AK-Sen: Murkowski Leads Big (In Friendly Poll), Miller 2nd

Hellenthal for Alaskans Standing Together (10/25-27, likely voters):

Scott McAdams (D): 23

Joe Miller (R): 29

“Lisa Murkowski, as a write-in”: 44

Undecided: 5

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Here’s one more data point from Alaska, a race that’s impossible to poll but where pollsters are still trying their darndest. I don’t know if I’d trust this poll (sponsored by Alaskans Standing Together, a group that supports Lisa Murkowski, and taken by a local pollster with whom I’m not familiar… by the way, how can a state as small as Alaska support what seems like so many local pollsters?) any more than I’d trust yesterday’s Hays Research poll, but they show the same thing: Murkowski opening up a pretty big lead over Joe Miller and Scott McAdams, both of whom are mired in the 20s. The big caveat here, of course, is this poll uses some prompting, although it does also mention that one would have to write Murkowski in. This new poll shows Miller similarly toxic, with 33/62 favorables (including 46% “very negative”). McAdams’ main problem, by contrast, is lack of name rec: 7% of respondents asked “Who?” when his name was read.

Also on the Alaska front, there’s still the issue of the printed list of write-in candidates that will be available at polling stations, which the Alaska Supreme Court has basically OK’d, although another hearing will be held today. However, the state was swamped with dozens of people signing up as write-in candidates, apparently in an attempt to bury Murkowski’s name and make it harder to find (this was urged by a local conservative radio talk show host). Here’s a link to the list as it stands: the list is in alphabetical order (and I assume that’s how it’ll be presented at polling places), meaning that anyone with basic familiarity with the letter “M” should be able to operate it without too much trouble. The only names on the list that seem poised to generate any trouble are “Lee Hamerski,” and “Lisa M. Lackey.” (Somehow I gotta wonder if that second one is even real; it’s a little too convenient. At least I.P. Freeleigh didn’t sign up.)

Finally, McAdams and Murkowski are both out with last-minute TV ads that are worth a watch. McAdams goes negative against Murkowski for going Washington, while Murkowski (probably guided by the poll above) still seems to see Miller as the bigger threat, and goes after him for his hired goons’ detainment of a reporter.

47 thoughts on “AK-Sen: Murkowski Leads Big (In Friendly Poll), Miller 2nd”

  1. And thus voters won’t be prompted as to whether or not they want to fill in the “write-in” bubble and spell out her name.

    Therefore, poll is worthless except as an optimistic view of how much support the senator could get if all voters were prompted.

  2. I think she might just see almost zero dropoff from being a write-in as compared to if her name were printed on the ballot.

    Of course I’m not in Alaska to monitor this, but I get the impression she’s saturated the airwaves and cluttered people’s mailboxes so that everyone knows she’s running as a write-in.  And of course she’s the incumbent, so she had the best name recognition to begin with.

    I think she’s likely to pull it off, and the write-in issue might have dropped to the point where polling her as a named candidate is as accurate at this point as anything.

    I still see a needle that can be threaded for McAdams, but it requires him winning over Murkowski’s soft Dem support and then collecting undecideds.  Of course if this poll is right and Murkowski really is at 44, then game over.  But if she’s in the 30s, then McAdams still has a path.  He actually needs Miller to stay in the 20s to do this, and not have any more reliable Republicans flip to Lisa.

    I do not think Miller will win, and I stand by my most recent prediction that Miller finishes 3rd.

  3. And think for a split second that “Trig” was running … as in Palin?

    Also, isn’t it a little odd that all of the major candidates (and quite a few of the minor ones) all have last names beginning with “M”? Weird coincidence, I suppose.

  4. here’s to you..

    David & Vicky Beeman, Ken & Linda Bullard, Stephanie & Ty DeVault, Erma & Gale Doggett, Dona & Marty Grossman, Devone & Dominic Hasara, David & Deanna March, Karen & Roderic Perry, Carl & Patrina Remley, Irene & Richard Repper, James & Pamela Thatch, Linda & Tracy Vrem

    Also, Janelle & Kim Thibodeaux could be sisters, or Kim is a guy.

    Sadly, Paulette & Roger Egger couldn’t make it as write-ins due to tardiness. Same goes for Joshua and Kristin Holland.

    Best write-in name: Tom M

    Second most well-known write-in: Jerry Ward (no word on if it’s that Jerry Ward)

  5. The key for McAdams is for more people to intend to vote for him than for Miller. Even if more people intend to vote for Murkowski than McAdams, a lot of her votes could be disqualified for not filling in the bubble, screwing up her name phonetically, filling her in for Governor etc. With 100 listed write-in candidates, there’s a good chance that an average Alaska voter has met one of them. Most people won’t throw their vote away on a random acquaintance, but a few close friends may.

    Alaska voters don’t seem particularly diligent with their ballots. Apparently during the Republican primary there was a ballot initiative on abortion which galvanized so many social conservatives that 10,000 of them voted only on that issue and left the senate race blank.  

  6. R – 44%

    I – 37%

    D – 19%

    McAdams – 4/34/60 = 26%

    Miller – 65/30/6 = 41%

    Murkowski – 31/36/34 = 33%

    So, that’s Murkowski’s worst-case-scenario, methinks. I really can’t think of a plausible voter model under which McAdams could win – the guy probably needs 45% of Independents and 80% of Democrats, and neither of these is happening. Nonetheless, I do think Murkowski will have a sufficient GOTV operation, and I think she’ll prevail in the end.

  7. I’d be pushing ads on radio and in print urging people to vote for Lisa Murkowski for Governor.  Her dad was governor fairly recently so it might be enough to fog the minds of enough voters to have people write it in on the wrong line.  And I doubt it would really hurt Parnell.

  8. would be if McAdams wins.  I can see reasonable paths to victory for Miller and Murkowski.

    Either the write-in takes off or it doesn’t.  If it does Lisa wins, and if it doesn’t Miller will win.  

    I think Miller has a real shot because folks will head into the booth and have a ballot without Murkowski on it and will just vote for the [R] and thus Miller.  I think Miller is being heavily under-polled in polls that give Murkowski as an option off the top.  Politics is a team sport for the vast majority of voters, if they self-identify as a Republican they vote for the Republican no matter what, and the vice versa with Dems voting for the [D].  

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Miller ends up with 40% of the vote on Nov 2nd.  

    I don’t like McAdams’ last ad at all either.  He never really got the campaign message across that Murkowski cannot win via write-in, it’s an extreme longshot and that any vote for Murkowski is helping Miller.  

  9. Now comes a Dittman poll with Lisa M in the lead –

    Dittman says: the technique used by pollster Dave Dittman is unique to most public polls of the race. Respondents are first asked an open-ended question about their vote preference, and their choice of candidate is recorded. If the respondent is unable to make a choice, he or she is read the names of the candidates on the ballot, with the option of a write-in candidate. In order to choose Murkowski, the respondent must choose the write-in option and provide her name.

    This is NOT what happened. As I posted yesterday or the day before, I was polled by Dittman and given all THREE names.  

  10. Just had a PPP robo-poll on AK Senate:

    “Will you vote for?”

    1. Scott McAdams

    2. Joe Miller

    3. Someone else

    Depending on where they sampled, might be more valid.

Comments are closed.