Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

May 2008

Clinton 48%

McCain 44%


Obama 46%

McCain 46%


Last month, Obama was beating McCain:

April 2008

Obama 48%  

McCain 44%


Clinton 47%

McCain 43%


Key findings:

* Obama trails McCain 40% to 52% among white voters.      
  Clinton trails McCain 44% to 48% among white voters.

* Obama leads McCain 68% to 25% among nonwhite voters.
  Clinton leads McCain 65% to 25% among nonwhite voters.

The overall results of the poll indicate electoral challenges facing Obama in a year when Democrats generally appear to hold an electoral advantage:

Tags: Election 2008, newsweek poll (all tags)



good news

when the primary is over, look for that number to increase in Obama's favor!

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 03:49PM | 0 recs
Is that hope

or is that change speak?

by linc 2008-05-26 03:51PM | 0 recs
high on hopedust is more like it.


by cosbo 2008-05-26 03:54PM | 0 recs
awww emo kids cheer up!


and quit the bitchin!

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 03:55PM | 0 recs
This is the sexism

that you just don't get.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:00PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

yeah we got the memo, everyone opposing Hillary is a sexist.

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

we saw your photo, tell me if you posted it because you thought it was an attractive picture of Hillary supporters, and I won't say you're sexist.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

It ain't their looks, it's the facial expressions.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, not an obvious underlying sign of sexism.


by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:06PM | 0 recs

touche` ;)

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-26 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

oh why yes that is why I posted the picture because of how they look.  (rolling eyes)

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

You don't even know the definition of sexism anymore. You have used it so often and in so many instances, that you have lost any ability to recognize it anymore.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

that was for anna

by venician 2008-05-26 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

time to look in the mirror, because last time I checked, these words were racist or race-baiting in some form by Obama supporters:


as well as any dry, historical references.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

fairytale is not racist....

kid isn't either although it is condescending and insulting.

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

Hillary supportes are taking this election way too personal.

I worry for them

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

HA! I've seen Obamabots get offended at that crap.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-26 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

HA! I've seen Obamabots get offended at that crap.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-26 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: This is the sexism

oops, double post.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-26 04:44PM | 0 recs
It's kind of become reverse sexism at this point

by jaywillie 2008-05-26 05:21PM | 0 recs
Don't worry....

President McCain will cheer you up. He's actually a really funny dude.

by cosbo 2008-05-26 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Don't worry....

I bet the geezer is, here is some of his best work

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:04PM | 0 recs
Shouldn't you be listening to John Edwards?

"There is one man who knows in his heart that we have to build one America - not two - and that man is Barack Obama,"

by bobdoleisevil 2008-05-26 04:05PM | 0 recs
Well shit

what happened to Edwards wanting to build one America?  Only ONE man?  Gee.  What about a woman?

by linc 2008-05-26 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Well shit

Edwards was supposed to stop the bleeding among working class white folks.  A few days after his endorsement, it appeared to have had the opposite effect (Kentucky, +28% for Clinton in the polls, +35% for Clinton in actual votes).

by BPK80 2008-05-26 06:01PM | 0 recs
Meh. He probably said the same thing about...

Kerry and look where that got us.

Still like JRE though. He was actually The One. But the suckers in the democratic party fell for the media sting again.

by cosbo 2008-05-26 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: awww emo kids cheer up!

Both sexist and fat hating.

Really, get off my side. Go troll for Bob Barr on conservative sites or something (you'd be doing much more good for the Democratic nominee than you are with this crap).

by letterc 2008-05-26 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: awww emo kids cheer up!

fat hating???  hahahahahahahaah


Oh you hillary supporters give me a good laugh!

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: awww emo kids cheer up!

Check my comments. I favor the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama.

by letterc 2008-05-26 04:09PM | 0 recs
I don't think

letterc is a Hillary supporter.  You picture and its caption, were still sexist- you will get it one day, maybe after you graduate and leave the frat.... maybe.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think

look when you want to have an intellecutal conversion I am more than willing, but if you want to play dirty gutter politics I am one of the best.  You get what you give simple as that!

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:12PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think

Really, stop already. The more you cry sexism for everything anyone says the more it looks like you have this sick need to play the victim. Therapy may be able to help you with that.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think

It's their last refuge... let them have it in less than 2 weeks it will all end.

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:21PM | 0 recs
This is just plain ridiculous
Speaking as a woman, it's simply a picture of two human beings who happen to be disappointed Clinton supporters at that moment, and as luck would have it (50/50 chance) they just happen to be females.

Could have easily been two males. Then again, there may not have been as many men there with such long faces?

Take up your sexism issue with the photographer.

by DemsRising 2008-05-26 04:24PM | 0 recs
Did you miss the caption

or what?  Jesus, I am so sick of this blindness towards sexism, supposed Democrats should be better than this.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:28PM | 0 recs
I didn't consider that comment
underneath a "caption" nor sexist.

Then again, who knows, maybe I actually am a sexist? I tell my husband (on many occasions),
"Quit bitching already." ;o)

by DemsRising 2008-05-26 04:55PM | 0 recs
Why isn't it sexist?

I am serious?  If it was a picture of two black people and the caption (or line under the photo, whatever) said stop your 'niggerin' would you find it to be racist?  No question in my mind, so why is it OK in a sex/female circumstance?

by linc 2008-05-26 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Why isn't it sexist?

I wouldn't even know what it meant to be honest...

Do you get insulted by dog shows that refer to the female dogs as bitches...?  Honestly curious...

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 05:08PM | 0 recs
No you are not

honestly curious and you damn well know the answer.  I feel bad for you- I hope your lack of self worth is restricted to blogs and not real life.

by linc 2008-05-26 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: No you are not

Well crimony on a cracker... you are the one complaining about the use of words, so I decided to ask about another one.

Don't feel bad for me, I don't feel bad for you.

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 06:14PM | 0 recs
Well I do

I feel bad for people every day who are not concerned with their own empowerment.

by linc 2008-05-26 06:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Well I do

I am a white, middle-class woman who has not been denied an opportunity in my life for reasons over which I had no control such as gender.

I am empowered...

I also own the word bitch, so it does neither define nor dismay me.

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 06:51PM | 0 recs
That's hypothetical
It wasn't a pic of 2 african americans, with your imagined caption.

I don't know where you live, or how you were brought up, but "quit bitchin'" is pretty darn universal in my book, whether you're male or female.  For me, I hear it (and say it) mainly when you're tired of hearing the same complaint over and over again.  It's said out of frustration; to mothers, fathers, spouses, children - you name it.

I just don't see what you do, and certainly don't find it offensive in any way.

by DemsRising 2008-05-26 05:11PM | 0 recs
It doesn't matter where I grew up!

its derogatory towards women unless you want to deny that the definition of bitching in this context is specifically related to 'complaining like a woman'.  Do you really think it is something else?  For Pete's sake, stick up for yourself.  No wonder so many women are still put in their place- they think its the right fucking place to be!

by linc 2008-05-26 06:29PM | 0 recs
My female ego is not nearly as easily bruised as yours appears to be.
by DemsRising 2008-05-26 06:40PM | 0 recs
its not about me

i have a male ego- with a feminist spirit.

by linc 2008-05-26 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Did you miss the caption

I would hate to be in the same work place as you.  I'd have to have an attorney present at all times.

by hootie4170 2008-05-26 05:29PM | 0 recs
I see
I am sure you feel similar about comments like 'shuck and jive' or suggesting that certain people sold cocaine in their younger years... or that MLK and LBJ needed each other to get shit done (now that was really racist).  

Do you go around your place of work and tell folks to stop their bitching alot?  Just curious.
by linc 2008-05-26 05:38PM | 0 recs
Re: I see

Bitching- to complain or grumble....Simple as that...I doubt however you are is stern with individuals who stereotype young voters as naive, or men as being lazy and "dogs"....

I still stand by my statement, it would be very difficult to have a conversation with you for fear of saying something you consider sexist...

by hootie4170 2008-05-26 05:46PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think

In fighting sexism, is it really helpful to demean others as being too young or to rely on something as stupid as a "frat boy" stereotype?  

Seriously, if you think he's being sexist, then why let yourself fall back on stereotypes?  It hurts your argument.

by freedom78 2008-05-26 04:28PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think

I think it's the caption.

Stop BITCHin.

This word can be used in so many ways. Positive and negative.

I think you can be taking this the wrong way.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-26 04:42PM | 0 recs
but given the context, i don't think it can be taken any other way...

What if it was a picture of two black folks and the caption said, 'stop niggerin'.  Would you give the poster the benefit of the doubt and suggest that it was meant light heartedly? I sure as hell wouldn't.

Bitchen is quite different than the abbreviated bitchin'- which translates to bitching.  
by linc 2008-05-26 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks

Those two words are simply NOT analogous.  I'm not being pedantic here either.  "Bitch" has a ton of other meanings or appropriate contexts.  "Nigger" really doesn't have that many.  Outside of hip-hop or some black comedy, I can't think of a context where it is acceptable.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:57PM | 0 recs
What about this context
how am I supposed to interpret that photo and caption in any other way?  This IS the ingrained sexism that permeates our culture.  Somehow, somewhere along the line, it became OK to use this sort of degrading language about women.  As far as I know, a bitch is some sort of derogatory towards females in slang and a female dog in actuality.

Please, if this was not meant to be derogatory, please give the another reasoning in which this exact photo with its 'stop your bitchin'' caption could be considered anything but sexist.
by linc 2008-05-26 05:02PM | 0 recs
Re: What about this context

Bitch is not used toward female dogs in a derogatory way... that is the original use of the word.

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 05:10PM | 0 recs
Too bad for you terrible argument

that that wasn't a photo of two female dogs then, eh?

by linc 2008-05-26 05:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Too bad for you terrible argument

Let's see..

Here is your quote:

"As far as I know, a bitch is some sort of derogatory towards females in slang and a female dog in actuality."

I responded that the word bitch to describe female dogs was the origin of the word and it is not derogatory in that usage at all.

Too bad you seem to be suffering from either selective outrage or willful ignorance.

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 06:17PM | 0 recs
Still unwilling to address

the issue at hand.  The photo, its caption?

by linc 2008-05-26 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Still unwilling to address

"bitching" is colloquially used to mean "complaining."  I use it, in that context, wholly divorced from whatever gender baggage it may have once, or frankly even now for some, entail.  I cannot speak for he who used it in the caption, though.

I will say this.  Intent matters.  Obviously how things are received matters to.  When I use the word "bitching" I do not use it as a sexist slur.

However, if someone took something I said that way, I would apologize.

This parallels the "assassinate" problem pretty well, by the way.  If I hurt or offend someone, even accidentally, I have the good graces to say I'm sorry, because I didn't mean to to do that.

Senator Clinton could do well by doing likewise.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: awww emo kids cheer up!

Seriously, I think you should be banned.  I've had to hide rate so many comments from you just this weekend not only because they flout the site's guidelines but because their ugliness brings down the integrity of this site.  

by BPK80 2008-05-26 06:03PM | 0 recs
Could you do me (and others) a favor?

Stop posting unnecessary photos, particularly if they are intended to rile up people?  From what I have seen, you haven't proven that you are a "f*ck you! I'll do whatever the hell I want to" type of jerk, so I'm assuming you are open to reasonable persuasion.

This practice is getting bad around here and you will be much more popular if you don't commit this practice.  Just saying.  People come here because they get sick of other places.  Let's keep the atmosphere.

by lombard 2008-05-26 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that hope

It's what usually happens to the winning candidate. Maybe in 2016 your candidate will get that same chance, or at least you can hope she does.

by venician 2008-05-26 03:55PM | 0 recs
"It's official June 4th" is pure crap!

More ongoing misstatements of fact!

It's not freakin' "official" until the Democratic Convention in Denver in late August.

Period! Get over it!

by bobswern 2008-05-26 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: "It's official June 4th"

Seems to me you're the one that needs to get over the fact that your candidate lost.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:28PM | 0 recs
With Hillary in this race...

...everyone has won!

And, frankly, you need to tone it down a bit. You're doing your candidate a disservice by alienating other Dems with your over-the-top comments.

Obama is the likely nominee as of June 4th... Nothing more. Nothing less.

There are roughly 90 days 'til the Convention. It is in Denver where Obama will be anointed, assuming everything goes according to plan.

by bobswern 2008-05-26 04:35PM | 0 recs
This one

is not worth it bobswern.  Don't let s/he get to you.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:39PM | 0 recs
Yes, I know... the old saying goes: "In a battle of wits some people have no ammunition."

Thanks for the head's up!

by bobswern 2008-05-26 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that hope

It's realism.

I'd almost guarantee that Clinton supporters are telling pollsters they'll vote for McCain, but Obama supporters are doing so in much smaller numbers. Ergo, Obama suffers a greater loss from Democrats defecting to McCain in these polls.

Let's check back a month after the convention and then we'll see where we really are. Given how people can readily use polls to vent their frustration with the race or game the results, I don't take polls too seriously right now.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-05-26 04:18PM | 0 recs

I love it when people refer to realism based solely on speculation.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:22PM | 0 recs
Re: ha!

It's not speculation when you're sure of it.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-05-26 04:31PM | 0 recs
From my experience

confidence in speculation gets you know where, but maybe you have a secret you aren't sharing...

by linc 2008-05-26 04:37PM | 0 recs
Re: From my experience

It's not a secret; we've already seen a ton of polls that empirically state just what I wrote.

During exit polling, more Clinton supporters say they will vote for McCain than do Obama supporters. Repeatedly (and most especially since Pennsylvania), it's been about 33-35% of Clinton supporters who say they won't vote for Obama, and 20-25% of Obama supporters who say they same about Clinton.

So why on earth would anyone think these national polls are different? As if Angry Clinton Supporter X will simply say, "Well, I was threatening to vote for McCain before, but now that a national pollster is asking me, I better admit I was just faking."

So as I said, I'm not taking these polls seriously at all until well after the convention, when everyone who's going to unify will have done so.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-05-26 04:49PM | 0 recs
I don't think they are any different
I however, am not jumping to the conclusion that folks that voted for HRC and said they will vote for McCain over Obama, are liars.  In polling, to have that sort of consistency- it would be virtually impossible for such a scenario to come true.  Everyone thinks people lie to pollsters, its just not the case.

Now, do I think Obama can try to change their minds? Yes.  Do I think he COULD succeed in that effort?  Yes.  But that still doesn't make the assumption that these folks will actually start saying Obama instead of Clinton or McCain when the poll is asked in two or three weeks.
by linc 2008-05-26 05:06PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think they are any different

I basically agree with you.

I'm not saying they're lying, I'm saying they're angry and frustrated. They may well be completely truthful with stating that they'd vote for McCain if the election were held today, which is why we need to wait until after the convention for accurate results. The whole "cooler heads" thing.

Perhaps Obama won't convince all of them, but I also can't imagine 25-35% of Democrats won't vote for the party's nominee. (And I'm not saying Clinton supporters are unusual this way; I'm sure the numbers would be similar if Clinton were in the lead.)

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-05-26 05:19PM | 0 recs
Re: From my experience

Aren't you "speculating" about Clinton winning the nomination?  Or is that fantasizing?  Definitely not "realism".

by hootie4170 2008-05-26 05:35PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

huh?  Should his numbers have gone up, not down, since he has been crowned by the MSM?

by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 03:58PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

not till the primary is over...

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 03:59PM | 0 recs
Has it ever occured to you

that those voters that support Hillary and will vote for McCain over Obama were never going to vote for Obama anyway?  That they were being drawn by Hillary, not the party or Obama?  Somehow I doubt you could allow yourself that introspection, but do try.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Has it ever occured to you


by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:05PM | 0 recs
Hey dude!:?

got a brewski?  

by linc 2008-05-26 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Hey dude!:?

not into beer, but gin and tonic?  I am there

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-26 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Has it ever occured to you

Actually, Obama beats Clinton among independents, while having problems retaining the loyalty of Democrats. So the people he is not keeping loyal at the moment are people who do support the party. Some significant chunk are certainly pissed off Clinton supporters. Pissed off Independents are a lot more likely to be harder to get back than pissed off Dems.

Certainly, there are some voters who are purely attracted to her either because they'd really like to see a woman be president, but anyone who is drawn to her for policy reasons will have a hard time supporting McCain over Obama, and anyone who loves Hillary will have a hard time ignoring it when she spends the Fall campaigning for Obama.

by letterc 2008-05-26 04:14PM | 0 recs
They are called Reagan Democrats

for lack of better term.  They didn't vote for Gore in large enough numbers, they didn't vote for Kerry in large enough numbers and they didn't really vote for Bill in large enough numbers.  Hillary is the only Democrat in a couple decades to actually be able to pull large amounts of this voting group back to the party.  Its not about independents- they will swing Democrat without much help this time around, its the Reagan Dems, its the Latino voters, its the single women (who have a terrible GOTV record).

by linc 2008-05-26 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Has it ever occured to you

I have no problem in believing what you say...but it leads to "asking why" a person would vote for Clinton over McCain but vote for McCain over Obama considering Clinton's and Obama's policies and future for the country are nearly identical (even said so by Clinton).

The only reason I can imagine is out of spite....

by hootie4170 2008-05-26 05:39PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

serious question. If you got a call by a pollster asking if you would support Obama in the General Election what would you answer?

As a Clinton supporter, I'd say McCain.

It's the same reason the amount of Clinton supporters who say the won't get behind Barack Obama is so high in the exit polls.

It helps Hillary in the polls and can be used as an electability argument (or work as a talking point, hence the diary.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-26 04:01PM | 0 recs

are not a Clinton supporter and have a quite... developed opinion of what Clinton supporters are and what motivates them.  Let me tell you, we are not evil and we are not duplicitous- despite what you might wish us to be.  Did you ever think that those who Clinton has engaged, at least some of them over the last couple months, might just be engaged because of her, not the party, not Obama?  Yes, she too can draw people out into the political process.

by linc 2008-05-26 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: You

linc, didn't you get the meme?

Only Obama inspires people.  All other candidates before him and those that will come after him - people are just holding their nose.


by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

honestly, I don't think Americans think about "electability" arguments when they are being asked via a phone poll.

seriously, I have been involved with politics since 1984 and I have NEVER been called for polling.  so, quite frankly, I think they are asking the voters who aren't really activists or really that involved.  None of my other political friends have been polled either.

there must be a special list somewhere, based on what you watch on TV

CSPAN - don't call
Family Guy - call

by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

They will after June 3rd when it's official. For now we still have to deal with hillarys shadow which is casting darkness on the democratic party.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

only to Obama supporters is Hillary "casting darkness" on the democratic party.  17 million other voters disagree with you

by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

Believe me her mentioning ASASSINATION has not won her any support in the dem. party.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:22PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

only amongst Obama supporters.  At even at that, most of them understood what she meant, at least on this site.

dailykos - they are probably still circle-jerking around that one.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

I thought it was already over. KO told us all on MSNBC. You are living in a dream world if you think it's not over.

Sighs, inspite of it being over for Hillary long back, she still fares well against McCain than Obama. Is this the weakest candidate we are electing as a nominee?

by Sandeep 2008-05-26 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

It seems hillary is the weaker candidate if she couldn't even beat a black Jr. Senator with a funny Arab sounding name, who was polling at about 5 when the race started.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: good news

one word - Axelrod

He IS good.   Patrick, who used Axelrod as well, was the original "hope & change" messenger.  Patrick won by 25% here in MA.

now he is tanking because he has done a piss poor job in MA.  But we, including me, bought that message, hook, link & sinker.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-26 04:17PM | 0 recs
Hoping for a unity ticket

and hope you are too.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-26 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Hoping for a unity ticket


Because the unity ticket is essentially pandering to HRC supporters threatening to defect to McCain.

And from what I've seen, those trolls won't vote for BHO if Hillary is on the ticket or not.

So why pander to them if it won't win him any votes?

by pomology 2008-05-26 03:54PM | 0 recs
Your thinking and atitude

are a losing strategy for November. Hope that improves.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-26 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Your thinking and atitude

I don't really care if Obama asks Hillary to be his VP or not.

I'm not sure why Hillary would want to be VP anyway, except to bring honor back to the office after Cheney. She'd be so much more influential if she were to continue to be senator.

It just seems that Obama offering Hillary the VP spot wouldn't get him any more votes and would not be all that beneficial. Then again, I should stop listening to the trolls. I know there are reasonable HRC supporters out there and even though they would vote for Obama whether or not Hillary is on the ticket, they really hope she is, and for their sake I hope she is, too.

by pomology 2008-05-26 04:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Hoping for a unity ticket

Please make sure the campaign talks and acts in the way you think. It's your campaign so YesYouCan make sure the campaign ditches Hillary.

Please join me in opposing John McCain once he is elected President (hopefully by then you will have learnt to pander).

by Sandeep 2008-05-26 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Hoping for a unity ticket

I have no idea what you are talking about and I don't think you understood what I meant at all.

by pomology 2008-05-26 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Hoping for a unity ticket

I have seen people (especially Republicans) using that line when one wants to wiggle out of a difficult scenario with no moral explanation left to share.

by Sandeep 2008-05-31 10:36AM | 0 recs
The Obama administration

will be run by Barack Obama, not the DNC.

Barack Obama will select those who serve and in what capacities for his own reasons.

The Vice Presidency is not a consolation prize.

Let's see

1956 Stevenson did select Kefauver (Kefauver withdrew before the convention)

1960 Kennedy did select Johnson (Johnson did not run in the primaries, but challenged Kennedy at the convention.)

1968 Humphrey did not select Wallace or McCarthy

1972 McGovern did not select Humphrey

1976 Carter did not select Jerry Brown or George Wallace

1980 Carter did not select Kennedy

1984 Mondale did not select Gary Hart

1988 Dukakis did not select Jesse Jackson or Gore.

1992 Clinton did not choose Brown as his running mate.

2000 Gore did not choose Bradley as his running mate.

2004 Kerry did not choose Dean as his running mate, but he did choose Edwards who was in 3rd.

There has only been one "unity ticket" in the last 50 years, Kennedy Johnson. Therefore it would be a departure from party history to force a "unity ticket" on the nominee now.

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-26 04:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Statistical tie

Both figures are within the margin of error.

by Brad G 2008-05-26 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

My usual comment that I'm sure will get troll-rated....

Why even vote in November when there's polling data in Spring that is ultra-reliable as to inspire diary after diary?  I mean, heck, Spring 2004, Kerry was leading and then in Novembe... oh wait... maybe it ISN'T reliable...

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 03:51PM | 0 recs
I would call you a hypocrite, but I wouldn't tr yo

tell me, can you say you didn't support every. single. diary. in January and February when the meme was that HRC was less electable than Obama?

by linc 2008-05-26 03:54PM | 0 recs
Re: I would call you a hypocrite, but I wouldn't t

I can say that honestly.  In pro-Obama polling diaries and pro-Clinton ones, I say the exact same thing.

Having learned that lesson the hard way too many times has done that to me.  I put exactly not one iota of faith in polling data, but even less (if possible) in polling data done several months in advance...

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

But that just goes to show that not every poll is reliable.  For instance, the ones that show Obama outperforming Clinton against McCain--very unreliable.

Thank goodness the sages of MyDD are on top of this, which is why they don't use polls that show Obama beating McCain in Wisconsin and Michigan.

by deminva 2008-05-26 03:54PM | 0 recs
Well for those of us...

who has been paying attention to politics for years...these #'s are actually not good. The republicans haven't even started the negative campaigning with all his weak points as yet. They haven't started to define, distort, destroy him yet. The $250 million dollars worth of 527s haven't started on him as yet. And he has no padding whatsoever to work with, RIGHT NOW. Lucky us. Woohoo!

But don't worry, as soon as McCain goes one on one with the O, he'll likely moved to the center with enough street creds of working across party lines for over 20 years, which will make everyone feel better then, I'm sure.

by cosbo 2008-05-26 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Well for those of us...

Can't really disagree, as long as it is clear that both of the Dems are within the margin of error of each other. What isn't good for one of them, isn't good for the other either.

by letterc 2008-05-26 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Well for those of us...

This is the opposite of the truth.  McCain should be killing in the GE polls right now.  He has been getting a free ride for months.  He has also had free rein to raise money, unite the party, and define himself/his opponents.  

At the same time his opponent is still locked in intra-party conflict.  Nearly 20% of Obama supporters are saying right now they won't vote for Hillary, and 30%+ of Hillary supporters are saying they won't vote for Obama.

This is the type of situation McCain needs to seize, and he hasn't done that yet.  It speaks to the strength of the democratic party this election.

by Sarcastro 2008-05-26 04:35PM | 0 recs
Nah. Most of the media is still focused...

on Obama vs. Clinton. That's all they talk about. That's why  you haven't seen McCain going anywhere.  He's pretty under the radar. That'll change when it goes one on one.

by cosbo 2008-05-26 04:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Well for those of us...

Um, as I have a B.A. in Political Science, I can tell you that I have paid attention to politics for decades.

The only thing polling data is good for is to indicate demographic breakdowns where the candidate needs to focus... that's pretty much it.  

A lot can change in 5 months, including the numbers... or, actually, ESPECIALLY the numbers...

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-26 04:48PM | 0 recs
Why even have elections?

We'll just see who's ahead in the polls and declare them President.

Easy-peasy, swiss-cheesy...

by jaywillie 2008-05-26 05:29PM | 0 recs
Why won't non-white-people vote for Hillary?

by bobdoleisevil 2008-05-26 03:53PM | 0 recs
Based on other survey data I've read
The Rev. Wright issue has given white voters pause for thought.
A substantial number believe he shares Wright's views.
by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-26 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Based on other survey data I've read

No, he asked why Clinton does so badly with white people. It was snark. Both Clinton and Obama poll about the same among white people (well within the MOE of each other). You can't use Wright to explain why white people don't like Obama any more than they like Clinton or Kerry or Gore or Bill Clinton.

Actually, you can. I think it is called the Southern Strategy, but I hear we aren't allowed to talk about that.

by letterc 2008-05-26 04:22PM | 0 recs
yes I saw that

after I posted my comment. It's been a long holiday for me hosting and serving guests all day, lol

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-26 04:41PM | 0 recs
People believe Obama shares Writh's views

mainly because Hillary and her droids tell them he does.

There is nothing in Obama's record or rhetoric that suggests that he shares Wright's views, nothing.

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-26 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Nothing but polling noise.  That 4% swing is WELL within the MOE, not to mention that national surveys mean jack now.

by skywaker9 2008-05-26 03:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

And Newsweek/nbc ALWAYS tilts and favors towards Obama.  Not a good trend for Obama, now that this has joined Gallup and Quinipiac all showing the same thing.........HILLARY WINS!

by LindaSFNM 2008-05-26 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Fine.  Hillary can win a poll that has shifted within the margin of error.

Obama can win the primary and then he can win the general.

I can live with that deal.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

One single poll this far out within the margin of error= toilet paper.

by Casuist 2008-05-26 04:06PM | 0 recs
Hillary wins; Obama ties

it's bad news if Barack bullies the supers into giving it to him before the convention, before we can find out if he's electable. So far they're holding firm, refusing to commit, many in congress want a GE win more than anything else.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Hmmmm.........before we can find out if he's electable?

That sounds to me like "Gosh, I really hope and pray that he gets eaten by a bear, hit by a meteor, or found in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

There is nothing that you, or the superdelegates, will learn in the next two weeks that will fundamentally alter our understanding of Obama's electability.  You may hang on a little longer, but reality is going to come into sharp contradiction with your views in about two, maybe three weeks.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Yeah, I kind of agree with you.  It's not going to happen in the next two weeks.  It will happen once Obama is ordained as the nominee.  The Rethugs are holding off for now.

by Montague 2008-05-26 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

that's why it needs to go to the convention, we need more than two weeks and if he's the man he claims to be, it won't hurt him, it'll help him because he'll be seen as a real winner and if something is leaked that makes him unelectable shortly before nov. we won't be as mad at him for not telling on himself.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

You are correct.

by Montague 2008-05-26 04:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Of course, because our party will look so unified, decisive, mature, and orderly if we decide our nominee at the convention.  Come on.

Also, if your wildest dreams play out, and Barack Obama falls on his face, what makes it so clear that the party will want to elevate Hillary Clinton as its nominee?  Clearly, after the Wright affair was at its peak, and Obama didn't play Hillary's game on the gas tax, NC and OR voters weren't willing to elevate Hillary Clinton to majority status.  So why Hillary?  Why not Al Gore?  What about Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, or Bill Richardson?

by Brad G 2008-05-26 04:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmmm ...

... It seems the only candidate falling flat on her face these days is Hillary Clinton.  "Hard-working Americans, white Americans ..."; "We all remember when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated ..."

by Brad G 2008-05-26 04:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

What if it happens to John McCain?  Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, why did you quit before the convention?

by Brad G 2008-05-26 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

there are other reasons, and he's behind now, so it can get worse or better and one or the other is likely.  Yet another example of someone overrating Barack's charms and thinking the only way to beat him is to .... ?  Silly you, he's a Chicago pol, a lawyer, a big city slicker and McCain sucker punched him already.  Barack was very green to give John that opportunity.  You don't tell a war hero he doesn't understand the needs of our vets, even if it's true it's too stupid. McCain got to paraphrase Barack's only joke, and what will Barack say next, McCain doesn't have to show him respect, he's not in our party, he doesn't need to unify with us, matter of fact he needs not to.      

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

The Republicans have shown that one way to win is to attack your opponent where he is strongest.  I absolutely cannot stand Karl Rove or his style of politics, but I learned that lesson very well.

Define your opponent or he will define you.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

too well, he used it on Hilary, her experience, her appeal to female voters, her insurance plan, her kindness and generosity, he learned. But it didn't work with John and it won't, John is goofy but he's a real man and he's going back to the straight talk, and he won't trash Barack, he'll point out how Barack is trashing him and everyone will get mad at Barack for trying to tarnish a guy who ran against Rove and already got tarnished. None of the character assassination will work with McCain he's been a prisoner of war, he has guys like Barack for lunch, Barack will have to debate him on issues, not just mock him.   McCain will get Mitt as his vp, mr. Economics to red businessmen, it won't be as easy as he seems to think.  But, hey, he doesn't need me so I'm sure he has a fail-safe plan.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

McCain has already gone very, very negative in, of course, the classiest way possible.

Please, join the rest of us in reality.

McCain has repeatedly, repeatedly asserted that Hamas has endorsed Obama.  That isn't exactly what happened, and more to the point, has fuck-all to do with anything.

McCain has attacked Obama for his lack of military service, something that McCain has said was improper when people attacked other Republicans for their lack of military service.

McCain may not always have been a hack, but he is one now.  He learned, sadly, that for him to win the Republican nomination, you've got to sacrifice one heck of a lot of your scruples.

Hasn't seemed to bother him.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

I must have said something wrong, I meant to say that McCain wouldn't hold back like a Democrat would who needed party unity. John will go for everything, if not directly through his agency, he hired the swift boat people five months ago. I mean that Barack won't win votes among independents by attacking John's character, Bush already did that, and John is seen as a victim and a nice man and no one will love Barack for taking away the illusion, John has the same advantage over Barack that Barack had over Hillary. He's got some inoculation against viscous character attacks that Hillary thanks to our great media and our DNC, didn't have.  Barack was able to say the worst things about her, sending the KO thing to newspersons is just what he got caught doing.  The media hates her and all powerful women when they start to slip, but they love John McCain, he's the straight talk express, he's funny and warm and he can get away with a lot.  Hey, it's a man's world.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

I mean, he won't look like he's trashing Barack's character, he won't say, like Barack did to Hillary, that he's untrustworthy, instead he'll look like he's talking to a retard who doesn't know any better.  He'll stand up to him, but behind his back he'll mock him and jeer him and challenge him.  And his group will stop at nothing, not a thing.  But, don't worry, it won't get started in earnest until he's the nom for sure, john wants to run against him, he doesn't want it to be Hilary.  There is nothing new on Hillary and her military stuff looks good to pugs.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

You just wrote more positive things about McSame then you've ever written about Obama. You just outed yourself as a Repug TROLL.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

that's not true, I used to say great things about Barack, and I'm talking election strategy, there is no way I'd vote for John McCain, and no way I won't vote for Barack, if he's the nom and no way I'm giving up hoping it's Hilary until it's over.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Then why aren't they coming out and supporting Hillary? How many S.D.s has Hillary received in the last week? Last month?  

by venician 2008-05-26 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

she's getting a trickle, a few every week. What's telling is that she's the presumptive loser but keeps getting them and the rest aren't falling in line behind Barack. That's the real question, her supporters want to see how she does in the next few weeks and how she polls, so it looks on the surface that mainly her supporters are left, the one's that want to win the GE and want to pick the one most likely to win it.  Right now it looks like her, but it's too soon, things can change.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary wins; Obama ties

I have a feeling you'll be the last of the clinton clingons.

by venician 2008-05-26 04:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Gee ...

And I thought you wanted everyone to wait until August. ...

by Brad G 2008-05-26 04:36PM | 0 recs
She's been getting add on supers.

In the last week, she had a net loss of non-add on superdelegates.

by bobdoleisevil 2008-05-26 04:36PM | 0 recs
Re: She's been getting add on supers.

that's true, some of her early ones switched, but she's had some new ones.  What's the hurry, am I the only one having fun?  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: She's been getting add on supers.
This weekend       Obama   9
                   Clonton 0
by venician 2008-05-26 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: She's been getting add on supers.

not a lot, but some, it's heartening to me. by the way, concerning your sig, the way the winner wins will determine whether the loser's supporters gag their breakfasts while voting for him or her.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 05:02PM | 0 recs
The supers giveth and the supers taketh away

The superdel traffic has essentially been a one way street, and the street leads to Obama.

Can you not see this?

by Priest Valon 2008-05-26 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: The supers giveth

no, I think it's much more interesting that the deciding ones are still waiting and that she's increasing her momentum.  It's unseemly and offensive to act like it's over and that she needs to drop out.  It's also stupid, there is no gain to be made by offending her supporters, so to me it's a sign of weakness. A real winner would be on the high road and would no longer by trying to drive anyone off.  

by anna shane 2008-05-27 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course

Because we all know you win by losing.

The real question is this:  Why after eight years of her husband being president haven't more supers endorsed her as a way of saying that she would make a better president than her opponent of so few years of federal elective office experience?

by Brad G 2008-05-26 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

The elitist bastards within the party wont understand what has happened until it is too late. I guess that's how we ended up nominating Dukakis, McGovern and Mondale. Those same people think we are going to win Kansas and Texas in November. Grassroots? More like Grass Smokers

by bsavage 2008-05-26 04:13PM | 0 recs
If my gal can't win... then the other guy better


Utterly disgusting and disgraceful attitude.  We're not voting for class president, we're voting for someone who will set the countries course for the next 4+ years.

by Priest Valon 2008-05-26 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: If my gal can't wint

you misunderstand, we don't want the nom to fail.  We want the nom that won't fail.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:24PM | 0 recs
Re: If my gal can't wint

Sadly, yours already has.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-26 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: If my gal can't wint

says you, but it isn't over.  

by anna shane 2008-05-26 04:35PM | 0 recs
The elected and super dels have said its

over.. in spades.

Can I suggest a good grief councilor?

by Priest Valon 2008-05-26 06:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

Yes!  HRC will be President of Newsweek!

by fogiv 2008-05-26 04:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

And Kentucky

by venician 2008-05-26 04:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties
I am confused..
In looking at the electoral maps on the front page..
Do they show Clinton beating McCain More?
Do they show Obama beating McCain?
So your argument is:
Because the winner in the Democratic Party beats McCain by less than the loser..(five months before the election)the loser should be our nominee?
by nogo postal 2008-05-26 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

oh as for
"The elitist bastards within the party wont understand what has happened until it is too late. I guess that's how we ended up nominating Dukakis, McGovern and Mondale. Those same people think we are going to win Kansas and Texas in November. Grassroots? More like Grass Smokers"

Don't forget to claim your McCain Troll points logInteract/BlogInteract.aspx

by nogo postal 2008-05-26 04:53PM | 0 recs
The race numbers are more interesting

This is the same poll with the odd "Race Resentment Index," which identified the white Democrats with the most trouble with Obama. There was a series of ten questions about race issues and, not surprisingly, the majority of "High Race Resentment" Democrats were older, less educated, and lived in the South.

I'm not sure if their questionnaire is fair. And it sort of confirms the obvious: racist people won't vote for a black man for President.

But the data doesn't really tell us exactly where these voters are, or how hardened their opinions were (a majority of High Race Resentment White Democrats still support Obama, though at less levels than Clinton).

by elrod 2008-05-26 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Newsweek Poll: Hillary wins; Obama ties

If the world is going to end if Obama gets the nomination then it is time to prepare for the end of the world.

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-26 06:10PM | 0 recs
he's goin' down...

BECAUSE the country ca see him for the EMPTY suit and bullshit that he is...

by nikkid 2008-05-26 06:49PM | 0 recs
Going down to Colorado

to pick up the nomination for President.. thats what you meant to say, amirite?

by Priest Valon 2008-05-26 06:58PM | 0 recs

by nikkid 2008-05-26 07:04PM | 0 recs
Yuhuh! He'll have the 2210+delegates with him and


Hillary's delegates and $2 will buy her a trip on the NYC subway.

by Priest Valon 2008-05-26 07:14PM | 0 recs
ack.. nomination for the Democratic candidate for


I spoke to soon, inauguration of Obama is next year.

by Priest Valon 2008-05-26 06:59PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads