Public Policy Polling (D)
7/23-27/08; 883 LV, 3.3%
Obama 46, McCain 43 (June: Obama 48, McCain 39)
Sen: Levin (D-i) 54, Hoogendyk (R) 35 (June: Levin 54, Hoogendyk 32)
Though the PPP release says the movement is among Whites and Republicans, a comparison of their demographics is instructive:
Women-Men: June 55-45, July 50-50
Democrats-Republicans: June 38-31, July 37-34
The first is a loss for Obama while the second is a small loss for Obama/a gain for McCain, which would explain why the margin is much tighter. Maybe the LV screen is leaving out Democrats/leaners who are feeling primary fatigue?
OTOH, the 2004 exit polls show women were 51%, the July poll is closer to that...
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:18 AM
I prefer this numbers that the previous, why? Well, in the June poll the party ID gap was 7% in favor of democrats, 38% vs. 31%. In this July poll the party ID gap is 3% in favor of the democrats, 37% vs. 34%. Not even in 2004 when republicans were very energize by Bush, the democratic advantage was that small. Keep in mind that in 2004, 5% more democrats than republicans were voting in Michigan, 39% vs. 34%.
In my opinion a party ID gap of 3% is the worst case scenario for Obama because I think on election day the democratic turnout will not be worse than in 2004, actually I forecast that it will be fantastic, especially among AA in the Detroit area. The fact that Barack is constantly holding onto his edge among independents is key. Just ask Kerry who won independents by 2% and ended up carrying the state by 3%.
I prefer polls like this showing a more even party field because it doesn't overestimate the support for the democrats. Again, independents will be key, so forget about Hillary.
there we have it again, the dastardly 20 percent who are holding steady in the undecided column.
yesterday i was addressing this an a remarkable phenom and attributable almost entirely to the hillary factor.
you can see it at work in her states: michigan, ohio, texas. if you see any erosion in new jersey
i'd say obama has got a chance at the biggest embarassment in american political history going down.
but we're far from there yet, if ever.
we need a better break down in the profile of these independents and what kinds of prompts they are answering to. if after all the hoopla and ad dollars and marketing strategies that obama has exercised, this sizable portion of the population is still un-responsive it begs
the fantasy of them falling in line at this late date.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:22 AM
Hillary the independent's darling? Where are you getting that information? Where have you seen that independents are Hillary's base? Weren't democrats her base?
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:27 AM
yesterday i was addressing this as a remarkable phenom and attributable almost entirely to the hillary factor.
you can see it at work in her states: michigan, ohio, texas. if you see any erosion in say new jersey i'd say obama has got a chance at the biggest embarassment in american political history going down.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:37 AM
I just checked the exit poll from Michigan, the uncontested Michigan primary with just Hillary's name on the ballot. Hillary got just 37% of the independent vote!!! 51% of this vote went to uncomited, 11% went to Kucinich, 1% to Dodd. Imagine, those independents went to vote and almost 2/3 decided that they would vote for anybody but Hillary. This was one of the reasons that made "open primaries" good for Obama and McCain since it seems that both had more support from independents than the party faithful.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:38 AM
mark, please remove this double posting.thx.
because in many states where the primaries were open they voted. and in many states, registered democrats consider themselves independents and respond as such but play the primaries just to have an extra chance to vote.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:40 AM
I really don't get into speculation, so no comments about it. I just discuss facts, nothing else.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:45 AM
Correct. Appalachian Dems. Also called Reagan Dems. Blue collar Dems. They make up a sizeable amount of self proclaimed independents, along with far right wing Repubs, and far left Dems and a few socially progressive Republicans. Every study I've seen of late summer self proclaimed independents show them politically all over the map, just like the general electorate.
And YES. Women are far more of the electorate in general, they are far more likely to vote and far more likely to vote Dem.
Also, Yes, somewhat understated Dem numbers v GOP.
You are right to conclude this is a clear sign that MI remains remains very blue. Of course the National polls would have made that clear.
Battlegrounds remain OH, CO and VA IMHO. Love to see 1 poll a week out of each. If OH remains a few points up for BO then no need to poll IA, MN, MI or PA. No way he gets OH and loses IA, MN, MI or PA.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:48 AM
This is what Undecided said on July 15 about Hillary and the independents:
"9. Would you like Barack Obama to pick Hillary Clinton to be his vice-presidential running mate or not?"
"Democrats responded 56% yes/33% no... and most interestingly blacks 57% yes/33% no.
Notably, the Independents are not enamored with the idea 35% yes/50% no... "
It could be that those independent are Hillary supporters, but the arrows don't aim on that direction. I think that for independents is harder to fall in line since there is "no line" for them to fall. Independents are going to be the battleground and Obama and McCain have to woo them with a very "outsider" message.
Posted on July 30, 2008 11:57 AM
Interesting results in line with the much heavier advertising by McCain/RNC in Michigan over the last couple of months. I'm expecting a Romney selection as VP to reinforce it. I doubt it will work but McCain has no choice but to try this strategy. If he loses the entire northern tier, he's toast.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:32 PM
I don't know if Romney could help with independents. For what I see from the exit polling in the Michigan primary, Romney was the favorite of Rep.; however, McCain was the one for Ind. and Democrats. I don't think that McCain will have problems attracting Rep. against Obama, but Ind. could be turned off by Romney. I don't know; it is an opinion of mine.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:40 PM
The change from June to July is stated as follows:
"Most of the movement in the last month has been among white voters and Republicans. In June PPP showed Obama earning 19% of the GOP vote but that is now down to 9%.
McCain has a turned a small disadvantage with white voters into a 50-40 lead."
Regarding Independents... other polls have shown up to 1/3 of Independents being undecided. This polls tags it at 20%. Smaller, but still a large number that could swing either way.
I cannot remember which poll narrative I read this, but it said that the number of undecided voters is far larger this year than it was at the same time in 2004 (and I think also 2000... need confirmation for 2000).
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:43 PM
You know who I think could be a good pick for McCain: Joe Lieberman(the democrat turned Ind.), Tom Ridge, or Newt Gingrich. I think that Romney could be a liability among Ind. and for sure among Hispanics. You don't want to see the coverage that Romney had in the Spanish media, like the #1 foe of Inmigrants!
I think Lieberman could be a danger on McCain's ticket.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:45 PM
Pollster now has Michigan "light" blue... leaning Democrat.
CNN and Real Clear Politics has Michigan as a toss-up.
Note: Michigan has 17 electoral votes.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:49 PM
If one looks closely at the whole poll, we can see that both parties are starting to rally around their nominees.
In June McCain had the support of 74% of Rep.; in July it is 87%. In June Barack had the support of 78% of Dem.; in July it is 86%. It seems that the race is taking its normal course, highly partisan. The important issue then becomes the beloved Independent voters! In June Independents were supporting Barack by 4%, with 24% undecided; now they are again supporting Barack by 4%, with 20% undecided. So far it seems that the undecided, indepedent voters are splitting right in the middle. We've got to keep an eye on those Ind.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:55 PM
I pick Tom Ridge for McCain. Gives him a shot at PA. Former state governor and "security" credentials. But I am still turned off by the terrorist warning color alerts.
Romney is actually well liked in Michigan by more than just GOP because his dad was a good governor for them. The Democrats are probably hurting in Michigan because of the high unemployment and the current governor is Democrat who has been ineffective in changing that dynamic... even though she was elected for a second term. Maybe buyer's remorse.
Romney also helps in Nevada because of his Mormon faith... and most people consider him to have economic as well as governor credentials. May be a backlash on his health care initiative in Massachusetts that is turning out to be very costly... but then the new Democratic governor Deval Patrick has been a disappointment.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:57 PM
To be clear... I do not think McCain has a chanced in Massachusetts.. only that the events there may impact the nationwide viewpoint of Romney.
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:59 PM
"Gives him a shot at PA" - good one. LOL.
Yeah, and a haircut gives me a chance at Cindy Crawford.
Anyways, I hope McCant picks romney or ridge. It'll be hilarious watching Kaine rip them new ones during the debates. Kaine vs either is going to be a blowout among hispanics - so forget about Nevada. Gramps will lose his own state once Kaine becomes the vp.
Btw the way, as props to me, I had Kaine in February, so yes, I am patting myself on the back.
Posted on July 30, 2008 1:07 PM
Yes.. Pennsylvania-- McCain/Obama
Rasmussen 7/23/08 500 LV 45 51
Rasmussen 6/19/08 500 LV 42 46
Quinnipiac 6/9-16/08 1511 RV 40 52
Posted on July 30, 2008 1:20 PM
McCain will not get Pennsylvania. It will go for Obama by about 4-8 points. McCain wants PA but he's wasting his time. This is a Democratic state. The cities always go for the Democrat while the rest of the state votes Republican, but just getting the cities of Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Erie, Wilkes-Barre, and Scranton is enough to win the state by a few points, especially since the rural areas are declining in population.
Posted on July 30, 2008 2:16 PM
I totally agree that McCain will not be able to carry PA. It seems that is a state for pro-choice republicans and McCain doesn't fit that bill. I think that McCain could actually hurt himself if he brings a pro-choice candidate on the ballot. Pro-life people are kind of skeptical of McCain on abortion and having a pro-choice person on the ticket will be the last thing he could do to reinforce that "skepticism." However, Newt Gingrich is a conservative Rep. and he is originally from PA.
Posted on July 30, 2008 3:44 PM
Today RealClearPolitics is showing an Strategic Vision poll that has Obama up by 9% in PA, after having him down by 10% in their last poll back in April. No one single poll has shown him losing since last April, in the middle of the figth against Hillary. I don't think that McCain will end up investing money is such expensive media market when there are more promising states for him. But let's see how things turn out.
Posted on July 30, 2008 5:44 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