Just as in her two previous re-election races, Barbara Boxer rates an uncommittal "eh?" (link to PDF) from California voters more than one year out from election day. She also squashes potential GOP opponents.
The latest Field Poll asked a representative cross-section of this state’s voters about their inclination to re-elect Boxer to another term. The results show that voters are about evenly divided, with 43% inclined and 44% not inclined to re-elect her. While not a ringing endorsement, this is a slightly better assessment than Boxer received early in each of her two previous re-election runs, both of which she eventually won by comfortable margins.
These previous re-election races, in 1998 and 2004, showed a similar divide in the electorate prior to Boxer’s reelection campaigns. A May 1997 Field poll showed "a slight plurality of voters were disinclined to support her for a second term." Boxer then won her 1998 re-election, over former state treasurer Matt Fong, by a ten-point margin.
Even more ominously, in April 2003, only 38% of California voters were inclined to support Boxer for re-election, while 43% did not. The following year, she trounced former California secretary of state Bill Jones, 58/38.
The current Field poll shows the same pattern: indifferent to her re-election, California voters greatly prefer Boxer to her potential opponents in the GOP, thought now to be either the vastly unpopular Governor Arnold Schwarzegger or Hewlett-Packard golden parachutist Carly Sneed Fiorina.
Boxer’s numbers in the current poll against these opponents look like this:
When Boxer is paired against Schwarzenegger in a simulated November 2010 general election match-up, she leads by a comfortable 54% to 30% margin. This is quite different from an October 2007 Field Poll in which Schwarzenegger held a slight 44% to 43% lead over Boxer.
When Boxer is paired against Fiorina in the current survey, the incumbent is preferred by a greater than two to one margin (55% to 25%).
No head-to-heads were conducted against state senator Chuck DeVore (R-Wingnut).
If the state allows gay marriage, DeVore said, it would have to allow polygamy because it could be argued as a First Amendment right. "If you proceed down this path, you will open Pandora’s box," he said.
DeVore is the only announced candidate to oppose Boxer, but he only attains 9% in a hypothetical GOP primary against Arnold (31%) and Carly (24%). Without Arnold in that primary, DeVore rises to 19% and Carly to 31%, with a huge 50% undecided.
Will Barbara Boxer perform her magic a third time, despite an electorate about as seemingly indifferent to her re-election as Californians were in 1997 and 2003? Or will one of the GOP hopefuls find a way to exploit that "eh?" factor that Boxer has previously turned into hefty vote totals?
Will California voters, despite their recurring apparent willingness to cast Barbara Boxer aside, again return her to office? Perhaps they remember her very first campaign slogan and decide: well, at least "Barbara Boxer Gives A Damn."



18 Comments








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Interesting that the two leading potential Republican candidates each have a record of spectacular failure, although Carly’s incompetent stewardship of HP is dwarfed by Arnold’s incompetent stewardship of California. Seems like the GOP would be better served by randomly selecting a person off the street. Is there sufficient time for Joe the Plumber to establish CA residency?
Hey Teddy,
I say they’ll retain her.
lol!
great comment rat!
Boxer’s a TOTAL ASSET to our pathetic senate.
She’d sure make a great majority leader.
*sigh, hint hint*
While there is always some ambivalence to Boxer, when the election approaches Californians begin to see her as a far better option that anything the Republicans could ever place as an alternative. They’ve tried extremists and “moderates” to no avail…and given the current disgust with Republicans holding the California economy hostage, and the fact that few are willing to assist the Republican Party at the Federal level to continue their shenanigans, they really don’t have much of a chance.
It’d take a real scandal of epic proportions.
All it takes is 50% + 1
I’ll be volunteering for her again
… or is it “meh”?
talk about damning with faint praise
Blue America up at the Mothership with Emanuel Pleitez, running to replace Hilda Solis
Not much of a thread, I don’t see any actual drama about her getting re-elected. Maybe we Californians are just lukewarm about all politicians. She’ll continue to get my vote.
Would someone ’splain to me why Boxer is less liked than DiFink in California. 52 percent having a favorable vs 57 percent for Feinstein in Field Polls? Other than George Murphy, I can’t think of a Californian that could care less about California.
Field Poll didn’t use Lungren as a potential opponent. Just sayin’ that I have a feeling about this – he’s gonna get stepped but good in CD3, maybe he’ll think of sidesteping that loss by running for Senate. Or go back to being a lobbyist.
Feinstein makes my skin crawl. She lost what little credibility she had left when she did that whole suck-up-to-Mukasey thing.
Boxer, what’s NOT to like?
Voted against Iraq War Invasion.
Voted against FISA (broke with Di Sci-Fi to do so, BLESS Boxer’s heart).
Supports Women’s Rights.
Supports Environmental Issues On Green Side.
BIG supporter of Election Reform (anti Diebold, etc).
Pro LGBT issues for the most part.
Pro Education.
Pro Free Internet, Increased Broadband Access For All.
Stood up to Bush appointee’s.
What’s NOT to like? As Wiki shows, she also keeps her husband and her personal life out of her politics.
I don’t know what lobbyists might have gotten to her during her lengthy career (she’s almost 70) but it hasn’t shown up in public that she’s beholden to anyone.
Almost a Phreakin Saint, in present political terms, for a Pub OR a Dem . . . she’s got my vote. No brainer.
Now Sci-Fi, that’s a whole ‘nother barrel of sour pickle to dip into . . . she’s about as sainted as Delay or any of the Pubs and beholden to so many it’s sick. A total disgrace to CA, and the Dem Party.
Nice read Mr. Partridge . . . . thanks. I needed a reminder of Boxer, and ANY pol that’s not raising a stench of SOME sorts today . . *G*
I know you guys tend to be shrill partisans and all, but really, “saint”? Google “Rubbergate”. No-brainer indeed.
Many Californians are “meh” because they see the same suits getting re-elected by special interests and partisan sheeple over and over, despite the state continuing to fall apart more and more, year after year.
P.S. Try to keep it in your collective pants about Arnold’s demise. After all, I doubt anyone would make any constructive progress with the kind of legislators he’s had to work with.
Probably because she has a much lower profile in the news. DiFi gets more attention.
Rubbergate’s covered in the WIKI Mr. Partridge posted . . . if that’s all ya got to diss on Boxer with, then yer trollin for pubs. *G*
Your second sentence is quite non Boxer related but certainly a generally broad brush. Thanks for sharing that.
Arnold is a whackaloon, was a whackaloon, and will always be a whackaloon. He’s a shill for the moneyed party.
He deserves every bit of ridicule we can heap on him, as do the GOP, and all their minions who PUT us in this mess from 40 years or so of their policy which was basically self serving to the upper crust.
Good luck tryin to make your points in here, as weak as ya have . . *G*
I’d ordinarily be inclined to support her. But then again, I haven’t forgotten her support of Joe Lieberman. Even when it became clear that progressives opposed him, she stayed with him–even when he stabbed progressives in the back, again and again and again and….
Ever since then, I’ve been thinking of dumping her.
And then the Repug options are presented….
Barbara Boxer should be replaced. Her support for Joe Lieberman is reason enough. She is a blue dog.