PA: Muhlenberg/MC: Sestak 40/Toomey 48 (10/24-10/27) DO NOT ENTER UNTIL 27 DROPS

[Keystone Phil]

The two debates are still to come, correct? Who is considered the strongest of the two in debates? They could decide who wins.

There is one tonight here in Philly and another Friday night in Pittsburgh. The problem with tonight's debate for anyone interested in Southeast PA interested the race? It's on during the Phillies game. 

[Grumps]

Didn't someone here post on another thread that the DSCC stopped spending money in PA?  I don't get it.......if they are this close, why would they stop?

[Keystone Phil]

Didn't someone here post on another thread that the DSCC stopped spending money in PA?  I don't get it.......if they are this close, why would they stop?

The other day, I said the DCCC (the House campaign committee) canceled their ad buy in Philadelphia (if that's what you're getting at).

The DSCC did scale back an ad buy a few weeks ago though.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

1:  California is slipping for the Democrats.  Fiorina is closer right now than she's ever been in this race, and looks like an even chance to pull this one off.

Fiornia was in better shape a month ago.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate/california

A Poll has her leading.  That's a first (I think), even if it is her own internal.

She led in multiple polls a month and a half ago. My link has a +1 Rasmussen and a +2 SUSA for her.

[Grumps]

Didn't someone here post on another thread that the DSCC stopped spending money in PA?  I don't get it.......if they are this close, why would they stop?

The other day, I said the DCCC (the House campaign committee) canceled their ad buy in Philadelphia (if that's what you're getting at).

The DSCC did scale back an ad buy a few weeks ago though.

Got my letters mixed up but at least the memory isn't a total loss......thanks for the clarification.

[bgwah]

I refuse to get my hopes up here.

[SvenssonRS]

You are my new favorite member right now.

uh . .  Thanks?

Someone needed to bitchslap some sense into SG.

[Sam Spade]

stickied as daily tracking - please update here.

[Sam Spade]

Title of thread has been modified to warn people not to enter the poll again until 19th drops off - otherwise the database will become Muhlenberg-centric.

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

What time does the next one come out?

[Keystone Phil]

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/

[So the Heroes Fall]

If I were Sestak, I would definitely be running Toomey = Santorum ads.

[Keystone Phil]

If I were Sestak, I would definitely be running Toomey = Santorum ads.

He already did that.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

10/16 was heavily pro-Sestak, or 10/20 is heavily Pro-Toomey.

I had a feeling this would happen. This poll won't be very informative till we get a few of them in.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If I were Sestak, I would definitely be running Toomey = Santorum ads.

Naw, he shouldn't implky that Toomey is that same as someone that liberal.

Lifetime ACU ratings:

Santorum 88
Toomey 97

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If I were Sestak, I would definitely be running Toomey = Santorum ads.

He already did that.

Well atleast Toomey won't have to worry about one certain PA voter.

[Rowan]

Day 2

Toomey: 43%(+2)
Sestak: 43%(-1)

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If I were Sestak, I would definitely be running Toomey = Santorum ads.

Naw, he shouldn't implky that Toomey is that same as someone that liberal.

Lifetime ACU ratings:

Santorum 88
Toomey 97

Perception is reality in politics.

Of course reality is Santorum didn't lose because he was too extreme, he lost for the following reasons
1. Bob Casey
2. Iraq
3. Bob Casey
4. Bush's approvals
5. Bob Casey
6. Santorum's gaffes
7 oh and I almost forgot, Bob Casey

Without Casey that race goes to a 9-12 pt loss instead of 18.

[J. J.]

The race is tighting, but I'd still give it to Toomey.

This was Santorum's pattern in 1994.

It will be close, folks, hang on to your hats. 

[Dgov]

It's a mistake to think Santorum lost only because he was "too extreme" for Pennsylvania.  Moderate Republican Icon Mike DeWine lost in Neighboring Ohio by only a slightly smaller margin, and Ohio is slightly more Republican.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's a mistake to think Santorum lost only because he was "too extreme" for Pennsylvania.  Moderate Republican Icon Mike DeWine lost in Neighboring Ohio by only a slightly smaller margin, and Ohio is slightly more Republican.

Maybe Sherrod Brown doesn't suck as much as Bob Casey?

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Day 2

Toomey: 43%(+2)
Sestak: 43%(-1)

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/

Poll demographics when from 46-46 to 48-45 Republican.

What is Muhlenberg's track record?

[tokar]

Day 2

Toomey: 43%(+2)
Sestak: 43%(-1)

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/

Poll demographics when from 46-46 to 48-45 Republican.

What is Muhlenberg's track record?

Pretty good...

Over their 20+ day span of their tracker poll starting in Mid-October ahead of the 2008 presidential election, the average margin for Obama was about +10.5 (went as high as 16 points to as low as 6 points...it never showed a lead for McCain).  The last couple days of the tracker showed Obama ahead in PA by single digits (6-8 points I believe)  Pennsylvania ended up going to Obama at +10.3 points.

Over their 20 or so day span of their tracker poll starting in mid-April ahead of the 2010 senate primary between Sestak and Specter, initially the poll showed Specter ahead.  The margin eventually tightened and Sestak went up (if I recall correctly) as high as 4 points before the tracker again tightened.  The last few days of the tracker showed flipping margins, eventually ending in a tie, indicating a rather tight race.  Sestak ended up winning by +7.8 points.

They did not do a tracker poll during the 2008 Presidential primary.  They did put out a couple polls, though.  One in mid-February showing Clinton +14, and one in early April showing Clinton +11.  The primary (held April 22) went for Clinton at +9.2.

I can't tell if they did a tracker for the 2006 Senate election, but they did put out polls every so often.  A mid-Sept 2005 poll showed Casey +8, a mid-Feb (2006) poll showed Casey +12, a mid-April poll showed Casey +8, a late July poll showed Casey +6, an early October poll showed Casey +5, and a late October/early November poll ahead of the election showed Casey +8.  Casey eventually won by +17.4 points.  (The only pollster to nail that blowout of a result was Keystone, sanctioned by a newspaper in Pittsburgh).


So all-in-all, they have a pretty good track record in my opinion.

(Disclaimer: all information obtained from RealClearPolitics.com)

[Tender Branson]

Title of thread has been modified to warn people not to enter the poll again until 19th drops off - otherwise the database will become Muhlenberg-centric.

So, the next poll entry should be on Sunday, with the sample from Oct. 20-23.

[Tender Branson]

Quinnipiac will also have a PA Senate poll out today.