MyDD :: Obama Dominating GE State Polling

Obama Dominating GE State Polling

by Socks The Cat, Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:08:57 PM EST

So here according to Rasmussen are three GE states and polling on where states currently see them...

Nevada

McCain: 49 percent
Clinton: 40

Obama: 50 percent
McCain: 38

New Hampshire

Clinton: 43 percent
McCain: 41

Obama: 49 percent
McCain: 36

Colorado

McCain: 49 percent
Clinton: 35

Obama: 46 percent
McCain: 39

Links...

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_20082/2008_presiden tial_election/nevada/election_2008_nevad a_general
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_20082/2008_presiden tial_election/new_hampshire/new_hampshir e_2008_presidential_election
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/colorado/colorado_2008 _presidential_election

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

Outside of "It's too early for these polls" what is the response from Hillary supporters as to why we would select Hillary if we wanted to win? It seems to me, that if Hillary wins the nomination, we are fighting the Kerry and Gore Strategy which is basically a 20 or so state strategy, while with Obama we have a much wider canvas to paint with. Feel free to tear this argument down, i am just curious to see how Hillary supporters feel about this.

Poll

Votes: 26
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, VP, Primary, General, Election, John McCain, Republican, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire (all tags)

Permalink :: 36 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (2.00 / 1)

It doesn't mean much in until September when their are vice presidential candidates on the table to.

by ejintx on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:11:30 PM EST

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Well, the numbers don't SUCK for Obama...

by Cycloptichorn on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:32:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

If you want to take it at face value, no. But we have yet to see what will happen and if the Romney endorsement will help McCain; I suspect it will.

by ejintx on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:01:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

The GE is in november your F*k*g poll now means nothing. After repugs vett him Obama will be in mid 20's!!!! He would loose the GE in a landslide.

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:16:01 PM EST

I am for Hillary (none / 0)

but I disagree with what you said.

Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog

by kevin22262 on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:17:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (2.00 / 1)

Well, then ignore Obama's numbers, and let's just discuss Hillary's performance. Since she and McCain have already been more thoroughly vetted, we can perhaps overlook that variable for nowv(although I'm sure there's more to know about both of them).

So, should Hillary's numbers concern us?

by DPW on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:20:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Yes, with 100% name recognition and basically being the incumbent, she should be well ahead.

by Toddwell on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:30:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Frankly they all should concern us. An unvetted candidate can lose 10 pts or more very quickly. It's going to be a tough race against McCain. I happen to think that Hillary is better because she's tough and not wimpy like Obama.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:51:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

"After repugs vett him Obama will be in mid 20's!!!! He would loose the GE in a landslide."

Nope, not on my watch.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 10:37:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Yet the Hillary supporters kept pulling poll after poll last summer to show how Hillary was inevitable. Bit hypocritical.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Dukakis was 17% ahead of Bush after convention and lost. His red state wins in georgia, Albama, North Dakota means nothing.

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 08:26:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

GE polls (none / 0)

mean nothing this far out.

If they did, then Hillary would be kicking ass and John Edwards would be the nominee since he lead all GE head to head polls for about a year.

Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog

by kevin22262 on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:16:30 PM EST

Very well said n/t (none / 0)

by linc on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:19:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're wrong (none / 0)

They mean that HRC will have to spend money to re-brand herself, just to get to a point where she could win the General election on the margins.

No such problem with Obama. Plenty of potential pitfalls for the GOP in attacking him. One false step and they find themselves completely on the defensive. And besides, there's no guarantee that the GOP can drive Obama's negatives way up.

What possible reason would we have for starting a General Election campaign 2 steps behind John McCain instead of 5 in front of him.

by johnnyappleseed on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:17:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're wrong (none / 0)

Actually, I think Hillary is performing badly because people don't think she will be the nominee. I think if she is the nominee and she doesn't STEAL the nomination to become the nominee future polling will be better.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:43:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Let me put it this way, I believe either Democrat will have significant difficulty against McCain and him against them. In the end, I feel it's too close to call, but we will see the political map shift in some significant way. McCain has been stronger in PA, Clinton in AR. Weirdness abounds.

by ejintx on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:19:00 PM EST

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

This should give serious pause to any Clinton supporters. Clinton has 100% name recognition and is this far down in polling in key states. If we nominate her, we can probably kiss picking up the Colorado Senate seat goodbye. With 100% name recognition, Hillary has no place to go but down.

by Toddwell on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:19:17 PM EST

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Why are you determined to believe that Presidential and Congressional races have direct impacts on each other 100% of the time?

by ejintx on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:21:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What are you talking about? (none / 0)

Mark Udall is his own candidate and is view quite favorable in CO. He will have no problem winning the seat if either Hillary or Barack is the nominee. Where did you get this sound bite, from kos.

by linc on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:22:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What are you talking about? (none / 0)

He's been preaching it as far back as I can remember. "Clinton's going to lose Congress for us 2010." Still no proof of that, still no proof that Obama will keep Congress let alone ensure that we'll pick up more seats.

by ejintx on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:23:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

I don't see it is negative at all. Obama faced his first negative ad in a national compaign only today. Clinton has been raked over the coals for years. Her skeletons have been outted for over a decade and she still rates that high with no debates with oposition, and in states that often lean Repub no less.

What happens to Obama's numbers when his negatives are exposed nationally as hers have been? Do we really know? The answer is no. Taking that into consideration, I see this as a very positive sign for Clinton abnd her ability to win a GE.

by DemMom on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:37:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

If you are basically the incumbent like Hillary and are behind this early, you are not going to win.

by Toddwell on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:38:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Tell that to Ronald Reagan.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 10:18:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

We all remember President Kerry. As late as August 2004, it was Kerry 48% to Bush 45%. We all remember President Mondale. We all remember President Dukakis. 17-point lead evaporated right after the convention.

So the fact that Obama is leading in these polls when he has 80% positive media coverage compared to Clinton's 40% positive media coverage is no surprise at all.

Restore America's Strength.

by RJEvans on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 09:45:45 PM EST

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

I hate how everyone on here says the Dukakis election was a bad one. In most ways, it was much better than 1992. In 1988, Democrats picked up a Senate seat, three House seats and several state legislatures. In 1992, they lost seats in all giving Clinton a black eye in his first term.

by Toddwell on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 10:45:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

We get it. You don't care about the presidency, only what happens with the house and senate. I can guarantee that numerous seats in the house will be lost with Obama at the top of the ticket.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:07:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Rasmussen polls are as bad as Zogby. Their median error rate is something like 6%.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 10:17:53 PM EST

Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

Man, can the Hillary supporters come up with just one plausible reason why this doesn't bother them? Of course not. They aren't rational. Sure, a lot can change between now and November. If both candidates were up against McCain - with Obama up a bit more - than I could see the argument about waiting it out. But the difference is staggering. Remember, Hillary WON New Hampshire and she WON the popular vote in Nevada. And yet, the voters in those state would rather have Obama over McCain and McCain over Clinton (or tied in NH). I wonder what the numbers look like in California or other states that "matter" according to Mark Penn. I bet they're quite close; they were tied in Washington. But keep telling yourself that the country loves Hillary Clinton.

by elrod on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 10:33:18 PM EST

Re: Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

What we see is a weak candidate in Obama. We've been there before and know that Rezko is enough to destroy him in a general election. He's not a fighter and has never had a tough race. He's condescending and aloof. All the things that make for a bad general election candidate we've learned from experience. Even the speechifying is getting shopworn. By the time Nov. rolls around no one will want to hear the old purple speech anymore.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:06:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

Rezko won't matter against Mr. Keating Five. Rezko is as untroubling as Whitewater.

As for having a tough race, when has Hillary Clinton ever had a tough race? Ric Lazio? John Spencer? Just as lightweight as Alan Keyes.

You think he's condescending and aloof, but most Americans do not. They see him as inspiring. Perhaps you don't, but you aren't the majority. Only you find the speechifying shopworn. As if "I have 35 years of experience fighting for hardworking Americans" isn't shopworn? It's almost as bad as "son of a mill worker."

I see no evidence he's a weak candidate. He's handled himself and his campaign with tremendous grace and discipline. He parries charges instantly and with humor (like his Wisconsin ad today). Hillary may have been attacked a million times in her career - most of it unfairly - but that doesn't mean Obama can't fight either.

by elrod on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:17:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

Keep telling yourself that Rezko is no problem. It is a huge problem though. In 2007 Obama ran away from the press and hid so they couldn't ask him any questions about Rezko. The trial is starting in a few weeks and it's being done by Patrick Fitzgerald. The FBI mole in the case says that he was following Obama and Blago around to their meetings with Obama. He will be testifying in court about that. He'll be talked about in a criminal case while the primary is going on.

Lazio? He was at least from NY and the GOP threw everything that they had at her. Obama has never had an competition. He got everybody thrown off the ballot in his races. Does he think that he can get McCain disqualified from running?

How do you know what most Americans see in Obama? Don't you think the "you're likeable enough" showed how condescending he is? If that was played it would damage him.

He has not handled his campaign with discipline. McCain is already catching him waffling on issues about campaign financing. The fact that he hasn't been hit doesn't mean that he's run a good campaign. Hillary really has been mild on him. The GOP will have no problem talking about his muslim background in 527 ads. Don't you think that it would severely damage his chances? The WaPo reported that 45% of Americans would automatically vote against anyone with that association.

Like I said, he has a ton of baggage. He's too reliant on the media to defend himself. One willie horton style ad will collapse him in the general. He has failed to define himself so the GOP will do it for him. And they've already started. But the good stuff won't be done until he's the nominee.

Here's the news report:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDHsHM0la T8

Go ahead and think it's nothing.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:44:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

What tough race has Hillary had? She's got way more shady shit in her past and present. Those two didn't make 54 million without some help.

by illlaw1 on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:41:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

Lazio was harder than Keyes. The GOP threw everything they had at her. Obama has never once had competition for races. Keyes wasn't even from the same state for petes sake.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:48:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Denial is a river in Egypt (none / 0)

Dukakis was 17% ahead of Bush after the convention and I do not remember Dukakis presidency. obviously you are smoking Hopium.

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 08:29:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

Hmmm

Hillary is not electable!!

by Djneedle83 on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 10:43:46 PM EST

Re: Obama Dominating GE State Polling (none / 0)

You are also completely wrong.