So... looks like Sharron Angle, the teaba^H^H party candidate in NV, is going to win. Polls (and common sense) suggest this is a great thing for Harry Reid, because he'll have an easier time with her than either Lowden or Tarkanian. So, what do you think? Has the R party shot themselves in the foot again, and nominated the one person who will ensure Harry Reid goes on being Speaker? Or are the teabartiers going to beat Reid and put Angle in the Senate? Is it even good for the dems to reelect Reid, or would they be better off with, say, Chuck Schumer as speaker? My take: we are going to have some big Rand Paul-like fun learning about Angle. barfo
Well Sarah Palin was a bit more extreme then her counter-part and yet she got elected. I think this whole series of elections will tell us if there really is a big swing back.
Yes, but AK is a solid-red state. Winning the primary means winning the election in most cases. NV isn't an automatic win for the GOP. But I agree with your conclusion. It will be interesting to see. However one possibility is that the R's are limiting the swing that was going in their favor by nominating folks like Rand and Sharron who might not have broad appeal. But who knows, maybe they will... barfo
In the primaries, you race to the edge; in the general, you race to the middle. You'll see a moderating of positions all over the country on both sides.
Definitely, but pretty hard to moderate when you've come out against the civil rights act or in favor of prohibition. barfo
I think this clearly gives Reid the edge. I don't care for Reid and feel his place in history will not be treated kindly, but the tea baggers are just too far out to me. Their routine is getting old- although I do understand their idea behind it, that we need a major overhaul in Congress.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub..._elections/nevada/election_2010_nevada_senate Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s support remains frozen again this month around 40%, while two of his chief Republican opponents continue to draw over 50% of the vote in Nevada’s U.S. Senate race. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Nevada shows Reid earning 39% to 41% support, depending on his opponent, well below the 50% safe mark for incumbents. His numbers are virtually identical to findings in the previous survey earlier this month and in line with surveys since last fall when his support began trending down. Reid, who is seeking a fifth term in the Senate, received 61% of the vote in 2004. Nearly half the voters in the state (47%) continue to have a very unfavorable view of the Democratic incumbent, while 23% view him very favorably. In her match-up with Reid, Sue Lowden, ex-chairman of the Nevada Republican Party, earns 52% of the vote to Reid’s 39%. Businessman Danny Tarkanian gets 51% support to Reid’s 41%. Both Republicans have been hovering around 50% for months. A third GOP hopeful, former Assemblywoman Sharron Angle, wins 48% to 40% for the Democratic incumbent. Angle, too, has consistently beaten Reid in head-to-head match-ups but by slightly smaller margins that Lowden and Tarkanian.
More recent poll (May 24-26): http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...major-ground-against-gop-in-reelection-battle Yet, let's see how accurate the poll is! Actual results: Angle 40%, Lowden 26%, Tarkanian 23%.
There were some polls that showed Angle surging ahead in the last couple of weeks. So not everyone got it wrong. barfo
Reminds me of Minnesota selecting Al Franken in the Democratic primary. I remember thinking, "Ok, I suppose you might be able to make it work. But why take the risk? Why not just go with a candidate that will cream the other party?" Turns out it (eventually and just barely) worked out for the Dems, but that seems a much more blue state than Nevada is a red state. I really don't think the Tea Party/anti-immigration wings are doing many favors to the Republican party in the long term. The GOP should destroy the Dems this fall, but with so many extreme candidates it seems like it's going to be a lot harder. And they seem hell-bent on alienating the hispanic vote. I could be wrong, though. Al Franken seems a lock to remain a senator for as long as he wants to now. If the GOP can do the same, it may be worth the risk.
What does that have to do with this poll? This poll suggests the race is close, and wasn't very good at predicting the results of the primary (other than Tarkanian's 23%, spot on!).
Poor Tarkanian. If only more people erroneously thought that he had once coached UNLV, then he'd probably do better in the polls...
I agree with you about that poll. I was just pointing out that other polls did better at predicting the results. What do other polls have to do with this poll? Well, they are all polls of the same race. That makes them related, no? What's your point about this poll, anyway? Almost 2 weeks before the election, their poll didn't match the final outcome. Ok, so.... what? barfo
Why vote for a candidate that you don't want to win? I don't know much about those candidates, but it shouldn't be just about voting out people you don't like. It should be about voting for people you DO. Regular people who are married to either the GOP or Democratic party are fools. Ed O.
This is the poll that the media is touting as if the race has tightened. I tend to believe the Rasmussen poll is closer to reality. A lot can change between now and the election, but this is the way it is now.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub..._elections/nevada/election_2010_nevada_senate Sharron Angle, following her come-from-behind Republican Primary win Tuesday, has bounced to an 11-point lead over Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Nevada’s closely-watched U.S. Senate race. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Nevada, taken Wednesday night, shows Angle earning 50% support while Reid picks up 39% of the vote. Five percent (5%) like some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided
I don't like Reid, so I wouldn't be sad to see her win. Will she though? My only thinking on that is that it appears her race to lose.
Will the tea party get enough traction between now and November to get a decent-sized voting block of their own? I mean, what's the critical mass for something like that? 10 seats? 50? Are there even that many candidates? And if there are, does that allow "conventional" republicans to appeal more to the tea partiers?
