What a Difference a Day Makes

May 19, 2010 -

In politics, 24 hours is a lifetime when you are in the media spotlight. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal can attest to that personally, thanks to a freshly conducted telephone poll of "likely voters" in the state conducted by Rasmussen. In one day, Republican senatorial candidates are closing in on the Attorney General, who once enjoyed double digit leads over every possible opponent this fall. But the darling of the CT political machine has taken a real credibility hit not only in CT but around the country, following a New York Times report that he exaggerated his military record (or at the very least never corrected the record on it).

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Connecticut finds Blumenthal with a three-point advantage over Republican Linda McMahon - 48 percent to 45 percent. Two weeks ago, he was comfortably ahead by 13 points. Against former GOP Congressman Rob Simmons, Blumenthal leads by 11 points - 50 percent to 39 percent. Two weeks ago, he held a 23-point lead. Blumenthal leads Peter Schiff, a high-profile Wall Street investment banker, 53 percent to 37 percent. In the previous survey, he posted a 54 percent to 29 percent lead over Schiff.

26 percent of voters surveyed say Blumenthal should withdraw from the Senate race. Only nine percent of Democrats believe he should drop out of the race. But by the same token, 53 percent of voters say that Blumenthal's issue of military service will be "somewhat important" in how they vote in November during the general election. That figure includes 27 percent who say the issue is Very Important. 25 percent of voters not affiliated with either political party also consider this issue "Very Important."

Some notes on this poll; 500 Likely Voters in Connecticut were polled by phone on May 18, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95 percent level of confidence. Field work was conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See further details on methodology here.


Comments

Re: What a Difference a Day Makes

Linda McMahon all the way.

She is a saint for putting up with Vince McMahon.

Re: What a Difference a Day Makes

Seriously, third news on this guy in less than 48h.

What did he do, kill your dog? There are worse fishes than him in the ocean.

Also, a 3 pts diff. with a 4.5 error margin? Might have been worth mentioning on the same line, don't you think?

Re: What a Difference a Day Makes

ANd so? Did this guy try and ban games or soemthing?


Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! CP/IP laws should not effect the daily life of common people! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: What a Difference a Day Makes

He raised a big enough stink over a beer pong game on Wiiware that it was renamed to Pong Toss.

Re: What a Difference a Day Makes

Soda Pong would have been a better name, or Skee Pong.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenNow, having said that, what sites are you reading that are claiming that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem" or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"? Or was that hyperbole too?09/21/2014 - 1:03am
Andrew EisenFirst of all, ONE person in the Shout box suggested an obligation to call harassers out on their harassing but only after YOU brought it up. Plus, Techno said "when you see it happening." If you don't see it, you're not under any obligation.09/21/2014 - 1:02am
Sleaker@Craig R. - at this point I don't even know what the hashtags are suppsed to be in support of. what does GamerGate actually signify.09/21/2014 - 12:21am
Sleaker@AE - Hyperbole for the first 2, but it seems like some of the comments in the shout are attempting to place blame on fellow gamers because they aren't actively telling people to stop harassing even though they don't necessarily know anyone that has.09/21/2014 - 12:16am
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician