Pollster.com

This pollster always leans republican and goes against the grain. 4 days late too...

Best to take it seriously. If we kick back because we spin poll results we could still lose this.

And wouldn't that be a kick in the butt.

stuarts got a point. i would be lying if i said i thought colorado was out of reach for republicans. colorado has to be a state that we keep our eyes on.

They have a reasonable record, according to 538. But note the MOE of 4%. We'll see...

This poll must have had an incredibly high number of 65+ aged voters in the poll which favor McCain.

In the 18-34 group, Obama leads by 25% and from 35-64, it is statistically tied. McCain leads by about 10% in the 65+ group.

Yet it is tied? Did they poll about ten people in the 18-34 group or something?

Why dismiss the Mason-Dixon poll? Colorado is a toss-up state. Look at the Polster.com trend chart and the last three polls.

The Dem convention bounce has left completely; CO is definitely a toss-up state again.

It will probably come down to the ground game.

The ground game that Obama is superior at! Im not worried about CO when you have VA, NC, Fl, and OH *rushing* towards Obama

Let's see if new Colorado polls for this week bear this poll out. Hopefully the Obama campaign is stepping up their effort in CO, along with VA and MN.

Will see what FOX/Rasmussen releases tomorrow.

Ground game or not we don't need this to be this close!

Okay, I had to create an account because of this poll. I live in Colorado, and we WILL turn blue this election.

I'm still waiting for SOMEONE to do a poll that isn't from a right-biased source, that is released less than four days after the poll was conducted.

Cordially of course,
Anders

For the record, I for one am not dismissing the poll, I consider Colorado a battleground no matter which way you spin it.

Obama's strength is with unaffiliated (+20). Overall Colorado has been close. Not sure why Rove has given Obama Colorado in his electoral map?

In 2004, Bush and Kerry held their base (93/7). Kerry won unaffilated by 7 and lost CO election by 4 points. Unaffilated represented 33%. The math works out to Obama needing +19 with unaffiliated to win.

The way this election seems to break down right now is as follows:

Obama wins Kerry states + Iowa + New Mexico = 264. Obama needs 5 electoral votes from one of the following CO, NV, OH, VA, NC or FL (I am assuming MO and IN go to McCain and that NE and ME are entirely McCain and Obama respectively).
If Obama wins only NV, then there is a tie (which presumably seats Obama in January based on house delegations).

I agree with (mostly) everyone else in that no one should readily dismiss anything at this moment. 30 more days of constant scrutiny and worrying and this things will be over! :)

I wonder if the LV screen is discounting the youth and minority votes. That would shave off a point or two from Obama. This election is going to be won or lost on the ground game, and from everything I've seen Obama has the much superior ground game.

Colorado is the type of state that could switch towards red status if Palin's attacks are effective: regarding his past dealings with Ayers. If people respond the way I think and hope they will, the voting public will be disgusted by the false attack, and it will push Colorado towards "Leans Democrat." But Obama has to punch back immediately to hold onto states like Colorado, Nevada, and North Carolina. Obama's hold on these states is tenuous at best.

Mason Dixon was the best of the pollsters in the individual battleground state projections in 2004. This is definitely bad news for Obama. The best chance of Obama picking up a Bush carried state other than Iowa and New Mexico is Colorado. If Obama misses out on Colorado it will be much harder to pick up any other Bush state he would need to win the election.

Troubling, but I'm still confident Obama can win this one come November. No need to panic, but a good reason to get your ass in gear and help the GOTV campaign.

You would figure with all the tree huggers in Colorado that Obama would have a comfortable lead. I guess they don't have enough of them, because Bush took the state last time right!

And we saw the result of that now didn't we?

@ pazienza

Um...where have you been hiding?

Leads in FL, VA, NC, NV, OH mean anything to you?

Not to mention a tightening race in MO and IN

With the power of Obama's grass roots ground machine, it is highly unlikely that McCain will be able to hold on to ALL of those.

All Obama needs is 10 more EVs. 10. Look at all the outs. McCain is virtually drawing dead.

Wake up and smell the cafe...

I like Nate's assessment of this poll in fivethirtyeight.com
Mason-Dixon may have shown a consistently republican bias, there's certainly reason to believe that the race in CO has tightened somehwhat and it bears watching.

I see no reason to simply attack the methodology here. It's a state where, as has been pointed out already, Republicans outnumber Dems slightly, and where it's vital for Obama to pull in a solid majority of independents, as well as turning out the base.

GOTV in CO is far better for Dems. There are some great reports from CO in the "on the road" reports from fivethirtyeight.com and they really bear this out. It's worth a point or two. Also if they can turn out the Hispanic vote in numbers approaching their representation in the population Obama should win, if he also gets a modest lead in independents. If independents are close for both sides McCain will hold the state no matter what Obama does on the ground unless Repubs stay home in droves, an unlikely scenario.

Sarah Palin is slandering Barack Obama's good name and she and McCain are playing dirty politics.

Wasn't Sarah Palin the Director of a 527 political group that was organized by Ted Stevens, the now indicted Senator from Alaska? This article: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/01/palin-527-stevens/ says she was.

Wasn't John McCain investigated for his role in the Keating 5 savings and loan scandal? This website: www.keatingeconomics.com
says he was.

VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA AND LETS GET A DEMOCRAT WIN IN NOVEMBER!

Remember this -

NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY

Final Results -- Clinton +2.6

RCP Average -- Obama +8.3

American Res. Group -- Obama +9.0

Suffolk/WHDH -- Obama +5.0

Rasmussen 01/05 -- Obama +7.0

ReutersC-Span/Zogby -- Obama +13.0

CBS News -- Obama +7.0

Marist -- Obama +8.0

CNN/WMUR/UNH -- Obama +9.0

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html

@ pazienza

...and your point is...?

No need to panic. This is a slightly Rep leaning poll. There is no substance to the shift ... did everyone just decode to jump ship from OB on Wednesday over cocktails ... what changed? Nada.

Anyway if the most biased (ignoring Fox) poll shows level ... as Sarah Failin' would say "that ain't too bad' you betcha" (wink wink).

For OB to ignore this would be naive, he should just take it with a pinch of Alaskan salt.

As I live in Colorado, I can tell you that the Mason-Dixon/Denver Post poll doe snot truly reflect the sentiments of the voters in this state. Mason-Dixon is known to be right leaning, as is the Denver Newspaper Agency who publish The Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News. Both Denver papers have a conservative lean since the merger a few years ago in a JOA.

Most people I know here are voting for Barack Obama. Even people who voted for George Bush four years ago. So, it was surprising to see the story is yesterday's paper indicating the race was tied here.

About the only place that is heavily Republican territory is Colorado Springs, home of "Focus on the family" and the center for conservative Christian Republicans. However, Denver, Boulder, parts of the Denver suburbs and the Latino population in the western part of the state vote Democratic.

In addition, Mark Udall (Democrat) has a huge lead in the US Senate race. This lead is translating to a lead for Barack Obama, as well.