Pollster.com

I still don't know if Rasmussen is polling Washington correctly. The 50/49 Obama approval seems low. I saw WI, Iowa and other states more favorable. Seattle's metro area is still about half of the population or more of the entire state, it leans left. The numbers don't ad up.

Rossi is well known, sort of like the Rudy Guilliani of Washington, but the other two candidates, are unknown and inexperienced. Just doesn't seem to make sense.

Farleftandproud,

Assume Seattle metro is half the voters in the state (which feel a bit generous but I'll give it to you), Obama probably gets 60% approval there, while in the rest of the state he gets 40%. Not that unreasonable. Nor is it unreasonable when you consider that this poll is of likely voters, those who are galvanized to vote in November, and certainly anti-war liberals are less excited to vote in November than anti-government conservatives.

Also, the other Republican candidates have done a fairly decent job of name exposure, enough at least to treat their numbers to be a bit stronger than Murray running against a generic Republican.

Well, I know the Portland area a little bit but that part of Washington between seattle and portland seems like 50/50. It is sort of a swing area, while Metro seattle leans left. I guess Spokane is more conservative, but doesn't the eastern part of the state account for a small portion of their population.

I live near a part of upstate NY that is like 60/40 Republican and some of the areas in Central and Western NY lean republican too, but since NYC and Long Island have so many people, NY breaks down to like 60/40

But than again if being anti-war in 2010 is a bad thing for Murray, why would a very Patriotic and conservative state like Kentucky's Republicans nominate Rand Paul, sho says he would support withdrawal from Iraq? What is Dino Rossi's strategy going to be in Eastern Washington, considering many libertarians are huge admirers of Ron Paul?

Charlie Cook senses that there may be a possible breaking (or at least a perturbation) in the Republican wave. If that's so it will directly impact this race, CA, WI, IL etc. where Dems absolutely need to hold to stay at 54 (at least) in the Senate. If Dems can't hold WA the cycle may be a disaster (unless this is due to a purely local effect such as a scandal or gaffe by Murray)

It's, of course, crucial that the wave not crest any higher in the House, where probably 30-40 seats will be won or lost solely on general sentiment rather than local politics (where the candidates are 0-4 point apart).

I'm hopeful that there's just been a very slight trending back towards Dems. I'll be looking expectantly for Gallup's new generic next numbers to confirm if its sample, at least, is reflecting this. I tend to think it will continue to regress back towards the mean; if it doesn't that's reason to be hopeful.

I don't yet see this trending back, but I respect Cook, if he thinks it might be there. I DO see some individual actors whom the public finds a bit extreme. That's why it's close in KY and NV. I also don't see any additional rise in anti-incumbent anger or anti Dem sentiment, but there's already so much of it that it may be enough for Repubs to win the House.

Farleftandproud,

Well, Rand Paul ain't exactly leading in Kentucky so perhaps you aren't incorrect. What's keeping Paul alive are his strong positions against Obama's policies. Are Republicans willing to forgo their reservations towards an anti-war, somewhat nutty candidate if it means one less vote in favor of a Democratic agenda? In the end I think they will but now they are on the fence. It reminds me a little of the 2006 TN race where Republicans toyed with the idea of voting for Ford but never really delivered.

"Dems absolutely need to hold to stay at 54 (at least) in the Senate."

Why? What's the difference between 54 and 53 or 52? As long as Democrats permit Republicans to abuse the filibuster by transforming something that was intended to be used only rarely into a defacto supramajority to pass anything, it doesn't matter. When you get below 52, then it matters because of the possibility of party switchers and deaths.

This Ras poll is probably accurate, but the state is tricky to poll. You either poll too much of the west side of the state or the too much of the east side of the state. But I think this is close, maybe not this close.

Didier is becoming more prevalent though. Rossi's campaign has been slow and unorganized in my opinion. It really makes me wonder if Rossi was just giving this a college try that while he's raised money for his campaign nicely he just doesn't use it for advertisement.

TN in 2006 Chantal had a much better GOP candidate than Rand Paul. Corker is fairly moderate, but Paul is just really far out.

Is Cook right? Looking just at the Senate I'm not sure I completely agree. A number of races have moved towards Dems in the last few weeks (KY, NH, NV, CA) but then a fair number of races have moved towards Reps (MO, OH, WI, WA, CO). Perhaps Cook is looking more at rhetoric than actual standings as Reps were definitely overconfident with states like California and Nevada, and that has since returned to reality. Right now cook is saying 5-7 seats in the Senate... is this really a crest?

Is Cook right? Looking just at the Senate I'm not sure I completely agree. A number of races have moved towards Dems in the last few weeks (KY, NH, NV, CA) but then a fair number of races have moved towards Reps (MO, OH, WI, WA, CO). Perhaps Cook is looking more at rhetoric than actual standings as Reps were definitely overconfident with states like California and Nevada, and that has since returned to reality. Right now cook is saying 5-7 seats in the Senate... is this really a crest?

Cook is pretty close with his 5-7. 538.com is projecting 7 GOP gains but 0 Dem gains with >50% chance (excluding the non-event that's of Crist/Rubio).

And even if you count every race greater than 1/3rd chance of flipping to other party, that's still net GOP+6. Either way it's a crash, since 52-48 outcome practically undid every seat gained in '08.

And worst case scenario for Dems is GOP+9 (GOP gains every seat >33% chance, but Dems fails to flip any of them). That puts it at 50-50, which easily can swing to GOP majority if they can talk Lieberman over.

Am still trying to figure out where Rasmussen get the money to do all these polls every day''This guy is making up these numbers am 100% sure of that.

I would say its unlikely that the GOP gets 7. I think 5 is going to be it in the senate and another 5-6 in 2012- looking way out.

I do think the number of house seats that switch is looking better for the GOP. I don't know how to feel about that. On one hand, it would nice to overthrow Queen Stretch Pelosi and her far-left nutty rule but on the other hand, if the GOP fails to take the house in 2010, it gives them an advantage to take the WH in 2012. Its a catch-22.

But watch out my crystal ball says major gains for the Dems in 2042 after WWIV!

@melvin, the bulk of Rasmussen's polling concerns consumer confidence and other financial numbers that he sells to his clients. His national surveys are also omnibus in that he can sell five or six questions at the end to various customers (such as "How often do you eat fast food?"). IVR is also a very cheap method of conducting surveys, and like PPP he probably conducts them pro-bono as a means of advertising his brand of survey research.

@Mogando996, I think Reps will have a better chance of flipping Nelson than they would Lieberman. Either way, a GOP pickup of 6 seats with Crist, Lieberman, and Nelson voting with Republicans is still pretty devastating and hardly a sign that a Republican (or Conservative) surge is over.

Obama is going to dump Biden for Crist in 2012,but Crist have to win and November.I don't see a Republican out there beating that ticket.The GOP recapture the House back in 1994 because most of the seats they won was in the South,but its different this year,because in order for them to win back the House,they have to win a significant amount of seats up North.

@melvin

Define North? There are a fair amount of seats in the southwest, midwest, rustbest, and mid-Atlantic that can push Pelosi out of office, but you will see GOP pickups in NH, NY, NJ, CA, FL and IL as well. These are Dems who represent districts that voted for McCain or that simply are freaking out about the amount of government spending and little economic growth.

And you're right, Obama/Crist is unbeatable.

chantal:Am talking about the NE,SW,NW and MW,also did Mccain win Penn 12? The Democrats have already proven they can win a district Mccain won back in 2008.Many polls had the Democrats losing that special election,but the Democrats won by a wide margin,so what does that tells you?

Given the Rangel effect, I would say Rossi +9 by next week.

"Obama is going to dump Biden for Crist in 2012"

Where did you pull that one out of?

@melvin, out of the 10 polls released for the PA-12 special election, only two showed the Republican leading by more than the margin of error (and technically twice the margin of error constitutes an actual lead), whereas 6 of the 10 polls showed the Democrat favored to win. So I'm not sure your characterization of that election's survey behavior is at all accurate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania%27s_12th_congressional_district_special_election,_2010

"Obama/Crist is unbeatable"

OH? Obama/The Pope is more than beatable if the economy still stinks in 2012.

If the economy stinks now, what was it in January 2009 when job losses were 700,000 a month? Republican.

No way Biden steps aside. He is way too arrogant, selfish and idiotic. And Obama is too much of a wuss to ask him to.

I believe that the reason Akers and Didier are doing so well in this match-up, despite being relatively unknown to the greater population here in WA state, is that Republicans and TeaParty members are still split in this state over Didier and Rossi particularly. Rossi is definitely known by everyone in this state and I recall reading somewhere that whichever Republican gets the nomination, he will receive full backing of the TeaParty and Republicans. Whether Dino chooses to court them I don't believe matters because he is going to get a bump in support; potentially placing him above Murray in polls. This race is going to be closer than people outside of WA realize. Rossi is running against Murray already, but he has yet to unleash his full-blown ads and signs until he claims victory in the primary.

TeaPartyRules:

Given the Rangel effect, I would say Rossi +9 by next week.

Posted on July 30, 2010 1:05 PM

LOL. I'm sure the first thing on Washington voters' minds right now is a Congressman from New York City.

Colton I think you fail to realize the negative dip in numbers for being supported by the Tea Party in Washington State as well.

I am well aware that the Tea Party is generally not seen in a positive light here in WA state, hence why Rossi has been distancing himself. My point is that regardless whether they are seen in a positive light or not, they are still voters in this state that may not be as potent as Nevada, but still there are a large enough number of them supporting Didier, that when Rossi wins the nomination I believe we'll see a bump in his support because the Tea Party in WA has already said they will throw their support behind the Rep candidate because defeating Murray is the most important goal.

Chris V, it is not so much a New York representative as it is about corruption within the party. Explain what Anita Hill had anything to do with voters in WA? And yet, Ms. Hill affected women across the nation, hence 92 was the "year of the woman."

A Supreme Court nominee being accused of sexual harassment is a lot more significant than a politician being accused of corruption. It would be more of a news story if no politicians had been indicted this year. I think most voters realize that there is widespread corruption within both parties and will choose more on the merits of the candidates themselves than they will about whatever Charlie Rangel is up to.