Skip to main content

Republican candidate in the 2010 race for U.S. Senator from Connecticut Linda McMahon, former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO, makes a campaign stop outside a polling location in Norwalk, Connecticut August 10, 2010.    REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
When Linda McMahon is the GOP's best performing Senate candidate, they may not be doing as well as they hoped.
I've noted in just about every one of my battleground matchup posts how Mitt Romney simply can't get out of the mid 40s in the polling composite in most of the key states:
He exceeds 46 percent in just five of these 12 [battleground] states, and hits 48 percent in just one. His likeability problem has imposed a ceiling to his potential support, a sign that the Democratic campaign to define him in those states was a resounding success.
Just checked TPM right now, and yup, there's Romney stuck at 45.1 percent.

So I just re-read my Senate snapshot from yesterday, and I was drawn to the GOP percentage totals:

(Again, these are TPM poll composites. The bolded numbers indicate incumbents.)

Like the presidential numbers in key battleground states, the Republican candidates appear mired in the low- to mid-40s. Of the 15 races on this list, Republicans exceed 46 percent in just two of them. Ironically, two of the most liberal on this list—Massachusetts and Connecticut.

On the other hand, Democrats exceed 46 percent in 10 of the 15 races.

Does this mean anything? Beats me. It could be coincidence, but it's certainly an odd one—Republicans are having a hard time busting out of the mid-40s—even in the handful of states on this list that don't double up as presidential battlegrounds.

Originally posted to kos on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 02:49 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  You sure it isn't 47%? (14+ / 0-)

    That would be perfect, especially today...

  •  Karma man... 46% is within margins LOLOLOL (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BobBlueMass, SteelerGrrl

    How can you tell when Rmoney is lying? His lips are moving. Fear is the Mind Killer

    by boophus on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 02:54:50 PM PDT

  •  Well (13+ / 0-)

    When the majority of your ideas are designed to fuck over the middle class, there's just no good way to polish that turd.

    And Linda, way too much jewelry, hon.

    Hillary Sent Me. OBAMA/BIDEN '12

    by HillaryIsMyHomegirl on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 02:54:52 PM PDT

  •  Perhaps some in America have noticed (9+ / 0-)

    that republicans suck in general and that Rmoney sucks in particular.

    Even other republicans think he sucks.

    That is some robust suckiness.

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 03:04:06 PM PDT

  •  Republicans are now the 47% - i.e. pathetic losers (5+ / 0-)
  •  all of the bad press Romney is getting doesn't (4+ / 0-)

    Seem to be hurting his numbers. I'm suprised this is still a 3 point race. How sad.

    "I'm not mad at them (tea party) for being loud, I'm mad at us for being silent for the last two years. Where have we been"? "it was never yes HE can, it was Yes WE can". - Van Jones

    by sillycilla on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 03:07:08 PM PDT

  •  Romney's Campaign to Give Himself Democrats' (0+ / 0-)

    definition of him.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 03:18:13 PM PDT

  •  You know -- in the end (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DuzT

    ...Romney's been telling the truth this whole time.

    About himself.

    (Also, it didn't help that they put his butt on backwards when he was assembled. It's hard to get people to like you when that happens.)


    A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

    by Pluto on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 03:18:24 PM PDT

  •  Citizens United in action (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    glitterscale, Odysseus

    there aren't as many true undecideds as there used to be; piling on to the now-decades old 24/7 news channels, both the radicalization of the GOP and the saturation ad coverage incited by CU have made it virtually impossible not to have picked a side by now. That said, there is a hard ceiling of under 50% for nakedly cruel political agendas, it would seem. The Republican's true job is to push that over 50%.

    R-Money/R-Ayn, the ENRON Ticket, is not a campaign; it's a hostile takeover bid.

    by kamarvt on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 03:29:28 PM PDT

  •  Gee, you'd think killing medicare, social security (6+ / 0-)

    ....and going to war with Iran would generate better numbers.

    Repubs started up the car, hit the throttle and sent it over the cliff, and now they're complaining that the black guy hasn't fixed it fast enough.

    by Bush Bites on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 04:47:54 PM PDT

  •  I can't believe CT might elect McMahon (4+ / 0-)

    What is wrong with that state???

  •  In fact, very few polls (0+ / 0-)

    outside of Rasmussen and Gravis show Mitt even coming close to the high 40% in any state or national poll.

    This race is not as close as most in the media would have us believe.....

  •  Dinosaurs had such small brains (0+ / 0-)

    That when something chomped off their tail and they were bleeding our, it took a long time for them to process this information and recognize that they were, in fact, mortally wounded. Republicans are like dinosaurs, mortally wounded and they can't figure out where all the blood is coming from. Not getting above 46% is the death rattle of a failed ideology.

    "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

    by US Blues on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 04:49:11 PM PDT

  •  Okay. The polls say consistently that Obama's had (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lighttheway, earicicle

    at least an "edge" in the polls, and the WSJ-NBC poll show him with a strong lead in all stinking categories.

    Guess what? The fuckers out there that want a horserace, or who think that Obama will sit there and look stupid during the debates, are still saying that Romney

    can turn this around with a debate or two after all this
    ghastly, elitist, shitty, disastrous campaign.

    This includes John Heileman, who keeps talking like Romney can turn this all around in just about ninety minutes of air time.

    Who here thinks this? Raise your hands, please!

    "listen: there's a hell of a good universe next door; let's go." --ee cummings

    by Wildthumb on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 04:50:49 PM PDT

    •  In fact, there is already a growing meme (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      churchlady

      among the media that Romney will not do well in the debates which is, of course, lowering expectations on his performance. Pretty soon, all he will have to do is show up at the debates and state his name and the media will rejoice in how Romney "beat expectations."

    •  Everybody thought Gore'd Kick W's Ass (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DuzT

      in the debates, too.

      Rmoney can still win this with great debate performances. Given what I saw in the Spring against weak competition, and his inability to keep his foot out of his mouth without a script, I confident the President can handle him.

      Rmoney doesn't have W's folksy aw shucks aura, that likeability thing that got people to overlook a few flaws. Nobody likes Rmoney, nobody wants to have a beer with him. Hard as people try to like him and support him, even diehard Republicans, most people can't stand the guy.

      And that's why Rmoney won't have his 90 minutes of greatness.

      A society is judged by how well it cares for those in the dawn of life, the children. By how well it cares for those in the twilight of life, the elderly. And, by how well it cares for those on the edge of life; the poor, the sick, and the disabled.

      by BobBlueMass on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:05:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You seem to contradict yourself. You say "Romney (0+ / 0-)

        can still win this with great debate performances," but that the "president can handle him."

        And you end with "Romney won't have his 90 minutes of greatness." I'm not putting you down, I'm just asking: Which is it?

        "listen: there's a hell of a good universe next door; let's go." --ee cummings

        by Wildthumb on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:10:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I are an engineer (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NoMoJoe

          So let's try this again.

          Yes, if he does great in the debates, he can still win this. But I don't think he will have great debate performances. He hasn't yet. And the President is more than capable of handling him.

          But there is that chance.

          The President could forget to zip up. Or trip walking on stage. Or some gaffe of incredible proportions.

          Rmoney could actually grow a soul. Could actually look into the camera and say something that could convince the country that he isn't the rich bastard he is.

          But that is not going to happen. Could. But it won't. I watched Rmoney against Ted Kennedy in debates. And Ted took him apart. He hasn't gotten any better in the last 18 years.

          Rmoney can't hide from Bain. Can't hide from the decisions he's made, the money's he's made, what he's done with his money, and how he really feels about the rest of us.

          Rmoney is a cold hearted rich bastard. The world knows that.

          Still. Stranger things have happened. And it ain't over yet.

           

          A society is judged by how well it cares for those in the dawn of life, the children. By how well it cares for those in the twilight of life, the elderly. And, by how well it cares for those on the edge of life; the poor, the sick, and the disabled.

          by BobBlueMass on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:23:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Okay. You think all of the accumulated stuff (0+ / 0-)

            about him, and the failed convention, and the lack of bounce from Ryan's pick, can all be undone by basically a couple of hours of air time. That it's possible.

            I think even if he wins all 3 debates, even handily, he still is likely to lose, because there is recent evidence that most of the time debates basically don't matter much. That they don't count as much as people think they do. As a matter of fact, there is a new book out cited by Taegan Goddard on Political Wire, that says basically that eleven out of fourteen elections were basically decided by APRIL, for chrissakes, and Obama has had a consistent edge since then. In other words, once peoples' attitudes pretty much harden, that things can't be turned around.

            Enough said. I think for months I've been saying that Romney could still turn this around (the way I'm sure people said for a long time that Bob Dole could turn things around on Bill Clinton.) Now I just think the handwriting's on the wall.

            I know we all should stay open to the fact of reversals, and disappointments, I say that it's highly unlikely now.

            Thanks for clarifying. I just lean more to an Obama win now, after holding out myself for a long time.

            "listen: there's a hell of a good universe next door; let's go." --ee cummings

            by Wildthumb on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:40:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Gore Did (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TomFromNJ

        Kick W's ass in all three debates.  But by then the media had decided that the only way to make it a horse race was to carry water for the Village Idiot.  Oh, and by the way, Gore also won the election, not just the vote count, but the electoral votes, but the Supreme Court stopped the count and declared Lil' Smirky the winner.

        •  The media really hated Gore (0+ / 0-)

          REALLY hated him. And so they made him a fibbing effete elitist and Dubya a fun, relatable rouge. By that point in the election, it probably didn't matter how Gore performed in the debates (and I've read that debates seldom have any effect on the race anyway). It was baked in the cake at that point. This election, the dynamics are that people like Obama and dislike Romney. Probably more importantly, people are now seeing Obama as a strong leader who has his act together and Mitt as a core-less cipher and total fuckup. The only way this election changes is if the Republicans can pull off another budget standoff situation that makes Obama look weak

          "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

          by Septic Tank on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 10:07:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Arizona Senate Looks To Be Really Close! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DuzT, SoonerG, mconvente

    Is Arizona Turning Blue Faster than previously thought? I sure hope so!

    •  would likely be Blue now but Obama took Dem Gov (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mconvente

      into his Cabinet. That was one of his dumbest moves ever -also the Kansas Dem governor too. That state was moving slightly purple too.

      •  In hindsight taking Napolitano was a bad move... (0+ / 0-)

        ...for sure. Jan Brewer was the direct result of that.

        As for Sebelius, I think that one was okay. It'd have been nice to have her in the Senate, but you could also argue that the nation got real polarized once Obama got in office that Kansas was not likely to elect Sebelius to the senate in 2010.

        "If these Republicans can't stand up to Rush, how can they stand up to the Iranians?" - Redmond Barry

        by xsonogall on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:35:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I would rather we start putting money into CT race (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NoMoJoe, mconvente

      ...than get into a pissing match in Arizona and likely lose it in November... If Carmona can take AZ, great, but in a presidential election year, I think we're better off courting Obama-Murphy voters than Rommey-Carmona voters just by the law of averages.

      "If these Republicans can't stand up to Rush, how can they stand up to the Iranians?" - Redmond Barry

      by xsonogall on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:30:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We're getting some DSCC ads in CT, but it's (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xsonogall, mconvente, TomFromNJ

        hard to compete with WWE's millions.  

        McMahon apparently spent close to $16 million of her own money on the primary earlier this year (to defeat the eminently defeatable Chris Shays).

        She spent $50 million of her own in her loss to Blumenthal in 2010.

        According to McMahon's 2010 financial disclosure, she had "$156 to $400 million."

        We must drive the special interests out of politics.… There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will neither be a short not an easy task, but it can be done. -- Teddy Roosevelt

        by NoMoJoe on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:38:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Need help from Obama now (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TomFromNJ

          If CT is really indigo blue (or close to it), need to start riding Obama's coattails hard now. I remember driving through VA in 2008 and seeing a lot of Obama/Warner signs (not sure who was rising whose coattails then). Are there a lot of Obama/Murphy signs up in CT?

          "If these Republicans can't stand up to Rush, how can they stand up to the Iranians?" - Redmond Barry

          by xsonogall on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:41:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Senate and House - (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    etatauri

    most important priorities right now are keeping the senate and regaining the house.  I think all this foo-fah-rah about Romney is distracting us, personally.

    On the issue of having this debate, there can be plenty of debate. But on the issue of wanting to have this debate, there can be no debate. — Paul Ryan, as channeled by BiPM

    by Jensequitur on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 04:56:05 PM PDT

  •  It is conceivable that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mconvente

    all four Republican seats could turn blue.  Very possible if we get the "wave" that might be coming.

    Expose the lies. Fight for the truth. Push progressive politics. Save our planet. Health care is a right, not a privilege.

    by lighttheway on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:00:39 PM PDT

  •  Nooooo (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Desert Rose, xsonogall, TomFromNJ

    Please, no Linda McMahon photos!! She is so vile and I'm so tired of her relentless campaigning with her zillions of dollars in negative ads. She's terribly unlikeable. We were deluged with her ads in 2010 and now we have to hear her all over again just 2 years later after her loss then.

    And she's not even a candidate here in NY, I have to hear her chicken-scratching for power in CT.

  •  I'd feel better if we had more people over 50% (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xsonogall, mconvente, Odysseus

    Given what we faced, and continue to face, this is not too bad. Helluva lot better than I thought we'd be at this time this year. Bad economy and way too many seats to defend, plus all that GOP money.

    But we've got nearly everybody stuck under 50%, including incumbents and seats that should be ours (CT and MA).

    I expect this to get better as Rmoney pulls the GOP down. Knock on wood. And Obama and the Dems will have a much better ground game.

    But we need some time, money, and love down ticket. A second term with the same congressional bullshit as the first term gets us nowhere.

    A society is judged by how well it cares for those in the dawn of life, the children. By how well it cares for those in the twilight of life, the elderly. And, by how well it cares for those on the edge of life; the poor, the sick, and the disabled.

    by BobBlueMass on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:11:59 PM PDT

  •  Can we still call Mass and Conn Liberal? (4+ / 0-)

    I still cannot for the life of me understand why Mitt Rmoney was the Gov of Mass and Elizabeth Warren isn't walking away with the senate race.  And seriously Connecticut?  You are really going to vote a faux wrestling tycoon in as your senator?

    Do not become intoxicated with the excessive exuberance of your own inexhaustible verbosities...

    by SoonerG on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:22:34 PM PDT

  •  Dammit Kos delete Linda McMahon from (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xsonogall, annieli

    my screen!!!!!

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

    by CTMET on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:22:58 PM PDT

  •  Maybe only 46% of the country actually believes (0+ / 0-)

    this shit.  

    Maybe that is the high water mark in this election for Repug 1% class greed, dog-whistling racism, corporate welfare, gay bashing, women hating and war mongering.

    Maybe the 99% can wake up a little more and see Mitt and his fellows friends for their true selves.  

    Maybe this is Mitt's gift to us -- helping to wrap his downticket friends in his mistakes as well.  

  •  New England loves to flirt GOP (0+ / 0-)

    New Englanders love to flirt with the GOP. As a former, Connecticut resident Chris Murphy and Elizabeth Warren will win by moderate margins on election day.

    •  I would hope so, but Murphy (0+ / 0-)

      appears to be in real trouble.  The non stop lies on TV are hurting.
      If you don't believe me, try some GOTV calls.  And Chris should be a really strong candidate.  All the McM ads are either outright lies, or totaly misleading.  One essentially replays a newspaper quote deleting the word "NOT".

  •  The Democratic effort was a 'resounding' success? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus

    I don't like the idea that it was Democratic 'branding' of Romney that has turned people off to him.  Democrats didn't make him into the blatant asshole that he is.  The bizarre and disturbing fact is that nearly half of all voters STILL say they'll vote for him in spite of his atrocious campaign.  

    I'm not convinced that there was much success at all in Democratic 'branding' efforts.  We put forward a much more populist, sane and appealing face at our convention.  With the campaign that he's run, with the personality that he has, with the complete failure of the ideas he's claiming as his own, I don't see how his numbers could be any higher than they are whether Democrats were 'defining' him or not.  

    Seems like he should be down among George W Bush's eternal 30 percenters if enough people were really getting the picture about who he is.  

    When the truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

    by Sun dog on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 05:50:37 PM PDT

  •  The 46% ceiling is interesting (0+ / 0-)

    A few days ago, a Gallup poll on party affiliation broke it down as follows:

    44% Democrats or leaning-Democrat
    41% Republicans or leaning-Republican
    (which leaves 15% independents who don’t lean either way).
    If Republicans are hitting a 46% ceiling, that means they’re only getting a 5% bump from independents.

    Romney and the Republicans are not only failing to appeal to groups such as women, Hispanics, and African Americans, I suspect they’re losing people who should be in their base: evangelicals, tea partisans, and libertarians.

    But the angle said to them, "Do not be Alfred. A sailor has been born to you"

    by Dbug on Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 09:01:15 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site