Poll: War concerns hampering Kean Senate bid (Kean leads 43-39)

San Jose Mercury News ^ | 30 August 2006 | Associated Press

[okstate]

TRENTON, N.J. - The U.S. Senate race between Republican Tom Kean Jr. and Democrat Robert Menendez is virtually deadlocked, but if voters weren't so concerned about the war in Iraq, Kean could hold a clear lead, according to a poll released Wednesday.

A portion of Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind Poll designed to test the impact of national issues on the race indicated that if the war were not a factor, Kean could be leading Menendez by 47-36 percent. As it stands, however, 43 percent of voters polled said they favor Kean to 39 percent for Menendez, a difference that matches the poll's sampling error margin and makes the race a virtual tie.

[NorthEastRepublican]

Kean is clobbering Menendez is Monmouth, Ocean, Cape May, etc.

Menendez isn't doing as well as you should be in Camden and Newark since blacks aren't enthusiastic about him. His internal poll had bad news for him.

Kean's internal poll had him up 3. But the campaign in an unbiased way asked voters which issue was of concern to them and gave them fair quotes from both candidates descrbing each candidates posistion on the issue. The result, Kean up 9.

If Kean can raise money and communicate, he wins.

[NorthEastRepublican]

Would you rather have someone who supports Roberts, Alito, tax cuts, the marriage amendment, fiscal restraint and the war or a corrupt party base that favors abortion gay rights, an immediate withdrawal and is a tax and spend liberal?

[California Patriot]

Right. I also think Kean is a weak candidate, although this is based on one poor debate performance a few months ago.

We're better off sending our $$$ to Santorum, Burns, DeWine (I know, I know), Talent, and Mark Kennedy.

[cookcounty]

" NONE of the polls is 2-3% close to where the GOP vote really is. So if you add 2-3% to all the GOP candidates, then we'll talk who might lose a seat. In 1996, every one of the polls---every single one---was off in Clinton's direction by anywhere from 1% to 6%. It's not "randomness," becuase not one single poll had Dole higher than where he finished, and if it was just an accident, one or two would have been off in Dole's favor. So there is some phenomena here no one has figured out yet. "

It's the Mild-Mannered Uncool Voter Effect (MMUVE). There are a small number of folks that hate confrontation, and save their wrath for behind the voting booth curtain. They pick up from the "popular culture" (Hollywood plus various media darlings plus aggressive ill-mannered Bush-cursers) that voting GOP is very uncool and so are in the habit of pulling their punches in conversations (which extends to strangers asking poll questions), but let it all "out" on election day.

[TitansAFC]

Forget Kennedy; he's toast.

Send it to Mike Bouchard in Michigan. This is going to be a close one.

[Antoninus]

Would you rather have someone who supports Roberts, Alito, tax cuts, the marriage amendment, fiscal restraint and the war or a corrupt party base that favors abortion gay rights, an immediate withdrawal and is a tax and spend liberal?

Huh? The second part of your statement describes both candidates. Kean is a liberal. So is Menendez. Thus, I'm either writing in Bret Schundler, or staying home.

[Antoninus]

You may not like having to simply take the lesser of two evils, but its a fact of life.

What part of "I don't vote for pro-aborts" don't you understand? I'm done with that cr@p. If the GOP is to become a liberal pro-death party, they can do so without my vote.

[MassachusettsGOP]

Enjoy Menendez.

[Antoninus]

Enjoy Menendez.

I won't. But I wouldn't enjoy Kean either. It's a lose-lose here in NJ. Whoever wins will do so without my vote.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

Well, thanks for your help getting that moonbat Menendez out of the Senate. Not to mention that the Dems think they can take back the Senate, and it would be priceless to see them lose a seat in a blue state of all places. "Principles", right?

You know, social conservatives are funny people. They seem to think they own the GOP. I'm a moderate on social issues, but have no problem voting for a social conservative if they're good on other issues. For example, I supported Tim Pawlenty in Minnesota, and would've supported Schundler in NJ had I lived here then. But you ask a social conservative who purports to also be an economic conservative to support a strong conservative who's a bit more moderate on some social issues, they tell you to go screw yourself. What gives?

[Antoninus]

I'm a moderate on social issues, but have no problem voting for a social conservative if they're good on other issues.

That's because the social issues don't mean that much to you. If social issues are a make-or-break thing for you, like they are for me, then it makes a huge difference in who you vote for.

But you ask a social conservative who purports to also be an economic conservative to support a strong conservative who's a bit more moderate on some social issues,

Doug Forrester was "a bit more moderate" on social issues and I held my nose and voted for him. Kean the Less is a liberal and a doctrinaire pro-abort. I don't vote for liberals and his abortion position makes him utterly anathema.

they tell you to go screw yourself. What gives?

Hey, I'll at least do Kean the Less the courtesy of not openly supporting his Democrat opponent. The same could not be said for those oh so noble moderate "Republicans" who came out for McGreevey against Schundler in 2001.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

That's because the social issues don't mean that much to you. If social issues are a make-or-break thing for you, like they are for me, then it makes a huge difference in who you vote for.

Yeah, I'd say that's probably true. My point is that I don't think social issues should be top priority for anyone - stopping socialism is much more important, thus stopping Menendez is much more important.

I know we don't agree at all on abortion, so I'm not even going to go there.

Hey, I'll at least do Kean the Less the courtesy of not openly supporting his Democrat opponent. The same could not be said for those oh so noble moderate "Republicans" who came out for McGreevey against Schundler in 2001.

I wasn't aware of that. That was a stupid thing to do. Of course, I'm not a "moderate" Republican - I'm moderate on social issues, but very conservative on economic issues. If somebody was moderate on economic issues also, then I could see why they wouldn't support Schundler, but I can't see why they would call themselves Republicans.

[California Patriot]

I'd say that Kennedy is a definite underdog, but not "toast." He's running for an open seat. That's the main thing that gives me hope.

I have a hard time seeing the Michigan race as truly competitive, but I'll keep an eye on it. Hope you're right.

[razzle]

"I'm not voting for him anyway"

I pray there are not more like you - or we'll have Bush impeachment hearings for the next 2 years run by Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid

[Antoninus]

Yeah, I'd say that's probably true. My point is that I don't think social issues should be top priority for anyone.

I disagree with that sentiment with every fibre of my being. A coarse, vicious, self-indulgent society that kills the unborn, the elderly, and the disabled in the nae of convenience is bound for self-destruction and no economic policy on earth can save it.

I know we don't agree at all on abortion, so I'm not even going to go there.

If a politician can't stand up and say: "Baby-killing is wrong" he should not expect my vote. Period.

[Antoninus]

I pray there are not more like you - or we'll have Bush impeachment hearings for the next 2 years run by Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid.

If that happens, too bad. Blame for it can be laid squarely at the feet of a Republican Party which ran from its base on issues that matter and is just completely out to lunch on illegal immigration.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Your prayers have not been answered. There are plenty more conservatives in NJ who feel the same way. Myself among them.

I just can't do it. I'm sorry to let you all down. I can't vote for Kean. I can't in good conscience tell the dozens of friends and family who routinely ask me who they should vote for to vote for Kean either.

I'm writing in Doug Forrester or Rush Limbaugh. A real conservative.

I know what this means. It's a tossup race and if it comes down to a few hundred votes and there is a recount, and then we lose control of the Senate by 51-49 I will feel like an ass. Many of you might already think that I'm an ass and I can't blame you.

But I'm a Reagan/Goldwater conservative and I can't do it. I can't support Kean.

I'm sorry.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Right. I also think Kean is a weak candidate, although this is based on one poor debate performance a few months ago.

________________________________________________________

No, it's not just one debate performance. The guy is just immature and stupid. I reluctantly call him immature because he is exactly my age. He's my peer.

Did you see him on FOX with Hannity defending his call for Hastert to resign? Sean asked him, and I'm paraphrasing here "after you're elected to the Senate, and some other Republican deviant is accused of doing ___________ (fill in the blank), should they call for your ouster even though you had nothing to do with it?"

His answer: "blah, blah, blah, hummina, hummina, hummina" (picture Ralph Kramden caught in bed with Jim McGreevey when Alice walks in).

Then he disrespects the Bing. You all remember the Sopranos episode where Ralphie swings a chain playing gladiator and knocks the bouncer's eye out. Then he kills a defenseless woman with his bare hands outside the Bada Bing. Silvio says to Tony "He disrespected the Bing".

Well, Kean disrespected Rush Limbaugh. You don't disrespect the Bing and get conservative votes.

If he loses, he'll know why. Hey, he's only 38, when he runs again in 4 years, he'll know better.

[razzle]

"I just can't do it. I'm sorry to let you all down"

Well I just hope there are some libs who feel the same way about Menendez. I'd much rather see Republicans control the Senate with the likes of Chaffey, Specter, McCain, Graham, and Kean than have Harry Reid and company vote down our next conservative supreme court nominee. I'm voting for Mike Steele in MD and he has been saying some pretty liberal things also.

[Eric Blair 2084]

razzle, you're a better person than me than.

I said something on another thread that made people curse and yell that I must be a "troll" or a closet Commie/socialist/Dimocrat: maybe Republicans need to lose a chamber of Congress just so that they get a slap in the face and wake up and return to their core principles of limited government.

We had a once in a lifetime opportunity. Control of both houses of Congress and the Oval Office. And what do we have to show for it?

Federal spending has increased 33% from 2001 to 2005, from 1.8 Trillion to 2.4 Trillion. Two times faster than the rate under BJ Clinton. (He was too busy with cigars and interns to come up with any new socialist programs, thankfully) We have the largest expansion of entitlements since the New Deal with the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit.

I'm not the only conservative/economic libertarian who feels this way. Check out Ryan Sager's book "Elephant in the Room" or Slivinski's book "Buck Wild".

If you're interested, I'll post the first chapter here for you.