Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

DE: 50% Coons, 34% O'Donnell (PPP 9/11-12)

Topics: Delaware , poll


Public Policy Polling (D)
9/11-12/10; 958 likely voters, 3.2% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release)

Delaware

2010 Senate
50% Coons (D), 34% O'Donnell (R) (chart)
45% Castle (R), 35% Coons (D)* (chart)

*Christine O'Donnell won the Republican primary last night

Favorable / Unfavorable
Mike Castle: 44 / 40
Chris Coons: 31 / 33
Christine O'Donnell: 29 / 50

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 46 / 48 (chart)
Sen. Carper: 45 / 36 (chart)
Sen. Kaufman: 38 / 33 (chart)
Gov. Markell: 50 / 32 (chart)

 

Comments
Paleo:

O'Donnell's win pretty much guarantees Democratic control of the senate (whatever that's worth). Assuming Democrats don't win any Republican seats, and that West Virginia and CT stay Democratic, Republicans would have to win all 10 of the remaining contested seats to get to 51. A tall order.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

Yeeehaw! But Castle would have had a hard time too, especially after tarnishing his brand.

Good lord! - look at those negatives.

____________________

Huda:

Christine O'Donnell: 29 / 50

LOL.....well Coons better not sit on his arse and get on with campaigning to make sure his victory is guaranteed.

____________________

Field Marshal:

While i think Castle would have been just another RINO in the senate (he was voted least conservative republican in the house), the seat would have been at least red, and not blue. Instead, we'll have another lawyer career politician who will vote lock-step with Reid (if re-elected and the president). The more i heard of Castle's positions, the less i cared if he won or not.

____________________

dpearl:

"O'Donnell's win pretty much guarantees Democratic control of the senate (whatever that's worth)."

Paleo: There are few guarantees in life and even fewer in politics. Overall chances of Republican control of the senate will definitely go down but ...
Remember that this is a pre-primary poll and Ms. O'Donnell will get a boost due to her victory and the natural movement toward her of Republicans previously for Castle. In fact, Nate Silver mentioned in a recent column that he gives her a 17% chance of winning.

____________________

Bukama:

It's still possible that Nelson of Nebraska might switch parties if it would give Republicans control, but clearly, what was a long shot is now a longer shot. Still, the likelihood is the Senate will flip in 2012, unless there is a remarkable turn around in the economy by the summer of that year.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Reps chances of the senate were very low to begin with in 2010. In all likelihood, they will gain it in 2012 with numerous reddish state Dem senators up for election. (think Nelson, Tester, Baucus, conrad and Brown). In fact, of the 33 senators up for election in 2012, 23 are dems.

I'm still ambivalent to the Reps taking the house. Their chances in 2012 for the white house would be significantly better if they don't. However, it would be great for the country and the stock market if they do so its a tossup.

____________________

Paleo:

"Remember that this is a pre-primary poll and Ms. O'Donnell will get a boost due to her victory and the natural movement toward her of Republicans previously for Castle."

PPP indicated that more Castle voters chose Coons than O'Donnell. And O'Donnell is not a new face in Delaware. She ran for senate two years ago and got 34%. Maybe she'll get 44% this time, or 48%. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win. Even Republicans concede this.

Having said that, I'm sure Rasmussen will come out with a poll in the next day or two showing her nearly tied with Coons.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

O'Donnell to the GOP is like Alvin Greene to the SC Democrats. I don't know if she will do that bad.

It is almost like the Delaware GOP secretely knew O'Donnell wouldn't have a chance, and didn't want the GOP to waste money on a good man like Castle, who would have been a moderate voice in the party.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Having said that, I'm sure Rasmussen will come out with a poll in the next day or two showing her nearly tied with Coons.

Given that this poll was done before the primary, i would expect to see a new poll out in the next few days showing it much closer than 16 points, probably high single digits. It won't last, IMO.

____________________

lat:

Great job GOP! This woman takes the cake! I did not think it was possible to be to the right of Sharron Angle, but this nut O'Donnell even says that masturbation is part of abstinence and needs to be curtailed (granted it was a 14 year old interview, but still...). Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

____________________

Cederico:

Castle is not endorsing her and many of his supporters cannot stomach the idea of voting for her. This greatly increases Coons chances to win this seat.

I doubt Coons will sit on his laurels. He already was out with statements complimenting Castle (wooing his supporters). He has been very busy campaigning and raising money...he had 1 million in the bank after the last quarter.

____________________

HookedOnPolls:

Actually for me the most interesting stat here is Obama's disapproval; very interesting.

____________________

melvin:

This is a message to Senator Snow,and Senator Collins of Maine,please leave the Republican party,because you guys will not be nominated by these right-wing nuts the next go around...The only chance you guys have would be joining the Democratic party immediately,because only racist right-wingers vote in primaries,which is very bad news for the Moderate Republicans.

____________________

CHRIS MERKEY:

Not to mention nrsc is not going to give her any money.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

When PPP says it, I believe it! At the moment I have no reason(s) to believe any other pollster but we live to see.

____________________

StatyPolly:

Hooked, another interesting stat is Coons' disapproval. And that's before anyone campaigned against him.

Dumb move by PPP to release this after the votes are counted.

____________________

melvin:

The Republican primarey voters have spoken,they dont want any Moderates,or Center-Right Politicans in the Republican party anymore...This gop party is being overtaken by right-wing crazies,who only wants to take this Country back 145 years...Castle was punishhed,because he supported one of the Democrats bill a few years ago.

____________________

Field Marshal:

If Snowe and Collins moved to the Democratic party, they would quickly be destroyed by the radical wing of it and the wingnuts constituents in it. Look at what they have done to Lieberman, Nelson, and Bayh. All are gone or will be by 2012. In fact, there are less moderates in the Dem party- the majority party- than in the minority Rep.

____________________

StatyPolly:

Based on the timing and results of this poll, O'Donnell definitely has a reasonable shot here. It's up to the quality of the two campaigns now.

____________________

melvin:

FM: The Democrats didn't do anything to,Nelson,or Bayh,they did it to themselves..The Democrats loved Bayh,but he just quit on the Democratic party...Nelson this past year acted like a right-winger,and i admit the Democrats do hate Lieberman with a passion,because he lost in the primary,but refused to accept defeat...This Republican party today is so far to the right,its now scaring the hell out of Karl Rove.

____________________

Field Marshal:

The Democrats didn't do anything to,Nelson,or Bayh,they did it to themselves.

Sure. Blame it on them and not the nuttiness of the democratic party. The democratic party today is so far to the left its now scaring the hell out of Mao Zedong!

____________________

melvin:

Its going to be very interesting to see what Romney,Huckabee,Pawlenty,and Daniels do in 2012,because 70% of the GOP voters in the Primaries are Right-Wingers...Am predicting you are going to see those idiots go so far to the right,that they're moma wont recognize them anymore,because they know that's the only way they're going to win votes in the Primaries in 2012,and have at least a slight chance of beating your majesty Sarah Palin.

____________________

cmbat:

The Democratic party today is far too center-based and not nearly left enough, and the idea that there are more moderates in the Republican party only proves that you are far less knowledgeable than I gave you credit for initially. There were about 2 moderates left and the Tea Party will take care of that.

I've said since the start that the big loser of the 2010 elections will be the Tea Party. They may win in Alaska and Kentucky (don't take that last one for granted), but when they lose in Delaware and Nevada and Colorado (yes, Colorado), the reality will hit the fan. They have broken the Republican party brand with the final nail in the coffin. This will lead to a great schism that will guarantee that Obama wins again in 2012 and the Democrats will likely retain a more moderate control of the Congress for a while to come (they were never going to hold the record numbers that they had this time, the country doesn't work like that).

After this election, Senate will be:

Dems 55 (raised it one from what I have been saying because of Delaware)
Reps 43
Indies 2 (Sanders and Lieberdoofus)

Also, the Republicans will walk themselves into a trap on taxes in the next three weeks and Dems will retain the House. That puts the hard work (midterms) behind them and they can start prepping for where they will have the advantage again, 2012.

The Republicans are stuck now on this tax thing. After two years of just voting against every bill that the Dems and Obama put up to define themselves as the Party of No, they are now forced to vote for the Democratic/Obama middle class tax cuts to replace the expiring Bush ones or vote against those tax cuts for 98% of America because it doesn't include the other 2%. Either one is a loser for the Reps. Game over.

____________________

melvin:

This right-wing Republican party is now Sarah Palin's party,that was proven lastnight...A Sarah Palin endorsement is worth more then gold right now to the idiots in the Republican party..Can one of you fair minded Republicans tell me how in the hell do the right-wingers even think a solid Blue State like Delaware is going to elect a nut case like O'Donnell,who lost by 35% to Biden in 2008?

____________________

melvin:

The PPP Dailey Kos poll has been right on target,so now we know what pollster is 100% accurate.

____________________

Field Marshal:

The Democratic party today is far too center-based and not nearly left enough, and the idea that there are more moderates in the Republican party only proves that you are far less knowledgeable than I gave you credit for initially. There were about 2 moderates left and the Tea Party will take care of that.

The fact that you think the Democratic party is too center-based demonstrates the lack of any intelligible comments you may further have on this site. All i have to do is look at your senate and house predictions for further proof of that.

____________________

Dave:

I think this will wind up a little closer, as some- certainly not all, but some- Castle voters eventually come around to O'Donnell.

I guess it sucks for the GOP in the short term, but my view on it is this: A pro-abortion, pro cap and trade, DISCLOSE Act co-sponsor, with a lifetime ACU rating of around 50 lost last night. I'm supposed to be sad about this because he had an "R" next to his name?

____________________

cmbat:

Yes Dave, you are because you need 51 people with those R's to control committees and start your witch hunt.

____________________

John1:

@cmbat

How can you possibly come to the conclusion that the democratic party is too centrist? This party hasn't been this far-left since FDR and I would say its much farther left than it was during Johnson's administration. You senate projections are also way off. You think the Republicans will only pick up 2 seats? Which 2 if you wouldn't mind enlightening us with seemingly endless wisdom?

____________________

Bob in SJ:

O'Donnell will not win. The ads write themselves - Castle reacted too late, and in the wrong way. I want to see the NRSC throw money at this one, because it will mean less money somewhere else.

Any one who thinks the Republicans flip this seat is as delusional as someone who thinks that the Dems will hold the North Dakota seat.

____________________

Dave:

Yes cmbat, that's true. However, going by your predictions for the Senate, which I assume are totally accurate. The Republicans will only win 43 seats. Does 44 really make a difference?

____________________

Field Marshal:

The house is more important to win since the filibuster essentially means the democrats actually have to compromise on issues if they control less than 60 seats. This maybe hard for them to do given that its been 2 years since they've tried it but they'll have to if they want to pass legislation.

____________________

Field Marshal:

If the GOP is on the losing side of the tax issue then why is it the Dems who are postponing the vote on the issue until after the elections?

____________________

Paleo:

FM is right about that. Now that the Republicans have made 60 votes a prerequisite for passing anything of consequence, control of the senate is not as important. Control of the House is because there's no filibuster, and no arcane rules empowering the minority.

"The Democratic party today is far too center-based and not nearly left enough . . . . There were about 2 moderates left and the Tea Party will take care of that."

Exactly right.

____________________

melvin:

The GOP is only going to win 28 seats,because 18 of the seats the GOP is trying to win saw the Democrats win those seats by an average of 20%,and 8 more Democrats went unchallenged,but RCP has the GOP winning 24 of those 26 seats,which is so unbelievable.

____________________

MikeyA:

LOL I love cmbat's prediction. LOL When every major pundit out there is saying that the Republicans will pick up at least 4 seats and the majority are saying a 8 seat gain is very possible cmbat is predicting a GOP gain of only 2.

LOL it's going to be a long November 3rd for him.

____________________

MikeyA:

LOL, and O'Donnell's website just cashed because of too many donors now getting on to give her $$.

HA did I predict it in the other thread last night or what. Dems celebrating a GOP primary doesn't spell good things for them. (I said the same thing two years ago when Repubs were excited that Hilary didn't win the Dem nomination)

____________________

Field Marshal:

"The Democratic party today is far too center-based and not nearly left enough . . . . There were about 2 moderates left and the Tea Party will take care of that."

Exactly right.

What are the two moderates in your opinion? You get to three really easy simply staying in the New England. (Snowe, Collins, and Brown).

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ MikeyA

All the money in the world won't help her. She's a fraud, not conservative, and a nut. The press is goign to have a feild day with all of the crap she'd spouted over the last 15 years. But please, throw your money away.

____________________

cmbat:

The only group that hasn't compromised is the Republicans.

@John1 - Because the Democrats aren't doing what they should be doing and what a more left-of-center Democratic party should be doing...raising the tax base to balance the budget against the costs of Bush wars, his useless tax cuts that cost this country jobs, and the TARP program that fell out of his administrations lack of regulatory oversight on the financial sector. Those are the burdens that our children will suffer from.

What a left-of-center Democratic party would be doing is correcting this by ending the wars (to drop that cost), raising taxes (to get the budget back in balance), and forcing Wall Street to pay more heavily for their transgressions.

In reality, the last two years of Democratic controlled House with Obama's backing and the Democratic almost-controlled (you need 60) Senate have brought us mostly the opposite. Sure, we're heading out of Iraq, but not enough. We stepped it up in Afghanistan, which has more costs. We didn't tax the banks enough, although more of TARP will be repaid than people are acknowledging, and taxes haven't gone up at all (should be on the wealthy, not the middle and lower class). Obama has consistently wasted time including too much of the Republican playbook in his ideas and not gotten a single vote for it and we're in worse shape because of it. They should should have recognized from the start that this wasn't the same Republican Party from the Clinton days where there were moderates that would come to the table and trade off ideas to get things passed.

How anyone says that an administration that has favored Wall Street and corporate America over actual people and the middle class is "left of center" just shows how much we've dialed down public education spending in this country.

@Dave - No it doesn't make a difference to me, but it should to you...was the point.

This reminds me of two years ago when I was active on this thread and the right wingers kept talking about how Obama would lose and the country was too right of center to elect a Democratic Congress. I disagreed then and almost nailed my electoral and Senate predictions.

Someone asked where I came up with 55 seats for the Dems. I'll give you the short version instead of walking you through race-by-race. Go to Nate Silver's blog and look at his current Senate predictions. He has the Democrats with 52 seats. If you look at his line-by-lines, here's where I think the difference will be. I think the Democrats will also win three out of these four: Delaware (almost certain now), Washington (looking more likely), Illinois, and Colorado. That's my 55. Could be 56, and if Rand Paul actually gets out there and talks some more, could be 57. And don't get me started on NH and Alaska, where weird things could still happen, but the Republicans are currently predicted in those numbers as getting those seats.

The Democrats still hold the money edge, and the campaign really starts right now for the hearts and minds of the base. The difference is, the Republican base has already been energized, it's in the poll numbers, there's no more upside there, and the split is occurring. Even if a Tea Party candidate isn't in the state, the more O'Donnell's that are at the headline talking, the more the independents will be scared away from the party.

Anyway, a discussion is a discussion, everyone gets to be right and wrong. I'd rather hear a good discussion than waste time on the other junk.

____________________

Field Marshal:

A quote from Evan Bayh made TODAY:

"When you get here, the pressure by the two caucuses to kind of go along with 'the team' is pretty constant. And it's gotten more so over the years... Any deviancy from party orthodoxy is viewed as an act of betrayal or a lack of moral fiber."

-- Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN)


Seems like he got out because the dems became a fringe-far-left nutty party to me. But yeah, he did it to himself by not drinking the Kool-aid.

____________________

Bigmike:

Just want to make sure I understand some things.

It's OK for the Dems to toss out the Blue Dogs but not OK for the GOP to get rid of RINO's?

What witch hunt? I don't recall anyone being accused of being a witch?

@Dave

"A pro-abortion, pro cap and trade, DISCLOSE Act co-sponsor, with a lifetime ACU rating of around 50 lost last night. I'm supposed to be sad about this because he had an "R" next to his name?"

Well said!

@Melvin

"RCP has the GOP winning 24 of those 26 seats,which is so unbelievable."

Why is it unbelievable? Maybe you should look at what the polls are telling us. And 3 years ago if you said a left wing yankee would get elected Pres I would have said that was unbelievable. Live and learn I guess.

____________________

Xenobion:

This time its not a tea bag joke (see link), but Republicans are drilling themselves back into the values that got voters to oust them. Social Conservatives need not apply. Castle would have at least been a fiscal conservative. The Republicans cannibalize their own young and while you can have a whacko here and there, you really can't have a party full of them to get back control of the legislature.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzHcqcXo_NA

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ BigMike,

Please, please purge all of your RINOs. Collins looks like a good target, as does Graham. It'll make it easier for the Dems to win some seats.

All kidding aside, each party should do exacly what it wants, and each party's activists should be able to dictate what the party does.

____________________

Field Marshal:

It's OK for the Dems to toss out the Blue Dogs but not OK for the GOP to get rid of RINO's?

THANK YOU BIGMIKE! I've been trying to show them the stupidity of their hypocrisy for weeks now but as cmbat said in his post, public education has been dialed down significantly. We can all thank the teachers unions for that.

____________________

cmbat:

@ Field Marshall -

"What are the two moderates in your opinion? You get to three really easy simply staying in the New England. (Snowe, Collins, and Brown)."

When I say "There were about 2 moderates left and the Tea Party will take care of that."

That, my friend, is what is called "hyperbole." The key word to tip you off should have been the use of "about."

____________________

Paleo:

Evan Bayh? Good riddance.

I'm old enough to remember when there were actual liberals in the Republican party. Javits, Case, Weicker, Brooke, among others. Those days are long gone.

____________________

melvin:

cmbat: I agree with you 100%,Obama in the Democrats should have cut the defense bill to 400 billion,and Obama should have ended the Iraq war immediately,and the Bush tax-cuts ASAP,because those 3 acts alone would have saved this country over 900 billion dollars in his 1st year...Obama caved in to the blue-dogs,and the Republican party,that's why the economy is still having a tough time getting out the mess the Republican party caused doing the Bush wing nuts years.

____________________

cmbat:

@Field Marshall -

"It's OK for the Dems to toss out the Blue Dogs but not OK for the GOP to get rid of RINO's?

THANK YOU BIGMIKE!"

Actually, I agree with this logic up to a certain point. Either party has the right to try to take out whomever they want, that's what elections are for and why this is such a great Democracy. The only thing that matters in the end is that we all respect the system and abide by the fact that the winners get to dictate policy until they get voted out. If you don't believe that, then you don't believe in the American model (I'm not saying you do or don't, I'm just saying in general).

Here's the difference. When Dubya was elected, I knew we were in for a rough haul. I didn't agree with the invasion of Iraq from the start, but I didn't stop paying my taxes just because some of that money would go to the war. I believe in American Democracy first, and if that's what people vote into office, I have to be respectful and do my part until someone else gets in. The difference is that I see a lot more out of the right-wing saying that they don't want to contribute their part to the country when it doesn't go their way, and that's un-American, period.

But regarding the Blue Dogs and RINOs, while I agree with your general point, the only point that I have made about this is that the Blue Dogs are an extremely conservative slice of the Democrats that nationally represent a very small percentage of the Party's belief system. When it comes to the RINOs versus the Tea Party, it's really the other way around. Although the Tea Party can win in places like Alaska and Kentucky, which are just that far to the right, and they can win in Delaware where the Senate primary was a total of 45,000 votes, that doesn't mean that Republican party nationally likes that.

Or let me state it this way. If you poll Democrats nationally, I think more of them agree with someone like Harry Reid more than Blanche Lincoln. If you poll the Republicans nationally, I think more of them agree with a Castle over an O'Donnell. And certainly, the independents, which, on average are even MORE between the two parties, aren't going to be comfortable with the far right. That's just the mathematical reality of how the pendulum works. So when the extreme of a party of a party (not the middle of the party) starts knocking out the middle too much, it inevitably causes a schism in the party. And that's my main point. These Tea Party wins are bad for Republican chances at taking the Senate, they will ultimately hurt the Tea Party, and they will also be part of the schism that splits the Republicans in 2012.

I'm sure you'll find a reason to disagree, but that's my two cents.

As for the Senate side of the election coming up, which is really more interesting to me than the House, I think if it were today, the Democrats would win 52-53 seats. But it isn't today, and I think the Democratic upside from here forward is better than the Republicans, just like it was at this time 2 years ago. The Republicans already dominate the enthusiasm gap. They can't take that any further, but even losing 2 points nationally in the end swings it back in tight races for the Democrats. Obviously, anything can still happen. This whole thing could still come down to some event or comment that hasn't even happened yet, and that's fine. Makes it exciting. But until I see that game changer, I'm sticking with my predictions because it's fun to see.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"This party hasn't been this far-left since FDR and I would say its much farther left than it was during Johnson's administration."

FDR and LBJ both advocated gov't direct jobs and training programs. Ie: WPA or CCC under FDR or job corps under LBJ. That is FAR more liberal than anything Obama has done. All Obama has done is somewhat increase aspects of the government that were already there to begin with (although he has cut some, ie: space program). The growth in spending is almost all mandatory spending from social security, medicare, and unemployment insurance - FDR and LBJ initiatives. Obama has increased certain federal departments and basically beefed up most programs from Bush levels. He has not initiated much that is new.

Obama and most of the dems are corporatist through and through. The health care plan was a huge giveaway to the health insurance industry - force millions of people to become new customers but don't regulate their pricing or investigate their procedures.

A true "leftist" would have first asked the question, "Is the health insurance industry even necessary?" They're nothing but the middlemen after all.

A true leftist (leaning towards socialism, communism, their variations, or some other scheme) does not fully accept that laissez-faire or moderately regulated capitalism is the best economic system.

In the sum total realm of political theory most democrats are in the same ballpark as republicans.

Just spending money does not a leftist make, and that is what the democrats do. They spend *a little* more than republicans on their preferred programs. Most republicans spend almost as much, just on defense-related activities and things like VA benefits (VA dept was created during Reagan admin - come on, is that not growth of gov't?). They've been that way since WWII. No republican since Hoover has been against benefits for veterans.

In fact, a leftist can be just a much a fiscal hawk as a conservative, there are just different priorities of spending. A liberal *should* be for less waste and more efficiency just like a conservative.

____________________

melvin:

As long as the Bush tax-cuts stay in place,this economy will never recover,because it cost 700 billion dollars a year to fund it...If the Bush tax-cuts was working, why did it only create 1 million jobs in 8 years,but before the Bush tax-cuts the economy created 23 million jobs in 8 years doing the Clinton years,and created the biggest surplus in this Countries history....Obama in spite of the Bush tax-cuts has created over 900.000 jobs in 21 months,compared to only 1 million jobs doing the Bush 8 years.

____________________

cmbat:

@BigMike-

"What witch hunt?"

Again, difference between the Democrats and Republicans. I don't think there is a question that the Bush Administration lied to take this country to war and probably committed some high level crimes with torture. Pelosi stated before Dems won the House in 2006 that she wasn't going to spend her time trying to punish him or moving the country backward, that the Democrats would just look forward and try to wrap up things we didn't like. And she stuck to that, even though many people disagreed.

We already have a bunch of Republicans campaigning on the notion that if they can retake the House or Senate, they will do nothing but investigate and try to impeach Obama. It's the Republican way, and also it gets the base riled up. Instead of respecting the Democratic process, they just want to go on a witch hunt looking back.

I used to be a Republican, but as, Charles Barkley said, "Until they lost their minds." Why can't they just stick to solid fiscal policy and not make it about religion, the bedroom, hatred, war, and hurting the other guy?

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"I'm old enough to remember when there were actual liberals in the Republican party. Javits, Case, Weicker, Brooke, among others. Those days are long gone.

Charles Mathias. Hell, they kicked out Joseph Martin because the house caucus was starting to get too conservative for the likes of him by the late 60s.

I would add Prescott Bush and George H.W. Bush would be borderline.

____________________

Paleo:

"FDR and LBJ both advocated gov't direct jobs and training programs. Ie: WPA or CCC under FDR or job corps under LBJ. That is FAR more liberal than anything Obama has done."

Thank you. (And you can add Medicare, which was miles to the left of what Obama signed). It's only because the Republicans keep moving further and further to the right (will they eventually fall off the political spectrum?) that they say Obama is left.

____________________

StatyPolly:

As far as which party is wingnuttier goes - according to this poll, the average American thinks it's the Dem party, by more than two to one. If you look at that second graph from the top.

http://people-press.org/report/636/

And for O'Donnell's chances - look at the calendar. It's 2010, not 2008. Things are very different. She will win if she runs a good campaign.

____________________

melvin:

The HCB is a disaster,because it don't regulate,or have a public option,that's why its a complete failure..What was the Democratic party thinking?..Everybody from the left was screaming to them idiots it wont work,because it don't give the Insurance Companies any competition period....The polls showed the public option was very popular with the American people,but Obama caved in to the Insurance Companies,and the GOP bigtime,which made me lose faith in Obama's leadership....And for all you wingnuts who thinks Obama have been governing to the left only means you nuts have been drinking to much kool-aid,because if Obama was governing to the left we wont have the Bush tax-cuts,all the Troops would be home,and a public option would have been included in the HCB,and this Country would have a Immigration bill right now.

____________________

Paleo:

"Everybody from the left was screaming to them idiots it wont work,because it don't give the Insurance Companies any competition period....The polls showed the public option was very popular with the American people,but Obama caved in to the Insurance Companies,and the GOP bigtime,which made me lose faith in Obama's leadership"

Shh. He's a socialist, don't you know?

____________________

AlanSnipes:

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Republicans of Delaware for keeping that seat in Democratic hands.
This is not an unfactual statement.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"the average American thinks"

What the average American thinks is socialist is not socialist, no matter how much they use the term incorrectly. There are very few socialists in America today. There used to be actual ones.

Our politics is so silly b/c we boil everything down to two choices. You have to choose either Yankees or Red Sox. No opportunity to choose Rays or Rockies.

But go ahead and wrap yourself in the flag of public opinion, which is what all republicans are doing now. It will bite them in the a$$ once it inevitably turns against them.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

And what actually DOES lean socialist (medicare), most Americans are fine with, including many tea partiers, etc...

____________________

Field Marshal:

As far as which party is wingnuttier goes - according to this poll, the average American thinks it's the Dem party, by more than two to one. If you look at that second graph from the top.

Yup. But the kool-aid drinkers continue to spout how its the GOP that is moving so far to the right that they are extreme. Luckily, most Americans see through that tripe and recognize the fact that it is truly the Dems who are moving so far off to the left that they should rename their party. Maybe something like Democratic Socialist Party or the Workers Party since Socialist has negative connotation in the US.

____________________

Hawk:

@StatyPolly-

O'Donnell's not going to win this one unless Coons completely implodes. Her only strength is that she's a conservative in an election year that favors conservatives. That's not going to be enough in Delaware.

Too many people have an opinion of her already for there to be much upside. Moderates have a 14 /63 favorability rating for her. Conservatives will rally around her, but to get to 50% in Delaware, you'd need a decent percent of moderates, and I can't see how that's going to happen.

In any case, this race isn't important for Republican control of the Senate anymore. If they win Delaware, they would have already won enough other Senate seats by larger margins to gain the majority.

____________________

Paleo:

"Luckily, most Americans see through that tripe and recognize the fact that it is truly the Dems who are moving so far off to the left"

If you read the poll, it's an eight point difference, 26-18. So, it's not "most Americans." It's about 1/4. Since more Americans profess to be "conservative" than "liberal," that's not surprising. In fact, it should be more than just an 8 point spread. But it could be that when some people say they're conservative, they do not buy the right wing ideology hook, line and sinker.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ Alan

I see your unfactual, and raise you a refudiate!

____________________

Farleftandproud:

This totally doesn't make sense, that the GOP thought they could nominate someone as crazy as O'Donnell. If they were truly the party of family values, it would have been David Vitter who would have had a primary challenger of substance. I think O'Donnell and Vitter would be the perfect couple in my opinion.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

If Sharron Angle does manage to win, I will always say that if Harry Reid had done what Chris Dodd had done, and perhaps the mayor of Las Vegas had decided to run for the senate seat, I bet he would be ahead by 15 points over Angle. Anti-incumbency is so bad, that Reid is facing this phenomenon.

____________________

TeaPartyRules:

Get ready for Christine bitches. DE owned by Palin.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@TPR

Thanks for destroying the Republican Party for us! Please keep it up - and don't forget to donate the O'Donnell!

____________________

BH:

"This totally doesn't make sense, that the GOP thought they could nominate someone as crazy as O'Donnell."

Kind reminds me of Minnesota. O'Donnell is clearly the antithesis of Al Franken who is just as crazy, had even more baggage and now he's a sitting senator...and yet, look at all the liberals on their high horses. There's no excusing the nuttiness on either side, nor the hypocrisy - and there is plenty of that to go around.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"just as crazy"

Define crazy. It seems to me, "crazy" means having a logically consistent ideology, ie: Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Jim DeMint. At least they stand for something. I don't respect wishy-washers like Lieberman, Specter, or Crist. Franken is left and he's unapolagetic.

The difference with his race is that MN is one of the more liberal states in the U.S. If O'Donnell had won in SC or even a more moderate state like NV or FL, yeah she could win. But this is Delaware, one of the more liberal states. Castle was a good fit and would have been a walk.

____________________



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