Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

IL: 2010 Sen (Kirk 2/1-2)

Topics: poll

Magellan Strategies for Mark Kirk (R)
2/2/10; 885 likely voters, 3.3% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Magellan memo)

Illinois

2010 Senate
Kirk 47%, Giannoulias 35%

Favorable / Unfavorable
Mark Kirk: 31 / 26
Alexi Giannoulias: 24 / 39
Barack Obama: 51 / 45

 

Comments
LordMike:

And Caokley's internals had her winning, too... Let's get an independent poll out there that isn't polling on the night of the primary election.

I'm sure Rasmussen would be more than happy to provide one if they think that Kirk is really leading.

____________________

Stillow:

I hope you Dems can learn to say Senator Mark Kirk.

____________________

ChicagoKid:

Big mistake for Dems by picking Giannoulias, he full of the Chicago corrupt/shady machine. Hoffman would have had a better chance in the long run of winning this seat. Kirk is from the Northern extremely wealthy suburbs. He is going to have plenty of money, well connected base, and national GOP pushing extremely hard for him. His only question of concern will be whether he can be conservative enough to get the down state conservative base out, without going to far to alienate. But he is a good politician and has a good record.

____________________

poughies:

Only 47% of this electorate voted for Obama as compared to 62% in the 08 election... And his favorables are also well below what we would think they should be (only a +6? spread).

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Ill_128.pdf

Look at that poll... % of electorate that voted for Obama over McCain is 20%... only 7% in this poll...

Makes you wonder...

____________________

Xenobion:

So does noone really even notice what is wrong with this poll? Sheesh the ideologues are out in a frenzy today. Give em a bone and they think they got a prime rib dinner.

____________________

Stillow:

Huh? Everyone knows this poll is a joke....but Kirk will win.

Don't be in the way when the red tital wave comes headin your way.

____________________

Xenobion:

Question is when will America get red tide poisoning again? Lest we forget how unpopular the Republican Party is still. Most of this is a rebuke at what Democrats are doing not support for Republican ideas. Both parties are fairly bankrupt.

____________________

Stillow:

That is true. People always get cranky wit hthe GOP, then they elect a liberal and suddenly remember why we won't like liberals very much. O saved the repblican party. Its united, it swinning elections and its got its mojo back again.

____________________

Xenobion:

That really doesn't explain Clinton. I don't think many people realize that Republicans are grasping for seats they haven't lost in decades, and yeah they're getting them back but if Republicans think its going to be their exact same agenda under Bush they'll get voted out just as fast.

As it is now Obama will probably retain the presidency like Clinton. Why? Because I believe much of those who failed against McCain will run again and squelch any new blood and Romney/Palin/Huckabee/Paul types simply won't beat him because of their polarizing views that have brought stability to the Republican party but been outright rejected by 40% of America.

____________________

libertybrewcity:

Kirk is not a true Republican. He is RINO Neocon lib like the most the rest...

____________________

Stillow:

X - Clinton was not a liberal. After 94 he left a trail of smoke he ran to the center so fast. He became pretty much a small g'ment advocate who didn't spend to much. The GOp was doing just fine until they started spending to much money. W's inability to contro lhis spending did a lot of damage, I wont argue that point, but 2010 will be a wave election like 94 or 2008, the GOP will at the least capture the House. O will not budge, he will stick o nthe left.

Plus I think his handling of terrorism will be his ultiamt edownfall. People know libs cannot contro lthere spending, etc....but it will be his weak stance against terrorism that willeventually mmake him a one term guy.

Right now americans know that spending has to get under control...it doesn't take a genius to know that running these high deficits year after year is sustainable...its killing us....and it may collapse our entire economic system if it keeps up. The GOP will produce a REAL fiscal conservative in 2012, not a fony like Bush.


The GOP is not grasping to keep seats. The GOp is winning seats it hasn't heled in years...NJ, MA????????? VA was nearly a 20 point landslide a year after obama won the state? ND, NV, AR....these are all highly likely to switch to the GOp and those are seats the gop hasn't had in forever.

____________________

Stillow:

Hmmm, a rino neocon liberal................

____________________

Farleftandproud:

This poll is just another copy cat of Coakley's pollster. Either that or the liberal media has been more favorable to Kirk than the Democrat. So far, all I hear about Giannoulias is that he is from a wealthy family of bankers. Ever since Obama decided not to let the banks fail, which is probably what would have happened if Obama had not bailed them out. Bush, Bush 1 and Reagan would have done exactly the same thing. It is some sort of mortal sin for a Democratic candidate to have a background in Banking. It is like Democrats are stereotyped as being enforcers of corporate greed, but America is a capitalist country. Being successful financially is a attribute, and unfortunately if you don't have a lot of money your chances of being elected to the US senate are weakened.

This was MSNBC, a liberal network that mentioned The democratic candidates shady dealings; it didn't come from Fox. With friends like that, who needs enemies.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Fear not progressives: The GOP and other more conservative Dems, have the advantage of being funded by corporations, and interest groups, and they can run attack ads against their opponents. I think it will backfire. Coakley ran nasty attack ads in Mass, and her opponent came across as more human. I think if the GOP plays dirty and corporations spew their venom at them, it will inspire progressive candidates to campaign against that.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Kirk may be pro choice, and a social moderate, and even if he came out and supported gay marriages, he still is a Republican in principle which means he is opposed to health reform, and regulating the banks, yet will go out of his way to blaming his opponent for being a banker. Yep, that is the GOP in a nutshell.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"This was MSNBC, a liberal network that mentioned The democratic candidates shady dealings;"

Not surprising. If you read actual academic studies of media bias (there is a subfield within communications called media studies) they find that the notion of "bias" is actually a groupthink or herd phenomenon, and that the real bias is toward whomever conventional wisdom says is going to be the winner. That's why it seemed like the media favored Obama so much in 2008, and why they seem so against him now for the most part. The sensationalism that pervades our media compounds this problem.

We're really going back to the future when it comes to the media. Basically from the founding up to the 1930s the media was highly segmented by political preferences. The crises of the great depression and then WWII birthed a media that tried to act above the fray, but this was already beginning to break down by the 1970s, and I think completely gone by the 2000s.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I think the genre of Cable news and the internet has had it's impact on extremes from both sides. Too much information gets out these days. FDR in the 1930's was loved by the people of the South. Here was this wealthy liberal gentleman from NYC and his wife Eleanor who was way ahead of her years, for her progressive ideas. I the height of the depression, people of the south loved them. Many poor places looked to them for change and support. It seems like the same places in 2010 don't want any help from the government at all. Liberalism is percieved as Evil. Even if Obama wanted to help them, they probably wouldn't want his help, because he is different from them. If Obama visited Bentonville Arkansas tomorrow, what would be the reaction he would get?

The Roosevelt's were certainly outsiders when they went to Georgia and Tennessee in the depression, but it seems as though Obama keeps his distance from these places.

Roosevelt actually raised taxes by a lot higher percentage of the time, and he helped out banks to get back on their feet.

Modern American culture has turned their backs on government for help, and trust in government was much higher in the 1930's but in this cynical age when you have so many special interests and information on everyone and everything on the internet and cable news, it is no wonder why public opinion shifts like it does.

____________________

Xenobion:

Clinton not liberal... My you conservatives are sure good at re-writing history for your own benefit. Ol' Ronnie would be proud.

____________________

Stillow:

X - Its generally accepted except by loons that Clinton was pragmatic and a moderate. He campaigned as a new democrat. It was he who declared the era of big g'ment over. it was he who signed into law things like welfare reform.....ya he tried HCR to pander to his base early on, but after 94 he became a centrist...he dropped all the liberal nonsense at the door. I don't know of anyone, except for you I guess who actually think Bill was a liberal....that is laughable! In fact Bill used to love touting the fact that he was a moderate Dem fro mthe south.

Next your going to tell me old Zel Miller is a raging liberal too.

Bill clinton a lib...heheh, well thanks for the laugh at least. After 94 you would have been killed instantly had you been standing between Bill and the politcal center. He couldn't run there fast enough which is why he won e-election, though with only a plurality and not a majoirty.

____________________

LordMike:

Stillow, Bill Clinton's health care proposal was WAY more ambitious and "liberal" than what is coming out of congress today. By your own definition of HCR, that makes Clinton a raging lefty.

I'd like to paraphrase your comment:

"That is true. People always get cranky wit hthe Dems, then they elect a right wing radical like Bush and suddenly remember why we won't like republicans very much. Bush saved the Democratic party. Its united, it swinning elections and its got its mojo back again."

That was 2008. It seems that the country is going to flip flop every two years trying to get the change they want and will be unable to get, 'cos of the complete dysfunction of the Senate. I think it's become clear by now, that the country is completely ungovernable. It's the Californication of our federal government.

____________________

Ryan:

Clinton's healthcare proposal came pre-1994, after the election, as stated before, Clinton went way to the center.
Hilary care was dead by the end of 1994. Remember the whole "The era of big government is over" quote? He was very liberal in those first 2 years. After that, he moderated and became a very good president.

Obama, on the other hand, is too much of an idealist to moderate. But I guess well know for sure after the 2010 elections. If he does moderate, he'll be fine.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I have news for everyone. Bill Clinton never got to first base with health care. He and HIllary did something that would have been impossible. At that time, you had Ted Kennedy and maybe 20 Democrats who were willing to even take on Health reform. Obama has gotten to third base, or in the red zone. We are not caving in this time around.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Health care costs were not out of control in 1994 like they are now. Back than it was mainly the uninsured that were of concern, but now I speak with tons of working people with good jobs and benefits and if they are not married, their costs are sky high. These make up for a lot of people. They make like their care, but hate what they pay for it. We have had trustbusters of other industries like computers, energy, telephone and cable companies breaking monopolies and promoting competition, but our government has been reluctant to break the trusts of our health insurers who have virtually no competition in a number of states around the country.

____________________



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