New Senate Poll, and What You Should Do About It
The Daily KOS has commissioned a lengthy poll in the US Senate races.
For those who lean toward the Tea Party, there is only one move that makes sense. There is only one outsider who has a chance to force a run-off with Bailout Boozman. That's Jim Holt. Even those who favor another outsider candidate should consider switching their vote to Holt in order to prevent a Baker-Boozman insider run-off. Try to look at it with logic rather than emotion. None of the others have a reasonable chance of landing a run-off spot at this point.
If you can't bear the thought of voting for anyone else besides your chosen champion, then I would next implore you to at least go ahead and vote. The only outsider with a chance faces two problems. One is getting past Baker, and the other is holding Boozman below 50%. A voter who supports one of the down-list candidates who decides to vote strategically for Holt helps with both problems. The down-list supporter who still votes for their down-lister still helps with the second problem by adding an additional vote. So if you can bear to, vote strategically, but even if your guy is sure to lose, at least vote.
Blanche Lincoln (D) 46
Bill Halter (D) 37
D.C. Morrison (D) 6
Undecided 11
John Boozman (R) 46
Jim Holt (R) 19
Gilbert Baker (R) 12
Kim Hendren (R) 6
Curtis Coleman (R) 2
Other 2
Undecided 13
For those who lean toward the Tea Party, there is only one move that makes sense. There is only one outsider who has a chance to force a run-off with Bailout Boozman. That's Jim Holt. Even those who favor another outsider candidate should consider switching their vote to Holt in order to prevent a Baker-Boozman insider run-off. Try to look at it with logic rather than emotion. None of the others have a reasonable chance of landing a run-off spot at this point.
If you can't bear the thought of voting for anyone else besides your chosen champion, then I would next implore you to at least go ahead and vote. The only outsider with a chance faces two problems. One is getting past Baker, and the other is holding Boozman below 50%. A voter who supports one of the down-list candidates who decides to vote strategically for Holt helps with both problems. The down-list supporter who still votes for their down-lister still helps with the second problem by adding an additional vote. So if you can bear to, vote strategically, but even if your guy is sure to lose, at least vote.
posted by Mark Moore (Moderator) at Thursday, May 13, 2010
12 Comments:
PS- my esteemed blogging colleague Jason Tolbert makes a point that the relatively higher turnout helps Baker over Holt and Boozman.
He may have a point, but I'd say Holt is a state-wide figure. Most of those voters outside of the third district have already voted for him twice.
Myself and a number of other conservatives from all parties I know are and have been voting for Halter. That way Blanche is out early. The republican that survives will be better than Halter all day long and win. We cannot take a chance that Blanche survives.
I agree with the person above. Us conservatives should vote in the Democratic primary and vote for Halter. The earlier Blanche is out, the better.
The problem with that strategy is that Boozman is Blanche in a suit. He will vote for just about any expansion of government, so long as it was suggested by a Republican.
Halter OTOH has a better chance to win in the general than Blanche does. They can't hang the bailouts on him the way anyone but Boozman can on Blanche. This is a very anti-incumbent year and Halter would let them escape the wrath for that.
I am sorry to say that what you are doing is counterproductive on more than one level.
Mark, I totally agree! Halter is very masterful at positioning himself as an outsider... and in a race with Boozman he would be.
In any case, although I have a severe "throw the bums out" itch... I'm pretty sure Blanche would be better than Halter. Much like Obama he has the cajones to run as an unabashed liberal in a southern state.
Mark, I just cannot agree. you are a big proponent of touting history as the reason we should make our choice. Now you are changing up for convienence or loyalty? Taking a page out of your previous writings, Holt is a non-starter. He has already lost against Lincoln, he also lost against Halter. He is the only candidate that is a proven loser against those two. It is wishful thinking to even entertain that he can beat either of them now. There is a reason he has lost in the past. I am not comfortable with allowing him to make the same mistake a third time.
We cannot take the chance. Blanche needs to go now in the primary. The easiest way to do that is to vote Halter. Any republican will be better than her.
I'd rather have Blanche than Halter. And I agree that the GOP nominee would probably do better against Blanche.
faux Halter supporter,
I am in favor of using history in context. When then unknown Holt lost to Lincoln by 12 the polls before the election had him down to her by 30. Now the polls have him OVER her.
Holt only has to ask voters ONE question on the issue of a Blanche Lincoln rematch; "Are you better off now than you were in 2004?"
As to Halter, your attempt to tilt the scales notwithstanding, Lincoln will win the primary.
This is a "boot the incumbent" year. Lincoln will be much easier to defeat in November than Halter. With Boozman being a big government candidate and part of the problem in DC, Holt will have a good chance of defeating him in the primary runoff. If you vote in the Democratic primary and there is a runoff in the Republican Senate race, you can't vote. I just don't like the idea of voting in a Political Party primary you don't really support. History will show it doesn't make any difference.
This is exactly why we don't need instant runoff voting. If we had it, more than likely Holt would not even come close to winning second place in the primary. Most of what he has is all he is going to get. I am with Rick, and I actually voted for Blanche, rather than GOP because anyone can beat her when it November comes around.
Look even conservative political expert agrees in voting in the democratic primary in order to take one of the two candidates out. He says it on this video that he is voting democrat in the primary.
http://tolbertreport.com/2010/05/14/video-billhalter-will-not-answer-my-question-on-cardcard-ecfa-arsen/
"I am with Rick"
I don't think you read what Rick just wrote. He did NOT vote in another party's primary. The rest of your comment made even less sense.
Post a Comment
<< Home