Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

WI-Sen: 52% Johnson (R), 44% Feingold (D) (Fox 9/25)

Topics: poll , Wisconsin

Fox News / Pulse Opinion Research
9/25/10; 1,000 likely voters; 3% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Fox release)

Wisconsin

2010 Senate
52% Johnson (R), 44% Feingold (D) (chart)

2010 Governor
49% Walker (R), 45% Barrett (D) (chart)

 

Comments
Louis:

This is a Fox(i.e. Rasmussen poll) so it has the Rassmussen house bias. None the less it is clear that Feingold is in trouble, proably 2-6 points down. With Johnson hovering around the 50% mark. Feingold will have to energize his voters plus score sone hits on Johnson to pull this out.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Ras house bias hasn't been much of a bias lately. In fact, the last poll on this done by Daily Kos/PPP had the margin wider at +11 for Johnson.

53/38 in favor of repealing health care law.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

Johhson has been quite a suprise this cycle. Those Guv numbers look closer than I've seen in this race, though. I think we're looking at a similar dynamic as Minnesota in '02.

____________________

Dave:

This race is just so crazy to me. Unfathomable that a guy like Feingold could be down by such a wide margin- despite every media organization in the state fawning over him.
It would make more sense to me if the Gov and Senate numbers were switched around.

____________________

nick283:

Will be nice to have an extremist like Feingold out of there. This is just awesome.

____________________

JJC:

@Dave

Unlike most races, I think Johnson's lead has more to do with him than the national unpopularity with democrats. He's running extremely smart advertising and can handle himself well with the media. When you compare these two together it's no contest. I've been saying for a while that once Johnson gets more name recognition after the primary, he would begin to pull away.

Keep an eye on him. I think he's another rising star in the GOP.

____________________

Dave:

Yeah, that's interesting that you that. I'm conservative, but I think a lot of Ron's ads have been only so-so. Same with Walker's. Oh well.

Obama is actually in Madison today, and it sure seems like the enthusiasm gap isn't really anywhere to be found. Feingold just reversed himself and decided he'll attend after all. We'll see if the share a hug or anything.

____________________

Dave:

Haha, and as soon as I type that, I see two excellent Johnson ads on the news.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

Ooh - This is gonna hurt Johnson:

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/95740094.html

Nothing like oppossing victim's rights to sue abusers!

Que Staty saying it's no big deal...

____________________

me.yahoo.com/a/REF6S0ZjruJNLMmtFB0ftgY96AzZ8ZeiYQ--:

I hope Barrett doesn't beat Walker. I don't know how he could. He was called the invisible man in Milwaukee because he never came out of where ever the hell he was hiding. I probably saw him in the paper once.

He raised taxes almost every year, never balanced the budget. He is a complete idiot. I am surprised the dems couldn't find a better candidate. Anyways, Walker will destroy this because he is well liked throughout Milwaukee county. He needs to energize the northern and western Republicans because they might be skeptical since he is from the city.

Thank god we are finally going to have some sanity back in Wisconsin. The dems have destroyed the state, making it an almost unbearable place to live.

____________________

Dave:

Check the date Bob, that story was written in June. If it hasn't hurt him by now, I doubt it will.

____________________

Dave:

Ah, I read on SSP it's coming back to the surface again. Media has to race to Russ' defense of course. Johnson should totally regrow his beard.

____________________

JJC:

@ Bob

Sure Bob, Johnson hates children. And he probably wants them to be sexually abused to. I'm sure there's nothing inherently flawed about the bill. Nope. Johnson must just hate children.

*Sigh* This is like when Coakley accused Brown of turning away rape victims because he is pro-life. It's pathetic. Any and everything in politics will be taken out of context - and it's the standard rule for liberals (read Alinsky).

Just like the liberal hero Alan Grayson who aired an ad comparing his opponent to terrorists with a quote so out of context even MSNBC is calling him out on it.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/28/video-the-context-behind-graysons-despicable-taliban-dan-ad/

____________________

Dave:

If you notice this little sentence from the article Bob cited, "The bill failed to win approval."

Yes, that's right. This bill failed to pass the Democratic controlled Assembly, and the Democratic controlled Senate, all with a Democratic governor in charge. And the Senate Majority leader? He's on the ticket as the Dem. Lt. Gov candidate this fall.

If Johnson has to explain his opposition, there's a lot of other people who should be asked to speak up as well.

____________________

tjampel:

____________________
JJC: "Just like the liberal hero Alan Grayson who aired an ad comparing his opponent to terrorists with a quote so out of context even MSNBC is calling him out on it."

It wasn't so out of context. I read the entire paragraph. Webster affirmed that the quote used. that his wife should submit to "him" by Grayson is in fact to be found in the Bible, which he takes literally. Therefore he supports this comment.

He went on to say that he wasn't there to advise women about what prayers to say; he was advising men in this speech. And then he went on from there. But he brought it u in this context; that he wasn't going to use a quote like that; however that quote was in the Bible.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ JCC

Hey, the bill may have had flaws, but Johnson still on the side of pedophiles and profits on this one. Honestly, I don't see any flaws in letting victims of abuse getting compensation for their hardship - I assume that you don't either.

Oh, and nice Strawman with the Grayson campaign.

____________________

Dave:

Again, Democratic Assembly, Democratic Senate, Democratic Governor. Take it up with them.

____________________

JJC:

@ Bob

Bob, being a liberal, I presume you are a terrorist supporter. Why? Because you are more than likely against the Patriot Act. The bill may have had flaws, but you are still on the side of terrorists and profits on this one. Honestly, I don't see any flaw in monitoring terrorist calls - I assume you don't either.

Oh, and nice non-answer with the Grayson campaign.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ JCC

Even for its flaws I did support the Patriot Act. All bills have flaws - doesen't mean we can't try to fix them later.

____________________

JJC:

@Tjampel

"It wasn't so out of context. I read the entire paragraph. Webster affirmed that the quote used. that his wife should submit to "him" by Grayson is in fact to be found in the Bible, which he takes literally. Therefore he supports this comment."

Wow, just wow! I'm going to presume that whatever "paragraph" you read was from a lefty source as to not insult your intelligence. Why don't you watch this video of him IN CONTEXT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu1DVk6YsQE&feature=player_embedded

He was saying DON'T seek passages like your wife being servant, but instead seek passages saying always be faithful and loving to your wife.

I've been following politics for a while. I know that campaigns can get nasty, and that taking things out of context is as old as politics itself. But this is the most sleazy thing I have ever seen, mainly because of how out of context it was.

This would be like you saying "it's important to not hate muslims because of radical terrorists", then me taking that quote and saying "Tjampel say's 'hate muslims because of radical terrorists'"

If you have an ounce of principle, and aren't just a partisan bigot, you would denounce this garbage.

____________________

JJC:

@tjampel

Webster:

"Find a verse. I have a verse for my wife. I have versus for my wife. Don't pick the one's that say, uh, she should submit to me. That's in the Bible, but pick the one's that your supposed to do. So instead, love your wife, uh, even as Christ loved the church he gave himself for. As opposed to wives make yourselves to your own husband. She can pray that if she wants to but don't you pray it. Same with your children. Pick out the ones that have your responsibility to it. Yes children are to obey their parents. But more importantly we're as fathers to, uh, not provoke them to wrath."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu1DVk6YsQE&feature=player_embedded

This Webster sure is an evil guy, huh?

____________________



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