MO-2012 Senate: 43% McCaskill (D), 43% Steelman (R) (PPP 1/27-29)

Public Policy Polling (D)
1/27-29/12; 582 likely voters, 4.1% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
PPP release

Missouri

2012 Senate
43% McCaskill (D), 43% Akin (R)
43% McCaskill (D), 43% Brunner (R)
43% McCaskill (D), 43% Steelman (R)

Job Approval / Disapproval
Sen. McCaskill: 42 / 49

Favorable / Unfavorable
Todd Akin: 19 / 28
John Brunner: 18 / 18
Sarah Steelman: 22 / 24

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[Field Marshall]

03:44 PM on 02/02/2012

Claire is toast.

[ashenthorn]

04:50 PM on 02/01/2012

I predict the polls in St. Louis will be open till midnight by court order as voters are lined up around the block in african american precincts to use the one working voting machine, and McCaskill loses her seat by 1000 votes. What a country.

[StatsNo1fan]

04:54 PM on 02/01/2012

I'd bet she loses closer to a 10% margin than a 1000 votes.

This poll is_junk. PP uses a turnout model to mimic 2008. It has McCain over B0B0 by 1% - the same margin he won the state in 08. And this ain't 2008 no mo.

[StatsNo1fan]

07:46 PM on 02/01/2012

What happened to my post here?

[JTyroler]

04:26 PM on 02/01/2012

Claire McCaskill can be relatively conservative for a Democrat, but she is one of the better senators in office. She has been following in the footsteps of another Missouri Senator, Harry S Truman by investigating fraud and waste in defense spending. She has my vote - even if there was a more progressive candidate, I'd still vote for Claire McCaskill just because of her trying to keep defense contractors honest.

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

04:09 PM on 02/01/2012

She is worth fighting for. This senate seat will be a nailbiter until the end. Missouri doesn't seem to change that much through wave elections the way Ohio or WI do. There are very stubborn voters from each side, but it has a rightward lean from the evangelical community making it difficult for Mccaskill. She only won by 2 points in 2006 and that was during the big Democratic victories.

[jbvbwysu]

05:40 PM on 02/01/2012

True, but Claire has a lot of things going for her:

1.) A moderate, anti-corruption record that should appeal to swing voters.
2.) Strong campaigning and oratory skills (these largely got her through 2006 when--IIRC--she wasn't even considered one of the top Dem contenders)
3.) A weak, fractured opposition (Akin? Steelman? Seriously?).
4.) Polling that shows her tied with or leading that opposition, before campaigning has even started (one could argue that Akin and Steelman aren't polling as well because they're less well-known, but that kind of deflates the "anyone but the Democrat" victory theories I keep hearing).

[stillow1]

08:47 PM on 02/01/2012

She is in MO, a right leaning state and what will doom her is Obamacare....which remains very unpopular nationally and even more so in right-leaning states....she will get pounded with Obamacare ads and it wil ultimately cost her the election. That is why Nelson in NE is out, its why Dorgan got out, etc....she's going to try and fight it like Lincoln did, but only to her own demise....

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

05:44 PM on 02/02/2012

She needs to try to get on the defensive and eat her opponent alive. She needs to strive to stay at least 4 points ahead. I think whoever wins this race will win it by 1 or 2 points.