Talk Elections

50-40, unchanged from February.  (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_LA_082013.pdf) Approval 46/43. Undecideds skew Pub, but main reason Landrieu does so well is getting 23% of Pubs. Next question is if those Pubs know her record on national issues and if they're persuadable on those grounds.

Wow, Rogue, you guessed 48-40. Good call.

Dominating.

In both of the primary scenarios, she's still in the high 40's:

Bill Cassidy 20%
Elbert Guillory 6%
Mary Landrieu 47%
Rob Maness 2%
Undecided 25%

Bill Cassidy 24%
Mary Landrieu 48%
Rob Maness 5%
Undecided 23%

So if West Viriginia, Montana and South Dakota fall into place because of retirements and Begich and Pryor get their asses kicked, the control of the Senate might be decided in a runoff election? That would be an interesting scenario. Otherwise, if Begich or Pryor stick around, I'd expect Landrieu to win any runoff as it would be a referendum as her as an incumbent against a fragmented field and not as much a generic R vs generic D election.

So our assumptions seem to be correct: Landrieu has a high-40s floor, only Pub pathway is full nationalization by forcing a runoff. My prediction: whoever wins does so by 3 or less.

New Poll: Louisiana Senator by Public Policy Polling on 2013-08-19 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/SENATE/2014/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=22220130819108)

Summary: D: 50%, R: 40%, U: 10%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_LA_082013.pdf)

Better than I was expecting.

I'm sure there is a run off in Georgia too. And in Arkansas?

Georgia yes, Arkansas only in primaries.

Louisiana will be really interesting :p

For the Republicans in 2014 there just isn't much low-hanging fruit in the Senate to be picked off. Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia may offer excellent opportunities for Republican pick-ups in the Senate... but let's put it this way: Mary Landrieu is far safer a bet for re-election than Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader. The open seat in Georgia doesn't look so great for Republicans, either. 

Cassidy entered when Landrieu was much more vulnerable. But then the others started declaring for governor. It looks as though he wasn't the best candidate.

Landrieu always win with ~52% of the vote anyway.

You make it seem as if the Republicans may blow their chances at the senate for the foreseeable future unless they have Morning in America v2.0 in 2016.

Loss of 3 seats in 2014 and win WI, IL, and PA anyways in 2016.

Seven Romney states?


Historically speaking, three is a lot of low-hanging fruit. Even in 2008, for their two most difficult holds, Republicans recruited an ex-Governor (Jim Gilmore) and a man who represented a third of the state in Congress (Steve Pearce). Obviously they both lost overwhelmingly, but Democrats are finding it difficult to even find (never mind recruit) candidates of that caliber in any of those three states. That should say something.


Not 'far safer'. I'll agree that Landrieu has more support than McConnell, but hers is on much weaker ground. Landrieu must rely on a large number of crossover voters to win -- McConnell must merely prevent anyone from defecting. I'll agree McConnell starts in a slightly worse position than Landrieu, but it's much easier to see him improving it.


Nunn is stuck in the low 40s, the undecideds lean Republican, and Nunn's bar to clear is higher than the eventual Republican nominee's -- she cannot afford to go to a runoff, where the voter pool will be older, more conservative, and more Republican. The Democratic candidate in Georgia has no electoral experience, is utterly untested and open to charges of nepotism. I wouldn't say it looks great for Democrats, either.


Are you saying Cassidy is a bad candidate because he managed to clear the field? That doesn't make sense.


Except the two of her victories (in 1996 and 2002) where she got less than that. And let's remember Landrieu massively underperformed in 2008. Republicans pretty much cut Kennedy loose to focus on defense. The final RCP average was Landrieu+14.5 -- she won by 7. That isn't a good omen either.


Polling is already showing Toomey ahead of Sestak, the Democrats have no obvious candidate in Wisconsin 2016 (unless Feingold runs as he's hinted at, in which case they have a candidate who can clear the field but can't fundraise -- Johnson will dominate the airwaves) and even Illinois doesn't look 100% for the Democrats considering how unpopular the statewide government is, though I'll grant you that one is a likelier pickup than not. But the Democrats' problem comes down to the fact that the seats they hold in Romney states were all (except Hagan) won by Romney by double-digits, whereas the seats Republicans hold in Obama states are all marginal (except Collins & Kirk), won by Obama by single-digits. 2016 for the Democrats is like 2012 for the Republicans -- there's a lot of opportunity, but you have to fight for every inch of it. There's no "low-hanging fruit" as pbrower put it -- not the case for Republicans in 2014.

Landrieu is a good fit for the state, period and she has the ability to hold the base, as well as get crossover support, which is very rare. Plus, Louisiana trended Democratic in 2012, going R+11 down from R+13 in 2008, that means if she can have a good turnout operation, her floor is more elevated.

Dardenne opted to run for governor instead of taking on Landrieu speaks for itself, he was the stronger candidate.

As for Illinois, the GOP won't have Quinn to kick around anymore. Once he is out of the way and Bill Daley, takes office, business start to develop, the Dems will rebound in Illinois.

I don't know much about Wisconsin and Pennsylvania politics but Toomey was only ahead of Sestak by 4 pts, and Sestak isn't in the media, and nor is Feingold. Once the campaign begins, the race in those three states will tighten. But I was referring to the grip the incumbent parties have for the forseeable future: GOP on the House and Dems on the Senate.

This is true, but Landrieu has the support of 23% of Republicans in this poll -- and she's still barely skimming the runoff line. So all Cassidy has to do to win is appeal to Republicans -- an easier task than other Republican challengers.


You're ignoring the elephant in the room, though -- R+11 is a lot.


Dardenne has been obviously aiming for the Governorship for some time now. Sometimes politicians' goals are more specific than just "promotion to whatever is available" -- not everyone is Mark Darr.

I'm not denying that Landrieu is pretty definitely favored here -- unlike Pryor or Begich, she has some room to maneuver/for error, and she certainly doesn't start out in a hole like in the open seats. But this race is winnable for Cassidy and there's a clear way to do it.


Considering Bill Daley is only a 50/50 bet to beat Quinn, and that they're both polling behind Republican frontrunners Dan Rutherford and Kirk Dillard, that's a pretty risky bet to make. Though obviously in a state this blue Republicans are nowhere near any kind of safe bet either.


Pennsylvania is trending Republican and Toomey is getting a lot of positive reviews, while Democrats have no obvious path to challenge Johnson's overwhelming fundraising superiority. Wisconsin isn't California -- Republicans can and do regularly persuade it to vote for them.


Illinois, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin? Yeah, probably, but that won't be for a while.


The first one is much more solid, since it's built on friendly territory (whereas the Democratic Senate majority is in large part built on people like Mary Landrieu, who must watch their backs constantly -- and they're not all as competent as Landrieu).

Changing tack, though, it speaks to what a remarkable politician Landrieu is that she can command a lead like this in a state like that.

Landrieu is obvious benefiting from the robust job her bro is doing as mayor of New Orleans. I would love for him to be the Governor of Louisiana some day particularly 2015.

R+11 is still less than R+13 and in this particular race, and in this particular race, the state will before more like R+5 to R+7, since ancestral Democratic support comes into the equation. Cassidy could close the gap by appealing to Republicans, but much of what is considered Republican support in the state isn't opposed to supporting a Democrat under certain circumstances, so it's not necessarily as simple as that.

I believe the 45-41 coming close to within 3 pts of winning not the 50-40 number, well within the margin of error.

Even with the handwavium you've added it's still quite a bit.


Well, I would presume people who vote Democratic in local races wouldn't self-identify as Republican (the way there are more self-identified Democrats than Republicans in Oklahoma, for instance). We're talking about normally straight-ticket voters.


What?

It appears this "hand waving" phrase is a new favorite of Republicans, whatever that means. I'm just point out that any trend is beneficial to Landrieu and that she will be dealing with an electorate that is much different than the presidential one, if she gets the right turnout out. I'm not guaranteeing that she'll win, but she has a lot of that could work in her favor. Now most ancestral Democrats probably wouldn't identify as Republican, but they still account for a big amount of what the GOP gets in vote margin in the state, Cassidy has to win votes like that too, not just self-identified Republicans. In 2008, Landrieu ran many points ahead of Obama in suburban New Orleans, which is where most self-identified Republicans are at, so she has a chance at maintaining some Republican support.

This poll also shows Obama with a 42% approval rating in Lousiana, which, when approval average of Obama is 46%, seems a bit inaccurate. Then again, I don't doubt that Landrieu is ahead at this point.

Still, Romney carried this sample 55/39, which lines up about right with his actual 58/41 win.

Good news. Still a long time to go however, Landrieu would probably need to avoid a run-off.

I'll give Landrieu + 6 at this point considering the other two polls were (R). And because undecided voters lean republican.

I would think Obama's numbers would be inelastic in inelastic states in Louisiana and would account for his high floor there. The headlines are about Obama losing white working class voters in the Midwest and he never had many of them in La.

Still believe this is tossup/Tilt D... goes to Lean R in a runoff however.

Landrieu's obituary has been written every single time she's run for the Senate, yet she's won 3 terms. I suspect history will repeat itself and she will win a 4th.

M Foster, Jindal, and Dardenne, although Mitch too will beat Dardenne, stronger GOP runs for Gov. Landrieu leads Vitter by two and Dardenne by 10. Since Katrina no one seems to stop them. Lost only one race since then.