Dodd's Odds
Mark Blumenthal | January 11, 2010
Topics: Christopher Dodd , Incumbent , Incumbent Rule , National Journal column
My column for this week looks at whether Sen. Christopher Dodd was right to insist that "any certain prediction" of his defeat in 2010, had he chosen to run for reelection, "would be absurd." While the odds of an incumbent Senator coming back from a double-digit polling deficit this early are very long, there are a few examples that I review in the column.
Thanks to the pollsters I emailed and my Twitter "tweeps" for digging into their collective memories of Senate campaigns in the not-so-recent past.
Note: most of the poll results for past races cited in the column come from the subscriber-only archives of The Hotline, thus the lack of links.
By Mark Blumenthal | January 11, 2010 10:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)
Comments
Nice article... and I love the examples...
Two things, notice all of those examples were March and later. Wouldn't that make the argument that Dodd could have won as the campaign went on, a little stronger?
Also, the fact how few polls were taken in that election. How many polls do we have on Dodd now? Something like 15?
Man, have we far we have come.
Not that it matters, but one poll in January 2006 showed Tom Kean defeating Bob Menendez by 11 points.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2006/senate/nj/new_jersey_senate_race-10.html
That's one of the elections in recent years where the incumbent (granted suffering from the Wofford problem) came back numerous mid-single digit deficits.
Posted on January 11, 2010 1:45 PM
came back, despite numerous polls throughout the campaign showing him down single digits.
Posted on January 11, 2010 10:06 PM
Post a comment