NC-Sen: Marshall (D) way ahead of Burr (R-i) among voters who have heard of Marshall

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 18:36


A new North Carolina Senate poll from PPP is perhaps the strongest indication yet that voters are not just in an anti-Democratic mood, but honestly in an anti-incumbent mood.  Democratic frontrunner Elaine Marshall is way ahead of incumbent Republican Richard Burr among voters who have heard of Marhsall:

Among voters who actually have an opinion of Cal Cunningham or Elaine Marshall- whether it's positive or not- they lead Burr. Cunningham is up 46-44 and Marshall is up 49-40.

That 9% lead for Marshall is actually an under-estimation, given that most voters who don't know Burr are actually Democrats:

Most of the voters with no opinion about Burr are Democrats, which could mean that his approval numbers are even worse than they look.

Elaine Marshall can, and should, win this campaign.  Even though she is challenging an incumbent in North Carolina, she is currently polling at a level roughly equal Democratic incumbents in bluer states like Arlen Specter, Michael Bennet and Harry Reid.  She is also doing better than Democrats in other purple states, like Florida and New Hampshire, even though those are open seats.  And, as the above polling shows, she has a lot of room for growth.

Marshall has the right resume for a Democrat in 2010.  Her background is in financial regulations, and her main legislative achievement was pushing the North Carolina legislature to enact tougher anti-lobbying laws. From her website:

The Secretary of State's office today is a key law enforcement agency protecting consumers, investors, and charitable givers against securities fraud and financial scams. Elaine's commitment to protecting investors and combating financial fraud has in just the past year and a half alone lead to the recovery of over $340 million from major Wall Street banks for North Carolina investors and foundations.

Since taking office, Elaine has cut the costs of doing business for companies and individuals -helping small businesses create jobs. She has taken on lobbyists in Raleigh, reforming North Carolina's ethics laws.

Here is to hoping she is willing to run on a populist, anti-Wall Street platform, rather than a more generic anti-big government platform that consumes so many southern Democratic candidates.

Either way, Marhsall is way ahead in the Democratic primary, by 35% according to the most recent poll, and that is a good thing.  Her main opponent in the primary, Cal Cunningham, would be another Blanche Lincoln.  From a source over email:

Cal just had a fundraiser in DC hosted by a couple of lobbyists one of whom who's proclaims him being a founder of Third Way and involvement with the DLC. The other co-host was Blanche Lincoln's former Chief of Staff. The lobbying firm that held the event, their client roster reads like a who's who of the usual suspects that worked to torpedo HCR (AHIP, Pharma, etc).

Go Marhsall, go!

This is a very winnable Democratic pickup in a purple state in a bad year for Democrats.  Further, the strongest Democratic candidate in the general election also happens to be the more progressive candidate in the primary.  This is a primary, and a general election, we need to win.

Chris Bowers :: NC-Sen: Marshall (D) way ahead of Burr (R-i) among voters who have heard of Marshall

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Chris ... (4.00 / 2)
thanks for this ... I don't know how in the world I ever got on Cunningham's mailing list(sharing by another Congresscritter most likely) .. but next time I get crap from him .. I'll be sure to unsubscribe .. we don't need any more Blanche Lincolns .. and I hope Marshall points that out

Will the real Blanche Lincoln please stand up? (2.00 / 2)
From October:

"With climate change, Marshall said she didn't know enough to comment about the bill introduced by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., to cut carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2050.

Climate change was something to which the government should pay attention, but it might be too early to take large steps, she said."

Cunningham, meanwhile, said he supported the Senate bill so much that he went to Washington to meet with Kerry on Wednesday when it was filed.

Cunningham, 36, a lawyer and one-term legislator, stepped down after his district's boundaries were redrawn. As a U.S. Army Reserves captain from Lexington, he served as a military prosecutor in Iraq. That is why he said it is important to rely less on foreign oil and more on clean, alternative fuels.

"I just spent a year of my life in a part of the world that wouldn't be important to our country's foreign policy except that there is oil under the sand," he said.



"Keep the Faith"

Either way, Burr must go. (0.00 / 0)
He's too conservative for North Carolina.

Spoke with Marshall on Saturday (4.00 / 5)
I don't know much about positions Marshall has taken over her career, but I spoke with her again at an event at the governor's mansion on Saturday morning. She's running a savvy campaign targeting likely primary voters.

She's been using current news items to send out regular e-mails that spotlight her positions on issues of interest to progressives - health care and Wall Street reforms, and asking supporters to call into MA in support of Martha Coakley. Smart. Having run and won statewide elections, Marshall doesn't have to buy name recognition as Cal Cunningham must.

Cal's biggest handicap is the support of the DSCC. First he was in, then he was out, then he changed his mind again once the DSCC agreed to back him. Nothing against Cal, but North Carolinians would rather Washington stay out of selecting their candidates. Progressives have learned to distrust candidates picked by the national party.  

One-on-one, Cal's a nice enough guy - a former one-term state senator who served as a JAG in Iraq and went after procurement fraud. But he comes across as a slick lawyer when giving speeches. That will hurt him. On the other hand, for a tough campaigner Elaine has a casual manner, is easy to talk to, and comes across as the sharpest neighbor on your street. A neighbor who just happens to be North Carolina's secretary of state.  

Taking Back America, One Radio at a Time.


And don't forget (4.00 / 4)
Elaine Marshall first won state-wide office by beating NASCAR legend Richard Petty. No small feat that in the tarheel state.

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...

[ Parent ]
Why is the DSCC backing Cunningham? ... (0.00 / 0)
I don't get it .. he's not as well known .. among other things .. and he doesn't poll as well

[ Parent ]
The other explanation (4.00 / 7)
is that the DSCC would rather support less viable neo-liberals (See Fisher, Lee) than more viable populist progressives (see Brunner, Jennifer), because ideology matters more than viability.

Of course, this isn't necessarily ideologically driven - it may be that are worried about big money donations.  But the result is the same.  

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.


[ Parent ]
I don't think ideology is really the factor (0.00 / 0)
It's a tempting story but the DCCC/DSCC are really oriented by who can wins elections.  They may be wrong about who's more electable - like they may be in this case - but their mindset is always about electability.

For example, in OH in 2006 it was widely believed that Sherrod Brown was more electable than Paul Hackett, despite Brown being noticeably to Hackett's left.  And the DSCC and other Democratic institutions overwhelmingly favored Brown, to the point where Hackett bitterly complained about them publicly.

Most of the time perceived electability has to do with perceived centrism and perceived ability to raise money (which often go hand-in-hand).  It's not often that you have a viable liberal candidate AND the establishment agrees with it.  So that's why the DSCC appears to favor more centrist candidates.


[ Parent ]
I'm not convinced that ideology (4.00 / 1)
alone drives it, although I do think it matters (and may well color what they think is viable - especially since neoliberalism generally is believed to be a lack of ideology - which makes it difficult to take care to avoid this problem.)  

You are right that establishment support also matters - but it's not an either or.

One more thing - I don't agree that they are always trying to choose the most viable candidate for each seat (even leaving ideology aside.) A real populist candidate makes it harder for Democratic incumbents to raise money from those who oppose populism (i.e Wall Street.) It's not a simple decision of what is best seat by seat.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.


[ Parent ]
re: marshall (4.00 / 3)
Her background is in financial regulations, and her main legislative achievement was pushing the North Carolina legislature to enact tougher anti-lobbying laws.

nice


I love stories like this (4.00 / 1)
Thanks for posting this and bringing this interesting incumbent challenge to our attention.

I hate to hear all the stuff about how many Democrats will lose their seats in 2010, in stories that completely ignore that many Republicans will also lose.

The Senate has done such an awful job in 2009 that I could wish that every incumbent running for reelection would lose. (That would be a net gain for Democrats, right?) Of course, almost every incumbent except my own Senator, Boxer. I wouldn't shed a tear for Feinstein, though, and I hope she does not run again.  

ec=-8.50 soc=-8.41   (3,967 Watts)


Second that on Feinstein (0.00 / 0)
Actually, I was hoping she'd run for Governor this year, so she could 1.) Give us a viable alternative to Jerry Brown 2.) Vacate her Senate seat and hopefully get a real liberal (my pick would be Phil Angelides) into that seat.

[ Parent ]
First off, thanks to Chris for posting this story (0.00 / 0)
I like it when Open Left discusses important elections, where we can actually work to make our future better by putting good people into office.

That said, I'm not sure if one candidate has a significant liberal advantage over the other here.  There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of information out there about them.  Marshall's website is incredibly sparse - her Issues page only discusses financial reform, Afghanistan and education.  Cunningham's is a little better but most of his positions are vague and standard New Democrat fare - small-bore education tax credits, deficit obsessing and "restrain spending", a health care page that speaks in generalities and makes no mention of Medicare for All or the public option.

To me, this seems like an unfortunate choice between the crap you see and the crap you don't.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox