New poll shows Kyl easily beating Pederson (AZ)

KVOA.com ^ | 1/22/06

[LdSentinal]

A newly released poll shows Republican Senator Jon Kyl has a commanding lead over Democratic challenger Jim Pederson.

Conducted by the non-partisan Behavior Research Center of Phoenix, the poll shows Kyl beating Pederson by 55 to 26 percent statewide with 19 percent undecided.

Kyl is seeking a third term. Pederson is a wealthy Phoenix developer and the former chairman of the Arizona Democratic Party. He's making his first bid for elected office.

The poll was conducted over an eight-day period beginning January 5th. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4-point-2 percent. The results are based on telephone interviews with 549 voters.

[inkling]

Anyone running against Kyl has a political death wish. I'm surprised the Dems are even trying.

[Arizona Carolyn]

Fingers crossed this trend continues, John Kerry, Howard Dean and Moveon are pouring money into the state to defeat out senator.

[AZRepublican]

Kyl is well liked in AZ...looney liberal Dummycraps need not to apply.

[Theodore R.]

This is good news, but I believe that Howard Dean has put AZ near the top of his "upset" lists for 2006.

[faithincowboys]

Kool and the gang. I dig me some KYL...

[Ma3lst0rm]

I think the Dems are going to see some great disappointment this year. They are celebrating victory in many quarters before their Republican opponents have even begun to fight. It is like Casey and Sanatorum in PA. I'll place my wager on Sanatorum and Swann.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Isn't this election in about a gazillion days away? Yes Kyle will win but polls this far out? Meaningless.

[sine_nomine]

Kyl is our good senator.

[Stayingawayfromthedarkside]

You got that right.

[Stayingawayfromthedarkside]

I didn't know the Prez was a Steelers fan. LOL!!!

[grey_whiskers]

I seem to remember within the last month KFYI reading from an Arizona Republic editorial about how unbeatable Kyl's opponent was, and how he had all the independents and momentum going his way.

The MSM is nothing but the propaganda arm of the DNC.

Cheers for Kyl, though.

[gooper]

Why would anyone, regardless of political party, think that they were qualified to serve in the U.S. Senate by virtue of nothing more than the fact that they have a big bank account (holding aside the fact that most 1st time candidates for Senate have little more than that to recommend them)?

[gooper]

The MSM is nothing but the propaganda arm of the DNC. Seems like they put the wood to Clinton on the whole Lewinsky thing. There was way more ink on that than on the domestic spying thing in December. The MSM tilts left somewhat, but the lefties don't have anywhere near the partisan media apparatus that we have on the right. I went to the ALEC conference in 1992. After Bush's keynote, we had state reps lined up for video interviews with fake reporters that were then sent back to local MSM outlets in their home districts. The Dems still don't have that kind of infrastructure. They are also way behind in talk radio and in the blogosphere.

[sine_nomine]

I don't read the Arizona People's Republic. I question whether many people do anymore.

I always pay attention when Kyl is speaking. We need 100 senators like him.

[SC33]

Swann has a very good chance. Unfortunately, I don't see any way Santorum can win this one, unless Casey finally decides to open his mouth and something stupid comes out.

[Ma3lst0rm]

Sanatorum will destroy Casey if he has to. Coming from behind is not a good place to be but he has did it before and can do it again by mainly by tying Casey to the national Democratic party. What I'd do is take advantage of having Swann running and put together Team PA ads using football metaphors to get people rooting for the GOP team versus the team Al Qaeda and the Democrats. It wouldn't be as simple as that but the general idea would work. Republicans can win big in 2006 if they put together a national marketing theme and focus state by state on getting people out and excited. They need to run it like a Presidential election year, like 1994. The one thing they can't do is let the left pretend to be conservative and run a status quo election. I get the feeling that Casey will probably have more trouble from his own party before all is said and done.

[grey_whiskers]

Seems like they put the wood to Clinton on the whole Lewinsky thing. There was way more ink on that than on the domestic spying thing in December. The MSM tilts left somewhat, but the lefties don't have anywhere near the partisan media apparatus that we have on the right. I went to the ALEC conference in 1992. After Bush's keynote, we had state reps lined up for video interviews with fake reporters that were then sent back to local MSM outlets in their home districts. The Dems still don't have that kind of infrastructure. They are also way behind in talk radio and in the blogosphere.

I looked up your posting history after your thread about "republicand for pro-choice majority" or some such group, in which the claim was made that a number of RINOS were going to vote against Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.

To my surprise, I came up with a post that said you were a Catholic, and didn't know of any official position of the Catholic Church on in vitro fertilization.

To my further surprise, I came up with this post...

While I appreciate your humor in using "putting the wood to" and "Clinton" and "Lewinsky" in the same sentence...

The ink on Lewinsky was because "sex sells" and most emphatically NOT because they were trying to humiliate or to oust Clinton. I still remember the reporterettes' silly grins when the Starr report was first made publically available; not to mention the famous quote by one female media personality that she would gladly personally fellate Bill Clinton just for keeping abortion legal...(not to notice the irony in the fact the fellatio is its own form of , err, "oral" contraception). Remember the mantra "it's just about sex" or the hit pieces on Linda Tripp?

As far as the IVF on another thread,
"In summary, the Catholic Church condemns as gravely evil acts, both IVF in and of itself, and stem cell research performed on IVF embryos." quoted from this site.

Finally, your remark about state reps, video interviews, and fake reporters? That illustrates the whole point. The Republican party has to have fake reporters of the type you see on infomercials. The DNC owns the real ones. Hasn't it ever struck you as odd that George Stephanopoulos is the host of an ABC News program? I.e. we Republicans do have Ben Stein, but he is limited to financial columns on Yahoo.com and bit parts in movies and eye-drop commercials...

Seriously, you are either behind the curve (which I allow might be the case, seeing you have a very recent sign-up date on Free Republic) or you are beginning to bear resemblances to a troll. Time will tell.

Cheers!

[AmishDude]

Casey has all the charisma of a wet sponge and half the intelligence. The worst thing he can do is actually campaign.

[gooper]

I think the problem you have is that I don't agree with you that the MSM is a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party. I agree that the MSM schews to the left -- and said as much in my response. I also agree that Stephenopolous is a Democratic party hack who shouldn't have his own show.

However, I'm not going to sit idly by while some folks like yourself issue vague threats about keeping an eye on me, or questioning my loyalty because:

1. I don't agree wholeheartedly with your opinion about the MSM or
2. Because I pointed out that a pro choice republican group with several members who will be voting on Alito came out in opposition to his confirmation. (Isn't that the sort of information the group or we should have so we can pressure some of those people before the vote?). or
3. Because I believe that the Republican party and its allies are doing a better job of creating and using alternative media to get the message out.