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.
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.