Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

CA: 45% Boxer, 40% Fiorina (Rasmussen 8/3)

Topics: California , poll

Rasmussen
8/3/10; 750 likely voters, 4% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

California

2010 Senate
45% Boxer (D), 40% Fiorina (R) (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Barbara Boxer: 47 / 46 (chart)
Carly Fiorina: 46 / 42

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 56 / 41 (chart)
Gov. Schwarzennegger: 29 / 69 (chart)

 

Comments
Poll Troll:

Uh huh... Nothing to see here. Moving on...

____________________

Field Marshal:

While this represents a tightening of 2 points since last month, Fiorina can't seem to break any higher than the low 40's. I just don't think there are enough 'right' minded people left in California to elect a real senator instead of the same tired old career politicians.

____________________

ndirish11:

I think the best way to decipher wether the person is going to be a career politician/in it only for themselves only/going to become a Washington insider is to look at the platform they run on. When their platform has nothing incendiary about it, then you need to be suspicious. When you have a wealthy individual running on platform that is so bland and has nothing that distinguishes itself from the GOP or Democratic PArty platform, its pretty clear that these people are just running to get elected to further their career.

The two most honest people in the Congress are Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Their platforms are non-mainstream of their party and that gives them credibility. When someone runs on ideas that aren't really popular or mainstream you at least know that even if you disagree, the candidate is genuine. You know that they aren't sacrificing what they believe and what they stand for just to get elected.

So if your a Democrat in your upcoming primaries, vote for the candidate who has a few non-mainstream ideas. Not the one who has a thousand commercials spitting out "ideas" and "plans" from the DNC issues webpage. Same as if your a Republican. Say the "non-mainstream" candidate wants to eliminate social security and you think that's crazy. Oh well, vote for him. He won't be able to anyway. But at least when you have people with ideas of their own, who think outside the mainstream box you know that they are running on their principles and not what it takes to be elected. They are running not to become a corrupt insider who is in it for himself, they are running to truly help the country.

____________________

Louis:

Field Marshall,
Funny how when the voters agree with you they are right(no pun intended.) but if they disagree with you they just misguided.

____________________

StatyPolly:

Fiorina is wacky. I said so when she was campaigning for McCain in 08. Several goofy comments she ended up having to retract.

Can't imagine the "hair" comment helped her much. GOP had a good chance of taking out Boxer in this environment, had they fielded a decent candidate. As many wins as Palin had/will, this one is heading into the loss column. Still a small chance though.

____________________

Gopherguy:

Fiorina has a small chance, but she is definitely wacky. Also, she was a failure as a corporate officer.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Still rather have a "failed" corporate officer than a "failed" career politician.

____________________

Bukama:

Fiorina may see an upswing, depending on how Boxer comments on the Walker decisions. Remember, large portions of hispanic and black votes approved of Prop 8. Governor Arnold has applauded the decision, but he's not running for anything. If Boxer does the same, Fiorina can run ads saying Boxer applauds activist judges running roughshod over the will of the people. Might pick up socially conservative minority votes.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Okay, Rasmussen, I believe you on Wisconsin and Ohio and Washington, but obviously you have probably overlooked California's Democraphics again. I am willing to bet next ppp poll will have Boxer up by 5.

If this poll is accurate, than I guess Fiorina has concocted some good lies, and has probably changed her web site a bit since last time I looked.

____________________

iVote:

What are you talking about? Boxer is up by 5 here.

____________________

iVote:

What are you talking about? Boxer is up by 5 here.

____________________

iVote:

What are you talking about? Boxer is up by 5 here.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I meant Boxer might really be up by 10 in CA, since Rasmussen doesn't really poll in an accurate manner for CA. The likely voter scenerio may apply in some states, but CA always has a higher turnout in midterms than many other states.

This poll is an indication at the liklihood Boxer would win, and Fiorina won't. Perhaps, Meg Whitman still has a shot but Fiorina is clearly a social conservative.

Allow same-sex couples to marry in Calif and have regular marriage laws apply to them? Yes 51% / No 42% (Field Poll of CA voters, July 2010)

____________________

billwy:

This is the tightest race the repubs just aren't going to win. Washington and Wisconsin I can see...perhaps even Connecticut if Blumenthal's trends continue, but Boxer seems to stay steadily ahead by mid-single digits.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Dems won't lose CT. Mcmahon has no experience and pro wrestling is popular in CT, but they also value experience. If Rob Simmons won, it could be more competitive, but Blumenthal, may have made a mistake of exagerating his vietnam experience, but so did Kirk in IL. I think Kirk could actually win.

WI and Wash will be nailbiters, but if the GOP pulls upsets, I think they would be bigger than Scott Brown's victory since he had a mediocre opponent. Defeating an incumbent who is high profile like Feingold is not easy.

____________________

Obama 2012:

CA, WA, WI & CT are all progressive states.
In CA, a GOP senator has won only once in the last 40 years - it is not going to happen in 2010. Whitman is perceived as another Arnold, so she has a chance. However, Brown has never lost a statewide race in CA.
WA races are always close, but King County usually determines the election. I would never bet against Patty Murray. Rossi always runs a close race, only to choke at the end (even Gregoire, who is an unpopular Governor beat Rossi twice).
Feingold always runs in close elections and always wins; it's hard to buy an election in WI & Feingold is respected for his independence.
In CT, Blumenthal had such a huge lead in the polls it is only natural that it would shrink; he is still way too popular to lose the election. The only reason Lieberman won in CT is because he is a true Dem - look at his voting record under Obama.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR