Google Ads


Site Stats

AK-Sen: Miller, Under 50, Leads McAdams by 8

by: James L.

Sun Aug 29, 2010 at 1:56 PM EDT


Public Policy Polling (8/27-28, likely voters, no trend lines):

Scott McAdams (D): 39
Joe Miller (R): 47
Undecided: 14

Scott McAdams (D): 22
Joe Miller (R): 38
Lisa Murkowski (L-inc): 34
Undecided: 6

Scott McAdams (D): 28
Lisa Murkowski (R-inc): 60
Undecided: 12
(MoE: ±2.7%)

Folks, we have ourselves a race here! In a head-to-head matchup against Miller, McAdams trails Miller by only 8 points -- that's about the best poll we've seen for a Alaska Democrat this cycle. McAdams holds 81% of Democrats (to Miller's 73% of Republicans) and splits independents down the middle with Miller at 42% apiece. And that's before most Alaskans are acquainted with McAdams! Joe Miller has a favorable rating that's already underwater at 36-52, while McAdams is at 23-24, with 53% claiming "not sure".

The poll also solidifies that this race would be dead in the water with Murkowski as the Republican nominee. Murkowski has stronger favorables among liberals than she does conservatives, and has a higher approval rating among Dems (52-41) than Republicans (47-47). In a three-way race as a Libertarian, Murkowski would take a plurality of independents (38%), a significant chunk of Democrats (28%) and nearly a third of Republicans (32%). As Tom Jensen notes, Democrats should actually be hoping that Murkowski does not pull the Libertarian trigger, as her supporters align behind McAdams by a 47-23 margin in a two-way race against Miller.

Of course, the dynamics of three-way races are always unpredictable, and as we're seeing in Florida right now with Charlie Crist's difficulties, they can present difficult needles to thread for the outsider candidate. However, for the time being, it would appear that Democrats should be hoping that Murkowski loses the final count -- and that this stays as a two-way race.
James L. :: AK-Sen: Miller, Under 50, Leads McAdams by 8
Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
AK-Sen: Miller, Under 50, Leads McAdams by 8 | 98 comments
Any hope she could be persuaded to leave her party upon entry?
They did just give her a big phat phinger, and her base seems now to be cross-partisan
Eh
I remain persuaded (although not 100%) by arguments that Crist might become a Democrat, but I see Lisa Murkowski as more of a Republican Lieberman.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
About as good of news as we can expect
From the very little bit we've seen of McAdams (i.e. the video posted here and his website), I really think he has the possibility of connecting with rural, mostly conservative voters.  He reminds me a bit of John Tester.

It seems pretty clear that enough independents and more moderate Republicans (the folks that mostly would vote generic R this year) are really uneasy about Joe Miller.  McAdams needs to keep raising those questions, and sell himself as a solid alternative.  Fortunately, this is such a cheap state to do it in -- various groups could spend as much on all of McAdams's campaign as would take for one weekend of a TV blitz in California or Texas.

The GOP moderates
are really mostly the Stevens republicans that figure out Alaska needs pork in order to survive
[ Parent ]
Hell
Palin was pretty moderate herself until McCain brought her onto the national stage. Then she went full on tea party and didn't look back.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
If we lose the House
but win the Senate races in NV, KY, CO, and AK, that will be the story the next day.  "Republicans take the House, tea-baggers screw them over in the Senate.)
well, I guess I still include the other part of the story in my headline
but you know what I mean.  ;)  (Im tired from moving boxes.)
[ Parent ]
I would say if ...
... we lose the House and win three of the four races you mention, that's what the story is going to be.  The real question then becomes whether the more sane elements of the Republican Party realize this and do more to stand up to the baggers.
[ Parent ]
Mana from heaven
This looks like a solid win/win for us. If Murkowski forgoes a third party bid, she'll likely rule out endorsing Miller and we have ourselves a race. If Murkowski jumps in, we start out behind but have the opportunity to make significant inroads and at the very least, get an autumn full of Grade A cat fud. Plus the national media this kind of race could generate would be huge for us. Knock 'em dead Scott.

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)
Big caveat
Alaskan opinion polls seem to be of questionable reliability. This one seems intuitive, though.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
Amusing tweet from Tom
I think something people are forgetting with the Alaska polling sucks is that the one showing Begich up 20 was 'conducted' by R2K

http://twitter.com/ppppolls/st...

Indeed, the rest were much closer:
http://www.pollster.com/polls/...

[ Parent ]
They all showed Begich ahead in the end though
also check out the House race polls. Even Ivan Moore, who did well on the Senate race, had Berkowitz winning 51-43.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
Yup, Alaska polling sucked in 2008, Dems waaaay underperformed the polling, BUT two important things to consider are...
...first, the polling likely simply missed Palin coattails, and second, do we really know there was anything wrong with Alaska polling in cycles previosu to 2008?  If not, then it's dubious to put so much weight on 2008 in forming skepticism about 2010 polling.

At least I think with an intriguing McAdams-Miller matchup we're guaranteed now of a more-than-average amount of polling in AK-Sen 2010, and we'll see if 2008 was an aberration, or if polling problems persist.

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

[ Parent ]
Alaska polling is weird
In December 2008, R2K released a poll showing Palin leading Murkowski 55-31 (do we know if all their polls were fake?). Then in January 2009 a poll by local pollster Dittman Research came out showing Murkowski on top 57-33. It's similar to ND where R2K released a poll showing Dorgan beating Hoeven 57-35 and Rasmussen showed Hoeven winning 58-36. I dunno, maybe this is just an R2K thing.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
Primary polling in general
And all forms of low-turnout elections. Everybody's record suffers with primaries. There, intensity is the key; whoever can motivate people to come to the polls and pick between two or more people who normally share at least the same philosophical baseline is generally going to be the winner. When it gets to the general election, the intensity can be swamped by the larger numbers of people who show up and vote.
[ Parent ]
AK polling pre-2008
Alaska was always considered hard to poll.  In the contiguous 48, there are concerns about people who don't answer a landline; in Alaska there were concerns about people who didn't answer a phone.  Pollsters tended to come across (at least to some) as outsiders who shouldn't be trusted, it can be hard to get a representative sample (particularly outside the cities), etc.

As to how much these problems mattered, or still do ... I do not have an informed opinion.  But I haven't heard anyone claim that Alaska polls have become more reliable than they used to be.

[ Parent ]
Very good point, James
I was also keeping in mind the poor prognostication in the Republican primary we're discussing in this thread, though.

But yeah, one does forget that some of the "polls" were "done" by Y2K.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

[ Parent ]
Mmm...I find the crosstabs a bit odd
The sample went for McCain over Obama 55-39 while the real results were McCain over Obama 59.5-38. No doubt these numbers would still be surprising if the voter sample were appropriately adjusted, but perhaps a few points ought to be shifted to the R column. I see no reason to not expect R enthusiasm to outpace D enthusiasm as is the case with everywhere else.

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)
Although remember Palin running as VP
Might have created excess Republican enthusiasm in 2008.  
[ Parent ]
This. Pretty much...
Palin's numbers have cratered in Alaska from where she was as VP candidate.  

Which is why it's hard to really come up with any "scientific" voter screen.

[ Parent ]
This is absolutely true
AK looked shockingly competitive on the presidential level before Palin's selection was announced. Look at the Pollster chart - couldn't be more stark.
[ Parent ]
That's because she's shown she doesn't give a rip about Alaska
Mountains and bears and moose are just props for her now.
[ Parent ]
McAdams
I think the one path to victory he has is for Murkowski not run and then endorse him about 2 weeks before the election.  

Or McAdams drops out and Murkowski is the Dem.

Libertarian secular Republican, MO-7

Murkowski as the Dem will never happen.

[ Parent ]
I agree
The other path is the only realistic one.  It just depends whether or not Murkowski wants to run for office again more than she wants to screw Palin.

Libertarian secular Republican, MO-7
[ Parent ]
I wouldn't get too excited...
her supporters align behind McAdams by a 47-23 margin in a two-way race against Miller.

This is just the result of a hard fought primary.  I'd suspect this number would flip-flop and most of the Murkowski Republicans would find their way home to the GOP.  

Also Miller will have 10x the money McAdams will being a National Teabagger candidate and quasi-celebrity for knocking off Palin's arch enemy in Alaska.  He'll be able to frame himself and McAdams before Scott has enough time to even get enough money to get on the air.  

Miller is going to race to the middle, to pretend to be a moderate and that will fool enough of the Murkowski voters.  

Only chance I'd give McAdams is if Murkowski endorses him and campaigns with him.  

Her supporters
are much more moderate then Miller's supporters. That's why they did not vote for him. I see McAdams gaining more support from Murkowski supporters. Besides the fact that McAdams is a moderate that fits his state well. It would only take $500,000 to be effective in Alaska.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
So...
McAdams is one of those "moderate" progressive heroes?
[ Parent ]
I'm not entirely sure
what he is, but from what I've seen he seems like a good fit for Alaskan Democrats.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
I'd say he's a good fit for Alaska in general
(pun unintentionally created but totally intended)

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Oh Mercy!

[ Parent ]
I could care less his ideology
Winning in AK would be killer.
[ Parent ]
If he is like...
....Begich, I'd take him in a heartbeat, over Murkowski or Miller. Begich is adamantly anti-gun control, but other than that, he's been a fairly reliable D vote. He's no Ben Nelson, that's for sure.

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.
[ Parent ]
Well, a few things...
First, if Murkowski runs third-party, there's no way she bolts and caucuses with the Democrats. I suspect the national GOP, unlike the Palin/Tea Party crowd, would half-heartedly back Miller, whilst giving a wink and nod that a Murkowski win would be OK. I think if she does jump in and run a center-right campaign, she probably wins.

Second, I have a tough time fathoming McAdams can really win here. Democrats are likely to make-up less than a FIFTH (!) of the electorate this year, and even if McAdams made inroads among moderate Republicans, he'd probably still fall at least ten points short.

Third, I'm actually of the mindset that McAdams can only win if Murkowski DOES run. If Miller runs as a Tea Party populist and Murkowski as a rank-and-file Republican, that gives McAdams a clear path to scoring among the centrist Tony Knowles crowd.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

So you
are saying the PPP poll is wrong?

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26
[ Parent ]
I think the PPP poll is probably an accurate post-primary snapshot
I don't think it accounts for the likely behavior of disgruntled Murkowski supporters in the long-run, though. In a two-way Miller/McAdams race, I think most of them would hold their nose for Miller. And, in the three-way poll, my guess is a lot of moderates said Murkowski w/o knowing much about McAdams.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast
[ Parent ]
There is certainly a cat fud factor
Murkowski and Miller would be hitting each other extremely hard because each candidate had the voters the other one needs to win.  McAdams could slide up the middle, but that only seems to happen in primaries.
[ Parent ]
Where is your 1/5th number coming from?

[ Parent ]
Historically, Democrats make up roughly 1/5 of the electorate
In '08, they made up 20%, in '04, 19%. Democrats only win in Alaska by running-up double-digits among the 45% who are unregistered.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast
[ Parent ]
A couple of points....
I cant see how Miller beating McAdams 47 to 39 can be thought of in any way as great news. If after all the votes are counted Miller wins the GOP nod its still his race to lose.

Remember there is still uncertainty on the GOP side holding down Miller's numbers right now. If he wins outright his numbers will improve.

As for Murkowski I dont see what she gains by going rogue (I couldnt resist using that line). If she has lost she needs to realistically look at what she wants. I could see Murkowski very easily sliding into a very well paid K street lobbying job. Going 3rd party, bad mouthing Miller and making GOP enemies wont help her very much in her new career.

Sadly for the Dems I most likely can see her swallowing her pride, endorsing Miller and then riding off to rake in the bucks.

Besides if in the back of her mind she ever hopes to stage a political comeback (ie run for Senate in 2014) pissing off the GOP establishment out of spite wont help her any.

Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...

She might hate
Palin that much and it cant hurt that Miller essentially called her a whore. Besides, McAdams has low name recognition meaning he can define him self and get closer to the 50% mark. It would only take $500,000 to do this.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Murkowksi
Could also make good with Republicans and run for Gov or Sen again in 2014. MAybe even for the House when Young retires?
[ Parent ]
I don't think that's realistic. An incumbent losing a primary is dead in the water in the future......
Murkowski is a loser now.  And worse yet HER FAMILY are losers, with her dad, too, losing as an incumbent in their party's primary.  Lisa can't run again in such a strongly Republican state without fierce primary competition that, with a large and conservative GOP electorate, will eviscerate her.

Murkowski's only path to victory would be to thread the needle THIS year as a Libertarian, if she can get that line.

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

[ Parent ]
I'll disagree
Murkowski will make herself the Lieberman of the right by running as a Libertarian. She'd have a good chance this year, but she'd completely alienate the Alaska GOP.

Given her relative youth, the best way for her to save her long-term political career is to endorse Miller, if only supporting him passively, and then spend a couple years in Alaska rehabbing her image, whether in the private sector or perhaps in Parnell's administration. When she heals the wounds with her party's base, she'll be able to run for office again, perhaps governor or against Begich in 2014.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

[ Parent ]
She is closely linked to
the large corporations. In a few years time she will either be on K street or on the board of one of those corporations. She is not about to endorse a man whom called her a whore and the supporter of this man who she hates with a passion.  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
8 points down after what I assume was
very few if any tv ads vs all that money that went behind Miller.  Doesn't sound too bad.  Doesnt mean we'll win, but it's good position to be in for an unknown in as red of a state as Alaska.
[ Parent ]
Surprisingly gloomy comments.
   McAdams is much closer to Miller in a two-way race than I thought possible.  

24, Male, GA-05
Take heart
This poll is flat wrong, Alaska polls usually are. This is a huge and diverse state and pollsters typically take the easy way out - they call random folks in Anchorage, Fairbanks and Juneau and then are amazed when the actual results come in. At that point we hear, 'Boy things must have changed in the last 10 minutes after we took our poll. Some pertinent details:

1. Democrats do very poorly in statewide office. Ted Stevens lost due to a late - and ultimately bogus - felony conviction. Prior to that, it had been 1970 since a Dem had been sent to Washington.

2. There aren't that many Dems here - only 15% of the registered voters. True, only 25% are reg Rs but the vast majority of the Inds and NPs vote R. Look at the primary, look how many of them took the R ballot rather than the D.

3. PPP says they surveyed 1,300 likely voters but offers no geographical info or party weighting. No doubt they oversampled Anchorage and oversampled Ds.

4. No one in Alaska was really surprised that Miller pulled out ahead. As the election got closer, one began to hear more and more supporters for Miller and the feeling was that it was getting close. Even the last pollsters had him down 11 - and he finished up 2, a mere 13% error.

5. Pollsters made the same mistakes when Palin ran for governor - she was supposed to finish 3rd in the primary and won by 20%. Then she was going to lose the general to Knowles and won by 8%.

Trust me, if Miller wins the primary, he easily beats McAdams in a 2-way. If Lisa M runs as a Libertarian, folks will call her a sore loser and, again, Miller wins the general. Her best shot might be as a write-in and I can't see that working.

Her only real chance is hoping the remaining count goes her way.

I think
I'll trust PPP over someone who just opened an account here today. And the PPP poll matches fairly closely to the 2008 election results when you factor in Palin's positive effect for the Republicans. I do not think anyone here believes it will be easy or even likely that McAdams will win, but he certainly has an opportunity if he can portray Miller as too extreme, while also effectively reaching out to ordinary Alaskans. Alaska is not necessarily ideologically right-wing as you make it out to be your reference to post-1970s performance by Democrats. Since that time, Alaskans have voted for a variety of less ideological-driven Republicans. I guess panic is setting in on the Republican side in Alaska though.
[ Parent ]
Wishful thinking you call analysis.
   It might just be that a Alaska prefers a small town mayor to a right-wing ideologue lawyer.

24, Male, GA-05
[ Parent ]
PPP is good
They take very accurate polls, they've been wrong a few times, but they've been really accurate mostly. If this is an open seat race, McAdams is going to have good numbers. His record is very impressive and it will be appealing to many Alaska voters.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
As I said down below
You need a serious attitude adjustment. But you've already burst out the gates with pretty damaged credibility, thanks to this:

Pollsters made the same mistakes when Palin ran for governor - she was supposed to finish 3rd in the primary and won by 20%. Then she was going to lose the general to Knowles and won by 8%.

Wrong.

[ Parent ]
Interseting.
So you had two polls, Hellenthal and CRG Research, neither of whom I've ever heard of (maybe they're Alaska pollsters?) showing Palin tied or losing by 1 point to Knowles in mid-October.

Not to defend JimAK, but perhaps that's what he was thinking of, though I have no idea if the media narrative after the Hellenthal poll came out in Alaska was that Palin was in any serious danger of losing.

[ Parent ]
Actually, PPP does give party weighting.
You have to open the .pdf file to see it, but it's right there on the second page.

Democrat    20%
Republican  38%
Independent 42%

So if you're correct about only 25% of Alaskans being Republican, then they very much oversampled Republicans in their poll.

They also gave breakdowns of ideology.

Liberal      14%
Moderate     44%
Conservative 42%

And they also show the sample is:

53% female
47% male

82% white
18% non-white

And when it comes to age:

18-29    8%
30-45   28%
46-65   45%
over 65 19%

I have no idea if these figures are representative of Alaska, or more importantly, of the electorate that will actually show up this November.  But those are the numbers.

Oh, Mike Gravel won in 1974, and served until January 1981 after losing the Democratic nomination in 1980.  So technically, Alaska was "sending" a Democrat to Washington up to the beginning of 1981.

[ Parent ]
I have to admit
I love "a mere 13% error." That's like a poll predicting that George W. Bush would tie John Kerry in Maryland. 13% is not "mere," dude.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
Please
McAdams has no shot. None. He didn't even file until June 1 when it became clear that no other Democrat was going to bother.

Why do you think Tony Knowles said no to replacing him on the ballot? Because he knows he would lose and lose badly.

Knowles lost to 'Thanks Dad' Lisa Murkowski in 04 despite the baggage of being the only US Senator appointed by her father. Two years later, he lost 41-49 to Sarah Palin.

If the so-called 'most popular Democrat in Alaska' couldn't win an election, how is McAdams?

Get out a map. Sitka is on an island and is closer to Seattle than Anchorage.

Again, look at history. No Democrat has gone to DC since 1970 except Mark Begich who barely scraped by after Stevens was convicted of 5 felonies.

Bill Sheffield was elected governor for one term in 1982 but didn't run for re-election due to some pesky indictments. Steve Cowper served a term and then fled.

Tony Knowles was elected Governor by the thinnest of margins in 1994 and then was re-elected after the Republican nominee was found to have lied about getting millions in donations from his rich Chicago wife.

That's it. That is the list of successful statewide Dems in the last 40 years. Contrast that with Ted Stevens, 40 years in the Senate. Frank Murkowski, 22 years in the Senate. Don Young, 40 years in the House. Governors Hickel, Miller, Hammond, Palin, Parnell.

Alaska has been carried by exactly one Democrat running for President, LBJ in 64. Every other time, the electoral votes have gone to a Republican.

Lisa Murkowski may win or Scott Miller may win but you can bet it will be one of them. As the DNC spokesman said,  "Well, our candidate in Alaska...his name is not Lisa Murkowski."

You need an attitude adjustment
You are a brand new user commenting here for the first time. You may not march in here with a bellicose, smug, know-it-all attitude. If you can't dial your attitude back, you won't be welcome here for very long.
[ Parent ]
Is this the Alaska edition of Tekzilla?
Tony Knowles lost very narrowly to an incumbent, at the same time that President Bush was carrying Alaska by a huge margin.  

Palin was popular and a fresh face in 2006, getting losing 49-41 (with Andrew Halcro maybe siphoning off some voters too) is not that bad.

And yes, Alaska is a huge state. Sitka is equidistant to Seattle. My sheets are Egyptian cotton. Neither of those statements have any relevance to the race.

It's a state that has historically elected Republicans, but doesn't have a special propensity to elect nutbergers like Miller.

The dems have a shot in this race, because the teabaggers can't control themselves.  They did the same in NV and KY.


21,Democrat, NY-02, male

[ Parent ]
"My sheets are Egyptian cotton"
One of the best zingers I've heard in a while. Gotta remember that one. :)

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08
[ Parent ]
Disagree
The State Democratic Party thought so little of their chances that they didn't field a candidate.

McAdams is unknown in the state and likely to stay that way. The commercial and political center of the state is Anchorage. He lives 700 miles away and travel is difficult at best.

I'm just learning my way around here - is 'teabagger' accepted?

[ Parent ]
yes
"Teabagger" is accepted, but if you say "Democrat" instead of "Democratic" party, people get mad.  That makes me laugh.  

But seriously, the best thing Sen. Murkowski could do is what Crist should have done.  Keep her powder dry, endorse and campaign for Miller, and make it clear she wants to run again in '14.  If she promises to help get Miller elected, she will have some serious chit from the right-wing.  Is there a chance they'd betray her in 3 years?  Maybe.  But I do think it's the best chance she has.  

Charlie should have done the same thing.  Run the primary.  If he lost it to Rubio, smile, endorse and campaign for him, and make it clear that you want to run in '12.  It would be less time to wait, but a harder race to win.

Sometimes the sour grapes on both sides makes me think these politicians grew up today rather than 20-40 years ago, when kids DID actually lose and not everyone got a trophy.  Man up (or woman up) and act like an adult when you lose, and try again!    

[ Parent ]
Without getting into a huge debate
over the stupid "teabagger" vs. "Democrat Party" crap, this is a Democratic site and there is a double standard. There are more rules for Republicans to follow. Just a friendly FYI.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
okay
Putting aside the fact that I've been visiting this site at least weekly since you were in eighth grade, I figured the liberal owner opened the tent to all.  I understand it's a left-leaning site, but there's some good stuff here.  I've tried to keep my center-right politics out of my few posts (you can check), but you are right, the posters have a right to discriminate on the minority who are not left-leaning.  I mentioned the Democrat thing once and I was automatically called out as a "Thug".  It's more that and less the actual discussion of the issue that "makes me laugh".  I suppose if the goal is to get the most left-leaning members and participants, than that is fine.  I'll just not join the facebook group or twitter feed or tell my friends and all that.  And I'll remain mostly silent.  It's a shame, as I mentioned in a previous post, I once was on the ballot as a Democrat several years back!
[ Parent ]
rolls eyes.
I was thinking it was better you hear something critical from me than James or David because I can't suspend you. But I said my peace and now I am done.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
I've never understood why this site can't be non-partisan
The material is decidedly in the realm of "political news" rather than "political commentary" (although the news is often presented in a partisan tone, it's not fundamental to the news).

If we're interested in accurately predicting results, we need to be well aware of the false consensus effect that is especially prone to occur in environments with insular feedback. For instance, I think people here tend to underestimate the chances of right-wing Republican candidates because they overestimate the degree to which the average voter shares their perspective on how "nutty" those candidates are.  

[ Parent ]
As a social democrat
who ends up being effectively a very liberal Democrat by default, I agree with you and think you make a very good point.

But neither of us makes the decisions here. Just as a newspaper sets the editorial tone for its coverage, the Publisher and Editors of this site set the editorial tone for Swing State Project's coverage. So ultimately, anyone who cares greatly about a site having a neutral tone will need to either play by the rules here or/and start their own site.

I would point out, also, that there's nothing to prevent neutral horse-race analysis here. Most of the folks here are either Democrats or Democrat-leaning Independents, but people who make biased predictions that seem to have a very flimsy basis don't meet with a bunch of yes-men/-women here.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

[ Parent ]
Because
Analyzing the news while pretending to have no skin in the game would be totally disingenuous of us. No offense to the guys at Cook Political, or Rothenberg, or the like, but the last thing I'd want this site to become is some non-partisan playpen that divorces electoral politics from the reason why we care about it in the first place.

Otherwise, you may as well just go watch pro sports.

[ Parent ]
Politics is a lot like pro sports
Your vote has about as much of a chance of swinging the election as your cheering has of changing the outcome of game. There may be more at stake instrumentally in elections, but from a private perspective the expected benefit is close to zero. Indeed, there are a number of academic articles in the field of public choice based on the principle that democratic participation can be explained in a similar manner to why people support sports teams.
[ Parent ]
I think both of you make great points
Thanks for the high-level discussion.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
Let me put it another way
Writing about politics while being neutral is like following sports without rooting for any particular team.

There's something unnatural about pretending you have no skin in the game.

[ Parent ]
All's fair in politics.
There are no "rules" for behavior. They do what will most likely get them elected.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
"if you say "Democrat" instead of "Democratic" party, people get mad"
It's actually quite simple. "Democrat" is a noun; "Democratic" is an adjective. Simple English.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
THIS.


NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan
[ Parent ]
Here here
Agreed. Come to think of it, what we lefties are really objecting to is poor grammar.

Well, that, and the fact that when Republicans refer to the "Democrat Party," they usually follow it up something along the lines of "evil socialist baby-killing atheist Hitlers."  

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

[ Parent ]
I can't help mentioning
that it should be "Hear, hear." That's the expression. Of course, I agree with the content of your post.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
LMAO!!!!
It's always good to get your spelling right when criticize other peoples grammar! Since I am a horrible typist and make tons of spelling & grammatical errors in my posts I will not throw stones!

Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...
[ Parent ]
And it makes me laugh
that a lot of those that demand all immigrants from non-English-speaking countries speak English and are calling for English as the national official language have a pretty poor grasp of the language themselves.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Yeah, I've noticed that too
It's hilarious.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
Simple logic
Members of the Democratic Party never called themselves members of the Democrat Party.

Members of the Tea Party happily declared themselves 'teabaggers' voluntarily.

Teabaggers found out after naming themselves that they had made a hilarious and stupid mistake, but they picked the name for themselves. Democrats never called themselves 'the Democrat Party.' 'Teabagger' is a reminder of a blunder by the targets. 'Democrat' as an adjective is a fabricated tribal identification taunt.

[ Parent ]
This is obviously a Miller supporter trying to dampen our hopes
He see's Miller is somewhat vulnerable, and he thinks that if he somehow convinces us (mostly progressive dems, and ones who are very interested in electoral politics to boot) that it's not worth our time, we won't donate money to McAdams campaign, or only half halfheartedly support him.

It's really kinda sad, we don't go on redstate and spew the opposite stuff, just leave us alone.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

[ Parent ]
sorry
I voted for Lisa Murkowski. I've lived in Alaska all my life and know a fair amount about it.

I found this place when a friend pointed out the excellent analysis of the Alaska primary voting patterns.

[ Parent ]
Sorry, the kind of stuff happens quote often here
Especially when it regards a race where a teabag candidate is involved, I remember one dude basically saying the Dan Mongiardo could do no wrong.  This was likely due to the fact that he polled worse than Conway in a Paul head to head match-up.

Being a Murkowski supporter, how will you be voting in a two way / three way race?  And what if Murkowski (as unlikely as it may be) decided to give Palin the finger and endorsed Scott McAdams?

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

[ Parent ]
Well
If Lisa M runs a credible write-in campaign, I will write her in and vote for her.

If she sells out completely and finagles her way on the ballot as a Libertarian, I will vote for Miller.

My bet is that either way, she finishes second.

Then what? Well, she could run for US House in 2 years, Don Young is 80 and about to retire. That would seem to be a real step down, though.

The other option would be to run against Mark Begich in 4 years but that might not be a slam dunk, either. Word is that Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan is angling for that and there is also a possibility that Sarah Palin might run, depending on what happens to her other ambitions between now and then.

[ Parent ]
Now
I'm not an expert into Alaskan politics, but Palin would of been much more formidable in a race against Begich if she had stayed as governor instead of taking off to be a celebrity. There was plenty of bad blood between them for sure.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Doesn't have to be a Millerite
A Republican who voted for Murkowski but didn't switch to McAdams would still be perfectly happy to come in and attack the Democratic candidate. Now he's a Miller supporter.
[ Parent ]
Poor PPP poll
At some point PPP has to reexamine it's weighting.  They do excellent among the sample they do poll, but their sample weighting ranges from okay to incredibly obtuse.  That's why they are quite accurate in primaries (where there is almost no partisan weighting).

PPP scale now goes from a 28% Obama voter no-show rate in consistently high turnout Wisconsin, to this poll where they assert a 10% McCain voter no show rate.

While I can see some merit to the idea that Alaska will have the greatest McCain no-show rate in the country, 10% is enormous... especially given their assertions of extreme 20%+ Obama no-shows in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Delaware.

A more realistic (and consistent with their other polling) 2% percent McCain no-show rate would put McAdams about 12 points behind.

I shouldn't have said "poor PPP poll"
Rethinking it, a 10% McCain no-show rate could be plausible in Alaska since Palin did drive up the numbers here unlike anywhere else.  But still, their assertion of such wildly different behavoir between here and Wisconsin and Pennyslvania is hard to imagine.

On the other hand, it could explain why they placed such a high Obama no-show rate in Delaware... but even that doesn't make much sense as I doubt Biden drew nearly as many normally non-likely Delaware voters to the polls as Palin did normally non-likely Alaska voters.

[ Parent ]
But...
Biden wasn't the only draw in Delaware, or in other blue states. You can't forget that Palin was particularly repugnant, drawing extra Democrats to the polls out of disgust at the idea of her getting anywhere near national office. Polarization works with both carrots and sticks. In general, though, expect reversion to the mean. States that went McCain by a margin larger than their actual Republican registration will show some movement toward Democrats (after accounting for a national swing in mood that may be more or less significant in various areas), and so on.
[ Parent ]
It's not a question of swings
It's an issue no-shows.

In this case, PPP has both coming into play.  PPP has McAdams improving on Obama's performance for two completely different reasons.  

First, about 10% of McCain voters will stay home.  Second, a net of about 7% of McCain voters will switch to vote for McAdams.

[ Parent ]
Joe
Miller was on Face the Nation today. You can watch the video here. I won't write what I thought out his appearance but all I'll say is if this wasn't a deep red state like Alaska his goose would be cooked like Sharron Angle's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

Just the starting baseline
Immediately after the Republican primary in Nevada, the polling had Angle over Reid by 11. Once she had to start actually defending her ideas and positions, she started tanking. Joe Miller's got that same not-ready-for-prime-time air to him and a similar collection of patently nutty proposals. His proposal to eliminate the Department of Education would cost Alaska a significant sum. His proposals to limit the amount of revenue Alaska receives from the federal government would seem very likely to draw a negative reception. He got off on an Angle-like wrong foot by starting his (mostly) post-primary campaign by sending out the Murkowski tweet, alienating her and a large percentage of her supporters.

Basically, a difference of eight points is the starting baseline. If Miller turns out to be as bad a campaigner as Sharron Angle or Rand Paul, then McAdams has a legitimate shot at taking this seat. If Miller gets his act together very rapidly, if McAdams runs a poor campaign, or if Miller gets a large amount of outside help, then the chance will fade into the normal Republican-leaning Alaskan political mold.

Well
the saving grace for Paul and Miller is that their opponents didn't have the huge warchests like Harry Reid did to immediately begin attacking them on TV right after the primary ended. Sharron Angle's poll numbers imploded because Harry Reid started airing attack ads against her right after the primary end. Negative exposure in the media will hurt you, but if your opponent has the money to put your wacky views on TV every night during Prime Time you're in trouble.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Why do people think Miller is going to be a bad campaigner?
He came from nowhere to knock off an incumbent Senator in a primary. He certainly had an assist from Palin, but not all of her candidates have won this cycle.

The guy's a right-winger in the line of Jim DeMint or Jim Inhofe, but those two prove by their mere existence that being this far right and winning isn't impossible. The question is, is he too far right for Alaska? That, not running a lousy campaign, is most likely to be his downfall should he lose.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

[ Parent ]
Because of what he's shown so far
Starting off by massively and unnecessarily insulting Lisa Murkowski was not a sign of a good campaigner, and vowing to cut federal funding for Alaska is not a good campaign move. There isn't enough yet to say those are definitely proof of his ineptness, but they're a bad start. I did say 'if' when listing the situations where McAdams could win - and noted that if Miller gets his act together, or in other words turns out to be a better campaigner than his initial missteps have indicated, then there's little chance of overcoming the state's partisan lean.
[ Parent ]
By the way, I'm putting my metaphorical money on
"concern troll".

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
Man, I don't even mind Republicans that much...
but seriously, just come out and say you're a Republican (and don't be too obvious in your trolling, like General Hospital). That's one of the things I like about GOPVOTER, his name screams his party affiliation at you in all caps. It makes things so much easier.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
don't forget
MassGOP, and also cclub, although it's a more clever reference

18, Dem, CA-14 (home) CA-09 (college, next year). social libertarian, economic liberal, fiscal conservative.   Everybody should put age and CD here. :)
[ Parent ]
INRepublican, too n/t


"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
AK-Sen: Miller, Under 50, Leads McAdams by 8 | 98 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