Notable Links



Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

New Rasmussen Polling on Senate Race

by: Colorado Pols

Fri Mar 05, 2010 at 12:05:29 PM MST


Rasmussen Reports is out with new poll numbers on Colorado's U.S. Senate race.

As we've said over and over, head-to-head polling (of general election voters) matching up candidates from different parties is virtually meaningless at this point in the race. Probably 95% of voters aren't paying any attention whatsoever right now, so polling today is basically asking people their opinions about two people they don't know anything about. Matchup numbers today will look completely different in three months once the candidates start advertising heavily -- that's when these numbers will tell us something meaningful.

For example, this poll shows that Republican Ken Buck would beat both Democrats Michael Bennet and Andrew Romanoff in a head-to-head race. But as you'll see below, basically only 22% of voters even know anything about Buck. What this really means is that "unknown Republican" beats "unknown Democrat," but given the recent anti-incumbent trends, we already knew that.

The only numbers worth looking at this early in a race, which Rasmussen acknowledges, are those that show "very favorable" and "very unfavorable" ratings; in order to have a "very" favorable or unfavorable opinion of someone, you probably know something about them. With that in mind, here are the "very" favorable/unfavorable numbers:

VERY FAVORABLE
Jane Norton: 21%
Andrew Romanoff: 17%
Michael Bennet: 16%
Ken Buck: 12%
Tom Wiens: 11%

VERY UN-FAVORABLE
Ken Buck: 10%
Tom Wiens: 11%
Andrew Romanoff: 19%
Jane Norton: 21%
Michael Bennet: 26%

What does this mean? It looks like a pretty clean slate all around. Nobody's "very unfavorables" are too bad (and nobody has great favorables, either) which says that there isn't a huge hurdle for any candidate to overcome. Back in 2005, then-Rep. Bob Beauprez had very high unfavorable ratings more than a year before the election for governor, which portended an uphill climb for Beauprez; for obvious reasons, it's hard to get people to change a negative opinion about you.

Without seeing detailed results, it's hard to know how much of Bennet's unfavorables are because of him personally or because of a negative attitude towards incumbents generally. The most interesting number is Norton's 21% "very unfavorable" rating; do people dislike Jane Norton, or do they dislike some other Norton? There must be some "Norton confusion" here, because when you add up both numbers, she is as well known as the incumbent Sen. Bennet. Elsewhere, we don't see anything noteworthy about Romanoff's numbers, good or bad, and Wiens and Buck remain a mystery to voters.
Colorado Pols :: New Rasmussen Polling on Senate Race
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)

Share this post:

New Rasmussen Polling on Senate Race | 51 comments
Twistin' in the Wind
Whoa! Talk about spin!

Let's read Rasmussen's lead paragraph on this poll:

Colorado's race for the U.S. Senate is considerably tighter this month, especially if Democratic incumbent Michael Bennet isn't in the race.

Ok, that isn't really palatable for BennetPols.com. Understood. But let's take another look at the "veries:

NET veries--Very favorable minus Very unfavorable:

Bennet: minus 10
Romanoff: minus 2
Norton: zero (16% for both very fav. and very unfav)

Interesting number, that 2. In the overall poll, it's Norton 44 Romanoff 42, versus Norton 48 Bennet 39.

Seems the "veries" margins and the overall results are basically in line!

Read it yourself: http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

Correction
Norton is viewed very favorably by 21% and very unfavorably by the same number (21%).

[ Parent ]
Facts Remain the Same
Bennet has the funds to better his numbers and AR does not. Do you know how much AR has in his  coffer??

Also, sometime I wonder about Rasumussen polls since they are known to lean left. Could they possibly be trying to help AR in these polls so that it forces a bloody primary? Gotta wonder...

[ Parent ]
Rasmussen leans right

KOS leans left and showed Bennet winning in the last 2 weeks.

OFA polls have Norton by 3 over Bennet.

judge elected officials by their actions, not by their rhetoric

[ Parent ]
Meant to say Rasmussen leans right

[ Parent ]
thanks for writing this RSB.

This quote however,
we don't see anything noteworthy about Romanoff's numbers

First, whose "we"? Are you officially with the campaign, or did you mean "we" as in Bennet supporters?
Second, the fact that Romanoff is only down 2 points - within the margin of error, while Bennet is still down 9 is significant.
I am glad that they both have risen 5 points, but an objective viewpoint is that Romanoff is the stronger candidate.

As for the claim about Bennet's money, all the money in the world won't matter if he does not make it out of the Primary.

[ Parent ]
correction, i saw RSB's diary and thought
Pols front paged it.

"we" = Colorado Pols.
Interesting - Colorado Pols doesn't see anything noteworthy about Romanoff's numbers - so you know, even though he is polling stronger than Bennet vs Norton, Bennet remains 8-1 and Romanoff will remain 20-1. That's how Colorado Pols sees things - illogically.

[ Parent ]
Dude, relax, read slowly
We said there was nothing particularly noteworthy about Romanoff's favorable/unfavorable numbers. Overall they aren't good or bad.
[ Parent ]
trust me, i am relaxed
and looking forward to the outcome of this race.
[ Parent ]
You're Being Ridiculous
As for your claim...

As for the claim about Bennet's money, all the money in the world won't matter if he does not make it out of the Primary.

You obviously aren't being realistic here or else you don't give a damn about keeping this seat blue. What part of "you need to raise big dollars to win a Senate seat" don't you understand? Pretty stupid comment

[ Parent ]
so you are saying what?
that if Romanoff wins the primary the DSCC won't support him financially?
[ Parent ]
Wade, serious question here:
Do you think it's up to the DSCC to raise Romanoff's funds for him by dumping millions of dollars into a race that he himself cannot fund raise enough to finance so far?

And if I remember correctly, and I do, Romanoff has already indicated he will not accept DSCC monies because of his stance regarding PACs so isn't your question a mute point?

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

[ Parent ]
You forget that our country is in a depression
Romanoff will be successful in the primary. But if Bennet should win the primary he will not win in the general because with all his showboating he still has accomplished nothing except collecting money from the banks and Wall Street. His inexperience and opportunistic politics are shining through and the voters in Colorado see this for what it is.  
[ Parent ]
And on a related note...
[ Parent ]
ok, that's a fair question
and it is true that the DSCC's job is to support D candidates, whether they accept the help or not.

i will ask this though -
if Bennet loses the primary, what happens to the millions he raised?

[ Parent ]
Got me. Good question.
Conversely, what happens if Romanoff loses? What happens to the hundreds of thousands he's raised?

I will mention this, Wade, because I know you have been on campaigns so there's no point in us pretending to be naive here--if Romanoff wins the primary and has little money going into the general, the DSCC isn't going to dump into a race for a candidate that couldn't finance his own campaign and is going to go dark 3 weeks before election day. You know it. I know it. The DSCC knows it. The DCCC knows it. And they do it all the time--thus the diaries on Daily Kos begging people to put in a plug for their candidate to convince these committees to pony up for their candidate. Romaoff has to prove he can raise the kind of money it takes to win a race this size (think Udall's $15 million race.)

And don't you find it hilariously ironic that Bennet gets shit for raising money out of state and Daily Kos BRAGS about how much out of state money the progressives are raising for Blanche Lincoln's primary opponent? Oh, the irony. The irony. The irony. The irony.

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

[ Parent ]
BIG DIFFERENCE
Bennet raises money from the likes of Wall Street and the banks - corporate money if you will while Daily Kos raising money for progressive candidates from progressives.  

Nice try though but Bennet's connections with the banks and Wall Street is not going to help him in this election.  As for your other point about Romanoff don't you think where he is going to win the primary you should start contributing to his campaign?  

[ Parent ]
...
[ Parent ]
so you are saying that
if Romanoff wins the primary, the White House, the DNC, the grassroots, and the DSCC are not only not going to give money to him to beat an extreme right republican, but they are going to purposely not fund him, because it would be a waste?
that's a pretty defeatist attitude.
and Sharon is right, fellow conservadem raises most of her money from PACs and corporations (who are out of state) and Halter's donations are small dollar individuals, just like the kind that elected Barack Obama.
[ Parent ]
Irony wasn't the word that came to my mind.

[ Parent ]
say wha?!?!
look, I think this poll gives Romanoff supporters such as yourself reasonable cause for celebration, and there's an electability argument to be made against Bennet (not that I would necessarily say it's compelling, but I think Bennet supporters like myself should recognize that numbers like these provide at least some warrants for such an argument).

However to suggest that a correlation in favorability differentials with support differentials means that the support differentials are meaningful in any way at this point is ridiculous. I can think of no methodological reason that would justify such a claim. If you have one, please explicate it, I would be thrilled to hear it, but correlation does not equal causation and these questions are measuring two different aspects of the race with different implications/meaning at this point.

By all means, I think you are right to harp on Romanoff's better net favorables, but let's not overly distort facts, ok?

"If someone just sticks to shutting the fuck up, can they still go outside and play a game of hide and go fuck yourself?" -- Fidel's Dirt Nap


[ Parent ]
We've always said the same thing about polls
We said the same thing about the Hickenlooper/McInnis poll last month. We don't put much stock in any head-to-head polls that measure hypothetical general election matchups -- not just this poll. It's not a big anti-JO conspiracy.

Those head-to-head results don't mean anything until the candidates all start advertising heavily, because 95% of voters don't know who any of these people are. If you add up the total very favorable/unfavorable numbers, nobody even breaks 50. Two of them (Buck and Wiens) are barely above 20. Voters don't know any of these candidates.

You can discuss net favorables if you'd like, but the reason we don't bother is because they are all so low. Ken Buck has a net favorable of +1, but barely 20% of respondents even have a solid opinion of him, so who cares? That means nothing.  

[ Parent ]
The margin of error
on net favorables is in the stratosphere. It's meaningless to say one candidate is "minus 2" and another "minus 10" and think that means anything. Especially not for candidates who have never run statewide before (on their own, since Norton did when she was Gale and when she was Bill's No. 2).
[ Parent ]
Opinion?
Is the following sentence from the second paragraph your opinion or based on empirical evidence: "As we've said over and over, head-to-head polling (of general election voters) matching up candidates from different parties is virtually meaningless at this point in the race."

I actually don't know because I haven't looked at the numbers over a substantial period of time for a sufficient number of races around the country. However, I'd like to know, so, if possible, please give us the numbers that brought you to this conclusion. Thanks.

My Poll Results
My poll results are completely different.  That's odd since I pulled them out of the same place Rasmussen did.

There is no point in wasting time with an invalid polling institution, not to mention the early point in this race.

Back to nap-nap.  

ITLDUSO  
Honk hello when you see my license plate!

you have your own poll?
that was meant to be snarky (if not, then just, you know, wow!), because your dismissal of this information is no better than AR supporters dismissing Bennet's very relevant fund-raising numbers. I support Bennet as well, so I'm hoping that his supporters don't stoop to JO and Sharon Hanson's level of just dismissing whatever they like instead of actually engaging credible arguments where they exist. When all candidates and supporters disregard actual differences, we're forced to focus on the unimportant ones, and that does no one any good.

"If someone just sticks to shutting the fuck up, can they still go outside and play a game of hide and go fuck yourself?" -- Fidel's Dirt Nap


[ Parent ]
Without having seen them,
there are better polls with more useful data.

And I'm not claiming caroman has seen them either, but I think he can Pols are right. Pols with solid methodology and large numbers can be useful when they ask the right questions of the right people.  Neither Rasmussen nor R2000 have done that.

[ Parent ]
These are the first truly good numbers for Romanoff
Does anyone know why Rasmussen has not done a poll on the respective primary races?  
They're not getting paid to poll the primaries

[ Parent ]
Who is paying for these polls?

[ Parent ]
Good Question BTR, Anyone know??

[ Parent ]
Does it matter why?
Without seeing detailed results, it's hard to know how much of Bennet's unfavorables are because of him personally or because of a negative attitude towards incumbents generally.

Seriously JO? You don't know the answer to this?
If the bulk of Bennet's unfavorable rating is just a reaction to him being an incumbent, that means he can quickly move those numbers and pick up support.

But if the bulk of the unfavorables stems from a genuine dislike of Bennet the person, then those numbers will be very hard to change.  

[ Parent ]
Norton is in a similar situation
Do people not like Jane Norton? Or do they not like one of the other well-known Nortons that have been active in Colorado politics?

If respondents know exactly who Jane Norton is, and they still don't like her, then that's a lot different than if they said they don't like her because they think she's Gale Norton. You can fix the latter, but it's harder to change a solid opinion like the former.

[ Parent ]
That was the most obvious thing in the poll to me
Over two months of polling, Norton is flat to declining.

Today, you're either going to get better or you're going to get worse, but you're never going to be the same.  Which one will it be?  --Joseph V. Paterno
[ Parent ]
IF there is a generalized sense of disgust,
disillusion, or dislike of incumbents, based in the current case on the seeming inability of the Senate in particular to get much done--regardless of the role or non-role of any one incumbent--then it's far from obvious to me that Bennet "can quickly move those numbers and pick up support." How does he do that? What's he waiting for?

I would think it even harder for an "incumbent" like Bennet who doesn't have a long record of favors for Colorado constituents to point to, which would be the usual advantage of incumbents. Ergo, Bennet suffers the worst of both worlds: object of anti-incumbent sentiment, but not a "real" incumbent with a record to fall back on.

I realize that Bennet is trying to establish a record of running against the Washington establishment, such as drafting legislation to overturn the Senate rules--a gesture that seems fairly transparent--and unlikely to make any dent in the problem--as I observed here the other day.

Perhaps there are past examples of an era of general disgust with incumbents, a sense of "throw the bums out" in which approval of Congress is in the 20% range at best, in which an incumbent quickly overcome his/her incumbency. I'd be interested in knowing what election that might be. I'll keep an open mind on the subject.

I would make a similar observation about fund-raising. Sure, funds buy advertising, robo-calls, etc. But in Bennet's case, they also carry the burden of having come from corporate PACs and from out of state (including a healthy portion from DC)--a potent argument for an opponent, such as Brother Romanoff, in an era of anti-Washington sentiment.

[ Parent ]
Addendum
In the words of the Rasmussen poll:

Adding to Bennet's problems is the belief by 60% of voters in the state that it would be better for the country if most congressional incumbents were not reelected in November. Just 21% believe their representative in Congress is the best person for the job, and only 29% think that person deserves to be reelected.

[ Parent ]
Like most of you
I want this seat to stay Democratic. I have met Bennet 3-4 times. I have tried to like the man for all the reasons that have been mentioned here ad nauseum. I can't make myself do it. If he wins the primary, I will hold my nose and vote for him, but I will not work on his campaign.
[ Parent ]
Looks like that Fox News appearance has paid off!

The overall numbers actually seem to be good news
for our Democratic candidates. Their numbers are steadily ticking upward while they close the gap with Norton. No matter who you support in the primary on the Dem side, this poll is fairly good news. That's if you trust Rasmussen. Unfortunately, I don't because of their past track record.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
That's what I took from it too
All I know is that Republicans will still point to the fact that all the Republicans beat the Dems, but that is going to be tougher, if not impossible, to say should the current trend continue.
[ Parent ]
Both Romanoff and Bennet have moved up 5 points
[ Parent ]
Has anybody looked at other state polls
In states where the incumbent is a Republican, is the GOP candidate doing as poorly in a hypothetical matchup? Are the anti-incumbent sentiments nationwide intact for all incumbents, or is it only for Democrats since they are seen as the "incumbent party."  
[ Parent ]
I've seen a couple of polls on Daily Kos
and it seems to be for all incumbents, not just Dems. Senators seem to be doing far worse than House Reps, mostly because I think House members are seen as actually doing something while the Senate appears to be where good legislation goes to die.

BTW, most Democratic incumbents in tough races are getting creamed and their numbers are going down, not up like in this race.  

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

[ Parent ]
Here's a pretty good overview:
http://www.realclearpolitics.c...

Conventional wisdom seems to be that both the House and Senate are in play for Republicans this year, with 23 Democrats and 10 Republicans up for election in the Senate. If they make big gains this year, it's conceivable that they could reach a super majority in 2014.

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

[ Parent ]
Here's a much better read
[ Parent ]
ColoradoPols
should adjust the Big Line.

Who is Dean Madere in CD4? Who is Lang Sias in CD7? And how the hell could these guys be at 14-1 and 17-1 in their races when AR is 20-1 in the Senate race? Come on now. Atleast give AR 15-1.

I am still uncommitted/undecided in the Senate primary, but, that line doesn't even pass the straight face test.

Still think you are a bit too tough in the CD2 Big Line comments. JP has been the most visible Congressman in Colorado by far.  

MOTH you've increased your vocabulary
now you have "piss", "shit", "fuck" and "blow me".  Bravo!
Okay, your obsessive crush on me is bordering on creepy.
[ Parent ]
oooooh! MOTR! Sharon Hanson
made you upset!
[ Parent ]
Yes, I do find stalkers a little creepy.
[ Parent ]
New Rasmussen Polling on Senate Race | 51 comments
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?






Advertise Here!
ads@coloradopols.com


Active Users
Currently 6 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Colorado Pols Network


Jeffco Pols
Summers, Kerr to Host Joint Town Hall on Saturday
Jeffco Pols
Joe Coors Announcing CD-7 Run Today
Jeffco Pols
Roybal Fined for Wiechman Loan
Jeffco Pols
  More >

Denver Pols
Poll: Who Will Win the HD-1 Primary?
Denver Pols
Hancock Rolls Out Economic Development Plan
Denver Pols
Michael Hancock Wades into ASSET Debate
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 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 Bell Policy Center

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