Quinnipiac (10/7-11, likely voters, 9/21-26 in parens):
Richard Blumenthal (D): 54 (49)
Linda McMahon (R): 43 (46)
Undecided 3 (4)
(MoE: ±2.9%)
Remember back when everyone got all in a tizzy because Quinnipiac suddenly saw the Connecticut Senate race collapse to a 3-point lead for Richard Blumenthal? Of course, that panic lasted about a week before about half a dozen polls in two days showed that it was really a double-digit race. Well, Quinnipiac's back, and they too find that it's now a double-digit race, with Blumenthal up 11, and at the 54% mark. Blumenthal's favorables are 57/38, compared to McMahon's 46/46. Qpac's head Douglas Schwartz, in the poll writeup, muses "Linda McMahon may have peaked too soon and her advertising saturation could be causing 'McMahon fatigue.'" (I suppose that sounds better than saying "Uh, yeah, that was an outlier.")
OK, that's not entirely fair to Quinnipiac, because there's a lot of anecdotal evidence to that effect. In fact, it's the story on the front page of the New York Times today, focusing on McMahon's inability to connect with female voters, and the mind-numbing ad overkill (echoes of Meg Whitman here?) is a big part of that. Of course, the more relevant NYT story might be that they also just endorsed Blumenthal, despite their hatchet job on him earlier. They did (correctly, I'm afraid) describe him as "charm-free, though.
Also, despite McMahon's attempts to steer the discussion toward lunchpail issues, the story seems to be steering back toward her unpleasant tenure as head of the WWE, as seen in a new spate of news stories today, especially from the major in-state newspaper, the Hartford Courant, focusing on steroid and prescription drug abuse in the WWE. The DSCC is also fanning the flames, launching a new TV ad that's probably their harshest attack yet on the WWE years (maybe they were saving the best for last). |