Gibbons is in a tight race with Dina Titus for Governor; the most recent polls put Gibbons less than 2% ahead of Titus. The two meet this week for two live debates.

Titus 46, Gibbons 45. Based on phone interviews with 600 LVs, MOE = 4.

This result would appear to confirm the Zogby/ WSJ poll that showed her leading 47-44. Both campaigns have publicly acknowledged that internal polling shows the race within MOE.

The Rasmussen survey was of 500 LVs and showed Titus with 44 to Gibbons' 40 percent, which is an 9 point gain on the last Rasmussen survey (which had Gibbons ahead by 5, 46-41). This is the first independent survey to show Titus ahead.

Indicative of the strong campaign Titus has been waging, she put Gibbons on the defensive today about his vote to grant tax subsidies to oil companies, while gas prices in NV average over $3 per gallon.

Gibbons, who had intended to be so far ahead that he'd avoid any serious challenge, has a lead of only 46-41 over Titus, well within the MOE for a survey of 500 LVs. Titus gained ground on Gibbons in every survey taken in 05, and that trend now continues.

Titus posted impressive fund-raising numbers ($1.2m) in her end of year disclosure and is building a strong grassroots campaign. She's also been stumping hard all around the state, winning support in rural counties that Dems lost in 04 but need to win back to carry the state.

Sabato now lists this race as a "toss-up," out of the "lean Republican" column, and its shaping up to be one of the most important races in 06.

This is the same margin (+14) as her lead in last month's poll. The poll, MOE +-4, also showed her within 9 points of Republican Reb Jim Gibbons, whose unfavorability continues to rise.

Compared with a poll released by Gibbons' own campaign one month ago, this new non-partisan (though methodologically conservative leaning) poll by Mason-Dixon for the Las Vegas Review Journal shows Gibbons under 50 % and barely outside the margin of error against both Titus and Perkins (both of whom have much lower name ID than Gibbons).

Even more interestingly this poll shows Titus leading Perkins by over 2-1 among registered Democrats (31-15).

He gave $8K in "consulting fees" to a Nevada-based freelance tv and radio reporter and former director of the Nevada Press Association, for "election analysis". She did work last fall primarily for a radio station that features nationally syndicated right-wing shout radio programming.

Which of course is precisely the sort of speech that Jim Gibbons has specialized in lately.

But the big story is that the operative who heads the corporation established to run the joint is being investigated for fraud and theft. Seems he's collected about $25K in reg fees that he's spent on personal expenses, repaying loans, and bar tabs.

He's clearly got the wrong memo about "personal accounts".  

Where are these numbers coming from?

I do like the "Eagles" response though. Pokes fun at Bush but makes a lasting, easily remembered impression. IN fact, I like this ad a lot, because one of my concerns about KErry's advertising was that because of the emphasis on rapid response, they've had really weak visuals.
I have been saying to myself for a while that ,"self, what Kerry needs is a visual metaphor on which to close out the campaign." I had presumed it would be a boat...

but a soaring eagle vs. an ostrich is just great. On so many levels.  (Not least is that it reminds me of the unbearably funny scene in 9/11 of Ashcroft singing about soaring eagles.

He told me he uses them only because they send out coupons for very little money; he didn't even know that his ads run on Sinclair.

I have yet to find a local # for them, but it makes clear that we can make some progress here if we find out which media companies are doing the buying and then let them know their customers will be hurt due to their affiliation with Sinclair.

Please share your considered views with them.

Today, on the final day for mail in registration (in person registration continues for 10 more days), several thousand new registrations were disqualified by the County registrar.

(The County registrar is a Democrat, so its not likely to be a Republican "dirty trick.")

What does this mean? It appears there are, for the moment, no campaign finance rules?

And where were these people back in August when SBVT was running "non-coordinated" ads?

Lots of senior citizens in these precincts and we took names and addresses for vote-by-mail (in effect, no-fault absentee ballot).

Biggest drawbacks were that the Party gave us NO Spanish-language material (in Southern Nevada?!!) -- fortunately we were able to make our own flyers -- and a very aleatory list in low-income appartment blocks.

I recall the GOP in other states getting in trouble for violating the law prohibiting unsolicited email; does the same thing apply to these robocalls?

IF not, is it worth calling BC04 and telling them I do not ever want to hear from them again, in hopes it takes them some effort to find and delete me from their list?

Or should I just follow my natural impulse and drop my phone in a bucket of disinfectant?