Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Republican voter intensity could sway 2014 mid-term elections

Republican voter intensity could sway 2014 mid-term elections

Remember November

http://youtu.be/ABVmx24chnU

The Politico/GWU Battleground 2014 Poll has been released.

Guy Benson at Hot Air has the details, including a 4 point Republican advantage on the generic ballot.

Battleground Poll 2014 Generic Ballot Chart

But one particular aspect could be more important than any: Voter intensity, reflective also of a massive 16 point generic ballot lead in states with closely contested Senate elections:

The vote intensity of Republican voters is strong – a net twelve-points more than their Democratic counterparts. Overall, sixty-two percent (62%) of voters say they are extremely likely to vote in the November elections. However, Republicans (69% extremely likely) outpace Democrats (57% extremely likely). In fact, this intensity advantage exceeds where Republicans were in the September 2010 Battleground Poll.

In addition, Republicans hold a four-point advantage (46%-42%) on the generic Congressional ballot. In states with a competitive US Senate race, Republicans hold a sixteen point advantage (52%-36%) on this generic ballot. Not only are Republicans getting stronger support on the generic ballot from “hard” Republicans (93%) than Democrats are getting from “hard” Democrats (89%), “soft” Republicans are voting a net sixteen-points stronger for the generic Republican on the ballot than “soft” Democrats are voting for the generic Democrat. By any measure, Republicans are fired up and ready to deliver victories to their candidates in November, with of the strong backing of Independent (+15-points) and middle class voters (+11-points).

I haven’t seen any Remember November videos in this cycle. Perhaps they’re not needed to motivate Republicans this time around.

This is from October 2010:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

It was my understanding that Scott Rasmussen was summoned to the White House earlier this year, after reporting a disapproval rating for Obama of -24, but I can find no link to any story. Does anyone here recall that?

Odd, isn’t it, that with the country and world falling further apart since then Obama’s ratings on Rasmussen have never gone that low.

Polls defy common sense these days.

“It was my understanding that Scott Rasmussen was summoned to the White House earlier this year”
****
Unlikely. Scott Rasmussen was forced out of the company in July 2013. Rasmussen Reports had the reputation of being “R” biased now appears to have “D” bias.

    That is disappointing. Rasmussen was my “go to” when I wanted to check current polling.

    creeper in reply to SHV. | September 4, 2014 at 8:44 am

    Thank you, SHV. This explains a lot. Rasmussen’s numbers seemed to start veering away from reality right about the time you cite. Today, they simply make no sense. If Barry’s performance was worthy of a -24 six months ago, how can that number not be worse today?

    I just deleted my Rasmussen bookmark. No more opening the page in anticipation of -24, only to find them reporting -12.

Those polled likely felt like they were deciding between:

1) Cyanide
2) Electrocution
3) Undecided

if the choice is between a demonrat and a RINO from the GOPe, what’s the difference?

me, since i live in #Failifornia, will be voting for the worst choice i’m given, since trying to talk sense to the willfully st00pid is a waste of time.

maybe once it gets painful, they will be more inclined to actually think.

    platypus in reply to redc1c4. | September 3, 2014 at 1:24 pm

    Unlikely. More pain simply would increase demand for more painkillers, courtesy of taxpayers.

    Stopping the cause of their pain is above their paygrades.

    pablo panadero in reply to redc1c4. | September 3, 2014 at 2:18 pm

    Keep in mind that the “whoever holds the gavel holds the power”. Thus, even if you vote for the most conservative Democrat, they will put the gavel in the hands of their leadership, which is always more liberal/progressive.

    Democrats learned this lesson in 2000 and applied that in “swing” districts in 2004-2008. This allowed them to get majorities in the House and Senate, and put the gavel in the hands of Pelosi and Reid.

    There is an old saying in horse racing: “Never bet on the horse, bet on the jockey.” That is because the good jockeys get the good horses. Remember that person with the gavel is akin to the jockey in this analogy.

I’m supposed to get excited about the party that declared open war on me and mine during the primary season? Not likely.

And I’ll be here for the next primary season, and the next and so on and so forth. I am excited about that…

The fact is Republicans hadn’t overtaken Democrats in the generic congressional ballot by this time in 1994, and that turned out pretty well. And by this time in 2010, we had just pulled even.

Traditionally, even “likely” and “certain” Democratic voters are less likely to show up than Republicans who give similar responses. But then, they are generally undependable people.

Only Obama has been able to excite the lowest-turnout groups, blacks and young people. He’s not on the ballot, and it seems that at least young people are giving up on him now, too. They aren’t running to the GOP, but that’s okay. They don’t really have the experience to make intelligent decisions about public policy. As long as they aren’t blindly voting for Democrats, they serve us better.

Now, if we can only keep the idiots in the Republican party from staying home or voting Democrat out of spite because the Republican candidate on the ballot didn’t satisfy their 200-point purity test…

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend