New Poll(s) Confirm a Close Race

Two news polls, one reliable and one not, are out. Disparate levels of trustworthiness aside, both indicate the same thing: any daylight that was once between Begich and Stevens has winked out for the time being. Whether this is because Stevens has legitimately pulled level with Begich or if the daylight is simply being obfuscated by clouds from the political storm Palin has generated is yet to be seen.

In any case, the reason this post refers to two new polls as "Poll(s)" is because one was released by Rasmussen and will be taken as seriously as that merits, and one was released by the NSRC, and as such is intrinsically politically laced. Ambiguous plural(s) aside, the NRSC poll has Stevens leading for the first time in a poll of any kind, 46% to 44%. The poll was conducted in the immediate aftermath of Palin's Aug. 29th selection. Rasmussen shows an equally-close race, but a different result, with Begich holding on 48% to 46%.

Additionally, Begich folks can find some residual good news in the favorability ratings of Rasmussen's poll. Begich has a 61% favorability rating to Stevens' 52%. These numbers, largely influenced by the indictment, indicate that some folks may be voting for Sevens even though they have a negative opinion of him. This phenomenon is not uncommon as Alaskans trade what they perceive as fitness to govern in a candidate for pure power and influence in a candidate. 40-year incumbents have the latter in spades, but are not guaranteed to have the former.

Personal note: Vegas was interesting this weekend; Nevada is certainly an entertaining, fractious battleground. In one apartment complex, I met woman who had passed her citizenship test just days beforehand and was unbelievably proud to register to vote; living across the street from her was a man who shouted to me that Obama was a nigger; downstairs from him, a reserved Hispanic father voting for McCain because he felt safer with a military man in office. I have no idea how that state is going to fall, and anyone who tells you they do is lying.

Stevens' Corruption Trial Will Proceed

Since the day the federal indictment of Senator Ted Stevens was handed down, his talented, resourceful legal team have been launching counterattacks designed to score a quick dismissal for their client. Yesterday, a significant portion of those counterattacks were rebuffed.

D.C. District Court Justice Emmet Sullivan shot down several of Stevens' legal motions to dismiss the case, including questions about the charges' statute(s) of limitations. He also made strong statements regarding the direction of the case, saying that he intended to give the defendant the pre-election verdict he has publicly requested, and that it is unlikely Stevens' team's other peremptory attempts to dismiss the case will see any more success than the ones put to rest today.

Speaking as a constitutional law student, my opinion is that Stevens' claim that portions of the prosecution's violate the speech or debate clause of the Constitution (designed to protect legislators from arrest or intimidation by the executive branch) stands on speciously-constructed legs. There's no clear indication that the evidence in question is directly pursuant to Stevens' legislative duties. Since the clause's aim is to protect legislators acting in their official capacity, it is doubtful it will apply to the predominantly extra-congressional dealings addressed in the indictment.

There are also polls to be discussed--among other things--but I'll be in Las Vegas for the weekend and may not be able to get to them before I leave.

Until then.