Saturday polls: Obama opens lead in NH, and why so many polls from WA?

After yesterday's Newsweek poll showing Obama enjoying a dramatic bounce, the USA Today/Gallup poll looks to be more in line with what we have been seeing from other institutes:

• Obama is leading McCain 50% to 44%, which is the margin the latest NBC and CBS polls found as well.
• Obama enjoys the support of a high 84% of registered Democrats, and has a 12% lead among independents.

The Newsweek poll had similar internal numbers for the different partisan groups, confirming the analysis I offered yesterday that partisan breakdown would be the key measure of this election. While Newsweek's poll found a stunningly strong breakdown for Democrats (55% of respondents described themselves as such versus 36% of Republicans), it is not out of line with SUSA's repeated findings of a massive swing towards Obama's party compared to the 2004 exit polls.

Meanwhile, a number of state polls were also released in the past 48 hours, some of them from crucial swing states:

• In New Hampshire, Obama has opened a big lead according to Rasmussen's latest poll. He is ahead 50% to 39%, up from a 5% lead last month.

• In Nevada, Rasmussen finds McCain holding on to a lead, 45% to 42%. This is down from a 6% lead last month.
  
• Obama's favorability rating is only at 50%, versus 58% for McCain.

• In Iowa, SUSA finds Obama leading 49% to 45%, somewhat of a disappointing result given that some Democrats believe Obama is in a position to put this Bush state away early.
  
• Update: A commenter makes the good point that I should have thought about that polls from Iowa when the state is flooded cannot possibly be reliable.
  

• In California, nothing much has changed since 2004 according to SUSA's latest poll. Obama is ahead 53% to 41%, including a 65% to 26% lead among Hispanics and a 42% gender gap.
  

• Finally, SUSA released a poll from Washington, again. It shows Obama leading McCain 55% to 40%, which is the margin he has enjoyed in most other polls from the state.

Washington is vying for the title of the most-polled state this cycle. SUSA is releasing a poll from the state every two weeks, and we now have a lot of data points confirming that Obama has successfully put the state away. However much McCain wanted to contest it, the state's move back to the safe-blue column (which had already helped Kerry in 2004) is continuing. Do we really need this many polls from the state to confirm that?

The polls from Nevada, New Hampshire and Iowa are certainly more interesting for it is in these states that the election should be decided. While Ohio and Florida certainly hold more electoral votes, Obama will need an alternative path if those 47 electoral votes stay in McCain's column, one made up of smaller states like NV, NH and IA. Keeping New Hampshire's 4 electoral votes might not seem to be that important a priority, but the state is among the only vulnerable Kerry states from 2004. And it would enable Obama to win the election by pulling out Iowa and Nevada and just one other (say, New Mexico). Polls in Iowa have been favorable to the Democrat over the past few months, though Republicans must be relieved that they are still in a position to contest that one. And Nevada polls have been showing a very narrow advantage for the GOP candidate.

Can Obama put away the Dukakis 5?

In 1988, Michael Dukakis only won 10 states in the general election, but 5 of those -- Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon and Washington -- were among the hottest battleground states of the past two presidential elections. Al Gore and John Kerry wasted time and resources defending all of them, and while George Bush only prevailed in one contest in ten attempts (Iowa's 2004 election), many Democratic wins were very close calls (Kerry won WI by 1%, MN by 3% and OR by 4%). A sixth state, West Virginia, remained close in 2000 but appears to have moved solidly in the Republican column since then and its location at the heart of Appalachia does not make it a ripe target for Barack Obama.

But it increasingly looks like Obama could put away the "Dukakis 5," closing the door on McCain's attempt to keep them competitive, winning back Iowa's 7 electoral votes returning these states to their Democratic roots. Iowa appears to be 2004's red state that is leaning the most towards Obama, while Washington had already started migrating back in the comfortably blue column four years ago. Wisconsin is probably the state in which Democrats ought to be the most worried, though a poll I wrote about two days ago showed Obama trouncing McCain -- almost as comfortably as he does in countless polls taken in Washington.

Today, two new Rasmussen polls confirm this trend:

• In Minnesota, Rasmussen Obama is ahead 52% to 39% and enjoying a strong favorability rating (60%, including 35% of very favorable opinion while McCain's 54% is made up of only 15% of "very favorable" opinions).

• In Oregon, Obama is also dominating, leading 46% to 38%. Here again, his "very favorable" rating is much superior to McCain's -- though the same can be said of "very unfavorable" opinions.
• Note that the previous Rasmussen poll had Obama leading by double-digits, so this is technically a slip for the Democrat but there is no question that 8% leads is a strong showing for Obama here.
  

The Minnesota Star Tribune survey mid-May found Obama leading by 13% in MN though SUSA recently registered a 5% lead. In Oregon, the latest non-Rasmussen poll is SUSA's survey back in April, showing Obama leading by 9%. This is to say that Obama's strength in the Dukakis 5 is suggested by more surveys than this recent Rasmussen wave.

The advantage Obama stands to gain if he can keep up this advantage over the next two to three months cannot be understated. If McCain is widely trailing in these states by Labor Day, he is unlikely to mount strong challenges to Obama, making the Illinois Senator the likely winner of a bloc of 38 electoral votes. It is unlikely the GOP would cede Iowa considering Bush won it in 2004 but consider how much this would shrink the states in which Democrats are playing defense, for there would remain only three Kerry states which McCain could hope to win: Michigan, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, a list to which Republicans could perhaps hope to add New Jersey.

So what explains the increased Democratic strength in these states? First, eight years of the Bush Administration have forced a shift of partisan breakdown towards Democrats, getting states that were already leaning blue out of the Republicans' reach. Second, an increasing number of independent voters who are still not identifying themselves as Democrats are increasingly behaving like Democrats -- this was a great boost to the party in 2006, particularly in Minnesota (see Klochubar v. Kennedy). Third, one of Obama's strongest constituencies is Western independent voters, meaning that McCain's appeal to indies is unlikely to penetrate too far in Oregon and Washington.

This is not to say that Obama will be able to put away all or some of these states but only that he has the potential to do so in a way Al Gore and John Kerry never could. John McCain clearly has taken contesting a number of these states to heart and is said to want to push for the Pacific Coast. Minnesota will prove a particularly interesting case, as Gov. Pawlenty has long been rumored to be one of the front-runner's in the Republican veepstakes and as the GOP convention will be held in the Twin Cities. It will be interesting to see whether the latter event (and possibly the former) impact the state of the race.

Polls: Dems get good presidential day, GOP enjoys good Senate news

One of the most surprising fixtures of this early campaign season has been the number of Massachusetts polls finding a surprisingly tight race between Barack Obama and John McCain. SUSA's latest poll had the Democrat leading by 5% -- and that was an improvement over previous dismal SUSA findings. Other polls Obama up by 12-13%, certainly a stronger showing, but these surveys also pointed to a surprising Obama weakness in the state by finding him performing much more weakly than Hillary Clinton. Now, however, we finally get a Massachusetts poll in which Obama performs as strongly (even stronger) than he needs to:

• Suffolk released its general election survey of the state, finding Obama leading 53% to 30%.
  

One or two more of those and we will be ready to move MA from "Likely Obama" to "Safe Obama." Of course, Massachusetts isn't the most interesting general election state but it has long been a puzzling one which is why I chose to lead with it. Other important state polls that are making news today are:

• In Wisconsin, the renowned Badger poll released a poll finding Obama leading 50% to 37% -- a very impressive margin in one of the tightest races of the past 2 elections.
  
• A key finding: The partisan breakdown has shifted 12% towards Democrats since 2004.

• In New Jersey, Quinnipiac found Obama leading but struggling to open a substantial margin. He is ahead 45% to 39%.

• In Iowa, the 2004 red state that looks the most susceptible of falling in the Democratic column, Rasmussen finds Obama increasing his lead to a 7% margin, up from 2% last month.
  
• He now enjoys the support of 77% of registered Democrats, versus 71% last month, though McCain has also increased his support among his base.

• In the important state of North Carolina, finally, Rasmussen shows a tight race with John McCain barely ahead 45% to 43%. This is actually only a 1% tightening, and the two were tied at 47% two polls ago, but North Carolina is rarely included in the list of top tier states and every poll that shows this tight a race is treated as surprising news.

• In Oklahoma, finally, Research 2000 released a poll showing McCain leading by only 14% in a state that Bush won by 32%.
  

Any sign of North Carolina being a true toss-up this November is indeed a nail in the coffin of John McCain, as it is difficult to imagine the Arizona Senator losing such a traditionally red state and somehow get an electoral college majority. An Obama upset in North Carolina would signal major difficulties for McCain in a number of other (former) Republican strongholds, starting with Virginia. Even ruby red Oklahoma is showing signs of tightening!

As for the other state, it is important to realize that as long as Obama keeps all of the Kerry states he can win a majority by simply pulling in three states that are already tinkering on the brink -- Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado. Substitute the latter by Nevada and you have an electoral tie. That's why the recent surveys showing Obama posting huge leads in traditionally tight blue states like Wisconsin and Washington are very important, as they reduce the number of places in which the Illinois Senator will have to play defense.

Fortunately for Republicans, they got great Senate news today -- and unexpectedly so given the streak of terrible news that has fallen on the congressional GOP:

• In North Carolina, Rasmussen finds Elizabeth Dole leading Kay Hagan by fourteen points following Hagan's 1% lead last month.

• In Oklahoma, a third-tier race that Dems have made some noise about, Sen. Inhofe leads state Senator Rice 53% to 31% in a Research 2000 poll.
  

The previous Rasmussen poll was taken right after Hagan's primary victory, and it seemed that the Democratic candidate then enjoyed a short-lived bounce. In fact, there were a number of polls showing a very tight contest between the two North Carolina women mid-May, so Rasmussen's toss-up poll should not be read as a stand-alone outlier. While the evolution is a bit more brutal than expected, the trend lines make sense as it will take more work for Democrats to get Dole truly in trouble. In any case, pulling this race out of the first-tier is essential for Republicans if they want to have a chance of limiting their losses in November. Note that the NC Senate poll is accompanied by a gubernatorial survey that finds the opposite trend:

• Democratic Lieutenant Governor Perdue now edges out Charlotte Mayor McCrory 47% to 46%. The Republican posted a 45% to 39% lead last month.

It was clear as soon as McCrory announced his candidacy that this race woud go down to the wire, and nothing that has happened ever since has disproved that.

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.

Preparing for Puerto Rico, and the Michigan question

This Sunday, Puerto Rico will finally have a day in the national political spotlight by holding its Democratic primary. Of course, the contest is less important than Puerto Ricans were hoping just a few weeks ago. After all, countless scenarios were devised in which the island's vote was to be the last-minute decider, perhaps even allowing Clinton to regain the delegate lead; indeed, we believed for a long time that Puerto Rico would allocate its delegate on a winner-take-all basis before plans were clarified in favor of proportional allocation.

Hillary Clinton is widely held as the favorite of this contest given her lead among Hispanics. After all, it is because of the Latino vote that Clinton survived for so long, as they allowed her to win Texas and handily defeat Obama in California. But Puerto Rico voters are a very different voting group than Hispanics living in America and whose set of concerns and economic condition is very different, so it is important to not overstate Clinton's natural advantage. That said, the only poll released until today had Clinton leading by 13% (that was back in April). Today, we got another poll:

• This survey, conducted by Quinlan Rosner Research for Univision, shows her leading 51% to 38% in this race that will allocate 55 delegates. Among the most likely voters, Clinton leads 59% to 40%.
  

To overtake Obama in the popular vote (well, in a count that the press could hold as legitimate), Clinton will need a big win and a huge turnout. But Puerto Rico's vote now seems like an afterthought, which probably frustrates the press corps more than any one else.

Meanwhile, two general election polls were released by SUSA's ongoing series of testing vice-presidential match-ups:

• In Iowa, Obama leads McCain 47% to 38%. When VPs are added, John Edwards helps the ticket the most but Republicans lead in a number of scenarios. These are based mostly on name recognition so I will not spend more time detailing them.
  

• In Michigan, meanwhile, McCain is ahead 41% to 37%. Obama only gets 60% of the Democratic vote.
  
• SUSA only polled Mitt Romney as a Republican VP, as the former Massachusetts Governor can call Michigan as something of a homestate (which he won on January 15th, prolonging his candidacy). The McCain-Romney team lead all Democratic tickets, from a range of +3 if the Dem VP is Edwards to +19 if it is Webb or Kaine, two Virginians who are largely unknown in Michigan.

The Michigan question has to be troubling Democrats, as there have now been a series of polls showing the Arizona Senator edging the probable Democratic nominee. While the state featured tight contests in 2000 and 2004 (Al Gore and John Kerry both carried the state by less than 5%), the Democratic nominees posted a small lead throughout the campaign and Michigan was generally rated as a "lean Democratic" state. But with McCain's increasingly undeniable strength in the state, the likelihood of Michigan's 17 electoral votes being at the very center of the general election campaign -- replacing Florida as the third member of the holy trio, alongside Ohio and Pennsylvania.

This is obviously a dangerous development for Democrats, as two of the three largest battleground states would then be blue states -- and both are must-win states for them to recapture the White House. Michigan is too much a part of the Democratic electoral college base for the party to afford seeing the state joining the rank of toss-ups.

The delegate mess in which the Democratic Party is still stuck will not help Obama's cause, though the roots of the problem are obviously deeper. Michigan might be one of the only states in which voters partly blame Democrats for their worsening economic condition, as Governor Granholm's approval ratings have plummeted in the past few years. Furthermore, this is a state in which Obama's weakness among blue-collar voters could hurt him if he does not recapture that electorate by the fall, as the union vote is an important one (albeit a declining force) in the state.

Thursday polls: Color Arkansas red

The first general-election poll from Arkansas last summer made it clear that this would be the one state which would undoubtedly go from "Safe Democratic" to "Safe Republican" depending on the identity of the Democratic nominee. Arkansas is voting like Hillary Clinton's home-state, more so than New York. It gave her 70% of its vote in the primary and a new general election poll confirms that she would be in a strong position to carry it in November:

• Rasmussen shows Clinton leading McCain 53% to 39% in this red state. McCain, however, leads Obama 57% to 33%, a 38 percent gap.
• Clinton's favorablility rating is at 60%, including 35% who have a very favorable view of her (14% for McCain).
  

With Obama now the presumptive nominee, it looks like we can color Arkansas red (perhaps it could get competitive if he chooses Hillary or Clark as his vice-president?). But two new polls from Washington and Iowa confirm that those are two states in which Obama is well positioned, as they have been two states in which most polls show him faring considerably better:

• In Washington State, SUSA shows Obama leading McCain 54% to 42%. Clinton is ahead 49% to 45%. Obama is polling better among registered Republicans and independents. The margins are roughly what they were a month ago.
  

• In Iowa, Rasmussen finds a tight race within the margin of error for both candidates. Clinton trails McCain 45% to 42% and Obama leads 44% to 42%. Both races have tightened since last month.

McCain is looking to make Washington and Oregon competitive despite both states voting against Bush twice. Judging by this poll it will be difficult for him to do so because Obama has a firm grasp among the registered Democrat vote -- that is not the case in every state, so McCain would have more potential success by concentrating on purple/blue state where Obama is weak among registered Dems (starting with Florida, the South and some places in the Midwest; but not the West).

Finally, national general election polls continue showing a slight edge for Democrats:

• Quinnipiac shows Obama leading McCain 47% to 40%; Clinton is ahead 46% to 41%.
• POS/GQR finds Clinton trailing by 1% and Obama leading 48% to 43%.
• An ABC News/Washington Post poll has Clinton leading 49% to 46% and Obama ahead 51% to 44%.
• Gallup, however, finds Obama and McCain tied at 45% while Clinton is leading 48% to 45%.

It will be interesting to see whether national pollsters decide to not include Clinton in a poll before she drops out. My guess is that they will continue including her for fear of being criticized, but we'll keep an eye on that too. By the way, it is always remarkable to see McCain competitive at all in some of these polls considering the internal numbers many of the polls include and that reveal just how awful an environment Republicans are facing in the fall. It does look like only McCain could have made this tight -- and the question now is whether he can save anything for the GOP in down-the-ballot races.

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.
  

Poll roundup: Clinton loses her grip on Pennsylvania

For the first three weeks of the Pennsylvania campaign, Hillary Clinton not only maintained but even slightly expended her lead. But since then, it has been Ohio and Texas all over again: Poll after poll show the race tightening. And though there has only been one survey for now showing Obama with the lead, ARG released one this morning showing a tie between the two Democrats:

• Clinton and Obama both come in with 45%. Clinton's 16% edge among white voters is offset by Obama's 89% among back voters.
• ARG's previous poll released late March showed Clinton ahead 51% to 39%, a quite dramatic drop within two weeks.

Needless to say Clinton needs to win Pennsylvania to even stay in the race until the next context, let alone have any chance of taking the nomination. An Obama victory in the Keystone state would at once undermine many of Hillary's central arguments, in particular that Obama is too weak among key groups (registered Democrats, blue-collar voters) to be competitive in the general and that the late campaign is favoring Clinton with voters coming to realize they prefer her.

Do not write off Clinton's chances in Pennsylvania, of course. In the run-up to Ohio, I explained that the fact that we were talking about who would win that contest already meant Clinton would lose since she didn't need to just win Ohio but get a double-digit victory. But when all was said and done Hillary pulled out a 10% win. The trouble for her is that she needs even more than that in Pennsylvania to truly make her points, so if polls confirm that there now is a serious contest for the win rather than for the margin it is hard to see how Clinton can recover.

Meanwhile, two North Carolina polls suggest that the state's giving itself to Obama by a massive margin (Rasmussen suggested 23% yesterday) is not a foregone conclusion:

• McClatchy shows Obama leading comfortably, 45% to 36%. 20% of Clinton supporters (shall we say "only 20%" at this point?) said they would vote for McCain if their candidate did not get the nomination.

• Meanwhile, a Raleigh Observer poll was also realeased showing Obama ahead 32% to 26% -- as you can see undecideds were really not push by the pollster here.
  

North Carolina's primary seems to be the type of contest Clinton needs in Pennsylvania, one in which what is at stake is the margin without much suspense about the winner. Polls are showing an Obama victory anywhere from high-single digits to the 20% range. Even if Clinton is alive to fight on May 6th and even if she gets satisfying results in Indiana, she needs to make sure to cut her losses in North Carolina -- and she particularly needs to focus on winning the blue-collar white vote, the loss of which would undercut her central electability argument.

Finally, Rasmussen released two general election polls yesterday showing mixed results for both parties -- but mainly underscoring John McCain's strength:

• In Iowa, one of the rare states in which there is a consistent electability difference between the Democrats, Obama edges out McCain 46% to 42%, but the Republican crushes Clinton 51% to 36%.
• In Tennessee, however, it is Clinton who looks stronger, though both Democrats are trounced by McCain: Clinton is led 52% to 38% and Obama 58% to 31%.

Iowa will likely be one of the most important battlegrounds of the fall campaign after it handed George Bush a very narrow victory in 2004; Tennessee is less important in the logic of a general election campaign given that it did not even win for Al Gore in 2000. Let's note, however, that past polls showed that Tennessee could be in play: A survey in late February showed Clinton trailing McCain by only 4%, while Obama was crushed by 16%; an even earlier poll back in November showed tighter margins for both Democrats.

Controversy over McCain's public financing commitment picking up

John McCain opened fire on Barack Obama last week, accusing the Democrat of wavering on whether he would accept public financing for the general election. But he soon found himself in the center of a controversy, as the Washington Post came out with a story that put in doubt whether McCain was allowed to opt out of public financing after qualifying for it. If McCain applied for a December loan using the promise of these public funds as collateral, he is not supposed to be allowed to withdraw. In fact, the FEC Chairman wrote a letter to McCain questioning also whether he had a right to withdraw. For a full explanation of what exactly is the issue here, my explanation is available here.

Now the DNC is directly going after McCain on this issue, filing an official complaint with the FEC about McCain's spending. In fact, the DNC notes that McCain had spent $49 million as of the end of January, which means that he probably has already passed the public finance limit of $54 million! Let me repeat this: If the FEC rules that McCain is not allow to withdraw from public financing, the Arizona Senator would not be allowed to spend one more dime all the way until September... while Obama would spend tens of millions. That could just about do it for GOP hopes. And to make matters worse, the DNC is adding an argument to that of the loan's collateral, and noting that McCain might have used the qualification for public financing to get on the Ohio ballot and adding that such a move also locks McCain in the system.

Thankfully for McCain, not only are these matters still legally debatable (though the FEC Chairman clearly appears to share some of these concerns) but the FEC might not get to rule on anything at all. It is unclear whether the FEC will have a quorum to issue any ruling and hope to enforce them, since it only has 2 members right now out of 6. The Senate is deadlocked on the four others... allowing McCain to keep on spending. And the fact that getting FEC nominees approved might now cause huge trouble for McCain will make Senate Republicans less eager to resolve the dispute.

Even if he managed (as is still likely) to dunk the issue, McCain would clearly be hurt if he were to face weeks of questions on this issue for weeks, especially if it undermines his image as an ethics reformer. But campaign finance issues have rarely have a significant impact on election results, which is why the DNC is pushing the issue and making sure it gets as much coverage as possible.

Also today, three general election polls were released from purple states, all three showing Barack Obama running much better than Hillary Clinton, with McCain posting some strong numbers as well:

• In Wisconsin, Rasmussen shows Obama edges out McCain 44% to 43%, though McCain crushes Clinton 50% to 38%.
• In New Mexico, Rasmussen shows very similar numbers, with Obama and McCain tied at 44% and McCain crushing Clinton 50% to 38% yet again.
• In Iowa, finally, the Des Moines Register poll has Obama running 27% better than Clinton! He leads 53% to 36%, while Clinton trails 49% to 40%.

The electability gap keeps getting bigger between Clinton and Obama. As of late January, there was no consistent pattern; now, Obama almost always runs much better than Hillary (albeit with some caveats and key weaknesses that I explained here). Also, it is worth noting that SUSA's numbers were more favorable to Democrats than Rasmussen's (both Democrats lead McCain in New Mexico, for instance).

More polls, with a bunch of general election numbers

First, news came today that Obama has won his eleventh contest in a row, that of the Democrats Abroad, 66% to 33%. Obama narrowly won Mexico and Clinton narrowly won Israel; Western Europe went big for Obama. That gives Obama 2.5 delegates to Clinton's 2 (there were 9 delegates at stake, and they split 5-4, but each only has half-a-vote at the convention, thereby complicating matters with half delegates).

Meanwhile, ABC/Washington Post just came out with two polls from Ohio and Texas, confirming that the trendlines are not favoring Clinton at all and that Obama has a good chance of taking one -- if not both -- of these states, likely putting an end then to the Democratic contest. The fact that Texas in particular is so close (as it is in three polls released earlier this afternoon that I blogged about here) makes tonight's and next week's debates that much more important:

• In Texas, Clinton edges out Obama 48% to 47%. No internals are provided, but the WaPo does specify that Latinos are powering Clinton through here.
• In Ohio, Clinton stays more comfortably ahead, 50% to 43%.

These numbers speak for themselves, and my last post already delves into the primary and the dynamics in the run-up to March 4th; so I am going to jump straight to the latest general election numbers, for we have a few from different pollsters:

• Firs, a poll from New York. SUSA shows Clinton leading McCain by 11%, 52% to 41%; but it is Obama who fares best -- 57% to 36%. Most Northeast polls have usually shown Obama weaker than Clinton, and it is obviously a surprise to see the New York Senator being outperformed in her home state.
  


• In Pennsylvania, things are too close for comfort for both Democrats in a must-win state. That same Franklin & Marshall College survey that showed Clinton ahead of Obama in the primary this morning also released general election numbers: Clinton and McCain are tied at 46%, and McCain is edging out Obama 44% to 43%.

• SUSA also released a poll from Kansas that shows the state semi-competitive if Obama is the candidate, as he trails McCain 50% to 44%. Clinton is trounced, 59% to 35%. In SUSA's January Kansas poll, Clinton trailed by 13% and Obama by 14% -- so the two are stuck in very divergent trendlines.

• Next we have two polls from Rasmussen, the first of which comes from Virginia, where McCain holds off both Clinton (51% to 41%) and Obama (49% to 44%). SUSA's Virginia poll the other day had Obama slightly ahead.

• In Iowa, meanwhile, Obama is barely ahead, 44% to 41%, while Hillary is far behind, 47% to 37%.
  

• Finally, the Quinnipiac poll from New Jersey has both Democrats leading McCain in single-digits, 47% to 41% for Hillary, 46% to 39% for Obama.

This New Jersey poll is a perfect summary of the strength of the two candidates and what they each bring to a match-up against McCain. Clinton does better among Democrats (80-10, versus 72-15 for Obama); Obama does better among independents (leading 47-38, while Clinton trails 44-43) and African-Americans (87-6 versus 75-13 for Clinton).

Both candidates would have to work really hard to complete this coalition and to win the race, and their weakest points have interestingly enough been groups among which they are also weak in the primary, so this is not just a small problem they can expect to get resolved in a few days.

Also worth noting is how clearly Obama has gone up in the past month and Clinton has gone down, for example in the Kansas poll that has Obama gaining 7% and Clinton went down 14%. The same trend is obvious in many surveys and in national trackings like Rasmussen's daily numbers.

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.

Presidential polls coming in from all directions

I have been posting more slowly than usual the past 24 hours, and as a result I am left with a deluge of great polls that I have not yet talked about. So here's my best comprehensive attempt to list this morning's polls -- and there are a lot to list since many institutes decided to just deliver lots of state numbers today.

• Gallup's national numbers

I had already posted the Republican primary numbers yesterday to indicate Huckabee's stalling. Gallup also came out with general election numbers and a survey from the Democratic primary nationally:

• Among Democrats, Clinton comes in at 45% followed by Obama at 27%and Edwards at 15%. This is an improvement for Hillary who stood at 39% two weeks ago.


• In the general election, Clinton and Obama win all 6 match-ups. But Barack is much stronger than Hillary.
• Against Giuliani, Clinton wins 49-48 and Obama 51-45. Against Huckabee, it's 53-44 Clinton and 53-42 Obama. And against Romney, it's 52-46 Clinton only, and 57-39 Obama.

I don't much faith in the electability difference here, as we could point to many polls that have the reverse effect nationally (though, as I have explained before, there is more consistency in finding Obama stronger in the West and Clinton in the South). The bottom line is that Democrats are starting ahead in this election, but cleraly not by huge margins.

• Rasmussen's flurry of state polls: OH, MO and NJ

Rasmussen came out with a few great presidential polls this morning:

• In Ohio, Republicans have leads but it's all within the margin of error.Giuliani is ahead of Clinton 44% to 42% and of Obama 43% to 40%. Clinton and Romney are tiedat 43%.
• But it's Huckabee who runs best: 44% to 40% against Hillary, and 45% to 39% against Obama.


• In Missouri, Clinton leads Rudy Giuliani 45% to 39%, and Obama leads by 1%. But both Democrats lose against Huckabee, 45% to 43% for Clinton and 45% to 41% for Hillary.
• The explanation: Giuliani's favorability rating is the lowest of the four candidates, at 45%, under Clinton and Obama who are at 52 and 51%. What is happening to Rudy Giuliani in the heartland?


• Finally in New Jersey, Clinton is strong but Obama has difficulty putting Giuliani away: Clinton leads Rudy 50% to 37%, but Obama is statistically tied 42% to 41%. This is coherent with many other polls we have seen that Rudy would make the Tri-State area competitive if the Democratic candidate is not Clinton.
• Both candidates comfortably lead Huckabee: 49% to 30% for Obama and 51% to 34% for Clinton.

None of these numbers are very shocking: Missouri and Ohio are close, and New Jersey clearly leans Democratic. Missouri's slight Democratic lean in most polls taken this fall is probably the biggest surprise, as the GOP was boasting of having put the state away in past cycles -- clearly that is not the case, and Democrats have a great chance of winning the state. After all, they certainly have electoral college scenarios in which they get to a majority with Missouri and without Ohio.

• PPP: North Carolina is competitive

Public Policy Polling came out with a general election and a Senate poll out of North Carolina today:

• In the presidential race, John Edwards is the only Democrat tobeat Republicans in his home state: He beats Giuliani 48% to 43%, Huckabee 50% to 43%, and demolishes Romney 52% to 40%./li>/li>
• Giuliani leads Clinton 46% to 39% and Obama 46% to 43%. Huckabee leads Clinton 46% to 42% and Obama 47% to 42%. And Romney leads Clinton 46-42 and Obama 45-42%.

In the presidential race, Clinton had come in stronger in a previous North Carolina poll, but the Democrats are clearly running stronger in the South than they were 4 years ago. Edwards did not do much for Kerry in 2004, so it's interesting that polls are finding him this much stronger today.

• SUSA delivers too: IA and MN

SUSA also came out with two state polls from Iowa and from Minnesota:

• In Iowa, Clinton leads Giuliani 47% to 42%, Romney 48% to 45%. She's only up 46-45 against Huck and behind 46-45 against McCain.
• Obama runs much much better than Clinton: 55% to 36% against Rudy, 51-39 against Romney, 52-39 against Huck, and 51-39 against McCain.


• In Minnesota, it's Clinton who runs much much better: She demolishes Giuliani 53-40, Romney 58-36, Huck 53-41. Her lead is within single-digits only against McCain, but still far ahead 51% to 43%.
• Obama, on the other hand, trails Giuliani 48% to 44% and McCain 50% to 41%. He is timidly ahead of Romney 48% to 42% and Huck 47% to 42%.

This is the second month in a row that SUSA shows Obama miles ahead of Clinton in Iowa -- which could be significant given that it is the state in which Obama is the best known at this point after months of caucus campaigning. But by that token, Iowa has always been the state where Clinton has had the most difficulty in the primary campaign, which could also account for her weakness in the general election.

And don't forget that IA went red by a point or two in 04 and MN went blue by a small margin; but both states have long histories of being Democratic. So it looks like 2008 could see them both return solidly to the blue column -- though depending on the candidates the GOP can hope to make them competitive.