9/17-18/08; 702 Adults, 3.8%
Obama 54, McCain 43
This is like, what, the 20th poll in a row to show a big Iowa lead for Obama. I hope McCain keeps trying to hold this one like his visit here yesterday. YEAHH!!!
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:21 PM
I don't know if Obama's lead is this big, but if McCain keeps on trailing this badly among women, there is no way he can win the state.
Among women: Obama 58% vs. McCain 38%
In 2004: Kerry 51% vs. Bush 49%
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:25 PM
It seems yesterday McPa"lies" visited IA, what a waste of time and energy along with a waste of money
By the way IA has been wearing a lie-proof for the last 2 years
For the GOP campaigning in IA is pretty much look like campaigning in NY or in MA
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:26 PM
That one close poll in Iowa was clearly an outlier. Iowa will not go to McCain. Those 7EV's could come handy for Obama on November 4th.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:27 PM
Where is the SurveyUSA Poll on Florida??
But American Africans and Latinos are badly underscored....
The close Iowa Poll from Big 10 underscored women badly... forget it as soon as you can!! :-O
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:28 PM
is this poll of adults?
i know obama is leading in iowa but why not at least do a poll of rv?
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:29 PM
McCain really needs to improve his numbers among women.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:32 PM
I wonder what makes McCain think Iowa is in play. It clearly isn't.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:35 PM
McCain will take Iowa like Obama will flip Georgia. The more time he wastes there the beter for Obama.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:36 PM
It's mislabeled here. The "702" is correct but that's the number of likely voters. Before they filtered, it was 900 adults. From SUSA's site:
"SurveyUSA interviewed 900 Iowa adults 09/17/08 through 09/18/08. Interviews were conducted during a time of exceptional financial turbulence, coinciding with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the federal rescue of AIG insurance company, and immediately following the federal takeover of Fannie Mae. Of the registered voters, 840 were registered to vote. Of the registered voters, 702 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely voters in the 11/04/08 general election. Iowa has 7 Electoral College votes. George Bush carried Iowa by two-thirds of a point in 2004; Al Gore carried Iowa by one-third of a point in 2000."
This from Jay Cost at RCP
We also see a group of undecided voters who have not yet made a choice. They will probably be decisive. In a race with only two salient candidates - the goal is to hit 50%-plus-one. Both McCain and Obama can still do that via the undecided voters, who are becoming the critical voting block. My hunch is that the 4-7% who are undecided today were part of the 7 to 12% that were undecided in June.
Jay thinks they wont make up there mind till after the debates or late october.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:39 PM
The poll is LVs. SUSA polled 900 adults and determined 702 Likely voters. Of the last 4 Iowa polls, 3 have Obama with a double figure lead.
If you scroll down the list of polls on pollster you should find the SUSA Florida poll. It was the second from the bottom. Alternatively just click on FL on the electorial map.
Over time the Palin choice has really polarized the women vote. She may be a woman but her views pertaining womens issues are far from center and then adding the fact McCann himself doesn't support equal pay for equal work, there wont be any gains there. 55-45 Obama
I think that he is trying the energize Republicans as much as Bush did. If he is to compite in that state he must galvanize Republicans. Just my opinion, though.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:40 PM
I think that he is trying to energize Republicans as much as Bush did. If he is to compite in that state he must galvanize Republicans. Just my opinion, though.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:41 PM
Barring a huge slip by Obama, I just don't see McCain carrying this state...I would focus more on states like Indiana which has steadily shifted towards Obama.
In this crazy campaign sometimes you just have to get a sense of where a state is going. IA was very close in '00 and '04, flipping red after being blue. This year from all the polls, and anecdotal evidence of Obama's superior organization compared to Kerry's, that 6,000 vote razor thin Republican margin is gone. IA represents 7 of the 18 votes Obama needs to pick up. 11 to go.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:43 PM
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:50 PM
So all of a sudden SUSA is reliable to some of you? Heh.
I will be very surprised if IA goes red this year. Obama has a spectacular ground game there.
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:52 PM
You can take Iowa, Colorado and New Mexico off the Big Board. Looks like Virginia and Florida are next.
McCain is running out of states. Maybe he and Palin can claim that since Alaska is close to Russia, it should count for 100 electoral votes.......
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:55 PM
please don't feed the trolls like boomshat. they still believe in creationism and that palin is "qualified". LOL.
Just for everyone's amusement, more retarded blatherings from the idiot herself-
Good Lord. After that craptastic excrement, I now fully expect her to utter something along the lines of:
"Um, like such as ...and I definitely feel the Iraq ....and the maps for South Africa...um like such as to help children..."
Posted on September 19, 2008 3:56 PM
Agreed on NM and IA. I think Colorado could still go either way though.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:02 PM
Pollster.com keeps marking SUSA's polls "adults" instead of LV. Not sure why.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:18 PM
Anyone know where SPAIN is located? McCain's confused me.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:30 PM
This is good news for Obama. My educated guess is that Obama doesn't lead by this much in Iowa. My wife is from Iowa and the people there are older and more conservative. But Obama should win Iowa mostly due to the farm vote.
However, Obama WILL lost Minnesota. Minnesota has been trending Republican for the past 4 years now. Basically since the end of the 2004 election. Republican governor, Republican senator, etc. And Minnesota is known to support "outside the mainstream" candidates. For better or worse, McCain is seen as that candidate in Minnesota (I know partisans would spew the rhetoric that McCain is part of the establishment and to a great extent I agree. However, in MN he's not entirely viewed that way).
So, Iowa is mostly likely safe for Obama. The election, however is not.
I would have liked to see Obama to have NOT said he was reserving comment on the bailout until other people make a decision. BZZZT!! Wrong answer.
Come on Obama this is too important. Stop being a Kerry or Gore.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:31 PM
Didn't the Big 10 poll have Iowa a tie yesterday?
Penn a tie too? didn't like that poll not sure about this one either. I think both in this and Penn that's it more like +5/6 to Obama. but polls are polls!
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:34 PM
Oh and the reason why Minnesota is trending Republican is the enormous growth and expansion of white middle-class suburbs ringing the St. Paul area. MPLS goes Democrat. St. Paul and it's suburbs go Republican. Rochester goes Republican big. That leaves the upstate people. They're split. This state goes to McCain in November by a squeaker.
hey nick - why don't you put money on it there big talker?
No? Yeah, that is what I thought.
All hat and no cattle as they say.........
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:39 PM
Obama HAS to absolutely win MN, PA, MI, CO, NM, AND OH to win the election.
Not going to happen, sadly.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:41 PM
nick-socal, you lost all validity when you said St.Paul would go Republican. If the state is going to be a "squeaker" how can you be so sure that McCain will win?
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:43 PM
I'd gladly put money on it. You don't have to insult me just because you don't agree with me.
I'm an Obama supporter, but honestly the smugness and arrogance of some of you Obama supporters today is appalling. That will lose us the election you know.
Listen, if you agree that Obama keeps all the Kerry states from 2004, then Obama STILL has to flip IA, NM, CO. AND he must maintain all of those Kerry states. Obama won't win MN. So that means he'll have to pick up another Bush state such as Ohio or Virginia. Again, ain't gonna happen.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:45 PM
I would be shocked if MN goes red this election cycle of all cycles. There just is no reason to think it has changed that drastically from '04 to see it go red when IA goes blue.
Unfortunately for the nation that red/blue divide is reemerging. Some states are in flux in that battle: IA, NM, CO, NH,FL that have gone either way recently but MN is not. I cannot imagine it going red for the first time since '72, longest existing democratic streak in the nation, beating even MA! If any midwest state is in danger of tipping it is WI and I don't think that is very likely.
On the other hand, two reliably red states are giving the Republicans fits: VA and IN.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:46 PM
...and the list of states you just gave make no sense. If Obama wins MN, PA, MI, and NM, what state is he going to lose that is going to make him win both CO and OH?
You really don't seem to have any idea what you're talking about. I'm also starting to think you're only pretending to be an Obama supporter.
How did I lose validity. Do you actually know anything about St. Paul and it's exploding suburbs? It's Republican.
And so St. Paul, it's suburbs, Rochester, and the split upstate trumps the Democratic turnout in MPLS and it's suburbs. That's why McCain gets it in a squeaker.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:47 PM
There are far more ways for Obama to win than McCain 2 Red States are definitely going Blue NM and IA.
Go to 538 and Nate list every conceivable way. You say your an Obama man but you sound like a McCain plant sewing doubt.
McCain is unelectable, now even the more so now he has Sarah Palin.
Frankly I get sick of this "If you're not one hundred percent blinded Obama supporter you are a McCain plant" As if my lowly self can't have an opinion. I am an Obama supporter. But I'm also a realist. I watched all the conceivable ways Kerry was going to win. I watched how improbable it was to beat Gore. Haha and now we've had 8 years of Bush.
Here's how Obama loses:
The Republican machine subverts voters
Look, if I was here to sow doubt that doesn't make sense. If anything, my opinion would fire up people to go vote for Obama even more.
This is just my opinion but I think it's based in reality and history.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:50 PM
No I actually don't think Obama will flip CO. That's why I've maintained that McCain will win with ~+20 EV and 3,000,000 popular votes.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:54 PM
Virtually all the battleground states have Democratic Governors -all the Midwest. VA, NM,so whilst we are all aware of how the Repubs usurp, they are not well positioned to steal this one.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:55 PM
Why is Saint Paul the only suburb in America that has "exploding" Repubican suburbs? Race as a determining issue? Some of Obama's best numbers are in states with almost all white voting lists, like VT, ME and IA. I don't see race being a huge issue in MN of all places, which has a history of Progressive politics. The Republican dirty tricks work in states like OH and FL not MN.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:56 PM
Ramsey Country went 63/35 for Kerry. That's even stronger than Hennepin County.
I am not a blinded Obama supporter. You're the one ignoring the facts. Go do your homework and come back.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:57 PM
This makes me question ALL of those 'Big Ten' polls. The fact that this matches the Des Moines Register poll is pretty good...it also makes me think more highly of that poll that showed IN Obama +3.
Selzer has been dead on in the Midwest...
Obama has always been popular in IA, McCain has always been unpopular. If Obama wins Iowa by +10, I don't think there's any hope in MN or WI for McCain. The states aren't THAT different...Obama beat every poll that was in the Upper Midwest. Remember, he was only supposed to beat hillary by a few points in WI, and that turned into a blowout as well.
Posted on September 19, 2008 4:59 PM
Minnesota has a Republican governor.
They have absolutely trended Republican since the end of the 2004 election.
You guys are setting yourself up for shock and disappointment.
Even for Obama to hang on to every single Kerry state he'll have to flip IA, NM, CO. Odds are against Obama.
Ramsey County, not "country" (obviously).
That's St. Paul, to clarify. Are you not aware the Minneapolis and St. Paul are virtually the same city geographically.
All right, I'm finished with this silly argument.
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:00 PM
The states of IA, WI, and MN aren't that different??? LOL that's hysterical. You obviously have no clue about the upper Midwest.
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:01 PM
I hope I'm wrong but I've always been pragmatic and a realist and that has served me well in my life.
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:02 PM
Unless there is a flub in the debate, I would say that Iowa is no longer in play. I also think New Mexico is probably the same, btw.
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:16 PM
- Give me your e-mail and we will set up a friendly wager on MN and the election. How does 10K sound? Heck, I'll even go down to a measly 100 if you can't handle a real amount.
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:45 PM
You're ignoring the number of states that are not only "in-play," but places where Obama stands a decent-to-good chance of winning:
and, just maybe
That's a lot of defense for McCain, compared to Obama's (NH, MI, PA).
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:57 PM
So, actually, the "odds" are against McCain.
You know...he has to campaign too.
Posted on September 19, 2008 5:59 PM
This SUSA Iowa poll underweights Females. The split in this poll is 49-51. Exit poll in 2004 split was 46-54. So based on gender, if anything, this poll underestimates Obama's lead.
Posted on September 19, 2008 6:33 PM
Completely untrue. In 2006, Democrats kicked an incumbent GOP Congressman out of office in CD-1. Further in the Senate race, Klobuchar easily defeated Kennedy, it wasn't even close. Klobuchar won by like 20 points. It was supposed to be close with all of Kennedy's money, but it wasn't.
Minnesota isn't trending GOP. No place in the country above the Mason-Dixon line or west of the Mississippi River is trending GOP.
The GOP had their convention in Minnesota so they got a little extra free media during that time. That's all you're seeing.
If Obama is going to win Iowa by 10, he's going to carry Minnesota and Wisconsin.
And you keep making a fallacious statement with regards to what States Obama needs. Obama just needs the Kerry States plus Iowa and New Mexico (both virtual locks) plus one other State. That's it. Nevada, Virginia, Indiana, Florida, Ohio, West Virginia or Colorado. Obama has a win one of them, he has huge playing field and it is expanding.
McCain has to do the equivalent of drawing to a gutshot straight.
Posted on September 19, 2008 6:45 PM
lol. Yeah, Minnesota is sure trending Republican. Pawlenty ran as a Democrat and still almost lost it!
Obama is still polling well in rural Minnesota. Mpls and St. Paul and Duluth always come home to the Dems.
If McCain wins MN I will run naked through my neighborhood in broad daylight.
Posted on September 19, 2008 7:17 PM
When Bush took office he gave BILLIONS in tax cuts to the wealthy including corporations. They made great profits. In the meantime, incomes fell, the costs of living dramatically increased, food, gas, housing, energy, EVERYTHING went up. He has increased the federal deficit to HISTORIC highs. Still believe trickle down economics works? With all of those TAX CUTS, where are the new jobs? 100,000 jobs lost last month? But but I thought companies trickle down all that wealth to the little people? Hmmm.... I'm so confused. How come there is never PROOF to substantiate this economic way of thinking? It's ALWAYS disaster. And now, the TAX payers, are being given another 1.5 TRILLIAN in potential debt. Thanks THUGS!
Why can't Republicans understand basic math. How can you CUT taxes to the wealthy and spend so much money bailing out corporations for your lack of regulation with federal money, coming in at a lesser rate due to your "tax" cuts. What a joke!
Do you really wanna do this, again, America for 8 more years? WOW.
Posted on September 19, 2008 9:01 PM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR