Posted on 09/09/2006 11:09:09 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
I am not sure what the there, there is with this Menendez scandal however. It does not appear that he was being paid above market rent for his dwelling in beautiful downtown Union City, by the outfit that he was championing with federal funds, and in fact, he sold the building, and the outfit is now paying considerably higher rent. But the US attorney is investigating, and either it is a partisan witch hunt, or the prosecutor knows something not yet in the public domain.
ping
Ya, if that GOP pollster of Joe's is right. By the way, that is the same pollster who generated those automated telephone calls of CD races, which if accurate, show in my opinion a net gain of 20-25 seats by the Dems in the House. But they may not be accurate, although except in a few races, they seem plausible and within the CW to me. Some Freepers think the guy was a Dem operative poller. He is precisely the opposite.
Don't know about recent polling but I know Lieberman will win. :-} And it won't be close. That was and is my prediction. I have my finger on the pulse of CT! :-{
That same pollster that said Joe was up by 16%, also said your local congressman, Mr. Simmons, was down by 6% of something. What is your pulse on THAT one? :)
I meant a gain of 15-20 seats. I had a senior moment.
Sorry to be hemming and hawing but it's the same every time up here. The only reason he has won at all is because of the Groton sub base and the unusual number of folks in this corner of the state who have shotguns over the fireplace.
Despite all of Rick's past problems, he has the power of incumbency, he has the momentum going into the fall, he is within five points of his opponent and his opponent is a putz. Rick will win.
Keep me informed. :) Folks other than you have guns in Eastern Connecticut? That seems just so, well, er, surprising. Guns are for other zip codes, like say Alabama north, you know, the Pennsylvania T. :)
My gut's pretty good though. :-}
Luego.
And guess what hangs over his mantle? LOL.
more debates!
more debates!
more debates!
more debates!
more debates!
more debates!
I think that you're confused, Torie. Public Opinion Strategies (POS) are the ones who conducted the Lieberman poll. They are nearly always GOP pollsters and polls released publicly from them are always for partisan purposes. They are a great "campaign" polling firm, though. Their "true" internals, which we never see, are the best in the business.
The people who conducted the Constituent Dynamics polls are known as RT Strategies, a bipartisan team of Thomas Riehle (D) and Larry Tarrance (R). Tarrance is also a partner in the GOP polling firm, The Tarrance Group, which contributes to the Battleground Poll (done by Ed Goaes and Celinda Lake). The Tarrance Group is a top-notch GOP polling firm, not on the level of POS, but still very good. The Dem guy I am unfamiliar with.
Anyway, the point is that the two aren't the same, but that the Indy poll should be taken seriously. The pollster who I talked to about this has some philsophical issues with Tarrance's methodology, but those are merely philosophical issues. :)
Apparently I am. Thanks for sorting it out for me. I take the Constituent Dynamics poll seriously, because with some exceptions, I think it seems to fit in with what is out there. That doesn't mean that it is the gold standard. It just means, that it is information, that should be seriously considered.
Excellent!!! Bears repeating :)
Santorum is known for coming from behind, this wouldn't surprise me.
And every conservative/Republican needs to work their tails off near his area to get him across that line. If not in the area, donate to him.
Yes, I have said outright I want Chafee and DeWine to lose.
Not so Santorum. He deserves re-election. Get it done.
Makes sense to me. Crasher pointed out that the PA-10 numbers showed a much better number (+11%) for the Dem than his own publicly released internal poll a couple of days before, so I would throw that one out for sure, but that could just be old 1 in 20 rule fulfilling itself, rather than any particular problem with the rest of the polls. The rest of the polls don't seem too much out of the ballpark of numbers (MOE considered), though the CT-02 poll(Simmons) raises the same problem as PA-10, though less so.
Anyway, the only thing I trust less than a publicly released internal poll is a rumor of an internal poll which shows the opponent doing so much better than before. So it applies in this case.
I have been saying for over a year that Casey won't beat Santorum. I'm sticking by my prediction of Santorum winning 52%-47%.
First of all, I'm not so sure that Casey, who like his late father, Governor Bob Casey, is pro-life and pro-gun but very liberal on economics, will be able to raise as much money as he needs in such a competitive Senate race. I don't think the liberals' hatred of Senator Santorum will necessarily result in contributions to Casey; Pennsylvania liberals already hated Santorum when he ran for reelection in 2000, and they still wouldn't give a dime to Congressman Ron Klink because he was pro-life and pro-gun. Casey is not a good campaigner, as his collapse in the 2002 gubernatorial primary against Ed Rendell proved, and with such a large deficit in the area of campaign finance (Santorum already has a huge warchest and can raise pretty much as much as he wants) it will become difficult for Casey to make a "sell" to Pennsylvania voters.
I also think that RINOs (Republicans-in-Name-Only) and Rendellicans (Rendell-voting Republicans) would vote for Santorum over Casey, just like they voted for Santorum over Klink. While RINOs disagree with Santorum on social issues, they agree with him on economic issues, and they disagree with Casey on everything under the sun. In fact, Casey's father never ran well in the Philly suburbs. In his first gubernatorial bid in 1986 (against William Scranton III), Casey, Sr. won statewide with 50.69% of the vote, but his percentages in the Philly suburbs were pitiful: 39.59% in Bucks County, 39.50% in Delaware County ("Delco") and 33.69% in Montgomery County ("Montco") (source: http://wilkes-fs1.wilkes.edu/~hcox/gov/PaGov1986.html). And in his reelection bid in 1990, Casey, Sr. beat then-Republican Barbara Hafer with a whopping 67.65% of the vote, yet his percentages in the Philly suburbs were much lower: 58.58% in Bucks, 54.82% in Delco and 49.84% in Montco (source: http://wilkes-fs1.wilkes.edu/~hcox/gov/PaGov1990.html). Santorum, on the other hand, has always run very strongly in the Philly suburbs, running well ahead of GOP presidential candidates. In 2000, Santorum got 57.09% in Bucks County, 54.15% in Delaware County and 54.43% in Montgomery County (source: http://wilkes-fs1.wilkes.edu/~hcox/sen/PaSen2000.html), in each case over 10% higher than Bush's 46.29% in Bucks, 42.66% in Delco and 43.81% in Montco (source: http://uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/index.html). That was against Congressman Ron Klink, a socially conservative, economically liberal Democrat from Western PA (pretty much Casey, Jr. without the famous name but with more accomplishments and a better personality). In 1994, against Harris Wofford, who was not only a socially liberal Senate incumbent but also a Philly-area suburbanite, Santorum got 52.35% in Bucks, 52.70% in Delco and 50.49% in Montco (source: http://wilkes-fs1.wilkes.edu/~hcox/sen/PaSen1994.html). So Santorum should do very well in the Philly suburbs, which were the counties that gave Gore and Kerry their narrow statewide victories over Bush in 2000 and 2004.
In 2004, 33.08% of Pennsylvania's votes were cast in the Philly metro area (composed of Philadelphia, Montco, Delco, and Bucks and Chester Counties; Bush got 36.7% in the area); 18.86% of PA's votes were cast in the Pittsburgh metro area (composed of Allegheny, Washington, Beaver, Butler and Westmoreland Counties; Bush got 47.3% there, which proves that the Pittsburgh area is far more Republican today than it was in the 1980s), and 48.05% of the PA votes were cast outside the Philly and Pittsburgh metro areas, also known as "the T" (Bush got 57% there) (source: http://uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/index.html). Assuming that in 2006 the same percentage of PA votes are cast in each region, Santorum can win with 50.15% merely by getting 42% in the Philly metro area (5% better than Bush, which is certainly doable since he matches up a lot better against Casey in the Philly area than did Bush against Kerry), 47% in the Pittsburgh metro area (same as Bush, also doable because, while Casey is not a social liberal like Kerry, Santorum is a Pittsburgh native and has affirmative strength there) and 57% in the rest of the state (same as Bush, also doable assuming that Santorum works his conservative base hard).
But as I said, I think Santorum will do better than 42% in the Philly area and win with 52% statewide. I can't prove I'm right, but you'll have to wait until November of 2006 to prove me wrong.
Someone will notice this and post about it soon enough, so here's my heads-up. This has nothing to do with the thread above, btw. :)
http://www.roanoke.com/news/breaking/wb/82007
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.