LA: RRH: Edwards up 6

[Miles]

Post.

Edwards (D) - 48%
Vitter (R) - 42%

LG
Nungesser (R) - 43%
Holden (D) - 29%

AG
Landry (R) - 45%
Caldwell (R) - 25%

Interesting the AG is exactly the same as JMC's poll.

[Talleyrand]

It's happening!!!

[windjammer]

It's happening!!!

[DrScholl]

RRH is crap. During the Wisconsin recall, they put out a bogus poll that showed the Democrat leading by only two points and he went on to win by ten. The narrative that they are trying to create here is that all the undecideds will break for Vitter and he'll win in the end, but this is really weak since it barely keep Edwards under 50%. I'm not surprised they'd stoop low for Vitter, but they didn't stoop low enough to get him above a miserable 42%.

[Miles]

Edwards is at 39% with whites, more than what he needs. He's getting only 75% of blacks but the rest will break to him.

[Gass3268]

Edwards is at 39% with whites, more than what he needs. He's getting only 75% of blacks but the rest will break to him.

Also the sample size in this poll is ridiculously small at 359 with a +/- 5%. Generally 800 is the number you need for a good sample.

[Miles]

Edwards is at 39% with whites, more than what he needs. He's getting only 75% of blacks but the rest will break to him.

So they are artificially driving up undecideds then...

They also have Vitter up slightly in the early vote. Considering only about 20% votes early and the sample size of the poll is small, I'm not sure that means much.

[Vosem]

RRH is crap. During the Wisconsin recall, they put out a bogus poll that showed the Democrat leading by only two points and he went on to win by ten. The narrative that they are trying to create here is that all the undecideds will break for Vitter and he'll win in the end, but this is really weak since it barely keep Edwards under 50%. I'm not surprised they'd stoop low for Vitter, but they didn't stoop low enough to get him above a miserable 42%.

Can you provide a link to the Wisconsin poll? According to RRH themselves, the first poll they ever conducted was of the runoff in LA-3 in December 2012 between Charles Boustany and Jeff Landry, which showed Boustany leading 51-33 (he went on to win by 61-39) (link here: http://rrhelections.com/index.php/2012/12/page/7/ ). Indeed, the only incorrect winner they have ever projected was in a poll conducted shortly before the 2014 elections in Arizona, which showed Democrat Ron Barber leading Republican Martha McSally (of course, Barber went on to a defeat). I'm not doubting you; I just can't find any record of the poll you're referring to existing. (Also, you might've forgotten, but Republicans won every statewide recall election in Wisconsin during the recent hullaballoo, being defeated only in more local state Senate races).

[Miles]

^ They also had Sanford winning SC-01 and Jolly up in FL-13.

[DrScholl]

Edwards is at 39% with whites, more than what he needs. He's getting only 75% of blacks but the rest will break to him.

So they are artificially driving up undecideds then...

It indeed appears that is the case. That is quite a sneaky trick and it didn't even produce a lead for a Vitter.

[DINGO Joe]

Sounds pretty accurate, all Vitter has to do to win is get 30% of the black vote. 

[Ebsy]

Sounds pretty accurate, all Vitter has to do to win is get 30% of the black vote. 

hahahahahaha

[Ebsy]

Anyway, this is a partisan poll so I don't see why it was put in the database.

[Xing]

Even if this poll is accurate (which is a BIG if), it still shows Edwards in the lead and nearly at 50%. Not to mention that early voting has already started taking place. If this poll is good news for Vitter, it speaks to how much trouble he's in.

[ElectionsGuy]

Anyway, this is a partisan poll so I don't see why it was put in the database.

Vox Populi is also a 'partisan poll'.