Poll: Chris Matthews Only Trailing By Three Points In Possible Senate Bid
Hmm, maybe Chris Matthews does have a chance at getting elected Senator from Pennsylvania!
The new Rasmussen poll of Pennsylvania finds that GOP Sen. Arlen Specter has a bare three-point lead over the Hardball host among likely voters, 46%-43%, with a ±4.5% margin of error. These are not the best of poll numbers for Specter, an incumbent who will have been in the Senate for 30 years at the end of the current term.
Key internal numbers: Specter is attracting 32% of crossover Democratic voters, but only has 70% among Republicans. He's never been that popular with the right-wing base, and very nearly lost a primary challenge back in 2004. And if his support among crossover Dems were to weaken, too, he'd be in big trouble.
Other polls have shown Matthews further back than this, but here's something to keep in mind: All of them have had Specter in the mid-40s, too, with higher undecideds. Since Rasmussen is a robopoll, a method that has a natural tendency to push undecideds much harder, it appears those voters could end up breaking to Matthews as the Dem nominee.
Please run, Chris. You have more than worn out your welcome on the air and have nothing interesting left to say. Quit MSNBC and free up that spot for Chuck Todd or someone...
December 4, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, he's got to win the primary first which won't be easy since the left doesn't particularly care for Matthews and a lot of women in PA still think he was mean to Hillary so they will want their pound of flesh.
Me? I think he would make a lousy senator since being a senator means you have to engage in debate, not just screaming, spitting and talking over your opponent.
December 4, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly! His style is much better suited to the House than the Senate. He wouldn't last 10 minutes in that chamber without choking on his un-spewed comments.
December 4, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Geezzz - I thought he would run as a Republican...
December 4, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Meanwhile, Chris Matthews is Already Instigating an Obama-Hillary Rift
http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=4932
December 4, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
And we all know how accurate polls are two years away from the actual election.
December 4, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
But, but, but, Hillary was supposed to win!
....or was that Edwards?
December 4, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Um, how did Specter nearly lose to a primary challenger in 2000? He ran in 1998 and 2004, unless my math is off...
PEACE
December 4, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was 2004. The typo is now fixed. Thanks.
December 4, 2008 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can he close the deal with the voters? Does he connect with the white, working class salt of the earth types? Can you smell his after shave before he enters and after he leaves? Is that a thrill running up your leg or your man crush for Giuliani? Ha!
December 4, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
You forgot the whiff of cigar smoke...
And Aqua Velvet...
December 4, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Matthews chances are especially good when you consider the fact that Specter will likely face another Club for Growth stooge in the primary, and there is a good chance he would be knocked out then.
But what if Specter then runs as an independent Republican? Oh, the possibilities are endless.
December 4, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
So you mean Specter would be like a Republican Lieberman? Now there's a comparison I'll bet he appreciates!
December 4, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pennsylvania has a "Sore Loser" law, which bars a candidate from getting into the general election if he lost the primary.
If Connecticut had such a law, Ned Lamont would be a Senator right now.
Oddly enough, a lot of these laws were brought in after 1912...
December 4, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
That law ought to be unconstititutional (which it probably isn't since it's a state law).
December 4, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll bite. What's the significance of 1912?
December 4, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm assuming that he's talking about Roosevelt running as a Progressive against Taft - giving the election to Wilson.
December 4, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. I wish I had been this interested in politics when I took American History.
December 4, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just splash on some Aqua Velvet, but don't drop any ashes from your stogie on it cause velvet is hard to clean.
December 4, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can we at least wait until after 1/20 to speculate about the 2010 Senate races? Just askin'. . .
December 4, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
But it's so much fun!!
We could have some very entertaining races in 2010:
Matthews vs. Specter in Pennsylvania.
Lincoln vs. Huckabee in Arkansas.
December 4, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Palin vs. Murkowski in Alaska (I'm dreading that one!) :-)
December 4, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
One more:
Boxer vs. Schwarzenegger in California.
December 4, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's not a good one. I love boxer, but she would have a tough time with ahnold. I really don't get it. Ahnold is a great pr guy, unfortunately. However, he still can't pronounce California. You would think that that would count for something, at least. Ugh.
December 4, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
From an outsider looking in he looks like a fairly decent governor. How's he like on the inside?
December 4, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Middling. At first he sucked, but than he took a left turn when he realized that his popularity was tanking. Actually, he is more democratic, then many democrats and has promoted democratic policies. He's doing a decent job. It's the R by his name and I love boxer.
December 4, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Massive debt (needs bailout larger than the auto industry?), broken promise after broken promise, unions hate him (especially nurses and educators) BUT he has (had?) a nice body and huge name recognition.
Just sayin'...
But in defense of California, they receive $.70 for every federal dollar paid and, if a separate country, would have the 10th largest GNP in the world.
PEACE
December 4, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the info from both you and MichaelA; my in-laws are CA Rs and don't like him (Baptist minister and wife--think he's too liberal [go figure]). My R cousin who works for the CA gov't in the Emergency Response Office (or whatever the correct name is) is middling warm to him, so I was curious.
December 4, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
(had?) yeah, definitely had. Present tense not so much.
December 4, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was talking more about the entertainment value as opposed to how good the result of the race would be for the country (what--politics is more than a bloodsport?)
December 4, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think Huck really wants a piece of Blanche Lincoln, though I'd pay to see that GE myself. :-)
December 4, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
elections are endless in the age of the internet - and that's a good thing, though we should take a break from time to time.
December 4, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you....I'm not yet ready for two more years of ongoing insanity.
December 4, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chris matthews? This is silly, he would get hammered. I hope he doesn't run and the dems run a good candidate. Matthews is like another franken. The problem is franken probably has more name id in minnesota than matthews has in pa. Now if you were talking brit hume, he would have more name recognition. Fox entertainment is probably the most watched cable news in pa, which still doesn't mean squat.
December 4, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except that the left actually hearts Franken which virtually assured his primary win. Matthews? Not so much.
December 4, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. I don't heart franken. The problem is that pa isn't as left as minnesota, so that probably helps matthews, unfortunately.
December 4, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
FWIW coming from a Pennsylvanian, up until the "Obama sends a thrill up my leg" comment, I believed Matthews to be a Republican. So his moderate stance on many issues may play well here, and I am suspect of the assertion that most Pennsylvanians get their news from FuxNews.
What bothers me as a Dem is that Matthews seems to be very prolife, and I'd hate to see PA with two prolife Dems in the Senate from my state (Casey being the other, and the single vote that prevented the overturning of the stem cell veto)
PEACE
December 4, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm from PA as well. Depends on what part you are from. Statewide, dems are more conservative than other states, see casey for senate and knucklehead Santorum from a light-blue state? Very conservative dems.
December 4, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
You ought to check out our DINO, Jim Matheson, if you want to see really consertative Dems. I've been trying for two election cycles now to get him voted out. It would mean dealing with an R for a couple of years, but then we might get a real Democrat into the office. Jim just gets re-elected because we Democrats in the greater Salt Lake area are desperate.
December 4, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The base votes in the primary. Regardless of the state, primary voters represent the extremes in both parties. So liberals dominate the democratic primaries and conservatives dominate the republican primaries.
That's why politicians have to lurch back to the middle for the general, because they've spent so much time running hard left or right in the primary to satisfy the base.
December 4, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
No argument with that, but some states bases are more left or right than others. For example, in alabama or georgia, the base republicans are completely different than say NY base republicans. The reverse applies for PA. I would submit that the PA base dems are more like southern dems, than NY or Minn. dems. That was the point. PA is a very conservative state.
December 4, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me but southern Dems are also known as African Americans!
For the past 20 years, PA has typical of rust belt dems--OH, MI--blacks and blue collar whites. Now that the Republicans have run off all the college-educated whites who believe in science and don't hate gays, you can add them to the mix, too!
December 4, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
True, but I would throw ohio and Mi into a similar category as pa. Not really a huge number of hard core left wing dems. More conservative, just sayin.
December 4, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
First, I should note that "hard core left-wing Dems" don't make up the majority of Dems in most places.
Barack Obama carried PA by 11 points in this year's general, even after McSame/Failin, the National Republican Trust and Freedom's Watch put on a three-week sleaze-a-thon. Bob Casey won his Senate seat in '06 by almost 20 points. Ed Rendell won his last gubernatorial election by 15. The mayors of the two biggest cities are Democrats. Dems hold an edge in Harrisburg as well.
So, I wonder. What else does PA have to do to be considered Democratic?
December 4, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that pa is democratic, it's just "conservative" democratic. That was the point.
December 4, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
First Franken, now Tweety? What is this crap with drop-in celebrities? Can't the party recruit real candidates who are better bets to win seats that should be winnable?
December 4, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agree 1000%. There is too much focus on bullsh*t name recognition. I want action and policies, not bullsh*t.
December 4, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
and just like franken, tweety has some some pretty stupid things that will no doubt come back to haunt him should he actually decide to do this.
December 4, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Matthews is not a bad guy in person. And he is both very, very smart and well-versed in the political (especially legislative political) world from his earlier days. I suspect if he gets in he'll be an effective Senator, for those reasons.
He is, however, the walking, literal personification of a filibuster. Meaning maybe the Senate is a good place for him after all.
December 4, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm for anything that gets this loud-mouthed blowhard off of television (or radio, or the Internet). I pity Pennsylvania if he runs and wins.
December 4, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Matthews were elected to the Senate, he'd be a regular guest on all the cable news shows.
December 4, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
My opnion: The fact that CM is a credibal canitade for any office is just too creepy.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
December 4, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm curious as to what kind of candidate he would make.
He's an interesting character in that on his show he is a bit bi-polar: he's got the usual "Tweety" persona where all he does is sqwauks, but then there are times when he can be a deadly-serious, smart, effective pitbull of a cross-examiner (Michelle Bachmann, the PUMA people, to name a couple). He's obviously got a good handle on policy issues and has a legislative background.....I just would like to see what "personality" would come to the top as a candidate.
December 4, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
December 4, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Specter is that straight guy that teases all the gay guys, but never puts out. If it's a choice between him and another Dem in the Senate, I'll take the Tweetmeister.
Chris loves the debate, whatever his style, which changes depending on his context. He blows hard on Hardball, but is more demure on his own Sunday half-hour show. I believe he cares deeply for the country, and clearly he has the xp to navigate the Senate.
I'd vote for him, though I do not always agree with him, a wholly American sentiment.
Pax,
M.
December 4, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I think Matthews is picking the wrong fight, in the wrong place, against the wrong incumbent.
Pennsylvania isn't a state that easily elects people, especially the first time around. Bob Casey Jr. got stomped by Ed Rendell in a Democratic gubernatorial primary before running for the Senate. Even Rendell got stomped (by Bob Casey Sr.) in a Democratic gubernatorial primary his first time out on the statewide stage.
Also, there's no guarantee Matthews wins a primary, even. There are some people (like Joe Sestak, for example) who could certainly beat Matthews for the Democratic nomination.
I believe Matthews is sincere about wanting to run. But carpetbagging won't play too well here. Plus, Specter is well respected on both sides of the aisle in the state and is moderate enough to attract crossover votes.
If Tweety really wants to do this, I think he'd be much better off finding a vulnerable Republican House seat in the state, run for it, pull off a win and a couple of re-elections, then take a shot at Specter's seat in 2016 (when Specter may well not stand for re-election).
December 4, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink