Poll: Wyden 49%, Hoffman 35%

The poll of the week goes to Rasmussen Reports which shows that a new face can get 35% on the once invincible Senator Ron Wyden. This means there is room to grow. Law Professor Jim Huffman would make a great candidate and challenger to Wyden. From Rasmussen Reports,
The first Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 telephone survey of likely voters in Oregon finds incumbent Democratic Senator Ron Wyden with a 49% to 35% lead over law professor Jim Huffman, the most prominent Republican reportedly considering running against him. Seven percent (7%) prefer some other candidate, and nine percent (9%) are undecided.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 09:37 | Posted in Measure 37 | 12 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Richard

    Not so, It seem we can get a lot of candidates to poll in the 35% but 35% is not a winning number. Recent elections history say unless the republican is strongly ahead, this will repent in another close election loss.

  • valley p

    McCain managed to get 41%, so that there are 35% of Oregonians who would probably vote for any Republican is not a cause for celebration. Huffman has a snowballs chance and not much more than that. He is an ideological conservative and this is not a state where that ever plays well.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      >He is an ideological conservative and this is not a state where that ever plays well.

      Ever?

      Not quite.

      Remember, Reagan was an ideological conservative and he did win Oregon.

  • Anonymous

    there is a good discussion of the at NW Republican. i suggest readers join the existing comment threads there.

  • Pinkie

    Wyden needs to move to NY where is wife and kids live. He is no longer an Oregonian.

    • stubby

      I agree 100%. It’s time to send Wyden to New York for good !! he no longer represents us by living in New York. We need someone that’s willing to listen to us; Wyden no longer listens to us. It’s time to go !!

  • eagle eye

    Reagan was not as conservative as people like to think. He made it a point to say that he was a four-time FDR voter, that his party of the time (Democrat) left him, not the other way around. He never attacked the big New Deal programs, he never tried to scale back Social Security and Medicare. In fact, he appointed a committee and enacted their recommendations on how to keep social security solvent, and it worked for a quarter century, which in political terms is almost eternal success.

    Even in foreign policy, he was not completely conservative. He built up the military and pushed the Russians hard, but he was very careful to keep short of war. He was aghast at the nuclear arsenals, and was determined to reduce them, and he succeeded, even though people thought he was either a fool or a fake. He played Gorbachev beautifully, and took a huge amount of heat from the conservative side when he didn’t play them in the “conservative” way.

    Yes, bring back Reagan or someone like him, and he would win Oregon. But we’re not likely to see his kind again. His greatness is shining ever more brightly as time passes, but what we think we remember is not necessarily what was really there. That was, and is, part of his political genius.

    This has little to do with Jim Huffman.

    I will consider voting for him, but won’t some of you guys have a lot of trouble voting for a professor? One of those overpaid underworked types? In a law school of all things, the highest paid professors around except for medicine? Or does the fact that it’s a quasi-private school like Lewis and Clark make it different?

    Will he go with the stuff about trough-feeders? Then I predict he will never make it above 35%.

    • valley p

      “Remember, Reagan was an ideological conservative and he did win Oregon. ”

      Point well taken, but Reagan won primarily due to Carter’s ineptness, not for his ideology. If things get bad enough then someone as conservative as Reagan could win here again. But as Eagle points out, Reagan was actually a lot less conservative than modern day conservatives, probably including Professor Huffman. He governed pretty pragmatically. He raised taxes after first lowering them, blew the deficit sky high, yanked troops out of Lebanon after a good number were slaughtered, and gave amnesty to illegal aliens. He would be branded a RINO today.

      • Anonymous

        If Reagan won because of Carter, what happened in 1984?

        • valley p

          Reagan won because of Carter twice. The second time the Democrats ran Carter’s VP, and all Reagan had to do was remind everyone that they did not want to go back to the days of malaise. If Republicans were to nominate Cheney in 2012, that would be the equal. How do you think that would come out? We could say Bush elected Obama twice.

    • DF Lickiss

      I believe, but not 100% sure, that Professor Huffman is/was an employee of a private school. I just like the idea of a formed law school dean who taught Constitutional History and Constitutional law having a “beer summit” with a certain adjunct instructor of Constitutional law.

  • Jack Roberts

    This poll is indeed good news for Jim Huffman. The fact that Wyden, as the incumbent, is below 50% is encouraging. It will be tempting for Democrats to say, “Yeah, but 49% is almost 50%.” I know, because I said the same thing two years ago when Gordon Smith was polling 49% against Merkley before the primaries.

    Whether things get better or worse for Republicans this year will depend on what happens from here on both the national and state level. My guess is things will get better for Republicans and that if Jim runs a good, issue-oriented campaign he has a real shot.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)