Premium Sponsor


Featured Sponsor


Our Sponsors


Ad Networks

Advertise Liberally

Buy an ad on all of the top liberal blogs with just one click.

Site Stats

NV-Sen: Fourth Poll Shows Reid in Trouble Against Third-Stringers

by: James L.

Fri Sep 04, 2009 at 2:20 AM EDT


Research 2000 for Daily Kos (8/31-9/2, likely voters):

Harry Reid (D-inc): 40
Danny Tarkanian (R): 45

Harry Reid (D-inc): 41
Susan Lowden (R): 44
(MoE: ±4%)

These results match pretty well with recent internal surveys released by the camps of Lowden and Tarkanian, and also with Mason-Dixon's latest survey of the state.

Now, some may say that Reid has a lot of room to grow due to his early inability to consolidate the Democratic vote (just 70% of Dem voters are committing themselves to his re-election so far, compared to over 80% of Republicans who are firmly voting against him), but I'd still call this "deep shit" territory. Reid's going to be draining his war chest dry -- and probably lean on the DSCC to help -- even if the GOP nominates a third-stringer like Tarkanian or Lowden. Even if Reid manages to survive, it looks like it'll be an ugly win.

RaceTracker Wiki: NV-Sen
James L. :: NV-Sen: Fourth Poll Shows Reid in Trouble Against Third-Stringers
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
NV-Sen: Fourth Poll Shows Reid in Trouble Against Third-Stringers | 56 comments
Reid brought this on himself

The Dream Scenario
Health Care reform passes (w/ strong public option), Reid resigns as Majority Leader to spend more time focusing on his constituents of Nevada (they are clear across the country or something and he needs to visit them more), Schumer becomes the new majority leader, Reid is narrowly re-elected and the guy who reminds me of LBJ takes over the Senate (Schumer and LBJ both have the hawk looking noses and head shapes).

I can dream.

Reid's Had Ugly Wins Before
Remember 1998? He was running against his now disgraced colleague John Ensign and ended up ahead by only 428 votes. I'm sure ol' Harry is having a trip down memory lane at this moment, and thinking up every dirty trick he used back then and planning to resurrect them now.
I remember vividly
1998 was supposed to be a resurgence of the Gingrich/Republican revolution.  If memory serves me correct, the Republicans thought they would net 3 or 4 seats instead of breaking even in the Senate.  Also, the Republicans truly believed they would win 20+ seats instead of losing (net) a handful.
[ Parent ]
Yesh Reid has won ugly before
As Markos seems to really hate Reid, I'm not sure if his poll is as objective as it is usually is. Nontheless Reid is in trouble, but at the same I belive that many of you are understimating Reid. Reid is certainly prepared for this challange: he was able to defeat Ensign who was then a House Rep. While the 1998 election cycle was slightly favorate to the Democrats (thanks to the GOP overreaching in the wake of 94 and the subsequent Clinton impeacehment hearings), John Ensign had (and probably still does despite his affair problems) an immenssive array of politcal skills yet Reid was able to beat him, although only barely. Reid is definitly unpopular in Nevada and 2010 is looking to be a barely GOP year at best for Democrats, it doesn't change the fact that Reid is a very crafty guy and that Tarkhain and Durnam are 3rd tier candidates. Yes, if you would to contrast the Reid name with the Tarkhain name in Nevada (which ISN'T a "no-name" in the state), then perhaps it is resonable to conclude Reid being the underdog now. But who here thinks that someone who has lost all his previous politcal runs by double digits will be able to do against someone with the political skills that Reid has. Durnham is probably a bit stronger seeing as how she is the (soon to be former) head of the Nevada GOP party, but if she doesn't have goverment elected expereince then its going to be difficult for her. Reid may be disappointing as Senate Majority leader but to deny his political skills when it comes to his job as Nevada senator is fool hardy.

The race is going to be very ugly, and Reid won't get a blow out like in 2004, but lets not say that Reid is finished now ok?

[ Parent ]
This is the most
generous poll that has come out for Reid lately.  It is quite an accusation to suggest with no basis that Kos may have his thumb on the scale.  I seriously doubt it.

That said, I agree that Reid is far from finished.

[ Parent ]
I think Jaxx has a point
The weekly national poll follows the same pattern. No other poll shows Dems fleeing like they do. Almost like it fits the agenda over there which has become frighteningly millitant. Can't prove it but...
[ Parent ]
It's really gotten weird over there.
I go over there and almost never find anything interesting except Steve Sinsinger's occasional post.  It's a big echo chamber for purity on healthcare reform.  "Militant" seems about right.  Oh well, not all blogs can be as good as SSP!

That said, I do not think Kos would rig polls.  I also reiterate that the Kos poll was the kindest for Handsome Harry in recent memory, and shows only moderate attrition of Democrats.  

Don't know whether other polls support the fleeing of Democrats.  Could be that it only seems unique to Kos because he's the only one who highlights it.  Many pollsters aren't transparent enough about crosstabs to compare.  I just haven't taken the time to vet it.

[ Parent ]
Pollster is clear
The drop has been caused by Repubs and indies.
[ Parent ]
Link
[ Parent ]
Looking at the internals of the poll...
It appears that the undecideds are mostly Democrats and Independents.  The Republicans have basically made up their mind that there is no way they will support Reid (not a shocker).

And it also appears that the Democrats are fairly certain that they will support Reid.  Since the Dems have a slight edge in party identification, this will almost offset the Republican insurgence.

What is interesting is that Reid is slightly losing the Indies.  However, 19% of the Indies have not made up their minds yet.  

This poll shows a Democratic affiliation edge of 44/38.  Is this about right for Nevada?  I thought it might be a tad generous for the Dems, but I don't know.

Reid can win this race, no doubt about it.  His current situation would not have occurred if he was a lower-profile senator.  At this point, he's pretty much polarized the electorate.

[ Parent ]
2008 Nevada
38D, 30R, 32I
[ Parent ]
I think this poll shows one thing for certain:
Reid has basically pissed off about 45% of his constituents.  In a lot of ways I think Mitch McConnell can relate to Reid's woes.  If memory serves me correctly, Lunsford got 47% of the vote against McConnell.  In addition, McConnell was one of the few Senators that didn't have to fight against the coattails of Obama.  McCain outperformed McConnell in Kentucky.

Being Majority Leader is such a high-profile job that a Senator from a Purple State is just about impossible without pissing off the folks back home.  Tom Daschle had the same problem in South Dakota (in all fairness, Daschle was in a true Red state at the time).

My main man Chuck should be elected as the next Majority Leader.  The people in New York will support him in the role a lot better than the electorate in Nevada will support Reid.

Reid has other problems too.  I don't know if its really in his makeup to be the Majority Leader.  To this observer, he seems to be led more by his caucus as opposed to him leading the caucus.  I always thought he was more of a "face man" for the party.

I agree with another commentor that Reid should resign as majority leader once we pass some serious Health Care legislation.  

NV
Agreed 100%.  Not sure why Democrats didn't realize this after the Daschle debacle.  Also the fact that neither were charismatic and they couldn't sell anything is a major problem as well.  Just give it to Chuck.
[ Parent ]
Great point
Chuck has a lot more charisma than Reid or Daschle.  I always wondered if Reid and Daschle were put in this position to make inroads within their regions.  
[ Parent ]
Umm...Ya Think?!
Daschle was put there because they needed a balance between liberals and centrist within the caucus. The same deal with Reid, only with the additional reason of making inroads into the Western States. Those inroads have been met in the last few election cycles (i.e. Salazar, Tester, the Udalls, Merkley, Begich...).

It's not like having Reid as Majority Leader is essential to keeping those inroads open. They're not going to pillar the Democrats because Chuck Schumer's the ML. Hell, Schumer's rather amiable personality may be even better for them.

[ Parent ]
Are you actually giving Reid some credit for these victories?!
I don't know to what level (if any) these senators were helped by the mere presence of Reid as Majority Leader.  

 

[ Parent ]
I Don't Either
I did a paper in my last year at university examining the Democrats' gains in the Western States. I think Reid being Majority Leader was either pure coincidence (because he was Minority Whip, then Minority Leader at the time) or a act of symbolism for Western political activists to say, "hey, we're putting one of your own in an important position."

If I may clarify my remarks, I wasn't saying Reid as ML was a major factor in those Senators winning. I'm saying the Democratic Party's efforts to make inroads in that region contributed to those Senators winning.

[ Parent ]
I understand you now
I was always puzzled on how Reid became Majority Leader.  His demeanor didn't seem to fit the part.  I didn't want to assume that he was placed in this position because of potential benefits for that region.

[ Parent ]
Amiable?
That's the first time I've ever heard Sen. Schumer described as amiable.
[ Parent ]
How Would YOU Describe Him?
Crazy like a fox?  
[ Parent ]
Ambitious
Is the first word that comes to mind. Aggressive and cutting come to mind as well - all of which could be useful in a leader. But I'm not sure how he'd play on tv screens across the country.
[ Parent ]
The Problem is How They Choose the Maj. Leader
We don't really pick him based on his political standing back home, or how good he'll be at running the caucus (in point of fact, most Senators probably want the Maj. Leader to be LOUSY at whipping them). They pick him 'cause he's next in line, and they owe him a favor.

But count me as one more vote for Maj. Leader Schumer, even if I'm afraid of his Wall Street ties.

[ Parent ]
Even from that perspective
Schumer would have a great shot. Lots of Dems owe him favors. If it wasn't for him, 14 of them would not be in the Senate AND they wouldn't be in the majority.
[ Parent ]
Which 14 Senators?
Just interested to know that answer.  I know a lot owe him for his help.
[ Parent ]
Those 14 Senators
Were those elected in 2006 and 2008. Here's the list:

In 2006:
Casey - PA
Whitehouse - RI
Brown - OH
McCaskill - MO
Tester - MT
Webb - VA

In 2008:
Warner - VA
Udall - CO
Udall - NM
Shaheen - NH
Hagan - NC
Merkley - OR
Begich - AK
Franken - MN

That's the 14 Senators I believe were helped by Schumer (he was DSCC Chair in 2006 AND 2008).

[ Parent ]
Thanks
I wonder if we could include Menendez to this group.
[ Parent ]
Menendez?
You mean as a pickup? Or as DSCC Chair for the 2010 cycle? Menendez didn't pick up a seat from the GOP. He was appointed by Jon Corzine after he became Governor in Corzine's old Senate seat.
[ Parent ]
The DSCC came to his aid during his bumpy reelection
He probably owes Schumer a favor.  Cardin and Landrieu probably too: it looked pretty bad for a while and the DSCC gave them some help.  
[ Parent ]
He wasn't getting re-elected
Menendez was appointed to the Senate by Corzine in 2006...he'd never been elected before. But I agree, Menendez should be on the list of "people who owe Schumer."
[ Parent ]
The ones
that defeated Republican incumbents or picked up Republican open seats in the last 2 cycles: McCaskill, Tester, Brown, Casey, Whitehouse, Webb, Begich, the Udalls, Franken, Shaheen, Hagan, Merkley, Warner.

Check out the 2010 California races (http://2010californiaracetracker.wetpaint.com) and help us take back Red California! (http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org)
[ Parent ]
What about Dick Durbin?
I know Schumer would make a fantastic majority leader, but Durbin is second in the leadership. Wouldn't he be the obvious heir to the top spot?
[ Parent ]
I like Durbin too
I think I heard that Durbin prefers to be the Whip as opposed to the Majority Leader.  I can't remember where I've seen that, but I think this is the truth.
[ Parent ]
Barbara Mikulski
She should be majority leader!
[ Parent ]
We need someone younger than Reid, not older
It's not the time to get into leadership positions when you are in your 70's.
[ Parent ]
MAJ LEA
I don't think Durbin has what it takes.  He's a bit quiet too.  I think Schumer has the perfect personality and skill set for the job.
[ Parent ]
Oft-repeated
But the cosmetics of having the President and the Senate Majority Leader from the same-state (even if from vastly different constituencies and bases) will prevent Durbin from ascending higher than he currently is.

To echo everyone else here, Schumer would be a very welcome change at the helm.

[ Parent ]
And they have their leadership from red states!
Why can't we have our leadership from blue states?

Oh wait, they can't choose anything other than red states.

Anyway, Reid seems to me to be the sort of leader who would be far more effective in the minority (i.e. not getting squashed by a mean majority) than in the majority.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

[ Parent ]
Durbin is also from the President's home state
I would imagine that may weigh on some people's minds.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Yes
Durbin is the obvious choice to move up and replace Reid if there is an opening. I don't get the argument that because he's from Illinois he can't be Majority Leader. I don't see that as an obstacle. Schumer can certainly run, and sure he's got a base, but I'd think Durbin is the favorite.  
[ Parent ]
That Illinois argument doesn't make sense
A New York majority leader is a bad idea on paper, but our principal problem is a whole pile of unimpressive Democratic senators.

Durbin would be an improvement, as would Schumer despite being a "New York liberal" (to go with the "California liberal" Pelosi).  

A two day dead corpse would be an improvement.

[ Parent ]
The best available option
is Chris Dodd, but sadly his vulnerability makes that impossible.

I could definitely go for a Leader Durbin or a Leader Schumer though.

[ Parent ]
Come on
You don't like the idea of a New Yorker as Majority Leader, simply because of a "New York liberal" meme? Who the hell cares? Democrats are the more liberal party, period, and should revel in that. That's why the people voted for them. Well, that and the Republicans got us in a horrible mess. But if you ask me (and I realize you didn't), it's definitely high time for people to stop apologizing for being called liberal, whether they're from New York, California, or anywhere else.
[ Parent ]
Hell yeah!
When some idiot accuses me of being "liberal" I retort with that I am proud to be a liberal, and used to be a Republican until the nuts took over the party.

Check out the 2010 California races (http://2010californiaracetracker.wetpaint.com) and help us take back Red California! (http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org)
[ Parent ]
Who cares??
Besides everybody west of Pittsburgh?

Reid's only value is he is a Westerner, the area of the country where we both need growth and are growing.

"Liberal" is not the negative word.  New York is.  That two words is not helpful in Montana... if there is no one prominent in the party from the Mountain West.

If Reid had backbone and a personality, having soemone from Nevada as party leader would be terrific for the growth and health of the party.

[ Parent ]
You know what?
As a New Yorker, I resent people who are disproportionately represented in the Senate having the gall to voice prejudice against one of the states that disproportionately pays for their roads, bridges, farm subsidies, and schools. If it would upset them for the Majority Leader to be from New York, as far as I'm concerned, they can go fuck themselves, and I don't care if that's a non-campaign-strategic remark.

But having said that rant, I consider it hazardous to make assumptions about how people will actually receive leaders reviled by Congressional Republicans. Do you recall when the Republican Party ran against Tip O'Neill? I do. And I also remember when they actually polled people on Tip and found that he was widely popular throughout the country. I also would add that no-one would have predicted that a black man most associated with Chicago would have been elected President, yet he was.

For such an important position as Majority Leader, the person with the best ability (with some secondary concern about their own electoral survivability) should be selected, regardless of what state they are from. That's so much more important than petty concerns about idiots who would vote against their local Democrats out of spite for New York, California, or wherever.

[ Parent ]
I just want to add
that the "go fuck themselves" is NOT directed at you, because you are NOT voicing prejudice against New York but simply discussing potential electoral effects of having a New Yorker in the leadership. I just wanted to make sure that was understood completely clearly.
[ Parent ]
Sorry for the outburst; back to a question of electoral politics
And in that vein, I'd ask you the following question: Is there actually any evidence that any Democratic candidates for the House have been hurt electorally by Republican harping on "Massachusetts liberals" when Tip O'Neill was Speaker or "San Francisco liberal values" now that Pelosi is Speaker? Let's keep in mind that you'd have to show that enough voters would have voted for them except for the references to Massachusetts or San Francisco, in order for this to be taken seriously as an actual problem, rather than just a favorite whipping-boy of Republicans.
[ Parent ]
People don't keep yacking about things
that have never worked on some level.

As a party we need leadership from all areas of the country.  Of course it is superficial to rant about or care about where some person is from, but it is also objectively true that Tom Harkin and Tom Udall think about some issues more intently than Jack Reed does.  There should be some attempt at having broad leadership (regionally, ethnically, genderwise) because it is a good thing in general, but it is also good for party politics.  If every Congressional leader was male/black/Chicagoan, that wouldn't send a very diverse message.

To grow, the party needs dynamic leaders from California, the northeast, Florida, the Midwest and the Mountain West.  Running the party is a whole different issue, where in fact the best people for every job may in fact come from the same sex, and the same state, and the same race, but we need to recognize such lack of diversity would have real implications.

[ Parent ]
The conventional wisdom
is not necessarily true, but people yak about it all the time. I'd like to see actual evidence that having a Speaker from San Francisco has per se hurt the vote for any candidate.

I agree about diversity but don't see why that should exclude people from the most populous states for the top leadership position and object to the suggestion that it should.

[ Parent ]
Primary Reid from the Left
"A president like Obama only comes once in a generation and I'm not going to miss this opportunity to make the change this country needs just because we have a weak Senate leadership."
All we need is a credible candidate.
Reid
He Is not liked by Democrats.Even In Nevada.Remember
Obama has a higher approval than disapproval In Nevada.
Reid may very well lose but this will not be 1994
especilly If some kine of Health Care reform Is passed.
Reid has won close elections before.

Other factors to consider

Lot of tainted Republcinas.All the scandal about Ensign
plus ethical challenged Governor and LT Governor

Republicans have been pissing off Hispanic voters.A good
chunk Is In Nevada.

Obama and some king of public opotion could get Democrats
out to vote.

I agree that Schumer would be better as majority Leader.
Democrats need a strong one.Republicans would never have allowed the shit that Reid allows.

[ Parent ]
Anyone think it'd be a better idea
for Reid just to retire and allow Berkley or Titus to run?  It'd be great to have both of them replace Reid and Ensign.  (Berkley can have Reid's seat, Titus Ensign's.)
It would give the Dems a better chance at winning both elections
...but no way is Reid going to retire instead of running in 2010.
[ Parent ]
He's the equivalent of Corzine
or Blago or Patterson.  He just refuses to read the writing on the wall.

And his son... jeez, smell the coffee.  This is NOT a year for another Reid to run.

[ Parent ]
Yeah
His son should probably just wait.  He's only killing his own political future but trying this year.
[ Parent ]
NV-Sen: Fourth Poll Shows Reid in Trouble Against Third-Stringers | 56 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

Talk to your supporters, not tech support. Campaign Engine is the powerful, affordable Progressive Campaign Software.

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Contributing Editor: Crisitunity

SSP's Twitter Feed

SSP on Facebook

SSP's Frappr Map

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

Subscribe to SSP's RSS feed: Subscribe via FeedBurner

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

Partisan Voting Index

House Open Seat Watch

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

2010 Political Calendar

SSP Race Ratings

Senate Race Ratings

Gubernatorial Race Ratings

House Vulnerability Index

Blogroll

Daily Kos
DemConWatch
DLCC Blog
Five Thirty Eight
From The Roots (DSCC)
Hotline On Call
Kicking Ass (DNC)
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Project 2010 (DGA)
The Next Hurrah
Senate Guru
The Stakeholder (DCCC)
The Thicket (NCSL)
Powered by: SoapBlox