New Mason Dixon Senate Polls 10/24

Mason Dixon ^

[GOPcomeback]

TN Corker 45 Ford 43 MT Tester 46 Burns 43 MO McCaskill 46 Talent 43 VA Allen 47 Webb 43 NJ Menendez 45 Kean 42 OH Brown 48 DeWine 40

[harveyrabbit]

DeWine, McCain, and the other Rhino repubs who go in and act like dems don't have my sympathies. I don't think I'll vote for my Repub Gov because he's soft on Immigration but my Congressman seems to be serious against Amnesty. I simply can not vote for Repubs who beg my support and then vote with the Dems. Might as well vote for a Dem!

[LS]

They asked me who I was going to vote for, then said, "Did you vote in 2002?" Then they went back to a list of issues, and had me prioritize my most important issue (BTW, again, another stupid aspect of polling---they had "War on Terror" and "Iraq" as SEPARATE, which right away compromised the poll). Then they came back to "Did you vote in 2000?" In other words, they repeatedly, innoculously, got at my voting history and frequency.

And this was about 2-3 weeks before the general election. And it was M-D, as I later learned.

[ken5050]

Only a few more days until Charley Rangel retires from Congress..

[perfect_rovian_storm]

Just by reading the rather obvious difference in the wording.

[LS]

Well, no. Jay Cost is "da man" on this. In 2004, he (a graduate student at U. of Chicago) did an incredible analysis of voter registrations in many key states---NM, MN, OH, PA, MI, WI, NJ, and IO. Remember, this was when the Dems were touting "millions of newly registered voters" who couldn't wait to throw Bush out? Cost, in fact, also looked at population shifts in the red/blue counties, and concluded that all the Dems were doing was replacing voters who were leaving (probably for jobs elsewhere). But Republicans were actually adding to their registrations.

Well, that has a critical impact on whether you are accurately polling or not. If you are assuming that Dems make up 42% (or whatever) and Repubs 38% and indies 20%, then you weight your poll accordingly. But if, in fact, it's more like Dems 33, Republicans 35, and indies 32, then it's a much, much different poll result.

Then, people trot out the pollsters to "prove" that the GOP will lose, and therefore there is no need to vote---another key development when we KNOW that the GOP normally tends to vote at a higher % than the Dems. So it's important not to fall prey to bogus polling.

[tobyhill]

I have no doubt about it.

[LS]

I think I deduced that because I read the poll results a few days later, and it was exactly the poll questions I answered. Both the timing and the questions correlated, but, no, I don't have "pwoof," as Lanny Davis would say.

[ken5050]

IMHO, the really big surprise comes in MD, where Steele wins comfortably..maybe by 6 points, and gets a HUGE % of the black vote. I suspect many blacks are afraid to tell pollsters they're voting for Steele..this will be a BIG story post election..

[carton253]

I don't think poor diddly is over the shellacking given to his Longhorns. This isn't the first negative post he has written about the beloved Buckeyes. I think we need to cheer him up with the stirring Buckeye Battle Cry!!! LOL!

[conservative blonde]

Don't forget 2004, the Rat polls were saying the same things that Rats were going to win big. Did they?

[webheart]

Do you still answer when the little window says, "Unknown Caller"?

This is the most important factor, in my opinion, in the way the internet is changing the world. For one thing, newspapers are losing (not loosing) subscribers, TV news is losing viewers, and caller ID is causing people to not answer their phones. Times are changing, and the media is still acting like this is 1970.

I know that I haven't been polled ever in the last 15 years, but then I never answer the house phone, and I only have a house phone for emergencies. Everyone I need to talk to calls my cell. Pollsters don't call cell phones that I have ever heard of. I also don't watch TV, and I only read the local liberal rag when there is absolutely nothing else to read. I get all my news at FR first (thank you).

This can only get worse for the pollsters with their mid-20th century methods.

[BLS]

"I can't believe that Ohioans would go for Brown"


The dems that would vote dem in any other year, will vote for him. The trouble with Dewine is conservative turnout. Too many conservatives see this as a race between two liberals. IOW, they have no dog in this fight.

[GraniteStateConservative]

In all seriousness, are there any incumbent Democrats in trouble anywhere?

No incumbent Dem senators and only Jim Marshall (GA-8), John Barrow (GA-12), Leonard Boswell (IA-3) and Melissa Bean (IL-8) are at all vulnerable and the odds are high that all 4 will win their re-election races. Marshall is the most vulnerable--representing a Bush district and facing a former 6-term GOP Congressman-- but Marshall is in the Army Ranger Hall of Fame and his voting record isn't hard for him to defend.

[zook]

I have no link. I copied that directly from the front page of this morning's paper.