Quick Hits for Tuesday

I’m calling this a partial sick day. The magic of Claritin D is keeping me from being completely miserable, but my mind’s not quite right. So rather than spend too long trying to make a full post, here’s a couple of quick hits from Rasmussen Reports.

Missouri Senate: Rasmussen finds Roy Blunt to be consolidating his lead, and though of course it’s very early for a general election, a 50-42 lead (MoE 4.5) over Robin Carnahan demands attention. They say an incumbent below 50 is in trouble, so a corollary of that is that a challenger at 50 is doing well. And my model’s 81% lead probability for Blunt testifies to that.

Iowa Governor: In a race we haven’t covered yet, Rasmussen carpet bombed the three matchups for Governor in Iowa. Thankfully it’s one Democrat, Chet Culver, against three Republicans, Terry Branstad, Bob Vander Plaats, and Rod Roberts. I hate the carpet bomb polls, but three matchups is workable.

On to the results: the three Republicans run dramatically differently against the Democrat. Branstand boatraces Culver 53-38 (MoE 4.5 for all of these), taking a virtually certain 95% lead probability. Vander Plaats leads but Culver is close, with the Republican up 45-41 with a 67% lead probability.

On the other hand, Culver leads Roberts 43-41, giving the Democrat a nail-biting 59% lead probability.

Not surprisingly, Branstad looks much better in the favorability ratings, taking an amazing 29% in the very favorable category for a +8 index*. All the other three are underwater. Democrat Culver stands at -21, Vander Plaats at -8, and Roberts at -3. However both Vander Plaats and Roberts are much less known than the leaders, at 21% and 41% Not Sure each.

Will Culver’s apparently decent odds fade after the primary? I have to suspect so.

* For the “index” I’m using Rasmussen’s own standard of subtracting Very Unfavorable ratings from Very Favorable ratings, measuring strong support and opposition. I take that metric as a suggestion that he feels the milder ratings are more fluid in the minds of voters and less useful for projecting results.