Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: PPP, SurveyUSA, Portland Tribune Oregon


Oregon

Public Policy Polling (D) (5/9-11)
n=615
Obama 53, Clinton 39

SurveyUSA (5/10-11)
n=949
Obama 54, Clinton 43

Portland Tribune/Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall (5/8-10)
n=400
Obama 55, Clinton 35

 

Comments
Mike_in_CA:

So basically what this information tells us is that Barack clearly has a problem with low-income white racists in Appalachia. Oregon is ranked 23rd in median income (so it certainly isn't elite) and these polls show that he actually leads BY MORE among rural whites in OR, which contradicts Clinton's "Only I can win rural working class whites"...

Basically, in my opinion, it all comes down to this question: "why do working class whites IN APPALACHIA (and the South) not like Barack?" and I think the answer is easy and now, obvious. Most western states are solidly white and solidly Obama, and solidly middle-class/working-class. So what gives?

Now, I don't know much about racism in Oregon, but I can tell you, having lived in both CT and now CA, that racism toward AAs was actually MUCH worse in CT than it is in CA. I would say that the true "racists" out here direct their vile toward Latinos (sadly).

____________________

Dan:

Anyone know anything about the methodology of these Oregon polls? What I mean is this: ballots were mailed out over a week ago. So how accurate can these polls be in gauging how many people have already voted vs. how many have yet to vote?

____________________

BLeigh82:

All this poll does is further prove that both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton have pretty much sewed up their respective bases. It should be no surprise that Sen. Clinton wins big in West Virginia today and also in Kentucky on the 20th. As well, it should be no surprise that Obama wins big in Oregon on the 20th.

Just shows you how close this race has been and how entrenched the bases for both candidates are at this point.

It will be interesting to see how Clinton will try to give Obama some cred among her base after the final primary on June 3. Everything else equal, I imagine that is when she will concede.(baring something unusual coming out of a certain committee on May 31)

____________________

Uri:

@Mike_In_CA: I find it interesting that the MSNBC article about "racism towards Obama" popped up the same day of the WV elections... Admittedly, from the same people who yesterday said "WV now has phones and some can even read, how do they not know that Obama won?".

If you look at the numbers, it is not clear that Obama doing badly just because of his race. After all, the AAs in almost every state voted 92% for Obama because of his qualifications (most said in exit polls that race had nothing to do with it). Hence, since Clinton never did this well among any groups of whites, they are of course not racist because Obama voters can't be racist.

My impression is that Oregon falls into the bin of states where there are few AAs but the democrats are very liberal. Same story as WA, Vermont, etc. None of these are ever really swing states.

If dems want the white house they need to win all those weird racist states like PA, OH, WV, etc. that are unfortunately part of the union. That's life.

____________________

RS:

@Dan:
SUSA's cross-tabs show the split between "already voted" and "likely voters."
PPP didn't ask whether folks had voted - read the comments on this blog post:
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/05/oregon-results.html
No idea on the Portland Tribune poll.

____________________

RS:

@Uri:
Maybe OR/WA typically go Blue... But look up Wikipedia for candidate visits right before the Nov-04 election, and you'll see Oregon getting a lot of attention. Senator Kerry won by less than 5% - against President Bush. Senator McCain is perceived to be much more "moderate," with a "good" record on the environment. Senator Kerry won WA by ~7%.

The last SUSA GE poll for Oregon (mid-April?) - FWIW - shows Senator McCain tying Senator Clinton, but losing handily to Senator Obama. I think WA was a similar case a while back.

The GE polls - FWIW - show Senator McCain well-outperforming a generic Republican. So you might want to rethink your concept of swing states to incorporate other factors.

____________________

mago:

Well, people seem to have very malleable definitions of 'swing state' depending on what ax they're grinding. I would suggest that a state that Gore won by 1/7 of one point is a swing state. Other critical states that fall into the same bin would be WI and IA.

Actually, WA (and MN) would have been swing states if Clinton had been the nominee.

Here are Clinton's win probabilities based on polling and demographic data, from 538.com

OR .55
WA .50
WI .33
MN .58
IA .26

Nope, no swing states here.

____________________

Shadar:

A swing state is a state that could go either way in the CURRENT election. It doesn't matter what states did previously. At least that is my opinion on the matter.

Obama will have totally different swing states if he is the candidate than Hillary would. With Obama there will be 20+ states up for grabs between him and McCain. With Hillary it is closer to 5-6. It means there is a larger chance of a blowout for McCain or Obama and a better chance of a narrow race for McCain or Clinton.

I personally would rather there be a lot of contested states than the traditional 4-5.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Oregon is as Red as Idaho outside of Eugene and Portland. Its a total agriculture state and the sheer population of Portland ends up ruling the entire state. It is a total bi-polar state with a blend of the greenest hippies from Vermont to the remote big sky country conservatives of Montana. It is an interesting phenomenon. Again the state has high independent population.

____________________

Nickberry:

First... Mike in CA.... Quit calling people "racists" just because they happen to live in West Virginia. If you knew your Pacific Northwest History, you would be cognizant of the fact that Oregon Territorial Government and subsequently the Oregon State Constitution BANNED blacks from owning, leasing , or renting land in Oregon... ergo the were not allowed to live there. The Oregon State Constitution also banned slavery... but not for altruistic reasons, but because they did not want any blacks living in Oregon!!! A black war hero by the name of George Washington Bush (not kidding) came over the Oregon Trail, was told to leave when he arrived, and had to cross the Columbia River over to Washington to live... thus becoming the FIRST black settler in Washington (1850) and one of the first settlers of any race.

Additionally, the City of Portland in its early days tried to make itself the "Paris" of the West Coast and is known to have more high society attitudes than that of Boston. They even made their "Pioneers of the Oregon Trail" organization into a western version of the elitist DAR.

Outside of Portland is are very conservative communities. In fact, Oregon has a very large Mormon population.

Yes, Oregon has a very large independent voter population (my sister being one of them)... and this primary is a CLOSED primary. To vote one must change to Democrat ahead of time... before receiving their ballot. Note Oregon is an all mail-in ballot state. (As an Independent my sister received a non-partisan ballot with no Presidential primary candidates on it.)

____________________

Tzal:

Mike- You raise a really interesting question, and one I've pondered myself. WV and OR are very similar in terms of demographics. But no one even raises OR, or the other contests he's won that have had a significant amount of white, working-class voters as a response to HRC's white working-class voter arguments.

So what is the difference between OR's white, working-class voters, and WV's? And anyone who suggests that OR is not populated with many of these folks, they don't know much about Oregon.

____________________

Nickberry:

Oregon demographics are NOT the same as West Virginia. Where did you get that idea?

Oregon has a very large urban corridor... West Virginia has not. Oregon's economy in the past was based on resource extraction (mostly timber and salmon)... but that has changed where now Oregon is a major Pacific Rim trading partner (think NIKE) and a leader in technology.

West Virginia has a population of 1.8 million... and Oregon is twice that at 3.8 million. Portland has over 1/2 million.

West Virginia has 15% with college degree and Oregon has 25%.

____________________

Tzal:

Did I say the same? Maybe we should define the term working class voter. Both OR and WV have small AA populations, white populations in excess of 90% and median incomes below the national average. It's not a perfect match, I'll give you that, but those numbers seem to suggest that Oregon, like WV is peopled with white, working-class, voters.

____________________

damitajo1:

Clinton has a problem with low-income and uneducated black people. blacks have the lowest educational attainment levels in the country. why are dems disparaging uneducated whites but not uneducated blacks?

____________________

illinoisindie:

Damitajo1
What an ignorant comment to make

"Clinton has a problem with low-income and uneducated black people.blacks have the lowest educational attainment levels in the country"

So I take it that the 90% of african americans supporting senator Obama are all low-income and uneducated... The democrats are not disparaging appalachia blue collar white voters (abc's). The facts are that they (the abc's) sometimes abandon the democrats for the republicans while the african americans are a dependable constituency. There is an obvious disconnect because senator Obama has won the white working class vote in other states lets start from the beginning in Iowa. I went to school there and it doesnt get any more white blue collar.

I guess the point that the press is hinting at and they use code language (white blue collar, catholic voter...you pick your poison) is that there is a geographical segment of abc's that feel the same way about senator clinton as 90% of AA's feel about Obama. Identity politics.

Regardless of the democratic nominee though... democrats have an advantage in people wanting to identify with anti-bush policies. Anyway, i am waiting to see if people really will vote against their own economic self-interest because they cant vote for a woman, or my candidate didnt win, or he doesnt look like me...

So white blue collar does not mean white blue collar...or at least the term is not being applied consistently.

____________________



Post a comment




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.

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