Missouri Democrat McCaskill leading Talent in poll for US Senate 47%-44%

[SaintLouisBlues]

snip:

"The poll of 800 likely Missouri voters also found a statistical deadheat in the U.S. Senate contest between incumbent Republican Jim Talent and his Democratic rival, state Auditor Claire McCaskill. She had a three-percentage-point edge -- 47-44 -- which is within the poll's margin of error of 3.5
percentage points for each number."

Link to story:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/missouristatenews/story/5CF7A2C7E89E20F6862570FD000A7F6F?OpenDocument


This seat is definitely in play.

Plus, Gov. Babydoc Blunt losing to Jay Nixon in this same poll, though this race is in 2008.

And the possible ballot proposal which would allow stem cell research is favored by huge margins.

Here's the poll result link:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/06375AF9E03504EA862570FD0020C166?OpenDocument

[thefloyd]

1. Bluntco has shown their true colors

Missouri(Show-me state)does not like lies.

[HeeBGBz]

3. Blunt is nothing more than a Bush neocon wannabe

Just another hog at the trough.

[HeeBGBz]

2. I still say Missouri was turning blue in '04 until cheated

I know a lot of disgruntled people around here.

Great news, SaintLouisBlues!

[Scout1071]

8. Missouri was blue until I went to bed that night. Then it turned red over

night. I still think it's bullshit.

[kiteinthewind]

17. Yep!

:evilfrown:

[rzemanfl]

4. Dems have to put up a spread of at least 15 points to overcome

cheating. Within the margin of error doesn't cut it. Five percent doesn't cut it. There is probably a built in 5% edge for them due to oversampling of Repukes. The fascists cannot steal a 20% spread without it being so obvious that they would get caught at it, anything less I worry about.

[Robbins]

5. Missouri

Some things to take from this poll.

Bush's unpopulary Is hurting Talent. While Talent does slightly better In holding Republicans than
Mckasill does Democrats she has more Republicans crossing over than Talent has Democrats,and she wins the Independt vote. The poll for Governor shows how much trouble Blunt Is In. Couple of Intresting things Nixon narrowly beats Blunt among men,and just narrorly loses the overall white vote. While It Is a while till the Governor's race this shows people are willing to throw Blunt out.

[nickinSTL]

15. It's not just Bush's unpopularity...

I'd guess that Blunt's unpopularity will hurt Talent as well.

Blunt's cuts have been hitting even his own supporters pretty hard...many of them are finding out that maybe voting on things that don't affect them (like gay marriage) isn't the best idea if they depend on social programs.

[skipos]

7. I am all for a 15 point lead but

We didn't have a 15 point lead in VA in '05 (I think it was a around 2%) and Kaine still won.

We didn't have a 15 point lead in defeating all of Arnolds bills in CA and we still won.

In most polls, Corzine had on average a 10 point lead in NJ, and went on to win by 10%.

It is an uphill battle but we can win elections.

[rzemanfl]

10. I don't think they use the Diebold diddle in elections for State

offices or votes on State referenda outside of Ohio-where they have the home court advantage.

[skipos]

11. Diebold was used in that VA election. nt

[rzemanfl]

13. If it was "diddled" then the Dem would have lost. I don't think they

run the risk of getting caught doctoring the results of elections for state offices. It's a cost-benefit thing, plus it would be hard to claim "national security" reasons to quash an investigation into the rigging of a state contest. The Diebold diddle is for the big stuff, like President, and maybe to avoid unbelievable differences between the state vote for Senator and the vote for their national candidate. There were way too many ballots cast here for Bush for President and Betty Castor for Senator, stunk to high heaven, but they used the "it's a woman" explanation and got away with it.

Ohio is an exception because it is home turf for them and the voting all involved the future integrity of Ohio voting-they didn't want honest elections in Ohio and had to reward Blackwell for delivering.

[kiteinthewind]

18. KC Board of Elections just approved Diebold machines for their elections.

:wtf:

[snowbear]

6. Good for Claire McCaskill...

I hope she kicks the Rethug's butt right out of office!

Now if you could just do something about those doggone St. Louis Blues this season!!!

:spank:

[Darkhawk32]

9. Black vote = 20% undecided... that's 2% more for her if she aggressively..

seeks the black vote more.

Plus, right now, she only gets 50% of the female vote. So she can, and probably will, make gains there as well.

So, if she keeps working hard, she'll win come November and quite possibly by about 4%-5%.

[thatsrightimirish]

12. its funny because

if you look at sabato's crystal ball, he still has this race at solid republican. :rofl:

[safi0]

14. These numbers

Are pretty consistent with other poll numbers on this race. They've usually shown McCaskill with a 1-2 pt lead or a dead heat. The thing that's got me really happy about this is the internals. The groups that have high undecideds are democratic leaning. 10% of Dems are undecided, 20% of African-Americans are undecided, 22% of other minorities are undecided. 11% of women are undecided, 10% of people between the ages of 18-29 are undecided and 13% of Union members are undecided. The only bad thing is that the North/SE and Southwest have 10 and 13% undecideds and these areas lean heavily right, although one cold certainly look at that as an advantage since Talent is an incumbent and these people are atleast willing to hear what McCaskill has to say.

Edit: McCaskill has higher approval ratings than Talent. Its only 2 points, but for a challenger to actually have higher favorables than the incumbent 10 months before the election is virtually unheard of.

[kansan]

16. Joplin Globe article

http://www.joplinglobe.com/archives/story.php?story_id=121487

"What should be Roy Blunt's least expensive election is costing him $7,480 per vote, according to Mike Casey, director of the Campaign for a Cleaner Congress.

That's how his group is characterizing the $635,802 that Blunt has given to 63 of the 85 members of the House of Representatives who have publicly said they would support his bid to be the next House majority leader.

The money was given to Blunt's colleagues over the last decade during their own election bids.

It's money that Blunt or his affiliated organizations have given to Rick Renzi, an Arizona congressman, for example, who has received $26,000 during previous election cycles, or to Shirley Capito, a West Virginia congresswoman, who has received nearly $35,000 courtesy of Blunt during her previous campaign bids."

more at link