U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
August 11, 2011 01:01 AM UTC
60 Comments
While the typical voter tends to have a fairly short memory (and attention-span), the GOP will probably keep the bad press coming all the way to 2012.
With the upcoming budget battle, renewed FAA funding fight and the Federal gasoline tax expiration all coming up, the GOP will provide many, many chances for the public to remember who is pushing us back into a recession, keeping unemployment high, and our infrastructure crumbling.
they would run the Koch brothers or Grover Norquist. Then the public would have a real choice between the president and the people who call the shots for Republicans.
There’s an education problem in this country, and it’s not in the public schools, it’s in the public square….the commons.
One question to be asked is, “When will the American voter begin to vote their own interests, and build the path forward based on what is best for them?”
Since I’m sick of elbee posting this on every poll, I’m going to go ahead and post it for him:
PPP grossly oversampled Dems in this poll
Here are the results of their robopoll, which surveyed 510 Colorado voters. Since it’s a robopoll, they can’t necessarily be faulted for the result, it’s just whoever ended up picking up the phone and pushing buttons. I would be interested in seeing their target universe, though.
Here’s another telling question:
Currently the voter registration numbers are about 1/3 Dems, 1/3 GOP, and 1/3 Indies. Among active voters, the GOP has about a 5 point advantage over the Dems, but it’s really the total registered that matters.
I won’t go so far as to say that PPP (which is a Democratic polling firm, and noted so in the PDF. It also pointed out that Nate Silver said their polls tend to lean towards Republicans, though it’s hard to say that claim can be substantiated given these results) did this on purpose. However, I do not think that this should be taken as a very accurate picture of the electorate.
There are a few things we can glean from the results:
1.) Democrats, however dissatisfied they might be with the President, are still planning on voting for him in 2012.
2.) Independents that were surveyed are grossly dissatisfied with the job the President is doing.
3.) Obama still got a 50% disapproval rating in this poll, despite clobbering the competition.
No matter how you look at it, it’s going to be a rough road forward for the President. Is the Republican field tough? No. But that might not matter if the GOP does a better job of GOTV than the Dems, who have their work cut out for them.
That poll called me!
It asked a bunch of other weird stuff, too, like if prostitution should be legal. And it just hung up on me eventually–no “thanks for playing.”
PPP oversampling Dems? Surely not!
As far as I can tell, no. If they did, they would probably mention that. Although PPP isn’t as transparent in their methodology as, say, RBI Strategies, so I guess it’s possible. I doubt it though.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mean to rain on C Rork’s parade. I wish that reality matched this poll, but I look at polls objectively, and this one seems more like a Democratic wet dream than a true metric.
that they did automatic corrections for registration bias. BUT, since it is my post, I will put in the leg work of putting in a call/email to PPP this morning asking if they do.
They still oversampled Obama v. McCain.
I’m still not convinced they weighted anything, because that would mean that they weighted the responses to every question except for party ID.
It would be nice if they had weighted it, because then we could tell Colorado Peak Politics to suck it.
Obama won by 8.95%, and they have a +9 Obama favor from people who say they voted in 2008. I stand corrected on that criticism.
Could it be that self-reported party affiliation has shifted since 2008? An awful lot of unaffiliateds are/were disgruntled Republicans. Maybe they’re back on board?
Look at the crosstabs on the Indies. Obama’s at a 56% disapproval rating with them, and it’s a -18 pt spread. That’s brutal.
The question wasn’t “Do you consider yourself…” it said “If you’re D, press 1, if you’re R, press 2” While it’s possible that they just found 9% of Indies who self-identify as Ds, that’s highly unlikely.
Even if that’s what happened, it doesn’t reflect the electorate as it’s currently constituted.
Not me. I’m just commenting on RSB’s statement.
As my dad would say, ‘It doesn’t take a dee-gree’ to figure out that Obama’s in huge trouble.
Look at how completely incompetent he’s looked the last two or three weeks.
When you’ve lost MoDo….
rain on my wet dream parade.
Where is ‘tad wih a Rasmussen showing how, when you compare this to that and the other number, Obama actually trails Romney in Colorado by a gazillion percent?
If you want a good read on what’s going to happen.
Did YOU look at Indies?
So even though they overwhelmingly disapprove of the job Obama is doing, they still see him as the lesser of two evils in any of the matchups polled. Romney is the only one who stands a chance with them, and even then it’s a statistical tie.
Hypothetical doesn’t matter right now. Look at President Obama’s job approval among indies.
I don’t even start paying attention until Ron Paul and his douchebag truther idiot supporters have moved back into the basement.
The election is going to be about the economy, and I cannot imagine a scenario where it improves markedly.
Dems would be much better off concentrating on the House and the Senate. And on reading Hayek and Friedman. Hehe.
The GOP field is weaker than the Dem field in 2004, and look what happened there. Bush’s disapproval numbers were just as high with independents much closer to the election, and he still won because Kerry sucked as a candidate. It doesn’t matter how shitty of a job people think the President is doing if the opposition party runs a truly awful candidate to compete with him.
If I were you, I would start doing everything I could to make sure Romney is the nominee, because he’s the only one who is even remotely competitive.
Christie as a VP for either Romney or Perry is going to be formidable.
Can you imagine a VP debate between Biden and Christie?
People will throw tomatoes at Christie.
At least they can afford to buy those tomatoes now, thanks to Christie.
B’Dump – CH!
Thank you, thank you!
Are you joking? If he ever got the nomination there would be wall to wall ads featuring every daffy thing he ever said or that the crazy ass pastors he chose to stand with at his Christian only “American” Prayer “response” ever said. And there’s an endless supply of those on ad ready video. He’d be a dream candidate… for Dems. And that’s not counting threatening secession.
Also, as I said before, in today’s world no obese asthmatic is ever going to be elected President or be part of a successful ticket. Especially one who committed the cardinal sin of standing up for Muslim Americans. Christie probably couldn’t get through the rigors of a national campaign without being hospitalized. Can you picture Christie having a sweat pouring attack while debating Biden?
(Rush pioneered the off-label use for slimming) and a surprise come from behind victory on “America’s Biggest Loser: Special Edition – Politicos” . . . and, presto! Formidable opponent.
Not their Rick Perry, our Rick Parry, with an ‘A’ for America, with an ‘A’ for Iowa…
This is indeed an interesting experiment in superpacs; a superpac for a fictional character created as a parody. Where will it all end up?
Obama only beats him with indies by 12 points head to head. 🙂 Seriously, though, I know a lot of people who think he’ll be the nominee in 2012. I just don’t think he has that ability to trounce Obama like Romney does.
But he’s still on the same level with Palin and Bachmann as far as being extremely conservative. In this poll, Independents gave him a 41% unfavorable rating to only an 18% favorable. 41% said they didn’t know, so he has plenty of room to work with as far as creating a more favorable opinion of himself.
He does have the fact that he’s not a Mormon going for him, which will probably give him the edge against Romney in the primary, but if you’re looking at a better general election candidate, Romney is more palatable to Independents and moderates.
I think what it comes down to is there is an “anybody but Obama” mindset among Republicans, just like there was the “anybody but Bush” mentality among Democrats in 2004. But with independents, there’s not that kind of galvanizing look at the matchups of who they’ll vote for, because they don’t hate Obama–they just think he’s a shitty President. But they’ll take him over someone they think will be even shittier.
They don’t behave like other interest groups. Essentially outside the usual political common wisdom which presupposes that people will pill together in the face of a common enemy they hate enough. But some TPers hate the GOP establishment almost as much. They could either force an unelectable candidate or go third party in Perot like numbers. On today’s tight electoral scoreboard, it wouldn’t even take a percentage as high as what Perot got when his candidacy elected Bill Clinton.
The Tea Party truly despises Obama. They likely wouldn’t exist were it not for his candidacy and administration.
I agree that they’re erratic and unpredictable, but they’ve already influenced the field so much by their mere presence. There’s really only one candidate in this poll that they don’t like, and he’s already done a great deal of pandering to them. I think in the end they’ll support the Republican, but it wouldn’t surprise me too much if they decided to pull a Palin and go rogue.
Forcing a candidate too extreme to win a general just as good as going third party. They certainly forced Boehner to go with a more extreme plan than he wanted. Also Tea Party isn’t a party. We’re really talking about a collection of various hard to predict Tea Party types and how they will behave in primaries. Some of those types really don’t care about politics and will go for their ideal.
But I think there are far more rank and file Republicans than Tea Partiers. Just because the field of candidates has been formed due to, and will be pandering towards, the Tea Party, doesn’t mean the Tea Party represents the most powerful voting bloc in the Republican primaries.
The disorganization you alluded to in the Tea Party is not nearly so in the Republicans. If they get their GOTV act together, they can be extremely competitive. But you’re right that they do exert an inordinate amount of power for how many of them make up the Republican primary voters.
That’s all I’m saying.
the candidates agree on rules. So, Biden insists that each green room has to have ham and potato salad. Christie never emerges thinking he has already won
Why? Because the economy is going to tank further and Obama will continue to do nothing about jobs. After another year of 17% actual unemployment (probably increased to 22%), people are going to vote “anyone else” because they know Obama won’t try to fix things while Romney might.
That’s a step too far. Romney’s whole agenda will be: (a) cut taxes; (b) repeal the health law; (c) eliminate natural resources and labor regulations; (d) defund any federal agencies doing anything progressive (EPA, NLRB, DOJ civil rights, EEOC…); and (e) appoint heinous judges that will rule for business every time.
To say that Romney might “try to fix things”, you’d really have to believe the problem with our economy is high taxes, high regs, and too many legal victories for progressive causes.
Seriously, Dave? What on earth would lead to anybody “knowing” that?
or Rush, . . . or Fox news, . . . or somebody who they know is knowy.
were all that big on Romney. And we all know Jesus is supporting Perry, at least according to the pastors he invited to his American (meaning Christian only, the rest of us being chopped liver) prayer day.
that the whole purpose of the prayer day was to highlight the fact Perry is not Mormon. If that is the case that is pretty slick of Perry.
I admire Romney’s intelligence. I really do. I just question his honesty like a lot of others.
Don’t know much about Perry, yet.
But for the low information voters in the middle, the ones that decide who wins, I don’t think they know that.
You’re describing TPers.
Among people who ID as “very conservative” in this poll, Romney is one of the only Rs who actually has a higher unfavorable than favorable.
Such is the tightrope walk that awaits the GOP candidates in 2012: they have to appeal to the Tea Party voters who are likely to turn out in droves to vote in the caucuses and primaries, but they also have to appeal to moderates and independents in the general who are starting to really turn on the Tea Party.
when he has a hostile GOP-controlled House and a Senate minority dead certain to filibuster anything he proposes?
Just what should he do?
If Obama and the Dem leadership had started out with jobs as their top priority and using every strong at arm tactic in the book on the Blue Dogs the way the GOP has always successfully brought their few “moderates” to heel from the get go back when Dems had the trifecta, including a 60 strong senate caucus, they wouldn’t be in the weak, please just take my lunch money and don’t hurt me, position they’re in now.
When you start off every negotiation by going three quarters of the way from the center to your opponents side and then give up more from there and fail to get your own troops in line time after time, what do you expect the outcome to be? Why do you think Indies abandoned the Dems they had just elected in droves in 2010? It wasn’t entirely because times had gotten worse but also because the performance of the Dems they had elected in 2006 and 2008 was so pathetic.
Bullies feed on weakness and the public despises it. As they should. Good intentions coupled with impotence aren’t of much practical value. Obama and the Dems didn’t get to this place overnight or through anybody’s fault but their own. Lousy messaging. Lousy discipline. Lousy negotiating.
After the Bin Laden triumph they had a fresh chance with the public and should have learned something. They didn’t. They just pissed away all that political capital and here we are. This hole wasn’t dug in a day.
Well, he certainly shouldn’t wring his hands and do nothing.
Put a jobs bill out there and let the House GOP kill it and the Senate GOP filibuster it.
At least he’d look like he has a plan.
Right now it doesn’t even look like he has a clue.
And spend every minute using the bully pulpit to talk about what is needed and why. FDR didn’t win every battle, but he clearly was fighting for the jobless every day.
Hitler and Hirohito came along to help him with that employment.
and cut the spending. But you’re right, the war pro ovided instant hyped up stimulus. Wars are the very epitome of massive government stimulus spending.
At least they used to be. Unfortunately Bush’s wars didn’t do a thing for the economy except tank it as they were not only the first wars ever fought without raising taxes to pay for them but taxes were actually cut, the war was off the books and entirely charged to our progeny. The only people who benefited were war profiteers.
Thanks for pointing out how successful stimulus spending was back in the day.
They used to raise taxes to pay for wars, too.
Forced massive stimulus spending.
I’m being totally serious.
http://coloradopeakpolitics.co…
they sure called Rollie Heaths’ education initiative dead on, didn’t they ? Regular fucking Nostradomi over there.
Obama beats the Republican candidates with the Indies too. And that has nothing to do with statewide party registration numbers.
I agree with Peak that the toplines are probably flawed, but the crosstabs have a ton of useful information in them. Care to add anything to the discussion other than “Pfft” and repeating what I already said yesterday?