SHOCKER: Rasmussen Poll Tilts to Ayotte

8 is a big margin, isn't it? (0.00 / 0)

--
"Act as if ye have faith and faith shall be given to you." -Aaron Sorkin

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 21:05:15 PM CDT

MoE is 4.5% (4.00 / 1)

Taken to the limits of error,

4.5 up from 38 = 42.5
4.5 down from 46 = 41.5

But I'm not going to get too worked up.

To me, a Ras poll where the D is down at the outer limits of MoE is basically = tie ball game, which is where R2K had it a while back when Markos polled it.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 21:26:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sometimes polling has its limits (0.00 / 0)

Much as I'm a fan of Nate Silver, he's all quantitative, and that's a limitation of analysis.

My prediction: New Hampshire is the single most likely Democratic Senate pickup.  Here are some of the non-polling factors worth evaluating to decide that:

• Massive realignment since the last real race for this seat (no disrespect to Granny D, but you know what I mean), becoming a blue state at every level of government
  
• Registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans in New Hampshire for the first time ever.
  
• State in which Democrats have won every Congressional, statewide, and national election since the last election for this seat
  
• Retiring Republican Senator
  
• State whose other seat saw a Democratic challenger defeat a Republican incumbent in the most recent Senate election
  
• Radicalizing Republican party meets a state in which, just a couple months after passing marriage equality, it's already a political non-issue.

--
"Act as if ye have faith and faith shall be given to you." -Aaron Sorkin

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 08:52:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I took the poll... (4.00 / 2)

In response to your question/comment about question number three, there is a good reason why they did not list how it was worded.  It was not a single question that asked you to choose from Hodes, Ayotte, Other, and Not Sure, as shown in the chart.  They actually posed multiple questions to get the data.  They took the responses from the multiple questions and merged them together to make the table.  I don't see how that is statistically valid.

The questions that I answered went something like this:

If the New Hampshire Senatorial election were held today, would you vote for Kelly Ayotte the Republican, Paul Hodes the Democrat, or are you not sure.  Key 1 for Hodes, 2 for Ayotte, or 3 for not sure.

If... (somebody who's name I forgot) the Republican, Paul Hodes the Democrat, ...

If... (a second somebody who's name I forgot) the Republican, Paul Hodes the Democrat, ...

Notice that they put Kelly Ayotte's name and the other Republicans name's first in the choices.  That is probably good for a couple of percentage points for Republicans right there.

Since Hodes was listed three times, his numbers were artificially depressed since a typical Republican responder would choose some other answer each time.  

I'm guessing that the "not sure" answers were artificially inflated since I would assume that a typical Republican voter would have voted not sure on the two questions where the relatively unknown Republican candidate was matched up with Hodes.

My guess is that if the question were really worded as a single choice between Ayotte, Hodes, Other, or Not Sure, that the Hodes numbers would go up somewhat, and that each of the other three choices would go down somewhat.

---

by: milfordmusings @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 22:52:59 PM CDT

On the name order, you dont know if they mixed it up with other respondents which would be the normal way to do it. (4.00 / 1)

While I do find it odd that the question isnt listed, I think this type of poll this early is inherently of little value. Few people know much that isnt vanilla about Kelly Ayotte at this time while the GOP has been whacking PH incessantly. This gives her small negative numbers and larger ones to Paul Hodes.

Wait until Ovide Lamontagne and Sean Mahoney have spent a few weeks discussing her short comings as a candidate and you will get a better, though still flawed, sense of how she is perceived.

All in all polls at this time are virtually meaningless.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 05:08:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It is Surprising (0.00 / 0)

Rasmussen is not ARG: these guys are generally reliable.

It's always difficult to run a campaign to appeal to both Republicans and Democrats.
But the base, as I perceive it, has yet to be fired up for Hodes.
And let's face it, the fact that he is one of the 12 Ds to vote against the resolution for decorum in the House chamber sure does not help with that base.
Anytime a candidate has to explain, that's not good.

Meanwhile two males taking on one Ayotte helps her.

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 07:01:49 AM CDT

Why is this a shocker? (4.00 / 2)

Kelly Ayotte and Paul Hodes probably have comparable name recognition, but in her case, it is still as the crime fighting Attorney General, and he is a congressman about whom people don't know a lot.

While we know she is a right wing, if not fringe candidate, who is flopping on the stump (hence Sean Mahoney's re-enthused intereste), the independents who were questioned don't know that. All her appearances have been on the Republican picnic circuit, she still refuses to do press interviews, and the bulk of voters are not paying attention.

Remember, when Jeanne Shaheen ran, she was much better known than Paul Hodes, as the state's chief executive receives much greater press coverage than the congressional delegation. NH was pretty much done with anyone associated with George W. Bush. So, not surprisingly,  Jeanne Shaheen took a lead from the get go against John E. This is a different race, different circumstances, different issues, different time.

This poll actuallty shows that Kelly Ayotte isn't doing all that well. She was a fairly popular, albeit for the most part innocuous, AG, she is a female in a state that is very receptive to women, and she was thought to be a moderate. Kudos to the NHDP, BH and everyone else for getting the word out about her right wing positions; as independents who aren't paying attention learn more about her, her numbers will slide.      

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 09:37:09 AM CDT

Still early (0.00 / 0)

That's my take, from a safe distance.

---

by: JimC @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 10:02:55 AM CDT

A Better Nominee Out There? (0.00 / 0)

As I've said a number of times on BlueHampshire.com and elsewhere, I think 2010 will be a tough year for Democrats.  We won't have George W. Bush on the ballot as we did in 2006 (we could run against him then) nor Barack Obama as we did in 2008.  Much depends on the economy, and where we stand with Iraq and Afghanistan and health care.  

It worries me a lot that after Paul Hodes has spent megabucks in two races for Congress, AND has high name-recognition, that he's dragging at this point behind any of the Republican potentials.

I've not been impressed by the dialing-for-dollars of his campaign machine, nor his weak support-Obama-blindly on the Afghanistan troop-surge, and the slow "exit" from Iraq.  Staying in Iraq or building up our forces in Afghanistan, and reaching out for big bucks from PACs isn't the "change" I thought we were going to get.

Perhaps there is a better Democratic candidate who could come forward who could engage some of these issues.  That's what primaries are for, and it would make our chances in November, 2010 better.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 12:23:58 PM CDT

No he doesn't (4.00 / 3)

Jim, Paul Hodes, like the usual NH congressman, does not have high name recognition.  

The UNH poll done in June showed 34% of those polled did not know enough about Charlie Bass to have an opinion.  Bass served six terms in congress, three times as long as Paul Hodes, and the Bass name is historic in NH.  37% did not know enough Hodes to have an opinion.

You'll have to come up with another ladle with which  to stir your "I want a primary in the senate race" pot :)  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 12:54:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry, Jim (4.00 / 2)

I've not been impressed by the dialing-for-dollars of his campaign machine . . . . and reaching out for big bucks from PACs isn't the "change" I thought we were going to get.

Don't know about you, but I want a candidate who will have the resources to fight back and defend progressive principles.  PAC money from labor, etc., is not our enemy:  Republicans are.  We've both experienced enough pre-Shaheen NH Democratic history to know that underfunded candidates -- from Wayne King to Mark Fernald -- are defined by our opponents, often through lies and deceit.

I would love campaign finance and lobbying reform.  (So would Paul Hodes, and earmark standards has been one of his signature issues on the Hill.)  But until we can push it through, I don't want Democrats fighting with one arm tied behind their backs.  

I'm glad that Paul works hard.  Can't say for certain that he'll win in 2010, but I'm damn well sure that he'll leave nothing on the table in the next 14 months.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 14:24:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hodes is the best pick. (4.00 / 2)

And I disagree with the following entirely...

I've not been impressed by the dialing-for-dollars of his campaign machine,

It's early. Campaigns cost money. Right now, I'm sure Hodes is busy in Washington doing his job. Since when have we become so obsessed with money? It will come, let the man do his job first.

nor his weak support-Obama-blindly on the Afghanistan troop-surge, and the slow "exit" from Iraq.  Staying in Iraq or building up our forces in Afghanistan,

The situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is surely not that simple. Remember, Bush got us into this mess, and it's going to take time to reverse the damage. Hodes' votes on both these issues are spot on.

and reaching out for big bucks from PACs isn't the "change" I thought we were going to get.

I think there is to much hype over PAC money. Hodes' has never sold out NH residents to make a buck, and he has been vigilant not to support earmarks that affect companies that have donated to his campaign. That is above and beyond for any Congressman.

Hodes is top notch. He is an experienced campaigner, he is a fantastic communicator, he kicks butt in Congress, and he is willing to rise to any challenge.

---

by: StevenPlace @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 15:25:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Lessons Of Vietnam (0.00 / 0)

"...the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is surely not that simple.  Remember, Bush got us into this mess, and it's going to take time to reverse the damage.  Hodes' vote on both these issues are spot on."

Change a few words and what have we learned from Vietnam?  I remember in those days when I was on the streets demonstrating, I'd hear New Hampshire Democrats say, while defending Lyndon B. Johnson, "...the stiuation in Vietnam is surely not that simple.  Remember, Eisenhower and Kennedy got us into this mess, and it's going to take time to reverse the damage.  McIntyre's vote on this issue is spot on."  

About PACs and fundraising -- I certainly agree some PAC funding is "clean" compared with other, but let's take a look at Hodes' PAC contributions, as I expect we'll see explored in coming weeks and months as the opponents on the other side will do.  And let's examine if there is any quid pro quo for any of the fundraising being done by any of the candidates, including the Republican candidates.  We'll never get reform of the fundraising system if we keep on cheerleading for it.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 15:35:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Vietnam? (4.00 / 2)

That's a lot to tag on to Senate candidate Hodes, Jim. Plus he's, what, in his third House term?

If you have an agenda, in the form of another candidate, I wish you would state it. Obviously you don't have to, but otherwise I just don't get your disgruntlement here.

---

by: JimC @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 16:01:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Vietnam" Is A Tag... (0.00 / 0)

...that I put on anyone who justifies for one minute longer that we should remain in Iraq or Afghanistan.  Vietnam was a war we couldn't win, but we stayed there so we could save face and show we didn't turn and run.  The Pentagon Papers need a re-read for anyone questionning that.  

We need to get out of Afghanistan without any further buildup, and we need to have a more serious strategy of getting out of Iraq rather than just moving off to camps out of cities -- ready to jump into more of a fight.  

We can't "win" either.  We're just making more enemies, more terrorists.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 16:30:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK, but (0.00 / 0)

This is a thread about the Senate race.

---

by: JimC @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 16:33:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And This Senate Race Is About Lives (0.00 / 0)

...lives being lost in Iraq and Afghanistan because of lessons not remembered.  I'm expecting that Iraq and Afghanistan will become the important nationwide issues in 2010 that they should become -- and that more people will rise up and say we have to get out now.  In three weeks we'll be "commemorating" our 9th year in Afghanistan.  And for what?    

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 16:46:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK (4.00 / 1)

So I ask again: Why knock your candidate and imply he's not good enough? Not that we can't criticize him, but do you really think the race will turn on his position on Afghanistan? Will the Republican candidate favor withdrawal?

Or ... do you have another Democrat in mind who does?

---

by: JimC @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 16:54:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I've Been Encouraging A Couple... (4.00 / 1)

...and at least I think the door needs to stay open to another candidacy.  We need the dialogue that a Democratic Primary can generate.  And since the Democratic Party is an open party...

If I do find one, I'll let you know.  And yes, I do think that Afghanistan and Iraq can be issues which will affect the 2010 races -- for Democrats and Republicans.  We saw that in 1968 and 1972, a time when I was as involved in party politics and elections as I am now -- and I remember them well.  These wars are not good for America.  Thousands of lives were lost for no purpose.  Same as now.  It's time to stop it.    

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 18:07:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks for answering n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: JimC @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 19:07:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Afghanistan (4.00 / 1)

Jim, I always respect your views, whether we agree or disagree.  You are a voice of reason on this site, as you are in the legislature.

But comparing Afghanistan to Vietnam is like lumping you together with Craig Benson (you're both NH politicos!).  The differences -- both moral and strategic -- are profound.  Work constraints have kept me from starting a diary on this, but I will try to do so this weekend.

In the meantime, thanks (as usual) for speaking out.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Sep 18, 2009 at 07:46:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Looking Forward To Your Diary... (0.00 / 0)

...because we need a dialogue on this.  I see many similarities between Vietnam and Afghanistan, so when you write I'll respectfully respond, and I do respect your words and positions.  

I do know this:  ANY war can be justified from some point of view.  That's how the "leaders" get the soldiers to march.  It's sad, but from someone's point of view, there's always reason to fight and kill.  In my view, Afghanistan has not been, and is not, a war that we should be fighting, nor can it be justified that we continue a buildup there because we cannot militarily accomplish our goals as I've heard them defined.

I just don't see how we can ever fulfill President Obama's goal, which he again stated in an interview this morning, of "destroying al-Qaeda" by our involvememt in Afghanistan.  To do so, and to eliminate the Taliban, we'd need a million boots on the ground, and then perhaps only accomplish the eradication for a year or two.  We can't win those kind of wars -- "those kind" being either Vietnam, or Afghanistan.  

We're making more and more enemies every day we're there and every time we bomb civilians, which is happening with far too much frequency.  Dale Carnige didn't put that in his book of "How To Win Friends And Influence People."

Just yesterday it was reported that U.S. Army General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of our forces in Afghanistan is requesting between 30,000 and 40,000 additional troops.  THEN what?

THAT'S the lesson we haven't remembered from Vietnam.  And that's one of the reasons why I'm not impressed with Paul Hodes at this point -- because I expected something different from him, and our Congress.  

I look forward to your analysis.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Fri Sep 18, 2009 at 15:57:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]