Talk about whiplash. Yesterday (see about 5 posts below) you post saying everything is going wrong for the GOP and things look very bleak. Then you have this post saying things are looking pretty good. Make up your mind.

This should help.

Poll: NY Dems could win all top posts

Led by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and state Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Democrats could be positioned for an electoral sweep in New York that would leave them in control of every statewide elected office for the first time in more than six decades.

Despite overwhelming voter enrollment advantages, the lengthy runs of Republicans Thomas Dewey, Nelson Rockefeller and now George Pataki as governors, and Jacob Javits and Alfonse D'Amato as senators have kept Democrats from holding all statewide offices since 1942.

But the first post-primary statewide poll, out Monday from Siena College's Research Institute, reported that Spitzer is maintaining a huge lead — 72 percent to 21 percent — over John Faso, a former state Assembly minority leader, in the race to replace Pataki.

Alexander's concerns yesterday had to do with the Senate specifically. I am curious about whether or not this latest poll in any way changes the outlook for the Senate.

Thanks for the link AKM-

Some senators should take a look at this-

Would you be more likely to vote for a candidate for Congress who supports President Bush on terrorism, more likely to vote for a candidate who opposes President Bush on terrorism, or would that not make much difference to your vote?

Likely Voters-

Supports Bush on terrorism-

45%

Opposes Bush on terrorism -

28%

Not much difference -

26%

No opinion-

1%

2006 Sep 15-17

Every area of NY currently led by a democrat is a total disaster. Hillary the Weasel has not produced 1/10 of what she promised to her district. It is one of the few areas in the United States with a net job loss. So what do the dummies do, reelect her. Need further proof that all democrats are retarded or that all retards are democrats? Even a dumb hillbilly criminal from Ark. is smarter than anyone in NY. At least that's what the voters in NY say.

Base to Bush: Stay on offense. It's working!

Ken

Is Sen Menendez trying to lose the seat in NJ? Not only is he running an anti corruption ad filmed in a court room (where he is likely to be in different circumstances soon) but yesterday he has the proven liar and slanderer Joseph Wilson campaigning for him. I know we are stupid in NJ but that dumb? I don't think so.

I like these numbers! After yesterday's Rasmussen results on those three Senate races, this news is a welcome ray of hope. It will be interesting to see which source - Gallup or Rasmussen - is experiencing a down time right now. I can't imagine both scenarios are playing out coincidentally for real. At least one of them has to be overstating.

Mr. McClure,

Always find your stuff interesting, especially the federal level polling.

Have a question. Maybe you can tap into as an article to post. First the preamble.

Pollsters almost invariably use the telephone to polling purposes, especially those 'quick polls' covering the weekend readout. There is a structural bias I believe in using the phone for such purposes:

1) The demographics would tend to lean to those of a less technological bent. ie an older population trend. Most of the younger generation has gone cellular which can't be polled.
2) Since the younger generation is not based on landline phones they are underrepresented in any blind polling that occurs.
3) Any cellular users that are polled were willing and so the results are positive to the basis of the questions posed.

So the question. Has anyone looked at how communication technology shifts have skewed polling results over the last 20 years?

Thanks!

It's not that we are "dummies" in NY, just that Pataki was voted in as a real Republican and got pulled to center by the Albany political machinery. Faso has a tough hill to climb in gaining statewide recognition and in re-selling the GOP to jaded constituents. Clinton only got 55% of the vote over a last minute fill-in candidate for Giuliani in 2000 - she spent a pile of money in that campaign. Money that she received from national donors, not NY'ers I might add.

Unfortunately, John Spencer is not well known and has not increased his exposure over the summer once he became the only candidate for senator for the GOP. The state GOP screwed up massively by supporting Jeanine Pirro in the spring, who was a disasterous candidate, over the wishes of Rove, etc. who were supporting Ed Cox. Cox would have made an excellent candidate, but pulled out when Pirro received the endorsement of the state GOP - we can also thank our hapless governor for that loss.

The state party is in disarray, but right now the focus for NY'ers is getting the state back on economic track. Clinton coasts on lack of attention more than anything else.