Google Ads


Site Stats

AR-Sen: Lincoln is toast according to PPP

by: conspiracy

Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 12:19 PM EST


http://www.publicpolicypolling...

Some of the others poll better but even Beebe loses to Boozman.

Lincoln 33
Boozman 56

Lincoln 35
Baker 50

Ross 37
Boozman 48

Ross 39
Baker 39

Halter 30
Boozman 53

Halter 34
Baker 45

Clark 36
Boozman 51

Clark 39
Baker 45

Beebe 43
Boozman 44

Beebe 46
Baker 38

For all you purists Lincoln's problems are certainly not because she isn't liberal enough. A majority of Arkansas voters say she is too liberal.

The only silver lining is that these other Dems all have high "don't knows" in terms of favorability but then so do both Boozman and Baker. I think we have to face facts - the state wants a Republican senator.
conspiracy :: AR-Sen: Lincoln is toast according to PPP
Tags: , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
AR-Sen: Lincoln is toast according to PPP | 60 comments
ND and AR - Foregone conclusions at this point
NV, just barely below it.

PA, CO, DE - Fighting chances and fleeting.

IL - The line.

If 2010 is insider/outsider election then we got a shot in MO. Maybe we can still swing something in OH if we get the messaging right.

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26

I'm only moving it to lean for the moment
Somebody other than Lincoln might make a race of it but it is hard to see her not being the nominee.
[ Parent ]
I'm more sanguine about PA, CO, and DE
Specter is a tough old bastard and has survived worse; lots of independents are rabid fans of his.  If Sestak wins the primary, the press boost should be enough to push him past Toomey.

Bennet is way down in polls but is also really unknown.  He's got enough money now to get his message out there -- let him do his stuff before writing him off.

Castle is certainly favored in DE, but I'd like to see what happens after Coons punctures his halo effect.  He'll probably still be up, but I'll wait to see by how much before writing this one off.

As for pickups, I still think we have excellent chances in MO, NH, OH, and NC.  KY is more difficult (Likely Repub at this point) but Conway could pull it off, especially against Paul.  We could also win FL-Sen if Crist switches parties, though not otherwise.  So I'm still seeing a best-case scenario of D+2, though my prediction is R+1 (they lose MO, NH, and OH, and pick up ND, AR, NV, and DE).  I'm comfortable being way more optimistic than most prognosticators because I think the Dems will pass some economic legislation that shifts the numbers significantly, and won't be caught flat-footed again like they were in MA.

The Crolian Progressive: as great an adventure as ever I heard of...

[ Parent ]
My prediction is about R+6
In THE VERY BEST case for Democrats: R+3
[ Parent ]
yeah
Lincoln may have a base problem, but the base is irrelevant here. She could win the base and still lose big.

Write Arkansas off.  

The base is never irrelevent.
Even if liberals are only 25% of the electorate, that's still halfway to victory if you hold them down and get them to the polls.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
she already has most of them
22% of liberals are undecided. If she does something to win them, it barely inches her closer, and she's actually winning moderates by nine points.

sorry, the base is irrelevant here. Any Democrat who wins statewide needs to win a lot of conservatives.  

[ Parent ]
25?? In Arlansas???
If only in primary. Among all Arkansas electorate - no more then 15%. Accorging to Gallup liberals comprise 20% of general electorate in US as a whole. Including MA, NY, CA and so on..

So "going left" is at least as stupid strategy in Arkansas as "going right". The fact that even very popular (and not liberal, BTW) Democratic Governor Beebe is only "equal" against Boozman proves that Arkansas simply doesn't want ANY Democratic candidate as Senator

[ Parent ]
PPP
says 9% Liberal in Arkansas.  
[ Parent ]
I was speaking hypothetically.
FWIW, CNN's 2008 exit poll says 14%.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
True
but doing the math, out of 810 respondents, if Lincoln wins 90% of the liberal vote (she has 69% with 22% undecided and 10% going to Boozman for whatever reason), she would still be down by 20 points, and that's with winning moderates by 9.

Conservatives own this state. She would need something like 30% of them to win. She only gets 9%.

[ Parent ]
Liberals+moderates=55%
(http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#ARP00p1)

Too bad she hasn't given the moderates much reason to support her either.  There are plenty of laborers in that group, I'll wager.  And yet, she's flipped her position on the EFCA (to against).  Polls have shown the public option popular in Arkansas (meaning it's support must go beyond self-described liberals); she opposed it.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

[ Parent ]
but they do support her
She wins moderates 49%-40% with only 11% undecided. If she won all the liberals and moderates who are already not voting for Boozman, she'd still be trailing by double-digits.

You can spin this any way you want, but unless you think some of those Boozman voters are really public option/EFCA supporters angry at Lincoln for tacking to the right, which is a ludicrous argument, none of that mattered.

Yeah the public option was popular, but if you remember, the bill that actually had the public option in it...was not, and Vic Snyder and Marion Berry were getting pummeled in the polls for voting for a bill with one in it.  

[ Parent ]
To get moderates's support
you must (preferably) be a moderate, not "very liberal".. And not all moderates are big fans of public option - i, for example, have great doubts about it's usefulness...
[ Parent ]
The electorate will be different in 2010
I suspect most of us understand that at least liberals will make up less of the electorate relative to '08.

Second question is whether the public option or even HCR is --still-- popular in Arkansas, after all of the crap that has been thrown at it. As much as I hate the idea, I wonder if Lincoln be better off if she threw HCR over the edge of the cliff.

[ Parent ]
She's toast either way
I suspect she knows that and is trying to play the lesser of two losing angles, which is not being a rubber stamp for the President.

The HCR bill was never popular in Arkansas, even when it had the public option, which was popular, in it. That's why I don't necessarily pay attention to how the public option polls. Yeah, in theory people like it, but they've shown they're willing to vote against people who support it. Blanche Lincoln would be in no better position now if she supported it.  

[ Parent ]
Good riddance.
That whoring to the right sure did help her, didn't it?  Another ConDem brought down (likely) by the monster they've largely created.  Hopefully, either someone worth fighting for that can hopefully change the game will enter the race.  If both of those fail to happen, hopefully the DSCC is smart enough not to waste money here.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
Lincoln is going down because of one thing only
she is in the same political party as the black President with the weird name most of her constituents believe was born in some foreign country.

[ Parent ]
Did DTOzone and Jsmith merge into one person?
(Sorry.)

That doesn't seem to be hurting Beebe.  Nor does it explain why Lincoln continues to slip.  I seriously doubt a lot of Arkansans suddenly realized the president is black.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

[ Parent ]
It does seem to be hurting Beebe
an uber-popular governor is barely treading water in a Senate race.

They didn't suddenly realize the President is black, they've known it for quiet a while, which is why the Democrats political situation went downhill from the moment he was nominated.

[ Parent ]
Yet he's still doing well in his governor's race.
And is within the margin of error against Boozeman and beating Baker.  

To whatever extent race is playing a role, it does not explain the poor poll numbers we're seeing elsewhere, like how Missouri has now tipped.

And for that second sentence, are you referring to Arkansas Democrats or to all Democrats?  

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

[ Parent ]
Arkansas Democrats
there is clearly a distinguishing factor to sending Democrats to Little Rock vs. Washington and that distinguishing factor is based on who's heading the party in Little Rock vs. Washington.

For everyone else, it has more to do with the national environment, but Democrats on the federal level have not been fairing well for a while now in Arkansas. Lincoln's approval rating tumbled early last year.  

[ Parent ]
Another words
I'd be willing to be that Blanche Lincoln would be cruising to reelection Ron Wyden-style if Hillary Clinton or a scandal-free John Edwards was President right now, no matter how conservative she is.  
[ Parent ]
The South in general
From what I've observed over the last 20+ years, Southerners don't mind electing Democrats for local races, and they are not all against electing Democrats on a state level, but most are very reluctant to send Democrats to DC.  I've seen a lot of the same in other areas, but with the parties in opposite roles.  South Dakota seems to always elect a Republican as Governor, but doesn't seem to have a problem electing a Daschle or Johnson to the Senate.  The same could be said for Montana (although they have a Democratic Governor), Nebraska, and North Dakota.  For many years, Utah would have a Democratic governer, but would never consider electing a Democrat to the US Senate.

As far as race goes, I can tell, being a Southerner, that it is definitely a factor with many of the Southern electorate.  I think when the civil rights act of 1964 and 1965 were passed, LBJ basically stated that it would cost the Democrats the South for a generation.  It's probably cost the Democrats the vast majority of the South for several generations.  I'm sure that the fact that Obama being the first African-American President is a problem with many, but to simply to conclude that it started with him would be inaccurate.  It's only another fact that's played on the minds of many within the South.


40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
oh it definitely didn't start with him
but some of the areas we've been able to hold on to, like Arkansas, Louisiana, and Tennessee thanks in part to Clinton, are gone because of him.  
[ Parent ]
Many thought of Clinton as the "Great Southern Democrat Hope"
Clinton spoke in the same manner they did, he could relate to their problems, and he could connect with these people.  When he left, a huge void was not replaced.  Gore, although a Southerner, was more identified as a DC man.  Kerry was considered an aristocratic Northeasterner.  With Obama, many saw a guy who has charisma, talked about problems they had, but many who were worried about his nationality, his experience, and the fact that many warned that he would expand the federal government even more.

Truth be told, many of this area wouldn't vote for a non-Southern Democrat period.  That's one reason (of many) why Dukakis, Mondale, McGovern, Obama, and Kerry would have no chance on picking up their votes.  It works a little of the same with non-Southern Republicans, but not to this magnitude.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
This reminds me
of the presidential primaries in 2004 and 2008 when there were some suggesting we can only win with a white male Southern governor and throwing out names like Mike Easley, Mark Warner, and Phil Bredesen as our only chances at winning.

Obviously it isn't true, but having non-Southern Democrats leading the party has seemed to completely annihilate the party south of the Mason Dixon line.  

[ Parent ]
There is a lot of loyalty for Southern candidates in the South
Which is why Clinton wasn't blown away in places like SC, AL, and MS, and why he could carry TN, AR, LA, and KY.

2008 was a very intense election year.  Obama was able to attract many new voters that pushed him over the top in VA, NC, and FL.  These new voters are somewhat unreliable in the 2010 elections, but will be more reliable than usual in 2012.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
Perot also probably helped
Disproportionately down there.
[ Parent ]
Probably so in 1992, but not as much in 1996
In 1992, the Southern states went as follows:

AL  48B(Bush)/41C(Clinton)/11P(Perot)
AR  54C/36B/10P
FL  41B/39C/20P
GA  44C/43B/13P
KY  45C/42B/14P
LA  46C/42B/12P
MO  44C/34B/22P
MS  49B/40C/11P
NC  44B/43C/14P
SC  48B/40C/12P
TN  47C/43B/10P
TX  41B/37C/22P
VA  45B/41C/14P
WV  49C/36B/16P

In these states, Clinton's baseline was no lower than 37% (Texas).  Many of the Perot voters would not have voted for either Clinton of Bush in this election.  Those who would have voted probably would break 2/3's for Bush, 1/3 for Clinton (Southern states only).  Looking back at Statistics paper I did in 1993 (my senior year at UNC), If Perot wasn't part of the equation, and given that only 70% of Perot voters would have actually voted, the breakdown would have been as followed:

AL  55B(Bush)/45C(Clinton)
AR  58C/42B
FL  53B/47C
GA  49C/51B
KY  50C/50B
LA  51C/49B
MO  53C/47B
MS  56B/44C
NC  52B/48C
SC  56B/44C
TN  51C/49B
TX  55B/45C
VA  54B/46C
WV  55C/45B

Comparing these numbers to 2008, the Democrats have noticably improved in FL, NC, and VA.  SC and TX remains about the same.  The Republicans have marginally improved in AL, GA, MO and MS, but have noticably improved in AR, KY, LA, TN, and WV.

This supports the theory that there are 2 noticable realignments in the South.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
I almost agree that it's not worth it for the DSCC to defend her
but I'm sure that it's not good if she loses. I think Lincoln, despite her healthcare douchiness, is 10000000x better than Boozman or Baker or any of the other GOP seven dwarfs in the primary.

NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan
[ Parent ]
I think her problem is...
being publicly wishy-washy, something along the lines of what Nate Silver said on 538 awhile ago. She could have gone the Mark Pryor route, or the route of many other Senate Dems from Red States - McCaskill, Rockefeller, Tester, Begich, etc.

They might be suffering, but I'm pretty sure they're not suffering in the polls as hard as Blanche is - she created her own mess through her public dithering, and at this point I'm sure most of us would rather take Senator Carnahan or Senator Fisher over her, but I don't think that's how (read: it's not how) the DSCC works.

[ Parent ]
Pryor is pretty close
His approval is only 29%, two points higher than Lincoln.

[ Parent ]
Begich
35-51 according to PPP. So being under the radar doesn't help either in a red state.
[ Parent ]
Eh...
Begich (who I am actually a huge fan of) really only won because he was running against a convicted felon. Let's at least acknowledge that Begich is probably an anomoly and will likely have a really tough re-election bid in 2014, no matter what he does.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
I think:
Lincoln should just quit while she's at it and not suffer the loss.
Arkansas, Louisana, Kentucky, and Tennessee
All 4 of these states gave its electoral votes to Clinton in 1992 and 1996, but since then they have become Republican states and have voted for Bush and McCain.  Back in 1992, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee and Kentucky had 7 Democratic Senators, but now its down to 3.  It's only a matter of time until the Republicans gain the remaining 3 unless something big happens for these states' Democratic parties.  Pryor and Landrieu will be endangered in 2014.

I think you will see a Republican win this race, although nothing should be cast in stone.  The Southern realignment is still taking place.  We will most likely lose 2 House seats in Tennessee and 2 house seats in Arkansas this election year.  LA-03 will most likely elect a Republican, too.  We could lose AL-02, MS-01, and several seats in FL, GA, SC, NC, and VA in the next few election cycles, but the Dems still have strength in a lot of these areas on a local front.



40, male, Democrat, NC-04

We're seeing two realignments.
Generally, it looks like the Atlantic South (along with Texas for similar but also different reasons) is already realigning back to the Democrats or has the capacity to but hasn't.  While the Border South (sans Missouri--if you count it as Southern) and the rest of the Deep South is either realigning to the Repubicans, a process that's starting to extend to or below the federal races.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
I agree
The realignment could be lumped into two different areas:  the growing areas that attract people from all walks of life and the areas of stagnation.

That's why we will see Texas, Virginia, Florida, and North Carolina becoming more Democratic friendly states.  

Some states, like SC, MO, and GA are somewhat in between.  These areas are growing in certain areas, but many areas are stagnant and are easy prey for the Republicans.

Alabama, Mississipi, Tennessee, West Virginia, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Arkansas are not growing, and as a result new ideas of progressive thought are not being encouraged.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
I think Georgia and maybe South Carolina can be included with your first group.
They're just far later coming to the party than Virginia and Florida.  In fact, there were big gains in both states over Kerry in 2008 that put Georgia into swing-state range and put South Carolina into the "no longer hopelessly blood red" range.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
As usually you are extremely optimistic
Georgia will reelect it's Republican Senator this year. It will also elect at least 7 (as now) Republican house members. The only chance for Democrats - Governorship, but even that is in doubt. In South Csrolina Republicans will surely hold Senate, most likely - Governorship and their 4 seats in House, and will get a chance to attack Spratt. Nothing to brag about for Democrats
[ Parent ]
That doesn't mean it will stay that way.


Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
They will.
In fact - there is no Senatorial and Gubernatorial elections in GA or SC in 2012. And Congressional redistricting by Republican-controlled legislatures of these states is unlikely to be friendly to Democrats. And in worst case can be openly brutal - as it was in Texas in 2003-2004
[ Parent ]
D gains in GA and SC do have a longer way to go
But they are coming, courtesy of demographics. However, we may have to wait until after the 2020 census to see the changes take full force.
[ Parent ]
Here i agree
but 2020 is ten years away)))
[ Parent ]
I agree with you on SC
SC is a growing state, and will probably gain a new district after 2010, but much of the area is still predominately Republican.  I could see the SC Coast eventually changing its politics like NoVA.  The rest of the state will trump it until that happens.

Georgia used to be more reliably Democratic.  In 1992, it gave its electoral votes to Clinton while NC and VA gave theirs to H.W. Bush.  Unfortunately, it has since drifted more to the Republicans.  I think with Atlanta continuing to grow, the suburbs of Atlanta will probably become more Democratic.  Some of the Southern areas of Georgia, if I remember correctly, will vote for a Democrat.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
Southern realignment had been slowly creeping along
But Obama's election kicked it into high gear. I think after the 2012 elections, the Dems with only hold minority majority districts in AL, MS, LA, GA, SC, TX, TN. I suppose someone like Gene Taylor could hang on but that's about it.
[ Parent ]
I wouldn't say it's that extreme
While I agree that it's rather bleak for the future, I would say that it's not as bad as you may think. Remember, Jim Cooper's Nashville district is white minority. Further, the whole Democratic allure in the South is the whole mantra of "standing up for the little guy." I think this enough will get some white Democrats elected in these states. Barrow represents a white majority district (granted the white-black proportion is very close).

I also think that districts that Gene Green and Lloyd Doggett hold right now can be drawn to liberal White urban constituencies after redistricting. We have a shot in the Texas House and the gubernatorial race (though it's not the best shot, but we have a chance after a bruising GOP primary).

NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan

[ Parent ]
Yes and no.
The chances of holding the rural Old South districts are low, especially after incumbents retire.  However, there are plenty of New South, non majority-minority areas throughout to rely on.  

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
True
but when you look at it, there's only one of those in South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana, and technically only one in Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia, though there are a Democratic-leaning white districts in those states.  

[ Parent ]
My God this is a weird poll
Look at the crosstabs-they have Beebe at a 52 percent with every other poll having him anywhere between 70 and 80.  It has Boozman's and Baker's approval rating as, overwhelmingly, don't know, and they're crushing.  Doesn't make any sense.  My bet is it comes down to the methodology.  Instead of a human being asking questions on the other end, respondents had a recording asking them to push 1, 2, and 3 for yes, no, and don't know-it's possible that people who just rushed through is skewed the results big time on this.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
It's registered Voter Poll
Update:

Rasmussen has also released an Arkansas Poll

Boozman 54 %
Lincoln 35 %

Strikingly Ras has Beebe with 70 % JA

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...  

[ Parent ]
I like how Scottie
Doesn't poll any Dem alternatives. You can bet if roles were reversed he would be polling Mike Huckabee, Bill Clinton running as a Republican and Jesus Christ himself!
[ Parent ]
When was the last Beebe poll?
I remember seeing him at 70-80, but that was almost a year ago.  
[ Parent ]
PPP always undercuts job approval
Don't know why. Time and time again they have Obama much lower than he should be. Their horserace numbers are very good.
[ Parent ]
don't push leaners?

[ Parent ]
Seems plausible

[ Parent ]
I doubt it
These robocalls are proving themselves more accurate than more traditional methods.
[ Parent ]
I think Arkansas want M Beebe for senate

In this level of support very few republicans run for senate against a strong democrat. Pence poll better against Bayh than Boozman against Beebe and Pence get out the race.

The alone democrat what can win this race is M Beebe.

Agree w/conspiracy, Arkansas is lost......
It's been said here before, correctly IMO, that Arkansas staved off the natural move to the GOP simply because of the Clinton Presidency.

But it's a solidly conservative state, and naturally should move to the GOP over time.  The Obama Presidency has accelerated the inevitable.  Those white conservative Arkansans who've voted for Democrats for a lifetime now see a liberal black guy from Chicago with a funny name to boot as THE President, and they just can't come to terms with it.

It makes it even worse that Obama upset their favorite daughter Hillary on the way to getting there.  That's the unique exacerbating factor in Arkansas that combines with the more common Southern state factors of ideology and race.

I'm particularly sad to see Vic Snyder go from the AR delegation.  He's a fantastic guy and a liberal who still managed to win, until now when he realized he was toast.  I met him once in a House office building, he was the most humble guy.

I think we have to be philosophical and realize we were going to lose badly here this year even if the national environment were better.  Obama's 59-38 defeat here set a record for Democratic nominee performance gap (minus-15) between the state and the nation.  Even if Obama's approval is at, say, 55% approaching the midterms, he'll be far under water in Arkansas, and we're going to suffer badly in federal races there.

My sympathy to Arkansas Democrats, it sucks to be on the losing end of this kind of trend.  It was hard enough in Virginia last fall to get thumped like we did, but at least it wasn't part of a right-leaning trend, just a horrifically bad flag-bearer at the top of the ticket.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

AR-Sen: Lincoln is toast according to PPP | 60 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

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

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox