Tuesday polls: Obama pulls ahead in OH and is competitive in NC, while Franken and McConnell are in trouble

Finally, after weeks of being bombarded by polls from New York, Kansas and Washington State, someone thought to poll the presidential race in Ohio – and it brings welcome news to Obama’s campaign:

• Public Policy Polling released its first survey in quite a while and it shows Barack Obama trouncing John McCain 50% to 39%. As usual, Obama is weaker among registered Dems (73%) than McCain is among registered Republicans (83%). Obama is leading by 13% among independents, however. As for potential VP picks, respondents seem more inclined to be swayed by Hillary Clinton than by their governor Ted Strickland.
• Update: A commenter points out that this survey was in the field on the 17th and 18th of May. This is very strange indeed, as it represents more than a 3 week delay... Did PPP not even poll Hillary Clinton against McCain then? At the time, most pollsters did.
  

A long series of polls showing Obama weak in Ohio or at least significantly underperforming Clinton (including PPP's most recent survey released in March, repeated waves of Quinnipiac's polls and Rasmussen's May poll) was interrupted by SUSA's showing Obama comfortably ahead of McCain mid-May. PPP's poll is the first since then. Given how much care the Obama campaign is putting in cultivating alternative electoral maps that do would not require victory in Florida and Ohio, the state's 20 electoral votes almost seem like they would be a bonus that would all but ensure the Democrat's victory -- though with McCain's apparent strength in Michigan, it is essential for Democrats to contest Ohio to offset a potential disaster in Michigan.

The day's other important presidential poll is the much-discussed ABC/Washignton Post national poll:

• Barack Obama leads 48% to 42%, a margin that is little moved since ABC's previous poll, suggesting there has been little movement since the Democrat wrapped up his nomination. The WaPo is emphasizing the fact that the two candidates are tied among independents.
• Another national poll, released by Cook/RT Strategies, shows Obama leading 44% to 40%.

Last week, after the NBC polled found Obama leading by 6%, I criticized the obsession with pointing out that Kerry had never led in NBC polls in 2004 and that Bush had never beeh ahead by that much either. I pointed out that, in many other polls, Kerry had a clear lead in the early summer and that Bush was repeatedly ahead by 9-11% in September. The ABC poll is a case in point: Now, everyone is pointing out that John Kerry had the same lead in an ABC poll taken at this time four years ago. So which is it? Is an Obama lead significant because Kerry never led or significant because he was the favorite? It is important to look at a pollster's trendlines because of methodology and turnout models, but the pollster-specific comparisons of surveys that are four years apart does not seem to me to be particularly helpful.

What is somewhat significant in recently released national polls is that predictions by strategists from both camps that Obama could open a double-digit lead in the weeks after becoming the nominee have not come true, though the Democrat is consistently ahead. But it is the electoral college, of course, that will determine the winner and two important state polls were released today besides Ohio’s:

• In North Carolina, polls are now consistently showing McCain’s leading hovering around the margin of error. The latest Civitas poll finds him barely ahead 45% to 41%, with Bob Barr polling in at 2%. Last month, McCain was up by 5%.


• In Minnesota, SUSA finds Obama struggling to pull ahead, coming in at 47% against 46% for McCain. He was ahead by 5% in a poll taken two weeks ago, though that swing is within the margin of error. The big difference is the flip of the indie vote.

It is difficult to imagine North Carolina flipping if a state like Virginia does not, underscoring how close to a blow-out victory Obama would get if he keeps NC this close through November. As for Minnesota, so much for my speculations that Obama might be putting away the “Dukakis 5,” though it’s worth pointing out that most other recent MN surveys finding a more comfortable lead for Obama. But it is SUSA’s Senate poll from this state that has got to worry Democrats:

• Norm Coleman has opened up a significant lead against Al Franken, 52% to 40%, though this is stable from last month's poll that showed the Democrat trailing 52% to 42%. Franken loses the independent vote 60% to 33%.
  
• If Jesse Ventura jumps in the race (it is the second time this week this match-up is polled), Franken trails 41% to 31% with 23% for Ventura. In a sure sign of trouble for Franken, Mike Ciresi, a Democrat who dropped out of the race in February, polls slightly better than him against Coleman: 50% to 40%.

• Also today, Rasmussen released a survey of Alaska's Senate race, finding Ted Stevens surviving 46% to 44% against Mark Begich, who was narrowly ahead 47% to 45% last month. Other surveys have found larger leads for Begich.

Al Franken has been suffering through months of bad press, as controversies over tax disclosures, a 2000 essay in Playboy and a 1995 joke on rape erupted in recent weeks. Yet, polls found little movement in this (very often) polled race. But SUSA's survey is obviously bad news for the Democratic challenger as it goes along the narrative of a sinking campaign. That Franken polls roughly at the same level as a candidate who has not been campaigning for 5 months suggests that he is now underperforming the level of a generic Democrat.

Update: SUSA just released a fascinating new poll from Kentucky:

• In the presidential race, John McCain leads Obama 53% to 41%. This is a huge progression from a May poll in which Obama trailed by 24%. Look no further than the vote of registered Democrat, Obama has gone from... 48% to 59%! Still a very low number, but one that is now in line with what you would expect in Kentucky.
• In the Senate race, however, Mitch McConnell is only ahead of Bruce Lunsford 50% to 46%!

I for one have long remained unconvinced that Lunsford would be a real threat to McConnell, and given how nightmarish he would be for progressives, it is certainly my top wish among GOP-held seats. But this now the second poll that finds Lunsford to be very competitive and there is no doubt that unseating the Minority Leader would be a huge upset. Given that the DSCC is looking for second and third-tier seats to make competitive to have a shot at 60, this is not the last we will hear of Kentucky.

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.

Monday polls: The Barr effect and the difference between the Northeast and the Northwest

There will be a lot more discussion of the general election map in the coming days, as the primary season wraps to a close. For now, we get a few interesting state polls, including our first look at the potential Barr effect. While Georgia is the Southern state in which the former congressman and current Libertarian candidate should have the most impact, PPP released a poll of North Carolina in which it included Barr's name:

• Barr gets 6% of the vote in both match-ups and helps Democrats draw close to John McCain, as Barack Obama trails 43% to 40% and Hillary Clinton is behind 39% to 34%.
  
• Note that it is rare to have the match-up including Clinton have such a higher proportion of undecided voters.

In 2004, Ralph Nader was not always included in polls but he ended up being a non-factor anyway, as voters who might have been hesitating between the Democratic Party and Nader remembered the lesson of 2000; also, Nader was not running as the Green Party's candidate so his spot was not guaranteed on state ballots. Will this year be different? Third-party candidates included on the ballot sometimes tend to appear stronger than they actually are (remember Rasmussen's strange poll that showed Stephen Colbert at 13%?), but there is no question that Bob Barr polling anywhere near 5% would make it very difficult for McCain to hold on to a number of states, as Barr would pull from disaffected Republicans who would be choosing between him and their party's nominee.

Complicating the picture for Republicans is the fact that the Libertarian Party has an automatic spot on the ballot in most states, so there is very little room for the GOP to maneuver and keep the former Republican congressman off the ballot, as Democrats did to Ralph Nader in 2004. PPP is the first pollster to include Barr in its poll but it would be good to have more match-ups try his name if he has the potential of being a disruptive force.

The second interesting poll of the day comes to us from Connecticut, where Rasmussen finds a close presidential race:

• Obama is only ahead of McCain 47% to 44% while Clinton is leading 48% to 42%.
  

Even more than fellow Tri-State Area state New Jersey, Connecticut could surprise us this year by hosting a competitive race. It is no secret that McCain believes he can appeal to independent voters and plans to campaign accordingly. Connecticut should be a good target for him as it is is much less of an automatic Democratic state than people think. Kerry won by 10% in 2004, and McCain will probably point to Lieberman's victory in 2006 as evidence of what he could accomplish. But ultimately, it would be a huge surprise to have any of the solid Kerry states shift this year given how toxic the national environment has become for the GOP since then.

Finally, SUSA released three general election polls from states that Democrats won in both 2000 and 2004, albeit not without trembling:

• In Minnesota, Obama is leading by a narrow 47% to 42%. McCain leads in a number of match-ups that include vice-presidential candidates, by as much as 8% if he selects the state's governor Pawlenty.

• In Washington, McCain is crushed 52% to 36%. The best he can muster is trailing by 5% if he selectes Romney and Obama selects Hagel.

• In Oregon, Obama also dominates, ahead of McCain 49% to 39%.
  

Washington and Oregon have long been two of the states in which Obama has polled the most strongly in the general election. Just as he is looking in the direction of the Northeast, McCain is also determined to put the two relatively swing states of the Northwest in play (Oregon and Washington). But the Western independents have become one of Obama's strongest constituencies, so much so that it appears that the Illinois Senator could be competitive in a number of Mountain West states. Unlike Northeastern independents among which McCain has strong appeal (see New Hampshire), Washington and to a lesser extent Oregon are clearly starting out in Obama's camp.

Week-end polls: In case anyone had illusions about Clinton's June 3rd chances

The first poll of the Montana primary -- not a contest that was expected to ever be surveyed -- suggests that June 3rd should not allow Hillary Clinton to close the primary season on a high note. Mason-Dixon shows Barack Obama leading 52% to 35%, and there is every reason to believe that Clinton's road is as tough in South Dakota.

Naturally, these two primaries award very few delegates (31 combined, versus 55 in Puerto Rico two days earlier). But since Clinton's goal seems to be to find an argument to stay in the race as long as possible, there is no doubt that two harsh defeats on the last Election Night will not bode well for her campaign's rationale in the days following June 3rd, days in which the remaining uncommitted superdelegates are expected to pick their side at an increasing speed. DemCon Watch details this week's updates, and finds that Obama picked up 3 supers to Clinton's one (all were add-on, and Clinton's surprisingly came from Georgia).

Meanwhile, a list of general election polls were released today:

• First, Gallup's national tracking poll is noteworthy for it shows one of the largest differentials between Clinton and Obama's performance that it has recorded since the tracking started a while ago. Today, Obama trails 49% to 44% while Clinton leads 47% to 45%.

• Meanwhile, Mason-Dixon's Montana poll shows possibly tight races, though McCain is predictably starting ahead. He leads Clinton 50% to 39% and Obama 47% to 39%. Bush won 59% to 39% four years ago.

• In neighboring Nebraska, however, Research 2000 crushes Democratic hopes of picking up a few electoral votes with Obama's candidacy. McCain trounces Obama 57% to 29% (leading by wide margins in all congressional districts) and leads Clinton 58% to 28%. A Rasmussen poll and a SUSA poll released in the past few months showed much tighter results.

• Meanwhile, in California, an LA Times poll should send shills down Democrats' spine, as McCain is very close to both Democrats: 47% to 40% against Obama, 43% to 40% against Clinton. Two polls released Friday showed both Dems up double-digits.

• Finally, a North Carolina poll by Civitas has a tight race between McCain and Obama, with the Republican leading 44% to 39%.
  

The California numbers are significant, for if a series of polls in the next few weeks show the potential of a single-digit race, the Democratic nominee will be forced to spend resources to defend this large state with expensive media markets even if the GOP campaign does not attempt anything. Democrats can take no risk in California, as the loss of its 55 electoral votes would leave no road to the White House.

The Western states are also interesting, for it is a central part of Obama's argument of a different electoral map that states that have traditionally not been receptive to Democrats -- places like North Dakota, some congressional districts in Nebraska, Montana -- could warm up to him. Polls are telling a conflicting picture about this, as Obama has polled very strongly in some polls (in Alaska, Nebraska) but more poorly in some. All these states have very few electoral votes, so the loss/gain of one would not necessarily determine the election (though it could, as Al Gore learned in 2000).

In one last polling note, Research 2000 also conducted a survey of the Nebraska Senate race and found Mike Johanns leading Scott Kleeb by a wide 58% to 31%. A Rasmussen poll released last week found Johanns ahead 55% to 40%, a more promising picture for the Democrats. But this merely confirms what we already know: What was a very promising race at some point in the fall is now among the most difficult for Democrats, as Johanns is a very popular and well-known politician of a very Republican state. This is a rare congressional open seat in which the GOP looks to have saved itself through recruiting.

Presidential polls: Obama weak in Florida, strong in CO, as Clinton posts surprising NC numbers

A lot of presidential polls to digest today, as SUSA, Rasmussen and two other polling groups released new match-ups for a total of 8 states with some surprises and some expected results. The most interesting come from the pair of Southern states that the Obama campaign believes it can put in play:

• In North Carolina, SUSA finds surprising results: Hillary Clinton is leading McCain 49% to 43%, while Obama is trailing 51% to 43%. As usual, Clinton's advantage is derived from women (she leads McCain by 19% while Obama trails by 1%) and by registered Democrat, among whom her lead is 20% superior to Obama's.

• In Virginia, a VCU Commonwealth poll shows that McCain is leading both Democrats, 44% to 36% against Obama and 47% to 38% against Clinton. One puzzling internal is that Obama only gets a 41% to 36% in Northern Virginia, a region he will have to win by a much bigger margin to make the state competitive.

With all the talk of Obama putting the Carolinas and Virginia (some even add other Southern states to the list) in play, it is easy to forget that until February Clinton polled systematically better than Obama in the South and in non-Western red states. This was true in Kentucky, surely, but also in states like Virginia. It is still surprising to see Clinton poll that much better than her rival in North Carolina, a state in which Obama trounced Hillary and a state which his campaign is prompt to put on the competitive list. There is no question that a race in single-digit is already a victory for Democrats, since they had difficulty reaching that point in 2004 even with that Edwards on the ticket; the same is true in Virginia. But to prevail in one or both of these states Obama will have to improve his showing among registered Democrats: They should be his base, but he often has trouble solidifying it.

Another important poll that was just released is Rasmussen's latest from Florida:

• McCain leads Obama handily, 50% to 40% (this is actually a 5% improvement for Obama). But he trails Clinton 47% to 41%.
  

Rasmussen's poll from Ohio found a very similar set of results a few days ago, prompting me to write early musings on Obama's electoral map and the fact that he appears constantly weak in Ohio and Florida polls. Whatever the reason -- McCain looks to be stronger than most Republicans among elderly, Hispanics and possibly Jewish voters while Obama has possible weaknesses among these groups -- Florida does look like one of the states where Clinton could have fared better, as Rasmussen's poll suggest and as the latest Quinnipiac poll confirmed (Clinton beat McCain by 8% while Obama trailed by 1%). This means that Obama will rely on an alternative electoral map, one based on states in which he appears stronger than Clinton, for instance Colorado:

• The latest Rasmussen poll from Colorado finds Obama besting McCain 48% to 42% while McCain beats Clinton 47% to 44%.
  

Colorado's 9 electoral votes are even more within reach considering that the Democratic convention will be held in Denver. Kerry got surprisingly close in 2004, and Obama strongly appeals to the Western independents whose support is key to changing the state's allegiance. If Democrats carry the state this year, Colorado will have gone through a very rapid switch from reliably red to blue state within 3 election cycles. And in other polling news:

• Missouri is another red state that will be very hotly contested in the coming months, certainly more than Kerry went for it in 2004. SUSA finds Clinton faring a bit better, besting McCain 48% to 46% while Obama narrowly trails 48% to 45%.
• The differential between the two Democrats is mainly due to the registered Democrats vote, as Clinton gets 82% to Obama's 72%.

• In the day's least interesting poll, Deseret confirms that McCain has no reason to worry about Utah's electoral votes. He leads 65% to 20% against Clinton and 62% to 27% against Obama.

Finally, SUSA released two polls from blue states testing potential veepstakes. I am not particularly interested in the VP match-ups in that most of the names have very low name recognition and the test is mostly a measure of that. There seems to be little question that John Edwards and Mike Huckabee help their party's nominees the most, but that is also a reflection on the other tested names not being very well known. So I am here only providing the hard matchup numbers:

• In Pennsylvania, Obama is ahead of McCain 48% to 40%. View more VP match-ups here, as I will only say that it is interesting that the inclusion of Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell does not help the Democratic ticket at all.

• In California, Obama leads McCain 49% to 41%. View the numbers with VP match-ups here.
  

The first margin is strong for Obama, though there is no question that he would rather lead by a larger percentage in California to ensure that he will not have to spend a single minute or a single dime defending the country's largest state, and one without which no Democrat can reach the White House. Finally, Democracy Corps released a national poll that shows both Democrats leading McCain by 2 percent.

Southern polls: North Carolina and Virginia will be battlegrounds

The West Virginia primary feels very much like Mississippi's on March 11th. It comes the week after a major Election Day and there is no suspense, hardly even on the margin of victory. 24 hours from polls opening, a new poll from WV combined to a poll from Kentucky (which votes next Tuesday) confirms how difficult the Appalachians region is for Obama and how disastrous those two states' results could be:

• In West Virginia, Suffolk University shows Clinton leading 60% to 24% for Obama. That's 71% of the two-person vote, more than what Clinton got in Arkansas.
• While Clinton has a favorability rating of 70%, only 44% of Democrats have a favorable impression of him.
  

• In Kentucky, Research 2000 finds a slightly 'smaller' Clinton lead, 58% to 31%.

• Update: SUSA has released a new poll from Kentucky as well, finding Clinton ahead 62% to 30%, a 2:1 margin which is actually a 2% progression for Obama! In Eastern Kentucky, the Appalachian region bordering West Virginia, Clinton gets 84%! Could Obama fail to reach the viability level in a district?
  

Those numbers might seem excessive but they are certainly realistic. Not only are they confirmed by other polls but they also conform to what we have been seeing in districts surrounding West Virginia in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania and in which Clinton routinely got 70%. Of the 5 counties of Ohio that border West Virginia, Clinton crossed 70% in 4 of them and got more than 77% in 3.

Obama's difficulty in winning these regions -- whether linked to racism or whether due to the primary's class-divide, with blue-collar voters dominating these regions being Clinton's base -- probably make West Virginia and Kentucky lost causes in the general election: With only 44% of Democrats having a favorable impression of him in WV, Obama has no path to a majority. That's not a concern in Kentucky but Democrats might have been looking to put West Virginia in play, as it had long been a blue state before increasingly turning red starting in 2000.

Note, however, that a series of polls taken this fall had Clinton and Edwards looking stunningly competitive in Kentucky, often leading Republicans, while Obama struggled (for example this one). As I have noted many times, both Democrats have regions of the country in which they would be clearly stronger than the other, and this is one Obama is weaker in. The Research 2000 poll referenced above also included some general election numbers with Clinton struggling but performing 13 percent better than Obama in Kentucky:

• McCain leads Clinton 53% to 41% and leads Obama 58% to 33%. Bush beat Kerry 60% to 40% in 2004.
  

Meanwhile, three new polls today show that Democrats would be very competitive in Virginia and in North Carolina, two states the GOP has not thought about in recent elections but which it could now have a lot of trouble defending:

• In Virginia, Rasmussen finds McCain leading Obama 47% to 44% and Clinton 47% to 41%. That's a great improvement for Dems since the end of March where their numbers had fallen to trailing by double-digits.
  
• Obama's favorability rating (51%) is lower than McCain's but he has more viewing him "very favorably".

• In North Carolina, Rasmussen finds similar results, with McCain leading both Democrats by 3 percent, 47% to 44% against Obama and 43% to 40% against Clinton. That's an improvement for Clinton but actually a slight drop for Obama who was tied with McCain in the last poll.
  

• Finally, Public Policy Polling released a poll from North Carolina as well, confirming that hte race is competitive without being quite as positive for Democrats than Rasmussen: McCain leads Obama 49% to 42% while Clinton trails 46% to 38%.

Virginia has been expected to be a swing state given the state's rapidly changing demographics and the Democrats' statewide success in recent years (Kaine, Webb). North Carolina is more of a surprise, after Democrats failed to put it in play in 2004 despite picking Edwards as their vice-presidential candidate. There is no question that forcing the GOP to defend both would be a great victory for Obama, but we should soon move beyond surprise that the state is competitive and start giving McCain credit for still being ahead. After all, Virginia and Colorado are two states who think of as red that the Obama campaign puts at the top of its priorities.

Two Senate surveys came with the polls listed above and they both bring good news for Democrats:

• Rasmussen confirms that Mark Warner is heavily favored to pick up Virginia's senate seat, as he leads Jim Gilmore 55% to 37%. 37% have a very favorable impression of Warner, and 29% have a somewhat favorable one (Gilmore's numbers are 15-33). It's hard to beat those numbers.

• More interestingly, PPP released numbers from the North Carolina Senate race. They find Elizabeth Dole leading 48% to 43% against Democrat Kay Hagan.

PPP's numbers are better for Dole than Rasmussen's shocking survey last week finding Hagan leading by 1%. But every poll that shows Dole this vulnerable is still a surprise. Hagan is considered a second-tier candidate at best, and few signs pointed to Democrats making it this tight this quickly with this little effort. Given that NC is (was?) about 10th on the Democrats' priority list, they will certainly take any poll that shows Dole under 50% and leading by single-digits.

Monday polls: Mixed general election numbers, as Clinton gains in Indiana

It looks like this morning's ARG poll will be the only numbers out of Pennsylvania's primary we will see today. But numerous general election surveys were released today, as well as a primary poll from the very important state of Indiana. (This survey was conducted from Friday to Sunday, so many interviews were conducted while people were being bombarded with stories about Obama's comments.)

• SUSA finds Clinton expanding her lead in the May 6th primary, now ahead 55% to 39%. This includes a 27% lead among registered Democrats, with Obama owing his survival to registered Republicans (+20%) and independents (+12%).

If Clinton survives Pennsylvania, she will have to strike again on May 6th, the next primary day. That involves getting a big victory in Indiana; the assumption until the first SUSA poll was released was that the state would be evenly divided, but Hillary looks strong with 3 weeks to go; her strength among registered Democrats is very important, for the main argument she has left with superdelegates is Obama's weakness among Dems, particularly blue-collar voters. Combine SUSA's numbers from Indiana with the string of recent Pennsylvania polls showing Clinton on the rebound, and voters are showing no intention of forcing the Democratic primary to come to a close.

But Clinton also needs to stay close in North Carolina, which also votes on May 6th. She has no room for error, and a blow-out in NC would offset any convincing victory she gets in Indiana -- both delegate-wise and symbolically. And this is a state Clinton has been unable to move numbers in for quite some time now:

• PPP's latest poll, released this afternoon, shows Clinton leading 54% to 34%. This is the third week the margin has held statistically stable.

Depending on how large victories Clinton gets in Indiana and Pennsylvania, she could have some wiggle room in North Carolina. But this primary will be the largest remaining once Pennsylvania gets done on April 22nd, so there is no doubt a 20% defeat would be very damaging.

Meanwhile, there were a number of general election polls released today -- and they bring good and bad news for all three candidates:

• In Pennsylvania, a Temple University poll (conducted over a long period) shows both Democrats posting a large lead against McCain. Clinton is up 51% to 40%, while Obama leads 47% to 40%.

• In Michigan, renown pollster EPIC-MRA finds Obama edging McCain 43% to 41%, while Clinton is trounced 46% to 37%.
  
• Proof of McCain's strength is supplied by the generic numbers, as he overperforms: A generic Democrat leads a generic Republican 43% to 31%.

• In Florida, Clinton edges out McCain 45% to 44%; but the Republican trounces Obama by a stunningly large margin, 53% to 38%. McCain is viewed favorably by 62% of voters, far outpacing Clinton (49%) and Obama (42%).
  

• In North Carolina, Rasmussen finds that it is Obama who is surprisingly strong, as he ties McCain at 47% in a traditionally red state; McCain leads Clinton 51% to 40%.

The Pennsylvania numbers are interesting in that they are further evidence that Democrats might be gaining a boost in the Keystone state because of the extended primary -- something I discussed in more detail just last week. With both Democrats spending millions on ads in mostly positive advertisement, they are gaining a crucial edge on McCain in one of the most important battlegrounds of the country.

On the other hand, Michigan has to be considered an increasingly worrisome state for Democrats. This is a must-win state for them, one that flirted with Bush in 2000 and 2004 but about which Democrats were never that worried. Even if Obama performs much better than Clinton, he is locked in a toss-up against the Arizona Senator in a contest Democrats should have a clear edge on given how important the economy is for Michigan.

Finally, it is starting to look quite consistently that Obama would have more difficulty than Clinton in Florida (the Rasmussen poll looks very similar to the Quinnipiac survey released last week); some even say that an Obama campaign would pretty much give up on the Sunshine state. Obama, of course, has his own red states that he would make competitive and his campaign argues that he would create a new electoral map; Clinton has more difficulty in (Colorado, for instance). North Carolina, Rasmussen suggests, is also one of them.

Monday polls: Nevada promises to stay tight, North Carolina leans red

A few polls this morning from Rasmussen, who released two state general election surveys to complement its national tracking. Democrats are continuing to look weak nationally, as today's numbers show McCain lading Obama 50% to 41% and Clinton 49% to 42%. This is the first time McCain is reaching 50% against Obama in Rasmussen's tracking, and his continued dominance comes at a time in which most other polls are showing Obama starting to recover from his post-Wright fall. Those include Rasmussen's two state polls:

• In Nevada, McCain very narrowly trails both Democrats, 45% to 41% against Obama and 44% to 43% against Clinton.

The only reason Nevada is not considered one of the core swing states of this election is that it only has 5 electoral votes; but there is every reason to believe that it will be one of the tighest states of the year. It traditionally votes Republican but has become solidly purple in recent cycles. John Kerry got very close to picking up Nevada in 2004.

Democrats know that they have to make inroads out West: The end-of-decade census will lead to Western states to pick up more electoral votes at the expense of the Northeast and the Midwest, and the party would have a very tough time in the presidential election in 2012 and beyond if it cannot count on states like Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado.

• In North Carolina, the situation looks better for McCain, who leads Clinton 50% to 34% and Obama 51% to 42%.
  

North Carolina should not be considered a safe Republican state, but it will clearly be an uphill fight for the Democratic nominee. Kerry failed to really move numbers in 2004 despite the presence of John Edwards on his ticket. But the Obama-McCain match-up is within single-digits, after all. It is difficult to imagine North Carolina becoming blue if neighboring Virginia does not do so as well, so if numbers in Virginia start moving away from Republicans (most polls right now show a toss-up) Democrats will be allowed to think of expanding the field to North Carolina and force McCain to play defense there.

In other poll-related news, Robert Novak's latest column in the Washington Post reveals that private polls taken in Pennsylvania showed Clinton expanding her lead way beyond a double-digit edge but that the Obama campaign started telling superdelegates on Friday that their numbers are "coming back" in Pennsylvania and Indiana. No exact numbers are provided but it is clear that a large Clinton victory in PA followed by a solid May 6th would guarantee that Hillary stays in the race and prolongs the nomination fight, no matter whether she still has a chance of tying him in pledged delegates. However likely it is that Obama becomes the nominee, he will have to get some key wins in May to avoid dragging this out to August.

Wednesday polls: General election toss-ups

Four general election surveys were released today, with very little consistency in the issue of the electability gap between the Democrats, but all showing John McCain in a strong position -- much stronger than his former GOP rivals appeared to be a few weeks ago:
Wednesday

• First, Quinnipiac released a general election survey which shows both Democrats barely edging out the Arizona Senator -- 44-42 for Clinton and 42-40 for Obama -- in a state either will have to win come November.
• This poll is very interesting because it underscored just how different the two candidates' core constituencies are. Among Democrats, Clinton gets 80% and Obama only 69%! Among independents, Clinton trails by 2% and Obama leads by 5%. Both Obama and Clinton are weak in one of those groups and they will have to be strong if they want to build a solid majority.


• In Ohio, a University of Cincinnati survey shows Obama edging out McCain 48% to 47% and McCain leading Clinton 51% to 47%. SUSA's recent poll from Ohio has shown Democrats in a slightly stronger position.


• Next, a poll from Tennessee gives a clear edge to John McCain who crushes Obama 53% to 37%. Clinton runs much better than Obama here and makes the race competitive: 45% to 41%. Until recently, Clinton used to systematically run ahead of her Democratic rival in Southern states.

• In North Carolina, finally, a new poll shows McCain in a strong position, crushing both Democrats by double-digits, 48% to 36% against Hillary and 46% to 36% against Obama. PPP released a poll from NC a week ago that showed the Republican ahead by 5% against both Democrats.

No earth-shattering numbers here. The question this early in the campaign is in what states will the general election campaign really engage in, what states look competitive with a McCain candidacy? These numbers from NC and TN -- the kind of states in which some of the Republican candidates looked particularly weak -- should offer the GOP some comfort that they won't have to put just as much defense here, though there is little doubt that the map will be significantly more expanded than it was in 2004 and that we should get used to the fact that many states that were on no one's radar screen then will host some very competitive races this year.

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.

Campaign picking up: Club for Growth attacks, and Rasmussen polls

Club for Growth has been going after Mike Huckabee for weeks now, even before his phenomenal November surge started. Pat Toomey its president had written a very vitriolic diatribe against Huckabee in late October in the National Review. And then they started running Iowa ads blasting Huckabee when he started to surge.

They have now increased their ad buy by $175,000 which can buy a significant amount of air time in Iowa, for this ad (YouTube link, so watch it there). So Iowans can now expect to see it even more. The ad showcases a Huckabee press conference in which the then-Arkansas Governor implores the Democratic legislature of sending him any kind of tax hike (and he launches in a big list).

I'm unclear as to why Club for Growth is not choosing to run another ad since there is surely plenty of material they can use; how useful can the same ad in three week rotation be after all? Especially when Huckabee's numbers haven't moved that much over the past month. Clearly, the angle of attack is one that can hurt Huckabee greatly given how important taxes are to the Republican base; and Huckabee is taking a huge risk by going all out in the populist direction -- though he clearly thinks the benefits could be significant.

• Rasmussen releases state polls: NC, IL, MI

Rasmussen comes out with a bunch of state polls today from states that could prove very interesting come election day.

First up, Illinois where Barack Obama runs much better than Hillary Clinton. That is not in itself a surprise given that it is Obama's home-state, but Clinton is much weaker than she should be in a very blue state:

• Obama beats Rudy Giuliani 51% to 31%. He is ahead of Mike Huckabee 54% to 30%.
• Hilary Clinton barely comes ahead of Rudy Giuliani 46% to 40% and Mike Huckabee 45% to 41%.

Next comes North Carolina, a reliably red state that Dems failed to make any inroads in in 2004 despite Edwards's presence on the ticket. And there have been many polls to suggest that Democrats would be very competitive (for example this one taken two weeks ago), and this latest Rasmussen poll is no exception:

• Hillary leads Romney 42% to 40% and is statistically tied with Giuliani 40% to 39%. She does trail McCain 45-50 but it's Huckabee who does the best, 46-39.
• Rasmussen did not test Edwards or Obama, despite the fact that it would surely be very interesting to see whether Edwards can carry his home-state. The PPP poll I linked to above has him leading Republicans.

Having Illinois and North Carolina as tight purple states would naturally be a huge expansion of the map on both parts in 2008. Michigan looks more solidly anchored blue in the Rasmussen poll, though it is clear that the Democratic nominee will have to fight for it just as Gore and Kerry had to in the past 2 cycles:

• Clinton leads both Huckabee and Giuliani 45% to 36%. It is Romney who comes the closest in the state of which his father was Governor, trailing 45% to 39%.
• Barack Obama leads Giuliani 46% to 38% and Huckabee 46% to 37%.

Remember when seeing these numbers that Michigan has a GOP primary on January 15th, and that Romney's natural edge in the state that this poll confirms could definitely help him here (though it will probably not do so if he can't carry Iowa or New Hampshire).

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.