Poll: Caroline Kennedy Might Put Senate Seat At Risk For Dems

[HeraldSquare212]

Poll: Caroline Kennedy Might Put Senate Seat At Risk For Dems
By Eric Kleefeld - January 6, 2009, 1:52PM

Yet more bad news for Caroline Kennedy's Senate prospects: A new survey from Public Policy Polling (D) shows that if she were appointed to Hillary Clinton's Senate seat, she could potentially put it in danger of a Republican takeover in 2010.

The numbers: Caroline 46%, GOP Rep. Peter King 44%, within the ±3.7% margin of error. State Atty. Gen. Andrew Cuomo leads King 48%-29%.

King's personal numbers are 34% favorable, 26% unfavorable, and the remainder having no opinion. So we can be pretty sure that a good chunk of people saying they would vote for him are really voting against Kennedy, whose own favorable numbers are at 44%-40%. Cuomo's numbers are 57%-20%.

A poll yesterday from PPP showed that Kennedy had also fallen way behind Cuomo as the choice of New York Democrats on who should get the appointment.


http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/poll_caroline_kennedy_might_put_senate_seat_at_ris.php

[ronnykmarshall]

1. This is all Hillary Clinton's FAULT!!

..... well? SOMEONE NEEDS TO SAY IT!!!!!

[HeraldSquare212]

3. LOL. The fact that Hillary hates CKS (so we're told) almost makes me want to see CKS appointed.

But only almost.

[Maven]

2. Never happen.

[SuperTrouper]

4. Yep, Barack Obama was at 6% when he announced for President well behind

Hillary, Edwards and the rest of the field.

[HeraldSquare212]

11. Roberto, I worked for BO, I voted for BO....CKS is no BO.

sorry, couldn't resist.

[w4rma]

5. Cuomo is a good choice, too. Nonetheless this poll is just name recognition. (nt)

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

13. Do Kennedys suffer from low name recognition?

Given the recent news covergae throughout NY State it seems likely her name recognition is higher than King's.

[ShadowLiberal]

29. But Kennedy was been in the news a lot the last few weeks, people are getting to know her

You'd have to be living under a rock lately to not have heard of Caroline Kennedy, or be someone who never watches the news.

People have been seeing quite a bit of Kennedy lately, and this poll shows that they aren't liking her that much now that they've gotten to know her better.

This isn't the only recent poll where Kennedy's numbers have dropped surprisingly quick in such a short amount of time, a poll released in the last day or two gives Andrew Cuomo like a 20% lead among democrats for who should be appointed to Clinton's senate seat, and even longer lead among all New Yorkers.

Carolina Kennedy has in a way become like a Sarah Palin in my opinion. Sure she started out with decent numbers at the time, but once people got to know Palin they didn't like her, so she quickly became extremely polarizing.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/poll_caroline_kennedys_support_collapses.php

[Blarch]

6. Look at that.

Throw Cuomo in there and all of a sudden 15% of Kings vote is undecided.

But with Kennedy, they are decided , against her.

[ErinBerin84]

7. oh, this is the same one from yesterday I guess

Yeah, there was always that at risk....she would have to prove herself if she is appointed.

[HeraldSquare212]

8. I think this is a separate one - yesterday was against Dems, today against Reps

[ErinBerin84]

9. ok, thanks.

I figured maybe I didn't read the full one released yesterday. Peter King sucks...."post 9/11 world" my ass.

[Pyrzqxgl]

10. Peter King is a dweeb. He'd never win NY statewide.

[Renew Deal]

12. King won't be going anywhere once NYers get to know who he is.

He's DOA

[PM7nj]

14. Umm...

Just saying. Two years is a long time.

[anonymous171]

16. lol OBAMA CAN'T WIN!

[Metric System]

20. Oh good grief. Why insult Obama by comparing him to Caroline? Yes, some of the same arguments that

were used against him are now being used against her. However, maybe the critics are right in her case. I don't understand this idea of using Obama to defend Caroline as if they've had a similar journey in life or have shared the same experiences. There is much more to be inspired over what Obama has been able to achieve in politics than Caroline just waltzing into a Senate seat after being so politically inactive for so many years. Come on, she doesn't even come close to Obama in terms of charisma, speaking skills, and smarts.

[MADem]

33. I agree. Obama, "you know" gave a barnburner of a speech at the Boston convention.

Caroline, you know, can barely talk about anything except in, you know, a monotone.

I agree with your assessment...

[MADem]

15. I think CKS is a ghastly choice..."you know?"

What she brings to the table is the ability to raise MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars. But what do you say about a candidate who raises money for public schools, and sends her kids to private school? Heck, you can even gloss over that, but you can't gloss over her VOTING record...or should we say, her "couldn't BOTHER to vote" record.

She speaks in a flat, uninteresting and uninterested monotone, even without the one hundred and sixty eight "You Knows" in one interview. She parrots plainly memorized talking points like she can't even bother to pretend to be animated about them or sell them like an idea worth getting excited about..

To me, her affect suggested medication. If that's natural, it's rather unique.

Here's the interview in full, for those who missed it: http://www.ny1.com/content/news_beats/politics/91347/-i-ny1-web-extra---i--watch-the-entire-interview-with-caroline-kennedy/Default.aspx

I have problems with the "Fundraise for the DNC" in exchange for a Senate seat that is happening here with her, too. It's money for a chair, and the only difference between that deal and the Blago deal is that Blago, if he'd gotten away with selling the seat, might have kept the money for himself...or for his OWN PAC, not the DNC coffers. It's still Quid Pro Quo.

[democrattotheend]

30. How do you think most Senate candidates are recruited?

I work in Washington, and I know that candidates are usually recruited and screened by TPTB based on fundraising ability, access to money, name recognition, and perceived electability. The DSCC and the NRSC don't recruit candidates based on their expertise on the issues or their ability to govern...it's based on money, name recognition, and connections. So until and unless the factors for candidate recruitment are changed, why should we judge Caroline Kennedy any differently? If we are going to hold against her the fact that the main assets she brings are money and star power, we ought to disqualify a whole host of other candidates the DSCC plans to recruit for the next cycle, because those are exactly the factors that the DSCC will use in figuring out which candidates to recruit and to support in primaries. Until then, I'd rather have Caroline Kennedy as a senator than someone else who has the fundraising ability and the name recognition and had to play the game to get them. At least Caroline Kennedy has the money on her own and didn't come up through the NY Democratic machine, so she'd be less beholden to special interests than other potential candidates who have already made deals and played the games they needed to play to move through the ranks of elected office.

[MADem]

32. I "get it." I used to work in Washington, myself.

The point is, among many, it is rather hypocritical to excoriate Blago for selling a seat, when the DNC is doing the same.

The point is, she's "you know" an awful speaker. She's uninspiring. She's probably the worst woman they could possibly find for the job. That calls into question, her, "you know" electablity!

I am in favor of giving the job to CUOMO....MARIO Cuomo. Not Andrew.

Let him placehold, and then let the chips fall where they may in a full throated primary. She can jump in then...in the meantime, maybe she can try to sell herself in the GOP strongholds.

I just think the quick money she'll bring in won't be worth it over the long haul when we lose the NY junior seat to some loudmouth in the GOP who will wipe the floor with her--hell, her personal voting record is ghastly, and she "tee hee, ya know" has no real excuse for not voting.

All of the, "you know" soundbites from that NY1 interview will make a helluva GOP campaign ad. All they have to do is string together a few of those hundred and sixty whatever "you knows" in a thirty second ad, and most people will come away with the impression that she's cracked. I don't see CKS as having the goods to make her case to the GOP side of NY state. Clinton worked it for YEARS and had help. CKS can't even string a sentence together...you know?

I am a champion of more women and minorities in the Senate and the House. There are too many fat white fellers up on the Hill, and the women tend to work harder and answer your phone calls, too. But she's not a good candidate, IMO. I don't think she has "the stuff."

I don't insist that people agree with me, and I'm not from NY so I don't even weigh in on this, but I just think we could do better.

[Barack_America]

17. Does anyone have the "Aw jeez, not this shit again" pic?

Much obliged.

[WI_DEM]

18. why doesn't Patterson just put a caretaker in? like Mario Cuomo who won't run in '10

[ErinBerin84]

22. honestly, I'm beginning to like that idea.

I'm sick of the DU fixation on the seat, when not that much attention was paid to the other appointments. Drama rama.

[BeyondGeography]

19. Peter King is an asshat, but he's also an alley cat

Fighting him with fluff is a singularly awful idea.

[dcindian]

21. They way the Senate Democrats are acting will put the seat at risk.

It doesn't matter one bit who takes the seat. So far the Democrats are acting like a bunch of children and America is watching.

[cecilfirefox]

23. It's New York. I think were safe. nt

[smalll]

24. This should by reason kill Caroline's candidacy.

Why is she the frontrunner really? Because this seat will face a general election BOTH in 2010 and in 2012. And so insiders worried about all the money that would need to be raised to run a key statewide election twice in four years, and who can raise the most money? -- CaroK of course, what with her Kennedy connections and the way she ran around the Oval Office desk so photogenically.

But look, the Republican Party in NYS is pretty weak. Sure, other candidates that Paterson could choose would have a harder time raising so much money. But it's not like the New York State Repubs are going to be fundraising dynamos anytime soon.

However, it turns out that the You Know Princess of Park Avenue is not only inarticulate, but also totally without charisma. Even Holy Joe Lieberman has more charm and spirit than she does.

Hmmm. Lots of money, but a uniquely boring candidate: "The More You Know," the less Caroline looks like the wise choice for New York Democrats.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

25. Why don't we wait to see how she might do as Senator

before we start panicking about what her prospects for election to a full term in 2010 (assuming she gets the appointment, of course) or a Republican win? If she ends up being a walking disaster hopefully she'll have the good sense to resign and allow the New York Democratic Party to run somebody else (i.e. Cuomo) or if not, hopefully the New York Democratic Party will support a challenge to her in the primaries. However, all of this is assuming that she will end up being a disaster on wheels and, well, there ARE "qualified" and long-serving Democratic Senators whom have a much more proven record of failure *cough* Harry Reid *cough* so *how* bad could she be? It's pretty early to write her political obituary and/or to start worrying about a Republican resurgence, isn't it?

[MarjorieG]

26. After non-stop bad media and Congressional aspirants' sniping, polls no surprise.

Then again, polls as manipulation or true reflection?

This has never been about CKS's ability to do the job.

[ClarkUSA]

27. Didn't PPP polls say that Obama couldn't possibly win before he ran for POTUS?

What happened in that case, I wonder?

[jesus_of_suburbia]

28. I hope Caroline gets it... I think her name will help her win again.

From what I heard, she needs to become more personable to the common people, but she can get help with that.


I'm most interested in getting someone who can win. Also, her name alone guarantees the ability to fund raise!

[TheKentuckian]

31. The polls are semi-meaningless

and I'd not expect them to hold in any way over the next couple of years but I don't have a dog in this hunt, Cuomo or Caroline are fine with me and I pray the people of New York send us their leftovers because when Mitch McConnell can reasonably be described as your liberal Senator then there's not much lower to go.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. She would win unless 2010 was a horrid year for Democrats, but...

The DSCC would have to spend money on her to ensure her victory. I'm sure that they would rather not have to worry about defending a blue state like New York. They would indeed rather someone like Cuomo who could not only easily defend himself but probably also have a good bit of his war chest left over to contribute to the DSCC. It's all about the money.

[Occam Bandage]

35. And her numbers are falling the more NY gets to see her. She'd never survive a full campaign.

Her only hope to ever see office is to win a princess appointment, and even then she'd only hang around for two years.

[CreekDog]

36. Andrew Cuomo has been elected to statewide office before

that's always a consideration, not a perfect one, but one nevertheless.

[fujiyama]

37. Her rollout has been awful

She's definitely not nearly as articulate as Hillary when she first began her "listening tour" of the state.

And I think the fact that she'll be appointed just rubs people the wrong way, especially since she has not run for any office before.

Now, I still think she'd make a fairly decent senator (probably be a good ally for Obama on a lot of issues), and win the seat as well unless things REALLY go to hell for Dems, but I think it will still cost money. And while it has been a long time since Schumer beat D'Amato, the state has elected several republicans to statewide office (Pataki for example). Granted, as of late the GOP in the state has collapsed, but still...it's better to never take anything for granted this far out...I think Cuomo may be the safer pick.

I have no issues with Caroline, but it feels like she's being appointed completely due to her name and ability to raise money - and that too because of her name.

[PurityOfEssence]

38. Last time I looked up the definition of "Senator", it seemed the word "politician" kept coming up...

That's a special kind of critter. I'm sure there are worse choices.