Poll: Dem Takes Lead In Special Election
Now this is big news. The new Siena poll out this morning, testing the special election this Tuesday for Kirsten Gillibrand's old House seat, shows Democratic candidate Scott Murphy ahead of Republican Jim Tedisco by 47%-43% -- the first public poll to put the Dem ahead, though his lead is still within the ±3.2% margin of error.
A poll from two weeks ago showed that Murphy was already closing the gap, trailing at the time by 45%-41%, after a poll two weeks before that had given Tedisco an even wider lead of 46%-34%.
The poll from two weeks ago showed Murphy achieving a huge turnaround among independents, and taking a six-point lead. But now this week's poll gives Tedisco a one-point edge among independents -- but Murphy's Democratic support has gone up from 72% to 84%, and Tedisco's Dem crossover support has fallen from 17% to 11%, and he even gets 27% of Republicans.
Murphy's road from 12 points down to four points up can be traced to a few things. First of all, he is a first-time candidate who started out with no name recognition, going up against the well-known state Assembly minority leader. Next, Murphy has consistently built up his own brand by tying himself in with President Obama and the stimulus plan. And now the White House itself has gotten involved through a public endorsement by Obama, a radio ad starring Joe Biden, and a new DNC ad reminding voters about the Obama endorsement.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Destroy Tedisco and destroy Steele.
March 27, 2009 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Scott Murphy wins, but want Steele to stay around, too. Politics needs someone who is "beyond cutting edge". Plus, I need someone to laugh at. Is that so wrong?
March 27, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry. If he loses the RNC chairman gig, that will give the Man of Steele more time to focus on his presidential campaign. It's all strategic.
March 27, 2009 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yea! I hope everyone will push turnout. The blueing of upstate NY is one of the key elements in our new Democratic majority. Let's make it permanent.
March 27, 2009 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Living in the NY-20th but not really being plugged into district politics it's been difficult for me to really figure out what's going on in this race. There seems to be about as much interest as in any off-cycle election, which isn't much. A fair number of yard signs but no barbershop conversation, very little name recognition and I have to guess a fair number of people showing up at the polls are planning on pulling either the little red or little blue lever and at that moment realizing, ah, Murphy's the Democrat, I see. The recent VP and POTUS endorsements should help a bit.
But this really is a bell weather election, at least for me, because this has been a Republican district for as long as I've been here and if it stays blue under these circumstances - the GOP having a slim edge with name recognition and a previously unknown Dem - I think that would say something beyond the collapse of the Republican brand, Steele's performance or even populist backlash. The blueing of Upstate New York indeed.
March 27, 2009 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do not underestimate the damage the NRCC and right-wing PAC advertising is doing to Tedisco. It is absolute carpet-bombing by at the NRCC and at least three PACs. Many fairly conservative people I know are disgusted with the tone of the ads and their ubiquity - you can't listen to the radio or watch the NCAA Tournament without being assaulted. Finally, the "no, no, no" presser last week where Tedisco denounced the stimulus package has been deftly used by Murphy to emphasize how Teddy Disco is saying no to upstate jobs.
Nevertheless, it will be very, very close...
March 27, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Republicans seem intent on being annoyingly extreme on their policy positioning and I can't say it bothers me that much. With the national outlook trending leftward, it doesn't bode well for the Republicans that they seem more and more out of touch.
March 27, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I totally agree about Tedisco's ads. They are despicable. Case in point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYnmbmEsPSA
What really gets me is that, rather than using the old line that outsourcing to India has "taken American jobs" (which is a claim that can be debated on its own terms), the NRCC is condemning Murphy simply because he created jobs in India. There is no claim that an Upstate NY factory was closed and the jobs shipped overseas. It's the mere fact that Murphy is involved in India that is the supposed "problem" here. No tortured analysis of the racial subtext is needed to explain what's going on in this ad. Murphy is being criticized simply because he created jobs for brown foreigners.
March 27, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric: Pretend some of us have been super busy and not following politics as much as we would like, and in that scenario, it would help to have which state this election is taking place. Thanks.
March 27, 2009 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the special election in upstate New York, around Poughkeepsie, for house seat located in district 20 (NY-20), vacated when Gov. Paterson appointed Kirsten Gillibrand to fill Senator Clinton's old seat after she was confirmed as Sec. of State.
By sheer numbers it has the heaviest Republican lean in New York state, and in my time in the area (my in-laws live up there), it is clear that pro-guns and anti-government has been the district's history (I saw more Ron Paul for President signs than Obama and McCain combined). It is also heavily effected by the last 18 months of recession and has seen massive layoffs and jobs lost.
It will be a big deal if the Tedisco and the Publicans lose this one, considering its Republican registration advantage and the amount of time and money that Steele has poured into the race.
March 27, 2009 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ahh, this is rich. Tedisco's campaign, in response to the Siena polls, says that their internals show that Tedisco has a "strong lead":
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTBlMzRlZTZkMTJjNzJkMzE5MDY1ZDJmMGVkMGQ0ZDU=
Of course, if you read more closely, they are saying they have "strong leads" in voter intensity and turnout. Not sure how you measure turnout pre-vote. Anyway, you know a campaign is in trouble when they start quoting internal polls to counter a public poll that shows them behind. Remember in the last days of the presidential campaign when McCain's camp was claiming that their internals showed Iowa and PA neck-and-neck? We know how that turned out.
And as noted, it looks like the attack ads are hurting Tedisco. Does the GOP ever learn anything?
March 27, 2009 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I live in the 20th district. When Gillibrand was running against Treadwell, very, very early in campaign the latter poured millions into a warm and fuzzy campaign making him look like a green progressive. It seemed to work, for his numbers started to climb. But then he decided that he needed to do something and went virulently negative, way way before Gillibrand did, who actually stayed relatively positive throughout. Gillibrand won by a huge margin -- 20 points or so in a 'Republican district.'
Tedisco skipped the warm and fuzzy part for the most part and went double-barrel negative. This was a mistake; he has no rep for doing anything except being a professional pol.
Murphy's ads are much better produced, more effective, mixing positive with negative, plus he must me outspending the Tedisco significantly, because he's everywhere. Both national parties have poured in a huge amount of money, and the NCCC has produced ads that aren't exactly of the Jesse Helms variety, but are so clearly reaching to smear Murphy (eg ad tagline: "AIG, Wall Street, Murphy") that they give the impression of lying and I think they are backfiring.
I predict a Murphy win of 6-8 points.
March 27, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
RSL, when did Tedisco's numbers ever go up? In fact, when was there a public poll of the contest released?
Fact is there never was a public poll on Gillibrand-Treadwell, but the internals all showed her winning decisively all along, according to Stu Rothenberg. Don't know why you think Treadwell ever gained--if he had, he wouldn't have turned totally negative like he did.
March 27, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tedisco's numbers never went up. He started ahead and has been losing ground ever since. The first polls were about about 4-5 weeks ago.
March 27, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink