Skip to comments.08/10/06 FOX News Poll: 2006 Election Anti-Incumbent Fever; Job Ratings (Not Good for Republicans)
Posted on 08/10/2006 7:53:47 PM PDT by UncleJeff
NEW YORK As the midterm elections approach, voters say they are much more likely to support a challenger over the incumbent candidate, according to a new FOX News Poll. In addition, "throw the bums out" is a popular choice when voters pick bumper sticker wording to describe the main reason for their vote for Congress this year. President Bushs job rating is unchanged this month holding steady at 36 percent approval...
If the election were held today, 48 percent of Americans say they would vote for the Democratic candidate in their congressional district and 30 percent for the Republican candidate. This 18-percentage point edge is up from an 8-point advantage in mid-July and a 13-point lead in June...
Among those saying Iraq will be very important to their vote, 48 percent say they plan to back the Democratic candidate and 31 percent the Republican candidate in the upcoming election...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Between Lieberman and this September 11, Part II, it's a whole new ball game.
Dick "toesucker" Morris was on O'Reilly and said the same thing.
. . . According to this poll, "24%".
Here in Ohio I have heard more than one Republican talk about not voting for that RINO DeWine. He votes with the Dems most of the time anyway - "So what is the difference?" -some are saying... Wish there were a good alternative to vote for instead of DeWine.
I think the events around the plane bombing plot will change the dynamic. We used the wire tapping and other tehcniwues the dems detest to help the Brits uncover this plot.
The dems will sound foolish bitching about this.
You also think the Dims will not waste time supporting things like flag amendments...but, will get right down to really serious business...like maybe raising taxes and oh, that one little worrisome matter of impeaching the President?!? Now, did I understand you correctly, just checking?
As was discovered in 2000, 2002, and 2004 the percent of truly Independent voters is a mere 5-7% . . . Just as it was in 2004, the 2006 election will be determined by the effectiveness of the Republican and Democrat 'Get Out the Vote' (GOTV) efforts!
Here's the difference:
ACU lifetime ratings
. . . 'nuf said!
Several months back DeWhine won his primary against a good conservative challenger. DeWhine got ~76% of the vote. The conservative challenger got about ~15% of the vote.
Maybe you heard two?
I suspect you are exactly right, and don't share the general glee around here at the Lamont/Lieberman Primary. A LOT of people turned out for what was, after all, just a Primary.
As an Ohioan you could answer #43, DrDeb, with more credibility than could I, a Texan...
Yes, but the problem is with the ersatz independent, who say they are independent, but vote GOP usually. Not this time, at this time.
Yea, and Lieberman was going to lose by 13% until the day before the election and then it was 6% but it ended being 4% then the twist is he's expected to win by 20% as an Independent. If someone can figure out the method to a pollster's madness then I would love to know as long as it doesn't require a poll to figure it out.
It's just my opinion, but I'm convinced Lieberman would have won handily if he hadn't broadcast his intent to run even if he lost the Primary. I can see that easily swinging more votes than he lost by.
Can't recall who but someone said Sherrod Brown's voting record is WORSE than Dennis Kuchinich's. Almost unbelievable, but Brown IS truly awful.
Pollsters/political pundits were saying the same thing in 2002 and 2004!
I saw that report on Fox. Yada yada, who cares. Outside of Bush telling it like it is, the House ain't doing anything, anyway.
Just, keep Shrillary out of my face!
Pollsters are less fickle than the consumers of polls; we love them when they look good for us, dismiss them as meaningless when they don't.
They were not actually, but whatever.