yeah, cuz there's a huge difference between losing by 28 and losing by 25

It was kind of a joke, you know how people always point to the moderate candidate and say, "That person is more electable, you should discard your beliefs and vote for them because they are electable?" But in this race, the person who is considered more to the left is polling better. Of course, barring a minor miracle, I'm thinking Arkansas is a lost cause regardless of the nominee...

Well Halter is polling much better than Lincoln, at the moment at least, so I expected people concerned about electability to rally behind Halter...right? If decency were not an issue in the Democratic Party, they'd give this primary to Halter and then have Halter and Beebe switch races.

I know the Dem numbers will improve after the runoff but this lead is insurmountable.

This is basically a question as to whom the Democrats want to lose with. In that respect, they may as well oust the corporate incumbent in favor of a candidate who appeals to voter anger.

I think they'll end up going with Halter, but I think that Lincoln's the better choice here-she's scandal-free, she's much more likable, and she likely has developed a more natural trust with the voters of the state that will increase her numbers. That said, this race is most definitely a lost cause. I don't see the Democrat going below 30%, but at this point, is 40% an impossible goal?

I'm endorsing Boozman here.

Kinda weird Lincoln defeated a Boozeman for this seat only to lose it to another one.

The much less politically astute one at that.

Sad when the incumbent has to release an internal poll showing her down "only" 9 points.

Even Rick Santorum was able to hit 40%. I have my doubts about Blanche even achieving that.

Lincoln deserves to get blown out on election day.

only Sharon Priest can save Blanche now

What kind of partisan firm (for your party) would put out a poll showing you that far behind? Jumonville 84, Lambert Lincoln 16

When you are a Demcratic incumbent and a Democratic pollster has you down 25, you might as well pack it in.

The same poll has Beebe under 50%. Perhaps the GOP needs to aim some fire that way. You never know if there could be a 2002 Roy Barnes-type surprise.

In Haley I trust

These numbers are absolutely pitiful.

I do wish the Dems could have had the sense to nominate Halter instead of Lincoln. I know he would have lost too, but not by this much. What's the record for the biggest general election loss by an incumbent in a Senate re-election bid? I bet she has a chance of breaking it. She could bring down the rest of the party with her.

Lincoln deserves everything that's coming her way.

Lincoln deserves everything that's coming her way. As do many Dems, who for all intents and purposes have told the public to f*ck off.

What's the record for the biggest general election loss by an incumbent in a Senate re-election bid? I bet she has a chance of breaking it. William Hathaway lost by 22.7% to Bill Cohen as an incumbent in Maine in 1978, also a Democrat losing their seat to a Republican challenger. I swear I saw a Senate race a while back where the incumbent lost by something like a 2-1 margin, but that's the most lopsided incumbent loss I could find in recent history.

Maryland, 1964? http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=25351