SUSA general election poll from Wisconsin - Democrats with small lead

SUSA keeps on rolling out daily polls, and today, it released a poll from Wisconsin! This is only a day after the Virginia poll, and before that was Iowa and Missouri.

Like all these states, Wisconsin favors Democrats -- but only by small margins!

Full analysis (and more polls, including NJ GE) at CampaignDiaries.com.

8 out of 9 matchups are won by Democrats.

  • Clinton beats Giuliani by 4% (48-44). She leads Thompson by only 2, and Romney by 9 (50-41).

  • Obama wins all three matchups as well. He beats Giuliani by 3 (46-43), Thompson by 5 (48-43), and Romney by 15 (52-37).

  • Edwards, in a stark contrast to what we are used to seeing, does WORSE than Obama and Clinton against Giuliani, and loses 45-44! But he leads by 9 against Thompson (49-40) and 18 against Romney.

 Poll link here.

Wisonsin has been among the tightest states in both 2000 and 2004. In fact, Bush had a large lead here much of the 2004 cycle and Kerry ended up winning the state by the smallest of margins. No one ever really pays attention to Wisconsin since Ohio and Florida are so much bigger, but it is really a crucial state with 10 electoral votes.

What is striking in this poll is not that the numbers are so close, but rather that Edwards is the one Democrat who loses a matchup. That is not at all what we have been using to seeing in the past few weeks. Look at the Missouri numbers. Or the Ohio one. Both have Edwards running significantly better than his rivals in the general election.

More analysis at CampaignDiaries.com.

Tags: Barack Obama, Fred Thompson, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mitt Romney, poll, Rudy Giuliani, SUSA, Wisconsin (all tags)

Comments

20 Comments

tips!

by LeftistAddiction 2007-09-26 07:05AM | 0 recs
Sure...

Look at the totality of general election polling...

http://esrc08.blogspot.com/

...and look at the whole series.

Losing to Giuliani by one point at 45 - 44 is no big deal, especially when you look at other statewide and national numbers against Giuliani (before you cite RCP or any other averages read the freaking link), when he wipes the floor with Romney (the likely winner of IA and NH, the ability to win in MI, and Jeb Bush's support in FL) and Thompson (the likely winner in SC).  And in MOST state wide and national polling, MOST Of the time Edwards does better than Hillary against Giuliani.

Your diary was fine (I recommended it), but I'm not going to allow these numbers to be twisted the way yesterday's VA numbers were.

And before anyone desputes that Edwards is clearly the most electable, click on the link above. If you still think he is not the most electable, you need a new pair of glasses.

http://www.surveyusa.com/electionpolls.a spx

Survey USA - September 26, 2007

Wisconsin

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 41%

Obama - 52%
Romney -37%

Edwards - 52%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 9%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 18%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 47%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 43%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 40%

Clinton leads by 2%, Obama leads by 5%, Edwards leads by 9%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 48%
Giuliani - 44%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 43%

Edwards - 44%
Giuliani - 45%

Clinton leads by 4%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards trails by 1%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 7.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 8.66%

Survey USA - September 20 - 25, 2007

*Results being released at a rate of one state per day.  Ohio, Alabama, and Kentucky, and Kansas were all released on the same day.  Iowa, Missouri, New Mexico, and Virginia soon followed.

Ohio (20 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 52%
Romney - 42%

Obama - 45%
Romney - 46%

Edwards - 56%
Romney - 36%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama trails by 1%, Edwards leads by 20%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 47%

Obama - 42%
Thompson - 50%

Edwards - 52%
Thompson - 43%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama trails by 8%, Edwards leads by 9%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 47%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 39%
Giuliani - 52%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 48%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 13%, Edwards trails by 1%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.33%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 7.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 9.33%

Iowa (7 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 50%
Romney - 43%

Obama - 51%
Romney - 41%

Edwards - 54%
Romney - 38%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama leads by 10%, Edwards leads by 16%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 44%

Obama - 51%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 54%
Thompson - 37%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 10% Edwards leads by 17%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 50%
Giuliani - 42%

Obama - 50%
Giuliani - 42%

Edwards - 53%
Giuliani - 39%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama leads by 8%, Edwards leads by 14%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 7.00%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of  9.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 15.66%

Missouri (11 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 51%
Clinton - 40%

Obama - 51%
Romney - 40%

Edwards - 56%
Romney - 32%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 24%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 48%
Thompson - 45%

Obama - 48%
Thompson - 45%

Edwards - 50%
Thompson - 40%

Clinton leads by 3%, Obama leads by 3%, Edwards leads by 10%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 45%
Giuliani - 48%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 44%

Edwards - 47%
Giuliani - 42%

Clinton trails by 3%, Obama leads by 2% Edwards leads by 5%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of  5.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of  13.00%

New Mexico (5 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 54%
Romney - 39%

Obama - 55%
Romney - 36%

Edwards - 54%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama leads by 19%, Edwards leads by 20%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 53%
Thompson - 42%

Obama - 52%
Thompson - 41%

Edwards - 52%
Thompson - 37%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 11%, Edwards leads by 15%

Clinton - 51%
Giuliani - 43%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 46%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 8%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 4%

Average

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of 11.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 10.00%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of 13.00%

Kentucky (8 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 46%
Romney - 46%

Obama - 43%
Romney - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Romney - 38%

Clinton is tied, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 10%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 45%
Thompson - 50%

Obama - 37%
Thompson - 54%

Edwards - 45%
Thompson - 44%

Clinton trails by 5%, Obama trails by 17%, Edwards leads by 1%

vs. Rudy Giuluiani

Clinton - 41%
Giuliani - 51%

Obama - 36%
Giuliani - 54%

Edwards - 43%
Giuliani - 50%

Clinton trails by 10%, Obama trails by 18%%, Edwards trails by 7%

Average

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 12.33%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of  1.33%

Virginia (13 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 53%
Romney - 38%

Obama - 50%
Romney - 38%

Edwards - 52%
Romney 33%

Clinton leads by 15%, Obama leads by 12%, Edwards leads by 19%,

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 50%
Thompson - 43%

Obama - 45%
Thompson - 47%

Edwards - 49%
Thompson - 39%

Clinton leads by 7%, Obama trails by 2%, Edwards leads by 10%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 50%
Giuliani 44%

Obama - 46%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 48%
Giuliani - 43%

Clinton leads by 6%, Obama leads by 1%, Edwards leads by 5%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by an average of  9.33%
Obama leads the Republicans by an average of 3.66%
Edwards leads the Republicans by an average of  11.33%

Alabama (9 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 45%
Romney - 46%

Obama - 36%
Romney - 53%

Edwards - 45%
Romney - 39%

Clinton trails by 1%, Obama trails by 17%, Edwards leads by 6%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 41%
Thompson - 54%

Obama - 34%
Thompson - 60%

Edwards - 38%
Thompson - 50%

Clinton trails by 13%, Obama trails by 26%, Edwards trails by 12%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 41%
Giuliani - 52%

Obama - 32%
Giuliani - 59%

Edwards - 40%
Giuliani - 50%

Clinton trails by 11%, Obama trails by 27%, Edwards trails by 10%

Average

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 8.33%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 23.33%
Edwards trails the Republicans by an average of 5.33%

Kansas (6 electoral votes)

vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 46%
Romney - 45%

Obama - 47%
Romney - 41%

Edwards - 48%
Romney - 34%

Clinton leads by 1%, Obama leads by 6%, Edwards leads by 14%

vs. Fred Thompson

Clinton - 40%
Thompson - 53%

Obama - 40%
Thompson - 50%

Edwards - 39%
Thompson - 46%

Clinton trails by 13%, Obama trails by 10%, Edwards trails by 7%

vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 40%
Giuliani - 52%

Obama - 40%
Giuliani - 51%

Edwards - 40%
Giuliani - 50%

Clinton trails by 12, Obama trails by 11%, Edwards trails by 10%

Average

Clinton trails the Republicans by an average of 8.00%
Obama trails the Republicans by an average of 5.00%
Edwards trails the Republicans by an average of 1.00%

by Michael 4 Edwards 2007-09-26 07:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Sure...

This is not a comment, this is a diary.  He pointed out the fact that Edwards doing worse in the head-to-head match ups was rare.  If you feel this needs to be posted go post a diary.  This is an obnoxiously long comment and detracts from the diary as a whole.

by Obama08 2007-09-26 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Sure...

You posted this exact same post in a similar diary and there is no need for it again.

by RJEvans 2007-09-26 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re:

These head-to-heads are all over the place.  Here Edwards does worse again.

If you put it all together:

1. Overall Clinton and Edwards perform similarly well in head-to-head polls.

2. Obama is somewhat behind those two, not doing that well overall.

3. Giuliani would be our toughest opponent on paper.  However, he has tons of skeletons most people have no idea about, which would make him less appealing to many in a hurry.  

by georgep 2007-09-26 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re:

Yeah Guiliani is tough on paper but would probably be easier for Hillary than he seems.

Why will Obama leads in Fundraising be the leading banner on Hillary's website , Hillaryhub , I have a feeling the opposite will happen.

by lori 2007-09-26 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: I think this merits a comment

Rudy is not the only one with skeletons.  Clinton has the most excess baggage (and it's asset to many as well, to be fair), but at this point, the non-Fox Media is ignoring the baggage.  I think the corporate media want the race they didn't get in 2000 in NY state, because these two candidates have the post to provide ad $ revenue, plus neither one have taken a strong stance on Net Neutrality.  

Do I need to mention those two have the most friendly relations with Murdoch?  

No one wins though if those two are the eventual nominees, and the American people will get more of the same because Rudy's coat-tails might be longer than Clinton's when it comes to congressional races in red states.

by benny06 2007-09-26 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: I think this merits a comment

That seems like a non-sensical post.  Clinton's "baggage"?  What in the world are you talking about?  Old stuff from her husband's presidency?  Are you serious?  If so, that is plain ridiculous.

1. Any "baggage" you would be referring to has been talked about over and over it is old news that nobody is going to talk about.  Whitewater?  Lewinsky?  You are way, way on the wrong track if you think that that will receive a warming-over.

2. Giuliani's baggage is hardly known to Americans. Most know very little about him, so those stories are going to be fresh and new, and shed a lot of light on the person Giuliani is.  

There is a HUGE difference between trying to warm up stuff that everybody has heard of years ago and stories that have yet to get national play about Giuliani.  

by georgep 2007-09-26 03:38PM | 0 recs
Democrats with small lead

We don't do tip jars at MyDD ;)

Edwards "loses" to Giuliani by a statistically insignificant point.  He has significant leads against the other two Republican candidates tested.

Clinton 2.0 and Obama are essentially tied with Giuliani, so that's not a "lead" either.  Clinton 2.0 only statistically leads Romney.

by Vox Populi 2007-09-26 07:13AM | 0 recs
SurveyUSA

It probabaly only gives us some baseline data, a couple of percentage points within MoE really don't tell us anything this far out.

by areyouready 2007-09-26 07:15AM | 0 recs
Re: SurveyUSA

You are wrong.  Edwards performs relatively bad against Giuliani in other surveys.  Clinton outperforms Edwards against Giuliani nationally:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/national.html

by georgep 2007-09-26 07:32AM | 0 recs
Re: SurveyUSA

There is a lot of regional prejudice in these polls.

by lori 2007-09-26 07:35AM | 0 recs
Bingo.

Here in WI we've less "gotten over" the Civil War than most northern States. Perhaps because Wisconsin had a disproportionate number of casualties.

by benmasel 2007-09-26 08:51AM | 0 recs
Re: SurveyUSA

I am sure it is right around  the corner.  But who is to say that you will like the result?  It could turn the other way just as easily.

by georgep 2007-09-26 07:48AM | 0 recs
Re: SurveyUSA

That in itself would not be newsworthy.  Who really cares whether Clinton or Edwards beat Giuliani or Romney in NH today, 15 months before the election?  The MSM does not report on that. We just know about it because we are "polit-geeks" and seek out poll  reports.   What WOULD make news for Edwards would be to lead in national polls or primary state polls, or surge.  After all, that is 3 months away. So far, no dice.  

by georgep 2007-09-26 03:31PM | 0 recs
Obama

In most of those polls , Obama does much better then Hillary against Romney and thompson.

This poll again shows Obama doing better then her..

by JaeHood 2007-09-26 07:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama

Another ridiculous claim. He lost to Rudy in two key swing states  OH, FL by double digits.

by areyouready 2007-09-26 07:27AM | 0 recs
Obama supporters don't care

They think Oprah is going to sprinkle magic fairy dust and that Obama will win inspite of the facts.

Sometimes I admire people who think with their hearts not their heads, but not when it comes to politics.

by dpANDREWS 2007-09-26 07:47AM | 0 recs
Re: SUSA general election poll from Wisconsin - De

I do not think we should rest on our butts in 08 and think that PA , NJ are a slam dunk for democrats.

Guiliani plays very well in PA and he can pick up the state against any of our candidates . John Mccain can also win in PA , I bet you if they had included Mccain in the matchup he would probably have been running 1 or 2 points behind Clinton and would have been beating Edwards and Obama . There are a lot of Reagan Democrats in PA who would vote for Guiliani/Mccain because of National Security and ditch Obama because of that . I seriously can see that happening. If you are having numbers in the low teens or on single digits in terms of ready to lead or experience to be president numbers that will be tough going against a Guiliani or Mccain In PA. Candidates like Guiliani and Mccain are uniquely suited for PA.

Guiliani can win in NJ because he is very liked there and there is a sizeable number of italian americans in that state .

Overall Guiliani/Mccain are their toughest candidate . I will give the edge to Mccain because Guiliani has the probability of crumbling under the weight of new information.

by lori 2007-09-26 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: SUSA general election poll from Wisconsin - De

I think Democrats will continue to win NJ until some sort of major scandal erupts, the kind of thing that happened to Republicans in Ohio, at which point we'll feel bad that we didn't do more to clean up our own house.  Until that day the NJ Dems will remain the powerful machine that they are.

PA kinda makes me shrug, it's still a purple state, but I don't see Giuliani having any more ability to pick up "national security" voters than Bush did in 2004.  But Giuliani will certainly play better in PA than he will in the Midwest, that's for sure.

At the end of the day the Northeast has just been trending bluer and bluer and I don't see the Republicans picking up votes there by nominating a local candidate, any more than John Edwards would magically win us South Carolina and Georgia.

by Steve M 2007-09-26 07:41AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads