Unless it is an outlier McCain's campaign is really starting to take on water fast.

That is really interesting.

Of those who called it a mistake, however, just 31 percent said she should apologize. Among Democrats who called the war the most important issue in deciding their 2008 candidate preference, Clinton led Obama 40 to 26 percent.

Is anybody graphing/tracking the outcomes of these kinds of polls with time?

Where's Jim Webb when we need him?  That guy would blow everyone out the water.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_pol ling_for_the_Democratic_Party_%28United_ States%29_presidential_primaries%2C_2008

One of the most interesting things about the Hotline poll is that 6% identified Obama as a Muslim.  That compares to 22% who identified him as one of the Christian denominations (with 1% as no religious affiliation).

McCain has made some fatal errors and it looks like it will eventually be Guillianni vs Obama.  I am, of course, counting on the fact that Hillary will not get the nomination.  If she did I would have to skip voting all together.  I do see obama catching up to her and overtaking her by spring, maybe early summer.

The base may be able to forgive his stands on gay rights and abortion rights but will they be able to forgive his endorsement of Mario Cuomo in 1994?  After all, he was practically the anti-Christ to many on the right.  I am not convinced Giuliani is going to cruise once that becomes public knowledge.

This is shaping up to be one of the most interesting Presidential races in a long, long time.

I was having a discussion with a friend today and we were trying to figure out what the Evangelical community's problem is with a Mormon.  After all, they see eye to eye on many of the social issues important to Evangelicals.  Is it Big Love?  Does anyone have insight on this?

Chris, I think you are misreading this section:

[i]The Post-ABC News poll found that 52 percent of Democrats said her vote was the right thing to do at the time, while 47 percent said it was a mistake. Of those who called it a mistake, however, just 31 percent said she should apologize. Among Democrats who called the war the most important issue in deciding their 2008 candidate preference, Clinton led Obama 40 to 26 percent.[/i]

You commented:  

Man, the Democratic base has the idea of compromise so thoroughly beaten into it, it is really kind of sad. Even though nine in ten Democrats oppose the war, fully half say that supporting it was a good idea back in 2002?

I read the result differently.  A lot of Democrats believed in 2002 that they did not vote FOR war, but actually AGAINST it.  Remember, the AUMF replaced one that was basically a complete rubberstamp of "anything" Bush wanted.  The replacement stipulated that the UN would be given leeway to put weapon inspectors back into Iraq (which, presumably, would then find out whether WMDs were even there, settling the matter.)  There were also solid assurances by Bush and Powell that diplomatic means would be exhausted first, and that war was only going to be used as "a last resort."  Sure, they were duped, but at the time many felt they were voting for more diplomacy and a larger involvement of the UN.   The GOP had the votes to push the AUMF (even the tougher one) through with or without Democrats as it was.

With that in mind, the subset of Democrats you refer to did not necessarily state that "supporting war" was a good idea back in 2002, but that the vote was made against the backdrop of what I mentioned above, can therefore not be considered a "mistake" per se.  Misjudgement of the sincerity of Bush, Powell and other members of the administration, perhaps.  But not a vote "for" war in the sense that it stipulated ways to avoid war altogether, none which were heeded, as we know in hindsight.  

Man, the Democratic base has the idea of compromise so thoroughly beaten into it, it is really kind of sad. Even though nine in ten Democrats oppose the war, fully half say that supporting it was a good idea back in 2002?

I believe that approval for the war at the very beginning was about 70% in the general public, which means about 50% of Democrats supported the war. I thought the figure would be lower (around 40%), but not that much lower.

In 2002, most Americans supported George Bush and his War on Terror; many believed there was a 9/11-Iraq connection.  The WMD argument was bought hook, line and sinker.  We had gone to war with Iraq previously and won, so the general assumption was this was the same.  The war went bad, people are mad and they now know they were misled.  Now if you were one of those Democrats who initially supported the war, but who now thinks its all fucked up, you are going to accept Hillary's position that if she knew then, what she knows now, she would have voted differently, because that's where you are.  Trying to tell these people that she should have known better and her explanation is BS doesn't go over well, because they didn't know better then either.  Just to make clear, I was one of those Dems who thought the war was BS from the beginning, but her vote is a forgivable offense for me.

The African American shift is interesting.  I wonder if she will keep at least half that vote or continue to lose out to Barack once Bill starts his serenade of the Black community.

My assumption is that all articles bring the social issues because they know that Giuliani will be subject to a vicious attack.

Mel Martinez won his Senate primary by attacking his main rival for being "the darling of the homosexual lobby" for voting for hate crimes legislation. It's total death in the Republican primary, more than anything on the Democratic side except saying you want to fiddle with Social Security (which no one ever says). It will take one TV ad and one direct mail piece, and it will be over.

vest. That's my take as a white-guy. I saw it first in the Harold Washington election when it took a long time for the polling numbers to shift to Harold. I believe that it's partly that they don't want to seem to be supporting someone simply because they are black. They know how to vote principles are quite good at knowing which side of their bread the butter is on. While Clinton did a lot of harm to their community, he also did much more good than likely any of the other possible winners. They do not want to waste their votes.

What I'm saying is that the true support of Obama from the African-American community when it's time to vote will be much greater than those numbers indicate now. High 80,s easily and even the 90's possibly.

Here's an interesting scenario:

We continue to pound McCain until he's starting to worry about being the Republican Kucinich; he then starts the heavy negative campaigning in a last ditch effort to save his ass. Giuliani, of course, is quite susceptible, and Romney is a joke even now. Then all three of the Republican frontrunners are jokes by, say, July. We're then treated to a second wave of conservative fire breathers, escaping to the public view after the wall of "moderates" has come tumbling down. Gingrich, Brownback, and Tancredo as the new front-runners? Then we get to see them tear each other apart in their lust to rise to the top in the shortened time span. It'll make the 2008 election a bloodbath. The spoils of the accelerating, continuous news cycle.

Of course, I'd love to see Giuliani as our opponent. He's a paper tiger, for one, and definitely beatable (though less so than McCain or Romney). The great part comes, however, with the down ticket races. Most Republicans will still vote, but I can see maybe 5% in excess (of the other candidates) staying home (who already will depress turnout somewhat). That's more than enough to gain significantly more in the Senate and the House both, along with picking up state positions too.

Democrats, by contrast, have fine candidates all around who agree with our values and are great choices for the nomination. 2008 is a year to look forward to.

the latest Iowa polling I've seen is from Feb 16-18th:

John Edwards 24%
Hillary Clinton 18%
Barack Obama 18%
Tom Vilsack 14%
Joe Biden 5%
Bill Richardson 3%
Wesley Clark 2%
Chris Dodd 1%
Dennis Kucinich 1%
Undecided 14%

http://strategicvision.biz/political/iow a_poll_022207.htm

Anyone have anything more recent?

and I think you guys are underestimating Giuliani. He has weaknesses of course, but he would be an incredibly formidable candidate that could potentially make a lot of must win states competitive and make others impossible.

   How does supporting Clinton reveal authoritarian, domination-loving tendencies among Democratic primary voters?  I just didn't understand your comparison.

Why would they want to vote for  a thrice divorced guy who is pro choice and for gay marriage?

Whoever supports the concept of enforcing our current immigration laws, allowing only 800,000 LEGAL applicants into the States on a yearly basis, moves in a new direction supporting a NO AMNESTY AGENDA, and getting the troops out of Iraq as soon as possible, that candidate will pick up the support of Moderate Democrats nationwide, and will WIN BIG!

"More Liberal than Harry Reid!"

Just sayin'

Giuliani has an 84% favorable rating among Republicans. The other key thing in the Republican poll is that both McCain and Giuliani's support is really soft. 6 in 10 voters are "somewhat" supporting their candidate. Contrast that with Hillary and Obama, where six in ten voters are sure about their candidate.