Notable Links



Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

Anti-Incumbent Sentiment Harms Bennet

by: Colorado Pols

Fri Dec 11, 2009 at 14:45:56 PM MST


CQ Politics reports on Rasmussen's latest, our well-documented ambivalence toward early polls notwithstanding:

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) trails his best-known Republican challenger and also is struggling in hypothetical November 2010 matchups against much lesser-known GOP candidates, according to a Rasmussen Reports survey of 500 likely voters on Dec. 8.

Former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton (R) leads Bennet, who was appointed to the Senate in January, by 46 percent to 37 percent. Norton, the best-funded Republican candidate, has the backing of numerous Republican senators and Colorado officeholders.

Even county prosector Ken Buck and former state Sen. Tom Wiens, two other Republicans in the race, are running even or slightly ahead of Bennet despite not being established political figures statewide.

Bennet is suffering from a mediocre public image in his state. The poll said that 39 percent of respondents had a very favorable or somewhat favorable impression of Bennet but that 46 percent had a very unfavorable or somewhat unfavorable feeling. For Norton, the figures are 49 percent favorable and 32 percent unfavorable.

Bennet faces a primary challenge from Andrew Romanoff, a former state House Speaker. Romanoff trails Norton by 11 points and is running about even with Buck and Wiens...

Michael Bennet's favorability rating is more a function of his high appointed-incumbent profile than anything else--he's an easy target for voter's angst, and intense unease on both sides over the congressional agenda, certainly in a primary where a rival is second-guessing you at every step, makes every procedural vote and statement from Bennet stand out disproportionately.

Don't mistake what we're saying for excuse making, of course: Bennet is down by 9 points in this early poll, that's the bottom line. There's no sugar coating, except maybe for fundraising purposes--he's got his work cut out for him, a previously known fact.

One thing these numbers don't show, that said, is anything particularly good for Andrew Romanoff. Romanoff is well known around the state and remembered fondly from his time as Speaker of the House, and should expect positive name recognition--combine that with sympathy for his 'plight' in some quarters, and the fact that he's not the one making the hard votes right now, and his somewhat better overall favorability makes sense.

But even with all that in his favor, Romanoff still loses by a wider margin.

Additional commentary here.
Colorado Pols :: Anti-Incumbent Sentiment Harms Bennet
Tags: (All Tags)


Anti-Incumbent Sentiment Harms Bennet | 54 comments
"loses by a wider margin"
But that "wider margin" is within the margin of error of the poll (+/- 4.5%), thus raising the question: "So what?"

Democrats have an uphill fight against Norton, at this early stage. Which candidate would be stronger?

Comparing voters' opinions of the two Democrats in the race, Bennet scores a net negative 7 points; Romanoff is net positive 9 points. That seems like a significantly bigger difference between them than their relative scores against one of three possible Republican candidates.

So what?
No matter how much David Sirota scumbags Michael Bennet, and how personally likable Romanoff might be, Romanoff still doesn't poll as well as Bennet. There is absolutely no reason for Andrew Romanoff to be running.

That's what.

[ Parent ]
Hmm Rasmussen
Arent' they the same firm that showed Mark Udall losing to Bob Schaffer last time around?

Official pollster for Fox News right?

Take this ALL with a BIG grain of salt.  

Robo dials all done in one day....Republican firm...doesn't release party registration breakdown for respondents...

I wouldn't spend much time trying to read the tea leaves on this one, either for the primary or the general.  

Wasn't there just a diary about Rasmussen up here this week?
And about the fact that their polls aren't always credible?

That said, these numbers this early out are a good wake up call to both Democratic candidates and I would imagine both camps are taking them seriously and recognize that the Dems have a lot of work to do to retain this seat.

On another note, w/in margin of error or not, I'm a bit stunned to see Romanoff down by 11 points, considering his AWESOME name recognition and him being the people's choice and all.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

[ Parent ]
I agree this is a bit early to start worrying for dems
but the fact that Romanoff has 35% unfavorable ratings vs 46% for Bennet must mean something.
[ Parent ]
Indeed.
And those general match up numbers must mean something, too. And frankly, all snark aside, being an incumbent next year (even an Appointed One as you and JO love to remind us) can easily be a detriment, particularly if the economy doesn't pick up.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
Of course it does
It reflects that most people wouldn't know Andrew Romanoff from the czar of Russia.

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy
[ Parent ]
Was name recognition in the Rasmussen poll too?

[ Parent ]
Not specifically
http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

Generally if a pollster doesn't specifically ask whether you recognize the name, the "Not sure" is considered "unfamiliarity." Based on this measure Romanoff is slightly less well-known than Bennet.

Bennet has a 15% unsure, and Romanoff has a 21% unsure rating from the linked poll.

Of course it's Rasmussen, so consider it crap.

I demand that all students get As, that all our oil comes from American soil, that waste and fraud be eliminated forever, and that potato chips stop making me fat!

[ Parent ]
Actually
Rasmussen doesn't say what questions they used, which is important. If you ask people whether they support "Democratic U.S. Senator Michael Bennet," you'll probably get a different response from "U.S. Senator Michael Bennet" which will be different from "Michael Bennet." They don't say how the question was asked. Anyone know what their typical procedure is?

I demand that all students get As, that all our oil comes from American soil, that waste and fraud be eliminated forever, and that potato chips stop making me fat!
[ Parent ]
I noticed that too
Though the chart has "D" and "R" after the names, I can't tell if they were read or not.

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy
[ Parent ]
Methodology is critical
If they don't post the sample size and the geography of the same distribution then there is very little to jusge from thi poll.

judge elected officials by their actions, not by their rhetoric
[ Parent ]
Their sample size is nearly always 500
But they conduct the calls all on one day, which means their sample is highly dependent on external factors affecting response rate as well as the attitude of the respondents. For instance, they're likely to get very different results calling in the middle of a Broncos game, when every call is going to piss someone off, than they might get on a school holiday when the person pushing the buttons might be a junior high school kid.

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy
[ Parent ]
No
Which is a strong reason to ignore any conclusions anyone might make based on this poll.

Most people can't name their current congressperson, let alone the former speaker of the state house from 2 years ago.

Barely half of the voting age public knows that the public option has to do with health care.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/13...

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy


[ Parent ]
You mean Romanoff ISN'T the Tsar?

[ Parent ]
Agreed
As a general warning to get serious, this poll is useful. It's not gospel though.

Here's a topic I want to explore, might diary this over the weekend if I get time. High negatives for Bennet, all this anger from the hard progressive left over health care and Afghanistan. A sense that Democrats will be unmotivated in 2010.

Why? Did Obama promise to quickly pull out of Afghanistan as he did Iraq? Did anyone believe that health care reform would happen without compromise? Did we go to sleep and wake up in a country where 48% of the country doesn't oppose us tooth and nail? What did the Democratic base expect, and what do they think will happen if they let Dems twist in the wind after only two years?

Who built up unrealistic expectations on the part of the left that are now being torn down? I don't think it was Obama, at least not on the two issues above.  But I do hear an awful lot from 'progressive' bloggers and pundits, some of whom have been declaring Obama a failure since before he even took office. And now they're driving Obama's approval down from the left.

Is that the wave that Romanoff supporters hope to ride? If so, what happens if it doesn't work? And how much collateral damage are they willing to do?

Yo quiero gobierno medio!

[ Parent ]
Oh, I hope that diary
because I think you have hit on something that I'm seeing at Daily Kos and Square State (both places of which I rarely blog anymore because of the constant "outrage").

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
write it-
or draft the outline and MOTR and I and others will flesh itout.

You are right, of course.

Obama was always going to be a moderate. Only the right wing talkers (Caplis, Rush, Beck) and the hard left thought otherwise. The talkers because they were laying the foundation and setting up their "just say no" and the hard left "cause they're blinded by ideology and wishful thinking.

[ Parent ]
let it go. Ali Foreman

[ Parent ]
Indeed
In fact, Republican-sponsored polls in the same time frame showed Udall winning. Rasmussen was more favorable to Bob Schaffer than either Hill Research or McLaughlin.

http://www.pollster.com/polls/...

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy


[ Parent ]
Beauprez/Ritter
I also believe that about a week out from the Ritter vs. Beauprez election they had Beauprez leading by a double digit margin?? Didn't they?
[ Parent ]
Quick question
Is Ken Buck still a candidate or has he dropped out? He came up to Estes Park last month for a meet and greet as the "next Senator of Colorado" but I haven't seen hide nor hair of him since.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
He's still running
One interesting thing about Buck - he takes his existing job seriously and it limits his campaign time.

No trees were destroyed in the posting of this comment. But a large number of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.
[ Parent ]
I have a hard time believing
More than 30% of the electorate could even name two candidates in this race. What we're seeing mostly is an anti-Democratic mood. And that to a large degree is driven by the glacial pace of Washington on healthcare and the lack of any action on jobs.

When people are in this much hurt they are not in a mood to hear "legislation takes time" and "the Senate can only handle 1 serious bill at a time." It doesn't matter that the Republicans are the ones slowing it down - we Dems hold everything and so the people expect action and expect it now.

Bennet, Ritter, Markey, and a ton of other Democrats are to a large degree dependent on how fast & effective the Senate is.

No trees were destroyed in the posting of this comment. But a large number of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.

Exactly
and that's an explicit part of the GOP obstructionist strategy. Muck things up enough, slow things down enough, even without proposing viable alternatives, and voter rage at Democrats only builds.

A leader on the battlefield can be a leader in Congress. -- redstateblues
[ Parent ]
Agreed, but
... it's not just Republicans. There have been a few key "moderate" Congressional Dems (and one "moderate" Lieberman) who've been equally complicit in the mucking.

________________________________________

Whenever you see any political ad, ask yourself:

Who paid for this ad, and why?
[ Parent ]
Another hit job on Andrew Romanoff brought to you by Colorado Pols
love,

Sharon Hanson

In fact, I just registered
www.veryliberalagitatedpissedoffpeoplewithnoorganization.com
-Laughing Boy

Right. The whole world is against you
And the grays are members of Obama's cabinet who avoid detection because they are shape-shifters.

Conspiracy theorists are bothersome to me.

This is serious, you commie dolt  --davebarnes, 2012.

[ Parent ]
Man- wtf!
if you ever talk about the grays again, publicly, you're out.  
[ Parent ]
Have you lost your sense of snark?
n/t

This is serious, you commie dolt  --davebarnes, 2012.
[ Parent ]
apparently
I thought your coment was funny-  and I thought I was too.

swing and a miss.

[ Parent ]
I got it
But then I am also mad. Mad in the head. In CO.

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy
[ Parent ]
Just leave
the grays out of it. It doesn't help The Program to leak word prematurely.

A leader on the battlefield can be a leader in Congress. -- redstateblues
[ Parent ]
I wish I WAS being funny
But I actually heard some lady say that on George Noory the other night!

This is serious, you commie dolt  --davebarnes, 2012.
[ Parent ]
Dude.
That's no excuse.

Oh wait- it is an excuse.

Seriously, no more C2C.

And whatever happened to Paul Hill anyway?  Do we find out in 2012?

[ Parent ]
When I can't sleep, it HAS to be C2C
About the only other choices are Jon Caldara (at least from 11 to 1, by which time I'm usually asleep), all-night sports radio, and the trucker's network.  I ain't about to listen to Caldara.  If I'm going to listen to a lunatic, the ones who call into C2C are much more entertaining.

According to Wiki, Paul R. Hill died in 1990.  I assume that's the one you're talking about.

And don't you know there is NOTHING after 2012?

This is serious, you commie dolt  --davebarnes, 2012.

[ Parent ]
I know most of "them" want you to believe that
Hill died in 1990.
Does the name Christopher Pike mean anything to you?

Of course. But sometimes NOTHING is something.
Looking forward to it.

[ Parent ]
There's one other choice at night
Navajo drum music on KTNN, Window Rock, Az.

But I can't understand the DJs.

This is serious, you commie dolt  --davebarnes, 2012.

[ Parent ]
Who is running Bennet's race
I hear it is David Kenney of many failed referendum/issue fame.  He is also the man behind Ritter. Could he go 0 for 2 this cycle?
You heard wrong
Maybe you should sign up for his e-mail list so you can get e-mails from Craig Hughes.

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

BTW, I "adduced" this all by myself, you total fucking assclown.
-Laughing Boy
[ Parent ]
You are lost...
Craig Hughes is certainly NOT the person behind the candidate.  
[ Parent ]
Nothing wrong with David Kenney
He's smart and hard working.  Nobody wins them all, not even, as we now know, Tiger Woods.
[ Parent ]
This poll is good for one thing
Well, I could wipe my ass with it. For all the reasons people have listed, it's nothing to provoke strong reactions either way.

But there is one lesson I personally glean from this poll: Andrew Romanoff is pulling down Michael Bennet. He is preventing Bennet from consolidating his base. And he is doing it for no good reason, because he is no more electable, actually less electable, than Bennet.

Come on, Tsarevitches. Tell me it's not so.

It might be meaningful, and it might not
A Rasmussen poll typically doesn't tell us which way a race is going so much as which way Faux News is trying to push that race.  The only time a Rasmussen poll really has any measurable chance of yielding reliable information is when it's compared and synthesized with other (more reputable) polls. And even then.    



________________________________________

Whenever you see any political ad, ask yourself:

Who paid for this ad, and why?

What a Rasmussen poll typically tells us
Whether the poll is designed that way or just exploited that way, you're right. The NRSC blasted this headline based on the poll this morning:

2010 Colorado Senate: Norton Runs Best Against Democrats

The election is nearly a year away, but right now former Lieutenant Governor Jane Norton appears to be the Republican with the best shot of beating either of the potential Democratic candidates in Colorado's race for the U.S. Senate.

That's what this poll is really about.

A leader on the battlefield can be a leader in Congress. -- redstateblues

[ Parent ]
Yep, they're trying to "clear the field" for Norton
... Because that strategy worked so super with McInnis!  

________________________________________

Whenever you see any political ad, ask yourself:

Who paid for this ad, and why?
[ Parent ]
The primary is not predictable at this point,
and Bennet himself may not be predictable.  What if he decides the US Senate is just not what he expected it to be?  It is a barely-functional body held up nearly entirely in its work by rules that allow a tyranny of the minority (some might say).  What if Bennet decides the creativity (and financial benefit) of the private sector is just a whole lot more fun?  

Stay tuned.

What if this was alll a dreeeeaaammm
It's really December 2008.
[ Parent ]
I am sincerely glad that Colorado Pols is promoting Andrew Romanoff

All along you have been so kind to Romanoff and so dismissive to Bennet and here is one more example of your kindness to Romanoff. You had better be careful Colorado Pols or you will leave the impression you are biased in favor of Romanoff with your audience.

ALL THE FAVORABLE POSTING ON COLORADO POLS FOR ROMANOFF ARE LEAVING THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU FAVOR HIM AS SENATOR; EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW HE WOULD BE THE BEST CANDIDATE FOR THE JOB.

I've got an idea let's post more unfavorable postings for Romanoff. That way the audience will see you don't favor Romanoff. What do you say, Colorado Pols?  

See my post above
And spend less time listening to Coast to Coast.

This is serious, you commie dolt  --davebarnes, 2012.
[ Parent ]
decaf and more protein, less carb.

[ Parent ]
Nice spon Pols
This post should be called "Norton beats Bennet by 9, Romanoff by 11." Any other title is nothing but spin spin spin spin spin
You could drink those tears with a spon
[ Parent ]
Okay, where can I buy that (the holidays and all)?

[ Parent ]
Anti-Incumbent Sentiment Harms Bennet | 54 comments
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?






Advertise Here!
ads@coloradopols.com


Active Users
Currently 4 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Colorado Pols Network


Jeffco Pols
Lakewood Legislators to Host Civil Unions Town Hall on Saturday
Jeffco Pols
GOP HD-22 Candidates to Debate on May 29
Jeffco Pols
Hudak Campaign Kick-Off Tomorrow
Jeffco Pols
  More >

Denver Pols
Pat Steadman, Mitch Morrissey Trade Barbs on SB-163
Denver Pols
Denver's Jeff Shoemaker Honored by White House as "Champion of Change"
Denver Pols
Hide Your Wives and Daughters: Heritage Foundation Rolling through Town next Week
Denver Pols
  More >











RSS 2.0



Pols Gets Mobile: ColoradoPols.com/mobile/

Colorado Pols is on Twitter: twitter.com/coloradopols

Email Pols


How to Write a Diary That Will Make the Front Page



Terms of Use/Privacy Policy



Pols Posting Policies



The Pols Penalty Box



Yard Signs!



The Pols "Mailbag"

Mailbag #1

Relevant Links

The Bell Policy Center

The Big Media Blog

Blog It Right

Blog For Growth

Blogometer

Business Word

Colorado Capitol Journal

Colorado Center on Law and Policy

Colorado Democratic Party

Colorado Ethics Watch

Colorado Independent

Colorado Labor Blog

Colorado Veterans for America

Colorado Legislature

Colorado Lib

Colorado Libertarian Blog

Colorado Media Matters

Colorado Progressive Coalition

Colorado Republican Party

Colorado Secretary of State

Colorado Senate Dems

Colorado Senate GOP

Colorado Young Democrats

Commentary Today

Coyote Gulch

CU Democrats

Curious Stranger

Daily Kos

Dan Willis-Rumors

Dem Notes

Democracy for Colorado

Denver Politics

East Boulder County Politics

Ed Stein Ink

Election Neutrality Now

eleXn

George in Denver

Great Education Colorado

Head First Colorado

The Hotline Political Network

Junction Daily Blog

Left in the West

Liberal and Loving It

Maintain Educational Standards in Colorado

Mount Virtus

MyDD

National Journal

On Call

Peak Dems

Political State Report

Progress Now

Prometheus

Project Vote Smart

Radio Free Denver

Senate Guru

Slapstick Politics

Steam Powered Opinions

Square State

Stygius

TalkLeft

The Thicket

The Hypothetical Wren

ThomasMC.com

Toilet Paper Online

TRACER Campaign Finance

View From a Height

Walter in Denver

Wash Park Prophet

Western Democrat


 
Colorado Pols is wholly owned by Colorado Pols, LLC
webmaster-at-coloradopols.com

Powered by: SoapBlox