This is the most important point to note from PPP’s gulping report of a double-digit collapse of Elizabeth Colbert Busch’s chances in SC-01 (Mark Sanford went from -9 to +1 over Busch in two weeks, and the more Republican the likely voter electorate gets in the next two days, the better it looks for Sanford):
If SC-1 voters went to the polls on Tuesday and voted for the candidate they personally liked better, Colbert Busch would be the definite winner. That’s why Sanford’s campaign has tried to shift the focus toward national Democrats who are unpopular in the district, and that’s been a key in helping him to make this race competitive again. Nancy Pelosi has a 24/61 approval rating in SC-1 and although voters don’t like Sanford, they do like him better than Pelosi by a 53/37 margin. President Obama doesn’t fare a whole lot better in the district. His approval is 39/54, and voters say they have a higher opinion of Sanford than him by a 48/44 spread.
Whether or not Colbert Busch wins on Tuesday or not (I’m thinking, ‘not*’) this is a highly relevant point for 2014 Democratic hopefuls everywhere: the House Minority Leader is currently demonstrating why most ex-Speakers have the good sense to retire after they lose the Speakership, or even take a beating in the caucus. You think that Steny Hoyer would be producing this kind of profitable concern in SC-01? …No, neither do I. If I was in the Democratic party leadership I would be explaining to Nancy Pelosi right now why she’d need to retire. Then again, if I was in the Democratic party leadership I would have stopped my colleagues from stampeding their way into an Obama candidacy in 2008…
*PPP does have a fairly poor track record on special elections – which is an unfair way to put it; no firms really have a good track record on special elections.