MyDD :: Virginia Polls

Virginia Polls

by Chris Bowers, Sat Jun 18, 2005 at 01:11:05 PM EST

Rasmussen has released a wealth of polls on Virginia:

Governor
	   6/15    4/14
Kilgore      46      44
Kaine	    40	   36
Other	     2	    5
Undecided    12      15

Both the results and the trendline are similar to those found in the Survey USA polls on this race. Kilgore has a small lead, but Tim Kaine has inched closer.

President 
	  6/15
Allen	   50
Clinton     41

Warner	   46
Allen	   41

A poll like this could only further fuel speculation into Warner's political future. If he can lead Allen in Virginia, then he could definately win Virginia in a Presidential election. If fact, against someone not from Virginia, the state would probably be a slam dunk for Warner. The Kerry states plus Virginia nad New Mexico euqal 270 electoral votes. A Warner-Richardson or Richardson-Warner ticket might indeed be very electable.

Senate 
	 4/14
Allen	  47
Warner	  43

I am not sure if this could be considered a separate poll from the Presidential poll, since both match up Warner and Allen in the same area (statewide Virginia). There might be some reasons to think that people in Virginia would prefer Allen in the Senate and Warner in the Presidency, perhaps related to Republican fatigue in Washington. Looking at these numbers, combined with an indication that he would be open to running for Governor again in 2009, makes me think that Warner will not challenge Allen for Senate in 2006. I am disappointed, but I can't say I really blame him, considering what else the future might hold in store for his career.

Tags: Governor 2005-6 (all tags)

Permalink :: 11 Comments :: Post a Comment

Angels on head of a pin (none / 0)

Imnsvho, all of these speculative excercises are just that until one question is answered first: does Hillary Clinton run?

If she does, I haven't seen any credible...or even incredible...scenario by which any other candidate can get the nomination against that combination of $$$$, organization, staff, and star power.

I can understand that some people might not like this. There are aspects I'm still coming to grips with myself. But that's a separate question.

If HC doesn't run, then all bets are off and names like Clark, Warner, Schweitzer, Edwards, Richardson, or even Feingold (though I doubt it) are all fair game for the top spot.

by InigoMontoya on Sat Jun 18, 2005 at 04:36:31 PM EST

Warner - Richardson sounds good to me (none / 0)

The thought of a Warner - Richardson ticket appeals to me greatly. Here we have two bright Democratic governors who have shown not only that they can win in 'red states', but effectively govern them and be genuinely admired for it.

These are the grown-ups coming to town. I'm all for it.

by Matusleo on Sat Jun 18, 2005 at 06:47:17 PM EST

Re: Warner - Richardson sounds good to me (none / 0)

With that ticket, Ralph Nader sounds good to me.

by Paleo on Sat Jun 18, 2005 at 07:03:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well... (none / 0)

If Warner doesn't run Virginia would be a perfect state to Draft Anthony Zinni to run for Senate in. Seeing as PA already has two contenders, why not push to get a real liberal, at least on National Security and foreign relations. Maybe he could bully Lieberman into STFU about supporting the President's "plan" and he could definitely help to highlight the major problems (to put it lightly) that we face in Iraq.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Sat Jun 18, 2005 at 08:47:34 PM EST

Adding Virgina removes need for Ohio or Florida (none / 0)

That's an incredibly vital state in 2008 and beyond. The huge Republican margin for error is all but gone if we somehow annex Virginia and its 13 electoral votes. Kerry ended up with 252, 18 short of a majority. Add Virginia, hold everything else Kerry won, and suddenly you only need one among the close losses from 2004 -- Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada or Colorado. We could blow Florida and Ohio and still be in very good shape.

So you can guarantee Rove and Co. know the math and will do everything to shore up Virginia prior to 2008. Frankly, I don't see how we have a shot at that state minus Warner atop the ticket. At VP it figures very close but a probable narrow loss. If the partisan shift of 2 or 3 points in our favor every 4 years continues, we're still 3 or 4 points behind in 2008. That's manageable with Warner as the nominee, especially since no one from Virginia has been on a national ticket in quite some time. We were hurt in Tennessee 2000 from kind of a blase attitude after Gore had also been on the ticket in '92 and '96. As a first timer I think he would have carried the state.

At VP I always project a 3 to 3.5 point bump, which is precisely what Edwards was apparently worth last year if you look at the partisan shift from 2000 and 2004 in North Carolina, roughly 13 down to 10. Absolutely sickening we didn't have a young VP candidate from Ohio last year, a John Glenn minus 20-30 years. Kerry would definitely be president in that case. Bench depth can be critical and we perpetually underestimate that.

Atop the ticket you can estimate 4-8 points in partisan swing in a contested home state, which is why I continue to believe Jeb will be the GOP nominee in 2008. He would virtually sew up Florida, allowing time and funds to be spared for other battleground states, and I don't see how the GOP can dodge that incredible opportunity. For his sake It's probably better to pretend he's not running at this point, and then claim the party encouraged him.

by jagakid on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 01:42:45 AM EST

Re: Adding Virgina removes need for Ohio or Florid (none / 0)

You may be right about Jeb but I'd still bet against it and give odds. Two words: Bush fatigue.

by InigoMontoya on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 02:35:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

JEB in 08 (none / 0)

Interesting thought, but do you really think that the Reds are going to try to ram another 4 years of Bush down our throats? But considering that JEB will slice out some of the Latino vote, I can see where you were going with this....Good post

by Bruticus on Mon Jun 20, 2005 at 03:55:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I like Warner. (none / 0)

but am afraid of what some people I know who have met him say. Namely that he is a flyweight who got lucky in the cell phone bussiness and after a while it will seem like we are running Mr. Ed for President.

by strrbr on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 01:34:30 PM EST

Warner-Richardson not a good idea (none / 0)

Warner might make an okay VP as might Richardson, but I don't see either one as president. As far as the poll goes, if Hillary can pick up 41% at this early stage in the race against Allen in a state where he is a former governor and current senator, then she or whoever our nominee is might be able to pick up VA.. I still say Feingold is the best choice. WI would be easier to win (it has been a swing state in the last two elections), and he could pick up Richardson as VP candidate, which might help us pick up some additional support from hispanics as well as bring NM back.

Tennesseans for Russ Feingold

by schwompa on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 01:42:25 PM EST

Re: Warner-Richardson not a good idea (none / 0)

WI and NM have pretty much got to be counted in any Dem total anyway; holding WI and getting NM back may be necessary but it is not sufficient.

Ohio and Florida are the obvious targets for expansion to the magic 270 or greater. Colorado also works. Getting Iowa back helps, as would picking off NV. I'm dubious about Virginia being genuinely in play though I'm willing to take a second look after the governor's race this year and the 2006 Congressional elections.

Given demographics, if we don't get Wisconsin anyway then we aren't going to get any of the states on the target list.

by InigoMontoya on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 04:03:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This must be some other Warner (none / 0)

Than the one who waxed eloquent about why Americans hate Democrats. Surely no one here is supporting THAT clown for President.

"We are building a political movement - not one that wields the power of lobbyists and corporate interests, but the power of millions... who seek change." -Dean

by Jim in Chicago on Mon Jun 20, 2005 at 12:55:41 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.