WV: Rasmussen: This one may as well be competitive too, right?

[Brittain33]

This is certainly one graveyard I wouldn't be whistling past, but then again, it's not like we're heading into a historic wave election or anything.

You've made a point like this many times, on threads from here to that IL-2 internal. My question is: so what if people are confident about the WV Senate race? So what if people are "whistling past the graveyard" on this race given Manchin's background and what happened in PA-12? No one here is in charge of resource allocation for the DCCC or DSC.

In 2008, Keystone Phil made a point of warning Democrats not to get "too cocky" about upcoming gains. Why did it matter?

I don't see much meaning in declaring a very wide series of races to be "potentially competitive," even if many of them are... either they will become competitive, or they won't. But I'm guessing that many Republicans leaking internals showing them up by a point won't go anywhere in November, and yet I can't think of any reason for me to warn Vepres that his optimism is materially harmful to anything.

[Vepres]

This is certainly one graveyard I wouldn't be whistling past, but then again, it's not like we're heading into a historic wave election or anything.

You've made a point like this many times, on threads from here to that IL-2 internal. My question is: so what if people are confident about the WV Senate race? So what if people are "whistling past the graveyard" on this race given Manchin's background and what happened in PA-12? No one here is in charge of resource allocation for the DCCC or DSC.

In 2008, Keystone Phil made a point of warning Democrats not to get "too cocky" about upcoming gains. Why did it matter?

I don't see much meaning in declaring a very wide series of races to be "potentially competitive," even if many of them are... either they will become competitive, or they won't. But I'm guessing that many Republicans leaking internals showing them up by a point won't go anywhere in November, and yet I can't think of any reason for me to warn Vepres that his optimism is materially harmful to anything.

Hurr durr, people predicting a GOP wave are hacks.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

No.

I change my mind. The race could be this close under the best of circumstances.

[Torie]

I told you guys, and you thought I was on crack I know.

Yes, Ronnie, Raese has a chance - maybe a 25% chance at the end of the day. Those odds may go up, if the Dems continue to steadily slide downhill, as they are now.

[Хahar 🤔]

This is certainly one graveyard I wouldn't be whistling past, but then again, it's not like we're heading into a historic wave election or anything.

You've made a point like this many times, on threads from here to that IL-2 internal. My question is: so what if people are confident about the WV Senate race? So what if people are "whistling past the graveyard" on this race given Manchin's background and what happened in PA-12? No one here is in charge of resource allocation for the DCCC or DSC.

In 2008, Keystone Phil made a point of warning Democrats not to get "too cocky" about upcoming gains. Why did it matter?

I don't see much meaning in declaring a very wide series of races to be "potentially competitive," even if many of them are... either they will become competitive, or they won't. But I'm guessing that many Republicans leaking internals showing them up by a point won't go anywhere in November, and yet I can't think of any reason for me to warn Vepres that his optimism is materially harmful to anything.

Hurr durr, people predicting a GOP wave are hacks.

You should be banned for that.

[Dgov]

This isn't entirely unlikely.  Rass Polled the Arkansas Senate race a while back and found that Boozman beat Mike Bebee despite the latter having a similar approval rating.

It's probably because being a Senator requires much more conformity to a national party's agenda than being a governor.  The Republicans can run against him being another vote for Harry Reid or Chuck Schumer, neither of whom have anywhere near favorable ratings.

[bgwah]

This is certainly one graveyard I wouldn't be whistling past, but then again, it's not like we're heading into a historic wave election or anything.

You really do post the same thing in every thread. Fascinating. You can still reply to my post in that other thread if you like.

[Vepres]

I will say, with regards to this race, that people tend to care less about a Governor's party than the party of a Senatorial candidate. For example, many Vermonters would probably approve of Jim Douglas, but he probably couldn't have beaten Bernie Sanders in 2006 (even when putting the national climate aside).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Hey, at least Manchin is leading. Fwiw, back in 2006 Rasmussen got Raese about right quite early in the race, but had Byrd a quite a bit lower than what he eventually polled until their last poll.

[Rowan]

If you want another West Virginia poll, vote here:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/

[DrScholl]

Hey, at least Manchin is leading. Fwiw, back in 2006 Rasmussen got Raese about right quite early in the race, but had Byrd a quite a bit lower than what he eventually polled until their last poll.

That's a good point.

[Iosif]

In 2006 Scott had Lynn Swann beating Rendell.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I will say, with regards to this race, that people tend to care less about a Governor's party than the party of a Senatorial candidate. For example, many Vermonters would probably approve of Jim Douglas, but he probably couldn't have beaten Bernie Sanders in 2006 (even when putting the national climate aside).

Which is true, but really makes no sense.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Uh, guys, this is pretty obviously the Scott Rasmussen Patented Post-Primary Bounce. Not that Democrats shouldn't be worried about their prospects in a state that hates Obama so much, but I don't think it's really a six-point race at this point.

[The Vorlon]

It's one poll in the middle of August that contradicts another Rasmussen poll just a few weeks ago.

One flower does not spring make, lets see another poll from another organization till we start talking about this one.

[Rowan]

In 2006 Scott had Lynn Swann beating Rendell.

...in April.

[Holmes]

If you want another West Virginia poll, vote here:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/

Kentucky is obviously the correct choice.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

If you want another West Virginia poll, vote here:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/

Kentucky is obviously the correct choice.

Don't worry, once the Paulbots get wind of the poll, they'll stuff the ballot box.

[tpfkaw]

Texas, bizarrely, leads in the poll, despite TX governor being a rather boring race. I voted Connecticut, because I want to see how McMahon is doing.

[Barnes]

If you want another West Virginia poll, vote here:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/

Kentucky is obviously the correct choice.

Uh, I'm pretty sure you mean Georgia.

[Vepres]

I will say, with regards to this race, that people tend to care less about a Governor's party than the party of a Senatorial candidate. For example, many Vermonters would probably approve of Jim Douglas, but he probably couldn't have beaten Bernie Sanders in 2006 (even when putting the national climate aside).

Which is true, but really makes no sense.

Not necessarily. On the state level, the parties are catered to the state, whereas in congressional and Senatorial elections, you have the shadow of the national party over the election.

[Dgov]

Not necessarily. On the state level, the parties are catered to the state, whereas in congressional and Senatorial elections, you have the shadow of the national party over the election.

Especially in Southern States, the Democratic party is almost as Socially Conservative as the Republicans (to be expected when 2/3rds of your voters are Socially Conservative Blacks).  It's why they still dominate state legislatures across the region.  Welfare and social programs sell way better than Abortion and Gay Marriage in Rural Tennessee.

[Free Palestine]

West Virginia is an interesting state, indeed.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

This is certainly one graveyard I wouldn't be whistling past, but then again, it's not like we're heading into a historic wave election or anything.

You really do post the same thing in every thread. Fascinating. You can still reply to my post in that other thread if you like.

Similar posts get similar replies.

[bgwah]

This is certainly one graveyard I wouldn't be whistling past, but then again, it's not like we're heading into a historic wave election or anything.

You really do post the same thing in every thread. Fascinating. You can still reply to my post in that other thread if you like.

Similar posts get similar replies.

While detailed and thorough analyses are ignored. I'm glad we cleared that up.