One month after formally announcing her candidacy for governor, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) has taken a lead over incumbent Rick Perry in the latest Rasmussen poll.

Primary Election Matchup
Hutchison 40 (+4 from last survey, 7/15)
Perry 38 (-8)
Medina 3 (n/a)
Not Sure 19 (+5)

Hutchison did lead in some early polling on the race, but Perry had jumped ahead in Rasmussen's last two surveys. Both candidates have nearly identical favorable ratings among the Republican primary electorate -- Perry is at 72 / 26, Hutchison at 71 / 26. Perry's job approval rating is at 69 percent among Republicans, while 29 percent disapprove. President Obama's approval rating among Texas Republicans is just 18 percent.

The automated telephone survey was conducted September 16 among 790 likely primary voters, with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percent.

Public Policy Polling (D) has consistently shown Senator Richard Burr with Harry Reid-esque polling numbers in North Carolina.  Three polls, taken in May, August, and September, show him leading his prospective Democratic opponents, but receiving less than 45% of the vote.

Enter Scott Rasmussen.  His most recent polling shows Burr receiving 48% against three prospective opponents.  None of the Democrats are above 40%, and Burr is right at 50% of the two party vote.

Obviously these pollsters have very different views of the electorate.  Unfortunately, we won't get to see who is right for another 14 months!

Gibbs says it. The White House blogs it. The Huffington Post leads with it.

On a day when news breaks that the administration is making a major change in U.S. foreign policy, until minutes ago the Huffington Post was leading with this:

At the moment they're blaring a headline that reads, "Health Insurance Company Revoked Policy of HIV Teenager."

So much for Arianna's new left wing journalism. If you relied on the Huffington Post for news you'd be unaware of the biggest story of the day.

Suffolk University's poll of the landscape in Massachusetts finds, as a previous survey did, that state Attorney General Martha Coakley (D) is an early favorite in the race to succeed Sen. Ted Kennedy (D), with a third of Democrats undecided and the field still in flux

Special Primary Election Matchup
Coakley 47
Capuano 9
Khazei 3
Undecided 33

Rep. Stephen Lynch had been included in the survey and received 6 percent of the vote, but announced he would not run. Bain Capital managing director and Celtics co-owner Steven Pagliuca, who will announce his candidacy today, was included only in the final night of polling, and drew no support.

A third of voters think, regardless of their own choice, that Coakley will ultimately be elected, with no other candidate drawing signficant numbers; half of voters were undecided on the question. Coakley continues to benefit from higher name recognition as the only statewide elected official in the race. She had a 53 percent favorability rating.

The Kennedy legacy is still a factor in Massachusetts, the poll also shows. Fifty-nine percent of voters say they would have voted for former Rep. Joe Kennedy, RFK's son, had he run. His endorsement could also help shake up the field: 41 percent say they'd be more likely to back Rep. Mike Capuano if Kennedy endorsed him. Yet only 25 percent say they wish Ted Kennedy's widow, Vicki, were running.

Whoever emerges from the Republican field faces long odds; state Sen. Scott Brown (R) is currently the only announced candidate. Here are how some potential matchups polled:

Coakley 54 - Brown 24 - Undecided 20
Capuano 36 - Brown 28 - Undecided 34

Curt Schilling, the former Red Sox pitcher who has talked about making a run, was not tested in the survey. But interestingly, he has a net-negative favorability rating -- 29 percent view him favorably, 39 percent unfavorably.

The poll also shows that 55 percent say they support changing the Senate succession law to allow Gov. Deval Patrick (D) to appoint an interim replacement. Forty-five percent of voters say health care is the most important issue facing the next senator.

The survey of 500 Massachusetts registered voters was conducted September 12-15, and had a margin of error of +/- 4.4 percent.

The good news for Senator Chris Dodd in the new Quinnipiac poll out today (Sept 10-14) is that his deficit to Republican Rob Simmons is now only 5 points, 44 to 39. That represents a four point closing of the gap from last month's survey. The bad news for Dodd is that the closing of the gap comes entirely by way of a drop in support for Simmons, not a gain in support for Dodd. In fact, Dodd has been stuck at 39% for the last three surveys, while Simmons' support started at 45, bumped up to 48 a month ago before coming back down to 44 this month.

Also troubling for Dodd: the decision by the Senate Ethics Committee to clear Dodd of charges relating to his motgage dealings with Angelo Mozilo of Countrywide does not appear to have helped him with the public and may in fact have slight hurt him.

Only 14% of Connecticut voters said the Committe's decision makes them think "more favorably" of Senator Dodd while 26% said it make them think "less favorably." Fifty-nine percent said it doesn't make a difference.

Dodd's favorable rating remains unchanged from last month at 40%, and his job approval rating is up just a single point to 43% (49% disapprove).  A 51% majority still does not believe Dodd is "honest and trustworthy" compared to only 40% who do, though on the bright side for Dodd that is an improvement from last month's numbers of 55% and 35%, respectively.

Finally, President Obama's job approval rating in Connecticut stands at 57%, while 36% disapprove. While still healthy, this is another net 10-point decline from last month's rating (63-32) which was at the time his lowest approval rating to date.

Since his inauguration, Obama has lost 12 points in job approval in Connecticut, decreasing from 69 to 57, while his disapproval rating in the Nutmeg State has doubled from 18 to 36 percent.

And once again we see, even in a true blue state like Connecticut, that President Obama is more popular than his policies. On his handling of health care, only 47% approve while 45% disapprove. While some Dems may disapprove that Obama isn't pushing harder for liberal policies, the main source of the difference between Obama's overall job approval and his approval on health care comes from Independents.

Independents give Obama a 56% job rating overall, but when it comes to health care their approval drops to 43% while disapproval rises to 49%.

Overall, 47% of voters in Connecticut support Obama's health care plan while 42% oppose.

Former Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R) has an early lead in the race to replace retiring Senator Judd Gregg, according to the first Rasmussen reports poll of the race.  She leads Second Congressional District representative Paul Hodes 46%-38%.

It's interesting that Republicans are doing well in states like Colorado and New Hampshire, but not particularly well in Ohio (though its dangerous to compare a Quinnipiac poll in Ohio to the Rasmussen Colorado and New Hampshire polls).  The libertarian swing voter is apparently swinging more heavily toward Republicans than the populist swing voter.

Remember when the liberal blogosphere proudly trumpeted themselves and their policies as being the "reality-based community?" Well, not so much anymore.

Take this Gallup poll today on Obama and the Democrats' health care plans.

Question: As you may know, President Obama is proposing a health care plan that is designed to expand coverage to nearly all Americans without raising taxes on the middle class or lowering the quality of health care. If Obama's plan is passed, do you think it would or would not be able to accomplish all of these goals?

Ninety percent of Republicans and 64% of Independents don't think Obama's plan will do any of these things. But two out of three Democrats (66%) believe Obama's plan will accomplish all three goals.

As I wrote the other day, President Obama is making claims about his health care plan that even his most passionate defenders don't believe.  Senator Baucus made those exact same claims today in the Wall Street Journal unveiling his bill. But a sizeable majority of the public seems to recognize that too good to be true notion that coverage can be expanded dramatically without raising taxes or suffering a decrease in quality is, well, not a claim that's based in reality.

For months, criticism has been coming from the right and even some on the left about the number of so-called czars in the Obama administration. We noted some of the arguments about it in July. It's only today, however, that the White House and its allies have answered back, and they're punching hard.

First, the DNC circulated a memo outlining what they say is the hypocrisy of Republicans who have made an issue of Obama administration czars, pointing to reports during the Bush administration of a similar organizational structure.

"They come from the same Republican party that, not satisfied with the number of czars in the Bush Administration, asked for the creation of additional czars on multiple occasions," DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan writes. "They come from the same Republican party that themselves served as czars in the Bush administration. In leveling these ludicrous attacks, Republicans have crowned themselves the czars of hypocrisy."

At today's White House briefing, Robert Gibbs was asked about a letter raising constitutional concerns about the czar system not from a Republican, but from Obama's former caucus-mate, Sen. Russ Feingold. The press secretary said he hadn't seen the letter, but proceeded to echo many of the DNC's points in a heated response.

"I'm struck by a little of the politics in this," Gibbs said. He noted that "somebody referred to in the Bush administration as the abstinence czar was on the D.C. madam's list," and asked hypothetically: "Did that violate the Constitution or simply offend our sensibilities?"

He called the silence from Republicans about previous administration czars "deafening." Answering the substance of the critique, that these policymakers are not accountable, Gibbs said: "I think the America people hold the president accountable. That's what we would expect."

UPDATE: The White House blog now includes a "Reality Check" from communication director Anita Dunn on the czar controversy.

Good stuff from the folks at Reason:

Linda McMahon has quit her job as CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. to take on five-term Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) next year. McMahon is the wife of famed WWE leader Vince McMahon.

The longtime WWE head will need to get through a competitive GOP primary against Rep. Rob Simmons, Peter Schiff, State Sen. Sam Caligiuri and Tom Foley, the former Ambassador to Ireland.

Appearing on MSNBC this morning, McMahon said that her experience as a businesswoman for the past 30 years would help her to put people to work.

"WWE is an entertainment company with PG programming," McMahon said. "But the issues that are facing us today are not what takes place in the WWE's ring. It's about debt. It's about getting our folks back to work. And that's what I'm going to focus on here in Connecticut."

A Daily Kos/Research2000 poll released yesterday found Dodd trailing Simmons, the leading Republican, by 4 points. He leads Caligiuri, Schiff and Foley. The survey did not include McMahon.