Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest banner
Want the scoop on hot races around the country? Get the digest emailed to you each weekday morning. Sign up here.
Leading Off:

Polls: Five different Democratic internal polls came out on Thursday, in five different races: CA-03, FL-18, FL-26, MI-03, and NY-01. And while the results individually look good for Team Blue (Dems lead in four of the five surveys, and full details are provided on each below), it's also worth noting more globally that we haven't been seeing as many internals from Republicans. As my colleague Steve Singiser noted earlier this month, Democrats have released a wide majority of the private polls so far this cycle—and that trend only continued yesterday. It's hard to view that as bad news for Dems.


CT-Sen: Republican Linda McMahon goes for compare-and-contrast in her new ad, with the narrator praising her as a job creator, then switching to attack mode on Chris Murphy. The spot repeats the claim that Murphy missed a lot of committee votes, plus the lie that he voted to cut 700 infinity zillion dollars from Medicare.

MT-, ND-Sen: It looks like the DSCC is re-upping the buys on some existing ads in Montana (anti-Denny Rehberg, for $166K) and North Dakota (pro-Heidi Heitkamp, for $45K).

MO-Sen: PPP went back into the field with another Missouri poll on Tuesday and Wednesday of this week and found much the same thing they did with their one-night flash poll last week when the Toss Akin story first exploded. Dem Sen. Claire McCaskill is up 45-44, little changed from Akin's prior 44-43 edge. Notably, the sample was much less red this time: 35% R to 33% D, versus a 39-30 spread last time, so clearly composition didn't have a lot to do with the earlier result. And Obama also trails 53-41, barely different from Romney's 52-42 lead a week ago.

Also worth noting: By a 52-37 margin, Republicans do not want Akin to drop out, and an overwhelming majority are ready to accept his apology (such as it is). As Tom Jensen says, "There's clearly a disconnect on Akin's candidacy between GOP leaders in Washington DC and actual GOP voters back in Missouri." And Akin's favorability appears to be bouncing back from its nadir: He's now at 33-56—still abysmal, but better than the 24-58 he scored last time. Tom also points out that undecideds on the Senate race are supporting Romney 61-25, which leads him to conclude that these voters "will ultimately hold their noses and support their party's candidate." I'm inclined to agree.

WI-, ND-Sen, FL-Sen: Majority PAC's latest buys targeting Republicans include $599K against Tommy Thompson (for their new "influence peddler" ad) in Wisconsin and $106K against Rick Berg in North Dakota (I'm told they have a new ad in rotation that's not on their YouTube page yet). They're also spending $50K to air that Tiger Blood ad against Connie Mack in Florida.

PA-Sen: Republican Tom Smith steps in it again:

A video released Thursday by the Pennsylvania Democrats shows Smith, who introduced Ryan at an event last week, greeting two women in the crowd and asking them what they're talking about.

"We're talking about the power of petite women," one of the women says.

"Oh," Smith responds. "My guess would have been you were talking about shoes."


CT-Gov: The Connecticut Post takes an early look at Republicans who might challenge Dem Gov. Dan Malloy in 2014. It's mostly just Great Mentioner stuff at this point, though 2010 nominee Tom Foley (who lost by less than 1%) says he "plans to" seek a rematch. The other three potential names are all hedging: state House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, Danbury mayor Mark Boughton, and ex-Rep. Chris Shays, who is just coming off a huge loss to Linda McMahon in this year's GOP Senate primary. Cafero had considered a run last time but said no, while Boughton ran an abortive campaign last cycle.

WA-Gov: Despite Jay Inslee's "victory" in the state's top-two primary (where, with all the ballots finally counted, he finished ahead of Rob McKenna 47-43, or a cumulative D/R tally of 50-47), he and his allies aren't taking their feet off the gas. The DGA just pumped another $800K into this race, into the Inslee-supporting labor PAC Our Washington. That brings Inslee and McKenna into relative financial parity overall: Our Washington has raised $4.2 mil over the cycle while an RGA-backed PAC has raised $4 mil, while the McKenna campaign itself has raised $8.2 mil to Inslee's $7.8 mil. (David Jarman)


CA-03: The House Majority PAC has a new poll from GBA Strategies of the race in California's 3rd which backs up a one-day robopoll released by the DCCC's in-house shop last month. The HMP survey puts Dem Rep. John Garamendi up 54-39 over Republican Kim Vann, very similar to the D-Trip's 52-37 spread. Vann didn't respond to the prior set of numbers; let's see if she reacts differently this time.

CT-05: As expected, Chris Donovan has removed himself from the Working Families Party's ballot line (in Connecticut, all you have to do is send a letter to the Secretary of State). That paved the way for the WFP to formally endorse Elizabeth Esty, the Democratic nominee. Since the WFP could have potentially not given her their line after Donovan withdrew, presumably this means Esty satisfied party officials with her views on the issues—and hopefully we'll see a more progressive Esty candidacy as a result.

FL-18: This is very welcome news: A new DCCC poll from Grove Insight shows Democrat Patrick Murphy edging Republican freshman Allen West by a single point, 47-46. That's very similar to the numbers Murphy himself put out in early May, which put the race at 45 apiece and which West never responded to. Since then, both candidates have gone on the air, but given the increasingly polarized nature of the electorate in general and this contest in particular, I'm not surprised to see a similar picture—and few undecideds. Also of note, West's favorables stand at a mediocre 43-38 and his job approval rating is a negative 41-52.

And West certainly isn't helping himself. He's determined to either win this thing as the most obnoxious Congressman in America—or lose, as the most obnoxious Congressman in America. Check this out:

Congressman Allen West told a group of black Republicans gathered for the party's national convention Wednesday that Democrats are racist and the media doesn't call them on it.

West said Democrats have gotten away with attacking black conservatives. He then turned to the two reporters covering the event and said he had a challenge for them.

"Tell the story. You guys allow the other side to attack black conservatives, and you don't call them out," West said. "That's the most racist party I've ever seen in my life and you don't call them out."

FL-26: Everything's coming up Milhouse for Democrat Joe Garcia: On Thursday morning, he was added to the DCCC's Red to Blue list; on Thursday afternoon, he released an internal poll from Benenson Strategy Group showing him up 49-40 over GOP freshman David Rivera. Ordinarily, numbers that bad for an incumbent would have me raising an eyebrow—if not both of `em. But Benenson is a reputable firm and Rivera's well-publicized ethical troubles have plagued him since long before he even took office two years ago, so I find these results plausible at first blush.

However, the sample does seem pretty optimistic for Democrats: Barack Obama is beating Mitt Romney 50-40, in a district that was essentially tied 50-50 four years ago. But even if Obama were to only match his 2008 performance, Garcia would still be faring pretty well, given his gaudy nine-point lead as things stand presently. And given the demographic trends of this district, with non-Cuban Hispanic population growth edging out older, more conservative Cubans, there's reason to believe Obama could do better than before (though probably not 10 points better).

IL-13: Republican Rodney Davis, who on Wednesday became a target in one of the DCCC's second wave of ads, released his own introductory spot the same day. He talks about how he's coached pee-wee football and doesn't want to leave so much debt for his young players.

MI-03: Democrat Steve Pestka is touting a new internal poll from GQR that has GOP freshman Rep. Justin Amash leading 50-42, which Pestka says represents a gain of three points for the challenger since an unreleased February survey. What I'd say gives Pestka the most hope is that Amash, an utter outcast in his own party, is still pretty unknown and has very soft favorability ratings of just 32 positive and 28 negative. Also, about a quarter of the district is new to Amash, and the new parts of the CD are also slightly bluer than the old seat was as a whole. This will still be a very tough race for Pestka.

NY-01: Understandably, Dem Rep. Tim Bishop's trying to show that that overheated Politico story alleging he engaged in some sort of pay-to-play with a constituent (regarding a fireworks display!) hasn't damaged his standing with voters. To that end, he's out with new polling from Global Strategy Group showing him with a healthy 53-39 lead over Republican Randy Altschuler. That's little changed from his last internal (all the way back in March), which had him on top 53-36.

Since then, both candidates have gone on the air, with Bishop hammering Altschuler for running a company that's explicitly in the business of outsourcing jobs, and Altschuler airing a new spot over that whole fireworks business. We don't know how much either side has spent yet, but evidently the race hasn't shifted much as a result. Bishop's new internal might also serve as pushback against a bunk poll Altschuler released from Rasmussen's for-hire arm a month ago; those numbers implausibly had Romney beating Obama by 14 points here. Bishop's survey, meanwhile, has Obama up 50-45, which makes a hell of a lot more sense. (He won by three points in 2008.)

Other Races:

Colorado: Organizers trying to put a so-called "personhood" amendment before voters in Colorado have failed to submit enough signatures, meaning that personhood proposals won't appear on the ballot anywhere in the nation this fall. It's a mystery as to why supporters keep pushing this most extreme of ideas—personhood amendments attempt to re-define life as beginning at the very moment of conception, and one failed very badly in ultra-conservative Mississippi last year. And if you can't win in Mississippi....

PA-St. Sen: It's unusual enough to have an internal poll from a state legislative race see the light of day, but given the "holy crap!" nature of the results, I can see why this got some touting. An internal poll for Dem candidate Matt Smith (who's running to fill an open seat in SD-37 in Pittsburgh's western and southern suburbs) gives him a 54-38 lead over Republican D. Raja (whom you might remember as the GOP's nominee in the Allegheny Co. Executive race last year). That's a surprise since it's a GOP-held seat and a pretty red one at that (45 Obama, 54 McCain). The sample seems a little too Dem-friendly (it has Mitt Romney leading by only 1 in the district), but even factoring in the skew, Smith might actually be able to pull this out. However, even if the Dems win this one and the much-bluer GOP-held open seat in Erie's SD-49, that would still leave them a couple seats short of being able to take control of the state Senate. (David Jarman)

Grab Bag:

DCCC: The D-Trip has just added a few more candidates to its Red to Blue lists:

Red to Blue
Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)
Elizabeth Esty (CT-05)
Joe Garcia (FL-26)
Rick Nolan (MN-08)

Emerging Races
Jessica Ehrlich (FL-13)
Syed Taj (MI-11)
Upendra Chivukula (NJ-07)

House Majority: The pro-Democratic House Majority PAC just filed an IE for four recent buys attacking Republicans: IA-04 (Steve King, $40K); NC-07 (David Rouzer, $23K); PA-12 (Keith Rothfus, $98K); and UT-04 (Mia Love, $93K).

Iowa: PPP's Iowa miscellany is very politically focused, with approval numbers Gov. Terry Branstad and Sens. Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley, as well as matchups against generic opponents for Branstad (49-37) and Harkin (45-43), who are both up for re-election in 2014. More immediately, the generic legislative ballot is very tight, with the GOP up 41-40 over Democrats.

Voter Suppression: Big news out of Texas, or at least D.C., where a three-judge federal panel has struck down the Lone Star State's new voter ID laws for violating Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Rick Hasen has a link to the just-issued opinion as well as his analysis of the case. As with Texas's huge redistricting loss just two days earlier, the state AG plans to appeal. However, the Supreme Court is currently out of session, so it's hard to see how this ruling can change in time for November's elections, unless they take up the case on an emergency basis.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 05:00 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Is it fantastically optimistic of me (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Leftcandid, pademocrat, llywrch, thomask

    to think that OFA should swing by the Dakotas? Just once. He's not very far behind there, and even though they are quite red, it's a cheap media market and the economy is quite sound there. I guess it would at least be great for the local democratic parties.

    •  10-12 points isn't too far behind? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tietack, Actuary4Change, jncca

      Most candidates don't visit states unless they're behind no more than 7 points imo.

      20, Male, NC the best state ever! Majoring in Piano Performance.

      by aggou on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 05:41:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "fantastically optimistic" (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OGGoldy, Actuary4Change, jncca

      is putting it mildly.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:40:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The only way he wins them (0+ / 0-)

      is if he's pushing 400 or more votes in the Electoral College, unless there's a very state-specific event that pushes them to Obama's side.

      That said, there's a legitimate question over how much residual effect there will be from previous efforts in both states, or so I think. It'll probably be somewhere between what Gore and Kerry received and what Obama received in 2008, which I am sure is exactly the sort of specific answer you are looking for.

      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

      by bjssp on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:55:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If OFA is going to invest in a small red state... (5+ / 0-)

      It should probably be Montana or Alaska, which have more elastic voting patterns (especially Montana, which is very accustomed to ticket-splitting).

      Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

      by SaoMagnifico on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:54:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Dekotas are accustomed to ticket-splitting (0+ / 0-)

        as well, considering the Democratic Congressional delgations these two states have sent to Washington over the past years.

        One should no more deplore homosexuality than left-handedness. ~Towards a Quaker View of Sex, 1964 (Proud left-handed queer here!) SSP: wmlawman

        by AUBoy2007 on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:12:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  they're all elastic (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Montana is probably the least out of reach, but none of them would realistically flip given that he lost them all in 2008.

        SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

        by sacman701 on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:12:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Why AK? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Ok Palin may have inflated the R vote but it's been reliably Republican at the presidential level for nearly 50 years and Obama's 22 point loss there in 08 was actually an improvement on the 2 previous election results.

        MT is more reasonable - it was after all O's 2nd narrowest margin of defeat in the red states last time. But nothing like this will even get consideration unless a Democratic wave is seen developing.

      •  OFA spent about $1.68 million in Montana on ads (0+ / 0-)

        in 2008 for the entire campaign, so a last minute push there wouldn't be too expensive, if they wanted to make one.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 09:28:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The economy is sound due to oil (0+ / 0-)

      Obama won't match his double-digit loss margin in North Dakota as it is. It is foolish to be "swinging by" states that REALLY don't like Obama when the election is still up in the air.

  •  Howard Dean just tweeted (20+ / 0-)
    Howard Dean‏@GovHowardDean

     "New Hampshire" couple who touted Romney last night is from Vermont. It's not just the Big Lies about GM plants Its the small ones

    whats more distrubing is this couple agreed to go along with a lie! WTF is wrong with people!
    •  sorry didnt meant to ou this in this diary (0+ / 0-)
    •  You mean like when Obama says everyone (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      has a chance at dinner for Barack but then only people from big swing states or big primary states upcoming get picked?  Yeah, everyone has a chance.  

    •  My favorite Vermont / New Hampshire story (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Christopher Walker, pademocrat

      There was a period where my brother lived in Burlington, VT and I was seeing someone long distance who lived in Montreal, so I would drive up that way a fair amount.  Vermonters are famously insular and my Massachusetts plates would occasionally get my in trouble, especially when I would forget that I wasn't in Boston anymore and make a quick left in front of traffic or pass someone without leaving a lot of space.  Their dislike of outsiders is tempered only by their dependence on tourism, the hybrid sentiment of which was captured by bumper sticker I once saw that said, "Welcome to Vermont! Now Go Home."

      The only problem is, I saw that car, which had Vermont plates, driving in New Hampshire.

      30, (new) MA-7, Unenrolled

      Truman: "The buck stops here!"
      Romney: "The buck stops somewhere in the next county..."

      by Marcus Graly on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:51:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Aargh! (6+ / 0-)
        I would forget that I wasn't in Boston anymore and make a quick left in front of traffic or pass someone without leaving a lot of space.  
        You Boston drivers and that, "I'm going to pull out right in front of you as if you didn't exist" crapola... you deserve to get shit for that bullshit driving. I'm amazed that all of you don't get into accidents every day with you pulling out without any regard to traffic.


        by LordMike on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:17:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's not without regard to traffic (0+ / 0-)

          It's just that's how traffic works in Boston, which is why people from elsewhere find it terrifying.  I never do anything that would put me at risk of accident, it's just obnoxious if you do that somewhere where it's not the custom. (And I knew this and would try to remember not to, but would occasionally forget.) My brother's now wife learned to drive in Detroit and she would pull similar antics in her Vermont plated car, which would just confuse people.

          30, (new) MA-7, Unenrolled

          Truman: "The buck stops here!"
          Romney: "The buck stops somewhere in the next county..."

          by Marcus Graly on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:36:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  A little concerned about Connecticut... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    But hopefully, Murphy and the Dem PACs will buy more air time soon to counter all of McMahon's televised flatulence.

  •  Where do you think we stand in the races for the (0+ / 0-)

    House and Senate.  I'm hearing mixed results.  Yesterday, there was mention of a new study suggesting we may have a fair chance of taking back the House.  But, then I read one websites forecast that based on their current polls they give the Senate a 51-49 advantage in the Senate, and have the GOP keeping the House?  

    I know its hard to tell, but hope to get your overall impression.

    The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

    by HoundDog on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 05:35:58 AM PDT

    •  The House is tough (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tarheelman1993, llywrch, pademocrat, IM

      Really, the Democrats will need a bit more of a wave in their direction to take over.  Watch the generic ballot.  I feel like this is a re-run of 2010 when not many people (myself included!) weren't looking too closely at the national congressional ballot.  If that is showing anything north of D+3, the republicans are in big trouble.

      As of this week's update, I had the Democrats gaining 12 seats.  They need to gain 25 to take over the chamber.  

      The Senate is much more doable.  If Barack Obama wins the presidency, which I think most of the pundits think he will at this point, its hard to see Kaine, Brown, or Nelson losing.  Those are the three races I could see possibly going red if Romney carries OH, FL, and VA in the presidency.  If those seats stay blue, then to take over the Senate, the Republicans will have to win MT, ND, WI, and then one of MO, CT, or MI (all three of which are longshots, IMO)...while holding onto all four of MA, NV, IN, and AZ to take the Senate majority.  That is really threading the needle.  

      As of this week's update, I had the Republicans gaining 2 seats, winning NE, WI, and MT but losing ME.  It's starting to look like that is a pretty good scenario for Team Red unless they get some national momentum their way.

      •  Look at the trends... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dufffbeer, llywrch, pademocrat, IM

        Yes to all of StephenCLE's thoughts, but look at the trends:

        --If Shelley is even or near even in Nevada, she can take it, as Harry Reid did, b/c of the Obama margin and the huge organizational advantage in Nevada, where there is no functioning Repub org.

        --Indiana and Arizona are tied. If they stay that way, either could go our way.

        --I'm hoping Elizabeth can come back in Mass -- her speech at the Convention, the huge Obama margin there, the 53% in PPP's poll of MA that don't want a Republican Senate. I haven't given up on her.

        Unless the trends change (read: Koch money), it's also possible we'll see the Senate breakdown remain as is, or we even gain 1 or 2:

        We lose Nebraska, countered by win in ME. We win Mass, Nevada, and one of Indiana/Arizona, and then lose Wisconsin and MT.  +1.

        In the House, as I posted yesterday, Princeton Election Consortium, which has an excellent Presidential forecast record over the last two elections (more accurate than Saint Nate!), says 69% chance Dems win House.

        And look at Nir's column today: "Dems lead in four of the five surveys."

        Also, today I learned that the race in my own district, which I had given up on -- NJ-7, Republican Leonard Lance -- has the Dems designating as an Emerging Race for our team.

        Think trends.

        StephenCLE, will you be redoing you comprehensive rundown of House races to reflect changes? Hope so.

        •  Arizona does not start off tied (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Leftcandid, sacman701, pademocrat, jncca

          Flake has a clear but not huge advantage.

          31/D/M/NY-01/SSP: Tekzilla

          by Socks The Cat on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:12:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Agree, I'm quite bearish on Carmona... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CF of Aus, Tarheelman1993, pademocrat

            ...and I say that sadly because from what I've been able to follow of it, it looks like Carmona is a great candidate doing everything right.

            But as I've said recently here, I think Arizona whites are pretty hostile to national Dems.  The new maps mean we'll pick up U.S. House seats and state legislative seats anyway, but statewide will be more hostile.  My guess right now is that Obama and Carmona both lose by 10-12 points.

            44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:23:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Unreasonably bearish (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dufffbeer, SaoMagnifico, pademocrat

              I see no reason to think the margins will be lopsided and I think Carmona is close to even money at this point, no way Flake has a 10-12 point advantage.

            •  Your read (0+ / 0-)

              on the white electorate may be right, but why wouldn't someone with the background and bipartisan credentials of Carmona do at least a little better than Obama?  Do you just think Flake is a stronger adversary and that will offset Carmona's advantages?

              White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "Who let the dogs out? Who? Who?" - Mitt Romney, MLK Day 2008.

              by spiderdem on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:12:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Right now, Carmona... (6+ / 0-)

                Is running like a guy who is even money to win, not like a heavy favorite and not like a major underdog. He has a great media team in place -- I get emails from him almost every day, and occasionally letters -- so it's not like he's asleep at the wheel; he's simply introducing himself to voters, racking up endorsements, fundraising well, and covering the state.

                If he were way behind, he'd be trying to claw for traction by blasting Rep. Flake on his lobbyist past and attacking him for flip-flopping in the House; what's more, if he were seeing President Obama way behind, he wouldn't be trying to tie Flake to Rep. Paul Ryan (which suggests to me that Mediscare tests well among Arizona focus groups).

                And if he were way ahead, he wouldn't really be attacking Flake at all, nor would he be running bio spots to boost his name recognition. He wouldn't need to be working as hard as he is.

                So I think Carmona is about even money, maybe a very narrow underdog, to win. I'm interested as to why the DSCC has been holding its fire here, but my guess is that it's either at the candidate's request (wants to ramp up his campaign in his own way) or at the White House's request (possibly wants to keep Arizona open for a late concerted push). The NRSC hasn't been doing much of anything in Arizona, either, and it might be a sort of "cold war" situation. Either way, Carmona has been competitive in polling and fundraising, and I think he really could win this race.

                Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

                by SaoMagnifico on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:52:04 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The way he's running, per your report... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  ...corroborates my point that he's doing everything right, it doesn't address his chances of winning or, if he loses, his margin of defeat.

                  I don't and can't buy these optimistic assessments until we have a couple plausible polls showing him both in the mid/high-40s and within MoE.  His best polls have been the same as most of Obama's best Arizona polls (excluding PPP which had a couple bad optimistic outliers for Obama), meaning he's within MoE but only in the ballpark of 40% in the ballot test.

                  I'm sorry but until someone can share hard numbers to show Carmona is actually in range of the high 40s, I have to write this off as a mirage.  This isn't like Indiana where there's never been a poll showing Mourdock in anything but a nailbiter, the characteristics of the Arizona race are very different.  And even in Indiana, it's not a tossup until we start seeing some polls showing 47-47, not just 41-41.

                  44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                  by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:05:44 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

              IMHO, Jan Brewer is the worst governor in the nation.  I say this not because of her horrible positions on hot topic items, but because of her ability to promote fear and hostility towards the President.  She comes off to me as a modern day version of George Wallace.  She has effectively promoted hostility amongst the white voters and the "protect our border" crowd, and I feel that this animosity will rub off on the Senate race.  The polls might show a close race right now, but I feel that Flake will win by a decent margin.  This really sucks because Carmona would be a great senator for Arizona.

        •  Every week (0+ / 0-)

          Between now and the election I'll be updating the House big board, as well as the President and Senate ratings...those updates will usually come out on Mondays.

          I'll tell you that so far this week, there have been 5 changes on the House big board, all 5 were favorable to Team Blue, 3 of them based on polling and 2 others based on factors specific to the given race in question.

          Getting back to your comments, I think after ME, MA and NV are definitely the most likely pickups for the democrats in the Senate.  I'm not a big believer in candidates who have to rely on a large number of crossover votes to win, and that's what Scott Brown needs.  Polling has him up at the moment, but all Warren has to do is run the race just like Sheldon Whitehouse did against Lincoln Chafee in 2006.  As for Nevada, I agree wholeheartedly on the pollsters' constant republican bias in that state.  Right now that's the single closest race on the board.

      •  You are being bullish on MA + VA (0+ / 0-)

        Not to mention MO.

        I mean, I like your optimism and I agree that an Obama win in VA could very well push Kaine over the top, but this Akin nonsense will fade in the distance and the right wingers in MO are going to remember how much they dislike Claire.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:45:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  We'd need a landslide to take the House (0+ / 0-)

      ..but it is looking better and better for us keeping a slim majority in the Senate.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:43:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I just hope (0+ / 0-)

    That if we do win the House, we don't also lose the Senate... that would be AWFUL.

    I think we are in grasp of the House - we just need to nationalize Akin, Ryan, and the Republican plan.  It's not popular - and we need to run on that because I think it WILL help us.

    •  The odds of that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      llywrch, IM

      Are very, very small.  To win the House, due to gerrymandering in states like OH, PA, TX, MI, etc, you're probably going to need at least a 2-3% national win for congressional democrats over congressional republicans.  If the presidential race and the national house balloting shakes out at, say, 51-48 or thereabout, that likely means the following:

      Murphy beats McMahon
      Brown beats Mandel
      Nelson beats Mack (Romney might even win FL in this scenario, but Obama would run behind Nelson)
      Kaine beats Allen

      It's also plausible that in this scenario that Berkley would beat Heller and Warren would beat Brown unless there were a large amount of cross ticket voters in those races.  Donnelly would have a shot against Mourdock too as he'll run in front of Obama more than likely.  Akin's implosion would likely save McCaskill.  In this 3% win scenario, you're probably only losing Nebraska, probably Montana, and probably Wisconsin since Baldwin will run behind Obama.  North Dakota might be lost too but Heitkamp might be able to get sufficient cross-party support to win anyway.  

      That equates to a wash, or 1-2 seats on either side.  Bottom line, if the Democrats have a sufficient enough lead in national House vote, they ain't losing the Senate.  

  •  MO-Sen: flaws in Tom's & David's argument... (5+ / 0-)

    ...that undecideds are likely to break to Akin.

    First, crosstabs are unreliable.  These undecideds are 11% of the sample, that's a sky-high margin of error, and that 61-25 margin is a complete throwaway.  No doubt undecideds will break toward Romney over Obama because Obama will lose by probably high single-digits, but, that brings me to...

    ...second, which is that these same undecideds will favor Jay Nixon over Spence, so it's a given they won't just hold their noses and vote GOP.  That, too, blows up any conclusion the McCaskill/Akin undecideds will do.

    Third, PPP's own trendline has gone from Akin+5 to Akin+1 to McCaskill+1, so there's no basis to assume it'll move back the other way based on the characteristics of a very small subsample.

    Fourth, and most importantly, this is just one poll by a pollster that, like public polling across the board, simply hasn't been as good this year as previous cycles.  And it's already contradicted in real time by an equally plausible Mason-Dixon poll that has Presidential toplines essentially the same as what PPP says.  This isn't to be confused with Rasmussen which is obvious junk always but also provably so in this race since they also absurdly had Obama up a point.  Mason-Dixon correctly has Obama deep underwater in his own right and down big to Mitt, and still has Claire up big.  That PPP and M-D split only on the Senate race means that someone is either getting a bad sample, or doing wrong in question-wording or phrasing, or some combination of those things.  But there's no basis to think PPP is right and M-D is wrong.

    All this doesn't consider other essential factors, it's just to blow up PPP's absurd assertion on its own poll's undecideds.  I respect their work as much as anyone's, I really do, but their polling memo claims about their own crosstabs are always foolish in every single case...they make a lot of claims based on small subsamples that just aren't legitimate.

    The other big factor is that McCaskill is purposely laying off Akin to avoid driving him from the race.  She would've gone nuclear on him right away along with Dems across the board if there was no legal mechanism to put someone else in Akin's place in the GOP slot, and she'd be up 10 and coasting right now.  But she has to slow-walk it on purpose to let Akin think he can win, and that means absorbing some risk to herself......but ultimately she can blow up Akin anytime she wants, and eventually will.

    44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

    by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:07:18 AM PDT

    •  I'm in Kansas City, MO (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Byblis, pademocrat, askew

      and we are hopeful we can push Claire over the top. I think she will start running soft spots as soon as Dem convention is over, then after Sept. 26 will start whaling on Akin. If she doesn't, the Neanderthal will win. Because yes, Virginia, Missouri really is that red/ignorant.

    •  But it's legitimate (0+ / 0-)

      To make arguments based on small samples when the spreads are so wide. The undecideds' GOP preference is well outside the margin of error.

      I also don't believe Nixon, who has a very unusual profile, is applicable to McCaskill or Obama's situation in Missouri.

      Political Director, Daily Kos

      by David Nir on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 10:52:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yay FL-26 (8+ / 0-)

    Joe Garcia WILL triumph over the criminal known as David Riviera. The district has a lot of non-Cuban Hispanics AND a sizable number of African Americans. People are tired of his shenanigans.

    Glad to see the DCCC add Joe to the list, in addition to what Act Blue is doing. I'm very optimistic about bringing this seat into our column.

    Go, Joe!

  •  The reason why Rs won't get a convention bump (9+ / 0-)

    In the demo, "Honey Boo Boo" did even better. The half-hour series' showing among adults 18-49 bested all other cable outings for the night — coverage of the Republican National Convention, included — to pull a 1.3 rating.
    Well, that's just the humorous angle. But I do think that the R bump has already happened with Ryan's nomination -- and the RNC has been overshadowed by coverage of Isaac.

    We're still ahead, and our convention and bump is coming next week.

    "I hope; therefore, I can live."
    For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

    by tietack on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 06:21:58 AM PDT

  •  Somewhat repeating myself but (7+ / 0-)

    there's this constant repetition--from the Romney campaign, from pundits, whatever--that all Romney needs to do is convince voters who are "disgruntled with Obama, but nervous about a Romney administration".  I could cite any number of people here.  It's one of the cliches of the election.

    But I'm pretty skeptical.  

    Obama isn't popular, but he isn't anywhere near as unpopular as H.W. Bush, who was at 39/54 in Gallup right now.  He's not nearly as unpopular as  Carter , who was at around 35/55 in Gallup.  (He's probably less popular than Ford, but I think that's a clear special case.)

    I think pundits and political junkies and especially Republicans all think Obama should be even less popular than he is--either on the merits or because of their understandings of politics--and I think that colors their analysis.

    The economy might suck, but people simple don't think Obama is doing a bad job in the same way they thought those guys were.  But the assumption that they do--and just need Romney to be "humanized"--underpins much of our discussion of this election and underpinned much of the convention.

    And that has nothing whatsoever to do with how Obama supposedly made Romney an "unacceptable" alternative.  Obama is simply not in Carter and H.W. Bush's places as far as he himself is viewed.

    I also checked the DK/SEIU PPP poll respondent data, and, while this is statistically very dubious, there really aren't that many people with an opinion of Obama's job performance who aren't voting the same way as that opinion, already.

    2 approve of Obama but are voting for Romney.

    15 approve of Obama but aren't sure.

    20 disapprove of Obama but are voting for him anyway.

    35 disapprove of Obama and aren't sure who to vote for.

    That's all out of 1,000 (weighted) respondents, of course.  And I guess it's a close election, so maybe that's enough.  But I'm really skeptical of this constant repetition that Obama is unpopular enough that he "should" be losing easily.

    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-14 (formerly PA-02/NY-12).

    by Xenocrypt on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:13:10 AM PDT

    •  on August 27 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, IM

      which I'd count as the last day before you might start to get any RNC bump, Obama's average disapproval was 48.3 while Romney's polling average was 45.7.

      So if you trust these numbers that's 2.6 percent of the population who think Obama's done a poor job but were not ready to vote for Romney. If Romney could add this couple of percent to his score he'd gain a narrow popular vote lead, which might be enough if the electoral college is kind.

      So while it's true that Obama is certainly nowhere near the Bush 1 or Carter league for unpopularity, it's uncomfortable to be in a situation where "disapprove" is running neck and neck with "approve", and has been for most of the year. It gives the challenger a chance of winning if he can convert all those "disapproves" into votes for him. Given it's Romney and the current-day GOP we're talking about that's a pretty tough ask, but as a strategy it seems a reasonable one, and my impression was firmly that Romney was focussing on disillusioned 08 Obama voters whom he hopes might be peeled off.

  •  Civitas "unaffilliated" poll (8+ / 0-)

    McCrory 46%
    Dalton 29%
    Howe 10%

    Obama 45%
    Romney 45%

    If Obama and Romney are tied with unafilliateds, then Obama is definitely up overall in NC. Obama was up 3 with PPP when he was down 4 with Independents.

    22/Male/ D/Native of OH-16, Attending Graduate School in NC-04. Re-Elect Betty Sutton and David Price!

    by liberal intellectual on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:19:23 AM PDT

    •  bit suspicious they haven't released full numbers (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I think there was one NC poll  conducted in February that Civitas sat on for a couple of months because it showed an Obama lead. Obama should indeed lead overall if he's tied with independents as Dems have a large registration advantage in NC - though to be fair the sub-sample size is probably small making this number volatile.

      •  I think they just polled unafilliates. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        From the website it looks like the poll was just of unafilliated voters, which means the MOE should be small that a usual subset of unafilliates from a larger poll.

        22/Male/ D/Native of OH-16, Attending Graduate School in NC-04. Re-Elect Betty Sutton and David Price!

        by liberal intellectual on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:21:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The audio says MoE "just under 5%" which... (0+ / 0-)

          ...means it's a sample of hundreds and, yes, probably a poll of just unaffiliated voters.

          Campaigns do this sort of thing all the time.

          And it doesn't mean Obama is winning because in NC the Dems have a lot of bleeding to GOP candidates...there are still a lot of conservative white Dixiecrats in the state.  A Democrat can split indies and still lose in NC with enough bleeding of white conservaDems...although, no question if a GOPer isn't winning indies outright, his/her path is steeper.

          All this tells me is that NC genuinely is a tossup.  It's no worse than that, but splitting indies doesn't mean Obama has any advantage.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:34:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I seriously doubt it (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            2008 Exit poll  for NC by party affiliation:

                             Obama McCain
            D (42%)       90         9
            R  (31%)        4        95
            I   (27%)       39       60

            I don't see too many Dixiecrats in those numbers.

            •  ConservaDems in NC (0+ / 0-)

              Eastern NC to this day has a lot of ConservaDems.  This is a big reason why North Carolina has elected Democratic Governors but usually support Republicans for President.  The NC Democratic party has kept many of these ConservaDems because the state party has a reputation for being mostly moderate.  The number of ConservaDems have decreased in the last 40 years...many have simply left the party or are no longer alive.

              2008 was a sign that the NC electorate has changed.  We've had an influx of jobs in the Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill area and in Charlotte.  At the same time, a good portion of the rural areas have seen a stagnation of growth.  These ConservaDems supported Obama in 2008 over McCain, but I don't know if that support will be the same in 2012.  Obama can probably lose some of the ConservaDem support and win in NC due to population growth.  Many of the jobs created here attracts people with more of a progressive mindset than the previous electorate.

              •  What about growth amongst nonwhite voters in NC? (0+ / 0-)

                A few days ago, bear83 said that were over 200,000 new non-white voters since 2008 in North Carolina. Turning out just a fraction of those voters and getting them to vote for our guys would be significant.

                "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

                by bjssp on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 11:34:18 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  That's not a reliably accurate breakdown... (0+ / 0-)

              ...of party registration, so it's not apples-to-apples.

              This poll was of registered unaffiliateds.

              That exit poll was of party self-ID, where people might not say what they're actually registered.

              Voter registration in NC in 2008 was 46D-32R-22I ("unaffiliated" in registration).

              I bet there are Dixiecrats who don't identify as Dems except perhaps locally, and it wouldn't surprise me if they routinely identify as independent.  The exit poll appears to ask for party "ID" rather than registration, which makes sense because they probably use the same stock question everywhere, and a lot of states (like Virginia where I am) don't have party-based registration so that party "ID" is the only partisan question wording that makes sense.  And party ID can easily get some different responses than "registration."

              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 01:56:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  2 NC Polls coming next week. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sulthernao, KingofSpades, askew

    Elon Poll on Tuesday at opening of convention and PPP is also polling NC.

    22/Male/ D/Native of OH-16, Attending Graduate School in NC-04. Re-Elect Betty Sutton and David Price!

    by liberal intellectual on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:27:23 AM PDT

    •  If I remember right, Elon has too many... (0+ / 0-)

      ...undecideds in their polls, reducing their value.

      At this stage any poll in a true battleground state that has either candidate in the low 40s isn't very good or worth much attention.  I dismiss SUSA's last NC poll for that reason, since the 43-43 tie isn't plausible to me, too low for either candidate.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:12:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, and along those lines... (0+ / 0-)

        ...I dismiss the newest daily tracker, I think Reuters/Ipsos, partly for the same reason, that they have the candidates in the low/mid-40s when that's not true.  They've had Obama down to 42 this week, that's just not true at all.

        44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:13:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Rasmussen has Romney +1 I see (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Byblis, sulthernao, askew, IM

    I wish there was a betting market on Rasmussen polls, it would be so easy to profit. Can I just do a little "I told you so" from a week ago?

    Rasmussen tracker has Obama +1 today (6+ / 0-)

    Good news in theory, but I was expecting an Obama mini-peak on Sunday or Monday to give maximum scope for a Romney "bounce" from the RNC. Especially after his latest MO poll it's hard not to be just a touch cynical about Rasmussen's polling.

    by distantcousin on Sat Aug 25, 2012 at 06:38:18 AM PDT

  •  Deathly hush on the polling front recently (0+ / 0-)

    I'm assuming that a lot of organisations are now in the field and we'll get a flood of releases on Monday and Tuesday next week.

  •  MN 8: 2 Dem polls have Nolan up slightly (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mark27, itskevin, askew

    “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

    by Paleo on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:30:18 AM PDT

    •  Not Surprising..... (0+ / 0-)

      ....I suspect the reason we haven't already seen internal poll releases by Democrats in MN-08 is because they were more focused on the primary up until now.  As I've said for months now, I'd be very surprised if Cravaack survived.  And the fact that Nolan's home base is in a Republican-leaning portion of the district would only seem to make Cravaack's situation that much more difficult.

  •  I just got polled! Online, by Ras. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, Byblis, itskevin, sapelcovits

    I have no doubt that my responses will be noted and then duly ignored.

    29, male, new MI-14/old MI-12.

    by Silvan Elf on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:33:11 AM PDT

    •  How did they poll you online? n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, Silvan Elf


      by LordMike on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 09:29:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm signed up for this online polling thing (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Where I get sent surveys from time to time on all sorts of topics...electronics, restaurants, cars, occasional strange ones about things like where I shop for auto parts, etc. I started it when I took out student loans back in '08 and I get monetary "rewards" for completing the polls. Never very much, but a few dollars here and there, then can withdraw it later.

        Every so often, a political one shows up. Today I started this one that I wasn't even expecting to be a political poll. When I started it, "Rasmussen Reports" showed up as the company taking the poll, and it was all political questions (who would you vote for if the election were today, what is your opinion of Pres. Obama, what is your opinion of Mitt Romney, of Condi Rice, of Clint Eastwood, etc.). I didn't even know they did online polling.

  •  When You Don't Like The Results Of Your Internals (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, Mark27, Byblis, itskevin, dufffbeer, IM

    you don't release them.  If the Dems are releasing theirs & the Republicans are not, it's very telling.  

    •  Not true. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      See Harry Reid, 2010.

      •  You mean "not always true" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        That race was a rare exception. It's certainly true far more often that it's not!

        Political Director, Daily Kos

        by David Nir on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 10:58:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There are other situations, many occurring (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          this election that I can't go into. Another one is Scott Walker.

          •  A little distinguishable too. (0+ / 0-)

            Walker was ahead in every public poll and letting those do the talking for him.

            White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "Who let the dogs out? Who? Who?" - Mitt Romney, MLK Day 2008.

            by spiderdem on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 11:22:27 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Michigan-Prez this year is another (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tietack, NMLib

              Obama is in a "tossup" in most public polls and yet doesn't release any internals and yet doesn't spend any money.

              And yet Romney, too, spends nothing, and now it's being more openly reported in the media that the Romney campaign is completely conceding Michigan, it's not on their radar.

              Of course this is not a situation where one campaign releases private polling, but really Romney releasing a private poll isn't worth as much as all the public polls  out there saying exactly what Romney would love to spin.

              And yet OFA is silent.

              Nondisclosure isn't worth much as a signal of anything.


              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 08:04:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I've never heard of OFA (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                releasing and internal ever.  May have happened but I've never heard of it.

                White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "Who let the dogs out? Who? Who?" - Mitt Romney, MLK Day 2008.

                by spiderdem on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 05:18:36 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Actually, it is a signal -- for fundraising (0+ / 0-)

                My feeling (someone really should do a statistical analysis) is that candidates who release internals don't have the funds that they need, and/or fear that their fundraising will dry up based on some other poll.

                Fundraising has never been an issue for OfA.

                "I hope; therefore, I can live."
                For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

                by tietack on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 07:15:32 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

            There are other exceptions! I don't disagree.

            Political Director, Daily Kos

            by David Nir on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 12:31:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think the exception is the rule (0+ / 0-)

              I've said this many times, I know there are people here who think otherwise, but the fact is most campaigns don't want to release their internals.  And I think they won't do so even when an opponent does because they do not care what anyone thinks about the horse race.  If you're winning, or at least doing as well as you hope if you're not clearly winning (e.g., running even in a tough district or state), and your fundraising is going well, and you're getting the local media attention you want, and your campaign strategy and tactics and execution are working just fine, you might just conclude an opponent releasing an internal isn't going to hurt you.  I think that's what happens the majority of time.

              Campaigns usually do not care what anyone thinks about the horse race.  They don't care because it usually doesn.'t hurt them in any way for a story or two to circulate on Politico and a few partisan blogs.

              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:36:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Even more...... (0+ / 0-)

                This came up here very recently just a week or two ago regarding Earl Perlmutter, whose GOP opponent released an internal showing him beating Perlmutter big.  Then a commenter here involved who is in touch with the campaign shared here that the campaign told him they're up double-digits in their own polling, and they don't care about their opponent releasing an internal or what anyone thinks about it.

                That's just the latest example out of who knows how many.  But those examples disappear down the memory hole here.

                Frankly I think that's more the norm.

                So many people here want to assume nondisclosure means you're in trouble, but I think that's usually untrue.

                44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:58:30 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  One exception: ND-Sen (0+ / 0-)

                  Remember the response to Heitkamp's early internal showing her in a slight lead? Crickets.

                  And given the history of ND electing Ds to the Senate, that internal passed the "smell test".

                  That was the "dog that didn't bark" sign that Berg was in trouble, something we know is true today, given the NRSC's move of millions from MO and NM to ND.

                  (I get a similar impression about IN-Sen, but don't remember details. If true, that suggests that sensible internals can have more of an impact in states where there's a dearth of polling)

                  btw, minor typo, it's Ed, not Earl Perlmutter -- one reason why he didn't have to respond was that internal did not pass the "smell test" in his swing district -- sorta like Charles Djou's internal that had him with some huge lead over Hanabusa in late '10.

                  "I hope; therefore, I can live."
                  For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

                  by tietack on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 07:23:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)

                  And I think it's too simplistic to view it merely through the lens of "disclosure" vs. "nondisclosure." First off, the initial poll has to be credible. Coors' pool, for instance, wasn't, as tietack points out. Also, Perlmutter's campaign claimed they never release internal polling, and the local press agreed that that was true (so I'm also skeptical of whichever commenter claimed to have an inside source).

                  Secondly, you also have to look at what the campaign says in response. Cravaack, for instance, bellyached that Democrats had released "incomplete polls"—as though the game is ordinarily played by releasing full polling instruments complete with crosstabs and raw data.

                  Third, how many polls have gone unanswered? Vann is behind the eight-ball because that's two identical polls in a row. Same with Cravaack, because it was two extremely similar polls right at the same time. And I think tietack's example of ND-Sen is a good one, too. One poll could just be a one-off thing. But more than one?

                  (Obviously this isn't always the case, with the WI-Gov recall being a notable exception, but I don't think a lot of analysts were buying those Dem internals. If anything, they just seemed desperate by constantly tossing out so many Walker +1-3 polls when almost no public polling every matched that.)

                  Also, it's not just a few bloggers and Politico who care about such things. Campaigns want to release good internals because it matters for fundraising purposes. And there's a whole eco-system involving the Charlie Cooks of the world, which gets you your ratings, and those percolate through to various groups, which decide whether to endorse you, etc. I've had people who work campaigns tell me that fundraising can get badly hurt if a bad poll comes out for you.

                  And in any event, Steve's crunched the numbers. Republicans released far more internals overall in 2010, and we got killed. We had a smaller edge in 2008 and did well.

                  Political Director, Daily Kos

                  by David Nir on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:48:35 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Harry Reid (0+ / 0-)

        repeatedly leaked his internals to Jon Ralston.  Not all that much different than releasing them.

        White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "Who let the dogs out? Who? Who?" - Mitt Romney, MLK Day 2008.

        by spiderdem on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 11:18:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, that's not true (0+ / 0-)

          The only time anything actually was reported out about Reid's internals was a week or so before the election, when Ralston or someone else on Twitter revealed that Reid's internal polling had him up 6-7 points consistently.  I remember that well, I followed the race obsessively, and at no point was anything at all leaked into a public forum or blog post or campaign media story about what Reid's own polling might be saying.

          And I bet that one leak was unintentional, I doubt the Reid campaign wanted it leaked...there was nothing gained at that stage.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 07:50:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's not my recollection at all (0+ / 0-)

            I remember Ralston reporting on both sides' internals repeatedly starting at least a month and probably more before the election.  You may be right, but that's my recollection.

            White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "Who let the dogs out? Who? Who?" - Mitt Romney, MLK Day 2008.

            by spiderdem on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 05:17:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Obama +1 Gallup (0+ / 0-)

    No change today.

    22/Male/ D/Native of OH-16, Attending Graduate School in NC-04. Re-Elect Betty Sutton and David Price!

    by liberal intellectual on Fri Aug 31, 2012 at 10:02:07 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site