Neva-d’oh! 68% Of Nevadans Regret Nominating Sharron Angle

Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle (R)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

If Nevada voters could do it over again, they’d really, really like to nominate someone not named Sharron Angle, according to a new PPP poll.

In the poll, 68% of Nevadans said they think Republicans should have nominated someone other than Sharron Angle to challenge Sen. Harry Reid last year. Only 21% said the GOP did the right thing in nominating Angle, and 11% had no opinion.

Angle surged to a surprise victory in the Republican primary due to strong Tea Party support and a big gaffe — followed by an even bigger gaffe — by the presumptive nominee, Sue Lowden. Lowden consistently led in polls until she suggested that the barter system would be a reasonable alternative to the Democratic Party’s health care plan. When that proposal was roundly mocked, Lowden decided not to walk it back, instead forging on to say that patients should “bring a chicken to the doctor.”

Lowden immediately dropped in the polls like some sort of flightless bird.

Angle’s general election campaign was bizarre, to say the least. She ran from the press, refused to answer specific policy questions prior to the election, accused Reid of wanting to give Viagra to sex offenders, proposed eliminating Social Security, and, in general, proved to be one of the cycle’s most unintentionally entertaining candidates.

Then there was her campaign appearance in front of Latino students, where Angle, responding to criticism that one of her ads negatively depicted Latinos as illegal immigrants, told the students that some of them looked “a little more Asian” to her.

Despite all that, Angle was widely considered the slight favorite heading into Election Day. In the end though, Reid won by a comfortable 50.2% to 44.6%.

The PPP poll was conducted January 3-5 among 932 voters in Nevada. It has a margin of error of 3.2%.

Latest DC
1
Show Comments
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: