, The Winners)
To: deport
I also think it highly unlikely that Bowles had made up this much ground so quickly. I could understand a shift this large if Bush's numbers were tanking but these seem to have bottomed out lately and even risen slightly. Certainly, his NC numbers must be considerably higher than his national average. I have also not heard of any Burr gaffes or massive Bowles ad buys.
The poll in question could have been of North Carolina Adults or just Registered Voters. These samples tend to give the democrats an advantage over those that survey likely voters only.
If I remember correctly, several 2002 polls had the dems winning or very close in Senate races in North Carolina, New Hampshire, Colorado, South Carolina, Georgia and Minnesota. I'll have to check to see how these turned out!
6
posted on
10/17/2003 8:06:10 AM PDT
by
UCAL
To: UCAL
It's way too early to get a good read on the race......A poll last week in Raleigh's News & Observer showed Burr leading Bowles by 43 percent to 37 percent, with 20 percent undecided. Days earlier, a poll commissioned by Bowles showed him leading Burr by 43 percent to 35 percent.
7
posted on
10/17/2003 8:18:06 AM PDT
by
deport
(The Many, The Proud, The Winners)
To: UCAL
Hell, this poll is already over two weeks old (from "last month". Any word on sample, criteria?
8
posted on
10/17/2003 9:06:42 AM PDT
by
JohnnyZ
(RED SOX WIN! We had 'em all the way)
To: UCAL
From the story:
The poll of 800 voters was conducted Sept. 16-24 by Market Research Insight for NCFREE, a nonprofit group that provides polling and political analysis for businesses in North Carolina.
Bowles led Burr 42 percent to 31 percent in a head-to-head matchup, while 28 percent were undecided. The survey had a 4 percent margin of error.
In a generic test of party preference, the survey also found that 41 percent of those surveyed would prefer a Democrat to win the Senate race, while 34 percent said they preferred a Republican.
To: The Old Hoosier
Thanks for the additional information. Up until now I've considered Illinois a loss for our side with Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina almost certain pick-ups. Do you really feel that this race is competitive or is this poll questionable?
10
posted on
10/17/2003 1:24:57 PM PDT
by
UCAL
To: UCAL
I wonder at it, since it's so widely different. Something is definitely wrong there.
I wouldn't consider this race a shoo-in, though.
And Illinois is not unwinnable, either.
To: UCAL; JohnnyZ; deport
The poll showing Bowles leading must be solely due to name ID. Remember, Bowles is still lingering in the minds of voters from last year's Senate race, while Burr is relatively unknown to NC voters outside Winston-Salem area. Once Burr starts running more ads and meets more people face to face, the NC electorate shall warm to him.
12
posted on
10/17/2003 8:13:27 PM PDT
by
Kuksool
To: The Old Hoosier; UCAL; Kuksool
The poll of 800 voters was conducted Sept. 16-24 by Market Research Insight for NCFREE Why is Roll Call citing a month-old poll showing Bowles leading when the N&O poll at the same time showed Burr leading? Aren't the first three letters of NEWS => N-E-W?
13
posted on
10/17/2003 10:45:06 PM PDT
by
JohnnyZ
(Red Sox in 2004)
To: Kuksool
You hit the nail on the head. Indeed, it's surprising that Congressman Richard Burr is running as well as he is, given that he has never run statewide before. And while Erskine Bowles may have higher name I.D., he also has higher negative name I.D. I still think that this race rates as "Leans Slightly Republincan".
To: Clintonfatigued
Burr is going to have to run a strong campaign in order to win. Bowles' name ID is high and his personal wealth could be very advantageous late in the campaign if he needs it. I'm much more nervous about this race than either Georgia or South Carolina and we need to win all three.
To: zebrahead
Burr has an Ace-in-the-hole when crunch time comes a few days before the election--George W. Bush.
You can count on him campaigning in Illinois, N.C., S.C., Georgia and Florida. He made a big difference in 2002.
I am optimistic that he will do even better in 2004.
16
posted on
11/08/2003 2:37:59 AM PST
by
Radtechtravel
(Proud member of vast right wing conspiracy since '92)
To: UCAL
I remember we WON all of those Senate races that the D's were polling ahead or tied...Let's hope Bowles loses like he did last time...BIG.
17
posted on
11/08/2003 6:43:29 PM PST
by
TatieBug
To: UCAL
It stands to reason that the people who voted against Bowles last time will do the same this time. What is his message. "I worked for Clinton?" Yeah, that'll score some big votes in NC. Usually candidates do worse after coming out again after a pretty bad loss. If he had lost by a handful of votes I would say different. He lost by over 200,000 votes last time.
18
posted on
11/08/2003 6:56:23 PM PST
by
sboyd
To: sboyd
I don't know if I completely agree with that assumption. Certainly there is a base vote that won't shift. There are, however, voters who may have liked Bowles but liked Dole better. There are also many in the middle that make their minds up based on the latest news cycle. I also recently read an article that Republican Party identification in NC had taken a 5 point nosedive recently.
I think you also need to take into account that voter participation is much greater in a presidential year. Those less inclined to vote (Poor People / Black People) will likely turn out in greater numbers.
Hopefully Bush will have the election in the bag and will have time to campaign for Senate, House and Governor candidates. I remember Reagan taking lots of time to campaign in Minnesota during the last days of the 1984 election. This may have cost us several close senate races that year. I doubt that Bush will do the same if he knows he has a nice Electoral College cushion.
19
posted on
11/11/2003 4:28:16 PM PST
by
UCAL
Comment #20 Removed by Moderator
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson