« The Allen Website |
| Weenie of the Week 09.23.06-09.29.06 »
I didn't publish this yesterday because I was thinking it was the same as the Survey USA poll earlier this week. This is in fact, a new S-USA poll.
ALLEN 50WEBB 44
September 30, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b13369e200d834b829ec53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference SURVEY USA:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
All I can think is that people must support either the Iraq War or social conservatism so passionately that they're willing to hold their nose and vote for Allen anyway.
September 30, 2006 at 02:05 PM
Really? Thats not the number the poll reflects. Is it not 49 to 44?
And you didn't post another emotional "180 degree change" in momentum? Hmmmmm!
September 30, 2006 at 02:09 PM
A three-day automated poll running from Tuesday to Thursday? No wonder it didn't merit a mention. Any good poll has both weekend and weekday calling to balance out the polling universe.
Not Ben |
September 30, 2006 at 02:11 PM
This poll has no credibility. I don't know why you publish this crap!
September 30, 2006 at 02:13 PM
They claim that Black support is close to 30% which represents an INCREASE since their last poll earlier this month. Are we really to believe that Blacks have increased their support since the revelations about Allen's racism.
September 30, 2006 at 02:15 PM
Allen's own internal polls show him down by 2% points....think about it that is why he is so negative
September 30, 2006 at 02:18 PM
Virginia is for lovers, NOT haters!
September 30, 2006 at 02:25 PM
SUSA is not even sure of their own numbers. Hahaha.
"though "day-to-day volatility remains high... The 6-point Allen lead in today's results may change - but it appears as likely to change in one direction as the other."
September 30, 2006 at 02:28 PM
Webb can get all the free media he wants, I guess, but Allen's paid media is formidable. Webb is getting defined by Allen rather than introduced on his own term. Allen could eat babies, but if the only person who gets to tell the story is Allen, then of course people are going to be told that it's all Webb's fault.
September 30, 2006 at 02:29 PM
You're right. But with the kind of money Webb is pulling in now, look for a major advertising blitz next month.
Webb's people are seasoned pros. They know when to hit back. And with Mo Elleithee producing ads for the DSCC, the combo ad blitz for Webb is going to be doubly powerful.
September 30, 2006 at 02:40 PM
Any Elleithee ouveres on youtube?
September 30, 2006 at 02:44 PM
I'm gonna guess that Allen is around 46 or 47 percent and Webb is around 43-44 percent, if we average those two polls together.
And we have six weeks to go, with more and more 'Allen is a racist' stories by the day, and Allen just going Negative, I think Jim Webb just needs a good statewide television ad that really introduces him more, and then just slams Allen for being from the 'old politics' of division and dissension
September 30, 2006 at 02:50 PM
I agree with you Plunge (and furrycat). The value of TV ads can't be underestimated.
I do have reservations about SurveyUSA's methodology, but one thing that is consistent is Webb's 43-44% support level. It's very likely that there are voters who are oblivious to press coverage, debates, and blogs. This is where mailings, TV, and radio saturation come in. Webb has some money and hand, but I suspect he'll need help from 527s and the national party to put him over the top.
The good news is that money has been pouring in lately. There is also one new Pro-Webb 527s that I'm aware of that is taking a very close look at Virginia (i.e. a newly formed group of scientist who are targetting flat-earth Republicans. George Allen is on their hit list for his opposition to stem cell research--I suspect his lockstep support of the anti-Science Bush administration is another reason).
September 30, 2006 at 02:51 PM
Looks like Allen isn't the only Republican making insensitive comments.
September 30, 2006 at 02:53 PM
You guys keep forgetting that Virginia is not some liberal oasis. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine ran what would be considered in most states a "republican type themed" campaign. They were very bipartisan themed campaigns. If you looked at Kaine's platform it looked very republicanish. For all intents, Webb is running to the left of both Warner and Kaine. In my opinion, this is the biggest difference. I think the marrriage amendment will eventually put Allen over the top this year.
September 30, 2006 at 02:55 PM
Good catch, UVA08 at 2:15. I don't believe SurveyUSA polls.
September 30, 2006 at 02:59 PM
Strange that SUSA shows Webb only 4 points down in Central VA when others show it much higher and 10 points down in Hampton Roads when most polls show it nearly dead even. Also I find it implausible that 26% of African Americans and 75 % of Latinos support Allen given his record on race relations & diversity.
So I question the validity
of this poll.
September 30, 2006 at 03:01 PM
How predictable is this?
Every time a poll comes out that one side doesn't like, they say that it's innacurate.
Virginia Centrist |
September 30, 2006 at 03:04 PM
I've never liked SurveyUSA polls, VC. And I don't see any reason to start liking them now.
September 30, 2006 at 03:07 PM
Damn it, George, I said "I don't like having a head on my BEER" !!!
September 30, 2006 at 03:17 PM
I think in general the polls say this race is very close with Allen having a very slight edge. I think it is crucial for Webb to start matching Allen in TV time and direct mail if he wants to keep it close. Webb will also need help from the Democratic Senatorial Commitee and DNC. The if committes cannot or will not help Webb will be facing an uphill channge even more.
Mo is good people. But "next month" is the last month. And you only get one chance to make a first impression. If Allen gets to make Webbs for him, then there isn't a way to make up for it later.
September 30, 2006 at 03:20 PM
Yeah, it's time for an airstrike on Allentown.
September 30, 2006 at 03:22 PM
This poll is bunk. There probably polled 4 latinos to show Allen at 75% support..
September 30, 2006 at 03:23 PM
"This poll has no credibility."
"This poll is bunk."
"I question the validity
of this poll."
ROFL!! Y'all are so damn predictable. VC has it right. If it's good news, you LOVE the poll, and it's the most reputable in the world, yada yada yada. But if it's bad news, it's a load of crap.
Too funny. Allen always pulls double the minority vote of any other GOP candidate. Add to that Lambert's endorsement, the Black Democratic Caucus keeping quiet (not even going so far as to hold their noses and endorse Webb), and Webb's high negatives with black voters -- Allen is heading into 10-point win territory.
It's all over but the crying. Get your hankies ready.
September 30, 2006 at 03:39 PM
Speaking of predictable, here's i.pub.
September 30, 2006 at 03:43 PM
Pube-lie-to-us, double the minority vote? Whooo. 19 times two is 38, so I guess you're right on that on.
September 30, 2006 at 03:47 PM
IP and others.... would you like to make a bet? I guarantee you that Allen max share among the Black population is 15%. Mason-Dixon said 5% last time so let's see what their cross-tabs say for their most recent poll.
"Add to that Lambert's endorsement, the Black Democratic Caucus keeping quiet (not even going so far as to hold their noses and endorse Webb)..."
Maybe you missed this story: http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-sou--virginiasenate0929sep29,0,76206.story?coll=dp-headlines-virginia
Pay special attention to this part: "Webb's endorsement by the all-Democratic Legislative Black Caucus came more than two weeks after one of its members, state Sen. Benjamin Lambert, shocked and angered the rest of the caucus by endorsing Allen."
"shocked and angered"? Doesn't seem like Lambert represents the overwhelming consensus.
September 30, 2006 at 03:56 PM
Actually, Lambert's endorsement probably backfired because it unified and electrified the Black Caucus. It made them realize that they needed to do something and act quickly. Of course the "n-word" revelations didn't hurt, and the special session for transportation gave them the opportunity to sit down together and talk.
And, while Lambert endorsed Allen, he hasn't condemned Webb: he's called Webb "a good man."
September 30, 2006 at 04:01 PM
Just the fact that the Black Caucus had to vote on Webb says alot. We'll see how much support these guys offer Webb the rest of the way.
September 30, 2006 at 04:03 PM
anon 4:03, lol. "had to vote".
September 30, 2006 at 04:09 PM
The vote was a formality.
Alen never even bothered to ask for the endorsement.
September 30, 2006 at 04:17 PM
Pube-lie-to-us: "If it's good news, you LOVE the poll, and it's the most reputable in the world"
Name me one Webb supporter who was enamored with the Zogby Interactive poll when it had Webb up by several points last time. Some polls are good, some are not. Ones that include no weekend days and do so with an autodialer are more suspect than others. The Zogby Interactive poll, which polls via e-mail is even more of a joke.
Not Ben |
September 30, 2006 at 04:25 PM
Not so sure if George Allen did well with the minority vote in elections before. Let's say he did just for discussion.
You think after hearing the deer story/macaca story/"n"word stories that will continue? bahahahaha
I don't think so.
September 30, 2006 at 04:27 PM
Apparently you missed the newsflash on the endorsement front IPubs, and somehow I DON'T think Allen has 75% Latino support given extensive coverage of his biased remarks.
September 30, 2006 at 04:42 PM
In polling, it’s all about the question(s):
“If the 2006 election for Virginia’s U.S. Senate seat were held today, would you vote for: Jim Webb? George Allen? Gail Parker? Undecided?”
SurveyUSA question (same as earlier poll this week):
“If the election were held today, and you were standing in the voting booth right now, who would you vote for? Republican George Allen? Democrat Jim Webb? Independent Green Gail Parker? Or some other candidate?”
I think it is fairly obvious why the disparity between the two polls. Anticipate Rasmussen’s upcoming poll numbers to clarify Virginia voter preference.
September 30, 2006 at 05:11 PM
Anybody else think the 52% uncertainty on the "amendment" was interesting
September 30, 2006 at 05:28 PM
"Just the fact that the Black Caucus had to vote on Webb says alot. We'll see how much support these guys offer Webb the rest of the way."
Ok, I'll pretend to be our anonymous poster in order to clarify his statement for him: "Trying to pretend that the caucus voting, as it always does, was something out of the ordinary, stupid and dishonest of me, and I'm very sorry that I'm so cowardly and dishonest."
September 30, 2006 at 05:49 PM
I got surveyed by S-USA on Thursday night. They were definitely asking only hot-button neocon issues, with yes/no answers. Are they pre-screening their voter polls?
Denis Lemieux |
September 30, 2006 at 06:02 PM
"Anybody else think the 52% uncertainty on the "amendment" was interesting"
They changed the poll question. See this post for details http://vivianpaige.wordpress.com/2006/09/29/surveyusa-and-marshall-newman-amendment/
Vivian J. Paige |
September 30, 2006 at 06:15 PM
SurveyUSA is limited in what they can ask because they, like Rasmussen, use automated polls. Mason-Dixon uses live polling.
Not Ben |
September 30, 2006 at 06:35 PM
Somebody upthread said that Allen always does better with African-American voters than the usual Republican.
Well, he hasn't faced an election in 6 years, but is this true? Did he get anywhere near 29% in 2000? Or in any of his other elections?
I'm not talking polls, here, I'm talking real and actual votes.
It just seems impossible to me that Allen could actually get 29% of the African-American vote. Now I know the A-team will come back with Lambert, but, seriously? 29 %?
September 30, 2006 at 06:59 PM
LAS, Allen does always do better among African-Americans. This helped against Terry and Robb. It was most evident in a race against Chuch Robb because you had George Bush's totals to compare to.
September 30, 2006 at 07:23 PM
Yes, BS, but where are the numbers? If you don't mind, I'd like to see them myself.
Did he get 29% of the vote in 2000? Really?
September 30, 2006 at 07:32 PM
Wow, several interesting points in SUSA
Among generatrions, Allen's strongest supporters are Gen X'ers, yet they are much weaker in their support of the marrige amendment.
Also, the strongest "sure yes" for the marriage amendment is among Gen Y'ers, yet those smae Gen Y'ers are thr strongest for Webb.
John Dalton |
September 30, 2006 at 07:39 PM
LAS - I just went hunting for actual vote totals by race for the 2000 contest and found nothing. I found a couple of references to polls from that year: an early one showed him getting 31% of the black vote, but the last poll done before the election showed him at 10%.
Vivian J. Paige |
September 30, 2006 at 07:46 PM
Found exit poll that said 18% of blacks voted for Allen in 2000.
Vivian J. Paige |
September 30, 2006 at 07:56 PM
LAS.... I am with you. I dont buy this "Allen does so much better than normal Republicans among Blacks" claim. I took a look at the 2000 election with particular focus on minority-majority or near majority areas namely Hampton, Newport News, Petersburg, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Bruswick, Greenville, Surry, and Emporia. The results?
Robb recieved a larger share of the vote than Bush or Gore in Hampton City, Newport News, Norfolk City, Suffolk, Surry, and Brunswick. In all the others Robb ran no more than 2 points behind the winner. I am just not seeing where people are coming up with this idea that he does so much better among Blacks than the normal Republican. I think a more plausable claim is that the same conditions that shifted the rest of the electorate towards Allen in those elections had a slight affect on the Black community. In other words, the same factors that led whites to vote more Republican had a similar (though not proportionate) affect on the Black voting population as well. This is different, however, from the claim that it is Allen himself that attracts more Black voters.
September 30, 2006 at 07:57 PM
VJP.... do you have a link? How did the numbers look when it came to Bush. Conventional wisdom holds that Black haven't traditionally been as Democratic as Blacks nationwide to begin with.
September 30, 2006 at 07:59 PM
All the links I've found so far are just reports, not polls. Here's the one which refers to the 31% http://loper.org/~george/archives/2000/May/32.html
Here's the 10% one http://loper.org/~george/archives/2000/Nov/097.html And here's the exit poll one http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/va/main.htm
Vivian J. Paige |
September 30, 2006 at 08:09 PM
September 30, 2006 at 08:10 PM
not to bust any bubbles- but do you understand what that poll says about itself? I mean it says that the numbers shifted dramatically from the first day of poll (before the start of this in the msm) to the last - by the last day it was a deadheat.
September 30, 2006 at 10:09 PM
I just found out I'm a member of the "Ggeneration Jones." I have never in my life heard this term. Is this a new way to separate the boomers? Does it refer to "keeping up with the joneses?"
September 30, 2006 at 10:34 PM
"a newly formed group of scientist who are targetting flat-earth Republicans. George Allen is on their hit list for his opposition to stem cell research--I suspect his lockstep support of the anti-Science Bush administration is another reason"
What idiocy and arrogance! Those of us who support stem-cell research without killing human life believe you ought not destroy human life in order to study it. Bush, Allen and most pro-lifers support adult stem cell research, umbilicaly ocrd stem cell research, and even embyonic stem cell research, so long as human life is not destroyed in the process.
Is being against killing-for-research 'anti-science'?!?
To have bio-ethics concerns and to follow bioethics rules is not 'anti-science', and it is insulting and arrogant to suggest it is. it is simply humane to consider it. Now, you can argue those boundaries, and that's a fair debate, but if you want to ignore bio-ethics entirely you could call Joseph Mengeles work 'science' too. Or you can call the majority of AMericans against human cloning or body part harvesting 'anti-science'...
This debate is not pro- or anti-science, but about the boundaries of human life and our consideration of it when we conduct science.
Since science exists to serve humanity, the REAL anti-science position is be bull-headed and pretend the dilemma doesnt exist.
September 30, 2006 at 10:36 PM
I know a member of the House of Delegates, GOP, that was polled just a couple nights ago. This poll is legit! Allen wins 58-42.
September 30, 2006 at 11:21 PM
In the last election, 2004, the most reliable pollster was Rasmussen with SurveryUSA right behind him. Sorry folks, Allen's moving ahead.
Once that 52% learns more about the marriage amendment, expect Allen pick up another 3% to 5%. It's helped every republican candidate when it's on the ballot. Churches are beginning their blitz on the marriage amendment this weekend and will continue very week up until the election. The first calls and literature went out today.
Jane Oldham |
October 01, 2006 at 12:23 AM
jane as I said in another thread- get some therapy. if you think the gay marriage amendment is more important than iraq where men are dying, than terrorism which threatens american lives, than the racist bile of the guy you support- there really isn't anything I can say on the internet to get you to realize how messed up you are. so all i can suggest is get some therapy, and maybe you will figure out whats really emotionally wrong with you.
October 01, 2006 at 02:44 AM
EARN GLOBAL MONEY gives you instant access to a dynamic, scalable, dedicated and responsible development program - a committed to meeting the highest standards, committed to delivering on promises, and committed to ensuring every program success.click here
July 15, 2010 at 02:09 AM
Earning money online never been this easy and transparent. You would www.bestonlineincomeguide.com.For more details and open floodgates to your online income. All the best.
July 26, 2010 at 06:09 AM
Get Genuine Ways To Earn Money Online With Payment Proofs. You Can Learn How To Make Money With Traffic Improvement Tips and make $100 every day .So That You Don't Waste Your Time And Money. !click here for more
KATHERINE MCPHEE |
September 01, 2010 at 03:07 AM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
(URLs automatically linked.)
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address