Quinnipiac Poll: Lautenberg too old; beats generic GOP candidate 40–33%
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:16:22 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Quinnipiac Poll: Lautenberg too old; beats generic GOP candidate 40–33%
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Quinnipiac Poll: Lautenberg too old; beats generic GOP candidate 40–33%  (Read 3543 times)
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 10, 2007, 08:27:18 AM »

Not that anyone should seriously believe that Frank Lautenberg will lose his re-election bid (especially considering the quality of GOP challengers looking at the race can be described as "piss poor" at best), but his numbers are still surprisingly low against a generic Republican.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Lautenberg, who narrowly won a first term in 1982 by insisting that Republican Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick was too old for the job, would be 90 years of age by the end of his fifth term.
Logged
Fmr. Gov. NickG
NickG
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,149


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -3.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2007, 12:59:22 PM »


Not suprising at all for New Jersey.   

Three almost universal principles in NJ political polling:
1.) Incumbents always have low approval ratings.
2.) General election polls show a high percentage of undecideds.
3.) Undecideds break for the Democrat.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2007, 03:08:56 PM »

And he'll be re-elected by at least twenty points.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2007, 03:10:46 PM »

And he'll be re-elected by at least twenty points.

That would make the first time, then, that he's ever won by more than ten.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2007, 03:11:37 PM »

And he'll be re-elected by at least twenty points.

That would make the first time, then, that he's ever won by more than ten.

Yeah, well the GOP isn't even trying (not that they should. NJ is a lost cause).
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,612


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2007, 03:14:30 PM »

Polls 16 months out in NJ are worthless.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2007, 03:15:00 PM »


What a coincidence—so is Senator Lautenberg!
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,612


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2007, 03:16:19 PM »


What a coincidence—so is Senator Lautenberg!

He's one of the best Senators, although he did vote for torture.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2007, 03:16:51 PM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2007, 03:31:23 PM »


What a coincidence—so is Senator Lautenberg!

He's one of the best Senators, although he did vote for torture.

He is a cranky, partisan prick who shamelessly won office by smearing a distinguished stateswoman.

During his time in the Senate, he was consistantly outshined by the brilliant, socially-liberal-but-fiscally-moderate Bill Bradley.  And there's not a day of the week where I wouldn't take ten Jon Corzines over one Frank Lautenberg.  Even Bob Menendez, whom I'm not fond of, is a better politician.

His 2002 maneuverings to return to the U.S. Senate were disasterous, costing New Jersey tons of seniority because he was too eager to work out a fair deal with Daschle.  He pretty much worked out to the NJ Democrats' ninth choice to replace Torricelli on the ballot after Bradley, Florio, and the seven incumbent Congressmen turned it down.

The only person I can say I prefer Frank Lautenberg to is Bob Torricelli, and that's only because I think Bob Torricelli belongs behind bars.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2007, 03:59:37 PM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.
Logged
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2007, 08:09:55 PM »

It's NJ, they're out of their minds.

I feel like if you took a hat with the names of every university graduate in NJ, and just randomly assigned them to government positions, you'd end up with a better group of people than they have now.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2007, 01:47:31 AM »

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.

In New Jersey, though?  No effin way.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2007, 09:03:43 AM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.

I was talking about general election results rather than polls, which then I think you will agree my statement holds true.
Logged
Conan
conan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,140


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 11, 2007, 10:13:33 AM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.

I was talking about general election results rather than polls, which then I think you will agree my statement holds true.
Your generic republican % is too high. It's around 42-46%. Not next year though, no good challenger has emerged. It should be around 60-40 or greater so far.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2007, 11:09:09 AM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.

I was talking about general election results rather than polls, which then I think you will agree my statement holds true.
Your generic republican % is too high. It's around 42-46%. Not next year though, no good challenger has emerged. It should be around 60-40 or greater so far.

My point is that a good challenger is not necessary, even in Schundler/McGreevey McGreevey couldn't pull 60%
Logged
Conan
conan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,140


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2007, 11:27:28 AM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.

I was talking about general election results rather than polls, which then I think you will agree my statement holds true.
Your generic republican % is too high. It's around 42-46%. Not next year though, no good challenger has emerged. It should be around 60-40 or greater so far.

My point is that a good challenger is not necessary, even in Schundler/McGreevey McGreevey couldn't pull 60%
I know... I was talking about Lautenberg next year. If his challenger is that Dougherty guy, then he might well get 60%+.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2007, 11:32:50 AM »

This surprises no one.  Generic Republican vs. Generic Democrat will always produce 45-48 percent for the Republican and 50-55 percent for the Democrat, in fact it works with any person.

Funny, then, that generic Republican led generic Democrat in 2002, then the two were about even in 2004, and generic Democrat led generic Republican in 2006. Lying to make your party look good generally isn't a good idea. If generic Democrat currently leads generic Republican, it's because, surprise, surprise, the country actually prefers the Democrats right now.

I was talking about general election results rather than polls, which then I think you will agree my statement holds true.
Your generic republican % is too high. It's around 42-46%. Not next year though, no good challenger has emerged. It should be around 60-40 or greater so far.

My point is that a good challenger is not necessary, even in Schundler/McGreevey McGreevey couldn't pull 60%
I know... I was talking about Lautenberg next year. If his challenger is that Dougherty guy, then he might well get 60%+.

You obviously missed my point of uber-popular Democrat combined with scandal ridden not loved Republican does not produce 60%.  I guarantee at least 40% of New Jersey will not vote for a Democrat and at least 50% will not vote for a Republican.  There is really only 10% wiggle room.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2007, 11:35:16 AM »

Unless Mike Doherty becomes the nominee (and I seriously doubt someone that conservative could win the GOP nomination in New Jersey), it doesn't seem likely that Lautenberg will win with a margin unlike his past races.

Now that soon-to-be-State Sen. Chuck Pennachio is looking into a run, I think he'll take the nod.  He's a pretty staunch conservative, but he's not crazy-right like Doherty is.  I don't know if the independently wealthy Anne Estabrook is going anywhere, but if she somehow becomes the nominee, she'll at least have enough cash to play with the big boys.

Doug Forrester, Chuck Haytaian, and Pete Dawkins were all terrible, unattractive candidates in their own rights.  Frank Lautenberg isn't getting more cuddly and loveable with time, that's for sure, so I don't see how his numbers wind up getting appreciably better if the caliber of GOP candidates remains constant.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2007, 11:36:19 AM »

Against Doherty, I'd be surprised if Lautenberg could win by more than 15%.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2007, 11:38:43 AM »

Let's rank the Republican candidates:

1.) Chris Christie
2.) Tom Kean Sr.
3.) Bill Baroni
4.) John Murphy
5.) Tom Kean Jr.


Yeah were pretty screwed
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2007, 11:50:34 AM »

Let's rank the Republican candidates:

1.) Chris Christie
2.) Tom Kean Sr.
3.) Bill Baroni
4.) John Murphy
5.) Tom Kean Jr.


Yeah were pretty screwed

It's funny, whenever national Republicans seriously pursue a Senate seat in NJ, they always fall up short by the same slightly-less-than-10 point margin (1988, 1996, 2006); whenever they wind up punting the seat in the electoral pre-season (1990, 2000, 2002), they almost wind up winning the damn thing to spite themselves.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2007, 11:53:03 AM »

Let's rank the Republican candidates:

1.) Chris Christie
2.) Tom Kean Sr.
3.) Bill Baroni
4.) John Murphy
5.) Tom Kean Jr.


Yeah were pretty screwed

It's funny, whenever national Republicans seriously pursue a Senate seat in NJ, they always fall up short by the same slightly-less-than-10 point margin (1988, 1996, 2006); whenever they wind up punting the seat in the electoral pre-season (1990, 2000, 2002), they almost wind up winning the damn thing to spite themselves.

Franks more of a suprise than usual, however, I think 2002 can be explained due to "unforeseen circumstances"
Logged
Adlai Stevenson
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,403
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2007, 11:54:03 AM »

I predict Lautenberg is re-elected along the lines of 54%-43%. 
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2007, 11:59:14 AM »

I predict some reason this race becomes competitive when Fmr. State Assembly Majority Leader Paul DiGaetano steps in.  Final result:

Lautenberg 50%
DiGaetano 48%

That's how much sense NJ politics makes
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 13 queries.