Polling Overview: U.S. Senate

Ryan Allesi has catalogued and compared all the recent polls for the U.S. Senate race. They are remarkably similar, except for the partisan PPP poll. The bottom line is that Rand Paul is winning and can win if he refrains from getting all wild-eyed and talking about obscure constitutional provisions and statutes:

U.S. Senate race of Rand Paul, the Republican, against Jack Conway, the Democrat:

• SurveyUSA Courier-Journal-WHAS Poll (7/30) Paul 51% to Conway 43% with 5% undecided
• cn|2 (7/22) Paul 41% to Conway 38% with 19% undecided
• Rasm. (7/20) Paul 49% to Conway 41% with 10% other/not sure
• PPP (6/30) Paul 43% to Conway 43% with 14% undecided
• Rasm.(6/28) Paul 49% to Conway 42% with 9% other/not sure.

Rasmusson Shows GOP Leading in Senate Race

A new Rasmusson poll shows that Kentucky voters prefer the Republicans -- Trey Grayson or Dr. Rand Paul -- to the Democrats -- whether the nominee is Jack Conway or Dan Mongiardo. That is, now matter who wins either primary, Republicans win the general.

For Republicans, the closest match-up would be Grayson v. Mongiardo; Grayson wins 44-37 and "some other candidate" gets 8 percent. The best margin for Republicans is Grayson v. Conway; Grayson wins 45-35.

Paul beats either Democrat by a slightly higher percentage than Grayson due to variable "some other candidate." Whereas Grayson beats Mongiardo 44-37, if Paul is the candidate, Republicans wins 49-35. Likewise, Grayson beats Conway 45-35 but Paul wins over Conway 46-38.

H/t: Joe Arnold

Senate Poll Looks Good For Grayson

The Daily Kos (via Page One) has a new poll on Kentucky's U.S. Senate race, and Secretary of State Trey Grayson must be pleased:

In the Democratic primary, Dan Mongiardo beats Jack Conway 37 -30; "other" polls 15. For the life of me, I do not understand why Democrats prefer Mongiardo; I can only attribute this to hostility to Conway's hometown, Louisville.

For Republicans, Grayson beats Dr. Rand Paul 40 -25; "other" polls 18. This is a weaker showing for Paul than the last SUSA poll. This race may well tighten when Paul starts to spend some of the proceeds from his "money bomb."

In a general election race between Mongiardo and Grayson, Grayson wins 45 - 41. If Grayson opposes Conway, Grayson's lead improves to 46-40.

If Rand Paul wins the Republican nomination, Mongiardo wins 42 - 37 and Conway wins 41 - 37.

Therefore, at this point, Grayson looks like the GOP's best candidate for keeping this seat.

The poll has a four percent margin of error and was taken August 31-September 2.

Poll Shift: More Americans Pro Life Than Pro Choice

For the first time since pollsters have asked the question, more Americans say they are "pro-life" than "pro-choice." A new Gallup poll revealed that the margin is not all that close: 51-42 percent.

I have maintained that technology eventually would cause those who are pro-choice to rethink their position. As someone who distrusts government generally, I can understand the desire to keep reproduction private -- the government is as ill-equipped to meddle in the bedroom as it is in the marketplace. That reasoning falters the first time one hears the sound of a baby's heart beat just a couple weeks after conception. And the image of a baby sucking its thumb on a sonogram makes it hard to dismiss this as a fetus or a choice.

But this is a polling shift that occurred over the course of one year; something else is at play besides fetal heart rate monitors and sonograms. The change is as sudden as it is profound:

The new results, obtained from Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs survey, represent a significant shift from a year ago, when 50% were pro-choice and 44% pro-life. Prior to now, the highest percentage identifying as pro-life was 46%, in both August 2001 and May 2002.

Is the election of our first pro-choice president in years the cause of the shift? Or his demand that taxpayers subsidize abortions for poor people (even though the U. S. Supreme Court held that there is no constitutional right to such a subsidy)?

Gallup writes

With the first pro-choice president in eight years already making changes to the nation's policies on funding abortion overseas, expressing his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, and moving toward rescinding federal job protections for medical workers who refuse to participate in abortion procedures, Americans -- and, in particular, Republicans -- seem to be taking a step back from the pro-choice position. However, the retreat is evident among political moderates as well as conservatives.

It is possible that, through his abortion policies, Obama has pushed the public's understanding of what it means to be "pro-choice" slightly to the left, politically. While Democrats may support that, as they generally support everything Obama is doing as president, it may be driving others in the opposite direction.

Maybe this newest poll will cause the Obama administration to moderate on the issue. I'd rather lose an issue and save lives. At the very least, it should encourage Republicans to hold fast to our beliefs and reject pressure to move to the center.

McConnell Lead Increases to 17

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell released results of an internal poll that shows him up by 17 points. Here's the national take from Realclearpolitics:

McConnell is in fine shape in his bid for re-election, a new survey for his campaign finds. Though Democrats have plenty of Senate opportunities elsewhere, the Kentucky Republican doesn't look like one of them.

McConnell is viewed favorable by 52 percent of those polled, and unfavorably by 33 percent.

In comparison, check out Bruce Lunsford's numbers: 30 percent favorable, and 36 percent unfavorable. (Ouch!) More people don't like Lunsford than like him. Nor can Lunsford's high negatives be attributed to an anti-incumbent sentiment, because Lunsford, despite myriad efforts, has yet to win an election.

No wonder the guy is forced to pump his own millions into his own campaign; to know him is to dislike him.

Altogether, Lunsford has spent roughly $17 million to get himself elected to something, anything. He's not particular; he'll serve as governor or senator. Anything to plaster his mug all over our TVs. That's one pricey singles' ad.

Convention Propels McCain-Palin To Lead Over Obama-Biden

Realclearpolitics.com reports that the Gallup three-day tracking poll found that the McCain-Palin ticket has taken a three point lead over Obama-Biden. Last week's events in St. Paul completely erased Obama's bounce from the Democratic National Convention and then some. The lead will likely widen even further tomorrow, when the first Gallup tracking poll is released based on polling taken on the first three days after the Republican National Convention.

Update: The USA TODAY/Gallup poll released today shows McCain-Palin leading by four percentage points among registered voters (McCain 50% - Obama 46%) and by ten points among voters likely to vote (McCain 54% - Obama 44%) .

Bush's Approval In Western KY Helps Mitch

Mark Hebert reports that President Bush's approval rating is 52 percent in Western Kentucky, 37 percent statewide.

As Hebert notes, Western Kentucky traditionally has voted in large numbers for Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. Given Bruce Lunsford's attempts to yoke McConnell to Bush, the president's continued support west of I-65 is good news for McConnell: his base is secure.

McConnell's approval rating has exceeded Bush's in Kentucky by a wide margin all along. Kentucky voters understand that McConnell's position as party leader requires him to shepherd the president's legislative agenda, even --as with immigration -- when Bush and McConnell see the issue differently. In that sense, the party leader wears two hats. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid acknowledged as much when he spoke at University of Louisville a few months back.

Lunsford's attempts to strap Bush to McConnell's back look increasingly desperate. Take his most recent commercial, in which Lunsford implies that anyone who made less than $15 million last year (the average pay of an oil company CEO) is a loser. All of us non-CEOs, according to Lunsford's logic, should channel our bitterness at Bush and McConnell.

It's a blatant appeal to class warfare, much like John Edwards attempted, to no avail. And as with Edwards, it looks silly and condescending for a multi-millionaire like Lunsford to suggest that voters should feel bad about their lives because they make less money than a CEO. Lunsford would have to impose a form of socialism to level the playing field to the extent that every worker is paid like the CEO from an oil company.

The old Soviet Union tried that ploy; it starts by nationalizing all industry so that the government owns the means of production. It didn't work so well. Consequently, the Obama-Lunsford approach would offer a softer, friendlier form of socialism --an accretion of increasingly burdensome taxes and regulations. All that will do is discourage investors from taking the risk to explore and extract new sources of oil.

If Bruce really wants to put more money in the pockets of us non-CEOs, he needs to tell his his buddies Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to let America tap our own natural resources by drilling for oil here and now.