So the Washington Post had a pundit contest this week, and I entered.  By admitting that, I’ve set myself up for some heavy jeering in a week or two.  Oh well.  Anyway, I ended up writing two pieces for the contest, but you’re only allowed to submit one.  Here’s the one I didn’t submit. 

A recent AP article wondered if the Virginia Gubernatorial race gives us a “snapshot” of US attitudes.  Indeed it does: it shows us that Americans of all political stripes are disgusted by the political process.  Less than a year ago, over 64 million Americans went to the voting booth to cast their ballot for Barack Obama.  They did so, in many cases, despite fear and trepidation.  Who was this new fellow with the rumbling baritone, the cool demeanor, and the lofty promises?  They did so, in many cases, despite ideological uncertainty.  Did this man really transcend partisanship?  Yet, they leapt. Eleven months later they’re still falling. 

    Our politics haven’t changed.  On health care, this President has managed to woo exactly 1 Republican, Olympia Snowe, and she may yet balk on the final bill.  He had scarcely more success during the stimulus debate.  The bill’s biggest Republican backer is now a Democrat.  Nor has the process improved much.  There haven’t been televised meetings with insurance companies to increase transparency; the promised open dialogue with the rest of the world has yet to materialize and, Nobel Prize notwithstanding, Obama’s substantially followed the Bush line on Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran.  Even for those of us who never thought much of these promises, the change is startling.

    Nor is Obama the only culprit.  Republican voters, who’d grown disenchanted with their party during the Bush years, were promised a new dawn free from harsh glare of self-serving, penny ante politicos.  Yet, the headlong rush for power has continued.  In New Jersey, the establishment Republicans promoted Chris Christie over the more principled Steve Lonegan.  Now, after breaking free at the 50 yard line, Christie is fumbling in the red-zone.  An independent whose name could be an epithet has seized the momentum. 

    In Florida, slick Governor Charlie Crist is contending for a Senate seat against the more conservative Marco Rubio.  Again, establishment Republicans are falling over themselves to back the cipher; to no avail it seems.  Rubio has moved to within 15 points of Crist in three recent polls.  If Virginia’s gubernatorial race is really a microcosm of the nation, it’s not because Americans are satisfied with Republicans.  Instead, they’re dissatisfied with a process that churns out mediocre leaders like so much butter.  For now anyway, the Democrats are the face of that process and so may not win.  But, ultimately Americans are the losers.

T-Paw held two fundraisers yesterday in DC, for his new PAC.  Here are a few short videos from the events.

-

Matthew E. Miller can be contacted at Obilisk18@yahoo.com and at his Pawlentyesque blog

There is growing pressure upon Republican Dede Scozzafava to withdraw from her Nov. 3 election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District.  Soon enough, attention will turn to Rep. Pete Sessions and the National Republican Congressional Committee to officially withdraw their support.

Scozzafava is not going to win.  The remaining question will be whether DC-based Republicans caused a Democrat to win over viable Conservative nominee Doug Hoffman.  Of the following scenarios, I only see the first one helping the future fundraising efforts of the NRCC, NRSC, and RNC:

• 1.  NRCC clearly supports Hoffman.  Hoffman wins or loses.  It’s known that the NRCC at least acknowledged its errors.
• 2.  NRCC never withdraws its stated support for Scozzafava.  Though, they may only spend money on ads that attack the Democratic nominee.
  • A.  Hoffman wins, which means the R+C vote was likely quite strong, in an Obama-voting district.
  • B.  Hoffman loses and the Democratic nominee wins.  More time and money is then likely wasted on choosing the best Republican nominee for 2010.

There’s not undoing the NRCC’s lost opportunities and resources from the past several months.  But there is an opportunity to minimize the impact of those errors and move forward.

Dede Scozzafava may cut her losses and withdraw, but this can’t be assumed about a campaign that lied to the press about another member of the press.  Which turns us back to the NRCC.

Consider:

- National Review’s Jim Geraghty:  ”When a candidate commits a crime, the usual bonds of loyalty that a party requires are severed… In New York, Dede Scozzafava — or, more specifically, her husband — has, at least on the face of events, filed a false police report when he called the cops on Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack.”

- Doug Hoffman reportedly raised $116,000 — YESTERDAY, alone.

- Ramesh Ponnuru:  ”Whoever wins the race, Hoffman will get more votes than Scozzafava. If Owens wins, in other words, it will be Scozzafava who turned out to be the ‘spoiler.’”

- RedState Directors:  ”Dede Scozzafava Should Withdraw.”

- Matt Lewis reports, “Steve Forbes has endorsed Doug Hoffman for Congress (NY-23).”

- The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder reports, “Expect Tim Pawlenty to endorse D. Hoffman in NY23 soon.”

- Ken Blackwell endorsed Doug Hoffman.

- Wall Street Journal editorial:  ”Republicans try to lose a House seat.”

- Rasmussen:  ”Just 15% of Republicans who plan to vote in 2012 state primaries say the party’s representatives in Congress have done a good job of representing Republican values.”

- Club for Growth ran this cartoon by Brett Noel (re-published with permission):

______________________________________________________________

Benjamin Hodge publishes the Web site KansasProgress.com, based in Johnson County, KS, in the Greater Kansas City area.  Hodge is a delegate to the Kansas GOP and a former state representative. You can join Hodge’s efforts on Facebook, through his personal Web site, on Twitter, and through his PAC.

PPP (D) Congressional Survey

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Democrats in Congress are doing?

• Approve 37%
• Disapprove 49%

Among Moderates

• Approve 46%
• Disapprove 36%

Among Independents

• Approve 29%
• Disapprove 53%

Among Democrats

• Approve 65%
• Disapprove 16%

Among Liberals

• Approve 66%
• Disapprove 17%

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Republicans in Congress are doing?

• Approve 21%
• Disapprove 61%

Among Moderates

• Approve 16%
• Disapprove 69%

Among Independents

• Approve 15%
• Disapprove 58%

Among Republicans

• Approve 43%
• Disapprove 45%

Among Conservatives

• Approve 34%
• Disapprove 45%

If the election for Congress was today would you vote for a Democrat, a Republican, or an independent/third party candidate?

• Democrat 40%
• Republican 29%
• Independent/Third Party 22%

Among Independents

• Democrat 23%
• Republican 18%
• Independent/Third Party 45%

Among Democrats

• Democrat 78%
• Republican 6%
• Independent/Third Party 10%

Among Liberals

• Democrat 80%
• Republican 4%
• Independent/Third Party 9%

Among Republicans

• Democrat 5%
• Republican 67%
• Independent/Third Party 19%

Among Conservatives

• Democrat 14%
• Republican 48%
• Independent/Third Party 29%

If the election for Congress was today and your only choices were a Democratic and Republican candidate, who would you vote for?

• Democrat 48%
• Republican 40%

Among Liberals

• Democrat 90%
• Republican 8%

Among Moderates

• Democrat 57%
• Republican 30%

Among Conservatives

• Republican 67%
• Democrat 19%

Among Independents

• Democrat 38%
• Republican 36%

Do you think the Democrats in Congress are too liberal, too conservative, or about right?

• Too liberal 47%
• Too conservative 16%
• About right 38%

Among Moderates

• Too liberal 37%
• Too conservative 16%
• About right 48%

Among Independents

• Too liberal 49%
• Too conservative 16%
• About right 35%

Among Democrats

• Too liberal 15%
• Too conservative 22%
• About right 63%

Among Liberals

• Too liberal 13%
• Too conservative 37%
• About right 51%

Do you think the Republicans in Congress are too liberal, too conservative, or about right?

• Too liberal 24%
• Too conservative 45%
• About right 31%

Among Moderates

• Too liberal 11%
• Too conservative 62%
• About right 26%

Among Independents

• Too liberal 20%
• Too conservative 46%
• About right 33%

Among Republicans

• Too liberal 35%
• Too conservative 20%
• About right 45%

Among Conservatives

• Too liberal 45%
• Too conservative 11%
• About right 44%

Survey of 766 registered voters was conducted October 16-19. The margin of error is +/-3.5 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 41% Democrat; 33% Republican; 26% Independent. Political views: 45% Moderate; 39% Conservative; 17% Liberal.

RedState’s Erick Erickson praises Palin’s courage in endorsing Doug Hoffman and then, hilariously, attacks Pawlenty’s early demurral.  He writes:

The big loser here is Tim Pawlenty. At the first of this month, he made a great deal out of his new leadership PAC. He made great hay out of going out for real conservatives and not just the same old, same old…

[Pawlenty's demurral]  is disappointing and further bolsters the Pawlenty stereotype as milquetoast establishment.

You get that?  Palin was a genius for endorsing Hoffman, but when Pawlenty doesn’t have a decision ready two hours later, he’s a “loser” and a member of the “milquetoast establishment”. Boy I’m sure glad Palin delivered her endorsement in time for that 8:30 PM, October 23 deadline.  Two minutes later and surely she’d have been on the wheel.  Or wait… maybe the deadline only applies if you actually make a statement on the issue.  So Palin would have been off the hook, then?

It’s a good thing she isn’t giving interviews or campaigning or holding fundraisers; that way, she can avoid taking a position on anything until it’s convenient.  This also lets her supporters assume she shares their positions and will say so on her own time schedule.  Like, for the first two and a half months that Doug Hoffman was the Conservative Party candidate, Palin supported him, but couldn’t say so since she was busy and stuff.  What with not having a job and all.

This morning, Pawlenty confirmed that he probably will endorse and then offered heavy criticism for Dede Scozzafava.  I know it won’t be any good if he endorses Hoffman tomorrow or on Monday- the deadline has passed.  Erik Erikson said so.  Milquetoast is milquetoast does.  Loser’s can’t redeem themselves after the race has ended.  And everyone knows the race ALWAYS ends before the finish line.  But, I hope next time they’ll let us know ahead of time.  It’d be a shame if Palin endorses Rubio in a couple of months and Erik Erickson slams the door shut.

Update: This isn’t meant as an attack on Palin, though it probably came across that way.  I like Palin and always have.  It’s an attack on those who want to set an arbitrary deadline for demonstrations of “purity” and base that deadline around Palin’s actions.  Palin doesn’t have a job.  She’s not doing interviews.  If she doesn’t have an answer to a question, she can wait until whenever the heck she wants to, and then throw up a post on facebook.  Pawlenty, who to quote Chris Cilliza today, is absolutely everywhere, doesn’t have that luxury.  He’s asked questions and he has to provide some kind of answer, whether he’s come to a conclusion or not.

Over at Real Clear Politics, Tom Bevan contrasts Obama’s campaign rhetoric with his actions as President.

Here’s a snippet:

During the campaign Barack Obama vowed he would be a different kind of leader who would move America beyond the “smallness of our politics.” That inspired promise was not an insignificant part of why he was elected last November.

~snip~

Not only has President Obama failed to live up to those promises so far, it appears that on more than a number of occasions he’s made a conscious decision to break them.

In the first nine months in office President Obama and/or members of his administration have accused doctors of performing unnecessary medical procedures for profit; demonized bond holders as “speculators;” produced a report suggesting military veterans are prone to becoming right wing extremists; attacked insurance companies and threatened them with legislative retribution; ridiculed talk show hosts and political commentators by name from the White House podium; dismissed and demeaned protesters and town hall attendees as either unauthentic or fringe characters; maligned a white police officer for arresting a black man without knowing the facts of the case; launched an orchestrated campaign to marginalize the country’s biggest pro-business group; and publicly declared war on a news organization.

Be sure to read the whole piece (here).

Rasmussen Trust on Issues Survey

Which political party you trust more to handle _________________________ ?

The economy

• Republicans 49% [47%] {46%} (46%) [45%] {43%}
• Democrats 35% [39%] {40%} (41%) [39%] {44%}

Taxes

• Republicans 50% [48%] {51%} (52%) [44%] {47%}
• Democrats 35% [40%] {35%} (36%) [39%] {41%}

Health care

• Republicans 46% [44%] {44%} (42%) [37%] {35%}
• Democrats 40% [44%] {41%} (46%) [47%] {53%}

Social Security

• Republicans 45% [41%] {43%} (42%) [37%] {39%}
• Democrats 37% [43%] {39%} (37%) [43%] {48%}

National security and the War on Terror

• Republicans 54% [51%] {47%} (49%) [51%] {48%}
• Democrats 31% [39%] {43%} (40%) [36%] {41%}

The War in Iraq

• Republicans 50% [47%] {42%} (45%) [45%] {43%}
• Democrats 31% [37%] {42%} (41%) [37%] {41%}

Government ethics and corruption

• Republicans 33% [35%] {31%} (34%) [35%] {29%}
• Democrats 29% [34%] {34%} (33%) [29%] {40%}

Immigration

• Republicans 40% [45%] {43%} (40%) [43%] {37%}
• Democrats 33% [33%] {35%} (34%) [29%] {36%}

Education

• Republicans 43% [40%] {41%} (38%) [37%] {36%}
• Democrats 38% [45%] {38%} (41%) [44%] {49%}

Abortion

• Republicans 47% [44%] {46%} (46%) [41%] {41%}
• Democrats 35% [37%] {36%} (39%) [41%] {41%}

Survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted October 14-15, 18-19. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted September 4-7 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted August 5-8 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted July 5-7 are in parentheses. Results from poll conducted June 3-6 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted May 5-8 are in curly brackets.

What is this?  From Michael Barone:

In my Wednesday Examiner column, I noted how Americans, historically distinctive in opinions from European elites, have become more so this year even though Barack Obama has opinions closer to those of European elites than any of his predecessors. More evidence of this has just come in from the most recent Pew poll on global warming.

 

Is there solid evidence that the earth is warming? 

Upon learning of the latest results from the Pew Poll, Al Gore personally sets out to prove to everyone that he alone can cause global warming

This piece was originally published at The Lobbyist.

You saw it here first (or second, or third (twelfth?)- the point is, you saw it here). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is going to lose on the public option, and it’s going to crush health care reform, his ability to effectively lead the Democratic caucus and possibly his already-tough reelection. Here’s what’s going on:

On October 21, a delayed cloture vote on the so-called “Doc Fix” failed miserably in the Senate. Watching the vote happen with trepidation, I was very pleased that the vote went against the bill, which the CBO estimated would have cost over $240 billion for the next ten years. The vote was 47 in favor and 51 against, something of a surprise given Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) expectations of a victory in the vote. As David Frum and The Heritage Foundation explained, Democrats wanted to pass the bill outside of the final health care bill because doing so would allow the a deficit-neutral bill to pass without noting the cost of the “Doc Fix” in the final legislation. After the vote, it became clear that the most likely method of including the “Doc Fix” in this year’s health care bill would be to put it in the final bill, adding $247 (or so) billion to the final cost of the bill (or some variation thereof).

Normally, this wouldn’t be a huge blow to Reid- after all, losses happen all the time in Congress. However, he delayed the vote at least once (it was originally supposed to be held on October 19), and by putting up and losing out on the cloture vote, it’s becomes clear Reid was blindsided. Embarrassingly, just before the vote, Reid blamed the AMA for misleading him, which is a very unseemly way to act as a leader.

Now Reid is claiming he has the votes to pass the public option. Or, as is also claimed, he has the votes to pass the procedural step of getting the 60 votes necessary to move it forward, before only getting the required 51 to push the final bill through. To me, this smacks of desperation, making the claim so soon after the major loss regarding the “Doc Fix,” where he also thought he had the votes. Remember, too, that numerous Democrats have claimed opposition to the public option, and so has Republican Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME), possibly the only Republican who will support a final Democratic health reform bill.

In the end, I suspect Reid will end up looking as bad as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) did after miscalculating the first House bailout vote last fall. Boehner barely held onto his leadership slot, but given the criticism of Reid offered by the influential Daily Kos (see here, for example) and other popular liberal voices in and out of Washington- in addition to the support for the public option by Senators such as Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Charles Schumer (D-NY)- I think Reid is setting himself up for a huge loss in leadership support.

In short, the public option will probably not make it into the final Senate bill, showing Reid’s inability to lead his caucus, costing him support from Senator Roland Burris’ (D-IL) and other Democrats for the final bill. This will shut down health reform, showing his caucus it may be time for “change” within the party leadership and also setting up a race in Nevada where Reid’s constituents may very well decide it’s time for “change” to come to Washington from their state.

Barry Casselman thinks so.

Rasmussen Survey on GOP Issues

In terms of how you will vote in the next national election, are you primarily interested in National Security issues such as the War with Iraq and the War on Terror, Economic issues such as jobs and economic growth, Domestic Issues like Social Security and Health Care, Cultural issues such as same-sex marriage and abortion, or Fiscal issues such as taxes and government spending?

• Economic Issues 31%
• National Security Issues 25%
• Fiscal Issues 15%
• Domestic Issues 12%
• Cultural Issues 7%

Over the past several years, have Republicans in Congress done a good job of representing Republican values? Or have Republicans in Congress lost touch with Republican voters from throughout the nation?

• Republicans in Congress have done a good job of representing Republican values 15%
• Republicans in Congress have lost touch with Republican voters 73%

Survey of 750 Likely 2012 GOP Voters was conducted October 15. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points.

Inside the numbers:

Republican women are nearly twice as likely as men to say their representatives in Congress have done a good job of representing GOP values. Younger voters tend to be less critical than their elders.

Research 2000/Daily Kos NY-23 Special Election Survey

If the election for Congress were held today, would you vote for Bill Owens, the Democrat, Dede Scozzafava, the Republican, or Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate?

• Bill Owens 35%
• Dede Scozzafava 30%
• Doug Hoffman 23%
• Undecided 12%

Among Republicans

• Dede Scozzafava 46%
• Doug Hoffman 27%
• Bill Owens 18%
• Undecided 9%

Among Independents

• Doug Hoffman 35%
• Bill Owens 32%
• Dede Scozzafava 22%
• Undecided 11%

Among Men

• Bill Owens 31%
• Dede Scozzafava 28%
• Doug Hoffman 28%
• Undecided 13%

Among Women

• Bill Owens 39%
• Dede Scozzafava 32%
• Doug Hoffman 18%
• Undecided 11%

(Asked of Hoffman supporters) If the election for Congress were held today, which candidate would be your second choice, Bill Owens, the Democrat, or Dede Scozzafava, the Republican?

• Dede Scozzafava 9%
• Bill Owens 3%
• Won’t vote 26%
• Undecided 62%

Among Republicans

• Dede Scozzafava 13%
• Bill Owens 1%
• Won’t vote 21%
• Undecided 65%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Barack Obama 53% / 39% {+14%}
• Bill Owens 33% / 24% {+9%}
• Doug Hoffman 27% / 19% {+8%}
• Chuck Schumer 49% / 42% {+7%}
• Kirsten Gillibrand 24% / 18% {+6%}
• Dede Scozzafava 38% / 35% {+3%}
• David Paterson 26% / 57% {-31%}

(more…)

PPP (D) Virginia Political Survey

Do you approve or disapprove of President Barack Obama’s job performance?

• Approve 41% {47%} (42%) [48%]
• Disapprove 52% {49%} (51%) [46%]

Note: In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama received 53 percent of the vote in Virginia.

Among Independents

• Approve 32% {31%} (34%) [38%]
• Disapprove 57% {61%} (54%) [52%]

Note: In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama received 49 percent of the vote among independents in Virginia.

Among Men

• Approve 39% {38%} (37%) [42%]
• Disapprove 54% {58%} (55%) [52%]

Among Women

• Approve 43% {55%} (45%) [54%]
• Disapprove 49% {41%} (49%) [40%]

Do you think that Virginia Governors should be allowed to run for reelection?

• Yes 57%
• No 35%

If Tim Kaine was allowed to run for reelection would you vote for Democrat Tim Kaine or Republican Bob McDonnell?

• Bob McDonnell 51%
• Tim Kaine 43%

Among Independents

• Bob McDonnell 54%
• Tim Kaine 39%

Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Tim Kaine’s job performance?

• Approve 46% {47%} (42%) [49%]
• Disapprove 39% {38%} (40%) [38%]

Among Independents

• Approve 41% {36%} (42%) [39%]
• Disapprove 41% {50%} (41%) [47%]

Do you approve or disapprove of Democratic Senator Mark Warner’s job performance?

• Approve 53% {54%} (56%) [57%]
• Disapprove 31% {30%} (32%) [31%]

Among Independents

• Approve 52% {48%} (58%) [51%]
• Disapprove 28% {32%} (24%) [34%]

Do you approve or disapprove of Democratic Senator Jim Webb’s job performance?

• Approve 42% {47%} [46%]
• Disapprove 40% {40%} [42%]

Among Independents

• Approve 36% {37%} [36%]
• Disapprove 37% {49%} [52%]

Survey of 666 likely voters was conducted October 16-19. The margin of error is +/- 3.8 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 36% {31%} (35%) Republican; 33% {38%} (32%) Democrat; 31% {31%} (33%) Independent. Political views: 44% {46%} (41%) Moderate; 41% {36%} (45%) Conservative; 16% {19%} (14%) Liberal. Results from the poll conducted August 28-31 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted July 31 – August 3 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted June 30 – July 2 are in square brackets.

Council of Economic Advisers Chair Christina Romer made a couple stomach-churning public remarks today:

Christina Romer, the chair of President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, said Thursday that the $194 billion already spent gave a jolt to the economy that contributed to growth in the second and third quarters of the year. She told a congressional panel that by the middle of next year, the impact of the stimulus will level off. Romer said spending so far has saved or created 600,000 to 1.5 million jobs but warned that unemployment will remain high, above 9.5 percent, through the end of 2010.

So, you mean to tell me that even though the early results of job creation by the so-called stimulus stand far below the initial forecasts, the package “will likely not contribute to significant [economic] expansion next year”, according to the cited AP article? That would mean that the bill will ultimately fail in two of the areas its proponents so fervently emphasized: minimization of the unemployment rate (9.8% now vs. 8% – the highest number the White House predicted if the bill passed) and overall job growth (early forecasts showed 2-4 million created or “saved”, depending on which of Obama’s public statements you consult). All for the trivial price tag of $787 billion. Of course, the administration could fix its problems by simply adopting a new formula to calculate jobs saved, since no one can accurately compute the metric. Regardless, this news leads me to repeat the characterization of the stimulus I employed yesterday: epic fail.

Democracy Corps (D) New Jersey Gubernatorial Survey

If the general election for Governor were held today and the candidates were: Democrat Jon Corzine, Independent Chris Daggett, and Republican Chris Christie, for whom would you vote?

• Jon Corzine 42% (41%) [39%] {38%} (41%)
• Chris Christie 39% (38%) [40%] {41%} (43%)
• Chris Daggett 13% (14%) [11%] {10%} (7%)
• Undecided 6% (7%) [9%] {10%} (8%)

Among Independents

• Chris Christie 44% (36%) [41%] {45%}
• Jon Corzine 34% (25%) [32%] {25%}
• Chris Daggett 16% (26%) [15%] {16%}
• Undecided 6% (13%) [12%] {14%}

Among Men

• Chris Christie 41% (44%) [46%] {43%}
• Jon Corzine 41% (34%) [37%] {37%}
• Chris Daggett 12% (15%) [11%] {11%}
• Undecided 5% (8%) [6%] {9%}

Among Women

• Jon Corzine 43% (46%) [42%] {39%}
• Chris Christie 36% (32%) [35%] {40%}
• Chris Daggett 14% (14%) [11%] {9%}
• Undecided 7% (7%) [12%] {12%}

Favorable (Warm) / Unfavorable (Cool) {Net}

• Barack Obama 54% (54%) [57%] {55%} (57%) / 31% (29%) [28%] {32%} (30%) {+23%}
• Democratic Party 44% (41%) [42%] {44%} (45%) / 38% (35%) [38%] {37%} (34%) {+6%}
• Republican Party 35% (33%) [31%] {33%} (32%) / 41% (40%) [40%] {39%} (43%) {-6%}
• Chris Christie 35% (30%) [32%] {33%} (35%) / 42% (42%) [34%] {33%} (34%) {-7%}
• Jon Corzine 38% (37%) [35%] {36%} (37%) / 46% (46%) [47%] {48%} (48%) {-8%}
• Chris Daggett 15% (15%) [8%] {5%} (4%) / 25% (18%) [10%] {11%} (8%) {-10%}

Thermometer – Mean Temperature

• Barack Obama 60 (60) [61] {59.3} (61)
• Democratic Party 52 (52) [51] {51.0} (52)
• Republican Party 45 (45) [46] {45.5} (44)
• Chris Christie 44 (43) [47] {48.7} (48)
• Chris Daggett 44 (45) [44] {40.1} (44)
• Jon Corzine 44 (44) [42] {41.5} (43)

Survey of 604 likely voters was conducted October 20-21. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points. Click here for crosstabs. Party ID breakdown: 38% (38%) [37%] {38%} (40%) Democrat; 33% (32%) [34%] {31%} (29%) Independent; 28% (29%) [28%] {29%} (29%) Republican. Political views: 40% (43%) [39%] {45%} (41%) Moderate; 34% (35%) [36%] {32%} (31%) Conservative; 21% (17%) [20%] {19%} (23%) Liberal. Results from the poll conducted October 6-7 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted September 22-23 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted September 8-9 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted August 25-26 are in parentheses.

So Christie has been bleeding and badly.  Independent candidate Chris Daggett is as high as 20% in a recent poll.  Maybe, he’ll hold onto that support, maybe he won’t.  But, it seems obvious that if Christie wants to learn how to knock an independent down a peg, he should call a guy who’s done it, twice:  Tim Pawlenty.  A September 2002 Tribune poll had Roger Moe (D) at 30%, Pawlenty at 28%, and Penny (I) at 25%.  An October 2002 Zogby poll had Pawlenty at 27%, Tim Penny (I) at 25%, and Roger Moe (D) at 23%.  An October Tribune poll had Moe at 29%, Pawlenty at 29%, and Penny at 27%.  On election day, a few weeks later, Pawlenty nabbed 44%, to Moe’s 37%; Penny, the Indpendent had fallen all the way to 16% and Pawlenty picked up the bulk of his support.  In 2006, Pawlenty stopped Independent Peter Hutchinson from getting out of single digits.  So call him up Chris: it couldn’t hurt.

Oh, and an interesting note.  In 2006, Pawlenty didn’t lead in a single poll after September.  In 2002, Pawlenty won by a much larger margin than polls were indicating.  Is there some kind of hidden, heretofore unpollable, pro-Pawlenty population out there?

-

Matthew E. Miller can be contacted at Obilisk18@yahoo.com or at his Pawlentyesque blog

Take a close look at the following picture-

Holy Huckabee!

That’s right.  You’re looking at a picture of someone who could legitimately claim his status as an early  frontrunner (along with Mitt Romney and possibly Sarah Palin). 

What a difference from 2007- when Governor Huckabee was barely scraping 1-2% in most of polls and might have had just enough campaign funds in order for he and Jim Gilmore to split the bill to rent a VW van so that he could  haul his formerly fat rear end from Arkansas to Iowa a month early to get a head start competing for the straw poll, and hope that Tommy Thompson would be there early enough so that they could all throw in just enough share a room at a Holiday Inn Express.  Even then, Huck still probably had to sleep on the couch. 

Well… that was then, and what a long time ago it was…

As I caught up on what my fellow posters have been focusing on over the last few days, I noticed a number of posts dedicated to the fact that the former Governor of Arkansas is performing , and the argument could be made that he is slightly ahead of the game, at this point.  It’s still early, but Huckabee is looking like a strong contender, if not one of the men (or woman in Sarah Palin’s case) to beat.

Only once in a blue moon do I come out and make a prediction, but the time has come again for me to look into my crystal ball and say what no one is saying, but many are thinking may well be possible:

Mike Huckabee = A Frontrunner

No one can accuse me of having any bias in favor of Huck, as I was quite visceral in my opposition to Huckabee securing the nomination.  In fact, as someone who fancied himself as a master of the art known as “the hit piece” during the 2007-08 primaries, I probably spent twice as much time spreading the Gospel of the Anti-Huck than I did blasting any other candidate.  I also proved to be quite accurate in my prognostications during the last campaigns, as I was the only contributor to  this site who openly stated that I believed Barack Obama would defeat Hillary Clinton… when she was still leading the polls by 15+ points.  I was also one of the first who predicted that Huckabee would pose a threat.  

You have been warned… laugh now, but it may be that Huckabee will be the one laughing come spring in 2012.   Those who support other candidates, or are like myself and not supporting anyone at this time, should see him as someone who could very well end up winning the nomination.  Write him off at your own risk.

Invoking the Great Communicator, Sarah has decided to join other prominent Republicans like Fred Thompson and throw her support behind Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman in the special election for New York’s 23rd Congressional District:

The people of the 23rd Congressional District of New York are ready to shake things up, and Doug Hoffman is coming on strong as Election Day approaches! He needs our help now.

The votes of every member of Congress affect every American, so it’s important for all of us to pay attention to this important Congressional campaign in upstate New York. I am very pleased to announce my support for Doug Hoffman in his fight to be the next Representative from New York’s 23rd Congressional district. It’s my honor to endorse Doug and to do what I can to help him win, including having my political action committee, SarahPAC, donate to his campaign the maximum contribution allowed by law.

Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a “time for choosing.”

The federal government borrows, spends, and prints too much money, while our national debt hits a record high. Government is growing while the private sector is shrinking, and unemployment is on the rise. Doug Hoffman is committed to ending the reckless spending in Washington, D.C. and the massive increase in the size and scope of the federal government. He is also fully committed to supporting our men and women in uniform as they seek to honorably complete their missions overseas.

And best of all, Doug Hoffman has not been anointed by any political machine.

Doug Hoffman stands for the principles that all Republicans should share: smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, and a commitment to individual liberty.

Political parties must stand for something. When Republicans were in the wilderness in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan knew that the doctrine of “blurring the lines” between parties was not an appropriate way to win elections. Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate who more than blurs the lines, and there is no real difference between the Democrat and the Republican in this race. This is why Doug Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party’s ticket.

Republicans and conservatives around the country are sending an important message to the Republican establishment in their outstanding grassroots support for Doug Hoffman: no more politics as usual.

Will Sarah’s endorsement make a difference? Time will tell, but I applaud the Governor for putting principals before party and throwing her weight behind the true Conservative in the House race.

Rutgers-Eagleton New Jersey Gubernatorial Survey

• Jon Corzine 39%
• Chris Christie 36%
• Chris Daggett 20%
• Don’t know 5%

Among Independents

• Chris Christie 35%
• Chris Daggett 31%
• Jon Corzine 27%
• Don’t know 5%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Chris Daggett 31% / 15% {+16%}
• Chris Christie 39% / 42% {-3%}
• Jon Corzine 40% / 52% {-12%}

Among Independents

• Chris Daggett 42% / 11% {+31%}
• Chris Christie 40% / 42% {-2%}
• Jon Corzine 33% / 61% {-28%}

Among Undecided Voters

• Chris Christie 28% / 20% {+8%}
• Chris Daggett 8% / 14% {-6%}
• Jon Corzine 22% / 51% {-29%}

Among Daggett Supporters

• Chris Christie 28% / 59% {-31%}
• Jon Corzine 26% / 66% {-40%}

Please rate how Governor Jon Corzine is handling his job as Governor. Is it excellent, good, fair, or poor?

• Excellent 5%
• Good 24%
• Fair 29%
• Poor 41%

Among Independents

• Excellent 3%
• Good 19%
• Fair 31%
• Poor 47%

Survey of 583 likely voters was conducted October 15-20. The margin of error is +/- 4.1 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 39% Democrat; 26% Republican; 35% Independent. 74% White; 13% Black; 9% Hispanic; 4% Asian.

SurveyUSA/WABC-TV New Jersey Gubernatorial Survey

• Chris Christie 41% [40%] (43%)
• Jon Corzine 39% [39%] (40%)
• Chris Daggett 19% [18%] (14%)

Among Independents

• Chris Christie 49% [48%] (44%)
• Jon Corzine 24% [26%] (32%)
• Chris Daggett 24% [23%] (19%)

Among Men

• Chris Christie 46% [44%] (48%)
• Jon Corzine 32% [34%] (35%)
• Chris Daggett 21% [19%] (16%)

Among Women

• Jon Corzine 45% [43%] (46%)
• Chris Christie 37% [35%] (37%)
• Chris Daggett 17% [18%] (13%)

Among those with no reservations about their vote

• Chris Christie 49% [48%] (47%)
• Jon Corzine 38% [40%] (43%)
• Chris Daggett 12% [13%] (9%)

Among those with reservations about their vote

• Chris Christie 39% [37%] (40%)
• Jon Corzine 38% [39%] (42%)
• Chris Daggett 23% [24%] (18%)

Survey of 674 likely voters was conducted October 19-21. The margin of error is +/- 3.9 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 41% [42%] (42%) Democrat; 37% [33%] (38%) Republican; 20% [23%] (18%) Independent. Political views: 45% [49%] (46%) Moderate; 28% [28%] (31%) Conservative; 22% [18%] (18%) Liberal. Results from the poll conducted October 12-14 are in brackets. Results from the poll conducted October 5-7 are in parentheses.

Perhaps the only epidemic more pervasive than the Swine Flu in America today is the endless litany of fake hate crimes.

The most recent of such hate crimes — that is, political protests by wannabe-victims — is, of course, a black woman named Megan Williams who claimed that she was sexually tortured by a bunch of white rednecks who screeched that “this is what we do to niggers around here.” It was everything that liberals wanted: fat, ugly rednecks raping black women for kicks. Except that, like, it never happened. (Liberals become sad when they find this out, because it takes away their chance to be heroic. If rape and racism ceased to exist, liberals wouldn’t know what to do with themselves.)

White men brutally raping an innocent black girl. Gosh, that sounds awfully familiar, doesn’t it?

In 2007, a black Minnesota man set a cross on fire in his own home and blamed his white neighbor. Why did he do it? Because he wanted public sympathy and free cash. Also in 2007, a few punks wrote “KKK” and, weirdly, “Gay Pride” all over a black teenager’s car and the community rallied against the “racist hate” committed by…four black teenagers. In 2006, a brutal black-on-black murder occurred in Philadelphia in which the killer wrote “Die Nigger” on the corpse. It was initially thought, of course, to be a “hate crime,” but — surprise, surprise — we don’t live in that era anymore.

This happens on college campuses, too, of course.  A year ago, a young Muslim girl named Safia Jalani wrote anti-Muslim graffiti on the wall of a women’s restroom, injured herself, and claimed that a masked assailant did it. (She was unable to recognize the masked assailant because she couldn’t see her face in the restroom mirror through her mask.) In 1997, a noose appeared outside of a Black Student Alliance’s gathering spot. But as a true testament to the insanity occurring on college campuses, even when two black students were exposed as the real culprits behind the incident, the university body praised them for protesting against racism. (That link is a particularly good one: a column by Ann Coulter with a list of fake hate crimes.)

Hate crimes — which might be an accurate label, come to think of it, considered that they are legitimate crimes committed by liberals who hate America — can even get political, and I’m not talking about those wicked racists Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. I mean the incident, two months back, of a Democratic office in Denver being ransacked. The local office blamed it on Obamacare foes. The local police blamed it on a liberal punk. (Not that it’s as common, but Republicans are immune to this sort of nonsense. Anyone remember “B Girl,” Ashley Todd?)

The entire concept of hate crimes exists only so that liberals can engage in mock-heroic battles, eternally combatting the invisible dragon which perpetually menaces an unsuspecting populace. Ironically enough, though, liberals would be utterly crestfallen if racism disappeared off of the face of the earth tomorrow: what then would they use to show their friends how morally just they are?

Talk to Alex Knepper at apkkib@aol.com

The crackdown on the highest form of patriotism continues:

At a fundraiser in New York earlier this week, President Obama praised Democrats for what he called their superiority to Republicans — as far as critical thinking goes. He joked that Democrats are an opinionated, contentious group, and that Republicans “do as they’re told,” possibly referring to the GOP’s fear of it’s increasingly bellicose right wing.

Patriots, rise up! Combat this violence to the Constitution! Combat this draconian, Orwellian hate! (Not yet, though; we have to wait for Rush’s instructions.)

So I guess this means that dissent is no longer the highest form of patriotism.

Barack Obama is now on record as stating that Fox News is essentially “talk radio” masquerading as a news station. In an interview with NBC’s Savannah Guthrie, he confirmed his concurrment with David Axelrod that Fox News “isn’t really news.”

Surely I am not the only right-winger in existence who has pondered to himself: what if George W. Bush and Karl Rove had launched an attack upon MSNBC? The Kos Kids would have been all over each other, congratulating themselves for their heroic bravery in speaking truth to power to a fascist, Orwellian administration intent on intimidating the patriotic dissenters who don’t want to give up essential liberties to secure temporary securities (which was uttered by Ben Franklin, you draconian boob). Indeed, according to the Nation’s Kristina Vanden Huevel in 2004, “dissent is patriotic” against an administration that sows division. She even quoted Theodore Roosevelt: “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” Is she planning on recycling this column this week?

This week, the hapless White House press secretary Robert Gibbs instructed ABC’s Jake Tapper to watch Fox News at 5 PM or 9 PM if he needed any proof that Fox News wasn’t really a news channel. To which one might very well say: have you gotten a load of what’s on at 8 PM on MSNBC? Except that fair people wouldn’t do that, because in either case, it’s incredibly asinine: the shows are commentary programs and are intentionally provocative. Of course MSNBC and Fox News have their particular biases. But only one gets condemned, because, in Obama’s world, any disagreement with his agenda doesn’t count as news.

Talk to Alex Knepper at apkkib@aol.com

PPP (D) 2012 Presidential Survey

• Barack Obama 47% {48%} [47%] (48%)
• Mike Huckabee 43% {41%} [44%] (42%)

• Barack Obama 48% {48%} [47%] (49%)
• Mitt Romney 40% {39%} [40%] (40%)

• Barack Obama 52% {53%} [52%] (51%)
• Sarah Palin 40% {38%} [38%] (43%)

• Barack Obama 50%
• Tim Pawlenty 30%

Among Independents

• Barack Obama 41% {46%} [41%] (42%)
• Mitt Romney 40% {35%} [41%] (43%)

• Barack Obama 43% {46%} [42%] (44%)
• Mike Huckabee 40% {33%} [41%] (43%)

• Barack Obama 47% {52%} [50%] (47%)
• Sarah Palin 35% {35%} [34%] (41%)

• Barack Obama 46%
• Tim Pawlenty 29%

Note: In 2008, John McCain received 44% of the Independent vote (29% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 48% of the Independent vote.

Among Republicans

• Mike Huckabee 79% {77%} [80%] (76%)
• Barack Obama 10% {13%} [11%] (12%)

• Mitt Romney 77% {72%} [74%] (71%)
• Barack Obama 10% {14%} [11%] (18%)

• Tim Pawlenty 59%
• Barack Obama 11%

• Sarah Palin 77% {70%} [74%] (79%)
• Barack Obama 15% {18%} [15%] (14%)

Note: In 2008, John McCain received 90% of the Republican vote (32% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 93% of the Republican vote.

Among Moderates

• Barack Obama 61% {58%} [56%] (58%)
• Mike Huckabee 29% {31%} [32%] (32%)

• Barack Obama 60% {57%} [57%] (56%)
• Mitt Romney 28% {30%} [30%] (32%)

• Barack Obama 60%
• Tim Pawlenty 20%

• Barack Obama 66% {68%} [63%] (62%)
• Sarah Palin 25% {23%} [25%] (31%)

Note: In 2008, John McCain received 39% of the Moderate vote (44% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 45% of the Moderate vote.

Among Men

• Mike Huckabee 47% {47%} [49%] (49%)
• Barack Obama 43% {44%} [43%] (43%)

• Mitt Romney 46% {46%} [44%] (46%)
• Barack Obama 46% {44%} [44%] (46%)

• Barack Obama 47%
• Tim Pawlenty 34%

• Barack Obama 50% {50%} [48%] (47%)
• Sarah Palin 42% {41%} [41%] (47%)

Note: In 2008, John McCain received 48% of the Male vote (47% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 55% of the Male vote.

Among Women

• Barack Obama 51% {50%} [50%] (53%)
• Mike Huckabee 39% {36%} [39%] (36%)

• Barack Obama 50% {52%} [50%] (51%)
• Mitt Romney 36% {34%} [36%] (35%)

• Barack Obama 54% {55%} [56%] (54%)
• Sarah Palin 37% {36%} [35%] (40%)

• Barack Obama 52%
• Tim Pawlenty 28%

Note: In 2008, John McCain received 43% of the Female vote (53% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 48% of the Female vote.

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Mike Huckabee 33% {38%} [45%] (42%) / 29% {36%} [28%] (33%) {+4%}
• Mitt Romney 34% {33%} [37%] (37%) / 34% {38%} [34%] (37%) {0%}
• Tim Pawlenty 11% / 16% {-5%}
• Sarah Palin 36% {37%} [40%] (47%) / 51% {55%} [49%] (45%) {-15%}

Among Independents

• Mitt Romney 38% {38%} [40%] (45%) / 28% {33%} [31%] (28%) {+10%}
• Mike Huckabee 34% {32%} [48%] (44%) / 27% {38%} [24%] (30%) {+7%}
• Tim Pawlenty 13% / 17% {-4%}
• Sarah Palin 34% {33%} [37%] (45%) / 48% {59%} [49%] (43%) {-14%}

Among Republicans

• Sarah Palin 72% {69%} [72%] (76%) / 18% {22%} [16%] (19%) {+54%}
• Mike Huckabee 56% {70%} [66%] (66%) / 13% {12%} [13%] (19%) {+43%}
• Mitt Romney 54% {50%} [52%] (54%) / 20% {21%} [18%] (25%) {+34%}
• Tim Pawlenty 15% / 9% {+6%}

Among Conservatives

• Sarah Palin 65% {69%} [68%] (73%) / 19% {22%} [20%] (18%) {+46%}
• Mike Huckabee 53% {59%} [61%] (65%) / 12% {15%} [13%] (16%) {+41%}
• Mitt Romney 49% {46%} [49%] (53%) / 16% {20%} [22%] (20%) {+33%}
• Tim Pawlenty 17% / 9% {+8%}

Among Moderates

• Mitt Romney 29% {32%} [34%] (33%) / 37% {41%} [36%] (39%) {-8%}
• Mike Huckabee 24% {29%} [40%] (34%) / 34% {43%} [30%] (36%) {-10%}
• Tim Pawlenty 8% / 19% {-11%}
• Sarah Palin 22% {20%} [29%] (33%) / 66% {71%} [58%] (58%) {-44%}

Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the Mormon Religion?

• Favorable 21%
• Unfavorable 34%

Among Liberals

• Favorable 18%
• Unfavorable 45%

Among Moderates

• Favorable 19%
• Unfavorable 29%

Among Conservatives

• Favorable 25%
• Unfavorable 35%

Among Republicans

• Favorable 26%
• Unfavorable 38%

Among Voters Age 18-29

• Favorable 21%
• Unfavorable 43%

Survey of 766 registered voters was conducted October 16-19. The margin of error is +/- 3.5 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 41% {40%} [41%] Democrat; 33% {35%} [35%] Republican; 26% {25%} [24%] Independent. Results from the poll conducted September 18-21 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted August 14-17 are in brackets. Results from the poll conducted July 15-16 are in parentheses.

Recently, President Obama sent new guidelines to federal prosecutors saying they should not go after marijuana suppliers or users as long as they are following laws within their respective states. This policy, despite being created by a Democratic president, is one conservatives should support. After all, it falls under states rights, begins the process of creating a more efficient (and less costly) culture for law enforcement and takes away some of the waste in our federal government’s budget. (Of course, we don’t know where that saved money will go- but that’s a discussion for another day.)

I wrote a blog post at The Lobbyist about this new policy- take a look.

Rasmussen Florida 2010 Gubernatorial Survey

• Bill McCollum 46% (42%)
• Alex Sink 35% (34%)
• Some other candidate 5% (7%)
• Not sure 15% (18%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Bill McCollum 49% (53%) / 31% (25%) {+18%}
• Alex Sink 41% (50%) / 30% (32%) {+11%}

Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted October 20. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted June 22 are in parentheses.

Inside the numbers:

McCollum leads by 14 points among men and by eight among women. In June, women voters were almost evenly divided between the two candidates.

Voters not affiliated with either major party favor McCollum by eight points, but 28% of these voters are undecided.

Fourteen percent (14%) have a very favorable opinion of McCollum, while 10% regard him very unfavorably.

Sink has very favorables of 15% and very unfavorables of 12%.

Last week, I wrote about some of my thoughts on the ever-present problem the GOP has with minorities, and blacks in particular.  The response was somewhat predictable, with some advocating no action (since that’s worked so well for the last 40 years), and others implying that blacks are just inherently unreceptive to conservatism.  One commenter, however, pointed to racially-divisive code speak being the main reason, and if the GOP would just stop it, things would begin to right themselves.

The first question becomes “Is this true?”  I will contend that the GOP uses significantly less racial code in their messaging than the Democrats (have any of you heard the ads that say “Elect a Republican, and another black church is going to burn?”), yet the perception is the opposite.  Take, for instance, the comments by both Sen Lott and Sen Dodd.  One praised a reformed segregationist at his 100th birthdayparty (shortly before he died), the other praised a reformed Grand Kleagle on the Senate floor.  One comment cost the senator his leadership position (and nearly his seat), despite repeated apologies.  The other occasioned no outrage (other than with the blatant double standard being employed).  Looking at the context of their comments, and the histories of the praised men, they’re substantially the same situation, with party affiliation being the only substantial difference.

This doesn’t answer the question of whether there is racial code in use or not, but it answers the question of whether the black community perceives there to be racial code in use by the GOP, and in the affirmative.  At the end of the day, it’s that perception of code words that’s the problem, and the reality doesn’t matter.  Perception or reality, whether the GOP thinks there’s a problem or not, the fact that the black community perceives a problem means there’s a problem.

One commenter claimed blacks paid a lot of attention to what the GOP said, and that’s how they notice the code words.  I contended (and still do) that this is actually proof that they don’t listen to the GOP’s words, instead searching so intently for “code” that they overlook the substance of the comments.  It’s like being unable to find a forest for all the trees in your way.

Perception of racism won’t be undone by “acting black,” becoming liberal-lite and offering tons of gov’t programs, nor by sticking one’s head in the sand and ignoring the problem (we’ve had 40 years of the latter to prove it doesn’t work).  It’s absurd to say that race makes one liberal, just like it’s absurd to say race makes one athletic or intelligent.  The only way the perception of racism can be overcome is through action, and until the GOP realizes this and actually goes into the black community to win their hearts and minds, they will continue to lose their support.

Right now only 58.8% of Americans have jobs. That percentage was as high as 64.5% in 1999.

We have 9.8% official unemployment. We’re at an all-time high for the long-term unemployed (more than 27 weeks). These nation-wide personal disasters will take years to rectify even if the economy starts to improve.

It may be tempting to look for politicial advantages in all this suffering.

However when Republicans regain Congress and the Presidency, we’ll still have the wreckage of this to clean up.

It won’t be as easy as snapping our fingers. Bringing America back will take a lot of work.

If the current President continues to run up the debt, introduce expensive new programs and raise taxes, it will just make our task harder.

Eventually Americans will have their fill of hateful, divisive and destructive ‘progressive’ politics. It looks like many Americans are already tired of being preached at by holier than thou ‘progressives’ who know better about what we should all eat, wear, drive, or how much electricity we should use, or what healthcare we should receive.

We’ve got to be sensitive to suffering people while pointing out the real failures of the President and his Democrats in Congress.

PPP (D) Maine Political Survey

Do you approve or disapprove of Republican Senator Olympia Snowe’s job performance?

• Approve 56%
• Disapprove 31%

Among Democrats

• Approve 70%
• Disapprove 17%

Among Independents

• Approve 51%
• Disapprove 33%

Among Republicans

• Approve 45%
• Disapprove 45%

Among Moderates

• Approve 67%
• Disapprove 20%

Among Conservatives

• Approve 34%
• Disapprove 53%

Among Men

• Approve 51%
• Disapprove 38%

Among Women

• Approve 61%
• Disapprove 24%

Do you approve or disapprove of how Olympia Snowe has handled the health care issue?

• Approve 48%
• Disapprove 35%

Among Democrats

• Approve 64%
• Disapprove 20%

Among Independents

• Approve 44%
• Disapprove 37%

Among Republicans

• Approve 33%
• Disapprove 52%

Among Moderates

• Approve 59%
• Disapprove 25%

Among Conservatives

• Approve 23%
• Disapprove 59%

Do you think that Olympia Snowe should switch parties and become a Democrat?

• Yes 32%
• No 49%

Among Republicans

• Yes 32%
• No 53%

Among Moderates

• Yes 22%
• No 58%

Among Conservatives

• Yes 42%
• No 40%

Do you think that Olympia Snowe is a liberal, moderate, or conservative?

• Liberal 21%
• Moderate 66%
• Conservative 13%

Among Moderates

• Liberal 15%
• Moderate 75%
• Conservative 10%

Among Conservatives

• Liberal 37%
• Moderate 47%
• Conservative 16%

(more…)

Rasmussen Florida 2010 Senatorial Survey

• Charlie Crist 46% {48%} (46%)
• Kendrick Meek 34% {29%} (28%)
• Some other candidate 9% {10%} (12%)
• Not sure 11% {13%} (14%)

• Marco Rubio 46% {43%}
• Kendrick Meek 31% {30%}
• Some other candidate 8% {8%}
• Not sure 15% {19%}

Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted October 19. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted August 17 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted June 22 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted April 23 are in square brackets.

Inside the numbers:

Forty-nine percent (49%) of Florida voters approve of Crist’s job performance, and an equal number disapprove. Those figures reflect a significant decline since August when 59% voiced their approval of the job he was doing.

Seventeen percent (17%) of Florida voters have a very favorable opinion of Crist, while 13% view him very unfavorably.

Meek, a fourth-term African-American congressman from a district on Florida’s East coast, is viewed very favorably by 10% and very unfavorably by 12%.

Thirteen percent (13%) see Rubio very favorably, but nine percent (9%) have a very unfavorable opinion of the Cuban-American legislator from Miami.

Forty-two percent (42%) of Florida voters approve of the job Obama is doing, unchanged since August.

The survey also finds that 59% favor drilling for oil off the coast of Florida while 33% are opposed.

To help protect the environment, 29% favor banning all paper and plastic shopping bags, but 60% oppose such a ban.

Six percent (6%) rate the economy as good or excellent while 63% say poor. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say economic conditions are getting better, but 47% say they’re getting worse.