« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Rasmussen updates on Sestak/Toomey

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  June 4th, 2010 at 01:59 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Sestak Toomey

We’re in for the long haul in the Pennsylvania Senate race, because I honestly do expect this one to be in the toss-up range from now to Election Day, but that doesn’t mean we don’t get to check in on the polls obsessively the whole time looking for clues.

Today: Rasmussen updates on the race.

First, the Rasmussen history on this matchup: March 15: Toomey +5. April 12: Toomey +11. May 6: Toomey +2. May 19: Sestak +4. One might say before now that Toomey peaked in April and the trend is for the upstart Democrat.

But no. As I expected, the pendulum has shifted back for now. Toomey 45, Sestak 38 (MoE 4.5). Add to that history June 2: Toomey +7. I’m still expecting Sestak to lead again at some point though, despite the huge 11 point swing for Toomey since the last poll.

But that’s not to say this current shift is purely random. Scandal seems to have driven at least part of this swing. Rasmussen polled on the allegations that the White House used former President Bill Clinton to offer Joe Sestak a job in exchange for clearing the primary for Arlen Specter. 42% are following the story very closely, and 72% combined are following it very or somewhat closely. 41% think it’s not very or not at all important to their votes, while 52% think it’s somewhat or very important.

So whether the next random swing lets Sestak recover this whole 11 point swing seems to depend in part on whether Sestak is cleared in this story, or whether the whole thing blows over entirely.

P.S. Toomey! If you don’t trust the NRSC, this is a race that’s virtually certain to need cash, so please consider hitting the big blue Contribute button.

Crossposted from Unlikely Voter

Tags: , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • bk

    Or even more importantly, how can they view him as anti-incumbent or an outsider?

  • earlgrey

    since he didn’t take the job. It’s not my way of thinking, but than I didn’t vote for Obama.

  • IJB
  • bk

    I realize the Philly union thugs are hopeless – I’m talking “normal” people. When you put everything together, Sestak is saying, “I’ve proven my outsider credentials by turning down a bribe from President Obama, who has endorsed me and whose policies I support 100%.”

    Sheesh – he used this (not a) job thing as a political ploy as good as any politician could have, all while claiming he’s not just your average politician. Unbelievable that people would fall for it.

  • Superheater

    Casey (both of them), Carney, Kanjorski, Murtha, Fattah, Rendell, Onorato..

    and Benedict Arlen..

    I guess we are stupid.

  • crosley

    We all know 2010 will be a good Republican year, but some people out there have this idea that every single race is going to go the Republicans’ way. Even in blowout years like Reagan winning 49 states , Republicans still didn’t win enough seats to take back Congress.

    Watching Murtha’s old seat in PA go solidly for a random Democrat hack despite McCain carrying it should wake us up that these are all going to be hard-fought contests. I still consider Pennsylvania to be a Democrat state, it hasn’t gone Republican at the Presidential level in over 20 years.

    Fortunately, Toomey is about as perfect a conservative as anyone could wish for, and I expect he’ll have an enormous amount of support nationwide for fundraising from the grassroots. Combine that with anti-Obama sentiment, I think Toomey pulls it off, but it’s going to be neck and neck until the end.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    There’s a ton of retired long time “old democrats” who vote party line and are still enchanted with *fond* memories of daddy Casey etc… but then there are a lot of them disenchanted with the O and if Sestak plays his “I didn’t accept anything from the O card” right it will be a close election…

    (and don’t forget the permanently retired who vote democrat even though their coffins stay sealed…)

  • novimir

    If Spector had won the Democratic primary, Toomey would be a solid favorite. This is probably Sestak’s race to lose if you look at overall voter registration. In order to believe that it is Toomey’s race to lose you must believe:

    - Rasmussen has a better polling model which was not demonstrated in
    2008 and not in PA-12 in 2010.
    - That the ~25 percent of people who don’t have land lines will not vote
    in less favorable percentages for Toomey.

    Crossley is correct that people are being “too optomistic”.

  • http://www.laborunionreport.combrand/brhttp://www.laborunionreport.blogspot.com LaborUnionReport

    unions have made PA one of their six “firewall” states and are going to spend millions on ads and GOTV. In order to combat this, Toomey needs to do the same.

  • bk

    he endorses me and I will vote with him 100%.

    That’s part of what I was talking about earlier. He contradicts himeslf to anyone who has more than a single-digit IQ.

  • Brian Hibbert

    Even in “safe” districts we need to get OUR people to the polls to make sure our candidates win.

    As LUR says, the Democrats have Unions to drum up the vote and organizing is something they are VERY good at.

    One way we can counter that is to become a Precinct Committeeman. If you aren’t already, go to ColdWarrior’s site http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.com/ and find out how to become one in your state!

  • Martin Knight

    That said, everyone missed out on PA-12 because no one foresaw the effect of having the primaries on the same day as the special election. Since it’s well known that Independents don’t vote in PA’s closed primary system, many Independents didn’t come out.

    If Sestak is dumb enough to look at PA-12 and think he’s going to scale through on voter registration, he’s relying on Independents being only 4% of the electorate on Election Day – that’s simply not going to happen.

    PS: Eeyorism is frowned upon here. If you’re going to be pessimistic, you’re going to need to be more original.

  • http://jakespeaks.wordpress.com/ Jake W

    Rasmussen was one of the most accurate pollsters in the Sestak/Specter race.

    http://unlikelyvoter.com/2010/05/19/grading-the-pollsters-pennsylvania-edition/

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/pa/pennsylvania_12th_district_special_election_burns_vs_critz-1472.html#polls

    Next post, please.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    I understand that Markos needs to attack Rasmussen to distract from the fact that his own polls are [expletive deleted]; but, really, Ras was hardcore on the money for 2008 and for the major elections since then. I see no valid reason why you need to parrot Lefty talking points.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I only saw Rasmussen polls of PAsen, in which Rasmussen mopped the floor with Research 2000.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    The jihad against Strategic Vision never went anywhere, and Rasmussen is scaring the talking wallets a bit, so it’s time to shift focus.

  • novimir

    You are correct. I thought He had done a early poll but I should ahve checked.

  • novimir

    Rasmussen is a top tier pollster i.e. 1 of 6, but he was not truly exception when judging the 2008 Presidential result per:

    http://electoralmap.net/pollsters/index.php

    In a different analysis by WSJ, they weren’t rated as highly per:

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IKhPZc5iEus/SfCoMmJLh7I/AAAAAAAAAEk/Ea5AlJ78Hho/S220/Wall+Street+Chart.jpg

    My point is that everyone is only looking at Rasmussen. If Rasmussen was aligned with the other top polls, that would be fine but right now Rasmussen has diverged from other pollsters in many races which brings me back to the two points I made initially:

    - You have to believe the Rasmussen voter profile for 2010 is correct
    - You have to believe that all the people who either choose not to answer pollsters (like me) or only have cell phones (like my sons) are going vote in a similar enough proportions to not change the result.

    Editorial comment: Within 4 years if pollsters are not allowed to call cell phones, they will have to add special weighting to model the younger generation of users they can’t reach by land line because there are generational voting differences emerging (for example DADT)

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Oh boy you couldn’t even be more wrong. I post on lots of pollster’s releases, not just Rasmussens.

    Admit you were wrong and move on. Stop digging.

    Or better: Take the 538/Daily Kos Jihad against Rasmussen back where it belongs.