Poll roundup: Will there be a bouce?

As I explained two days ago, I am skeptical of arguments that securing the nomination will automatically resolve Barack Obama's problems with the registered Democratic vote, but that does not mean that the Illinois Senator will not enjoy a substantial bounce in the coming days and weeks. We will then have to see how the bounce lasts and whether it gets Obama to his full potential. For now, use these polls -- some of which are very interesting on their own right -- as markers of where the campaign lied as of early June.

Keep in mind also that any bounce Obama will get will come from (1) the Democratic Party uniting and (2) the boost that any candidate derives from victory. I don't buy the argument that McCain has been campaigning for the general election for months but Obama hasn't and that he will therefore improve his percentages. He will certainly improve his general election organization, turnout efforts and registration drive, but that has little to do with poll numbers for now. If anything, McCain has been out of the spotlight and struggling to attract any attention since mid-February, whereas Obama has been airing dozens of ads in key swing states worth millions of dollars. He was campaigning against Clinton, sure, but many of these spots were meant to introduce himself to voters and having already aired those will be useful in the general election as well.

First, the latest NYT/CBS poll and USA Today/Gallup will be widely discussed because of their strong reputation:

• In the field from May 30th to June 3rd, the CBS/NYT poll did not register any effect Tuesday night might have had. Obama is leading McCain 48% to 42%.
• As for favorability ratings, both candidates have a lot of neutral respondents -- much more than usual. Obama's rating stands at a strong 41-31, while McCain is much weaker, 34-37.
  

• In the USA/Today Gallup poll, Obama is leading 46% to 43%. Clinton fares better in what is probably the last national poll in which she will be included, trailing 49% to 43%.
  

Republicans have long been worried that Obama might open up a double-digit lead nationally once he wraps up the nomination. If that is correct, the fact that he already leads by mid-single digits should worry the GOP. But Republicans are also more hopeful about the state-by-state situation and their chances in the electoral college. As my first ratings yesterday afternoon showed, that race is a toss-up, with McCain ahead by a slight 227 to 207 electoral votes. A few polls all released by SUSA on Tuesday give us a better sense of the situation in those states (these polls were taken to test VP match-ups which I will not report fully since I do not find interesting at all; most match-ups only test name recognition):

• In New York, Obama leads McCain 48% to 38%, with only 66% of registered Democrats. This is the same margin Obama has enjoyed for two months now, and it is naturally too close for comfort in one of the Democrats' strongest states nationally.
• Depending on the VP match-ups, the range goes from +1 Obama (if McCain picks Romney and Obama picks Hagel) to +20 Obama.

• In Massachusetts, Obama continues to look stunningly weak as he barely distances McCain 46% to 41%, with the support of 65% of registered Democrats.
• Depending on the VP match-ups, the range goes from +1 Obama (once again if he picks Hagel) to +16 Obama. Huckabee fares a bit better than Mitt Romney, the state's former Governor.

• In Missouri, Obama edges out McCain 45% to 43% with 74% of registered Democrats.
• Depending on VP match-ups, the range goes from +11 McCain to +11 Obama. Only Edwards improves Obama's vote total, but that is entirely a factor of name recognition.

• In Iowa, Obama is leading 47% to 38%. He has been ahead in every single one of the 10 polls SUSA has taken starting in February 2007, most of them by substantial margins.

• Finally, an Alabama poll confirms this state will not be paid attention to in the general election. McCain crushes Obama 57% to 34%, as the Illinois Senator only gets 19% of the white vote.

The Massachusetts poll confirms my rating of Massachusetts as only "likely Obama" despite the state's reputation as the country's most staunchly Democratic. It is difficult to explain why this is the one state in which Obama's weakness is so consistent. Rasmussen's survey last week found Obama up 13% but that paled in comparison to previous cycles and to Clinton's 30% lead in the same poll. As for Iowa, this poll confirms that this is the one 2004 Bush state that is already leaning towards Democrats, not to mention how strong Obama's organization in the state ever since the caucus campaign. Finally, Missouri is a good surprise for Obama as it is a state I have rated "lean McCain." Most other polls taken in the past few weeks show the Arizona Senator ahead in that state and it remains to be seen how strongly Obama will push there.

Another observation about these polls is the increase in the percentage of undecideds. The trendline in most of them shows a decrease in the totals of both McCain and Obama, which is not necessarily what we would be expecting after months of campaigning.

Finally, one last poll for the day concerns the North Carolina Senate race. It is an internal poll taken by Anzalone Liszt Research for the Hagan campaign and it was in the field mid-May, at the time other polls showed very narrow Dole advantages and before the Republican incumbent started airing ads of her own: In this survey, Dole leads 48% to 44%. Since then, a poll taken more recently showed her slightly expanding her lead, a possible consequence of the advertising blitz. But since I am still the phase of slight surprise at every survey that shows that yes, indeed, Dole is vulnerable, this poll is certainly useful.

Thursday poll: The Michigan question, continued, and Mississippi's racial puzzle

A number of state polls were released today, none more important than EPIC-MRA's Michigan poll. EPIC is the state's best pollster, and its numbers confirm the analysis I wrote 24 hours ago of the "Michigan question." No matter how unlikely a development given how hard the economic crisis has hit in Michigan, it does look like the state has joined Ohio and Pennsylvania as the holy trio of this year's battleground states:

• This poll shows McCain narrowly ahead of Obama 44% to 40%. He is largely leading among independents, 41% to 28%.
  
• However, in a match-up between an Obama/Clinton ticket and a McCain/Romney ticket, the Democrats shoot up to lead 51% to 44%.
  

There is nothing in these polls that suggests that Democrats are in terrible trouble in Michigan, but it is hard to deny that, considering the strong numbers Obama is posting in states like Minnesota, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Oregon and Washington, Democrats were allowed to expect better results out of Michigan.

The second important poll of the day is a national survey by Pew, whose polls are always noteworthy because of the detailed crosstabs and analysis that the institute provides:

• Clinton is ahead of McCain 48% to 44%, while Obama leads 47% to 44%, down from a 6% lead last month and a 7% lead in February. Obama and McCain are tied among independents, though the former led by 9% last month.
• Also, 44% say that McCain would continue Bush's policies, versus 45% who say that he will not. Obama is viewed as more capable on the economy, while the two are within the margin of error on Iraq.
  

Obama continues to enjoy a very small edge in most national polls, but the election clearly remains a toss-up at this point. It is had to determine who should be the most relieved: Obama that he has survived such a tough primary and weeks of bad press on Wright and Ayers while still looking competitive, or McCain for being largely ignored by the media since February and for running in such an awful year for his party but still looking like he has a road to win.

A series of other polls was released from states that are less central to the fall campaign:

• In Kansas, SUSA found McCain leading 49% to 39%, which is actually a very respectable showing for Obama in a staunchly red state. SUSA also tried some VP match-ups, but Governor Sibelius does not particularly help Obama. The closest he gets is a 2% loss if McCain chooses Pawlenty and he chooses Edwards.
  

• In New York, Rasmussen finds both Democrats crushing McCain, though Obama's margin is a bit inferior to Clinton's. He leads 52% to 33% while she trounces McCain 59% to 29%. Obama's favorability raitng (64%) is superior to Clinton's (55%) and McCain's (44%).

• No surprises in Alabama, where Rasmussen finds McCain leading Clinton 54% to 34% and Obama 60% to 32%.

• Finally, a last Rasmussen poll from Mississippi finds surprisingly tight results: McCain is ahead of Clinton 48% to 38% and leads Obama 50% to 44%. McCain's favorability rating (55%) is superior to Clinton's (33%) and Obama's (44%).
  

Mississippi is a state some Democrats murmur could be competitive in the fall, though it is hard to see where Obama would get the remaining 6%. Mississippi's vote is among the country's most racially polarized, and it should be so even more with a black candidate on the ballot. Obama will need a humongous surge in turnout among black voters (which would not just mean for African-Americans to vote at their level of the population, but for black turnout to be superior to white turnout) and he will also need to poll somewhat better among white voters than past Democratic candidates.

This is a tall order for Obama in any Southern states, but if it looks like he is on the path to making numbers move and results tighten in Mississippi, it could mean that he is in much better shape than expected in other states with a very large black population, especially Georgia and South Carolina. Both states are still safely in the McCain column, but the Obama campaign is planning massive registration efforts and we will soon be able to better assess whether there is any chance that numbers move in the Deep South.

SUSA releases wave of general election polls, with both Democrats displaying their usual weaknesses

On March 19th and March 20th, SUSA released 16 general election polls that recorded public opinion in the aftermath of the Wright controversy; in many states, Obama was found to be plunging due to his continued weakness among registered Democrats and to the departure of independents and registered Republicans.

A month has passed, and SUSA released 14 general election polls from some crucial contests today; there is some good news for all candidates in these polls, but the first thing that jumps at me is the extent to which McCain is holding strong, putting a number of Democratic states in play. Obama leads McCain by single-digits in Massachusetts, New York, and California -- including a toss-up (once again) in Massachusetts.

The two Democrats are exhibiting their usual weaknesses that we notice in poll after poll. Obama has regained some of the ground he lost last month, but his at times stunning weakness among registered Democrats in places like Ohio and Missouri leaves him distanced by McCain (and Clinton). This is also also what is making states like MA and CA competitive. This weakness has been picked up over and over again by SUSA -- but also by other institutes (check the most recent Quinnipiac poll from FL, OH and PA with McCain picking-up a significant number of Dem votes when he faces Obama). However small this problem might seem, it is wrong to simply assume that registered Democrats will come home; the ease with which many Dems cross-over is exactly what Clinton is talking about when she questions Obama's electability and McCain has demonstrated his appeal among Democrats.

Meanwhile, Clinton has her own major problems. First, she comes in at dismally low number among African-American voters in most of these states. I do not always mention the results here since in many states the sample of black voters is too small to be statistically significant, but the trend is too consistent to not be revealing. In places like Virginia, Clinton cannot hope to remain competitive without rallying the African-American vote. Obama supporters, of course, contend that for Clinton to win the nomination would take such an ugly scenario that there is no way the New York Senator could regain the black vote. Second, Clinton does not as well as Obama among independents and registered Republicans in many states; in places like Oregon and Wisconsin, we have been seeing this trend for a while, as independent voters in a number of states (particularly in the West) seem to be among Clinton's harshest critics.

And here is the run-down of the numbers:

• The most important state polled by SUSA is undoubtedly Ohio, where Clinton opens up a very significant lead against McCain, 53% to 42%. But McCain leads Obama 47% to 45%. That's a 5% shift towards both Democrats compared to last month, when Obama trailed by 7%.
  
• Almost all the difference is due to registered Democrats, Obama carries 65%, Clinton 82%. Also, Obama loses the white vote by 12% while Clinton leads, though she underperforms among blacks (73%).

• In Missouri, Clinton edges McCain 48% to 47% but McCain comfortably is ahead of Obama, 50% to 42%. McCain gets a full 27% of the vote of registered Democrats when paired up against Obama... which accounts for his trailing the Republican despite performing better among independents. This is actually a 6% improvement for Obama, however, compared to last month.

• In Virginia, Obama performs better than Clinton but suffers from a significant decline: After tying McCain two straight months, he is now behind 52% to 44%. Clinton is crushed 55% to 39% -- she is also tied McCain last month. This is due to Clinton's dismal performance among blacks (60%) while Obama comes in much stronger among independents.
• Obama's decline in the past month is due to McCain's closing the margin among registered Democrats by 17%.

• In Kentucky, which is not supposed to be anywhere near the list of purple states, Clinton defies the odds by statistically tying McCain, 48% to 46%. She gets 73% of the Democratic vote. Obama trails 63% to 29% and loses the Democratic vote by a point.
  
• It's hard to believe, but that is actually an improvement: Obama lost the Democratic vote by 7% last month, at least suggesting that this is not a complete outlier.

• In New Mexico, McCain narrowly beats both Democrats: 49% to 46% against Clinton, 49% to 44% against Obama.
  
• The two Democrats are equally strong among Hispanics.
  

• In Minnesota, Obama leads McCain 49% to 43%; Clinton edges him 47% to 46%. That's a 7% improvement for the Illinois Senator.

• In Iowa, Obama polls much better -- as usual: He beats McCain 49% to 42%, while Clinton trails 48% to 42%. The difference comes from independents, among whom Clinton trails by 26%!

• In Oregon, another bluish swing state, Clinton and McCain are in a toss-up, 47% to 46%. Obama comes in much stronger, 51% to 42%. Here again, the difference comes from independents.

• In Wisconsin, one of the tightest states in the country, Clinton and McCain are tied at 46%. Obama edges McCain 49% to 44%. The difference is very clearly due to independent voters: Obama leads by 1%, Clinton trails by 17%.
  

The next category are staunchly blue states that are essential to a Democratic victory -- and there are signs of troubles for Democrats, particularly in case of an Obama candidacy. The Illinois Senator looks weak in three states that constitute much of the Democratic base:

• In Massachusetts, especially, poll after poll have shown Obama weak against McCain: This survey shows the Illinois Senator barely edging out the Republican, 48% to 46%. Clinton crushes McCain 56% to 41%. Most of the difference comes from registered Democrats: Obama gets 65%, and Clinton gets 84%. Believe it or not, this is actually a slight improvement for Obama, who was tied with McCain last month.
  

• In California, Clinton beats McCain 53% to 40%; but McCain keeps Obama in single-digits, 50% to 43%. The difference here is first among women (Clinton has a 18% lead, Obama 8%) and both Democrats and independents (McCain actually leads Obama by 2% among the latter group!). That's a 7% drop for Obama over the past month.
  

• In New York, the story is very similar: Clinton crushes McCain 55% to 39%, Obama is held to single-digits, 52% to 43%. Most of the difference comes from registered Democrats (McCain trails by 17% less). Obama already led by single-digits last month.
  

SUSA also released a few polls from red states that aren't competitive at all:

• In Alabama, McCain predictably crushes both Democrats. He beats Clinton 60% to 34% and Obama 64% to 32%. Only 65% of black voters vote for Clinton, while Obama gets only 15% of white voters.

• In Kansas, McCain beats Clinton 57% to 36% and Obama 54% to 37%. That's an improvement for the Republican against both Democrats.
  

Tuesday polls: Clinton faces series of potentially game-ending contests

A number of primary contests looming in the next few weeks have still never been polled, though Survey USA corrected the most glaring of these omissions today by releasing the first public survey of Oregon, which votes on May 20th:

• Barack Obama leads Hillary Clinton 52% to 42%. He is the one who benefits from a very large gender gap (+37%), as he leads by 30% among men.

Oregon's voting is conducted entirely by mail, with all the ballots counted the night of May 20th. That could create a different turnout pattern than what we have witnessed in other states. Another important fact about Oregon is that it holds a closed primary in which only registered Democrats can vote. This could be crucial for the Obama campaign since one of Clinton's main arguments against him is his weakness among registered Democrats and his reliance on independents to win primaries; if Obama maintains a strong lead in Oregon, expect his campaign to use these numbers to counter Clinton's criticism.

Meanwhile, Clinton's main preoccupation is Pennsylvania, for she doesn't have much to expect from any May states if she cannot hold her own on April 22nd. All the polls over the past week showing a dramatic tightening of the race, with Obama even leading in one of them and tying Clinton in a second. Today, three new polls from the Keystone state show very differing trends:

• Quinnipiac's second poll in six days shows yet another tightening, with Clinton's lead now down to 6%: 50% to 44%. The margin last week was 50% to 41%. Looking at the shifts among internals, there is no particular group who has moved more than others.

• Rasmussen's survey brings good and bad news for Hillary: She is leading by only 5%, 48% to 43%. But this margin has remained stable in the past week, making Rasmussen the first institute to release a poll without movement away from Clinton.

• And then we get the surprise: SUSA's new survey shows Clinton jumping back up to a very significant lead, 56% to 38%. Last week, Clinton was leading by 12% (so SUSA never went in the low ranges that other polling institutes are showing).
  
• SUSA points to a lot of groups that shifted in the past 3 polls over the past month's (finding shifts among men and Southeast PA voters especially significant), but concludes that "The complete absence of movement among whites and among women is striking. Among white voters, Clinton polled at 61% in all 3 tracking polls. Among women, Clinton was at 62% a month ago, 62% last week, and 61% today."

The combination of these three polls confirms that the run-up to April 22nd will be very interesting, and that the debate next week could be crucial to the results. It goes without saying that a mid-single digit lead is much less than what Clinton needs to win by on April 22nd -- and there are too many polls showing the race to be trending against her for Hillary to be comfortable here. But at least the SUSA poll suggests that (just as in Ohio) Clinton has not lost her upward potential and could recover enough of the ground she has lost lately to survive beyond Pennsylvania. However, the Obama campaign is rapidly gaining confidence in its Pennsylvania numbers and this could lead them to invest even more in the state than they had planned. They do not have to believe that they will win the state, just that they will hold Clinton as low as possible.

Finally, the last primary poll comes from North Carolina, where PPP has found Obama leading Clinton 54% to 33%. This is the same margin that he posted last week, though that can certainly not be held against him given how massive his lead already is.

Pennsylvania, Oregon and North Carolina vote on three different dates; all three Election Days could mean instant death to the Clinton campaign which has very little room for error left. They first have to win Pennsylvania convincingly and they have to post great results on May 6th and May 20th; it seems to me that Clinton can survive without winning North Carolina and Oregon (as long as she wins Indiana and Kentucky comfortably) but she has to keep it close in both of these states -- and right now it doesn't look like she is managing to, at least in North Carolina.

• General election polls: Washington and Alabama
  

The day's two general election polls come to us from (who else?) SUSA and Rasmussen:

• In Washington, SUSA comes out with Obama leading McCain 51% to 44% while the Republican edges out Clinton 46% to 45%. McCain progressed against both Democrats in the past three weeks, when another SUSA poll showed him trailing Clinton by 5 and Obama by 11.
  

• In Alabama, Rasmussen finds McCain leading Clinton 51% to 40% and Obama 55% to 37%. McCain's favorability rating (60%) far distances that of Clinton (46%) and Obama (39%).
  

While no one expects Alabama to be anywhere on the list of competitive states in November, it is worth pointing out that Bush won 63% to 37% in 2004. As for Washington, it is a state both Kerry and Gore had to worry about but ultimately carried more comfortably than neighboring Oregon -- so Democrats better hope to take a firmer control of the state's 11 electoral votes.

SUSA complements primary polls with avalanche of general election surveys

• Primary polls have Clinton up in two key states
  

Two primary surveys released today point to Hillary Clinton's advantage in some upcoming states, including a surprisingly big lead in a state that is supposed to be closer:

• In Pennsylvania, Franklin & Marshall released a survey showing Clinton leading 51% to 35%. This is an improvement for the New York Senator, who led 44% to 32% in the group's previous poll.
• The favorability ratings of both candidates are also very instructive. In the past month, Obama has gone from 57-16 to 47-25, a significant plunge (and this is among Democratic voters only), while Clinton is still viewed favorably by 65% and unfavorably by 18%.

• In West Virginia, Rasmussen released a poll today showing Clinton up 2:1, 55% to 27%. West Virginia votes on May 13th.
  

Rasmussen's survey is the first poll we have seen from West Virginia, so it is clearly a relief for Hillary to see that she is so favored in the state, which was not necessarily a given. As for Pennsylvania, Clinton's has been steadily increasing her baseline double-digit lead since March 4th to the extent that a 16% lead almost looks disappointing for her right now.

• General election: McCain picks up ground but Obama holds his own
  

Following the string of 9 catastrophic general election polls released yesterday (including three from SUSA in OH, KY and MO), today's delivery of general election surveys is almost a relief for Democrats, as it can reassure them that they have yet to lose all the advantages they had amassed in the past few months. And SUSA followed up yesterday's releases with an avalanche of polls today, many of which were less dramatic for Obama.

We'll look more at the detail of the swing state surveys:

• In New Mexico, both Clinton and Obama lead McCain 51% to 45%. That's a six point improvement for Clinton in the past two weeks and a one point decline for Obama.
  
• Obama gets much more cross-over Republicans, Clinton more independents. And Clinton does better among Hispanics, 65% to Obama's 56%.

• Great number for Democrats in the traditionally red state of Virginia, where Obama edges McCain 48% to 47% and where Clinton ties him at 47%. That's a 10 point improvement for Clinton and a one point improvement for Obama over the past two weeks.
  
• Obama is slightly stronger than Clinton among independents and Republicans, and weaker among Democrats. Clinton is also weak among black voters (63% only, versus 84% for Obama).

• In Minnesota, Clinton leads McCain 49% to 46% but the Republican edges out Obama 47% to 46%. That's an 8 point decline for Obama and a 1 point decline for Clinton.

• In Iowa, it's the inverse: Obama leads McCain 50% to 44% but McCain leads Clinton 48% to 44%. That's a one point improvement for Clinton and a three point decline for Obama.
• The difference is among Republicans (Obama gets 14% and Clinton 5%) and among independents (Obama leads by 12, Clinton trails by 2).

• In Wisconsin, the race is also very tight: Clinton edges out McCain 45% to 44% and Obama beats him 48% to 44%. That's a 3% decline for Clinton and a 7% decline for Obama.
  
• There are here again noteworthy differences: Obama leads independents by 2% but Clinton trails by 19%. Clinton balances that by her strength among Democrats, 85% versus 74% for Obama.

• In Washington, Clinton is ahead 50% to 45% and Obama 52% to 41%. That's a significant improvement for Hillary who trailed in the state three weeks ago.
  

• In Oregon, Clinton leads 5o% to 44% and Obama 5o% to 41%. That's also a significant shift in Clinton's favor as she was led by 5% three weeks ago. Generally Clinton has had trouble in WA and OR, so it is good for her to be ahead in both.
  

• And then there is Massachusetts which is competitive even though it should not be: Clinton leads 55% to 42% and McCain manages the stunning feat of tying Obama at 47%. There have been many polls that have shown Obama in trouble in this blue state. Obama trails among independents and only gets 66% among Democrats in what represents a 7% decline for him in the past 2 weeks.
  
• We also got a MA poll from Rasmussen, pointing to a more positive picture for Dems: Clinton leads 54% to 35% and Obama 49% to 42%. Even that is too close for comfort for Obama.
  

We also got a number of polls from less competitive states:

• In California, Clinton is up 56% to 38% and Obama 54% to 40% -- that's a 3% improvement for Obama and 6% for Clinton, though she only gets 64% of black voters, while Obama is a bit weaker among both Democrats and Hispanics.
• In Alabama, McCain crushes Clinton 56% to 38% and Obama 62% to 35%, a 13% decline for Barack in 2 weeks. Obama gets 62% of Democrats, Clinton 64% of blacks.
• In Kansas, McCain leads Obama by only 51% to 39%. Clinton is trailing 55% to 36%.
• In New York, Obama is only up single-digits, 52% to 44% (a 6% decline). Clinton leads 54% to 41%.

The last poll I will cite is CBS's national poll that has Obama up 48% to 43% and Clinton up 46% to 44%. Worth noting that McCain was trailing by 12% against Obama last month, so this is actually a positive trendline for him -- though he clearly trails.

All candidates have good news in those polls: McCain is generally strengthening his position, Clinton is as well and while Obama is on the decline in most states he remains in a very strong position in a number of key contests (Virginia, Iowa, New Mexico, for example, all states won by Bush in 2004). Contrary to yesterday's 9 polls, these general election surveys point to are balancing from the polling excesses of the end of February: At the height of Obamania, Clinton was constantly distanced in polls and Obama was riding high. Now, the latter is back down to more normal levels and Clinton is back up to where she likely always truly was.

SUSA releases wave of competitive general election polls

SUSA released 8 general election polls today, getting it to a total of twelve within 3 days. First, they had shown Iowa and Virginia to be competitive, with Obama looking strong in the former and competitive in the latter, and Clinton struggling in both. In Kansas and New York, SUSA also found Obama running stronger than Clinton (surprisingly in New York), with McCain trailing both candidates in NY and leading them in KS.

Today's wave of polls offers a more complex picture of competitiveness and electability, with McCain competitive in unlikely places (Massachusetts, particularly against Obama for the second poll in a row) and struggling in others, and with Clinton pulling in stronger numbers than her rival more than we have been used to in recent weeks.

As you will see while going through these numbers, both Clinton and Obama have very clear groups among which they are stronger: Clinton outperforms Obama among women and Democrats; Obama among men, blacks and independents. And while one might think that it is more important for the nominee to appeal to independents than to Democrats, to whites than to black in order to win the swing states, that cannot get the Democratic Party very far: The base needs to be secured (and motivated). In Ohio, for example, Obama is stronger than Clinton among independents; but he is so much weaker among registered Dems than Clinton outperforms overall. The same is true in reverse for Clinton's relative weakness among black voters.

Democratic and African-American votes are usually taken for granted by the party's nominee, but it should not just be assumed that Obama and Clinton will post strong numbers come November. After all, John McCain's main asset is that he appeals to Democrats, after all; and while black voters are unlikely to go to McCain they could choose to not turn out, which could prove a very big problem. In other words, either Obama and Clinton would have a lot of work to do to secure the Democratic base, and McCain is well positioned to take advantage of their weaknesses.

And with that, let's look at the numbers:

• In Ohio, Clinton leads McCain 52% to 42%, while Obama is up 47% to 44%. The difference comes entirely from registered Democrats, which go 85-10 for Clinton but only 71-21 for Obama. Among independents, in fact, Obama is stronger even here, leading 50% to 36% versus 48% to 40% for Clinton.


• In Missouri, both Democrats are ahead: 51% to 44% for Clinton, 49% to 43% for Obama.


• In New Mexico, Clinton leads 50% to 45% and Obama does much better, 55% to 40%. This is due both to the male vote (Clinton is tied, Obama leads by 15) and to independents (Obama leads by 5, Clinton trails by 12).


• The numbers are almost the same in Minnesota, where Clinton leads 49% to 45% but Obama crushes McCain 55% to 40%. Obama runs 20% better among men, and he also does much better among independents.


• Oregon is another state in which Obama runs stronger, edging out McCain 48% to 47% while Clinton trails 49% to 41%. This is entirely due to the independent vote, which Obama wins 52% to 41% and Clinton trails 54% to 33%.


• The most surprising numbers come perhaps from Massachusetts, one of the country's bluest state in which McCain is very competitive, trailing 52% to 43% against Clinton and only 48% to 46% against Obama. In the last SUSA poll, McCain actually had a small lead against Obama, whose weakness is due to the female vote (+11 instead of +32 for Clinton).

• In California, neither Democrat has any trouble dismissing McCain: 58% to 35% for Hillary, 61% to 34% for Obama. The gender difference is astonishing: Clinton gets +39 among women and +6 among men; Obama gets +25 among men and +9 among women.

• Finally, in Alabama, McCain easily beats both Clinton (57% to 37%) and Obama (58% to 34%). Obama performs much better among blacks (87% against 69% for Clinton) but much weaker among whites (17% versus 26% for Clinton), in one of the only instances of such a racial divide.

Other than Massachusetts, there are no huge surprises in this group of polls, and we can expect the states we are used to thinking as tight to remain so in the coming months, including Ohio. If anything, the Democrats should be really happy about Missouri, a fairly large state in which they have been consistently competitive and which looks ripe for pick-up. The Democratic nominee can certainly hope to reach a majority by winning not a big Bush state like Florida and Ohio but putting together smaller ones, with Missouri and Virginia the obvious suspects at this point (as well as IA and NM, of course, but it is hard to think of those as red).

In new polls, Virginia and North Carolina look to be in play even with McCain's nomination

A number of interesting general election polls were released today, but first come the last two polls from the Wisconsin primary, both of which have good news for Barack Obama:

• The only pollster that had Hillary Clinton ahead in the state has revised its projection within a few days. ARG has a survey out today that shows Obama leading 52% to 42%, in line with other polls but a 16% swing from ARG's last survey!
• Meanwhile, Research 2000 has a poll of its own, showing Obama up 47% to 42%, stable from last week.

We are only a few hours from polls closing in Wisconsin, so there is no need to engage in extensive analysis of these numbers. except to say that no poll has shown the trendlines favoring Clinton at this point. Most surveys show a tight race in mid-single digits, with PPP (and now ARG, ironically enough) the only pollster that has Obama up more comfortably. If these numbers are confirmed tonight, it would meant that Clinton's strategy of drawing more extensive contrasts has not succeeded in gaining new voters, but it would also mean that it has allowed Clinton to halt Obama's momentum and prevent new voters from joining his candidacy. That lesson could be very important for Clinton's campaign given that they still look to be ahead in Ohio and Texas and need to prevent Obama from gaining ground.

• General election polls

Meanwhile, four general election polls were released this morning from four different states (and 3 different pollsters):

• In Iowa, SUSA shows a wide discrepancy between Obama and Clinton. The Illinois Senator leads McCain 52% to 41%, while McCain leads Clinton 51% to 41%.


• In Virginia, the race is also very competitive, with Obama leading McCain 51% to 45% but Clinton trailing 48% to 45%.
• This is great news for Dems, however. The previous SUSA poll of Virginia released a few weeks back had both Obama and Clinton looking very strong against all Republicans except McCain, who crushed Clinton 52-43 and Obama 52-40.


• No such miracle, however, in Alabama, where a new poll has McCain trouncing Clinton 58% to 29% and Obama 59% to 31%.


• Finally, PPP has in a survey of North Carolina that implies that yet another red state is in play next year. McCain leads both Democrats by 5%, which is about 10% weaker than Bush's totals in 2004. He is ahead of Clinton 48% to 43% and of Obama 47% to 42%.

Two major lessons out of these surveys: (1) The most consistent feature of the electability discussion has been that Clinton polls consistently better in red states, especially in the South. In states like Virginia, Alabama and Kentucky, poll after poll showed her faring much better than Obama did (while the Illinois Senator usually did better out West). While Obama looks stronger in this month's wave of general election polls, this set is the first one from places like Virginia that shows him either tied or running better than Clinton. Of course, this has to be relativized given that the two candidates are getting very different treatment right now, and that one is on the rise while the other is hurting, but this is the first significant development in general election polls.

(2) Democrats were worried that McCain's nomination would remove states like Virginia and North Carolina from the competition. For months now, genearl election polls testing different GOP candidates showed McCain running way ahead of Giuliani and Romney, and states like Kentucky in which Clinton looked to have a chance against some candidates looked totally out of reach against McCain. As I pointed above, the same was true in Virginia. But polls like these that show Democrats holding their own against McCain should reassure those that predict a doom scenario for the Democratic nominee.

On the other hand, it is undeniable that McCain is polling stronger right now than another GOP nominee would. For a party that was trailing in countless polls in states that are absolutely must-win in November, it is very reassuring to see that they are now back ahead in places like North Carolina -- and even in Alabama, which would seem obvious but where some polls showed the GOP to be on shaky grounds.

Catching up on some forgotten polls

With the January 19th craziness behind us, it's time to catch up on a few polls that were forgotten because of the focus on South Carolina and Nevada. And the first of these is a Rasmussen poll of California's GOP primary that was released mid-week (the Democratic numbers have already been blogged):

• McCain is ahead with 24%, followed by Romney's 17%, Huckabe's 13%, Thompson's 13% and Giuliani's 11%.

This is obviously very significant given that California will be the biggest prize on February 5th. Giuliani was long crushing the field here, and his collapse to fifth-place is that much more significant. The trouble for McCain's opponents is that numbers in states like California, Illinois and New York are likely to start reflecting national numbers given how huge those states are, and McCain has an unmistakable advantage there. And a win here would be particularly impressive for the Arizona Senator given that California is a closed primary (just like Florida), and McCain has not been doing that well among registered Republicans for now.

Second, we get a primary poll from Massachusetts by SUSA released on Thursday. MA is voting on February 5th and awards many delegates, particularly on the Democratic side, so these numbers are particularly important.

• On the GOP side, it looks like Romney will manage to hold on to his home-state. He defeats McCain 48% to 34%, with Giuliani at 8%.
• Among Democrats, Clinton crushes the field on the strength of a 42% lead among women (!). She gets 56% to Obama's 23% and Edwards's 14%.

Keep in mind that general election polls in MA have shown Romney much weaker than Giuliani and McCain, leading questions as to whether he would get any home-state effect in the GOP primary here. It would certainly be humiliating for him to lose the state. Second, MA is not generally considered to be in Clinton's home-state region (as NY, NJ and CT are), so she would certainly be able to spin a big victory here as a success and she would get a big delegate advantage if she keeps up this lead. But odds are the numbers will tighten at least to some degree when campaigning picks up.

Second, we have a wave of general elections polls released by SUSA on Friday of three states that went bif for Bush in 2000 and 2004. This time, Virginia and Kansas show more than competitive Democrats, though Alabama is firmly anchored in the Republican camp. But in all three polls, McCain runs about 15% stronger than his Republican rivals, underscoring just how consistently better the new GOP front-runner is polling in general election polls:

• Virginia looks like a very promising state for Democrats, and this poll has Clinton and Obama leading Giuliani (50-44 and 46-45 respectively), Romney (51-43 and 48-44) and Huckabee (50-43 and 49-44).
• And now take a look at McCain's numbers, who crushes Clinton 52% to 43% and Obama 52% to 40%.


• The scenario is the same in Kansas, a state Bush won by a massive 26%! Clinton manages to lead Giuliani 48% to 42% though Obama narrowly trails him 45% to 43%. The same is true against Huckabee (47-46 Clinton and 44-46 Obama), and both Democrats leadagainst Romney.
• But McCain handily defeats both Democrats 53% to 40% against Clinton and 53% to 39% against Obama. Notice that McCain's margins are still half of what Bush won by in 2004, but they have got to be disappointing for Democrats after seeing how weakly the other GOPers run.


• Alabama, another state Bush won by 26%, looks better for Republicans. Giuliani beats both Clinton and Obama (50-42 against Clinton and 55-34 against Obama), so does Romney (52-42 and 56-34) and Huckabee (55-40 and 59-32) But here again McCain manages to run even better: He defeats Clinton 58% to 37% and Obama63% to 29%. Notice also how much better than Obama Clinton is faring in this poll.

Two thoughts here. First, Democrats obviously need none of these states to win the 2008 elections. But if McCain becomes the GOP nominee, the polls that are going to come out from states like VA and KY are suddenly going to look much worse for Democrats than they have grown used to in the past few months, and Republicans will be able to be much less worried about losing red states like this. And while there is no telling whether McCain will prove to be the most electable of candidates down the line, the fact that he runs so much better so consistently says something.

Second, Hillary does run better in all three states than Barack. Keep in mind that this is a dynamic we are very much used to: Clinton almost always polls much better in red states like these and in the South, where she rallies much more of the Democratic base; Obama, on the other hand, tends to do better in other areas, especially out West.

SUSA comes out with 7 general election polls: Dems strong in VA and KY, and McCain as solid as always

Everyone obsessively tries to compare the electability of the different Democratic candidates, which I've tried to argue over and over again is an absurd exercise because there is no coherent data. There are dozens of polls showing Hillary more competitive than Obama and vice-versa. The one thing that holds consistently is Clinton running better in the South/deep red states. Why is no one talking about electability in the GOP race? The data here is very consistent: McCain is the best Republican to save the GOP from an electoral disaster. That may not be true down the line, but since we're basing ourselves on current perception and current polls, most of them remarkably show McCain running stronger than the other GOPers.

Today's massive SUSA poll release is an ideal example. Apparently looking to release as many polls as is humanly possible before Christmas, SUSA came out with seven general election polls last night and this morning. The main lessons: Democrats (almost) sweep Virginia, remain competitive in Kentucky, but Obama would have trouble holding New York or Massachusetts against McCain or Giuliani, and McCain is (by far) the most competitive general election candidate.

First up then, Virginia -- which is probably the most interesting poll:

• Hillary Clinton demolishes all GOPers: 52% to 42%, Romney 53% to 40%, Huckabee 54% to 40%. McCain keeps it a toss-up, 48-46.
• It's closer with Obama, who beats Rudy 48-45, Romney 50-43 and Huckabee 51-42. But McCain comes out on top 50-44.

This confirms previous polls that have had Democrats leading in Virginia, and it is a marked improvement from SUSA's last poll from the state. Remember: No Democrat has won Virginia since 1964 -- though Kerry held Bush to 9% in 2004. And the state has 13 EVs. If Democrats get it and a state like Iowa, they wouldn't even need to win Florida or Ohio.

The second state which has had Democrats strong throughout the fall -- and surprisingly so, is Kentucky:

• McCain is the only candidate to beat Clinton, 50% to 44%.
• Clinton comes out on top against Giuliani 47-45, Romney 48-44 and Huckabee 47-46.
• Obama, however, is demolished by all Republicans: 50-40 against Rudy, 46-40 against Romney, 51-38 against Huck, and 53-35 against McCain.

Kentucky has been one of the states that has the most consistently shown a blue drift in presidential polls over the past few months -- in a state Bush won by 20 points in 2004. The previous poll from SUSA had Democrats a tiny bit stronger, but this survey can in no way be consider an outlier: Obama might be weak here, but Clinton's competitiveness shows Democrats have a huge opening here.

A lot of this is due to the local situation in Kentucky, which is more toxic for the GOP than in other places due to the ethical trouble the state party was in that led to the ouster last month of Governor Fletcher. However stunning it might be, Republicans will have to prepare for Kentucky and its eight electoral votes emerging as a very unlikely battleground state in 2008. (In case you're wondering, Kentucky and Virginia together would give Democrats a victory,if combined with all the Kerry states).

SUSA then has polls from three of the most reliable blue states in the country -- NY, CA and MA:

• In California, Democrats never tremble and have some massive leads. Clinton demolishes Rudy 58-36 and even McCain 57 to 38. Obamais a bit weaker but he stays within double-digits: McCain holds him 52-39, but Obama gets 56-36 against Giuliani.


• New York is a bit more interesting: Rudy Giuliani gets Clinton down to... 55% (to 40%) and locks Obama in a toss-up in his home state (48% to 46%). McCain is also very competitive against Obama: 47% to 43%, but stands no chance against Clinton: 57% to 37%.
• The Democrats demolish the two other GOPers: Clinton hits 60% and 59% against Romney and Huckabee, while Obama beats them both 54-36.


• Finally Massachusetts, where Clinton crushes Rudy 57-37, Romney 60-34, and Huck 63-30, but beats McCain only 53-43.
• Obama stays on top but sometimes with difficulty: He crushes Romney 55-36, Huck 60-28, but it's only 50-41 against Giuliani... and a 47-45 toss-up with McCain.

Don't forget that Massachusetts is the state of which Romney was governor -- so he has no excuse for his stunning weakness there. Clearly, McCain has the potential to put very blue states in play, which is supposed to be Rudy's central campaign argument. Why is no one pointing out how BS Rudy's electability appeal is when McCain does as well as him in New York -- Rudy's home state -- and up stages him in Massachusetts? It goes without saying, naturally, that no Democrat will be elected in 2008 without carrying New York (and certainly also Massachusetts). So however much Democrats stay in a great position now, they should be afraid of McCain.

And SUSA closes it off with two polls from red states: Alabama and Kansas. The previous polls from these states by SUSA had Clinton very very competitive in states that Bush won more than overwhelmingly. Democrats today stay competitive: the GOP has the upper-hand, but remember how less than red than normal these states are performing (Bush won Kansas with 62%

• First up, Alabama, where Clinton holds all GOPers to single-digits: 49% to 42% against Rudy, 49-44 versus Huck and 50-43 versus McCain. She forces Romney into a toss-up 46-45.
• Republicans perform better against Obama, who holds Romney in single digits 48-39 but is then crushed by the the three others -- 54-36 by McCain and 52-36 by Giuliani.


• In Kansas, Giuliani leads Clinton 51-39 and Obama 52-38. McCain does better, 58-35 against Clinton and 56-36 against Obama. Huckabee leads a bit more weakly, but it is Romney who has trouble: ahead of Clinton 49-43 and of Obama 44-43.

Democrats did better in last month's SUSA poll where they led four out of eight match-ups, but the bottom line is that McCain is the only candidate not massively under=performing on his party's strength.

Democrats battle over health care, as a new poll shows Clinton competitive in Alabama

The hostage situation in Clinton's Rochester, NH office appears to have been resolved as the police reportedly now has the hostage-taker in custody. No one appears to have gotten injured. This incident has also led to the disruption of the DNC meeting in Virginia at which presidential candidates were scheduled to speak.

• Health care battle

The Democratic race this week centered on substantive discussion rather than process issues -- for once. Following up her strategy at the Las Vegas debate where she had unexpectedly attacked Obama on health care, Clinton had been relentlessly criticisizing Obama this week for his health care plan which, she says, does not cover everyone, whereas hers (and Edwards's, since Clinton and Edwards have very similar health care plans) does.

Today, the Clinton campaign demanded that Obama pull out an ad it has been running in New Hampshire, claiming that the ad is misleading in claiming his health care plan will "cover everyone." In response, the Obama campaign has been pointing out that the Clinton campaign is getting desperate, and they criticized in turn the "mandates" proposed by the Clinton/Edwards plans.

But it appears Obama is under intense heat at the moment for being too cautious, and the Clinton campaign is widely using Paul Krugman's latest NYT column that demolishes Obama on the health care issue. The first two paragraphs set the tone:

From the beginning, advocates of universal health care were troubled by the incompleteness of Barack Obama’s plan, which unlike those of his Democratic rivals wouldn’t cover everyone. But they were willing to cut Mr. Obama slack on the issue, assuming that in the end he would do the right thing.
Now, however, Mr. Obama is claiming that his plan’s weakness is actually a strength. What’s more, he’s doing the same thing in the health care debate he did when claiming that Social Security faces a “crisis” — attacking his rivals by echoing right-wing talking points.

Clinton's camp seems to have sensed this is the moment to push an advantage on an issue that they have been playing since Las Vegas and gain an advantage both substantively (on an issue that Democratic voters follow closely) and on process (knock down Obama's reputation as a hopeful idealist and show him to be to willing to compromise). These are definitely not the cliches of the two candidates -- but there is plenty of evidence after all that Obama is as much of a triangulator as Clinton (for example on Iran).

• More New Hampshire polls

Fox News is the third institute today to release a New Hampshire poll, after the ARG and Rasmussen surveys out this morning:

• On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton gets 30%, followed by Obama at 23% and Edwards at 17%. Richardson runs strong, at 12%.
• Among Republicans, it's Romney at 29%, McCain at 21%, Giuliani at 19% and Huckabee only obtains 7%. Fred Thompson manages to rise to... 4%!

Fox News agrees with the trendline most other polls have seen in the Democratic race: Clinton is sliding. A quick look at the Pollster.com listings tells us this is the first time since July she has not had a double-digits lead (in an ARG poll that had Obama and Clinton tied!). The decrease of Clinton's lead basically means that she will not be able to use New Hampshire as a firewall: An Iowa loss would immediately put her in major danger of losing New Hampshire as well. This was not the case a few weeks ago. On the Republican side, Fox News does not pick up the Huckabee surge -- and gives very good news to McCain who needs to win here (even a strong second-place finish would work under special circumstances if the field is very muddied and confused).

• Clinton competitive in... Alabama

And the trend continues in a new SUSA poll of Alabama: More and more states that were not in play in past cycles appear very competitive. And as has already been noted over and over again, Hillary Clinton runs much stronger than Obama in very red or Southern states (the same is not true in other regions of the country):

• Only McCain manages a convincing lead against Hillary, 52% to 42%. Giuliani only leads her 50% to 45%, while Huckabee is a point ahead (47-46) and Clinton ties Romney at 47%.
• Obama lags behind. He is crushed by Giuliani (55% to 38%), McCain (56% to 35%), Romney (51% to 41%), and Huckabee (48% to 41%).

This is truly a remarkable phenomenon. It appears that Clinton is so polarizing that she automatically federates all Democratic votes in these Southern states, even those that typically do not vote for Democrats anymore in federal races. This is not to say that the Democratic nominee will have much of a chance of carrying the state, but these are still remarkably strange results. Remember: Bush won Alabama 63% to 37%.