Fox News poll has Blackburn leading Bredesen by 3
U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, the Republican Senate nominee in Tennessee, speaks at a Farm Bureau event in Franklin on Aug. 9, 2018. (Erik Schelzig, Tennessee Journal)
Republican Marsha Blackburn has a 3 percentage point edge over Democrat Phil Bredesen in a new Fox News poll released Wednesday. The survey results follow an NBC/Marist poll that found Bredesen with a 2-point lead last week. Both polls receive A ratings from the polling website FiveThirtyEight.
In the Fox poll, Blackburn had 47% support, compared with Bredesen’s 44%. The poll of 686 likely voters and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
The poll showed Republican gubernatorial candidate Bill Lee with a 20-point lead over Democrat Karl Dean, 55%-35%, with 16% of Bredesen supporters crossing over to support Lee.
Eighty-one percent of Bredesen’s supporters said they feel certain they will vote for him, while 74% of Blackburn’s supporters said the same for her. Twenty percent said they might change their vote before November, while 8% were undecided.
Among those who said they support President Trump, 76% said they support Blackburn, while 16% support Bredesen. The former governor was supported by 93% of Democrats polled, while 83% of Republicans said they plan to vote for Blackburn.
According to the poll, the top issues for voters are:
- Economy and jobs: 29%.
- Health care: 27%.
- Immigration: 14%
- Taxes: 8%
- Gun policy: 6%
- Foreign Policy: 3%
- International trade: 1%
Popularity ratings were similar for both candidates the Fox poll, with 54% having a favorable impression of Bredesen and 36% seeing him unfavorably. Blackburn’s favs/unfavs were 51%-39%.
President Trump had a 58% approval rating among likely voters, while 38% disapproved.
Thirty-nine percent of those polled said they think Trump’s trade policies are helping the U.S. economy, while 37% said they are hurting.
25 Responses to Fox News poll has Blackburn leading Bredesen by 3
Leave a Reply
Tennessee has Republican statewide officeholders. That’s simply the way things were meant to be. Frankly, I don’t think Bredesen really wants to spend the next six years of the time left to him in the U. S. Senate anyway, so as Marsha pulls away there will be no one happier that Phil Bredesen.
Marsha is getting close to 70.
She voted poorly on the top 4 in the list.
She’s only 66 and I’ve known Marsha for over twenty years so you can take it from me, she REALLY wants to be our next U. S. Senator.
She votes poorly yet you want to reward her. Nothing will change to you hold her accountable, and a promotion is not holding her accountable.
The only way to “hold her accountable” as you put it is to vote for liberal Democrat Bredesen and you know that is simply out of the question. Besides, the average Senate Republican votes conservative only 71% of the time while Marsha votes conservative 82% of the time so electing Marsha is not only the right thing to do vis a vis Bredesen, it will also serve to move the entire Republican caucus to the right. That’s a twofer!
Marsha Blackburn Voted AGAINST:
Ban on UN Contributions, eliminate Millennium Challenge Account, WTO Withdrawal, UN Dues Decrease, Defunding the NAIS, Iran Military Operations defunding Iraq Troop Withdrawal, congress authorization of Iran Military Operations, Withdrawing U.S. Soldiers from Afghanistan, Libya Troop Withdrawal, Libya. stopping Indefinite Detention.
Marsha Blackburn Voted FOR:
Omnibus Appropriations, Special Education, Global AIDS Initiative, Job Training, Unemployment Benefits, Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations, Agriculture Appropriations, FY2004 Foreign Operations Appropriations, U.S.-Singapore Trade, U.S.-Chile Trade, Supplemental Spending for Iraq & Afghanistan, Flood Insurance Reauthorization , Prescription Drug Benefit, Child Nutrition Programs, Surface Transportation, Job Training and Worker Services, Agriculture Appropriations, Foreign Aid, Debt Limit Increase, Fiscal 2005 Omnibus Appropriations, Vocational/Technical Training, Supplemental Appropriations, UN “Reforms.” Patriot Act Reauthorization, CAFTA, Katrina Hurricane-relief Appropriations, Head Start Funding, Line-item Rescission, Oman Trade Agreement, Military Tribunals, Electronic Surveillance, Head Start Funding, COPS Funding, Funding the REAL ID Act (National ID), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, Thought Crimes “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, Peru Free Trade Agreement, Economic Stimulus, Farm Bill (Veto Override), Warrantless Searches, Employee Verification Program, Body Imaging Screening, Patriot Act extension., Supplemental Appropriations, Patriot Act Extension, Debt Deal, South Korea Trade Agreement, Omnibus Appropriations, Line-item Veto, Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA)..
NOTE TO READERS: Please note that in James’ quest for a smaller pre-1860 federal government there is no contention by James that liberal Democrat Bredesen would vote any differently. Indeed, to the extent one votes for the more liberal candidate you’re voting for a larger and more intrusive federal government.
Yes, if we reduced the size of the federal government by 80% then the costs would be reduced and the taxes. Did we really need that Bridge to NoWhere in Alaska ( that Marsha VOTED FOR ?)
Thank you for this information James. This is an extensive list of votes. While I don’t agree with every vote, I certainly support many of her votes, particularly the votes on the Patriot Act which is keeping this country much safer against radical extremists.
Eddie, the Patriot Act provisions that were set to expire on February 28, 2010. The provisions allow the federal government to exercise wide-ranging surveillance and seizure powers with few limitations. For instance, the records provision allows the government to obtain “any tangible thing” that, it says, has “relevance” to a terrorism investigation. “Relevance” is a much lower standard — if it can even be called a standard at all — than the “probable cause” and a court warrant standard explicitly required by the Fourth Amendment.
Marsha’s been in Washington too long. She talks out of both sides of her mouth and she’s tied to special interests (like Big Pharma, for example).
I wasn’t aware House members had an arbitrary time limit as to how long they can be in Washington and I can’t imagine why you would want to burden them with one. The average Republican House member runs as a conservative during election time but on average currently votes conservative only 65% while voting with the liberals 35% of the time. Marsha, as a welcome contrast, runs as a conservative and for this congress is voting conservative 86% of the time. Relative to the average Republican Marsha talks the talk during election time and walks the walk as she serves in the House.
The Club for Growth advocates for Term Limits. You’d think that candidates with a 90% rating would be, unless their egos suggested the were the only capable person on earth, wanting to Voluntarily step aside and go home to live under the laws they had created. A Quarter of a Century is too much, you’d think, in the eyes of CFG’s high ratings. Add to that voting for out of control spending and unfair taxation and that rating still makes no sense.
The CfG supports Term Limits. That shows they are not conservative or constitutionalists.
Thanks for the info MarLE
Oh you’re so right MarLE, let’s not rely on a full time staff of conservatives who are on capital hill every day which allows them to know exactly which votes out of the thousands cast during any session of congress are key votes that really make a difference and have ideological implications from which to come up with a rating. So much better to do what you obviously do, slapping a label on incumbents based on emotion, then again there are always your tarot cards and Ouija boards that can also come in handy when assigning a rating on legislators.
After thinking about it, I’ve decided that I will continue to use the device that every knowledgeable political analyst uses. I will use ratings assigned by reputable organizations like Heritage Action and The Club For Growth by which to evaluate the record of federal and state legislators.
I’m a member of the Club For Growth insofar as I send them financial support every year but in this instance the Club is wrong and James is right. I’m all for making it more difficult for incumbents by having runoffs allowing opposition to incumbents to coalesce but I’m not for limitations on my precious right to vote for whomever I want to by arbitrary term limits.
The only way for Marsha’s stand on term limits to affect her rating by the Club For Growth or Heritage Action is if the question ever came up for a vote and the organization made that particular vote a key vote. I don’t think the issue was put into legislation and I don’t think the legislation ever came up for a vote.
Omg, Stuart. They probably have narrowly defined requirements for meeting their call for spending discipline and for tax fairness. Now I see how someone who clearly doesn’t believe in any of those 3 of the CFG’s (tax fairness, spending control, term limits) 10 principles can still get a 90%. Thanks for clearing that up. Now I can just dismiss their rating as the joke I presumed it was.
Stuart…you are accusing me of coming to my positions based on emotion?? YOU are the one who offered to introduce me to Marsha so I could see how charming she was in an attempt to get me to alter my opinions. Now THAT is emotion. Everything I have offered is fact-based, albeit facts you don’t like to consider
I would not put too much stock in a Fox poll. In the past, they have proven only slightly more credible than the current President.
I am sure you put more stock in that NBC polll, they are certainly unbiased!
Then that’s pretty good!
Pingback: Thursday, September 13
I have known Marsha for nearly 40 years; she is a conservative. A vote for Bredesen is a vote for Chuck Schumer’s very liberal agenda. Bredesen would be a freshman Senator sitting on the back row doing exactlly what Shumer tells him to.
Amen Lynn, Amen!