Poll: GOP Senator Hangs On To Solid Lead In Georgia
Things are looking a bit grim for Democrats in the big Georgia Senate runoff, with another poll showing GOP Senator Saxby Chambliss hanging on to a decent-sized lead over Dem challenger Jim Martin.
The new numbers from Public Policy Polling (D): Chambliss 52%, Martin 46%, with a ±3.3% margin of error. That said, the nature of a runoff is that it can be be an unpredictable race, and really all about GOTV for both sides.
And on the subject of GOTV, the Republicans seem to have bungled the instructions in their absentee-ballot campaign, with around half the ballot applications being rejected in some pretty populous counties over failure to fill them out completely. Oops.
Late Update: The DSCC has followed up on this poll by releasing their own internal survey that shows Chambliss ahead by only two points, with 48% to Martin's 46%.
How fast before someone in the media tries to paint this as "Obama's first failure"?
November 24, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama and the Dems spent millions in GA, and they still can't win?"
November 24, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
you're right. May be that's why Obama isn't risking visitig this part of real America. Not that the current economic or national political climate will allow him.
November 24, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't you get the memo? Obama's already responsible for the sad state of the economy that we face today (see "Obama's Recession"). I'm sure that he'll end up being responsible for all the ills that Bush inflicted on our country before he's sworn in.
November 24, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
They haven't lost yet...
November 24, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't hold out too much hope on this one. I think the only thing that the race was close in the first place was because it was part of the general election (lots of voter turnout). Now that it's in a run-off folks will have to make a concerted effort to go to the polls, which I don't think will turn out nearly as many Dems.
November 24, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and the Libratarian was taking votes from Saxby...those guys ain't voting for Martin...trust me.
November 24, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Libertarian by the way. And, I would say dems are more libertarian than republicans right now, so you might be off on that analysis. We know that you want government in your bedroom, but most americans, including libertarians, don't.
November 24, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
uh...their motto is "Smaller government, lower taxes, more freedom" y'all can "try" to claim one of the three (but I'd argue with you about it). They we pissed at Saxby for the "Gang of 10" thing and the bailout. They ain't voting for Martin.
November 24, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not one of three, three of three. Last I checked obama wanted to lower taxes for 95% of americans, cut out government programs that don't work, smaller government, and stay out of people's bedrooms. Sounds libertarian to me. By the way, that's why the mountain west is starting to turn blue. They aren't libertarian out there are they? Nah.
November 24, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude...only a blind loyalist would even attempt to call what Obama plans "smaller government," and I'm not holding my breath waiting for my $500 check. I'm sure that "...now that we've taken a better look at the current sittuation, the tax cuts that we proposed are simply untenable (that means it's Bush's fault for you "low information" voters who so graciously put me in office)."
November 24, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
And, is the mountain west turning bluer? And, isn't he trying to cut taxes? And, doesn't he want to keep government out of the bedroom? And, doesn't he want to cut government programs that don't work? I don't get it. Sounds libertarian.
Oh, maybe we should argue about don't ask, don't tell. That would be more constructive.
November 24, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Martin faces a serious uphill battle, but i hope he pulls it out.
November 24, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess that's good news for Chambliss. Now he can get back to golfing on that bum knee that got him out of Vietnam...
November 24, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dead heat with the MOE.
November 24, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
OT: Weird. I've been on TPM for more than a year. Never heard anything about Andrew Golis before.
Is he the new sheriff in town?
November 24, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGO9bEejCi8
November 24, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hahhaahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaahahahah.........hahahahahaahaha...hahhaahahah
November 24, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. I sure hope the GOP gets those ballots straightened out so people can vote for Chambliss.
He's such a stand up classy guy.
He's the kind of guy you'd want to have a conversation about war veteran amputees over iced tea on the porch with.
November 24, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, can we get some in depth article written up on Saxby Chambliss to remind everyone exactly what he did. I'm not quite sure everyone is aware and to what low levels he stooped.
Maybe the article will be linked at other sites and get some attention right before the vote on Dec. 2nd.
November 24, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here you go...Max Cleland voted against the formation of the Department of Homeland Security because it didn't include union protection for DHS workers. Chambliss called him out for being more interested in protecting unions than the American people. Cleland got his butt whooped...
November 24, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I get it. Cleland was a commie pinko for wanting to protect american workers. He is such a traitor for trying to help average americans. That makes sense.
November 24, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
...nope, he made a calculated choice...he miscalculated. It happens.
November 24, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
You actually think that that vote was why he lost? I don't think so.
By the way, I hope that they break up dhs, it is unworkable and was a mistake. It's too big.
November 24, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, but that's what everyone here calls Saxby "Shameless" for, that's what his ad was about. Cleland only one his first time by 1%, it's not like this is a Democrat stronghold down here...
November 24, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
No that wasn't what the ad was about. The ad was trying to portray cleland as a friend of bin laden's and weak on terrorism, anti-american, unpatriotic, etc., etc. That's what it was about. Give me a break.
I agree it's not a dem stronghold, yet. Keep counting the old white people early voting and in ten years it will be a dem stronghold, or maybe even sooner.
November 24, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agree....it's revisionist history to suggest that people voted against Chambliss because of his pro-union stance. They painted him as a terrorist-lover and then used that awful Coulter article to diminish his Vietnam service.
November 24, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJGAWT90Xl4&NR=1
You make the call.
November 24, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmmm.....I don't see anything about unions in the ad.
November 24, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well I didn't see this either...
"They painted him as a terrorist-lover and then used that awful Coulter article to diminish his Vietnam service."
P.S. Everything Ann Coulter wrote about how he got wounded is in the biography section of his wikipedia page...
November 24, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you don't believe that the ad conveys that Cleland supports terrorists? Just because it didn't use my words verbatim doesn't mean that wasn't the whole point.
And just because something's in Wikipedia doesn't mean that it can't be used in a scurrilous way to call someone's service to their country into question.
November 24, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the point about the bio? I checked it and he was horribly injured in nam by way of an accident by some gung-ho wack job. What's the point?
November 24, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, since I got no response I checked out coulter the nazi's column and gee, she totally distorted what happened. Yeah it was an accident, but he was choppering into Khe Sanh, not to have a beer with his buds. You have heard of Khe Sanh haven't you? Give me a break. At least he wasn't snorting lines when he was supposed to be serving in the guard. Pathetic.
November 24, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are kidding right? That's too funny. You would have to be informed, like you obviously are to take away from the ad what you are arguing, which is a stretch in any event. An uniformed voter, which is, what, 80% or more of the population, would take away from the ad that cleland was supporting terrorists and was a terrorist sympathizer. Hello.
November 24, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stay away O
Let Lieberman save the day
November 24, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eh, Martin is getting the kid glove treatment from Chambliss. Just imagine the kind of commercials ol' Saxby would be running if Martin, say, had five draft deferments for a "trick knee" during Vietnam and is so hobbled now that he's teeing off with Tiger Woods and is known as one of the best linksmen in politics. Now THAT would surely raise the hackles of the valiant military veteran Chambliss and his patriotic supporters.
November 24, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is even more entertaining behind the scenes. According to long-time Georgia political columnist Bill Shipp, the Repubs in the Ga. legislature changed the requirement to require 50% of the vote for senator, thinking it would handicapp the minority Democrats in Georgia. With the third party candidate in the race, it put Saxby in a run-off instead...how justly deserved.
http://www.cherokeetribune.com/content/index/showcontentitem/area/7/section/25/item/122123.html
November 24, 2008 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink