MyDD :: Gallup's head-to-head comparison: All Democrats doing well against GOP candidats

Gallup's head-to-head comparison: All Democrats doing well against GOP candidats

by georgep, Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:22:42 AM EST

The latest Head-to-head comparisons from a national level (rather than state-level like yesterday's 16-state Survey USA survey) shows the three top-tier Democratic candidates with basically the exact same performance against GOP opponents, and it is across the board very positive for our party:

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/defaul t.aspx?ci=27940&pg=2

Registered voters:

Against Giuliani -

Clinton 50 - Giuliani 46

Obama 50 - Giuliani 45

Edwards 50 - Giuliani 45

Against McCain:

Clinton 49 - McCain 46

Obama 48 - McCain 46

Edwards 50 - McCain 44

Against Romney:

Clinton 53 - Romney 40

Obama 57 - Romney 36

Edwards 61 - Romney 32

---------------------------------------- -------------

Unfortunately, Thompson was left out of the comparative study. Regardless, things are looking good for the Democratic party when all three top-tier candidates are doing well against any GOP comers in hypothetical matchups.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards (all tags)

Permalink :: 21 Comments :: Post a Comment

How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

your title - I knew it would show Edwards as the most electable?

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:35:50 AM EST

Re: How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

laughable. The last straw.

by maoasada on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:37:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

bryandem (none / 0)

good to see you back

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:39:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

Uh, WHAT? They are doing equally well.

Of course, Edwards is currently a non-factor until he gains traction nationally and in states. Banking solely on Iowa is obviously a very, very risky strategy, and even there he is not doing that well anymore.

by georgep on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:46:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

This is a poll which is pushing people to make a decision. Especially with un-decided's at 4-5pts.

I am an Obama supporter and yes it does look good for all of our candidates, but I donot put much stock in polls this far out with such a low number of un-decided's. You would see this type of poll within a month of the GE.

by BDM on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:58:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

You are obviously wrong, but thanks for the lead-in anway. I did not push that aspect of this survey, but a closer look reveals:

Clinton vs. Guiliani

2007 Jun 11-14
50
46

2
1

2007 Jun 1-3
45
52
1
2
1

A turnaround of the Clinton-Giuliani head-to-head comparative by a full 11%. Before Giuliani was ahead of Clinton in the Gallup head-to-heads EVERY SINGLE TIME. How is that not "gaining traction" in this latest poll?

Now, it is true that Obama shows an improved performance vs. Giuliani here:

2007 Jun 11-14
50
45

3
2

2007 Feb 9-11
43
52
*
2
2

However, the last time this was measured in the Gallup poll was in February, which is a long time ago.

Bottom line is that all Democratic candidates are doing very well against GOP comers. Rejoice, Democrats, all of our candidates are supremely electable, a great development from previous polling in which our candidates were not doing quite that well against Giuliani and McCain.

by georgep on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:22:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

I'll probably diary this poll on dailykos to debunk the 'electability' myth. Link to the poll?

by maoasada on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:53:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How come the minute I saw (none / 0)

your title - I knew it would show Edwards as the most electable?

I think its funny that most of these Anti-Hillary "she's not electable" liberal democrats were the one's who booed loudest when Bob Graham said that he comes from the electable wing of the democratic party and then cheered the loudest when Howard Dean said that he was from the "democratic wing of the democratic party."

Hypocrisy?

by world dictator on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:03:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Howzzat? (none / 0)

George, I never thought your incessant poll-mongering would come to this...

I don't know whether to congratulate you on your spirit of bipartisanship and collegial democratic bonhomie or check that I still have my watch...

by Shaun Appleby on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:04:05 AM EST

it's smart politics (none / 0)

pre-emp the news how you want it spun

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:07:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's smart politics (none / 0)

Smart or merely fashionable?

by Shaun Appleby on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:48:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

You have not been here for a while, it looks. I always accompany poll diaries with realistic comments. For instance, recently I stated that in the Rasmussen-Poll Edwards was getting a dose of good news, as his poll number went up from 11% to 16% again.

by georgep on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:13:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

It is nice that our candidates are winning in this poll. However, all of our candidates are under-performing because the generic poll's show a democratic candidate beating a republican candidate by 9-10 pts and more in some polls. None of our candidates are performing this well. Most of these leads are within the margin of error and the RCP averages donot show huge leads except for lesser known candidates. Nobody is blowing Guliani out of the water.

This is a great time for democrats with respect to issues and the national mood. It may not be this good 6 months to a year from now.

by BDM on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:19:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

If you look at the polls, Giuliani, McCain and Romney appear to have positive/negative ratings that are unrealistic. I pointed out that in a couple of polls Giuliani's, McCain's and Romney's negative ratings were lower than any of our candidate's. That is the reason our candidates are underperforming when compared to the Generic numbers. There is no way in hades Giuliani's negatives will remain at 25% or McCain's or Romney's at only 31%. Even with that in place, we are beating them by 4%, 5%, 15%. Once the negatives of those 3 come up to realistic levels (approaching 40% or higher) this tells us that all of our candidates will be doing even better against them, lining up with the Generic numbers.

by georgep on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:27:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

Personally I think the Republicans are months behind us in settling the field. That's basically good, I think. But there could be some surprises. And Bloomberg? Hang on to your hats, folks, we could end up miles from here.

by Shaun Appleby on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:53:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

I think Giuliani will not be the candidate. Can you imagine the ads about him? He is not revered or beloved in NYC. He was at the bottom of the polls when he was leaving his post, around 9/11. Ask the firefighters or AA's in the city what they think about him. You could literally WRITE A DISGRUNTLED BOOK! He shafted the Iraqi Study Group to make more money, when this would have helped him for national security matters, and he would have been able to visit Iraq. Rudy G, is a scam and his fellow candidates will put all that out there about him. This is going to be between Romney and possibly McCain (ppl will come back to him as the Giuliani stuff crank out) or Thompson, Fred (Bassett Hound), but with FT it depends on how he is on the stump.

"I want my voice to be read"

by icebergslim on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:53:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

You are engaging in "if's" not today. That may happen, but also the favorable climate for democrats today, may not be so favorable in 6 month's or a year.

People are not to happy with the democratic congress and if the current performance continues then all democrats will suffer.

by BDM on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 12:30:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

Well, bully for you and Edwards, too. I must admit I admire your persistence.

Say, whatever happened to Francis Holland? Did he finally get himself banned? If so, I missed it. He tried so hard, you know.

by Shaun Appleby on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:41:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howzzat? (none / 0)

Yeah, he eventually managed it.

by Quinton on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:25:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

gallup not polling thompson? (none / 0)

considering that the betting markets habe hbim a favorite, I don't know why not. Fred in reality is the overwhelming favorite for the gop nomination, he will easily win every southern primary, and is down 4 poitns in Iowa where he hasn't spent a dime or even entered the race, Romney's poll #s are inflated becuase he's the only one spending in Iowa and NH, McCain is simply done and has about he same shot Bill richardson dooes, slim and none and Rudy is already collapsing (an awful week so far) just wait for the gun control ads among the universe of Gop primary voters it will be impossable for him to beat Fred. For us it means one thing i want to know who matches up well with Fred.

Obama! because 51% isn't enough!

by nevadadem on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:33:09 AM EST