home

Divergence

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:11:40 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

One thing does bother me about the polling lately - while the state polls have shown a huge shift towards Obama - big leads in blue states (CA, NY, IL), sizable leads in big swing states (FL, OH, PA), ties in big red states (VA, NC) and yet the national polling has Obama by 4 after Obama opened as much as a 9 point lead in some national tracking polls.

The results do not jibe. One possible explanation is that the Q polls were taken from the 9th to the 16th. Early in that period, Obama's results ramped up nationally before coming back to 4. In a sense, perhaps the Q polls are already out of date. Just a thought.

By Big Tent Democrat

< Drilling Down Into The Poll Numbers: FL, PA and OH | Voting Reform in FL Still Moving Too Slowly >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Divergence | 163 comments (163 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    The race is fluid at this point (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:14:11 PM EST
    unless and until SUSA conducts its 50 state poll every day, we're not going to have a great picture of where this election stands for a little while. I wish they would, but I expect that they won't.

    Read Poblano on this: (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:15:24 PM EST
    http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/label/bounces
    He's irreplaceable. (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:19:26 PM EST
    The key nugget:

    There are also a series of national polls out, all of which have consolidated in the area of Obama +4, exactly the popular vote margin that we attribute to him based on the state-by-state polling results.

    That's from yesterday, so given today's even better results it should be taken with a grain of salt.  One would expect to see Obama creeping up toward +5 or +6 in national polling in the next week.

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#6)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:21:42 PM EST
    That credible, eh?

    Parent
    As credible as anybody doing projections (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:23:45 PM EST
    this cycle.  Obviously it's a very inexact science, but IIRC he's only had two or three substantial misses.

    But maybe I just give him extra weight because I'm a huge fan of BP.  :)

    Parent

    I found some of his research (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:27:40 PM EST
    to be a bit shaky when he was writing dKos diaries.

    He seemed to want to ignore some necessary primary text sources like the Congressional Record in order to keep his claim viable.

    That kinda sorta bugged me.

    Parent

    That's fair. (none / 0) (#14)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:28:46 PM EST
    Seems to have been learning on the job.

    Parent
    That's something he should've learned (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:30:48 PM EST
    if not in EN102, then by watching and learning what not to do as the admin "fixed" its intel to fit its claims re: Iraq.

    Parent
    As credible as me? (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:32:08 PM EST
    Nope. I was better than Poblano.

    Parent
    I guess I wasn't reading you then, in that case. (none / 0) (#36)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:35:01 PM EST


    Parent
    Indeed... (none / 0) (#37)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:35:12 PM EST


    Parent
    that makes no sense (none / 0) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:31:43 PM EST
    the nationals are polling every night.

    If anything, you could argue that the state polls will converge with the downward track for Obama.

    Parent

    Indeed, (none / 0) (#26)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:33:30 PM EST
    The only thing new today is that Florida appears winnable, maybe. . .

    Parent
    Or that, sure. (none / 0) (#29)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:33:58 PM EST
    "Reality" in polling is pretty transient.  We'll see one of the two, anyway.

    Parent
    The thing that has me skeptical is (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:35:40 PM EST
    NOTHING happened in Florida to turn a 10 point McCain lead into a 4 point Obama lead. Absolutely nothing.

    Parent
    Time has passed and passions have cooled (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:39:34 PM EST
    is the only explanation I can think of.  But I'm not sure how much I even buy into that.  Wouldn't surprise me at all to see in a couple weeks that this was just a blip.

    Parent
    14 points of passion? (5.00 / 0) (#51)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:43:50 PM EST


    Parent
    I mean... what else you got? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:47:31 PM EST
    Intuitively, anyway, there would have been an overabundance of passion in Florida.  Doesn't make a ton of sense to me, either.  I'm still a couple more polls away from believing it.

    Parent
    Women, (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:54:34 PM EST
    Hispanics and Jews. For what national polls are worth, they show that these groups are breaking for Obama now. That might explain part of FL's two polls today.

    The last FL poll was a month ago. As we both know, there was a lot that happened since then. This poll was enough to change 538's regression to Obama +1.9.

    But this does not mean Obama is going to win Florida. I do, however, think it means that McCain is going to have to devote more resources there. In my opinion, that's the more important impact.

    Parent

    Nothing? (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Veracitor on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:09:59 PM EST
    McCain himself is helping Obama in Florida.  His recent there was marked by opposition to a very popular bill to restore and protect the Everglades.  Now he wants to drill the coast, which not even Jeb Bush could bring himself to support.

    In addition, he is framing himself with SS privatization and against healthcare.

    At the same time, Obama has been making great strides with Latino and Jewish voters.

    Parent

    National news happened in Florida (none / 0) (#85)
    by s5 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:13:26 PM EST
    It's pretty hard to overlook that McCain has just not been doing himself any favors lately. Even without rallies and speeches and voter outreach, McCain looks ineffective, out of touch, and generally confused about the big issues of the day.

    So my take on this is that there's tremendous upside for Obama when actually does actively campaign in Florida. People just don't like McCain, so now Obama has to do the work of convincing people to vote for him, instead of just against McCain.

    Parent

    Umm... (none / 0) (#160)
    by dogooder on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 08:39:30 PM EST
    Between the mid-May polls and the new mid-June polls, he won the nomination and Clinton conceded. How can you count this as "nothing"?

    Parent
    Hee (none / 0) (#144)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:50:25 PM EST
    Yes, I predict he'll go up or he'll go down.  Or stay the same.  Gallup, bring it on!

    Parent
    Polls tend to be out of date (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:15:35 PM EST
    the moment they're published, aye?

    Getting poll crazy this early ... (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by pluege on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:33:00 PM EST
    will surely drive you bonkers. I don't think any of them mean anything.

    Trends (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:03 PM EST


    Parent
    Has anyone found (none / 0) (#96)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:24:02 PM EST
    any of the underlying info on any of these polls, i.e., percentage of difference economic, gender & ethnic groups and percentage of Dems, Repugs & Indies polled?  What seems to me to have skewed so many of the primary polls was over- or under-polling of AAs and women, overpolling of voters of one political party or another, etc.  I could not find these for Quinipiac or ARG today.

    Also, is SUSA still doing automated phone polls? The automation, i.e., those polled did not have to tell a live person their preferences, but instead pushed a series of buttons and could feel comfortably(?) anonynous, may well have been one of the keys to SUSA's greater accuracy for much of the primary season, in addition to the fact that at least for a while, SUSA was polling a percentage of women and other voters that seemed to match the best estimates of what the electorate actually looked like.  

    The devil is in the details.  

    Parent

    It's too early for trends (none / 0) (#103)
    by dianem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:30:16 PM EST
    Trends happen over time. Obama is still in his "post primary bump" phase. For example, if we assume that the current numbers are trends that will invariably continue until the election, then by the time the election come around Obama will have about 200% of the vote.

    What will the price of oil be in November? Can you tell from looking at today's price? How much will gasoline cost? These are all numbers that can be tracked daily (and quite accurately), but we still can't predict the future based on how they are trending right now. Politics is messier - we can't even be sure what today's numbers are (+/- 3% is a big range, and even that is only right in 19 of 20 polls). You can make general forecasts: Gasoline will still be expensive, Obama will win solidly blue states. But that's all. No specifics are possible.

    Parent

    Polls, schmolls .. (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:03:12 PM EST
    Obama did poorly in the primaries when he had a strong party organization against him, he did poorly when only part of a party organization was against him.

    He basically only did well where there was an organizational vacuum.

    There are no such states in the GE.

    This is why the GE will be a hard road for him.

    huh? (none / 0) (#120)
    by tben on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:04:12 PM EST
    I'm really trying to understand your point here, and can't quite do it.

    He did poorly when the state party organization was against him? And you conclude from that that he will do poorly in the GE, when they will all be for him? Perhaps, but I dont see how or why you get from point A to point B.

    Parent

    Something odd that I have been noticing (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by FemB4dem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:20:46 PM EST
    in talking with people who don't follow politics regularly.  Many still don't believe that Obama is the Democratic nominee, and they think that somehow Clinton will still be the person they will get to vote for in the fall.  When I tell them, no, barring something earth-shattering, it will be Obama versus McCain, the next question invariably is, but she will be his VP, right?  When I say that seems unlikely as well, they shake their heads and mumble.  It is only then there is even a focus on the other choice.  Then it's been something along the lines of oh, yeah it's that McCain guy -- well he's not so bad.

    I kid you not, I have had variations on this conversation with at least 20 people.  My guess is that BTD is right:  This race won't even begin to be comprehensible polling-wise until after Obama either picks, or does not pick, Hillary as his VP.  Reality is tough to deal with -- my guess is that many everyday Dems being polled right now are in summertime avoidance and denial mode, and will not start to really focus on politics until after the VPs are set and the Conventions have been held.  IMO, that's why the repubs and the 527s are basically keeping their powder dry until September.

    I still think Hillary should be offered (none / 0) (#137)
    by Newt on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:33:42 PM EST
    Harry Reid's Senate Majority job.  It would give her a powerful platform to work for our issues, it bumps out someone who hasn't done anywhere near enough for us, and it gives her very good incentive to throw everything she has into helping our party win, including her lucrative donor base.  

    Please don't say I'm trying to bribe Hillary supporters, because other than some vocal people on this list, there are many, many Dems who voted for Hillary who would be thrilled to support Obama if they see that Hillary would jump a bunch of more senior Senators for that coveted leadership position.

    In the end, it shows that she has power within the party since that's not a job Obama can offer her, but one that would take real party agreement.

    I think it's worth pushing for.

    Parent

    Although I've said ad nauseum (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:18:00 PM EST
    I wouldn't vote for Obama under any circumstances, if he engineered her the Sen. Maj. Leadership, I'd eat my words and vote for him.  It would be the perfect spot for her.

    I just think there's no chance.  Reid, Dean and Pelosi et al are determined to eradicate Clinton influence from the party altogether.  Not even the most magnificent Obama people are hoping he'll be has the power to do this.

    Parent

    Obama could make it happen. (none / 0) (#145)
    by lmv on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:50:46 PM EST
    Bush did.  He leveraged his power among his supporters.  

    Apparently, Reid nixed this.  (What has he accomplished as ML?)

    I agree it's a great idea.

    Parent

    The Q polls show that Hillary (none / 0) (#154)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:22:49 PM EST
    would drag down Obama with Independents in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida:

    While Democrats support the idea, independent voters in each state say Obama should not choose Sen. Clinton as his vice presidential running mate. Results are:

    Florida: Democrats want Clinton on the ticket 57 - 33 percent while Republicans are opposed 59 - 17 percent and independents oppose it 46 - 37 percent;

    Ohio: Democrats want Clinton for Vice President 58 - 31 percent, but Republicans say no 60 - 19 percent and independents turn thumbs down 47 - 31 percent;

    Pennsylvania: Democrats say yes to Clinton 60 - 31 percent, while Republicans say no 63 - 20 percent and independents nix the idea 49 - 36 percent.




    Parent
    That doesn't surprise me (none / 0) (#158)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 08:16:00 PM EST
    The independent vote never struck me as a demographic that would vote for a woman President.

    Parent
    A couple of clues (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by RonK Seattle on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:18:01 PM EST
    1. Obama's new leads in several states are on McCain dips, not Obama bumps.

    2. The SUSA VP-testing polls are producing anomalous Obama bumps (reasons subject to speculation. Note in particular, SUSA did a regular head-to-head and a VP test h2h on the same dates in MO. Obama's margin was 5 points higher in the VP-not-named bracket of the VP test poll. SUSA VP tests in other states have been relative outliers.

    Running true to form, it's a race to the bottom - with McCain leading at this point.

    Seems like chill pills should be doled out (2.00 / 1) (#10)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:24:19 PM EST
    all around.  Some people are straining so hard to put these polls in a positive light for obama, they may end up with a hernia...maybe polls in a week or two might be a tad more reliable...just saying

    LOL (2.00 / 0) (#101)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:28:53 PM EST
    Yeah you really need to strain to put these polls in a positive light.  

    Parent
    I don't think (none / 0) (#16)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:29:49 PM EST
    any of the recent polls are reliable in predicting the outcome of November. But I do think they will set the strategy going forward.

    Until MN came out, it seemed like McCain would have to play defense in several key Bush states, whereas Obama could go on offense in FL, OH and elsewhere. MI seemed like McCain's only shot. But maybe there is some hope for McCain in MN.

    While these numbers are interesting, the one I am waiting for are fundraising numbers for June.

    Parent

    aaah pegasus...truth hurt?? (none / 0) (#142)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:42:17 PM EST


    Parent
    Any chance of an acknowledgement? (2.00 / 0) (#31)
    by lgm on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:04 PM EST
    This site a mere two weeks ago was flooded with people saying Obama could not possibly win Ohio or Florida or the general election.  Without predicting the outcome in November, these polls show an Obama win is at least possible.  

    I would love for some Clinton supporters to recognize that some of the things they said about Obama were too hasty.  

    Getting over the primary (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:35:55 PM EST
    is wisdom that cuts both ways. . .

    Parent
    Amen! (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by anydemwilldo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:49:16 PM EST
    Poking folks about junk from the primary, in either direction, is just dumb.  The primary is over, and there's a general election to fight.

    Parent
    acknowledge what? (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by jb64 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:46:58 PM EST
    A couple of polls 5 months out? None of this means anything right now.

    Parent
    Hillary's online support (none / 0) (#102)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:30:11 PM EST
    depended on polls way too much in the run up to Iowa.

    Parent
    If there is another poll next week (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:51:00 PM EST
    that shows Obama behind in FL, do we have to say we were too hasty to say we were too hasty in May?

    Can we wait until he actually wins before we grovel, please?

    Parent

    Florida I plead guilty (none / 0) (#44)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:39:06 PM EST
    Frankly, I find the FL poll results stunning.

    Ohio? No, I always said Obama could and SHOULD win Ohio.

    I think the idea of ognoring Ohio was nonsensical. That is a constant point I have made.

    So your comment is inaccurate mostly.

    Parent

    You know, Florida really isn't so stunning (none / 0) (#47)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:40:12 PM EST
    remember SUSA in February?

    Parent
    Sure (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:42:57 PM EST
    But that was February. Obama has higher negatives now.

    Parent
    Well. . . (none / 0) (#50)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:43:00 PM EST
    I've heard that privatizing social security does not play well in FL. I honestly don't know, but if so, that breaks well for Obama. No?

    And McCain is for (or has been for) privatizing social security.

    Toss in offshore drilling for good measure and good luck predicting FL.

    Parent

    Good question (none / 0) (#89)
    by Veracitor on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:17:21 PM EST
    Obama has defied every TL prophet of doom.  If they were to acknowledge their false assertions, there would be a serious shortage of crow.

    Parent
    Aren't we getting a bit ahead of ourselves? (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by tree on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:25:30 PM EST
    The prophets of doom are predicting that Obama will lose in November. Last I looked its only mid June? It temporally impossible to defy a prediction about what will happen 5 months from now.

    Parent
    Um, no? (none / 0) (#109)
    by anydemwilldo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:42:45 PM EST
    You certainly can do predictions about what will happen in the future.  That's why they're called "predictions" and not "facts."

    And look, folks: I think everyone needs to take a few breaths on both sides.  I see a bunch of Hillary supporters here making some pretty specious criticism instead of accepting these polls for what they are.  Worse, I see a bunch of Obama folks here crowing to the Clinton people and trying to rub their noses in it.  Stop it, all of you.

    Clearly, there have been a bunch of polls out today that in total are good, solid evidence of some very positive motion in the direction of the democratic candidate.  That's a good thing.  It's not the end of the election, but it's not a trick either.  Be happy.

    Parent

    reading comprehension is your friend (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by tree on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:55:52 PM EST
    Yes, you can make predictions about the future. I never said you couldn't. Please reread what I said. What I said was that you can't prove a prediction about the future wrong until you actually get to that moment in time. I could predict that it will be a cloudy day November 4th. You can't prove me wrong by telling me how sunny it is today. You aren't "defying" the prediction until that November 4th comes along and there's not a cloud in the sky.

    Thus, Obama can't "defy" predictions about what will happen 5 months out until we get quite a bit closer to November 4th. Its one of those counting your chickens kind of things.

    Parent

    Oh, for heaven's sake (none / 0) (#123)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:07:56 PM EST
    Get over it.

    Parent
    Not here and now (none / 0) (#105)
    by dianem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:35:47 PM EST
    When we get closer to the election, if Obama still has these kinds of numbers, then I will happily admit that I was wrong about Florida. I never made a prediction about Ohio. But I was not hasty. The logic is solid:

    1. Older, Jewish, and Cuban voter's are not strong on Obama. These comprise a significant part of Florida's electorate.
    2. Obama's refusal to fully support counting votes in Florida caused some people who would otherwise have voted for him to turn away.
    3. Florida is a marginal state for Democrats, at best. Their state government is solidly Republican and they gleefully cheat to ensure that Dems have as little chance at winning as possible.

    Polls right now don't mean a darn thing. The only polling that counts is the one on Nov. 3, although I'm sure that before that day we will have a better (not perfect) idea of where people stand.

    Parent
    I've read recent NYT articles supporting (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:43:53 PM EST
    the theory younger Jewish voters are not as interested in supporting Israel as their elders are.  Perhaps, like the younger Cuban/Americans, those votes could easily go to Obama.

    Parent
    Well, I'll go on the record (none / 0) (#122)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:06:42 PM EST
    again as saying Obama has no chance of winning this thing.

    Parent
    BTD passes, others not so much (none / 0) (#140)
    by lgm on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:37:08 PM EST
    BTD went further than anyone else in the direction of the black bird.  A big part of the Clinton message was that she was more electable than Obama.  Surrogate Bill was out there day after day saying Obama had no chance in the general, based on polls of the day.

    I don't know whether Obama will win, but the polls certainly have turned in his favor.  Can anyone besides BTD admit that they were wrong to say this could never happen?

    Parent

    My opinion... (none / 0) (#165)
    by Jeannie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 09:29:42 PM EST
    I don't think he has a chance. Gore and Kerry lost, and they didn't have Obama's strong negatives. When the media goes all out with the Wright, Ayers and other strange pals, the lack of experience and knowledge of the world - well, negative ads write themselves - and the Republicans don't even have to swiftboat (lie). I think he will lose, badly.


    Parent
    Also: (none / 0) (#4)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:17:04 PM EST
    Susa just released an MN poll:

    http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=b9f93545-a19e-4e8d-909c-59b6050c0d5e

    Note an important omission of potential running mates for BO.

    I don't know if I trust (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by eric on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:22:27 PM EST
    that poll, but I do think that Minnesota is closer than people think.  This is based upon nothing more than the fact that I live here.

    Parent
    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:25:51 PM EST
    I think it's unreliable as well. But I've been a BO supporter from the beginning so I try not to say stuff that might be unknowingly motivated by my desired outcome.

    Note, I fail at this repeatedly.

    Parent

    That poll makes no sense. (5.00 / 0) (#60)
    by masslib on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:50:18 PM EST
    Obama is beating McCain among older voters but tied among the 18-34 set?

    Parent
    It's a dumb poll (none / 0) (#68)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:56:21 PM EST
    and I'm embarrassed to have linked it. I'd like to see the racial breakdowns and turnout models.

    Parent
    That does seem odd, but (none / 0) (#70)
    by eric on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:58:50 PM EST
    here in the Twin Cities, we have suburbs full of 18 to 34 year-olds that, believe it or not, are republicans.  And the 18-34 year olds that live in the city, well, they don't have phones. (cell phones only).

    Parent
    One of the first things I noticed too n/t (none / 0) (#77)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:03:59 PM EST


    Parent
    I should note (none / 0) (#7)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:22:15 PM EST
    that by important omission I mean incredibly foolish omission. Not to spoil the surprise, but Hillary must be ahead of McCaskill on the short list.

    Parent
    McCaskill And Webb Great Picks For People (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:56 PM EST
    who care about issues like Iraq, FISA and immigration.

    Both have consistently voted with Bush and the Republicans on those issues. But heck who cares about issues anyway.

    Parent

    Clinton (none / 0) (#72)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:00:12 PM EST
    will not be the VP nominee.  Obama said so this week by hiring Solis-Doyle.

    No reason to poll Clinton.

    Looks like McCain should choose Jindal.

    Parent

    I'm fascinated by Jindal (none / 0) (#156)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:26:38 PM EST
    I think if he were picked, he'd be a real wildcard element.  And I'm bored now.

    I know some folks have said he's too wackadoo to get picked, but that's why I'd like to see it happen.

    And -- prophylactic Sigh -- don't anyone flip out and start accusing me of not being a real Democrat/humanist/progressive/pet lover.  I wouldn't vote for McCain-Jindal, I'd just like to see how that played out.

    Parent

    Well, if there ever was anyone who would (none / 0) (#167)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 09:33:18 PM EST
    pick a wackadoo VP, it is John McCain. He is a maverick, you know.

    Parent
    it would seriously undermine (none / 0) (#168)
    by tben on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 09:52:44 PM EST
    what McCain wants to use as a major line of attack vs. Obama - inexperience.

    Choosing a VP is a way of saying that if I win, and drop dead during the inaugural parade, this person can step right in, on day 1, and be a good president.
    If Jinadal is not too inexperienced on national level, and security issues, then you cant argue that Obama is too inexperienced.

    Parent

    Obama's inexperience is for the (none / 0) (#171)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:17:10 AM EST
    Presidency, not the VP.

    Also, as I said, I wouldn't vote for a McCain-Jindal ticket.  I am as free to argue against it based on inexperience as I would continue to be free to argue against Obama's inexperience, particularly since I'm not voting for either.

    It looks to me like the Republicans and McCain are trying to get Jindal some national spotlight now with an eye down the road for him.  

    Parent

    As I said (none / 0) (#173)
    by tben on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 08:06:09 AM EST
    the vice president can become president at a moments notice. Even on day 1. There is no difference whatsoever between the qualifications for one job versus the other.
    At least that is the argument that can and would be made by Dems if Jindal (or Sara Palin) is chosen, and the argument would resonate.

    He might be an intersting candidate for them 8 or 12 years down the road, but I think for now, you not only have the problem I explained above, there would also be the perception that all his talk of reformng LA gov't was totally phony - he would be leaving the state after hardly even beginning the job, putting his ambition ahead of reform.

    OF course he is also an extreme rightwinger when it comes to mixing very conservative religion and government - a position that it is hard for me to see as having much appeal outside the south. But maybe he could spend a decade or so evolving those positions.

    Parent

    I wonder if the reality of what a (none / 0) (#12)
    by inclusiveheart on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:26:46 PM EST
    President McCain might mean is taking hold now that post-primary emotions are starting to cool out.

    I doubt it... (none / 0) (#15)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:29:16 PM EST
    The polls have gone this way before.

    Remember. In 2004, there were several points where Kerry was up...a lot...and then not so much.

    Parent

    Did Kerry ever have a non-Zogby lead (none / 0) (#19)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:30:55 PM EST
    in Florida?

    Parent
    dunno... (none / 0) (#22)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:31:49 PM EST
    There was lots of up and down with statistical MOE heats through most of the summer IIRC.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#27)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:33:38 PM EST
    In Q polls for instance.

    I respect Q poll and I believe there were times when Kerry was ahead. I actually expected him to win Florida.

    Parent

    Fair enough (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:35:41 PM EST
    shades of today.

    Parent
    Except for... (none / 0) (#57)
    by anydemwilldo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:47:55 PM EST
    Except for y'know, the fact that the poll you link was an exact tie, and today's poll has Obama up by more than the margin of error.

    I'm not saying Florida is safe, or this is a huge lead.  Just that equating a tied poll to one showing a clear lead is kinda wrong.  If that's really your criterion, then polling is useless.  But it's not, you just need to be careful about how you read them.  Obama is undeniably doing significantly better (in the strict sense of "significantly") against McCain in Floriday than Kerry was against Bush at the same point in the election.

    Parent

    really? (none / 0) (#34)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:33 PM EST
    Kerry in a southern state?

    Parent
    Florida is not a Southern state (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:37:05 PM EST
    I do not know why people keep thinking it is. North Florida is but most of the population is in the south.

    the battleground is always the I-4 corridor.

    Parent

    Hey, they windsurf in FL. (none / 0) (#42)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:37:09 PM EST


    Parent
    Florida is a hodgepodge (none / 0) (#43)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:37:15 PM EST
    and can't really be described as Southern. It seems to me more like a slightly more conservative California.

    Parent
    I don't think (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:54:14 PM EST
    Florida is anything like California and I've lived (and voted) in both places.  Florida has always been more conservative.  Even the liberals are more conservative.  ;-)

    Florida has huge demographic issues that aren't mirrored anywhere else.  They have a significant older population (some counties have 30% over 65).  

    The Hispanic population consists of Cubans, Puerto Ricans and Mexicans/Central Americans.  I can't think of another state that has that particular mix of Hispanics.    

    Florida has a large Jewish demographic, but remember the 2000 election?  A lot of the Jewish voters registered in Florida actually live in Israel.  

    Florida has a significant black population that it hasn't always had.  

    Florida used to have a lot of military there.  I don't know if that is a large demographic anymore.  

    Rural voters versus city voters:  Even some of Florida's cities seem rather rural if you've lived there.  

    Anyway...  I think it is too far away from the election to accurately predict how Florida is going to go.  

    Parent

    Both states have lots of midwestern (none / 0) (#66)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:55:14 PM EST
    transplants, for example.

    Parent
    Yup. I don't really think of (none / 0) (#69)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:57:33 PM EST
    CA as a western state, lol~ I think TX, NM etc. western. CA, OR and WA are pacific or coastal states to me.

    Parent
    Yep (none / 0) (#84)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:12:50 PM EST
    I expected him to win FL too. He didn't lose by much but in the end it doesn't matter.

    Parent
    And Dukakis was (none / 0) (#118)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:00:51 PM EST
    19 points ahead of Bush I at one point.

    Parent
    Different time, different dynamic (none / 0) (#150)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:09:18 PM EST
    The Bush/Kerry race was remarkably stable....

    The era of the big bounce is over....With the internet, and at least three major 24 hour cable news channels, it seems less likely to have big bounces.....

    Parent

    I hope so (none / 0) (#17)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:30:20 PM EST


    Parent
    mcAin only seesm to win the (none / 0) (#24)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:32:30 PM EST
    Commander in Chief poll and the honest and trustworthy poll in something I saw today in an Arizona paper.

    So Obama's got it all togetehr on the economy and the likeability poll.

    Of course McCain's not using his artillery yet.

    We won't see any serious stuff until the conventions.

    Parent

    They want to make good and sure (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:13 PM EST
    that he's the candidate they'll be facing.

    Parent
    Typically the GOP hold their fire until (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by inclusiveheart on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:50:55 PM EST
    after the convention.  Its nothing new.  But I have noted a distinct trend in the media where people are discussing how similar McCain's policies are to Bush's.  I am wondering if that is helping Obama in places like Florida where they may not be gung ho about Obama, but may be realizing what McCain has to offer which really is more of the same.  Honestly, I've been surprized by the McCain campaign's seeming desire to hang onto Bush mantra - I thought they would be less lead-footed than they seem to be at the moment.  Normally, McCain is pretty clever about presenting ideas that are unseemly in such as way that they seem palatable and "new", but he has done neither of those things thus far.  It is odd.

    Maybe the GOP is so used to being out of the closet as it were with regard to their extremist ideology that they aren't able to recognize the danger they are putting their candidate in.  The Dems in the early 90's suffered from the same kind of tone deafness - it is entirely possible that the GOP cocoon is spun too tight for them to really see what's going on.

    Parent

    I think they'll go for paper cuts while people are (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:27:49 PM EST
    ... starting to wind down and/or going on holiday and stick to small, eroding attacks both to establish weaknesses and what the defenses are.

    Whatever draws more blood than usual, they'll earmark to hit hard later on.

    It's like a major league batter fouling off pitch after pitch until he's seen the repertoire and then Crank You Very Much, it's outtahere!

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:16:04 PM EST
    I think McCain is still trying to get some Republcans on board right now. Anyway, the rapid incoming ads aren't going to happen until after Labor Day.

    Parent
    Not just that (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Llelldorin on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:04:44 PM EST
    They also don't want to "peak" too early. If they've got something dramatic-sounding but fundamentally stupid, they can't release it now or by the election everyone will have figured out how dumb it is and be annoyed at them for pushing it. They'd do better to go for it in October.

    It's also possible that Wright was supposed to have been their swift-boating, and they got screwed up by the primaries beating the issue to death months ago. (If that's the case, every pundit who screamed that Clinton should drop out of the primaries early to avoid hurting the party needs to drive to Santa Monica and prostrate themselves before Digby until she accepts them as pupils in the School Of Remaining Very Calm.)

    Parent

    Where are people getting that Obama (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:01:43 PM EST
    is good on economy? Is it because of what McCain said? Obama's too all over the place and vague, imo, to have a good read as to how he'll be on economy. When I try and visualize him in his first months in office with all this heavy stuff on his plate, I get quite scared . . .

    Parent
    My thoughts also. Yes, I'll vote for him; but, (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:10:17 PM EST
    I have no confidence he has any savvy on managing the economy, figuring out what to do re high gas prices, foreign policy, and/or Iraq.

    AP Nedda Pickler reports first meeting of senior security/fp advisors.  

    Parent

    Oh and "OY." re: first security/fp mtg! (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:20:31 PM EST


    Parent
    Madeliene Albright is on the roster. (none / 0) (#95)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:23:57 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh lordy . . . . (none / 0) (#125)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:12:30 PM EST
    He was standing before 17 American flags and a sign that said "Judgment to Lead."

    the rest of the comment:


    He was surrounded by national security experts who had formerly served in Congress and the Clinton administration and will be advising his campaign -- an effort to bring foreign policy experience to a candidate who has served just three years in Congress.

     Interesting that he has all that "old politics" behind him  ;)


    Parent

    shoot. link (none / 0) (#126)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:13:34 PM EST
    here

    Parent
    Whether or not you agree (none / 0) (#132)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:20:49 PM EST
    with Obama's sincerity about bringing change to DC, suggesting that he lacks sincerity because he talks to people who have been involved in politics is intellectually dishonest.

    It's just a cheap shot.

    Parent

    The key word is "old" (none / 0) (#136)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:33:39 PM EST
     as in "old politics."

    Parent
    Loved this part too (none / 0) (#139)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:35:45 PM EST
    Obama later met in the same hotel ballroom with 41 retired admirals and generals to discuss the state of the military and the challenges in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

    Unfortunately, it doesn't say they are "recently retired."  I have a hard time fathoming what they are supposed to know about the current conflicts.

    Parent

    If he only had one major problem (none / 0) (#90)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:19:18 PM EST
    when taking office, I would be much finer (like my  grammar?) with him winning. But geeze, we are so screwed up right now . . . I imagine "deer in the headlights" from him on day 2. Maybe it's because I've had a few bosses like him . . .

    Parent
    Polls (none / 0) (#20)
    by Coral on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:31:30 PM EST
    Bush is in the cellar (24% according to Harris, via Atrios). The stock market is tanking. And fuel prices are going through the roof.

    If Bush (and McCain) keep this up, the Democrats and Obama might end up with a 50 state sweep.

    Well, maybe not. However, even as a totally unenthusiastic Dem at this moment (with angst about voting for Obama and even Kerry in MA after the primary fiasco), I feel relieved at the prospect of no longer having Republican misrule from the White House on down.

    If this situation (gas prices, crises is various markets, prospect of more war, poor job figures) continues into September/October, even the most brutal personal attacks will not work.

    I half expect gas prices to go down (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:33:47 PM EST
    before the election.

    Build it up and then see it tumble.   If conservatives can manipulate any commodity it's oil.

    Parent

    You can bet on it. Oil prices go down in the (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:53:14 PM EST
    fall.

    Parent
    That's why the Democrats need to be worried (none / 0) (#113)
    by SoCalLiberal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:53:08 PM EST
    All over LA, I am no seeing gas prices at $5 a gallon.  With things this bad, the fact that Obama is not blowing him away is troubling.  That said, the Q polls look pretty good.  And there are two other polls showing Obama with a lead in Florida and a lead in Ohio.  While I'm all for expanding the map, Obama has not shown that he can do it (except for Virginia where I honestly think he's got a shot).  However, he takes Florida and Ohio and holds the Kerry states (which I think he'll do), that's the election.  He's our 44th president.  

    Also, I've decided to try out a new nickname for Obama:  Hobama....Hope + Obama....Hobama.  That's better than Chris Matthew's "Barama".  

    Parent

    I predict you'll get called a racist for that. (none / 0) (#117)
    by tree on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:00:10 PM EST
    "Ho" could be seen as "whore" in black idiomatic speech. I say its better to keep away from any nicknames for any candidate- Obama, McCain, Clinton, anyone.

    Parent
    Really? Oh well then (none / 0) (#157)
    by SoCalLiberal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:46:48 PM EST
    I'm not going to use that nickname.  Now that I think about it.......yeah you're right...

    Okay, I'll look for another nickname.

    Parent

    Don't they generally drop in the fall? (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:03:04 PM EST
    {non-driver here!} I think the key will be how much more than normal.

    Parent
    I can imagine reasons (none / 0) (#91)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:20:23 PM EST
    why they might not want them to go down.

    Parent
    Well, yes, there's that too . . . (none / 0) (#93)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:21:49 PM EST


    Parent
    Congress (none / 0) (#74)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:02:37 PM EST
    is further in the toilet than Bush.

    Parent
    no kidding (none / 0) (#99)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:27:40 PM EST
    this idea that people are ready to "embrace" democrats just because they hate Bush is delusional.


    Parent
    Congressional Approval Ratings ... (none / 0) (#116)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:59:31 PM EST
    are more volatile than Presidential ones.

    A lot of Dems right now say they disapprove of the job Congress is doing, but they have no intention of voting Republican.

    Parent

    not only that but . . . (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by A DC Wonk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:02:21 PM EST
    most of the folks who complain about congress complain about other representatives, but have a relatively good view of their own rep.  thus, Congress can simultaneously have low ratings and extremely high re-election rates, year after year after year

    Parent
    It seems early (none / 0) (#32)
    by Lil on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:05 PM EST
    but maybe this country is really so fed up with the Republicans, that Obama and Dems all around will just roll over them. Of course the Republicans have barely begun their assault so we'll see how it all holds up in a couple of months. BTW, when have candidates typically announced their picks for VP in the past. I can't remeber what the window is.

    Kerry picked Edwards (none / 0) (#149)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:09:00 PM EST
    about 3 weeks before the convention.  I was just checking this last night.  (really, bc I'm so tired of all the VP talk I just want Obama to get it over with).

    Parent
    BTW, (none / 0) (#45)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:39:11 PM EST
    who likes Bob Graham as a runningmate? I could see it.

    My brother mentioned this (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by bjorn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:05:00 PM EST
    to me the other day.  He is a lifelong Floridian.  Graham is beloved there, more for his Governorship than being a senator.  I think he is too old too, but if McCain can hack maybe Graham can too.  Nelson does not have the same status in FL but he might be a good choice too.

    Parent
    Graham (none / 0) (#141)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:38:52 PM EST
    Bob Graham will not make the short list. He carries too much potential quirky baggage. Bill Nelson won't get picked since he is not a great public speaker, and a Dem Senator from a GOP state is not likely to be chosen.

    Don't waste your time prognosticating about a Dem VP from the Sunshine State, the VP will not be from here.

    As for Florida and Obama, he has recently announced who will lead his campaign in Florida, volunteer training for Obama is taking place in Gainesville, and his state headquarters will be located in Ybor City, a once booming then run down Latin area outside Tampa which is now more like the hip place to be. The Obama camp is in the news in Florida both by their own doings and also by what would be considered McCain Florida missteps. Florida will be a project...a project that if Al Gore had undertaken George Bush never would have left Crawford.

    Parent

    Lousy campaigner now (none / 0) (#48)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:41:57 PM EST
    Too old really.

    If that is the thinking, Bill Nelson makes more sense.

    At this point, Obama should do no harm with the VP IF this polling is real.

    We should know in a couple of weeks.

    Parent

    Oops. There goes that call for a Unity (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:44:57 PM EST
    Ticket.

    Parent
    Sure (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:45:04 PM EST
    And Florida is worth a Senate seat. Crist, naturally, would pick a Republican who could hold it for a while.

    Parent
    I'm with you (none / 0) (#54)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:45:23 PM EST
    I think that would be a smart choice.

    How old is he though?  My only qualm would be that he leaves us with no natural successor in 2016 (assuming 2 Obama/Graham terms).

    Parent

    W/ Obama's rightward tack Lindsay Graham will be (none / 0) (#129)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:17:44 PM EST
    ... floated by Donna Brazile when she's done praising Chuck Hagel as Obama's right wing VP choice for the Unity Ticket.

    Parent
    I wish John Kerry had done this (none / 0) (#121)
    by SoCalLiberal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:06:07 PM EST
    Bush's second term would have never occured.  Graham would be a great running mate.

    Parent
    Seasonal factors? (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:49:41 PM EST
    example: any polling last weekend would have missed everyone gone to Bonoroo.

    Possible something too that (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:53:36 PM EST
    Lots of elderly snowbirds get the heck out of FL in the summer.

    Parent
    or the old people who are home in Manhattan (none / 0) (#67)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:55:27 PM EST
    for the summer. Who knows.

    Parent
    Or the Obama bike ride photos plus (none / 0) (#71)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:00:09 PM EST
    Father's Day sermon?

    Parent
    A collection wd make a great coffee table book n/t (none / 0) (#130)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:20:15 PM EST


    Parent
    Only if packaged with a really fine bottle (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:34:56 PM EST
    of single malt Scotch.

    Parent
    What's that phone call? (none / 0) (#80)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:08:36 PM EST
    Rasmussen with sobering news:
    John McCain and Barack Obama remain in a statistical dead heat in the key swing state of Ohio, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the Buckeye State.
    McCain holds a statistically insignificant one-point lead over Obama, 44% to 43%, among likely voters. Seven percent (7%) favor a third-party candidate and 7% are undecided.
    All over the lot now (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:48:56 PM EST


    Parent
    One day poll with a larger margin of (none / 0) (#151)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:12:10 PM EST
    error than the Q poll, which has a MOE of 2.4%.

    Obama is unlikely to win Ohio big...but he should still win it....

    Parent

    MOE 2.6% (none / 0) (#155)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:25:28 PM EST


    Parent
    What was the mix of D/R /I this poll? (none / 0) (#83)
    by lmv on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:12:42 PM EST
    If many Clinton supporters have resigned as Dems, that leaves mostly Obama supporters.  Are there enough PUMAs to make a difference?  Have pollsters adujsted accordingly?  

    The demographics haven't changed in these states.  As BTD noted earlier, nothing has changed.  

    Just the make-up of the Dem Party.  

    Maybe the polls are weighted too heavily towards Obama?

    Indeed, and I linked it (none / 0) (#87)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:15:03 PM EST
    properly below.

    Rasmussen's OH poll (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by lmv on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:44:47 PM EST
    seems much more reliable.  National polls are showing Obama got no bounce from Hillary's speech.  There's no way Obama got huge bumps in swing states but not in the national polls.  Where are these new Obama voters?  

    Parent
    The WayBackMachine (none / 0) (#94)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:22:56 PM EST
    I went back to the Wayback machine looking for historical data on Kerry/Bush.  Here's the only link I had the patience to wait for download:

    Link

    This is August 8, 2004.  Kerry had 307, bush, 231.

    (Note:  The download is slow and the map doesn't download so you won't see the states).

    Polls in June are worthless.....fun, but serve no other purpose.

    The situation is very fluid. (none / 0) (#97)
    by AX10 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:24:30 PM EST
    Also, this PPP poll is highly unrealiable.
    Their samples tend to put Mr. Obama in a much better light than he is really in.
    Also, McCain will win Florida.  Lot's of retired military people, seniors, and and moderates down there.  Ohio is the battleground state that Obama needs to spend alot of time on.

    National polls. (none / 0) (#104)
    by OrangeFur on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:32:47 PM EST
    To me, the easiest way to assess the state of the race is through national polls. Not since 1888 has the electoral vote result differed from the popular vote result (yes, I am including 2000 in that), even though candidates have recently focused so much of their attention on only a few swing states.

    Even if you accept the FL result (none / 0) (#127)
    by Tzal on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:16:06 PM EST
    as favoring Bush, Gore still won the popular vote.

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results/

    Parent

    I know... (none / 0) (#172)
    by OrangeFur on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 03:24:35 AM EST
    My point was that in 2000, the winner of the popular vote was also the (rightful) winner of the electoral vote--Al Gore.

    Parent
    SUSA Had Obama Up By 9 (none / 0) (#106)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:37:57 PM EST
    in poll released 5/23. Obama 48%, McCain 39% and 13% undecided.

    Once the NRA starts running ads (none / 0) (#107)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:38:52 PM EST
    in Florida, what will that do to the polls?  Florida has one of the highest populations in the country of people with concealed carry permits.  

    If the NRA presents info on Obama as the "Anti-gun" candidate, it's going to be interesting to watch.    

    Won't do much (none / 0) (#124)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:12:12 PM EST
    Obama will say he's for local option on guns.

    Parent
    Here is the NRA fact sheet on Obama (none / 0) (#133)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:23:32 PM EST
    On the Second Amendment,

    Don't Believe Obama!

    I grew up in Florida and still have a lot of friends who live there.  They all seem to feel that everyone needs to have guns to protect themselves.  When I lived there, guns weren't nearly the big deal they are now.  

    Anyway, I think Florida has some of the loosest gun laws in the country -- and I don't think the residents want to change them.  

    Parent

    Umm, but there's that pesky (none / 0) (#135)
    by FemB4dem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:27:43 PM EST
    problem of him having said on tape that he supports the DC handgun ban and thinks it's constitutional.  That ban is so draconian, if it is constitutional, anything is -- because of this, IMO, Obama cannot present a credible front on guns, and in places where folks care about this issue he will be shredded on it, no matter what he says about local control.  Gun "clingers" tend to be slippery slope types.  They worry about federal control -- and a Dem Congress with a Dem president is a scary thing to them.  It will be interesting to watch the NRA vs. Obama.  Popcorn anyone?  

    Parent
    That's what I think too... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Grace on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:04:43 PM EST
    These NRA issues are going to be interesting to watch.  

    I noticed (during the primaries) that Obama won in a lot of areas where people wanted gun control -- like the city of St. Louis.  It's going to be tough to win over those rural voters because he does have a strong voting record on gun control.  

    Yes, I'll take some popcorn too...  :)

    Parent

    I think the Repubs plan to do last minute (none / 0) (#108)
    by Newt on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:40:38 PM EST
    swiftboating, or even give up on McSame and nominate someone else altogether.  Condi Rice & Colin Powell?  If all else fails, Bush already has his Third Term ready to roll if it looks like the reclamation of Congress via firing of Republicans is still on track next fall.  

    Worse case scenario would be a little dirty bomb brought into downtown Portland, a few Iranians arrested, some well timed statements about how we're finally winning the war in Iraq, but look those bad Iranians need our attention now, if only the Democratic candidate would refuse to speak to Ahmadinejad and stop being so soft on terror, and viola, middle America suddenly decides to support Republicans again...  

    Be ready.  Be very ready.

    The day before a hurricane hits... (none / 0) (#134)
    by p lukasiak on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 05:23:59 PM EST
    its usually bright and sunny.

    polls this far out are meaningless...especially since I think this is going to be the ugliest presidential campaign ever.  

    It wasn't that particular comment (none / 0) (#162)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 08:58:44 PM EST
    It was previous comments. The other thread was closed.  Other people have let you know you have violated the site rules so I reviewed you comments.  You might want to do the same.

    Calling other posters lying creeps will get you banned.  I suggest you stop.  Go review the site rules.  Jeralyn has also posted several items reiterating her view of the site... civility.

    Now Leading in Swing States Hillary Won (none / 0) (#169)
    by fctchekr on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 11:09:28 PM EST
    I will just say when Hillary won them the liberal media did not wallpaper their front pages with a U.S. Map.

    the only thing consistent about these polls (none / 0) (#170)
    by cpinva on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 11:37:22 PM EST
    is that they're hogwash. take all of them, plus a buck, and it'll get you a small coffee at mcd's. they're not worth the paper they're printed on.

    why you ask, and well you might. simply put, the actual campaign (still assuming obama is the actual dem nominee, and he's not imploded by then) hasn't begun in earnest. all these people know is what they think they know about obama, which ain't much.

    after the conventions, when the fireworks start for real, those #'s will drop like the proverbial stone. put money on it.

    oh, and the vaunted youth vote? yeah, right.

    Divergence | 163 comments (163 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment