Boxer Opens Small Lead

4Yesterday, we got the Field Poll’s take on the Governor’s race, and today we get the state of the Senate race.  While there wasn’t any major movement in the head to head, Sen. Boxer picked up 3 points to open a 47-41 lead, there were some other interesting statistics.

First, as you would expect, both candidates are doing similarly well within their own party, hovering in the upper 70s.  But while nonpartisans are split at the Governor level, Boxer holds a 6 point lead here, 46-40.  

But what is worth noting is that while Carly Fiorina hasn’t really inspired anybody, Sen. Boxer gets people moving one way or the other.  2/3 of her supporters are voting for her, for her.  Meanwhile, over 60% of Carly’s supporters are motivated by their dislike for the incumbent.  In California, Boxer has been an occasional lightening rod, but one thing that you can say for her is that she has the support of the grassroots base.  What is expected and nurtured in the Republican party, is typically shunned within the Democratic Party.  But Senator Boxer embraces the grassroots. She supports marriage equality, and has worked passionately for years on the climate crisis.  She is giving Democrats something to fight for.

Meanwhile, Carly Fiorina’s unfavorables continue to rise. Since July she has hovered at 34% positive, but her unfavorables have grown from 29 to 38.  There is still a lot of room for growth with 28% undecided, but California voters have not liked what they have heard about the failed CEO of Hewlett-Packard.  

The Bee has a pretty picture of much of this data here.

3 thoughts on “Boxer Opens Small Lead”

  1. First let me say I’m a lifelong Democrat and consider my self to be a progressive.  I understand that Barbara Boxer is one of the most liberal candidates around.

    That’s why the following two issues are of such problematic concern to me.

    What was so liberal or progressive about her “Bill of Attainder” b.s. against ACORN.  Boxer’s position was a complete “Oh my, the Republicans are barking and whining and I must respond to their cries for help”

    She wasn’t the only Dem to play that game, but that still bothers me.

    The other issue that REALLY bothers me is that Californian’s who support medical-marijuana and especially ending the propaganda-dependent cannabis prohibition have no champion.

    This is problematic to me because the status quo position on legalization held by Boxer is representative of agreeing that its okay to have propaganda as policy.

    Even a neutral position is squarely at odds with liberal AND progressive idealism and more importantly POLITICAL TRUTH.

    If the Republicans weren’t running such Wall Street extremists, I’d sit out this election entirely.

    I’m part of her base, and I think she’s TOTALLY WRONG on her anti-cannabis legalization position.

    In fact, the reason I’m writing this is I’d like to organize Democrats and anyone eles to quit voting for candidates who pretend the drug war isn’t a failure.

    If you’re against legalization then you’re for propaganda in our legal code.  It really is as simple as that.

    I DID NOT vote for Boxer, Brown, or Feinstein in the primary out of protest for their anti-legalization positions.  I did vote for my rep. Lynn Woolsey, because even though she has similar views to Boxer on legalization she IS a champion for medical-marijuana patient’s rights.

    While I’d like to sit out 2010 I’m aware that satisfying my emotions and not voting would help the party of NO WAY.  The only thing worse than lame Democrats is the Republican Party’s apathy towards participating in our de facto two-party system.


Comments are closed.