Week-end polls: In case anyone had illusions about Clinton's June 3rd chances
The first poll of the Montana primary -- not a contest that was expected to ever be surveyed -- suggests that June 3rd should not allow Hillary Clinton to close the primary season on a high note. Mason-Dixon shows Barack Obama leading 52% to 35%, and there is every reason to believe that Clinton's road is as tough in South Dakota.
Naturally, these two primaries award very few delegates (31 combined, versus 55 in Puerto Rico two days earlier). But since Clinton's goal seems to be to find an argument to stay in the race as long as possible, there is no doubt that two harsh defeats on the last Election Night will not bode well for her campaign's rationale in the days following June 3rd, days in which the remaining uncommitted superdelegates are expected to pick their side at an increasing speed. DemCon Watch details this week's updates, and finds that Obama picked up 3 supers to Clinton's one (all were add-on, and Clinton's surprisingly came from Georgia).
Meanwhile, a list of general election polls were released today:
The Western states are also interesting, for it is a central part of Obama's argument of a different electoral map that states that have traditionally not been receptive to Democrats -- places like North Dakota, some congressional districts in Nebraska, Montana -- could warm up to him. Polls are telling a conflicting picture about this, as Obama has polled very strongly in some polls (in Alaska, Nebraska) but more poorly in some. All these states have very few electoral votes, so the loss/gain of one would not necessarily determine the election (though it could, as Al Gore learned in 2000).
In one last polling note, Research 2000 also conducted a survey of the Nebraska Senate race and found Mike Johanns leading Scott Kleeb by a wide 58% to 31%. A Rasmussen poll released last week found Johanns ahead 55% to 40%, a more promising picture for the Democrats. But this merely confirms what we already know: What was a very promising race at some point in the fall is now among the most difficult for Democrats, as Johanns is a very popular and well-known politician of a very Republican state. This is a rare congressional open seat in which the GOP looks to have saved itself through recruiting.
Naturally, these two primaries award very few delegates (31 combined, versus 55 in Puerto Rico two days earlier). But since Clinton's goal seems to be to find an argument to stay in the race as long as possible, there is no doubt that two harsh defeats on the last Election Night will not bode well for her campaign's rationale in the days following June 3rd, days in which the remaining uncommitted superdelegates are expected to pick their side at an increasing speed. DemCon Watch details this week's updates, and finds that Obama picked up 3 supers to Clinton's one (all were add-on, and Clinton's surprisingly came from Georgia).
Meanwhile, a list of general election polls were released today:
- First, Gallup's national tracking poll is noteworthy for it shows one of the largest differentials between Clinton and Obama's performance that it has recorded since the tracking started a while ago. Today, Obama trails 49% to 44% while Clinton leads 47% to 45%.
- Meanwhile, Mason-Dixon's Montana poll shows possibly tight races, though McCain is predictably starting ahead. He leads Clinton 50% to 39% and Obama 47% to 39%. Bush won 59% to 39% four years ago.
- In neighboring Nebraska, however, Research 2000 crushes Democratic hopes of picking up a few electoral votes with Obama's candidacy. McCain trounces Obama 57% to 29% (leading by wide margins in all congressional districts) and leads Clinton 58% to 28%. A Rasmussen poll and a SUSA poll released in the past few months showed much tighter results.
- Meanwhile, in California, an LA Times poll should send shills down Democrats' spine, as McCain is very close to both Democrats: 47% to 40% against Obama, 43% to 40% against Clinton. Two polls released Friday showed both Dems up double-digits.
- Finally, a North Carolina poll by Civitas has a tight race between McCain and Obama, with the Republican leading 44% to 39%.
The Western states are also interesting, for it is a central part of Obama's argument of a different electoral map that states that have traditionally not been receptive to Democrats -- places like North Dakota, some congressional districts in Nebraska, Montana -- could warm up to him. Polls are telling a conflicting picture about this, as Obama has polled very strongly in some polls (in Alaska, Nebraska) but more poorly in some. All these states have very few electoral votes, so the loss/gain of one would not necessarily determine the election (though it could, as Al Gore learned in 2000).
In one last polling note, Research 2000 also conducted a survey of the Nebraska Senate race and found Mike Johanns leading Scott Kleeb by a wide 58% to 31%. A Rasmussen poll released last week found Johanns ahead 55% to 40%, a more promising picture for the Democrats. But this merely confirms what we already know: What was a very promising race at some point in the fall is now among the most difficult for Democrats, as Johanns is a very popular and well-known politician of a very Republican state. This is a rare congressional open seat in which the GOP looks to have saved itself through recruiting.
13 Comments:
HI Taniel,
I have the following count:
Delegates committed thus far: 3,762 (100.00%)
Obama: 1,976 (52.52%)
Clinton: 1,779 (47.29%)
Margin: Obama + 197 (+5.23%)
Distance to the nomination:
Obama: -50
Clinton: +246
Uncommitted delegates to date:
86 PDs (PR, MT, SD)
201 SDs
----
287 TOTAL uncommitted
Clinton must win 246 (85.71%) of the remaining 287 delegates to get to 2,026
Projected take from PR, MT, SD:
Obama 43 / Clinton 43
If my projections hold, then Obama needs only 7 more SD endorsements. He is bound to get well over 100 endorsements, and very soon.
You should put a poll up on your website as to when we think the SD avalanche will happen...
By Statistikhengst, At 26 May, 2008 08:05
I'm looking at what states I believe will switch colors in 2008. I'm pretty sure that Obama will be the nominee, so I'm leaving out any Clinton scenarios...at this time.
In order of chance to switch colors:
(1) Iowa
(2) Ohio
(3) New Mexico
(4) Colorado
(5) New Hampshire
(6) Florida
(7) Michigan
(8) Missouri
(9) Nevada
(10) Wisconsin
(11) Virginia
(12) North Carolina
I don't see any additional states that are really at risk. I believe that (1)-(4) is leaning towards switching, (5)-(7) is a toss up, and (8)-(12) is leaning towards retention.
Of course, there will be some movement regarding VP choices, but I just don't believe it will be very much. I think the Dems have an issue with Florida and Michigan in regards to sitting delagates at the convention, but I see this issue fading.
By Anonymous, At 26 May, 2008 10:25
Yes Taniel California will be a problem, but only if Clinton is the nominee. I anticpate that McCain will get into single digits in California partly because of Anti-Same Sex marriage amendment and partly because of his strength with hispanics but California is still strongly democratic. There are too many Democrats in the state for McCain to catch up to obama and therefore he would need to swamp Obama among the independents in Calfornia, which isn't happening. I think he is able to do this against Clinton, which is why he is so close to her in the s ate.
By Anonymous, At 26 May, 2008 11:37
It would be a dream for democrats if the GOP tried to contest CA. It would be a moneypit that would suck up every penny McCain has and more and he still wouldn't win - unless he becomes pro-choice, accents his pro-immigration stance and trashs Bush every chance he gets.
I really like your work, Taniel, but I think you should assume that Obama will have considerably more resources - therefore he can contest all the usual states - plus a few more at least. And his new states (outside of the big 15)like AK, MT, and NC are not that expensive - whereas, McCain's "new" states CA, MI, PA, are extremely expensive.
By st paul sage, At 26 May, 2008 15:48
Dear st. paul sage,
I have often made the point that Obama has enough money that he can contest much more states than Kerry and Gore did and not have to restrict himself as they did through strategic choice (if only Gore had not given up on Ohio in 2000). But he does has limited time -- and the way in which he frames his message will play more among some constituencies than others. The message and themes you want to concentrate on, that you want the media to relay and that you want voters to associate with your candidacy -- will they be targeted more to working-class white voters, to more upscale independent-minded voters?
I will put this in a longer post soon.
By Taniel, At 26 May, 2008 19:13
I remember in 2004 Dick Chaney visiting Hawaii because “it was in play”. And how many times have the GOP try to snatch a senate seat in New Jersey? In 2004 some democratic operatives saw reasons for optimism in Louisiana. All this talks of expansions of the electoral map are nonsense. The reality is, that this country is, at this point in time is framed by a very big, real, and measurable ideological divide. The tendency of many Obama supporters to see the Universe through the optimistic glass of their political preferences do not change the reality on the ground. North Carolina is not shifting anywhere. It will take very special circumstances, perhaps Makr Warner of Jim Webb in the VP spot, for Virginia to move. Florida has become a more difficult state in 2008 for the dems, precisely because Obama will head the ticket. With its very large Latino voting block, and the Jewish vote in So. Florida, right now Florida looks pretty good for the GOP. I have been sying for month that not one, not a single one, of the western states are going to move to Obama in the general. Pipe dream. Nonsense. And the polls validate that. Why do we ignore history and demographics so often, and go on this crazy speculations runs. Truth of the matter is, that Obama has a very narrow path to the presidency. Extremely narrow. He need to be 15 points ahead of McCain now, and he is not. He need to be in very good shape in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and he is not. He is awash in cash, but folks, this is the GOP we are talking about here. McCain will be competitive. And the 527 will be there doing their dirty deeds. Folks stop the insanity. All those that fail to see the incredibly tough road ahead of Barack Obama, are delusional, and setting themselves to a very hard disappointment. I am afraid in November I will be saying “I told you so”, and this really feels me with extreme disappointment. To borrow form the despicable troll Dick Morris,”the party that cannot win nominates a candidate that is eminently electable, and the party that cannot lose, nominate the candidate that is unelectable”. Perhaps the only sensible thing the little troll has said in years.
By Anonymous, At 26 May, 2008 20:24
I have been sying for month that not one, not a single one, of the western states are going to move to Obama in the general.
Polling has had Obama up consistently against McCain in Colorado. So there's one (though perhaps it is the only one).
He need to be in very good shape in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and he is not.
He does consistently better than Clinton in Michigan, and while it would help to have more of a cushion in PA, he is leading there too. While Clinton does better in Ohio against McCain, the state is certainly very much in play with Obama.
He need to be 15 points ahead of McCain now, and he is not.
Why does he need to be 15 points ahead at this time? Moreover, it's not unreasonable to expect his numbers to improve after the nomination is settled.
Both Democratic candidates are electable. And there's plenty of time to go before November.
By dsimon, At 26 May, 2008 20:57
to say that the map is static does not seem borne out by history. over time, places change.
it wasn't so long ago that california voted republican (1988), that illinois was a swing state, new hampshire was reliably republican and west virginia was reliably democratic.
one of the weaknesses of the clinton camp has been to rely on the same troops (seniors, women), in the same states (MI, OH, PA, FL) to carry us one nore time - and with the exception of florida, they are all going to lose electoral votes.
CO and VA have changed on the state level (dem senator and dem gov in each and likely 2nd dem senator this year) and are certainly ripe for the picking both from the polls we've seen but also from the changing demographics.
so it's a wider path than gore, or kerry or hillary clinton had.
obama is leading in almost every poll - both in terms of electoral votes and overall nationally - and we're still in "the middle" of a divisive primary so while victory is no certainty for hillary or edwards or obama, it looks pretty good.
By st paul sage, At 27 May, 2008 00:35
st paul sage - I agree with what you say, but there is one further point to consider. Changes at the state level sometimes precede changes at the federal level. Voters seem to have two different neural pathways. The national GOP pitch, based on security, low taxes and supply side thinking, doesn't resonate at the state level. The voter encounters the byproduct of lower taxes and starved government programs on a daily basis, in the form of bad roads, cronyism, diminished services and higher local property taxes. That may lead him to vote for the state official who will do something about it, most likely a Dem. Yet the voter doesn't always flash this antipathy to GOP philosophy when voting presidentially. It takes time, and real demographic change.
By Anonymous, At 27 May, 2008 06:13
obama is leading in almost every poll - both in terms of electoral votes and overall nationally
Though I think Obama's numbers will improve, I haven't seen him consistently leading McCain on the electoral vote count, though the sites I've checked have the race as close.
and we're still in "the middle" of a divisive primary
And when pro-Clinton women realize that McCain is staunchly pro-life with the chance to replace two supporters of Roe v. Wade on the Supreme Court, Obama should start looking better to that demographic.
it's a wider path than gore, or kerry or hillary clinton had.
I'm not sure about that. The state-by-state EV polling that I've seen has Clinton doing the same or slightly better against McCain than Obama. But again, the numbers may shift as the general campaign gets into gear.
By dsimon, At 27 May, 2008 11:25
louis vuitton, prada handbags, kate spade outlet, ray ban sunglasses, nike air max, jordan shoes, nike outlet, michael kors outlet, ray ban sunglasses, longchamp outlet, longchamp outlet, longchamp, tiffany jewelry, cheap oakley sunglasses, replica watches, oakley sunglasses, tory burch outlet, tiffany and co, oakley sunglasses, ugg boots, louis vuitton outlet, ray ban sunglasses, ugg boots, replica watches, louboutin outlet, louboutin shoes, michael kors outlet, nike air max, burberry, nike free, chanel handbags, ugg boots, ugg boots, michael kors outlet, christian louboutin outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton, polo ralph lauren outlet, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses, uggs on sale, michael kors, louis vuitton outlet, louboutin, gucci outlet, oakley sunglasses
By oakleyses, At 15 November, 2015 22:55
oakley pas cher, nike air max, true religion jeans, tn pas cher, coach outlet, nike blazer, vanessa bruno, north face, coach factory outlet, lacoste pas cher, coach outlet, true religion jeans, hollister, ray ban uk, nike free run uk, abercrombie and fitch, vans pas cher, north face, ralph lauren pas cher, nike air max, burberry, lululemon, air jordan pas cher, michael kors, true religion jeans, kate spade handbags, nike roshe, ralph lauren uk, nike roshe run, nike air max, louboutin pas cher, ray ban pas cher, new balance pas cher, michael kors, converse pas cher, coach purses, air max, hermes, sac longchamp, hogan, nike free, true religion outlet, timberland, air force, sac guess, longchamp pas cher, michael kors, hollister pas cher, mulberry, michael kors
By oakleyses, At 15 November, 2015 22:56
marc jacobs, doudoune canada goose, ugg,uggs,uggs canada, moncler, canada goose outlet, moncler, vans, converse, ugg,ugg australia,ugg italia, moncler, hollister, ugg boots uk, barbour jackets, gucci, bottes ugg, louis vuitton, michael kors outlet online, michael kors outlet, lancel, canada goose outlet, converse outlet, canada goose, pandora charms, barbour, canada goose, links of london, pandora jewelry, moncler outlet, coach outlet, moncler, pandora charms, replica watches, louis vuitton, canada goose, louis vuitton, nike air max, hollister, moncler, pandora jewelry, michael kors handbags, wedding dresses, ugg pas cher, swarovski, karen millen, juicy couture outlet, doke gabbana outlet, montre pas cher, canada goose uk, moncler, toms shoes, louis vuitton, ray ban
By oakleyses, At 15 November, 2015 22:58
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home