Quinnipiac (2/10-15, registered voters):
David Paterson (D-inc): 23
Andrew Cuomo (D): 55
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 24
Carolyn McCarthy (D): 34
(MoE: ±4.6%)
David Paterson (D-inc): 43
Rudy Giuliani (R): 43
Andrew Cuomo (D): 51
Rudy Giuliani (R): 37
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 42
Peter King (R): 26
(MoE: ±3%)
In the political chess game, David Paterson may have felt he was thinking ten moves ahead by picking Kirsten Gillibrand to fill the vacant Senate seat, by picking a young, charismatic woman with monster fundraising capacities who may well be holding the seat 40 years from now. However, it's starting to look like, in doing so, he wasn't thinking two moves ahead... as Quinnipiac now shows both Paterson and Gillibrand highly vulnerable in the 2010 primary. Picking Andrew Cuomo to fill the Senate seat would have killed two birds with one stone in the short-term for Paterson (get a Senator who's known statewide and ready to stand on his own, and give his electoral archrival something to do other than challenge him in the 2010 election). Instead, he gambled on long-term dividends, and it's possible neither he nor Gillibrand will be around to enjoy them.
The Gillibrand/McCarthy numbers seem likely to evolve over time, as 39% remain undecided. And both candidates seem largely unknown outside their respective corners of the state; Gillibrand's favorables are 24/9 with 65% "haven't heard enough," (and 81% "haven't heard enough" in the NYC Suburbs) while McCarthy's are also 24/9, with 66% "haven't heard enough" (with 88% "haven't heard enough" upstate). An uncontroversial two years for Gillibrand, combined with tacking left on guns and immigration issues, should bring her numbers up (although revelations like the one today that she keeps two guns under her bed can't be helping matters). Gillibrand has little trouble disposing of Rep. Peter King in the general (there's no polling of an all-LI slugfest between King and McCarthy).
Paterson, however, trails Cuomo by a 2-1 margin, and, unlike Gillibrand, everyone knows who he is. His favorables are a fairly grim 41/35, while Cuomo clocks in at 63/15. Cuomo also dominates a hypothetical matchup against Rudy Giuliani while Paterson only ties him. Much of this does, in fact, seem to be blowback from the senator selection process. Paterson gets a mark of 35/52 for approval/disapproval of how he handled the process, down from 44/42 from last month. We may be looking at a truly epic miscalculation from Paterson here, one for the history books. |
