Google Ads


Site Stats

KY-Sen: Could This Actually Be True?

by: The Caped Composer

Tue May 27, 2008 at 9:48 AM EDT


An eye-popping Rasmussen poll (5/22, likely voters) this morning shows Democratic senate candidate Bruce Lunsford leading Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell-- yes, you read that right, leading McConnell:

Bruce Lunsford (D): 49
Mitch McConnell (R-inc): 44
(MoE: ±4.5)

Granted, it's a long way from here to election day, and McConnell is already tying Lunsford to Barack Obama, who, as we all know, is not especially popular in Kentucky.  Still, the fact that a Democratic candidate is polling this well against the senate minority leader, in a blood-red state, is a heartening development.  I'm just hoping that Tom Daschle's iPod includes James Brown's "The Big Payback" . . .

Update (James): It's worth noting that earlier this month, Lunsford trailed McConnell by 36% to 48% in a poll commissioned by the Lexington Herald-Leader. Rasmussen's been giving us an awful lot of good news lately. Maybe too much good news.

Update II (James): Like clockwork, the McConnell campaign has released an internal poll conducted around the same time showing the Senator leading Lunsford by 50%-39%.

The Caped Composer :: KY-Sen: Could This Actually Be True?
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

My thinking:
Lunsford paints himself as a guy in the middle.  Hell, possibly right of center.  Everyone in Kentucky knows that.  He's run for governor twice.  The only way they are going to kill his support from the right effectively is if they artificially paint Lunsford black for their tv ads, hugging Barack Obama.  

No way
I think Rasmussen is one of the top two or three, if not the best pollster, but I cannot believe this result.  Being down 12 pts to Pat Roberts and Susan Collins is plausible, but this result is really hard to believe.

Hey, I hope I am wrong.  But if it is true -- WOW WOW WOW.   The GOP brand is done this year.  


That being said
even if you reversed this poll and it was McConnell 49, Lunsford 44, it would be bad news for Mitch.  That he is mired in the 40s is very bad news for him.  I am still skeptical about this poll, but it looks like the voters are angry and willing to throw out the most pol in the state.  

[ Parent ]
I'll bet
Luallen and Chandler are kicking themselves about now for not jumping in.

Luallen yes
Luallen would've been perfect...Chandler I suspect is waiting to take on Bunning or make another run for Governor in seven years.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
This race is a win/win for us
Worst case is Lunsford loses and spends a lot of money forcing McConnell to spend a lot of money and to be preoccupied from his duties as majority leader.

Best case is Lunsford pulls off a huge upset by defeating the sitting republican majority leader and we don't even have to spend much to help him out since he can self-fund.


Maybe win/win/lose
Since he would probably be a crappy senator. But if it means McConnell is tied down from campaigning around the country and the NRSC has to spend what it doesn't have to try to save him, personally I will take him if it helps to get us Senators Merkley, Franken, Allen, Hagan etc.  

[ Parent ]
Minority Leader
Mitch hasn't quite made it up to majority leader.

[ Parent ]
would it be possible
for someone to post a clip of Peter Boyle saying "holy crap" onto this thread?  i have dialup so, yeah i can't, but could someone?  because, i mean, HOLY CRAP!!!

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

and
they need to poll Oklahoma and I want to see Maine again.  We haven't seen a Maine poll for awhile and with so many races suddenly catapaulting in the polls, maybe Maine has and we just dont know it.  

[ Parent ]
Sending this to my College Dems email list
Virginia, has always been a given.

New Mexico, our nominee with large double digit leads (upwards of 20 or more)

New Hampshire, we are consistently up by single digits, 7 last time but usually varying between 7 and 12.

Colorado, we have finally seen a couple polls in a row showing leads, with the last being a solid 6, winnable but we should moving more in our direction as the election goes on

Alaska, we have been in the lead by 2 points with being all the way up to 6 or 8.

Minnesota, Franken has finally gotten back up in the polls and is down by 2

Oregon, after poll after poll for months showing both the Dems running in the primary down by large double digits, two polls have now shown us with 3 polls and we finally have our nominee

North Carolina, their primary is also over now and their nominee was down by double digits and now 5 polls have shown the race within single digits with both candidates showing leads

Mississippi, this race moved off of everyone's ratings when 1st quarter fundraising showed the Republican raising over 2 million and our guy raising a couple hundred thousand.  Now, one poll has shown us ahead by 4 and another poll, which was deeply deeply flawed against us showed us down by 8.  And with us winning a Congressional seat in a race that Bush won by 62% (!) we can win

Texas, two polls show us down by 4

Kentucky, a new poll that just came out showed us ahead by 5 points.  My first reaction was holy fucking shit, this race was pretty much off the table.  This is only the first poll showing us competitive but it is by Rasmussen, one of the top polling companies who even has a slightly Republican bias

Kansas, down by 12, very respectable for Kansas and we have a top recruit

Nebraska, down by 15 but Kos's poll showed quite otherwise (I trust the 15% a lot more), very very respectable for Nebraska.  Our candidate is a guy who lost by 10% in the 4th most Republican Congressional District in the country.  He is trying statewide and his opponent is a former Governor who was appointed Secretary of Agriculture by Bush.  Huge name recognition difference

There are two races which could very well become competitive but do have not polls showing an indication of that.  Oklahoma and Maine.  Oklahoma we just dont have any polls.  Maine should be on paper competitive, 6 term Congressmen vs. 2 term Senator, both popular.  No polls have shown the race smaller than 12% with most being 16%.  Maine should be competitive though and will be, we are just waiting for it to start trending our way.  Plus, Obama will carry the state by a wide wide margin, bringing out tons of voters for our Senate candidate.

That makes 11 states that poll already in the toss-up category or better for us.  3 showing some possibly competitive polls and one where we still need a poll.


[ Parent ]
You got the two MS-SEN polls wrong.
IIRC
Research 2000 (Kos' Poll)
(D) Musgrove 42%
(R) Wicker 46%

DCCC Internal
Musgrove 48%
Wicker 40%

The big difference is there are no party labels.  Which is why the R2K poll was flawed.  Right.  But we were up eight in one, and down only four in the flawed poll.  


[ Parent ]
Personally I'm waiting for the Idaho polling
I'm pulling this out of you-know-where, but I've got a good feeling about this one.  

[ Parent ]
Same here
I have a funny feeling that we're within 10 points, maybe as low as 6-8 in Idaho.  LaRocco has been in the race for a long time and seems to be running a very efficient campaign.

[ Parent ]
Oh
that's another race I need to add to a race that needs some polling.  

What will the Republicans do if we are targetting 16 of their seats?  They wont even bother with Landrieu first off, secondly, the races they will spend money on to protect will be Texas, Idaho, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Kentucky, Maine, North Carolina, and Mississippi, with Mississippi and North Carolina possibly dropping of that list.

They will basically be giving us 6 seats, maybe even 8 if things go really bad for them.   THANKS!  :)


[ Parent ]
At this time we lead in 7 states according to Rasmussen's latest polls
And Rasmussen is known for having a very slight repub. bias.

States we lead in:
VA by 18
NM by 16  I'm assuming Pearce wins the repub nomination
NH by 7
CO by 6
KY by 5
AK by 2
NC by 1

States we're down by <10 points
MN down 2
OR down 3
TX down 4
ME down 10

So in total Rasmussen has us either leading or within the MoE in 10 races.  And that is not including Mississippi, Oklahoma and Idaho where they havn't polled yet.


[ Parent ]
you gotta think
on top of W being such a drain to the republican brand that there is also a bit of "larry craig fatigue" as well

[ Parent ]
Why are we surprised
We should have known this was going to happen.  Democrats are consolidating behind Lunsford, he has made 2 (1 strong) runs for Governor so he had support among Democrats in state anyway and now the rest and coalescing behind him as they realize that while he may not be Crit Luallen, he's much much better than McConnell.  

second, McConnell has had some in state fights with Republicans, particularly the crowd that supported Ernie Fletcher.  Lunsford endorsed Fletcher after his first run for governor.  McConnell worked against him in the primary with Anne Northup.  I would not at all be surprised to find out that many Republicans from the Fletcher crowd are supporting Lunsford.  

Third, McConnell's views are well known to be far to the right.  His job as minority leader brings out his far right wing views everytime.  Independents in the state aren't going to like that.  they are indpendent because they AREN'T far right wing Republicans themselves.  

So here we are with a Democrat, who has the entire party behind him, with Republicans behind him because McConnell screwed them and with Indpendents seeing bi-partisan support which means he isn't as progressive as we'd like and he isn't a super conservative like McConnell and all that spells my friends is victory.  

This is why I liked the idea of Bruce Lunsford from the get go, he won't make the best Senator in the world, but he'll be a hell of a lot better than Mitch McConnell.  

Check out http://electioninspection.word... for the latest news, election results, poll analysis, and predictions


Kentucky is a
state where fifty something percent of the voters are registered Democrats, but most vote Republican. Lunsford getting these people much better than our presidential nominees, partly because they see him as someone like them, someone who sometimes goes with Republicans, who is very morally conservative but has a small, somewhat populist tint. He'd probably up with Ben Nelson as far as being conservative, but, and I dunno about you, I can live with that, especially having been in the senate and seen how many times McConnnell has filibustered bills, the obstruction of every Democratic measure, which is partly what has made congress even more unpopular, because they're still not doing anything because Republicans are, by and large, playing ideological games, blocking every Democratic measure, refusing to even allow amendmants to have up or down votes, and then trying to call Democrats a do-nothing party. I think the public is seeing through this time, which is why, with congress having an 18% approval rating, they're not taking it out on the ruling party; Democrats still have about an 8-11 point lead in generic ballot polling, which means they're continuing to take it out on Republicans.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
mitch is just an EVIL
bastard; AND he has troubles on his right flank as well from the fletcher re-election battle within the repuke party(AND i also hate his wife,WORST labor secretary in history)

[ Parent ]
Yup, I agree
I think Lunsford's biggest obstacle was getting those well to the left of him in Kentucky (probably from Louisville and Lexington) to vote for him. He doesn't have a solid record of being a progressive, hell he's even endorsed Republicans, but he's run in the Democratic primary very many times, is conservative and can self-fund. If he can consolidate most or all the Democratic party, he's won, since as you stated, Democratic registration is in the mid-fifties, and likely even higher now after the Presidential Primary. It's good because Lunsford can just use his own wealth and fundraising from his business buddies to make grassroots donations unnecessary - and hell, he may even win! Think about the psychological shock if McConnell bit the dust next time around - would we ever see a Republican filibuster?

[ Parent ]
HELL YES!

Please let this be true. And please let Lunsford pour like 20 million of his corrupt money into this race. Lunsford is a horrible Democrat but still. Beating Mitch would be amazing.

Let's see another poll, please?


I'm sure KoS will
commission a KY-Sen poll soon.

[ Parent ]
Mitch's internal only has him up 11?
That seems to lend some credibility to the fact that this we are no worse than 5 points down in this race.

and what's more
his OWN internal has him at ONLY %50

[ Parent ]
I think the truth is between the Rasmussen and McConnell poll
I think the right number is somewhere in between, with Mitch up a small handful of points, but below 50 percent.  I would take that too, btw.  Mitch has to be getting nervous, as evidenced by him quickly dumping this poll, but I am not going to start popping champagne corks yet.

No offense
to the good former senator from South Dakota, but I suspect his Victrola contains a wax recording of Thomas Edison singing Mary Had a Little Lamb.

hmm

On national trend to Democrats, the generic partisan split in Kentucky this year predicts to around 47/53.

That being said, McConnell getting a good scare and being put on notice that he's getting at most one more term...pretty enjoyable.



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

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox