Clinton 50, McCain 44... McCain 50, Obama 43
McCain 53, Clinton 43... McCain 64, Obama 28
McCain 48, Clinton 46... McCain 53, Obama 39
Pretty good evidence that all the negative news for the Obama campaign has hurt him, at least temporarily. These polls were done Friday thru Sunday, right when the videos of his former pastor were getting the most play on the cable news networks.
On the positive side, this is about as bad as it will get. I would bet that his numbers will recover after his speech; whether there was any permanent harm remains to be seen.
Bad news for Clinton, too. She has a small lead in Ohio, but is just behind in Missouri and clearly trails McCaine in Kentucky. Bad news for Obama doesn't help Clinton one bit in the general.
Posted on March 19, 2008 6:14 PM
Hillary is the only candidate that can win. where are all the half intelligent Obama's brainwashed homosapiens. Susan, Illinoisindie, your great manipulator black power candidate is done. I may even run against him in Illinois, because I would be sure to win that seat. Obama and pastor Wright can go fishing and discuss all day how much they hate White people, and Obama grandma (poor lady, he disowned his kin, she was ignorant, but he forgot that she grew up in a different time). Obama is done, go cry, go drink your latte, keep your White guilt, and pray for another Black power candidate, but this one is done, cooked, ashes are left. There is still a chance to overcome your fear of women and support the only viable candidate left that can stop the war and heal the economy. IN HILLARY WE TRUST. GOD BLESS AMERICA, GOD BLESS HILLARY, AND GOD BLESS ALL MEN AND WOMEN OF ALL RACES AND RELIGIONS. EVEN THE RACIST ONES.
Posted on March 19, 2008 6:37 PM
OH and MO are both important swing states if a Democrat hopes to win the White House. Coupled with the current polls in FL and PA, this is not good news for Obama. He had demographic problems in key swing states even before the Rev. Wright crisis. If Hillary wins in PA (big), KY, WV, IN, PR and perhaps a few other states, and if MI and FL either re-vote or are seated as is in some form, Obama is in real trouble, esp. if the national polls show Clinton doing better against McCain than Obama in June. She is likely to catch up or slightly surpass him in the popular vote, she will definitely have more Democrat votes, and she may be behind by only 50-60 pledged delegates at that point. Stay tuned. This isn't over by a long shot.
Posted on March 19, 2008 6:44 PM
@ Joseph E and Patrick:
I don't see Missouri or Kentucky as necessary to a bare-bones Hillary EV scenario.
By my count she needs CA, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, NJ, NY, OR, PA, RI, VT, WA, and WI -- all of which went for Kerry and I believe Gore -- for 248 EVs, plus AR and OH for another 26 = 274.
Of the first set of states, they're easy but for MI, MN, OR and WI. OH is the big prize.
That's not even counting possible swings like NH (which Kerry won), WV or MO, or states with big latino numbers such as NM, NV and of course FL.
Disagree? I'm interested.
Posted on March 19, 2008 6:55 PM
@ Ciccina I am from Wisconsin and everywhere I go, people are apllaud and feel betrayed by the Black Power candidate. he can ever win Wisconsin. Go read the articles in milwaukee Journal sentinel, we feel betrayed and hurt. Wisconsin don't vote republican, but after finding out Obama is a racist, we will vote mccain or nader before we support him. He is nlow unelectable and done. Hillary is now your hope against wars, and recession. Hillary or McCain, you choose.
Posted on March 19, 2008 7:13 PM
Ciccina - I agree completely with your analysis except I think Hillary could win MI, MN, and WI over McCain more easily than Obama. MO may end up being an important swing state; it's hard to say. My bottom line is that we have no reason to believe that Obama can do better than Hillary electorally, especially after the last week in which we've heard thousands of people say they will 'never vote for Obama'. He already had an uphill climb demographically even before the Rev. Wright crisis. While either Clinton or Obama can win the safely "Blue" states, she is bound to do better than him in OH, PA, FL, AR, MO, NV, MI, NM and a few other important swing states. He is likely to do better in OR, WA, CO, and a few other more "progressive" states, but those states do not have nearly as many electoral votes. And with the exception of DC, virtually all states that have a large African American population always goes "Red" in the general. Regardless of the # of pledged delegates each candidate has, the superdelegates really need to take into account. The truth is that Obama got a large % of his pledged delegates either in lop-sided victories in "Red" states (esp. in caucuses that don't reflect popular vote at all) and/or because of the votes of Republicans and Independents (in "open" primaries/caucus states) who will mostly vote for McCain in Nov. according to all the polls. The reality of the electoral college is that Clinton and McCain are stronger candidates than Obama.
Posted on March 19, 2008 7:31 PM
Check out the gender gap in these polls - what a difference between the Clinton and Obama.
In KY, men go for McCain over Obama 68 - 26%, and women go for McCain over Obama 61 - 29%. Men go for McCain over Clinton 61 - 37%, but women shift big time to go 45 - 49%.
In OH, men prefer McCain over Obama 54 - 37%. And they prefer McCain over Clinton 57 - 38%. Women prefer McCain over Obama 51 - 40%, but with Clinton they reverse - its McCain - Clinton at 40 - 52%.
Same thing in MO. Men prefer McCain over Obama and Clinton. Women prefer McCain over Obama but switch sides for Clinton.
And it looks like they may be undercounting women - the female turnout has been exceeding 51% - 53% in plenty of states.
I feel tingly all over ;-)
And I bet Ellen Malcolm and Ann Lewis do too.
Posted on March 19, 2008 7:35 PM
Looks like we can chalk up a primary victory for Hillary on May 20 in Kentucky. Mark it as strong Clinton.
Posted on March 19, 2008 8:02 PM
And the Clintonistas start piling on. Enjoy it while it lasts.
More to the point:
Ciccina - just wait till Senator McCain picks Charlie Crist as his running mate. Of course, New Hampshire likes Senator McCain, and the Latino population likes him too - after all, Senator McCain (not a Clinton) worked on a decent immigration bill with Senator Kennedy. And if Governor Huckabee seriously campaigns in Arkansas to bolster his standing in the GOP... can you say President McCain?
Posted on March 19, 2008 8:03 PM
Hi all I just looked at some of the cross tabs lots of interesting information. It appears that he does better with AA's. She appears to be able to Hold the Base better. And Senator Obama's strength with independents appears to be neutralized against Senator McCain. I will say that as much as i like that she appears to be in a better place then Obama I must say that these polls are still a long way away from the GE and these likely will dramatically change once the Dems have a nominee and the closer it gets the more it will change. So these I will consider as intersting and showing her in a better place right now, but as ultimately useless in perdicting November.
Posted on March 19, 2008 8:29 PM
oh by the way can anyone tell me where the sidebar went with the poll updates and quotes of the day or the what site that was so i can visit it i found it extremely interesting
Posted on March 19, 2008 8:31 PM
The_Truth I'm curious how long it will take you to get banned. Your flamebaiting won't go unnoticed. Get with the times, forum trolling was so 2002. So far everyone is doing pretty well at ignoring you. I just thought I'd highlight that point even though you hold 2 masters degrees and a PhD in political baloney.
Posted on March 19, 2008 9:19 PM
Andrew from wherever,
Go cry on Obama's shoulder, then he can cry on yours. say your goodbyes, then return to la la land.
Posted on March 19, 2008 10:36 PM
Hillary hasn't suffered from any bad press lately. Her numbers may look worse vs. John, once the "vast right-wing conspiracy" gets rolling again (I say this quite seriously). And I hope Obama will do better in the general, once people realize McCain is a real Republican (he polls better than a generic R candidate) and after they've heard that Obama really isn't a muslim or a communist or whatever else is out there.
But to get to your point... I think Hillary has bigger problems than your analysis shows. Certainly, things could improve for her once she gets around to attacking McCain instead of Obama, and if she gets a chance to debate him. But right now she only has a 39% win percentage at http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Polling averages show her losing Nevada, Colorado, Oregon, maybe Washington, maybe even New Mexico out West. The independent, anti-washington voters in my part of the country never liked Bill Clinton that much, and they don't like negative campaigns or "washington insiders"... and they think McCain is different, a rebel (an Arizonan too). Obama wins these states.
In the midwest, she is also trailing in Wisconsin, Iowa, and is close in Minnesota, all which went strongly for Obama in the primaries, with little Urban/Rural divide. They trust him, and feel he is honest... Hillary may lose out.
And in the old "big three" (which may be less relevant this time, at least for Obama), Hillary is narrowly leading in Ohio, tied Pennsylvania, but trailing in Florida (Obama is behind in Ohio, otherwise he's in the same situation).
Would winning Ohio (and Arkansa, the only other place where Clinton wins and Obama loses) make up for Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Iowa... maybe even Michigan, where Obama has a bigger lead? I think not.
Now, many of the polls that fivethirtyeight is using are a few weeks old ("Poblano", who made the site, believes polls often oscillate around a mean, as the news cycle shifts back and forth between candidates, but he does discount older polls), but at the moment I don't think there is any evidence to suggest Clinto would do better in the electoral college than Obama. Recent polls have brought Obama's win percentage down from 60% to 50%, but Clinton's is about the same, or even a bit lower (negative campaigning drags all democrats down?)
Speculate as you will, but until I see new polls in other states that show Obama losing those Western states, Michigan, or Pennsylvania by a big margin, or that show Clinton gaining in Florida, I don't think you have a good argument.
The argument that "These states went for Gore and Kerry, so they will go for Clinton", is just not supported by the polls.
Posted on March 20, 2008 1:02 AM
Oops, almost forgot.
Clinton also ties McCain in West Virgina, while Obama has little chance of a win there. She only makes it just to 50%, so I missed it while scrolling.
To be complete, Barack also wins New Hampshire, while John's support among "independents" puts him over the top vs. Hillary.
In the end, the analysis is basically same as I originally stated:
Obama's probability curve peaks around 270 electoral college votes (the winning number), while Clinton's is highest around 180 to 240 , and slides off above that.
(Again, if you love figures and charts as much as I do, you owe it to yourself to check out fivethirtyeight.com)
Posted on March 20, 2008 1:14 AM
has anyone thought about the brouhaha if and when obama steps out of the race?
i have wondered about the inevitability of this event in a kind of wide narrative arc. i think that no matter whether you like him or hate him, obama is the trail blazer to the inevitable: a black president. but i never thought it would be him.
it cant be when you step back and think about how we need to cough up the politically correct mucous clogging our air passages. this wright flap had to happen.. plain and simple. and we had to get down and dirty about race despite the media's attempts to be ultra polite. we had to get there in order to get past it.
i can just imagine the corporate meetings at msnbc and cnn about how to 'talk about' obama and race and color and culture.
and as much as i despise their shifting the ocean beneath our feet, they had to be delicate about Obama. tentative. timourous.
when the 'wright' flap clears, we shall anoint a black man or woman president but my hope is that it will be one who deserves it far more. harold ford comes to mind right now, someone who was not just swift boated but actually lynched.
that aside, the media has set the stage for race riots by priming the hopes of the intellectuals and blacks that he was the inevitable first, all hell will break lose when he is not. it has to . that's the story that has to get written, the mucous clearing our air passages such that we dont repeat this primal scream again, 4 years or 8 years hence.
it will. it has to . we have to go through this embarrassment just as much as a baby has to crawl and flop before it walks. the narrative is writing itself.. obama paved the way. this is brave,. this is good.
Posted on March 20, 2008 8:05 AM
Hey eric/mark -
When are you going to ban "the_truth"??
This woman is just a bitter Clinton supporter that posts hateful speech time and again. Please review her posts and delete the ones that are against your policy. Thanks.
An e-mail I received from an old college buddy a couple days back:
Subject: Barack's speech
Admittedly, I live in a liberal city and work in a liberal area of Seattle (south of downtown). Today at noon I went to a bar/grill place to have lunch and Barack's speech was on a few of the plasma TVs at the bar.
Everyone in that bar was absolutely mesmerized by this guy. It reminded of Jed and I watching the OJ verdict on TV so many years ago.
I have no idea whether this speech was politically good -a good friend of mine was telling that the right was making their usual hatchet job. I almost am curious to find out what the Clintons will do with this.
Up until today I was torn about what I was going to do in November. I can't stomach voting Republican mostly because of their social agenda. But I wasn't bowled over by Barack or Hillary. See I am too cynical and jaded to believe in hope and inspiration and all of Barack's rhetoric. Hillary's sense of inevitability and entitlement smacks of a politburo bureacrat whose turn has finally come.
Today though I am a believer. Maybe I am a sucker and maybe I will be dissapointed again. But right now I have bought into the dream. And against my better rational judgement I am allowing myself to believe that sometimes the messenger transcends the message. And that hope and inspiration can be the catalyst for real change.
There is one thing I disagree with Obama about. Obama has said, "We are the ones we have been waiting for". Wrong. HE is the one WE have been waiting for.
Posted on March 20, 2008 9:25 AM
Why does a "strong" woman stay with someone like this?
Posted on March 20, 2008 9:38 AM
So sad to see delusion on such a public platform. When are you going to get it?
HILLARY WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT!
What do you think will happen if the supers over-rule the pledged delegate totals? HMM? Any ideas rolling around in there?
Do you think one, even one, African American would be pleased with that? What about the youth vote?
I would love to see a scenario where Hillary can win even 30% of the vote without those two groups. Who is going to vote for her????
NO ONE. The truth hurts, I know.
Posted on March 20, 2008 9:46 AM
So this woman thinks she can secure our borders and safeguard our country? She can't even secure her husband's belt.
The only thing this woman has ever run are her marriage and her campaign. Both into the ground.
And she wants to lead my country???
Posted on March 20, 2008 9:48 AM
If Monica was "in" the White House so much, maybe she should run for the presidency. It looks like she had greater proximity to Bill!
Posted on March 20, 2008 9:50 AM
Decent post from a friend on msnbc-
I'm sure at times Senator Obama, especially early in his career, has had to maneuver as a traditional politician, in order to build a base. I won't hold that against him.
How sad would it be if we, as a country, would reject the most hopeful, potentially great president in generations, simply because his pastor has serious issues to work out?
I'm a 48 yr old white male from MI. I have some college and earn around 50k yr. I am not naive and do not drink kool-aid. Please don't insult my intelligence by accusing me of being brain washed. I can assure you, I am not.
I think MI should not have a re-vote. After Senator Obama has secured the nomination, I'm certain a reasonable solution to seating MI and FL delegates will be reached. You can not change the rules once the contest has begun. PERIOD
I do not hate Hillary or Bill. I try not to hate anyone. I could not bear it if she were to steal the nomination and if she were to pull it off I would vote for someone else.
We as a country have a once in a lifetime opportunity to take this great country, that I served honorably, to a place we could only dream of. Please give this man a chance. If history teaches us anything, Hillary or McCain will be more of the same.
I appreciate all of the intelligent opinions here but not the thoughtless words of hate and intolerance.
Posted on March 20, 2008 10:01 AM
i think the symbolic mistake made by many vis a vis obama is to confuse the guinea pig with the
leader. it's an understandable mixing of metaphors but it is the one that has landed obama in the tar pit for now.
here's a man for various reasons, ambition being the obvious one, but not the worst, who chose to be the first real contender from his race.
but this does not in and of itself confirm on him the right of leadership. it confirms on him the right of trail blazer.
here's where the press went off the deep end. here's where students and intellectuals did as well. for a group of 'thinkers' they fudged and smudged there symbols and with sloppy editing
they pasted in 'leader' for 'guinea pig".
Posted on March 20, 2008 10:16 AM
Aren't you being incredibly presumptuous in saying "when Obama steps out", and that he's the "guinea pig"? I suppose Clintonistas share the same "I am inevitably the nominee" (long discredited) notion of their favored candidate.
How are your posts different from "Susan's", I wonder? Your posts definitely are not based on any data, for sure.
Posted on March 20, 2008 11:03 AM
Actually, how about banning:
and anyone else who's posts are always off-topic.
Until then, I'll be ignoring you trolls, and I hope the rest of us will too.
Posted on March 20, 2008 7:13 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