HI-01: PPP: Hanabusa leads a close one

[Rowan]

HI-01

Hanabusa: 48%
Djou: 47%

http://www.dailykos.com/polling/2010/10/2/HI-1/11/5ZR4S

[Sam Spade]

So basically what I suspected, though Hawaii polling sucks, which means both I and it could be dead wrong.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

It's time for another Obama endorsement ad.

[Invisible Obama]

Hanabusa under polled very much during the special election, some of her support just didn't show up in the polls done then.

[Dgov]

This also has Abercrombie tied, so it might be a republican-leaning sample.

Either way, this is good news for Djou.  At the very least this isn't going to be a blowout election.

[Former Moderate]

This also has Abercrombie tied, so it might be a republican-leaning sample.

Either way, this is good news for Djou.  At the very least this isn't going to be a blowout election.

And surprisingly good news for Aiona. Someone should totally poll that.

[Capitan Zapp Brannigan]

Hansubusa's election day support was higher than her polls were in the special election. Supposedly there's a cultural thing where Japanese women refuse to answer polls or something.

[Dgov]

Hansubusa's election day support was higher than her polls were in the special election. Supposedly there's a cultural thing where Japanese women refuse to answer polls or something.

But wasn't that coming mostly from the other guy rather than Djou?

Either way, this is going to be an interesting end to the election night bonanza.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

The poll has Abercrombie and Aiona tied, so either this poll is understating Democratic support or Abercrombie's in some real trouble.

[Dgov]

The poll has Abercrombie and Aiona tied, so either this poll is understating Democratic support or Abercrombie's in some real trouble.

Well, the other Hawaii seat is more Democratic, so it still suggests he's leading statewide.

[Stranger Than Fiction]

Well, doesn't HI has a strong incumbent bent?

[Dgov]

Well, doesn't HI has a strong incumbent bent?

I don't know.  I don't think they've ever actually voted out an incumbent for anything, but then again they haven't had many competitive elections in their history so i don't know.

[Mr.Phips]

Well, doesn't HI has a strong incumbent bent?

I don't know.  I don't think they've ever actually voted out an incumbent for anything, but then again they haven't had many competitive elections in their history so i don't know.

The same was true for federal races in Louisiana until 2008 and in Mississippi. 

[Gravis Marketing]

Well, doesn't HI has a strong incumbent bent?

I don't understand the argument that someone counts as an incumbent if the large majority of voters never voted for him, but actually voted for members of the other party, and he's only been in office a few months.

[Stranger Than Fiction]

Well, doesn't HI has a strong incumbent bent?

I don't understand the argument that someone counts as an incumbent if the large majority of voters never voted for him, but actually voted for members of the other party, and he's only been in office a few months.

I don't understand what's your point being.  A large plurality did vote for him, and the fact is Hawaii never had never turfed an "incumbent" from federal office.

[Gravis Marketing]

Well, doesn't HI has a strong incumbent bent?

I don't understand the argument that someone counts as an incumbent if the large majority of voters never voted for him, but actually voted for members of the other party, and he's only been in office a few months.

I don't understand what's your point being.  A large plurality did vote for him, and the fact is Hawaii never had never turfed an "incumbent" from federal office.

Because he needs to win over lots of people who didn't vote for him. A traditional incumbent has already gotten a majority of people to vote for him once before who are then validating their previous choice or feel they have some personal investment in his performance. What other reason could there be for an incumbent to have an advantage?

His plurality was not that impressive, either. 45% would have been better, but at 40%, he clearly only won because the Dems split their votes.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

I've never understood why people put so much stock in these "state x hasn't voted out an incumbent in y years" saws. Past performance is never a reliable indicator of future results in politics.