Posted on 08/22/2012 12:20:32 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
There's no way that Republicans can lose a Senate race in Missouri while winning two in Massachusetts and Connecticut ... right? Would Spock have to wear a goatee in that universe? Rasmussen’s new poll in the Nutmeg State shows Republican nominee Linda McMahon out to a slight lead over Democratic nominee Chris Murphy in their first look at the general election race for Joe Lieberman's US Senate seat:
Former wrestling executive Linda McMahon holds a narrow lead over Democratic Congressman Chris Murphy in Rasmussen Reports’ first look at Connecticut’s U.S. Senate race.
A new telephone survey of Likely Voters in Connecticut shows McMahon with 49% of the vote to Murphy’s 46%. One percent (1%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.
McMahon will surely make Murphy's support for ObamaCare a big issue in the election, but Rasmussen sees that as more of a push:
Murphy voted in favor of President Obama’s health care reform law and has publicly stated that the law will save money on Medicare. When it comes to the future of Medicare, 44% of Connecticut voters are scared more by the president’s health care law than the reform proposal by Mitt Romney’s running mate Paul Ryan. But just as many (43%) say they are more scared of Ryan’s proposal on Medicare. Connecticut voters are more evenly divided on the question than voters are nationwide.
Eighty percent (80%) of Connecticut voters who fear the health care law’s impact on Medicare more support McMahon. Murphy is backed by 77% of those who fear Ryan’s plan for Medicare more.
This can’t be right, can it? Rasmussen must be using a Republican-friendly sample, people will assume … but they’d be wrong. In fact, the sample D/R/I (46/32/22) more closely resembles the 2008 Democratic wave exit polls (43/27/31) than the 2010 exit polls (39/28/33) for Connecticut. Remember that Republicans lost the Senate seat in 2010 even with the narrower gap in turnout, too. Murphy has a seven-point lead among women, which Rasmussen oversamples (56/44) in comparison to 2008 (53/47) and 2010 (49/51). The poll sample, if anything, might be tilted a little in Murphy’s favor.
So how does McMahon get her lead? She has a 24-point margin among independents, 55/31, for one thing. McMahon only trails by nine among voters under 40 (40/49), but gets a majority of the other two age demos, including an 18-point lead among seniors. Both candidates are seen favorably by voters, but McMahon’s 54/43 is slightly better than Murphy’s 50/41. Among independents, though, McMahon again far outpaces Murphy, with a 57/36 compared to Murphy’s 38/46 — and only 6% of independents view Murphy “very favorably,” as opposed to 23% for McMahon.
The big difference, besides the obvious advantage among independents, is probably the economy. Democrats will be on defense, especially Murphy, who currently has a seat in the House. Only 5% of voters rate the economy as “good,” with no one rating it excellent. A majority of 57% rate it “poor,” and another 37% only rate it “fair.” That will not help an incumbent, not even in Connecticut.
If McMahon can maintain her advantage over Murphy, the GOP may get an unexpected pickup to make up for the now-expected loss in Missouri. It might also force Obama to spend some resources to make sure McMahon doesn’t drive enough turnout to have Connecticut voters thinking about change at the very top of the ticket, too.
In 2010 she ran against a far superior opponent, one that was well known and had solid approval all throughout the state. Murphy’s not close to Blumenthal as a candidate.
I am surprised big time by this poll, my feeling has been that Linda M had little chance. Obviously future polls will reveal whether or not it’s a fluke.
But if this race is winnable it would nice to win it.
And the NRSC will put money in if it really is, as they should.
And Blumenthal I’m wouldn’t necessarily say was “worse” than Murphy. He was quite popular but he had a scandal crop up.
I’ve noticed a lot of undecideds in the Indiana race, people that are clearly going for Romney in the POTUS race. It’s hard for me to envision them breaking for the rat Donnelly.
Lugar RINO voters?
These numbers will no hold. Every election we see good numbers for the GOP from NJ, Conn, Penn, and MI in the run-up...but by late October the numbers flip to the dems. Same old same old every cycle.
The rats have got to be freaked out from coast to coast. I don’t know if there’s a phrase for “anti-coattails”, but that’s exactly what they are facing. Normal, taxpaying, traditional American families are so disgusted by the African communist “food stamp president” they will crawl through broken glass to vote him OUT. And a lot of rats are going with him, and they know it.
Lay down with dogs...
I don’t think it’s Hoosier RINO voters; we have an independent streak of not following long coat tails. When Mitch Daniels ran for governor 4 years ago, he slaughtered his opponent. But 0bama won Indiana.
I think it’s more reflective of Donnelly running a good campaign. He’s a total DNC robot, but he’s hiding it by running like a blue dog and making effective attacks on Mourdock. Mourdock is doing some radio spots but no TV in the Indy market. He needs to get his a$$ in gear and go sell himself.
You know, I’m apprehensive myself re: that CT poll, but I’m not ready to just throw it put. There’s something going on in CT that may signal it being at least as semi-competitive as in 2004 (when Kerry beat GW Bush by 54%-44%—the same as in CA), and perhaps as competitive as in 1992 (when Clinton beat GHW Bush by 42%-36%, but Bush likely would have won by a whisker had Perot not been on the ballot) or even 1988 (when GHW Bush beat Dukakis by 52%-47%). Obama is running TV commercials (or least was fairly recently) in Hartford, a market that reached only CT and Western MA—MA is far safer Dem turf than CT, so Obama must be at least mildly concerned about CT. We should keep an eye on CT. Even if Obama ends up winning it (as I am fairly confident he will), a competitive race in CT would signal a likely Romney victory in NH, PA and maybe NJ.
As for the Senate race itself, my understanding is that McMahon’s TV ads about how Chris Murphy was absent from almost 80% of his committee meetings for financial oversight committees have been very effective. The ending really packs a wallop: Would you pay a worker $170,000 a year if he doesn’t show up for meetings? Good stuff.
No, in a Van Dyke, the mustache and chin-beard don’t connect; Spock’s connected (clearly, from that picture, on the right side of the face, and presumably also on the left side), so it’s a goatee.
I had been reading that Linda McMahon has improved as a candidate, but this is astonishing. I’ll need to see other polls, as this could simply be a statistical glitch.
I’m shocked his not on TV yet, it’s time to get into gear.
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.