0
   

News & discussion on house and senate races

 
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 07:31 am
realjohnboy wrote:
I saw a poll, which I cannot cite, that Mr Bush's approval rating actually rose to 42%. Sorry for the lack of citation; not my habit.

Bit off-topic, but for the context of this:

http://www.pollingreport.com/images/BUSHtrend.GIF
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 07:32 am
This one's more on-topic:

http://www.pollingreport.com/images/2006.GIF
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 09:01 pm
Poll: Casey leads Santorum in Pa. race

That Casey leads is no news. What is (disturbing) news is that his lead on Santorum is slimming precariously, down to 5%.

-------------

On a more hopeful tick, a slightly older item:

Democrats like Ney's pick - Ties to beleaguered congressman box in Padgett, some observers say
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 09:14 pm
The Dems are working to get the green candidate (funded with GOP money, of course) off of the ballot in that Pa. race, Nimh. If they are successfull.... well, I doubt that you'll see many greens voting for Santorum, let's just say.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 01:29 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
The Dems are working to get the green candidate (funded with GOP money, of course) off of the ballot in that Pa. race, Nimh.

(1) Who is your source for the Republican funding?
(2) Don't complain, Democrats, fund the Libertarian candidate to take votes from the Republicans! (Not that I have a conflict of interest here.)
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 05:22 am
thomas

On Hardball two nights previous, Santorum explicitly admitted that the Republicans were funding the Greens and sending Republican volunteers over to help out with organizational matters. It was a prideful admission.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 06:07 am
Pardon me, but I'm going to violate a general rule here and paste in a complete piece. There are some interesting and important points made here.

Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/26/washington/26cong.html
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 06:54 am
Thomas wrote:
(1) Who is your source for the Republican funding?

No link, but I read an article (mainstream media) some two weeks ago detailing that up to 80% or 90% of the donors to the Pa. Green candidate were identified as people who also funded the Republicans, as Republicans themselves, or as well-known prior Republican funders. None of those had had any prior involvement with the Green Party. If I happen upon the article again I'll post it here.

Nothing surprising about Cyclo's assertion in any case - remember the flap in '04 about Nader/Camejo accepting significant sums of funding from Republican donors? I dont think the Libertarians even ever had that kind of funding.

The Pa. Green candidate is currently polling 3-4%. His emergence in the polls earlier in the month coincided with a drop in Casey's support.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 09:15 am
Ha ha, how dumb can you get..

Quote:
Schmidt Mired in Another Scandal

The authenticity of a photo showing Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) finishing a marathon in under three-and-a-half hours is being questioned, according to the AP. Her alleged finishing time would have placed her among the top finishers, but "a newspaper list of the top runners does not include Schmidt." In addition, "Schmidt doesn't cast a shadow while other runners do."

"State law prohibits candidates from publishing false statements designed to promote their election." In response to the allegations, "a four-member commission panel ruled Thursday that there was enough evidence to" investigate further.


From the AP story:

Quote:
On her Web site, Schmidt, who is 54, said she has completed 59 marathons. In April, she received a public reprimand from the Ohio Elections Commission for claiming on her Web site that she had two college degrees when she had only one.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 10:56 am
Thanks, blatham and nimh. And please do keep this funding thing for Libertarians in mind.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 11:42 am
thomas

What with this new business setup costs, we are watching pennies. And as the Libertarian folks in that jurisdiction are also in much the same situation, and yet need to make a favorable impression with the folks they talk to, I've tried to help by mailing off an envelope of very nice smelling talcum powder.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 04:13 pm
We dont have a Libertarian Party in Holland, I dont think. Well, there was a LP that took part in the elections in.. 1998? Didnt end so well, I recounted this once before... In the one instance that they succeeded to attract attention, the party leader gave a live interview on the radio - by cellphone, while he was driving. The Dutch Libertarian Party proposed to end max speed, and the leader illustrated his point by bragging that he was in fact driving too fast, right now - before subsquently crashing in a minor accident, live on air.

Not that the US Libertarian Party is any less wacky..
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 04:33 pm
Jesus, that is hilarious!

I don't have any idea if Canada has a Libertarian party. What would they desire? The inalienable right to jab a syrup collector in park pine trees? The removal of discriminatory signs disallowing snow shoes on escalators?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 06:34 pm
Katherine Harris gets in more trouble...

Quote:
Harris' remarks on religion draw ire

U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris (news, bio, voting record) told a religious journal that separation of church and state is "a lie" and God and the nation's founding fathers did not intend the country be "a nation of secular laws." [..]

Harris made the comments in the Florida Baptist Witness, the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention, which interviewed political candidates and asked them about religion and their positions on issues.

Separation of church and state is "a lie we have been told," Harris said in the interview, published Thursday, saying separating religion and politics is "wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers."

"If you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin," Harris said. [..]


Sherrod Brown again inches ahead of Mike DeWine in Ohio, but has something to lose as many people are still to make up their mind about him:

Quote:
Ohio senate: Brown (D) 45% DeWine (R) 42%

Once again, the challenger in Ohio's highly competitive race for U.S. Senate has edged out the GOP incumbent in the Rasmussen Reports election poll. Democrat Sherrod Brown now leads Republican Senator Mike DeWine 45% to 42%.

[T]he fact that the challenger has a narrow lead in three out of the last four polls is significant.

Early in the year, DeWine was consistently ahead [..] our three-poll rolling average confirms a long-term if very gradual movement in Brown's direction.

The question is whether either candidate can yank the closely watched race out of toss-up status [..].

DeWine is regarded as conservative by 34%, moderate by 44%. Brown is considered moderate by 38%, liberal by 32%. Twenty-four percent (24%) still aren't sure where Brown stands ideologically, which could give the incumbent a chance to paint him as too liberal in the remaining weeks of the campaign.

Before he secured the nomination, some Democrats in the state had shied away from Brown for being too liberal. According to National Journal's 2006 nonpartisan rankings of congressmen, Brown is one of the 20%-most-liberal members of the House. Despite this ranking, Brown currently captures 59% of moderates (compared to DeWine's 29%), and even 18% of conservatives.

The National Journal ratings say that DeWine is a plumb-line moderate in the U.S. Senate.

DeWine is viewed favorably by 51% of Ohio voters, unfavorably by 43%. Brown is viewed favorably by 49% and unfavorably by 35%.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 08:50 pm
And yet another Republican turns out to be a bit of the ass.hole variety:

Quote:
Senate hopeful explains anti-gay columns

U.S. Senate candidate Stephen Laffey said he regrets that he wrote columns denigrating gays when he was a college student.

Laffey, the mayor of Cranston, acknowledged writing the columns in a story published Saturday in the Providence Journal. [..]

Laffey, 44, running a closely watched race against moderate Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee [said] "Do I regret some of these things? Sure," he said. "But at the time, we were just having fun. We thought it was funny."

The Republican candidate wrote them in 1983 and 1984 while studying at Bowdoin College in Maine. The articles appeared in a paper published by campus Republicans.

In one column, Laffey said he has never seen a happy homosexual.

"This is not to say there aren't any; I simply haven't seen one in my lifetime. Maybe they are all in the closet," he wrote. "All the homosexuals I've seen are sickly and decrepit, their eyes devoid of life."

In another column he wrote that pop music was turning the children of America into sissies, and criticized the singer Boy George, referring to him as "it."

"It wears girl's clothes and puts on makeup," he wrote. "When I hear it sing, 'Do you really want to hurt me, do you really want to make me cry,' I say to myself, YES, I want to punch your lights out, pal, and break your ribs."
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 10:50 pm
nimh wrote:
realjohnboy wrote:
I saw a poll, which I cannot cite, that Mr Bush's approval rating actually rose to 42%. .

Bit off-topic, but for the context of this:

http://www.pollingreport.com/images/BUSHtrend.GIF


I disagree, nimh, with your comment about Mr Bush's approval ratings being off topic. Many, many races will be a referendum on Mr Bush's administration. So his approval rating is quite relevant.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2006 11:44 pm
I agree with realjohnboy, this election will in large part be a vote about Bush.

He has risen a few percentage points from his low several months ago, which is not surprising. Most candidates start off with 40% of the vote, and it's their job to go up from there.

A couple fo polls show Bush now at 42%, but most show him at mid to high 30's. I doubt it is anything he did. I think it is the fact that the midterm elections are approaching, and a few disgusted Republicans are realizing that when push comes to shove, they dislike the Democrats even worse than the president they're stuck with.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2006 06:26 am
Quote:
I agree with realjohnboy, this election will in large part be a vote about Bush.


I think so too, but the RNC is working like the devil to steer issues towards the local while the Dems keep pointing at Bush.

We haven't seen nor heard of Rove recently, nor Norquist. These are perhaps the two key 'behind-the-scenes' organize/co-ordinate boys. Norquist, of course, is now associated with the KStreet corruption stuff and so has double reason to be out of sight - busy and a bad association. Rove may poll in negatives related to the election but he too will certainly be extremely busy right now co-ordinating multiple races and trying to push issues down to the local.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2006 07:50 am
And are they succesful? Different polls published this weekend give starkly contrasting takes on the level of support for Republicans:

Quote:
Democrat Lead Down to Two Points in U.S.

The United States congressional election might be a closely contested affair, according to a poll by Gallup released by USA Today. 47 per cent of respondents would support the Democratic contender in their congressional district, while 45 per cent would vote for the Republican candidate.

Support for the Democrats dropped by six points since early June, while backing for the Republicans increased by three points. [..]

Polling Data

If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party's candidate would you vote for in your Congressional district? As of today, do you lean more toward the Democratic Party's candidate or the Republican Party's candidate?

Code: 20 Aug 4 Jun 30 Apr

Dem. candidate 47% 51% 54%

Rep. candidate 45% 42% 39%

Undecided/Other 7% 7% 7%


Source: Gallup / USA Today
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,001 American adults, conducted from Aug. 18 to Aug. 20, 2006. Margin of error is 3 per cent.


Quote:
Democrats Lead, More Undecided Voters in U.S.

The Democratic Party remains on top in the United States, according to a poll by CBS News. 47 per cent of respondents would vote for the Democratic candidate in their congressional district, while 32 per cent would support the Republican contender.

Support for the Democrats increased by two points since early August, while backing for the Republicans fell by three points. [..]

Polling Data

If the 2006 election for U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate in your district?

(Registered Voters)

Code: August July May

Democrat 47% 45% 44%

Republican 32% 35% 34%

Other -- 1% 1%

Will not vote -- 1% --

Depends/Not Sure 20% 18% 21%


Source: CBS News
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,206 American adults, conducted from Aug. 17 to Aug. 21, 2006. Margin of error is 4 per cent.

(Note that the top poll asks respondents which party they "lean" more to, whereas the bottom one asks which one they would actually "vote" for. That explains why there are many more "don't knows" in the bottom one.

That difference could be argued to imply that the overwhelming majority of those who are not sure but are leaning one way or the other are now leaning Republican, whereas they were still split evenly in July and heading more towards Democrats in May. It would be fairly irresponsible to deduce this from comparing two different polls with different sets of respondents and possibly different methodologies, though.)
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2006 08:05 am
Nimh:

It is more or less understood in America that before Labor Day, the electorate is largely uninterested. So you get things like conflicting polls.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Oz fest 2004 - Question by Love2is0evol
Human Events Names Man of the Year, 2004 - Discussion by gungasnake
Your 2004 mix tape - Discussion by boomerang
BUSH WON FAIR AND SQUARE... - Discussion by Frank Apisa
Weeping and gnashing of teeth - Discussion by FreeDuck
WOW! Why Andrew Sullivan is supporting John Kerry - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Margarate Hassan - hostage in Iraq - Discussion by msolga
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 4.52 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 09:51:32