Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Extended Democratic Primary Gives McCain a Boost in Wisconsin

Bookmark and Share

Last year, Wisconsin appeared ready to vote for a Democratic presidential nominee for the sixth consecutive election. Democratic candidates were defeating Republican candidates in most matchup polls and, in generic partisan matchups, Wisconsinites gave Democrats the edge by double digits in polls conducted in Spring 2007, Summer 2007, and as late as November 2007 (Badger Poll, WPR / St. Norbert College). However, Wisconsin is a classic battleground state and thus the numbers were bound to change with the political tides. And they have.

Once Republicans settled on John McCain to be their nominee, Wisconsin voters have seemed to rally around the Arizona Senator. McCain was once polling in the 30s when matched up against Hillary Clinton (Rasmussen, August 2007), but has gradually chipped away at her advantage in more than a half-dozen polls since: McCain polled at 40 percent against her in October 2007, 45 percent in November 2007, and 49 percent in December 2007 and January 2008 (Rasmussen, SurveyUSA). Two Rasmussen polls of likely Badger State voters conducted since McCain wrapped up the GOP nomination in late February and late March 2008 both show him with double-digit leads over Clinton, reaching the 50 percent mark in both surveys.

Barack Obama is more competitive against McCain than Clinton at the moment, though McCain did lead the junior Senator from Illinois by 48 to 46 percent (within the margin of error) in Rasmussen's late March poll.

The extended primary process has not been kind to Clinton in Wisconsin, and the already high unfavorable marks she had in the Badger State before announcing her candidacy (48 percent in July 2006, Rasmussen), have now climbed in recent months: to 51 percent in December 2007 and 58 percent in March 2008 (Rasmussen). Flirting with 60 percent unfavorable marks will not get you elected in any state.

Obama's unfavorability numbers were also bound to increase, as he was largely an unknown quantity to the average voter before the primary season began; they have increased in Wisconsin from 39 percent in December 2007 to 45 percent in March 2008 (Rasmussen). Still, a respectable 54 percent of Wisconsinites currently have a favorable rating of Obama.

McCain, however, has been a well-known and popular political figure in Wisconsin in recent years. And even though his favorability rating took an initial hit when he entered the 2008 race for the White House (dipping from 64 percent in July 2006 to 48 percent in August 2007, Rasmussen), this rating, unlike that of his Democratic challengers, has grown ever since: rising to 50 percent in October 2007 and 54 percent in March 2008 (Rasmussen). Perhaps more importantly, his unfavorability rating has remained constant: 45 percent in August 2007, 44 percent in October 2007, and 45 percent in March 2008 (Rasmussen).

Wisconsinites are not endeared by 'attack politics' and if McCain can stay above the fray—looking ever the more 'presidential' while his Democratic opponents beat each other up in the coming weeks—the Arizona Senator will be sitting in a good position to finally take back the Badger State for the Republicans come November.

Previous post: Governors Doyle, Culver Getting Low Marks While Pawlenty Prevails
Next post: Why Clinton Is Not In Trouble In Pennsylvania

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

Political Crumbs

Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting