Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

CT-Sen: 50% Blumenthal (D), 45% McMahon (R) (Rasmussen 9/26)

Topics: Connecticut , poll

Rasmussen
9/26/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Connecticut

2010 Senate
50% Blumenthal (D), 45% McMahon (R) (chart)

 

Comments
Farleftandproud:

I guess this close race in CT is the price you pay for being misleading about your war experience. I do believe that Blumenthal will pull this out, but it clearly was a bad mistake on his part. If he had not lied those times he would probably be about 15 points ahead. I guess Obama will have to not stump for Blumenthal, since he will likely be doing everything to help Alexi defeat the other liar in IL. Perhaps Bill Clinton should stump for Blumenthal instead.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

It would stink to have two Republican senators in CT; having one is bad enough. It is the governors race that means a lot because there is the hope, that CT, like VT could move forward in implementing a full single payer system. CT may be a wealthy state, but also an expensive one, and health costs are ridiculously high.

For those who may live in a state like TX or KY you have to realize that health care costs are much lower than CT and NY and for a lower-middle class or working class person in CT, Mass or NY they pay a lot more than they would in a state where rent and housing is lower.

____________________

Field Marshal:

4 point move towards McMahon since the last Ras poll on the race.

____________________

Paleo:

Being ahead by 50-45 with less than 5% undecided is not the worst position to be in.

____________________

Field Marshal:

I would say Bluimenthal is still going to win but McMahon has significant momentum with her.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

In line with that earlier Quinn Poll. It's gonna be close, but McMahon hasn't gotten higher than 45%, even at the height of the Vietnam comments. If I has to guess, it would be 47%-53% in the end for Blumenthal.

____________________

StatyPolly:

/polls/ct/10-ct-sen-ge-mvb.html


Good chart though. If it gets just a couple points closer in polls, it'll be a toss up and anything could happen on election day.

____________________

StatyPolly:
____________________

Field Marshal:

Looks like Lazio is dropping out of the NY gov race. That's good for Palodino.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ Staty

Always with the threadjack! Kidding.

Eh, the Chronical hasn't been a good newspaper for years. Not great news for Boxer, though.

It'll be interesting to see who the Bee (still a good paper) and the Merc (a sad shadow of it's formerself) endorse. If anyone at all.

____________________

StatyPolly:

Good for Lazio for not making a fool of himself a la Murkowski.

____________________

StatyPolly:

Boxer has polled higher on job approval than favorability a couple of times recently. Fairly rare occurrence in political polling. I argued that as a legislator, all she has to do is vote in line with her constituency to get a good job approval, which she has. But fewer people like her personally.

____________________

Cederico:

I think the close polls in Senate races like Connecticut, West Virginia and California is actually going to assist Democrats in holding them.

Before these closer numbers DEMS were likely to take these seats for granted because the states were heavily Democratic or the DEM candidate was overwhelmingly popular. With much more competitive races, Boxer, Manchin and Blumenthal are all having to work extra hard and take nothing for granted.

The DSCC and other Democratic aligned groups are up in each state working hard to promote the Democrats in the races and to pound the GOP alternatives. Their hard work is paying off in that despite Obama being toxic in WV..Manchin still leads, despite McMahon spending upwards of 50 million in CT Blumenthal still leads and despite Boxer having bad approval ratings she still leads in CA.

And the closer numbers also serve to stir up the Democratic voters in each state. If they think there is a chance to lose they are far more likely in my opinion to show up to make sure it doesn't happen.

____________________

ndirish11:

I'm on the ground in CT and if I had to make a bet, Linda is gonna win. Her yard signs are everywhere. Blumenthal's campaign doesn't even have yard signs available. She is running 4 commercials for everyone of his. She is on the radio non-stop.

I was a strong Peter Schiff supporter and while I suspect Linda is just another Neo-Con washington insider, I will still have to vote for her and pray that she isn't.

But right now, Linda has all the momentum. Blumenthal has nada.

____________________

Von Wallenstein:

@ FLAPjack...I thought Lieberman caucused with the Dems and voted for Reid for majority leader...

____________________

StatyPolly:

Thanks for the field report, ndirish. Sounds good. Linda is one tough-minded broad, and should she win, at least she won't be intimidated by anyone.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

On the ground in TX, Bill White signs are everywhere, especially in SA/Austin.

I don't think signs are a particularly good indicator, since the people that swing elections are likely not the kind of people that put out signs.

____________________

JSK2180:

I live in Austin and see no signs from either candidate.

____________________

ndirish11:

JSK2180

I don't know where Austin is, but it makes sense you wouldn't see Blumenthal signs, since he doesn't have any. As far as Linda signs? I'm not sure. Around the area of Suffield, Enfield, East Granby, Windsor Locks, and Windsor, I see them all the time.

____________________

JSK2180:

I was responding to Aaron about Texas.

____________________

Ryan:

FLAP: "For those who may live in a state like TX or KY you have to realize that health care costs are much lower than CT and NY and for a lower-middle class or working class person in CT, Mass or NY they pay a lot more than they would in a state where rent and housing is lower."

And people of TX and KY can thank their conservative state gov'ts for that by not putting so many requirements on them. If you want to cut costs in CT and NY, just open up the health insurers across state lines, then the CT and NY folks could get the healthcare availible in TX and KY, if they so chose.

____________________

Dave:

I can report there are no Blumenthal signs here in Wisconsin either.

Take that for what you will. :-)

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I was just joking about Joe Lieberman being a Republican. I mean in many ways he might as well be, even though he caucuses with the Democrats.


"Cederico:
I think the close polls in Senate races like Connecticut, West Virginia and California is actually going to assist Democrats in holding them.

Before these closer numbers DEMS were likely to take these seats for granted because the states were heavily Democratic or the DEM candidate was overwhelmingly popular. With much more competitive races, Boxer, Manchin and Blumenthal are all having to work extra hard and take nothing for granted.

The DSCC and other Democratic aligned groups are up in each state working hard to promote the Democrats in the races and to pound the GOP alternatives. Their hard work is paying off in that despite Obama being toxic in WV..Manchin still leads, despite McMahon spending upwards of 50 million in CT Blumenthal still leads and despite Boxer having bad approval ratings she still leads in CA."

Blumenthal is probably doing better than this poll shows, and Mcmahon won't have the numbers on election day to win. Now WV is a completely different story; it is in the south, and Obama's approval is terrible. CT has strong turnout, and it is much greater than many of the other states like PA or Missouri, where I think that turnout just isn't as strong.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

A registered Democrat in KY or WV is not like a registered Democrat in CT or CA. Many of those border states in the south are hard to poll because the Dems are sometimes so conservative, they will vote overwhelmingly for a Democratic governor and local officials yet, send a Republican to washington.

____________________

ndirish11:

I thought Austin might of been some small town in CT somewhere haha. My bad.

____________________

Cederico:

True FarLeft,

That's why Manchin is struggling and Conway has to work so hard. The key for both is not to be identified as Washington DEMS. I think that is one reason Manchin came out today talking about repealing part of the new healthcare reform law...Raese and the NRSC are killing him by attacking him for supporting the new healthcare reform package.

____________________

seg:

Cederico:
(1) I agree with you. I think it would be great if EVERY dem were behind in the polls right now. That way national folks would not be confused about who to send Obama and SEIU to support. They could send both to ALL candidates. Howard Dean advocated a national campaign in 2008, after all.

(2) "The key for both is not to be identified as Washington DEMS. .. repealing part of the new healthcare reform law...Raese and the NRSC are killing him by attacking him for supporting the new healthcare reform package."

Shouldn't dems be proud of being libs, backing health care reform and the stimulus? I am so confused. I mean, we all know they will vote for lib bills if they are elected. Why not be honest about it? I thought only reps were lying, conniving SOBs?

Dems are smart to pretend to be something they are not. Why are those awful reps so clear about what they believe? I don't recall ever seeing conservatives pretending to be moderates, much less liberals. They proudly call themselves "Conservative." It is such a mystery!

Is it possible that (gasp!), libs/progs ideas are not popular with the voters ? Nah! It can't be that!

Sorry for the snark. You made too inviting a target to resist.

PS Blumenthal will lose. He deserves to lose because he really is a lying, conniving SOB. From what I have seen, McMahon will be a better than average senator, which admittedly is a really low bar.


____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"live in Austin and see no signs from either candidate."

I don't know where you live, but I drive from the south on 183 to get to work and I see them everyday. I live outside of the city and there are 4 White signs within a 2 block radius of my place.

But my larger point was that the kind of people that put up yard signs are probably partisans that vote the same way year after year. So # of signs is just more indicative of a republican/democratic neighborhood than anything else.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"I don't recall ever seeing conservatives pretending to be moderates, much less liberals. They proudly call themselves "Conservative." It is such a mystery!"

This used not to be the case several decades ago. In the 1950s, republicans worked hard to not be identified with "conservatives." Conservatives were extremists like Robert Taft. Of course they still had remnants of their progressive roots at that time, quickly fading.

If you ask me, current republicans have fallen far from the tree, and basically have become what democrats used to be. Republicans like George Frisbie Hoar once stood up for individual rights when it wasn't popular to do so, opposing the Chinese Exclusion Act and was an early advocate of indpendence for the Phillippines.

____________________



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