CA/Rasmussen: Brown leads Whitman by 6

[DrScholl]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_governor_elections/california/election_2010_california_governor

Brown (D) 50%
Whitman (R) 44%
Other 2%
Undecided 4%

[Lief 🗽]

Hahah, what a waste of money Whitman's campaign has been.

[Oakvale]

The state of California should probably thank Whitman for her $120 million dollar stimulus package.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Database Entry: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/GOVERNOR/2010/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=620101013016

[Associate Justice PiT]

The state of California should probably thank Whitman for her $120 million dollar stimulus package.

     Heh, indeed. While I would have preferred Governor Whitman for various reasons, I am also rather happy that she is losing, since it should send a message that offices in California cannot be bought.

[Ronnie]

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

[Associate Justice PiT]

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

     Because they're Democrats, maybe?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

was this taken after the debate?

[Ronnie]

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

     Because they're Democrats, maybe?

This does not constitute a reason to vote for someone.  It's a matter of looking at someone's record and seeing that they utterly failed in office.  A couple of Democrats that I know refuse to vote for Brown in November because they know how bad he was.

[Eraserhead]

What? Brown was a great governor... some "Democrats" your friends are!

Anyway, I guess this just shows us that nobody really cared about the bogus "whore" flap. What a surprise!

[Associate Justice PiT]

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

     Because they're Democrats, maybe?

This does not constitute a reason to vote for someone.  It's a matter of looking at someone's record and seeing that they utterly failed in office.  A couple of Democrats that I know refuse to vote for Brown in November because they know how bad he was.

     You would be surprised by how many partisans there are out there. As far as they are concerned, it might as well.

[DrScholl]

I think the fact that Whitman is spending a ton of money to become Governor and didn't vote for years has put lots of people off.

[Oakvale]

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

     Because they're Democrats, maybe?

This does not constitute a reason to vote for someone.  It's a matter of looking at someone's record and seeing that they utterly failed in office.  A couple of Democrats that I know refuse to vote for Brown in November because they know how bad he was.

Eh, there's also a lot of people who respect and like Jerry Brown precisely because of his record, but whatever.

[Meeker]

The most well-known conservative on our campus (he writes a blog that gets several thousand hits a week and has a column in the school paper) is voting for Brown because of how well he ran the state back during his first go-around.

[Oakvale]

I've got an odd sentimental attachment to Jerry Brown because I once wrote a vaguely popular alternate history timeline about a Brown Presidency on another site. Heh.

[Psychic Octopus]

Whitman's money should have gone to funding infrastructure programs.

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

     Because they're Democrats, maybe?

This does not constitute a reason to vote for someone.  It's a matter of looking at someone's record and seeing that they utterly failed in office.  A couple of Democrats that I know refuse to vote for Brown in November because they know how bad he was.

     You would be surprised by how many partisans there are out there. As far as they are concerned, it might as well.

I am also happy that this proves that Californians cannot be bought by forty-four page promises and ideals that  could never be met.

As for the partisanship, dear god, there are a great deal of them. I have noticed, though, that there is a great number of Republicans "holding their nose" and voting for Whitman. It seems that a lot of voters are making the "lesser of two evils" choice.

[sg0508]

Makes you think, if the GOP wiffs in CA this year, can they ever win there again?

The 03/06 deal with the Governator was a rare case of prominence.

[King]

California voters prove they are smartest in nation.  This depresses me

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The most well-known conservative on our campus (he writes a blog that gets several thousand hits a week and has a column in the school paper) is voting for Brown because of how well he ran the state back during his first go-around.

I don't really see why anyone would vote for Whitman. Even Howard Jarvis voted for Brown in 1978.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Makes you think, if the GOP wiffs in CA this year, can they ever win there again?

The 03/06 deal with the Governator was a rare case of prominence.

     Jerry Brown is one of the strongest candidates the Democrats could have run, probably the strongest outside of Feinstein. I dislike him, but it would be foolish to not recognize that the average voter does like him. It's not hard to see the Democrats nominating a weak candidate, like they did with Kathleen Brown in 1994 or Phil Angelides in 2006, & losing the Governorship.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Makes you think, if the GOP wiffs in CA this year, can they ever win there again?

The 03/06 deal with the Governator was a rare case of prominence.

Gubernatorial races are usually less partisan than Senate races. Consider that Republicans currently hold governorships in Vermont, Rhode Island, and Hawaii, while Democrats currently hold Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Kansas. The incredible polarization right now probably means that it's harder for candidates of one party to win a governor's race in a state that naturally leans towards the other party, but that doesn't mean that it'll never happen again.

[Lief 🗽]

Gubernatorial races are usually less partisan than Senate races. Consider that Republicans currently hold governorships in Vermont, Rhode Island, and Hawaii, while Democrats currently hold Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Kansas. The incredible polarization right now probably means that it's harder for candidates of one party to win a governor's race in a state that naturally leans towards the other party, but that doesn't mean that it'll never happen again.

There's a very good chance that all six of those seats are going to switch on election day.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Gubernatorial races are usually less partisan than Senate races. Consider that Republicans currently hold governorships in Vermont, Rhode Island, and Hawaii, while Democrats currently hold Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Kansas. The incredible polarization right now probably means that it's harder for candidates of one party to win a governor's race in a state that naturally leans towards the other party, but that doesn't mean that it'll never happen again.

There's a very good chance that all six of those seats are going to switch on election day.

Yes, but my point is, Republicans can get elected in the first three, and Democrats in the last three. It's not going to stop happening just because of a rocky election cycle.

[redcommander]

As much as I dislike Whitman, I would still rather have her in Sacramento than Jerry Brown. California Democrats have gotten much more loopier since the 70's, and the state legislature is dominated by them. She could at least provide some checks and balances.

[Хahar 🤔]

This is depressing.  While Whitman isn't perfect, Brown is absolutely terrible.  Why would someone vote for him?

     Because they're Democrats, maybe?

This does not constitute a reason to vote for someone.  It's a matter of looking at someone's record and seeing that they utterly failed in office.  A couple of Democrats that I know refuse to vote for Brown in November because they know how bad he was.

Yeah, I have no idea what you're talking about. He wasn't as good as his dad, but he was pretty good.