The Daily Kos has published its poll results for the Nebraska Senate race.
Here’s what they’ve come up with:
Here’s what they’ve come up with:
If 2008 election for U.S. Senate were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Scott Kleeb, the Democrat, and Mike Johanns, the Republican?Now Kos would like to spin this starting with the numbers that show over 60% of Nebraskans have no opinion of Kleeb. (59% have a favorable view of Johanns and 38% have a favorable view of Bruning.) He wants to say that once people learn who Kleeb is, and get to know him…blah blah blah.
Johanns (R) 59%
Kleeb (D) 28%
If 2008 election for U.S. Senate were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Scott Kleeb, the Democrat, and Jon Bruning, the Republican?
Bruning (R) 55%
Kleeb (D) 29%
(Results are +/- 4%)
Nice idea…in a vacuum. But considering that the Republican nominee will also be able to shape himself – not to mention shape Kleeb – these numbers confirm what everyone already knows: a liberal Democrat, with zero experience doing anything, loses badly to either the former Governor or the Attorney General.
Of course the other interesting question is why Kos would bother spending the money involved to do such a poll to find out that a guy who lost by 10% to Adrian Smith, loses badly to a Mike Johanns.
All we can come up with is that Kos (Markos Moulitsas Zúniga) must be smitten with Kleeb and his wife, Fox talking head Jane Fleming. Kleeb was at the Yearly Kos deal and the photo of Kleeb standing in the field of flowers in his jeans makes the Kossack men and women swoon. So, hey, free poll for ya’ll…
We’d post the crosstabs, but the formatting is a headache. So, as much as it pains us to suggest you follow a link to the drivel on Daily Kos, you can click here to find out what you probably already know.
Posts
27 comments:
I'm surprised that Kleeb's numbers were that high in the poll given a vast majority of Nebraskans has never heard of him...even with OWH assistance. It's hard to believe that the NE Dems are so hard up for a credible candidate with some kind of statewide name recognition. I still think they should be talking to Bill Callahan since he's going to have the time available for a long campaign and he's experienced at handling crushing losses.
Mike Johanns is unstopable. The Dems and Brunning should start to face reality. Kleeb should stay on the ranch and continue teaching and Run in 2012. Just imagine how much more experience for serving in the US Senate he will have after a teaching a few more history classes and working part-time on the ranch. He is the Jim Esch of the 3rd district...lol
Did someone pay for this poll? What a waste of money.
59-28 and 55-29 Bruning or Johanns rolling Kleeb like Kansas rolled the Huskers. The Dems would call that a win.
Kleeb is Dreamy!!!!!! Please post more stories on him. I love reading about him in the paper.
Pat Flynn and Chriss Timm would throttle Scott Kleeb too.
--Fred in Minitare
The Dems wouldn't call that a win, a win is when you actually get to take an airplane to Washington every week. They would call that "close", which in their book means anything between 1 and 10 percent. Republicans have just one word for those numbers-LOSER!
Kudos to the editorial board of the World Herald for agreeting with Leavenworth Street comments that the only way two "Democratics" will be representing God's Country come January 2009 is if UNMC received an order to clone Senator Nelson. (and they were able to defy Senator Ashford in actually creating one such soul-less creature).
Check out November 15, 2007 editorial page.
Mr/Madam Street Sweeper - do you think it would be possible to get OWH to agree also that now the only unknown left in this Senatorial exercise is whether Pat Flynn WILL produce his Harley Davidson commercial with spring storms in the background?
Tim Criss - come on, sir - let's roll.
Regards,
Ness
Senor Ness is referring to this 11/15 Editorial cartoon by Jeff Koterba.
-SS
Kleeb needs to take a few lessons on campaigning instead of listening to the far left.
Lesson 1. Run against your opponent not his "supporters". The majority of Kleeb's dollars went to telling how Smith's Supporters hated farmers and yet Smith's record differs from thos accusations.
Lesson 2. Don't tell everyone you are pro-choice, take money from Emily's List and the last week of the campaign have Uncle Ben telecampaign that you are pro-life. Scott --- Nebraskans are not as stupid as you and your hanlers think!!!!!
Lesson 3. Get a record to stand on and get off your eternal "listening tour". (Oh!!! this might not work because you has never had an elected office before where your vote on issues changed peoples lives.)
The numbers tell more than you're letting on. You have to understand statistical polling, and I don't think you do.
Among those that do know Kleeb, 55% of Republicans, 90% of Democrats, and 82% of Independents have a favorable impression of him. Compare to Johanns where 91% of Republicans, 37% of Democrats and 70% of Independents find him favorable.
If you take in past performance, Kleeb does give off a favorable impression as people get to know him. Like it or not, that came out last election. Kleeb has room to move, and he would pull most of the Dems, a majority of Independents, and even pull over some of the moderate Republicans.
Finally, notice the numbers on Bush: 16% of Democrats, 61% of Republicans and 34% of Independents have a favorable impression. Thats for an average of 41% in the state. What's interesting is that the national average for Republicans is 67% approval right now. That suggests that Republicans in Nebraska have a higher disapproval of the President. That can, if it continues, affect Johanns.
Either way, it would be an uphill battle for Kleeb, but the numbers when you know how to look at them, do not suggest he'd be "smushed". That would only occur if the vote were today. It's not.
in the sky,
Lesson 1 and Lesson 2 are contradictory. It's ok for Smith to take money from those he disagrees with but it's not ok for Kleeb? At the very least, the lesson should be "don't be a hypocrite".
I am so sick of hearing that Kleeb "made a good showing" in 2006. Some of us have been around long enough to know a little history.
When Virginia Smith was first elected, she got 50.2% of the vote. Her oppenent got 49.8% of the vote which means she won by a margin of .4%.
When Bill Barrett was first elected, he got 51.1% of the vote. His opponent got 48.9% of the vote which means he won by a margin of 2.2%.
Adrian Smith got 55%, Kleeb got 45%. Smith won by a margin of 10% which is well above the normal amount for that district with an open seat.
I do not understand why the democrats and the media continue to act like Kleeb did something unusual. The unusual thing about that race was that it wasn't closer.
First of all, and most importantly, I’d like to apologize for the word “smushed” which was used in the headline. We were in a rush, and not thinking clearly when we made such a poor choice of words. Much better words would have been “walloped”, “throttled”, “clobbered”, or possibly “karate-chopped”. We promise to do better next time.
Oh, and thanks for that little “stats” primer. And yes, we’re familiar with the concept of “percentages”, but that’s for the re-cap.
However your and others statements that Kleeb would pull “a majority of Independents, and even pull over some of the moderate Republicans”, is patently moronic. Guess what, Scott Kleeb wouldn’t be running against a 32 year old State Senator with zero name ID, and little money. And he wouldn’t be running against a Don Stenberg either.
I'm sure Kleeb is a swell guy once people get to know him. Being a "swell guy" won't translate to votes when you’re running for one of the top offices in the land with no other credentials that qualify you for office. And being swell guy won’t get you too far against a former two term, mayor, two term governor, and Ag Secretary.
Wrap your head around that concept, and maybe you can understand a little better.
As far as your extrapolation on the “favorables”, it's easy to have a favorable impression when you have no record of any sort either. But once Kleeb enters big stage of a Senate race, you can bet the GOP will highlight his very liberal past affiliations and his complete lack of experience (in anything). Those “favorables” will go nowhere but down.
Your “W affecting him” point would be interesting if Bush were on the ballot, but he will not be. However, Hillary WILL (likely) be on the ballot, and WILL be a drag on the Democrat Senate candidate in Nebraska.
Finally, you’re correct, this IS counting as if the vote were today (uh, and note that the headline said “would”, not “will”). Because on Election Day, the smushing of Mr. Kleeb may be much worse.
-SS
anon: don't make Street Sweeper angry. You won't like him when he's angry (or her?).
Can everyone just leave Scotty alone. My boss and I love him and you don't want to make my boss angry!!! Kleeb is so nonpartisan and good looking. If the US Senate was like the nonpartisan unicameral we would have a perfect world. Were rooting for you here in Omaha Scott!!!!
To argue logic with a moron is by some measures moronic. But what else is there to do in a poltical blog?
"Smushed" is a poor choice of words..."Custered" is a more appropriate term. I really don't think Kleeb will run for the Senate seat...he still holds on to the hope of beating Smith.
Why a man asks for campaign contributions and doesn't declare the office he is seeking is beyond me. Is this a common practice for politicians? Maybe for those in office...or who have declared...but this???? Something is not right with this picture.
On another subject...the $30M to give the State Fair Grounds a new face-lift is fine with me as a taxpayer...it's easier on our wallets than any of the other alternatives. I prefer it be funded by something other than taxes...but I can live with the $30M if I have to.
I think you are making more out of this poll than what is there. These head-to-head questions are going to be extremely volatile early in the season, especially when one of the candidates hasn't declared. Kleeb would certainly face an up-hill battle, but few Dems running in state-wide races wouldn't!
The results indicate that a majority of the sample does not have enough information to form an opinion on Kleeb's favorability; however, when the head-to-head questions are posed the number of "no opinions" drop significantly. This does not demonstrate the superiority of Johanns' position, but the ability of respondents to make an electoral choice without information regarding one of the candidates. Regardless, the sub-sample results indicate quite convincingly that this is nothing more than partisan decision making. Party identification always has been, and will continue to be, the dominant factor in determining electoral choice among individual voters.
Maybe.
Except in Nelson v. Ricketts.
Ben Nelson is not a Democrat in the traditional sense so traditional labels for polling assumptions do not apply. Kleeb is a Dem and will not have the ability to win a statewide race. However if Kleeb pulled a Jon Brunning and ran for state legislature and pretended he is a conservative, then he has a chance.
Maybe Kleeb could write liberal opinion pieces for the Daily Nebraskan as well!!!
Miss Jane, just because 55% of the Republican's (which would be all the women) think your Cowboy is "hot", doesn't mean any of us would vote for him!Quit trying to spin the numbers.
With the WGA on strike and nothing but re-runs on, all I can say is: Run, Scott, Run!
This is gonna be good.
Mike in Omaha...
You are absolutely correct...e. Ben is not the traditional Democrat...he is a much larger weasel and he has conservative Nebraskans hoodwinked. He comes home every 6 years smiles...kicks the dirt...throws out a few earmarks and talks the talk. He gets re-elected then goes back to DC and assumes the lock step position. Every now and then when he knows his Party will carry a vote he votes against it so he can say "Look at me."
He said he wasn't for the Dream Act...even posted it on his web-site...then voted to keep it afloat. That's who e. Ben is and everybody votes for him because he is the Great Hoodwinker.
You say Kleeb is "dreamy" and so "good looking".
Thems tall words coming from a man.
one out in the third . . .
It is nice to see you are engaged and attentive to politics. Nelson, who is in "lock step" with the liberals in Congress, receives an A+ rating from the "very liberal" NRA. A further look at his voting record reveals that he supported NARL (pro-choice interests) 0% of the time, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce 83% of the time. Nelson has supported the John Birch society 70% of the time and the American Conservative Union gives him a 64/100.
These numbers are not suggestive of a liberal in conservative clothing, but an actual Republican mascaraing as a Dem. Perhaps you would be better served by learning something about politics before commenting on it.
He's a faithful follower of Brother John Birch...
Does Nelson belong to the Antioch Baptist church? Does he have a commie flag tacked up on the wall in his garage? Did he tear Wallace stickers off the bumpers of cars? Did he vote for George McGovern for president?
The citizens of Nebraska have a right to know the answers to these tough question.
Post a Comment