NH: 2010 Gov (Rasmussen 3/8)
Emily Swanson | March 11, 2010
Topics: poll
Rasmussen
3/8/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)
New Hampshire
2010 Governor (trends)
51% Lynch, 32% Kimball
54% Lynch, 28% Testerman
50% Lynch, 35% Stephen
Favorable / Unfavorable
John Lynch: 59 / 37 (chart)
Karen Testerman: 22 / 30
Jack Kimball: 27 / 25
John Stephen: 32 / 30
Comments
NH is a strange state. The trend in the northeast has been elect Republican governors but send people to Washington who are Democrats. From the mid 1990's until the election of Scott Brown that had been the trend. CT, VT, NY for a long time and Mass for nearly 16 years had Republican governors, yet progressive policies were still implemented in those states just fine.
This NH scenario is truly bizarre because Governors are the ones who keep the tax rate low within the state. I honestly can't undestand the sudden reversal. If you are a fairly strong blue state or at least a state that wasn't that crazy about the policies of Bush Cheney and elected Obama significantly, it doesn't make sense they would send someone who would hinder Obama's agenda to Washington, yet elect a Democrat in their own state who will likely raise taxes. Governors of both parties have to raise taxes and cut programs and all that stuff that makes them unpopular. In some states they have to decide if someone who might be innocent is going to be put to death by the state or not.
Posted on March 11, 2010 10:50 AM
It's New Hampshire. They have never had the most predictable politics. I will say the economy of the state might have something to do with not being overly angry at the party in power, because their unemployment rate is around 7.7% (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost).
Posted on March 11, 2010 12:52 PM
Post a comment