Second electoral ratings: Five changes all favor Obama

Two weeks have passed since my first electoral ratings found a tight electoral college race, with 15 states making up the initial batch of battleground states. Since then, the general election has been heating up and the candidates have engaged in tense back-and-forth on issues ranging from energy policy to terrorism. There have also been a number of polls released in the interval, not all of which have confirmed the conventional wisdom.

I will attempt to update ratings every two weeks (and every week once we get closer to the election) to maintain a continuous history. As I wrote last time, these are based on a mixture of polling data, considerations of which states parties are likely to invest in, the candidate's strengths and weaknesses and voting and registration patterns of each state since 2004. Thus, a low double-digits in a poll is not synonymous with likely category, and it will not descend to the "lean" group as soon as a poll shows a single-digit margin. (For electoral ratings that are based on stricter formulas, check the always-excellent Electoral-Vote and FiveThirtyEight.)

For instance, a recent AR poll might have shown a 9% lead for McCain, but the state remains in the "safe" category for now. Not only is one survey not enough to shift a state, but not all 9% leads are equal: Obama's very high unfavorability numbers in that AR poll suggest that he might have reached a ceiling he can only rise in case of a huge boost in black turnout. Until we see whether Obama is committed to such an effort in this particular state, there is no point in upgrading Arkansas to a more competitive category.

Without further delay, here are the second 2008 electoral college ratings (states whose ratings have been changed are in bold). Remember that states that are in the "lean" category are still considered to be very competitive and certain to be hotly contested, but it is possible to say that one candidate has a slight edge at this time.

• Safe McCain: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska (at large + 3rd congressional district), Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming (87 EVs)

• Likely McCain: Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska (1st and 2nd congressional districts), North Dakota, Texas (87 EVs)

• Lean McCain: Florida, North Carolina (42 EVs)

• Toss-up: Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia (84 EV)

• Lean Obama: Iowa, Oregon, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin (55 EVs)

• Likely Obama: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New Jersey, Washington (97 EVs)

• Safe Obama: DC, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont (86 EVs)

This gives us the following map (courtesy of the Washington Post's interactive feature, though I was not able to color lean states a lighter shade) and totals:

• Safe + Likely Obama: 183 electoral votes
• Safe + Likely + Lean Obama: 238
• Toss-up: 84
• Safe + Likely + Lean McCain: 216
• Safe + Likely McCain: 174

I will naturally not attempt to provide an explanation for every single one of these ratings and will concentrate instead on the four that have shifted over the past two weeks.

Arizona, Safe McCain to Likely McCain: Perhaps this is a case of an over-eager media looking for a story, but it is hard not to notice the abundance of articles questioning whether John McCain is a sure bet in his home-state, including recent pieces in The Christian Science Monitor and in CQ. The Senator's surprisingly low percentage in the state primary (he beat Mitt Romney by 12%) raised red flags as to his rocky relationship with Arizona's conservative base. The latest poll has an 11% margin and Obama could spell real trouble for McCain if he solidifies the Hispanic vote. The Republican remains heavily favored, if only because Obama is unlikely to push too hard. If he does lose here, however, would that push him towards the retirement in 2010?

Missouri, Lean McCain to Toss-up: The polls showing a tight race between the two candidates were available two weeks ago and were only confirmed by two surveys released since that showed Obama barely edging out McCain. What changed was my confidence that the Obama campaign will not give up on contesting Missouri. In 2004, the Kerry campaign pulled out of the state in October -- though it was certainly never their top priority -- and ended up losing by 7%. This year, the Obama campaign will certainly have enough money to not have to pull out and given their determination to not have to rely on Ohio and Florida they will make sure to push hard in other states that are ripe for pick-up. The fact that Missouri's gubernatorial race right now is an open seat in which the Democratic candidate is polling 20% ahead also tells us a lot about the dismal environment the GOP is facing.

Wisconsin, Toss-up to Lean Obama: Barack Obama is polling well in the "Dukakis five," states with traditional Democratic roots that had been more competitive in the past few cycles. By posting strong leads in Washington, Minnesota in particular, he is demonstrating that the shift in voters' partisan breakdown towards an increased identification with the Democratic Party is making it very difficult for the GOP to contest in states that have a slight blue lean in a neutral environment. Obama is posting narrow leads in Wisconsin, though the latest Badger poll showed him up by double-digits. Neither candidate is likely to create much space here in the coming months -- remember that Wisconsin really seemed lost to the Kerry campaign in the summer and fall of 2004 -- but Obama starts off with a slight edge.

Pennsylvania, Toss-up to Lean Obama: There is a reason Obama unveiled John Edwards's and Al Gore's endorsements in Michigan rather than in Pennsylvania: The Keystone State is no longer the main target for Republicans anxious to pick-up a blue state. Kerry's margin here in 2004 was smaller than Bush's in Ohio, but the state has shifted in the past four years. The Democratic tsunami ended up submerging PA Republicans more than it did their OH counterparts and the heated Clinton-Obama showdown gave both Democratic contenders weeks of exposure. Hundred of thousands of new voters registered as Democrats or switched their party registration, providing Obama with an increased base, and it's hard to ignore Quinnipiac's insistence that Obama

However, that Obama starts off with a slight edge does not mean that this state does not remain very competitive. If the Illinois Senator ends up weak among blue-collar voters, it will have a major impact on Pennsylvania and McCain will seize on every opportunity to gain in the state's rural regions. And the suburban areas remain a mystery, as Obama performed unexpectedly weakly in Philly's suburbs on April 22nd. The situation here is similar as the one in Florida: Both states will be hotly contested by both parties but it's hard to not think that they would go in opposing camps if the election were held today (I am aware of today's polls that show Obama slightly ahead in FL though I have not changed my rating. More discussion of FL will come in due course).

Massachusetts, Likely Obama to Safe Obama: This is the exception to my rule that ratings will not shift based on a single poll. This state was one of the biggest disappointments for the Obama campaign on February 5th, and he has been polling stunningly weak general election numbers ever since, barely edging out McCain in a series of SUSA polls. Yet, and while it appears likely that Hillary Clinton's margin of victory would have been far greater than Obama's, the latest poll released by Suffolk does show Obama distancing McCain by 23%. The thought of Massachusetts's general election being competitive is too ludicrous for me to entertain it without a constant stream of evidence, so this state is moving back where it should be -- though we will keep a close eye on it.

History of Campaign Diaries' electoral ratings:

• June 18th: +22 Obama (238 for Obama [183 base, 55 lean] and 216 for McCain [174, 42])
• June 4th: +20 McCain (207 for Obama [183, 24] and 227 for McCain [174, 53])

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.

Sunday polls: Shifts in the partisan make-up, and unlikely states to host tight races

Today's three presidential surveys come from states that are deemed unlikely to host competitive races but where these polls find some tighter-than-expected results. First and foremost comes Nebraska, a Western state which Bush had no trouble winning 2:1 in 2004 but which Barack Obama might have different thoughts about:

• SUSA finds McCain to be leading 49% to 40%, quite a dramatic drop for the Republican from past results.
  
• Very importantly, SUSA shows tight races in the 1st and 2nd congressional district. In the first, McCain edges Obama 44% to 43%. In the second, McCain is on top 48% to 43%. In the third, McCain is leading 57% to 33%.
  

Nebraska allocates 3 of its 5 electoral voters by district, and this is not the first poll to suggest that Obama might have a good shot at winning the first or second congressional districts, thereby complicating even further our electoral college calculations (by the way, expect the year's first electoral college ratings to be posted in a few days). This is also a sign of trouble for McCain in the Mountain West, as a number of states that are usually not even mentioned at the presidential level could host competitive races this year.

One note, however, about SUSA's series of presidential polls. SUSA's samples are consistently much more Democratic than the 2004 exit polls indicated. This is the case in this Nebraska poll, as the partisan breakdown is 44% Republicans and 38% Democrats while the 2004 exit poll found that 53% of voters were Republicans and 24% Democrats. This is not to say that SUSA's polls are too skewed towards Obama, for there is no doubt that the proportion of self-identified Democrats has considerably risen since the last presidential election and that there is a considerable enthusiasm gap between the two parties, making it credible that the partisan breakdown of this general election will be much more favorable for Obama than the one in 2004.

The fact that SUSA is registering this swing this consistently is amazing news for Obama's chances, for it is hard to see how he could lose the election if there anywhere near the 20% shift that this poll is suggesting. But whether SUSA is registering too much of a swing is open to debate, and it is indeed hard to imagine that there is this much of a change in partisan identification. Other polls are not necessarily finding this dramatic of shifts and it is important to keep in mind that SUSA's assumptions about turnout model, while they could be perfectly right, appear to be leading to results more favorable to Obama.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen released two general election polls of its own:

• First, it found a single-digit race in Louisiana, where McCain leads Obama 50% to 41% and Clinton 47% to 40%. McCain's favorability rating is superiot to Obama's, 55% to 45%.

• Meanwhile, Massachusetts looks Democratic as Obama leads McCain 51% to 38% and Clinton crushes him 60% to 30%.
  

Louisiana's numbers aren't surprising in the sense that the state used to be a battleground, with Bush prevailing over Al Gore by 8% in 2000. But the state has increasingly trended Republican since then, with Bush increasing his winning margin to 15% in 2004. Louisiana should not be the first Southern state to fall if Obama manages to make inroads in the region.

Massachusetts, meanwhile, has become somewhat of a puzzle: Why is Obama struggling to live up to the state's Democratic strength? While a 13% margin is certainly decent, it is underwhelming, especially when we consider that Rasmussen has consistently shown Clinton performing better here, suggesting that Obama is having trouble to catch on. More troubling have been SUSA's surveys, which have repeatedly shown Obama struggling in Massachusetts. The latest, released late April, showed Obama 2% ahead and that was actually an improvement from the March survey that had the two candidates tied.

Friday polls: Will Clinton get a post-PA boost?

Three days after the Pennsylvania primary, Hillary Clinton might have gotten a boost from her Tuesday victory if we believe Gallup's tracking poll. Clinton has recovered from a 10% deficit on April 22nd and has forced a statistical tie, with Obama ahead 48% to 47% in today's results which include interviews conducted on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Gallup adds, "Support for Clinton is significantly higher in these post-primary interviews than it was just prior to her Pennsylvania victory." Gallup also finds Clinton jumping to a lead against McCain, 47% to 45%, while Obama narrowly trails, 46% to 45% -- the first time in a while Clinton's trendline is better than Obama's in Gallup.

Clinton benefited from a similar boost of support in the days immediately following the ABC debate but the race quickly fell back to its pre-debate form. Also, Rasmussen's tracking finds no tightening of the race -- though it is on a four-day average rather than a three-day one like Gallup, so momentum swings take a longer time to register. In the general, Rasmussen finds a similar improvement for Democrats; while McCain is typically strong in Rasmussen, he is today tied with Obama and leads Clinton by 2, 47% to 45%.

The two questions in the coming days will thus be: Will Clinton confirm and maintain a boost? And will that momentum affect numbers in Indiana and North Carolina? For now, the trendline seems to be negative for her in Indiana, though she is certainly in a position to win as a new poll indicates:

• ARG, who came closer in PA than in previous contests, finds Clinton ahead 50% to 45%. At the beginning of April, Clinton was ahead 53% to 44%.
• The partisanship gap is fascinating: Clinton leads by 20% among registered Democrats, Obama is ahead by 31% among independents and Republicans.
  

What Clinton wouldn't give to have Indiana be a closed primary like Indiana... This poll breaks a string of surveys showing a small lead for Obama, and it confirms that Indiana is one of the only states since February 5th in which there is actual uncertainty as to who will win, making the job of setting expectations a bit easier. With both candidates now going all-out in May 6th states, these numbers will certainly evolve in the coming 10 days.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen released two important general election polls:

• First, a poll from Pennsylvania finds that both Democrats have lost ground against McCain in the past two weeks -- suggesting that the increased negativity of the final days might have undermined their appeal. Clinton is now leading McCain 47% to 42% (she led by 9% two weeks ago); Obama trails 44% to 43% (he led by 8% two weeks ago).
• Clinton gets 78% of registered Democrats, Obama only 65%; unfortunately for the Illinois Senator, that's certainly not an outlier. Dozens of polls confirm that he has trouble breaking even the 70% mark among registered Democrats.

• In Massachusetts, both Democrats are ahead by double-digits, with Clinton trouncing McCain 55% to 36% and Obama ahead by a narrower 51% to 39%.

Both sets of numbers are significant. In Massachusetts, first, where a consistent wave of polls has shown that Obama could (stunningly) be in trouble against McCain; the most recent poll has him only ahead by 2%. The Rasmussen poll does show Obama trailing McCain by 5% among independents, suggesting that McCain's appeal among Northeast indies remains strong. Naturally, it is difficult to imagine a Democrat winning the White House without the 12 EVs of MA (even McGovern got them in 72!).

As for Pennsylvania, as troubling as those numbers are for Dems, this is probably as bad as it is going to get for the two Democrats to appeal to each other's supporters. The exit polls on Tuesday suggested that a higher number of voters than usual would be dissatisfied if the candidate they weren't supporting got the nomination. At least some of those will end up joining the Democratic side; the exact proportion that will stay away will determine the nominee's fate come November.

On a last polling note, Rasmussen also released a survey of the Massachusetts Senate race and finds John Kerry trouncing his Republican opponents and staying above 50%; he leads Jeff Beaty 55% to 30% and Jim Ogonowski (who came close to picking up a blue district in a special election in 2007) 53% to 31%. Kerry is likely to coast to re-election but it is worth pointing out that an entrenched incumbent like him could have hoped to come even further ahead against mostly unknown Republicans.

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.
  

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).

General election polls: McCain's electability still on display

Just when we think we've seen the extent of McCain's superior electability come November, here's a new wave of general election polls that looks even more surprising -- even showing McCain potentially winning... Massachusetts. First, here are the most recent national numbers of the new LA Times/Bloomberg poll:

• Clinton and Obama crush Romney, Huckabee and Giuliani with margins they have rarely approached but that are starting to look very common in most national polls released in the past month. Romney is defeated 50-39 (Clinton) and 46-35 (Obama), Giuliani is crushed 53-37 (Clinton) and 49-32 (Obama) and Huckabee is down 51-38 (Clinton) and 47-37 (Obama).
• But McCain runs much better: He trails Clinton 46-42 and is statistically tied with Obama 42-41 (it's unclear who gets 42, as the official version has two different set of numbers). Notice also that Clinton runs slightly better than Barack in this poll, counter to the CW of some that Obama is obviously more electable (polls are very inconsistent in showing which of the Democratic candidates would run stronger).

In a Rasmussen survey of the general election that was released today, John McCain trails both Hillary (47% to 45%) and Obama (46% to 41%). But it is in state polls that McCain's advantage is the most obvious. Consider this wave of SUSA polls from key general election states released over the week-end:

• In California, for example, Democrats do not tremble but McCain does cut Clinton and Obama's lead by half: Hillary leads the Trio of Giuliani, Huck and Romney with margins raging 29% and 36% and she holds off McCain by 19% (58-39). Obama, who has smaller leads against the trio ranging from 18% to 24% only leads McCain by 6%, 50-44.
• In New York, meanwhile, neither Clinton nor Obama have trouble sending Giuliani packing (by 21% and 14% respectively) and they poll even better against Huckabee and Romney. But McCain keeps Clinton at 53% to 40% and Obama falls under 50% in the Empire State, trailing 49% to 43%.
• The most shocking result comes to us from the Massachusetts poll, one of the bluest states in the nation. Romney makes very little inroads in his home-state, the one he governed for 4 years. He trails Clinton by 24% and Obama by 13%. The pair of Democrats perform much better against Giuliani and Huckabee (who trails by more than 30%). But look at McCain's results: He is behind only 4% against Clinton (49% to 45%) and he leads Barack Obama 50% to 45%. That's right, McCain manages a lead in what is arguably the country's most liberal state.

The Democrats obviously cannot afford to spend a single minute thinking about NY, CA and MA come the general election. With polls showing them competitive against the GOP in places like KS and VA the list thing they want is to be on the defense in some of their most important states. Notice also that Giuliani was the candidate proud of putting these kind of states in play for a long time, but that he is doing nothing for the Republican ticket.

Also, I think it is fair to conclude that Barack Obama runs significantly poorly in staunch blue states than Hillary Clinton, as he does in very red states (like Kansas and Virginia). He often looks more electable in states that are less partisan (such as Iowa), suggesting that Clinton rallies her base very effectively and Obama reaches to independents better -- and both are weak at what the other does well. And while it is important to be able to reach out and win purple states, it is also important to be able to expand the map and not have to play too much defense.

SUSA also released three polls from swing states which are even more indicative of McCain's strength and they also confirm that Obama looks better in purple states than he does in either blue or red states. Take a look at these set of numbers:

• In New Mexico, Clinton has slight leads against the trio (1% to 5% only), but she is demolished 51% to 42% by McCain. Obama's lead is larger against the trio (8% to 10%) but he trails by just as much against McCain, 50% to 41%.
• On to Wisconsin, one of the hottest states in both 2000 and 2004. Clinton leads from 4% against Huck to 8% against Rudy -- but she trails 49% to 45% against McCain. Obama leads 10% against Huck to 13% against Rudy -- but he trails 46% to 44% against McCain.
• Finally comes Minnesota, a slightly blue trending state that Clinton leads from 8% to 11% against the trio. She once again trails against McCain, however, 49% to 45%. Obama leads the trio 7% (against Huck) to 19% (against Romney) but he trails McCain by an even bigger margin, 49% to 42%. That's right, McCain runs 26% better than Romney.

6 polls, and McCain runs better than his rivals 6 times, and it's not close. We are talking about wild improvements here, in the 15%+ range. And he wins MN and NM convincingly, two states Democrats would need to do very well in to capture the White House.

3 polls from blue states, and Clinton hardly trembles. 3 polls from purple states, and Obama's margins are bigger -- but that goes both ways, as his floor is lower as well. That is both the strength and weakness of Obama in the general election. His supporters are more uncommitted, he is less well known so he can rise higher or fall lower. Clinton both has a low ceiling and high floor.

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.