« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Battleground Senate Poll

Senate

From Unlikely Voter: In an open and credited aping of the Greenberg Quinlan Rosner House battleground polls, Public Opinion Strategies has conducted a massive Senate battleground poll.

Politico has for us the summary and 150 pages of gory, numerical details. I’m going to see what sense I can make of it.

Right off the bat, we lose out on the Swingometer when making the transition from House to Senate, unfortunately. I skipped the Senate when building the Swingometers because there are so few races that I feel I can cover them individually.

So when I look at the list of states in the poll (FL, KY, MO, NH, OH + AR, CO, DE, IL, IN, NV, PA, and WA) I think the results are going to be a bit misleading. I think that some of those states – specifically, AR, DE, and IN – are hardly battlegrounds in that they’re effectively lost to the Democrats already. So off the top, there’s going to be a Republican skew here in my estimation.

But the poll still shows independents to break for Republicans 47-25. The addition of a few marginal states should not be enough to create a 22 point margin, which is even bigger than that in practice because all of the remaining 28% of independents aren’t going to be voting third party, most instead will probably break R/D the way the rest do. Independents are favoring Republicans.

Even worse for Democrats, if we look specifically at voters expressing a Very High likelihood of voting, the overall split is 60 R-29 D, a rout. Include those who slightly less likely to vote than that, and it only drops to 54-35. Democrats are depressed.

Combine those two factors, and it just can’t be a good year for Democrats in the most competitive Senate seats. My last projection still showed control of the chamber likely to remain with the Democrats, but their majority is set to be reduced drastically.

COMMENTS

  • indyjohn

    of the Senate, those holding the majority will be very shaken and demoralized. They will blame Obama for their losses and will be extremely disinclined to follow his lead on any issue. Obama has already become an political pariah. After November 2nd, he will be as popular among Democrats in Washington as a pedophile at a six year-old’s birthday party.
    Democrats will forgive almost any personal fault in their progressive brethren, but they cannot abide political failure. An imploding Obama presidency will result in a recasting of the Obama narrative. We may eventually see the Democrats publish all of Obama’s hidden records, in order to convince the electorate that they were the victims of the Obama con as well.

  • rdelbov

    This poll is a killer for the democrats–WI poll out today had it 47-46 for Johnson over Feingold. Democrats are in deep trouble.

  • trt1

    …for a few more election cycles. When the votes REALLY matter, you can count on Graham, Snowe, Collins, et. al. voting with the lefties. That is four or five more seats we have to pick up…at least… in order to get true conservative reform passed and/or block the lib agenda. I know everyone reading this knows this fact, but I think posts like this one get a little too generic with R’s and D’s. That is the one thing I give the Marxists Democrats credit for- they sure know how to get everyone on board who has a D after their name…and then a handful of Rs.

  • jomo2009

    Republicans won’t make historic gains this fall in both Senate and the House is if, at a rally on the steps of the Capitol all the candidates tear off, en masse, their masks to reveal reptilian-like creatures a la the tv series “V.” That’s the way the Democrats view us as anyway. Oh what the heck, HISSSSS!

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

    I recognize that this verges upon the heretical, but I do NOT want the Republicans to gain a majority in Congress yet. Why? As it is, the WHite House and their liberal minions blame everything on Republicans despite their complete inability to block the Democrats on much of anything. If we gain numerical majorities, it’s a no-lose for The One. If things go well: it’s thanks to him, and he’s in again in 2012. If they tank? It’s because of Republican mismanagement—and, he’s back in for 2012.
    I’d like a nice 3 seat minority in the Senate, and perhaps 10-12 seat minority in the House, thanks. Just enough to keep a stick jammed in the liberal spokes but not so much that it gives the Democrats an excuse to whine even more than average.

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

    We *need* at least one house in order to mitigate another two years of damage.

  • renny

    it won’t matter what little o says in 2012.

    People who will be out of work a year or two or three are not going to vote Dem., unless they are furloughed unionistas.

    Bernacke and Greenspan are muttering about the recovery stalling. I don’t think there was a recovery. There was a little inventory restocking and now that’s taken care of, the ec. has no room for expansion due to DC oppression and anti-business practices.

    But, the bigger question is, if little o cannot win in 2012–WHO is going to run for the Reps.?

  • Oz

    I think that one of Paul/Angle/Buck fail and that the really obscure squekers on the left coast fall to the Dems.

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

    Which one is that?

    I have us at 6 last time I ran it, but…

  • deano64

    Do you really want another 2 years of what we’ve already gotten from the Dems? I mean just think of the damage they have already done. If you haven’t noticed the Dems stick together when the crap hits the fan and they want to shove some peice of crap law down our throats. Please explain how being in the minority in both houses does us any good?

  • Achance

    The Ds lie, the MSM, swears to it, and to some percentage of the population, that make it true. In ’08, it worked for 52% of the population and we got Comrade Obama and Comrades Pelosi and Reid’s Politburo. Our objective is to not let the communists get 50% plus 1.

  • sarg01

    I’ve had similar thoughts, but we have to look at all the damage the left has done in just a year and a half. We have to have some way to stop it. Obama’s nowhere near as politically deft as Clinton. Clinton believed in nothing but polls.

    Obama believes in big government. The people are rejecting big government. Unless Obama shows a sudden willingness to dump all this “change” he’s peddling, the Dems have no shot in 2012. Do you really think he’s going to sign Republican tax cuts or welfare reform and then try to take credit for them? Will he work out a compromise with Reps that allows him to keep portions of Obamacare but repeal its major provisions? I believe his ego is far too big for this.

    He’s too dangerous to be left unchecked. We need to get the Senate to at least 49, so that Lieberman jumps ship to the Rs so he can get re-elected in 2012. Its critical that we prevent any more the-government-should-be-able-to-order-you-to-buy-5-servings-of-vegetables-a-day Kagans from getting on the Supreme Court.

  • sarg01

    ND (lock)
    AR (basically a lock)
    DE
    IN
    PA
    FL
    Two of Paul/Angle/Buck?

    Only way I see 6 is to write off Rubio in Florida or if we drop 2 of the Paul/Angle/Buck trio. I don’t think we lose any of those, actually, but Crist winning in Florida’s 3-way is a real possibility.

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

    KY and FL would not be pickups.

  • sarg01

    Bleah, you’re correct.

    Though I then remembered IL and felt better.

  • gremlin1974
  • IJB
  • toadold

    The last poll I read showed Crist falling behind Rubio.

  • spainishirish

    My God, they have huge majorities and already blame the GOP minority when they fail to pass legislation. We might as well be in the driver’s seat.