Franklin & Marshall College is back with a new poll of the Pennsylvania races, file courtesy of Real Clear Politics, but I don’t trust the results.

It’s not just that the result seem to shade a bit more to the Republicans than I’m used to seeing, though. It’s that the numbers overall are just so low that it has me wondering.

College polls already have a shaky reputation with me, but when I see a result like Republican Pat Toomey 40, Democrat Joe Sestak 31 (MoE 5.4), I have to wonder where the other 29% are. This Senate race is one of the most heavily covered in the country, thanks to the party switch of Arlen Specter, the previous run of Toomey, and the allegations of impropriety around Barack Obama’s treatment of Sestak.

I just don’t believe for a second that so many voters have no opinion yet, not a bit. The last by Rasmussen was 48-40 for 12% undecided, the last PPP was 45-36 for 19% undecided, and the last Quinnipiac was 43-43 for 16%. 29% seems far too high to me.

But yet, the margins look pretty much right to me. That includes the 11 point margin Republican Tom Corbett maintains over Democrat Dan Onorato for Governor, even if their absolute numbers are way down at 38-27. 35% undecided? Pull the other one, Franklin & Marshall.

Possibly Related Posts

• April 12, 2010 -- Quick Hits for Monday
• August 18, 2010 -- Toomey comfortably ahead, says two (and a half) polls
• August 3, 2010 -- Corbett steady as Toomey and Sestak joust

We’re in for the long haul in the Pennsylvania Senate race, because I honestly do expect this one to be in the toss-up range from now to Election Day, but that doesn’t mean we don’t get to check in on the polls obsessively the whole time looking for clues.

Today: Rasmussen updates on the race.

First, the Rasmussen history on this matchup: March 15: Toomey +5. April 12: Toomey +11. May 6: Toomey +2. May 19: Sestak +4. One might say before now that Toomey peaked in April and the trend is for the upstart Democrat.

But no. As I expected, the pendulum has shifted back for now. Toomey 45, Sestak 38 (MoE 4.5). Add to that history June 2: Toomey +7. I’m still expecting Sestak to lead again at some point though, despite the huge 11 point swing for Toomey since the last poll.

But that’s not to say this current shift is purely random. Scandal seems to have driven at least part of this swing. Rasmussen polled on the allegations that the White House used former President Bill Clinton to offer Joe Sestak a job in exchange for clearing the primary for Arlen Specter. 42% are following the story very closely, and 72% combined are following it very or somewhat closely. 41% think it’s not very or not at all important to their votes, while 52% think it’s somewhat or very important.

So whether the next random swing lets Sestak recover this whole 11 point swing seems to depend in part on whether Sestak is cleared in this story, or whether the whole thing blows over entirely.

Possibly Related Posts

• August 26, 2010 -- I don’t trust this new Pennsylvania poll
• May 17, 2010 -- Primary Eve in Pennsylvania
• May 11, 2010 -- How does Sestak match up against Toomey?

Per Real Clear Politics there were six pollsters who took on the Pennsylvania primary, which Joe Sestak won handily by 8, 54-46 over Arlen Specter.

Let’s see who got it right, and also give credit to a particular pollster where it is due.

First, the losers.

• Quinnipiac’s final poll had Sestak just barely up, 42-41 (51-49 among non-undecideds). Sorry.
• Muhlenberg College/Morning Call had it tied (50-50 among non-undecideds). Nope.
• Research 2000/Daily Kos had Sestak slimly ahead 45-43 (51-49 minus undecideds) Try again.
• Franklin & Marshall had Sestak up 2, 38-36 (51-49 minus undecideds). You lose.

I went into the primary wondering if it would go to a recount, given that almost everyone had this thing close. But the counting barely started when I started to hear Specter was toast, which he was. But now, the winners who defied the norm and had Sestak clearly up:

• Rasmussen had Sestak up 5, 47-42, which translates to 53-47 when we subtract the undecided. That’s only one point from Sestak’s final tally.
• Suffolk also got close. They had Sestak up 9, 49-40, which would look like an outlier and easily dismissed when compared with the field. But when subtracting undecided that takes us to 55-45, also one point off of Sestak’s actual result.

Congratulations Suffolk University and Rasmussen Reports. You got one.

Also deserving a nod is Susquehanna Polling and Research. They, too, defied the trend that said the PA-12 special election was neck and neck by saying Mark Critz was ahead of Tim Burns 44-38 (54-46 subtracting undecideds). I said that was suspect because everyone else said otherwise.

Well, Critz beat Burns 53-46. Well done, Susquehanna.

Possibly Related Posts

• May 17, 2010 -- Primary Eve in Pennsylvania
• May 12, 2010 -- Pennsylvania update
• April 12, 2010 -- Quick Hits for Monday

One more day until the big primary election in Pennsylvania, and two big races to watch. Who replaces Jack Murtha? Who faces Pat Toomey in November?

Let’s dig in.

Two polls on the Senate Primary for the Democrats. Qunnipiac University out today shows Sestak slightly ahead at 42-41 (MoE 3.2), and Muhlenberg/Morning Call from yesterday reads a 44-44 tie. If any race is too close to call, this is it.

Not that the special election isn’t trying to match it. PPP gives Tim Burns the bare 48-47 lead (MoE 3.4) over Mark Critz. I sure wish we had more polling on this race, in order to know better just how off the Susquehanna poll was. But still I think it’s safe to say either candidate can win.

Possibly Related Posts

• May 19, 2010 -- Grading the Pollsters: Pennsylvania Edition
• May 12, 2010 -- Pennsylvania update
• April 21, 2010 -- Pennsylvania Special: Replacing Jack Murtha

We’re less than a week away from primary election day in Pennsylvania, so let’s take a look at the latest polling news from the House Special election to replace Jack Murtha, the Senate primary for Arlen Specter’s seat, and a surprisingly interesting House race.

Susquehanna Polling and Research came out with a pair of House polls. Their poll of the 12th district special election looks strange to me, though. Their sample of “400 Registered Likely Voters” shows a better than 2-1 advantage for Democrats, 63-29, and unsurprisingly Mark Critz leads Tim Burns in their poll 44-38 (MoE 4.9).

That partisan advantage strikes me as off. Cook Political Report gives the seat an R+1 PVI. For a comparison, Research 2000/Daily Kos gives Democrats a 53-36 (MoE 4) advantage in that seat. Susquehanna is giving Democrats a 17 point swing in registration, resulting in a 12 point swing for the Democrat.

I’m inclined to discount the poll pending confirmation.

So I’m also suspicious of this other Susquehanna poll I’ve come across, featuring trouble for incumbent Democrat Tim Holden in CD 17. Only 38% of likely primary voters want to see Tim Holden re-elected, though he leads the primary 54-27. The Republican four-way primary is a mess, with Dave Argall ahead of Frank Ryan 21-17.

But after seeing the huge discrepancy between Susquehanna and the usually reasonable DKos/R2000 poll, I don’t know whether to pay it much heed. Though oversampling Democrats wouldn’t really make Tim Holden feel better, would it?

Finally, the race we’ve all been waiting for, the primary between Joe Sestak and Arlen Specter. I said before that Specter needed to stop the bleeding to keep from losing badly. Per Real Clear Politics, Specter has regained a tie in the Morning Call/Muhlenberg College tracking poll, evening it up at 45. Anyone could yet win this, it seems.

Possibly Related Posts

• May 19, 2010 -- Grading the Pollsters: Pennsylvania Edition
• May 17, 2010 -- Primary Eve in Pennsylvania
• April 12, 2010 -- Quick Hits for Monday

Thanks to Arlen Specter’s collapse, it’s now more than academic to see how Joe Sestak matches up against Pat Toomey in the Pennsylvania Senate rate. So, on to Rasmussen’s poll from the 6th.

In short, this is a race we’ll all be watching from now to November. Toomey at this point routs Specter, but nobody cares anymore. Sestak though is consolidating support among Democrats and has caught right up to Toomey. Toomey leads 42-40 (MoE 4.5), for a sliver of an advantage with a 58% lead probability.

Democrats seem to be making a smart choice as with Sestak they have much better chances of holding onto this seat, one Republicans badly need for any chance at a Senate majority after this election.

Possibly Related Posts

• August 26, 2010 -- I don’t trust this new Pennsylvania poll
• September 1, 2010 -- Toomey maintaining his lead
• August 18, 2010 -- Toomey comfortably ahead, says two (and a half) polls

Every single time we’ve been looking at the polls for the Pennsylvania Primary election, Arlen Specter was way ahead of Joe Sestak. Then he commented that he regretted leaving the Republican Party.

Uh oh.

I was stunned when I saw the Sunday edition of the Mulhenberg College/Morning Call tracking poll of the primary. It showed a steady decline for Specter and a steady rise for Sestak over May, taking Specter from a 48-42 lead, to a 42-46 deficit (MoE 5).

And then today, confirmation: Rasmussen also shows Sestak having made the improbable comeback, leading 47-42 (MoE 4.5).

At this point I question whether Specter has any shot at all, if this trend continues. Though if he can stop the bleeding he’s still in it.

Possibly Related Posts

• May 19, 2010 -- Grading the Pollsters: Pennsylvania Edition
• May 17, 2010 -- Primary Eve in Pennsylvania
• May 12, 2010 -- Pennsylvania update

Public Policy Polling looked into the special election in Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, the seat vacated by the late Jack Murtha.

Republican Tim Burns comes out with a narrow lead, 44-41 (MoE 2.8) over Democrat Mark Critz. I see a 70% chance Burns is actually ahead right now, but of course a race this close could move either way by the end.

PPP notes that besides Critz being behind, Barack Obama, Arlen Specter, and Ed Rendell are all unpopular as well, making this a district and climate unfavorable to a Democrat in general. So, they say it would be surprising for Critz to win here.

I don’t think they go far enough. I suspect Critz is doing better than any of the three leaders of his party polled because of one advantage. Critz never had to make an official decision on the PPACA which is important when the poll shows disapproval of “President Obama’s health care plan” by a 59-28 margin.

Is that bill a problem more than party label? Are special elections giving fresh Democrats better chances to win than their incumbents will have later, meaning all the wins they’ve been racking up aren’t predictive of November? I think that just may be the case, reading polls like these.

Possibly Related Posts

• May 17, 2010 -- Primary Eve in Pennsylvania
• May 19, 2010 -- Grading the Pollsters: Pennsylvania Edition
• May 3, 2010 -- Tim Burns consolidates his lead

Here are a few polls that came out from later Friday to today that I don’t think deserve a full work-up, but are worth mentioning at least.

Looking at the Ohio Governor’s race: Daily Kos and Research 2000 have Strickland ahead again 45-40, MoE 4. The lines seem drawn now: Quinnipiac and Kos said Ted Strickland is up, Rasmussen and PPP said John Kasich is up. My conclusion: they have a fight on their hands, but Kasich had better keep busy because the trend is against him and for the incumbent.

If Rasmussen is even close to right, Charlie Crist is finished in the Republican primary for the Florida Senate race, as Marco Rubio crushes him 57-28. I’m grateful to see Rasmussen doing a primary poll, regardless!

This poll by Muhlenberg College for Morning Call of the big Pennsylvania races looks strange to me. Nearly half the electorate is undecided for the Pat Toomey/Joe Sestak matchup as well as every pairing for Governor. In a state Democrats win so often as Pennsylvania, I expect a unity bounce after the primary.

With a Margin of Error of 5 (or is it 40 for the Governor’s race, I can’t tell), the poll found Arlen Specter 40/Pat Toomey 47, Joe Sestak 40/Pat Toomey 33 in the Senate pairings. For Governor, Republicans unite behind Tom Corbett to give him leads of 42-18 over Don Onorato, 44-16 over Jack Wagner, and 45-11 over Joe Hoeffel.

Corbett had better hope he can get his fundraising in now with those numbers, as I see no way at all that Democrats stay under 20 for the Governor’s race in Pennsylvania. This poll I can find no use for at all. None.

Possibly Related Posts

• August 26, 2010 -- I don’t trust this new Pennsylvania poll
• May 19, 2010 -- Grading the Pollsters: Pennsylvania Edition
• August 18, 2010 -- Toomey comfortably ahead, says two (and a half) polls

Yesterday we looked at a poll from Public Policy Polling, but today we have a new poll from Quinnipiac University.

Amusingly enough, while we’ve seen Quinnipiac overcount Democrats in Ohio, their results for Specter and Sestak come in just under PPP’s findings.

That’s right. Quinnipiac gives Toomey the same levels of support against Specter (46) and Sestak (42) that PPP found. However the Democrats each lost two points. Specter dropped from 43 to 41, and Sestak fell from 36 to 34.

The Margin of Error for the Quinnipiac poll is 2.6 versus 3.2 for the PPP poll.

Of course nobody thinks that the Democrats just collapsed a bit in Pennsylvania. This is just random fluctuation. Take this same poll three times in a row and you’ll get three similar, but slightly different, results. It’s just chance that Toomey didn’t budge.

Toomey’s ahead for the moment, but I just know we’re all going to be hanging on every poll of this race from now to November.

Possibly Related Posts

• August 26, 2010 -- I don’t trust this new Pennsylvania poll
• May 17, 2010 -- Primary Eve in Pennsylvania
• April 12, 2010 -- Quick Hits for Monday