Posted on 10/14/2010 2:01:05 PM PDT by paudio
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Alaska shows Republican Joe Miller with 35% support and Murkowski, the incumbent senator he defeated in the state’s GOP Primary now running as a write-in candidate, with 34% of the vote. Democrat Scott McAdams runs third with 27%. One percent (1%) prefers another candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The race remains Solid Republican in the Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 Senate Balance of Power rankings because if Murkowski wins she is expected to caucus with the GOP in the Senate.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
A write-in candidate has been elected to the U.S. Senate twice. William Knowland in 1946 in a special election (with no pre-printed names on the ballot), and Strom Thurmond in 1954, because the original Democrat candidate died before the election, and the Democrats didn’t hold a special primary, angering many people.
I see no reason why Murkowski should succeed, as there is no outrageous conduct that would cause the voters to embrace her candidacy, and I doubt that the newspapers will openly campaign for her and put write-in ballot instructions on their front pages (as happened in Thurmond’s election).
Just fired off a donation. Hope it helps.
My thoughts exactly. She'd need a solid lead just to overcome that obstacle.
How is he responding to these charges? Is he running ads smacking back? If not, they will take aserios toll.
I think I’d rather the dem win. If Lisa is able to win this, she will be absolutely ruthless towards conservatives. She won’t even occasionally pretend to be one.
We are in full agreement.
I should add that in that 1954 election, there was only one pre-printed candidate on the ballot, and he was the Democrat that everyone was outraged was put there by the Democrats. The two other candidates, Thurmond and another “Independent Democrat,” were write-ins.
As I understand it no one has ever been elected to a statewide office by write in after losing a primary election in US history. Strom Thurmond (ex-Governor, State Rights Democratic Party Presidential candidate) was elected Senator as a write-in, but he had not run in the primary.
What is it that so many Alaskans see in this b*tch?
Mind you, I still hope people will send contributions to Joe Miller...I just want to make sure people have a realistic view of what the polls really mean, and that they should not get too down about the race appearing to be close.
Name ID...not much else happening there, I think. Half of her supporters probably think they’re voting for her father.
The 3% undecided is key here. When an undecided goes to the polls, I think it is unlikely that they will write in a name. The undecided this late are by nature indecisive and likely also the least informed.
I believe you are correct, sir.
I was going to post another poll from the other day that said pretty much the same thing, but it was commissioned by the Daily Kos and I didn’t feel like listening to crap from the many here who wouldn’t see anything past the source. Hopefully with this being a Rasmussen poll all the folks here who thought this was going to be a walk a park because Joe Miller is endorsed by Palin will pay attention.
Murkowski has tons of cash and so do the groups (Native corporations and unions) supporting her. The media blitz here is unbelievable. And of course the MSM here is totally in the tank for Murkowski and flinging a steady stream of crap at Miller. We can scoff all we want at their efforts but it isn’t us they are trying to influence, it’s the large number of folks that don’t pay attention to anything they don’t see on TV.
I don’t have much to give but I sent Miller some more yesterday.
Yes, also they may confuse Murkowski with her father or may think she is on the ballot. I bet those numbers drop by 50%
on election day when they see the names of the candidate and a line for a write-in.
They might be close in a phone poll, but writing in her name on the ballot will be a totally different outcome.
So? There's nothing wrong with taking advantage of unconstitutional handouts. If you don't, the government illegally takes your money and you don't get ANY of it back. This way, at least sometimes you get some back. Same with student loans, small business loans, grants, Social Security, Medicare, and just about everything the Feds do--it's all unconstitutional. But I'm going to make sure I get paid mine.
Phil Gramm had a very good response about something similar when he was asked why he worked so hard to get federal dollars sent to Texas when he was for reducing the federal deficit. He said that he would continue to work very hard to reduce federal spending, but if the money was going to be spent, he would then work very hard to make sure that Texas got its share of it. That's what Joe Miller needs to explain. His actions are not inconsistent with his beliefs.
Smearcowsky is relying on a whole lot of ice road truckers to spell her name right.
Yes. This was the third polls in past week that shows similar results.
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.