Poll: GOP Lead Shrinks Dramatically in Colorado Senate Race’s Final Days

Incumbent U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, (D-Colo.), left, and his opponent U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner, (R-Colo.), face off during a televised debate at 9News in Denver, Wednesday Oct. 15, 2014. Colorado's U.S. Senate candidates m... Incumbent U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, (D-Colo.), left, and his opponent U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner, (R-Colo.), face off during a televised debate at 9News in Denver, Wednesday Oct. 15, 2014. Colorado's U.S. Senate candidates met for their final televised debate before election day on Nov. 4. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Republican candidate Cory Gardner’s lead over Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) has shrunk significantly in the final days of the Colorado Senate campaign, a new poll found.

The Quinnipiac University poll released Monday put Gardner up by 2 points, 45 percent to 43 percent. That is down from the 7-point Garnder lead, 46 percent to 39 percent, that the pollster found last week.

Early voting has been underway for weeks and Colorado is undertaking its first all mail-in ballot election. Most polling has found Gardner with a slight edge, and another new poll on Sunday from Democratic firm Public Policy Polling gave him a 3-point lead, 46 percent to 43 percent, over Udall.

The Quinnipiac poll, conducted Oct. 28 to Nov. 2, surveyed 815 likely voters. Its margin of error is 3.4 points.

According to TPM’s PollTracker average, Gardner is currently leading 45.8 percent to 44 percent heading into Election Day.

Latest Livewire
38
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for jw1 jw1 says:

    The polling in so many races has ping-ponged for the last week.
    All about creating a narrative-- then not having the numbers to support it?

    COY(D)s!

    jw1

  2. So in less than a week, the very same poll has swung by 5 points, and yet they expect us to believe that these damn polls are not so effing screwed up. I just heard on MSNBC that people talking to the pollsters in Colorado, that the one thing they are being told, is that there has not been ANY polls in that state since the beginning of this race, that has said the same thing. I have been saying this for weeks now, and I will say it again, in race after race I have never seen such bipolar polls.

    As I have also been saying, although we have been told that “likely” voter models are more important. That is total BS, because remember 2012? For months the "registered " voter model had Obama with a decent lead. Then when they changed to the “likely” model, that is when the Cons were running all over the place screaming that Romney was going to win, and even Romney’s internal polling said he was, or so they claimed. Now what happened? Oh yeah when election night was over Obama won, and the funny thing is, the results looked a whole lot like those “registered” voter poll numbers.

    Thousands of people in all of these states have been newly registered in the last two years, meaning not a one of them show up in “likely” voter polls, because that is only people who have voted in the last two elections. How in the hell can a poll be representative, or even close to what is going to happen on election day, when 10’s of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people who are going to vote are left out of EVERY recent poll taken?

  3. Avatar for jep07 jep07 says:

    Once again, those mysteriously disappearing Republican polling advantages, on the eve of an election.

    And once again, I reiterate, if you can’t see the pattern in these skewed polls, you are simply naive.

    I am not saying some of the newer pollsters haven’t developed a fairly reliable model. Nate’s model seems to work quite well.

    When it is done without an agenda other than accuracy, polling certainly can be predictive, even quite accurate.

    But anyone who claims a billion dollars in oldstream ad revenues over the last two elections isn’t enough motive for this rampant polling deception is, at best, naive.

  4. Avatar for jep07 jep07 says:

    …why do you think we call them “CONS?”

  5. And not just in Ad revenues either. I am old enough to remember when we had maybe three reliable polling entities, and now we have them crawling out of the woodwork like roaches. They are making big bucks off this crap too. It is all about following the $$$$$, and how they want to lead us by the nose to get the results the corporatocracy wishes for.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

32 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for bdtex Avatar for cabchi Avatar for jw1 Avatar for jep07 Avatar for rationalleft Avatar for mymy Avatar for leftflank Avatar for fargo116 Avatar for mames5 Avatar for cwazycajun Avatar for xyxox Avatar for squeakyrat Avatar for sniffit Avatar for psyclone Avatar for docb Avatar for midnight_rambler Avatar for ottnott Avatar for robert1971 Avatar for captaincommonsense Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for sjk Avatar for Lizzie Avatar for sashasmom

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: