Talk Elections

Article. (http://gravismarketing.com/polling-and-market-research/current-kansas-polling/)

Orman (I)- 47%
Roberts (R)- 40%

Lean I.

Given his assurance of caucusing with the majority party, this race matters much less now unless Democrats manage to pick up three of AK, CO, IA, NC. It looks like Orman will be a Republican soon.

Orman will win and the DNC needs to take note. Democrat is the bad word in the Plains and South, not the policies of the Democratic Party. If Davis were independent like Orman, he'd be up 15 on Brownback.

Republican is also a bad word, but not as severely. An "Independent" might have beaten Cochran and Rounds as well if there were no Democrats involved.

If I'm head of the DSCC for 2016, I'm putting no Democrat on the ballot in 2016 against Shelby, Murkowski, Boozman, Moran, Hoeven, Thune, and Lee. Instead, I put out a feeler for the most Democratic friendly Independent I can find, tell innocuous PACs to support them, and just step back and see what happens.

You act as if this is extremely unlikely.

As expected, Domimating.

I hope Mike Beebe potentially running would be an exception to that. :P

Yeah Democrats are favored in one of those (NC) and the other three are toss-ups.

Are people really betting on a 50/50 proposition like that? Even if Orman is a Republican, he won't be a Conservative Republican and he might change caucuses with whomever is in charge again.


People want a third party, right?

New Poll: Kansas Senator by Gravis Marketing on 2014-10-01 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/SENATE/2014/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=20220141001232)

Summary: D: 0%, R: 40%, I: 47%, U: 13%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://gravismarketing.com/polling-and-market-research/current-kansas-polling/)

Be careful what you wish for.  I could see this strategy electing senators who caucus with the GOP in any of the New England states.  There are more solid R states that D's presently forfeit than solid D states that R's presently forfeit, though so if it goes national it would probably benefit Democrats on net. 

Also if we imagine that 5-10+ independents got elected on a "caucus with the clear majority" platform, it would effectively abolish the filibuster because the winning side would always have 60 senators.  That could be the best part of this type of reform.  Also, the independents would be even less likely to oppose non-crazy executive branch appointees, which would be another benefit for the system.

Agreed, except regarding Arkansas.

Gravis. Consistency dictates that no one is allowed to care about this poll.

Gravis is consistently bad in a specific way.  If anything, this suggests Orman is ahead by more :P

Garbage polling is garbage polling.

I can see 5-10 senators and maybe a couple a dozen Perot - like indies if this became a thing. Maybe there could be a third party formed out of regional opposition.

Remember it's only garbage polling to the members here if the Republican is leading!

Kevin the graphic in your signature is false. Braley never threatened to sue anyone. I'd advise you to, for legal reasons, take it down ASAP.

This. Gravis is showing Hillary doing horribly in all of the four states they've polled to date; California, Connecticut, Nevada and Iowa. Gravis has had an extreme R bias all year long. So taking that into account, Orman should be up by 10% at least.

I mean, Gravis showing Hillary would do 14% worse than Obama in California? Come on! Give me a break.

So by that logic, All the polls that have Orman up mid single digits are wrong, and when you unskew this it will have an even bigger Orman lead? And with the NM Gov poll recently, I suppose Martinez is in a dead heat with Gary King? No?

For Democrats to win three of those? It is. Begich and Braley are clearly losing, Udall is a 50/50 shot at best, and only Hagan is ahead.

Anyway, I strongly encourage Democrats not to run candidates in half of the Senate seats up next year. It will simplify the Republican path to keeping a majority.

Gravis is still a bad pollster, but what I think is going on is a clear Orman lead, and I think a lot of Democrats are saying Orman should be up by more are using past polling by Gravis (which usually favors Republicans) but they've gotten some races right in the past (the most recent one I can think of is the Florida Democratic Primary) and this, along with all the other polls showing Orman up by single digits, should show that Gravis isn't too far off.

Agree completely

I think when more reliable pollsters show Orman up by less than what Gravis shows, then we reject Gravis. Duh.

So it's extremely unlikely for Democrats to win a seat where they're favored, another seat which is a coin flip, and then an upset in one where they're currently an underdog? Note that I didn't say it was likely, just that it wasn't a remote and slim chance like the tone of the initial post implied. I think you guys might be on your victory lap a bit early. Republicans with a 58% chance still leaves Democrats a 42% chance.

One of those single digit polls increased to a 12% Orman lead once you excluded the undecided and "forced" people to choose between the two candidates. Evidence at this point suggests that Orman's lead will only increase once more voters get to know who Orman really is. One of the latest polls showed that one out of three Kansans still don't know much/any about Orman. Almost everyone knows Roberts though, and very few like him, even amongst Republicans themselves.

So it's extremely unlikely for Democrats to win a seat where they're favored, another seat which is a coin flip, and then an upset in one where they're currently an underdog? Note that I didn't say it was likely, just that it wasn't a remote and slim chance like the tone of the initial post implied. I think you guys might be on your victory lap a bit early. Republicans with a 58% chance still leaves Democrats a 42% chance.

Three polls, I think all three PPP polls, have showed Orman with a double digit lead, and that's with loads of low-intensity voters, that is mostly younger voters and Hispanics - typically Democratic demographics (though perhaps not quite as much in Kansas) - who have still yet to tune into the race.

Sounds about right, even if it is Gravis.

Toss Up, Tilt D, Toss Up, Lean D

On what basis is Alaska, where the incumbent has not led an independent poll since before the Republican primary in August, more of a tossup than Colorado, where polling leads have exchanged throughout the last month? Even if you do want to trot out the theory that "Democrats do better than the polls in Colorado," it would seem the reverse theory has just as much evidence to support it in Alaska.

Alaska has exhibited an Incumbency bias in the past, so time will tell if it pulls through for Begich.

His ground game is unparalleled in Alaska as well. He's hitting the remote villages hard and may be able to generate some thousands of votes that could very well tip the race in his favor.