Pollster.com

Closer to what I would expect. Perry's underwater and White's got a chance.

If this is the ultimate breakdown: "47% of those who plan to vote are GOP faithful, and only 30% Democrats and 23% independents," White doesn't stand a chance.

White should have just ran in 2006 and would be governor right now if he had. I feel like this race is a redux of the Dino Rossi vs. Christine Gregoire race in 2008.

PPP = rePublican, rePublican, rePublican for their right leaning polls. Am i right? Am i right???

My guess is this will be the actual outcome.

White has +15 net favorables, Perry has -11 net job approval.

Yeah, not directly comparable but close enough for an upset to happen. White will win undecideds, but still needs to "close the deal" somehow.

Field Marshal:

PPP = rePublican, rePublican, rePublican for their right leaning polls. Am i right? Am i right???

You are right. PPP has said that much. Their samples in states which voted for Obama by 5-7% generally voted for McCain by a few percent. So they're screening out a whole lot of Dems due to lack of enthusiasm. So...they are right leaning polls.

There's a difference between lack of enthusiasm and change of ideology. The RV Dems who are not being included in these polls generally would vote Dem again--- if they could be dragged to the polls, that is. They are salvageable but need something big to motivate them. That's very tough at this point but not impossible.

Negative campaigning, at the national level can be ruthlessly effective when it's done well, when it's believable. The Goldwater Ad...the girl with the daisy and the atomic bomb going off in the background is a good example of that.

There's plenty of time for a long tough negative campaign against Republicans. Repubs can and have attacked Dem leadership; the same is true the other way around. The difference is that Repubs have probably milked everything they can already from their incessant attacks. Dems and their allies have only just begun going after Republicans for being the party of no new ideas...rather of very bad and old ideas which have led to disastrous results.

True or not (I'm not looking to argue this point; we'll never come close to agreeing so it's a waste of mutual time) there may still be a lot of mileage in a very well produced and targeted campaign that hold Repub "NAY-ing accountable (no not Bush...current Repubs) for our current economic woes.

Tjample,

So clearly, as melvin and the other Ras-haters on the site say, they are clearly biased Republican and Fox News shills.

It is a long shot, but several polls now show a definite Perry vulnerability. This would be a huge Republican loss as TX stands to gain 4 house seats after the results of the 2010 census are released. Republicans were able to redistrict out several TX House Democrats in 2001.

"Republican loss as TX stands to gain 4 house seats after the results of the 2010 census are released. Republicans were able to redistrict out several TX House Democrats in 2001."

I think it's more likely we'll get 3. At least one of them will have to be in one of the more democratic growth areas.

They districted out 4 democrats in 2004, but 2 of those seats went democrat in 2006, 1 went back to republican in 2008, so a net gain of 3. Truth be told, those seats were conservative dems whose seats would have been lost when they retired anyway. But there's at least 1 republican seat that's growing more democratic.

Sometimes blatant gerrymanders backfire.

Thanks for that clarification and explanation, Aaron. We won't be having any problems with redistricting our one at large seat in VT next year.