Skip to comments.Exit Polls: the surprise in Delaware (Sorry, trolls: Mike Castle probably would've lost to Coons)
Posted on 11/03/2010 11:31:04 AM PDT by Qbert
(CNN) The thing about Delaware is: it's no Kentucky. The Tea Party's first Senate loss of the night may be no big surprise - the only question heading into tonight's been how big a victory margin Chris Coons would capture over Christine O'Donnell. But the exit polls lay out the political and demographic roadblocks facing any Tea Party favorite here.
If GOP voters are feeling any buyer's remorse, they may take some solace in one surprising stat: despite pre-election polls that showed longtime Republican Rep. Mike Castle handily beating Coons in a hypothetical matchup, the voters who turned out today said they would still probably have sent Coons to Washington over Castle, backing him 44-43 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
Exit polls are rarely even close to accurate. And with a one point differential in this case, no one can really claim to know what the result would have been with Castle as the candidate, particularly in the absence of a Castle campaign which would have changed the outcome to be sure. Democrats are more apt to answer exit polling according to experts. So this 1 point difference really says nothing.
No surprise. Given a choice between a RINO lib and Dim lib, they’ll take the real thing every time.
You will also snag the WarshDC metro-area GAY SCENE because they do a lot of that.
Not that the out of towners vote in Delaware, but they do get polled on what they think.
The Republicans who view Delaware as a "hobby" tend to stick to the summertime polls to guide them, so that's why the primary came out askew from their polling.
Wasn't a Republican year in Delaware ~ maybe next time.
Hey, a liberal replaced a liberal. Nothing changed.
Of course he would. Why vote for a liberal lite when you can get the real deal with Coons.
Speculation at best but destiny may well have been on Coons side in this election. 44-43 percent is closer than 57-40 which was actual.
I’d rather have seen O’Donnell lose than Castle win .. but had Castle been the GOP candidate, you would not have seen Obama and Biden rushing to DE every week, and Coons would never have seen the $$$ he received. Christine was made the GOP pinata by the GOP establishment, THE person to fear and to beat. Had Castle won the GOP nomination, that race would have received absolutely no serious attention, or funding.
I can't explain the logic because libtards are not logical. Does anyone care to try?
Just by her winning the nomination as a CONSERVATIVE in Delaware is a MAJOR accomplishment and she is to be praised. We cant win every seat, but we have to start to change the whole process at the state level... little by little, bit by bit...
Saul Alinsky tactics on full throttle. Identify, isolate, freeze and escalate.
With news media outlets on board how could any conservative win?
Bill Maher a legend in your own mind.
If Castle had, in contrast to O'Donnell, been running a competent campaign for the weeks running up to the election he could very likely have made up that one point.
O'Donnell began 20 points behind, was given $4 million to waste, and still ended up 20 points behind.
What this poll tells us about the race is that Castle began with a lead of several points, no one heard from him for almost two months, and he wound up polling just a point behind.
44-43 is a heck of a lot closer than what O’Donnell got, 56-40.
but I could care less.....they had a choice between a decent person and a ruling class elitist and they choose the elitist..
Believe what you will.
So now we LIKE exit polls?
O’Donnell was an awful candidate who didn’t deserve to win. Doesn’t mean Coons deserved to win, but she didn’t either. (I just would have prefered if she did.)
If we want to keep bragging that we’re the party of responsible adults, we can’t nominate people who talk responsibility but don’t pay their bills, sue for $6.9 million when they don’t get promotions, and who run campaigns by paying money to go on the air to announce “I’m not a witch.”
She was supported here as she should have been, but the election’s over. O’Donnell was a horrible candidate, a three-time loser, and she needs to go back to whatever it is she can do well, since running for office as one who doesn’t just talk the talk but lives by conservative principles ain’t it.
“Libtards hated Ronald Reagan, our last conservative president. But they hated the RINO father and son Bush team even more.”
Yeah, that is really odd. I don’t know- Reagan had a lot of Hollywood friends who personally respected him, even though they disagreed politically- and he obviously was a much more personable and humorous guy than the Bushes. So, maybe that had something to do with it.
Why O’Donnell lost:
-Delaware is a very blue State;
-O’Donnell got the Palin treatment from the oh-so-tolerant libs;
-in addition, O’Donnell got blindsided by some of her Republican cohorts.
But it still would have been a loss.
And it FORCED the democrats to spend a LOT of capital to keep a conservative out.
Better to go down fighting. Makes the war shorter.
Face it. Rove was right. O’Donnell was a flaky fringe candidate pushed into the big leagues by blind anti-RINO enthusiasm. She had just enough cuteness and communication skills to make an impression on disgusted primary voters, but she was a disaster in every other respect. Sure the media was out to get her but it doesn’t help when you shovel them ammo and make for an easy punchline. If this girl is serious about a career in politics she should give up the wannabe pundit routine and start building a real resume.
“probably” “44-43 percent”
Gotta love that CNN logic.
Still glad the cap and trader is gone.
The view from the cheapseats here, was that O'Donnell was villified in the press at every opportunity, day in and day out.
Pretty tough to fight the MSM full court from the opening buzzer, and I think she made a creditable showing.
The MSSM was out to crap on the TEA party movement, and she became the poster child for the campaign against Conservative America.
I really don't think going back to 'lesser evil' rino electing will benefit the country much either. After all, all those little compromises are what got the nation into this mess.
O’Donnell sucked! Plain and simple...
No more free passes.. call it like it is..
Nikki Haley was very good.. Rubio was very good.. I even like Angle...
However, O’Donnell was a freak. Yes, Rove sucked the BIG one for bashing her .. shame on him.. but she still sucked...
I was NEVER a Christine O’Donnell hater and what I heard from her and seen from her never convinced me that she was the evil moron that Karl Rove and the MSM made her out to be, but I didn’t know until last night that she had run for senator twice and lost badly.
I am not saying we should roll over for RINOs like Castle, but maybe it would be better to nominate somebody who isn’t a consistent loser.
I find it a little funny how Unions can support a Marxist considering how Marxist governments violently suppress unions. Delaware, you reap what you sow. Oh, how far the 1st state has fallen since 1776.
He had 3 million and the Delaware Republican Party in his pocket and couldn't beat "a flawed candidate".
The ridiculous lengths people go to to avoid placing this loss in the lap of the Delaware Republican Party is beyond absurd.
Memo to: Tokyo Rove
The minute O'Donnel got a serious look this thing was never going to be close. The reason the Dems/Media put so much focus on DE is they would much prefer the American people associate the Tea Party movement with Christine O'Donnell rather than competent, attractive pols like Rubio, Johnson, etc.
Every attempt to win with a conservative gets us closer to meaningful success while with every win with a RINO we slip further into the abyss.
“I am not saying we should roll over for RINOs like Castle, but maybe it would be better to nominate somebody who isnt a consistent loser.”
In 1980, Ronald Reagan was an almost 70 year old, two-time failed presidential nominee. That one worked pretty well though...
But fair enough as to your larger point, for the next time around.
I never posted a negative word about Christine. To the contrary. I was pulling for her 100%.
But I think if she is set on running for public office, maybe next time she should set her sights a little lower than Senate. How about state legislature or, at most, U.S. House? Get a little more experience under her belt.
Agree. She’s was right on the positions but that’s not enough in elections where people are also judging the candidate personally. You can’t come off that...weird, especially if you’re a Republican.
I don’t get why a lot of conservatives seemed to push her as the face of the Tea Party. If anybody, it should be now Senator-elect Ron Johnson. Normal, every-day business guy actually pushed to run at a Tea Party event (unlike O’Donnell who was involved in politics before).
MSM ran an end-around. Notice they virtually ignored him to focus on the likes of O’Donnell. Why? Because he’s a much more appealing representative of the Tea Party.
YES. We don't need little girls telling us "I'm you!" like they're running for class president. We need accomplished regular Americans who have jobs, who work, who have homes and families and aren't interested in talking about masturbation and witchcraft when they're not spouting cliches when asked about foreign affairs.
The more our candidates ARE just like most Americans instead of TELLING us they are, the more we win.
MSM ran an end-around. Notice they virtually ignored him to focus on the likes of ODonnell. Why? Because hes a much more appealing representative of the Tea Party.
And they also treated Alvin Greene as a curiosity, not an emblem of a party movement they want to squash.
We have SO many potential great candidates, we need to tell the foolish and emphemeral ones "Sorry, we have more respect for the voters than to accept this."
He did have the qualification of winning the CA governor’s race though...
I would have loved to see her win but ..
She seemed to be a professional runner. She ran for other seats and lost and I think the republicans had it with her. The Tea Party looking for a new face, her looking for another run embraced each other. The Tea Party a relative babe in the woods made tremendous gains this election but also took some hits. We should all learn as much from the wins as losses and move ahead. Before supporting a candidate we must vet them as hard as their opponents will. Even in loss we win, think of the money and time that the Democrats wasted to make sure they would win.
Every conservative can expect that from the MSM.
What matters is how effectively they respond to an obstacle that they know is coming.
The MSM went after Angle tooth and nail, characterizing her as crazy and a racist - and doing the same for Rand Paul.
Why did Angle run so closely, why did Paul win, why did O'Donnell lose?
Angle ran a decent campaign in a purple state and she had the benefit of solid legislative experience to point to at the state level - a record of accomplishment.
Rand Paul ran a very good campaign in a red state and could point to years of private sector experience as a respected medical professional, and he had a wife and children who made him instantly relatable to family values voters.
O'Donnell ran a terrible campaign in a blue state, she had no relevant job experience to point to at all, and she was a 41 year old singleton with an odd biography - not very relatable.
She was telegenic and articulate - more so than Angle and even Paul - but also insubstantial.
Castle would have crushed Coons. The GOP apparatus from out of state destroyed what could have been a good year for the GOP in Delaware.
I am not a big Mike Castle fan, but the September primary was not the correct time to settle the score.
As I predicted, COD was a down-ballot disaster. Instead of recapturing the State House, the GOP lost additional House seats. The GOP candidate for State Treasurer, Colin Bonini, a genuine conservative, narrowly lost. He and other downballot conservatives wanted CASTLE at the top of the ticket.
Castle was only going to serve out the remaining 4 years of the Biden term. He would have given the GOP a vote on most issues about 60 percent of the time - like Scott Brown. Instead, we got someone who will be Reid’s “pet,” possibly for life. He will be wrong on issues 100 percent of the time.
Palin, DeMint, LEvin and others were WRONG to interfere in this race. Moreover, to DE, Castle would have enjoyed the most seniority of any freshman with his years in the House and having been a governor.
Apparently the fact that Castle lost to O’Donell in the primary hasn’t fazed some of you. He lost. Too early.
The lack of support of O’Donell by some elements of the Republican Party is going to be addressed in the future.
They have the duty to support whoever makes it through the primary. Period.
Otherwise there is no reason to have them around.
If you want to primary RINOs that’s fine with me. But put your resources and effort behind a credible, qualified conservative candidate, not just anybody with a pulse. Otherwise you risk handing the opposition an easy win and hurting the overall brand. O’Donnell’s goofiness probably made the PA senate race closer than it had to be.
Please let’s deal in reality, one point in a poll indeed of those who turned out to elect Coons by a wide margin in a race in which Castle didn’t run. Shows how popular Castle is there. Whatever, we can’t win them all.
Interesting and probably true.
There are some states we just have to write off.
California and Delaware are two of them. Hopeless cases.
It’s probably not worth millions of dollars to try to change people who don’t want change.
A couple of FReepers posted last night, in all seriousness, that she is ready to run for President in 2012.
Her followers seem to have ingested a FlavorAid almost as strong as that of the Ron Paulestinians.
Agree. I was really worried about the O’Donnell effect here in PA.
I think if DE had had a more viable conservative candidate, Toomey would have won by a much bigger margin.
But I thank God that Pat won anyway.
O’Donnell lost by about the same percentage as Urquart did.
There are fifty percent more Dems than Repubs. Had they run a pro-abortion Repub would he have won? Maybe. What have you won?
We tried that in California, running “moderate” Repubs against rather unlikeable Dems, and they were still trashed, just like O’Donnell and they still lost. They came closer than she did but they lost.
I say, vote your conscience and let the chips fall. Who ever you pick, they are going to trash your candidate and make them out to be crazy or evil. If you are going to go by what the press says about your candidate, you may as well join the Dems, its the only way you are going to get good press. If you are a Repub you presumably don’t care what they say about you or your candidate.
Mike Castle believed that the O'Donnell campaign was responsible for the viral rumor that he had had a homosexual extramarital affair.
The individual who was responsible for posting the rumor on YouTube was an O'Donnell campaign employee who had suddenly resigned a couple of days before the rumor was planted.
If I were Castle and I believed that O'Donnell was responsible for the rumor, I would not feel I had any duty to support her whatsoever. In that circumstance I would consider it a favor to her not to endorse her opponent.
The people of Del are better off for her candidacy. Hopefully they're a little wiser concerning certain provisions in the constitution as well as motives and nature of liberals and RINOs.
That's true but it's not a valid excuse for running a terrible campaign, that's something almost every Republican has to deal with. Bush didn't have a friendly media to beat Gore and Kerry but he appealed to people and won. Coons was a slouch candidate and Castle would've had a better than even chance against him but he got a free pass getting to face a complete spanner.
4. No endorsement from Castle
5. Came across to anyone with any sense that she had the psersona of someone who was kooky, (even though she wasn’t)
6. Came across also as a whiner.
What I dont understand, and no one is mentioning this - not even Rush - in regard to the Rove comment about ODonnell not being vetted.
For crying out loud, the Republican Party used her in 2008.
Had her as the sacrificial lamb running against Biden.
She garnered 35% of the vote and the pubs left her with a $23,000 debt. Did you know that Haley Barbour and Buzz Aldrin endorsed her in 2008?
How come she was vetted and good enough to run in 2008
( no Bill Maher tapes )but Rove jumps all over her in 2010 ?