Monday polls: Why can't every day have more polls from Utah than from Pennsylvania?

A number of presidential polls were released over the past 24 hours, including (strangely enough) two polls from Utah. While Barack Obama might be putting a lot of red states in play this year, Utah, which gave George Bush 72% of the vote in 2004, is not one of them. In both polls, however, there is a narrow tightening compared to the 2004 margin:

• Deseret finds McCain crushing Obama 57% to 29%.
  
• Rasmussen's poll shows it a bit narrower, with McCain leading 52% to 33%.
  

While Utah might not be high up on Obama's priority list, a traditionally staunchly red state that is looking like a surprising bright spot for Democrats this year is Alaska. There have been a number of presidential polls finding a tight race, including Rasmussen's latest survey showing McCain leading Obama by 4% last week. Add to it now another poll, commissioned and leaked by the DSCC:

• McCain and Obama are in a toss-up, with the Republican edging out the Democrat 44% to 42% with 3% for Bob Barr.
• This poll was actually mentioned in the Washington Post a few days ago but came to my attention only now.
  

The Alaska Republican Party is in a particularly bad shape, with many of its major figures entangled in a corruption scandal that is threatening to end the careers of Rep. Young and Sen. Stevens in the coming months. That dismal predicament is spilling over to the presidential race, as Alaska voters are clearly not as eager as usual to support a Republican candidate. And the positive effect is mutual: Down-the-ballot Democrats running in a red state in a presidential year have to fight counter-current and escape negative coattails, so for Obama to truly contest Alaska (and he has an ad buy there) will help Democrats in the Senate and House races.

Other major polls released today include:

• Rasmussen's latest survey from Pennsylvania, that finds Obama leading 46% to 42%, up from a 2% lead last month but down from an 8% lead in early April.
  
• Obama's favorability rating (58%) is comparable to McCain's (57%) though Obama has higher very favorable and very unfavorable numbers.

• In Oregon, the latest SUSA poll finds Obama dropping from a 9% lead to a 3% lead, 48% to 45%. The partisan ID is comparable to 2004's in this poll, whereas SUSA usually shows a swing towards the Democrats.

• Finally, Obama gets good news from New Mexico in the latest Rasmussen poll. He leads 47% to 39%, holding on to his May lead.
  

It's difficult to know what to think of New Mexico as Rasmussen and SUSA are the only institute to release polls from the state. If Obama can manage to win back New Mexico and Iowa (the only two Gore states won by Bush in 2004), he will only be 5 electoral votes from a tie, making those early leads in both NM and IA particularly important. Much of the outcome of the race in New Mexico will depend on the Hispanic vote, but it's worth noting that the state was among the closest in the country in both 2004 and 2000.

As for Pennsylvania, I moved the state to the Lean Democratic column in my second presidential ratings last week. That was not meant to imply that the race is no longer competitive -- indeed every sign, including this poll, suggest that it will -- but that it is possible to say that Obama has a slight edge there based on a narrow but consistent lead in polls, massive gains by his party in registration results and the state's move towards safer blue in 2006. But there is no question that McCain will play very heavily in the Keystone state, and Republicans are no doubt aware that the margin here was tighter than in Ohio back in 2004. Pennsylvania is as close to a must-win as Democrats have in the list of swing states, as it would be difficult for Democrats to overcome the loss of these 21 electoral votes. And would the loss of PA not seal that of Ohio and perhaps of Michigan?

Finally, we got down-the-ballot polls today:

• In New Mexico, Rasmussen finds that Tom Udall is still increasing his lead over Republican Steve Pearce, now trouncing him 58% to 30%. Udall's favorability rating is 66%, compared to 54% for Pearce.

• In TX-32, an internal poll for the Democratic challenger's campaign finds Eric Roberson trailing Rep. Pete Sessions 52% to 43%.
  

Steve Pearce might have hoped for a bounce off his primary victory, but this race appears to be increasingly in the bag for Democrats. Combine it with Virginia and New Hampshire, and that's a very likely base of 3 gains for Senate Democrats. But I am very skeptical of the TX-32 survey -- as we should often remember to be with internal polls. Roberson is an unknown candidate with little money in a district that has been gerrymandered to insure Republican victory and in which Bush got 60% of the vote in 2004. In fact, Democratic Rep. Frost was shoved into this district by Tom DeLay and lost to Sessions in 2004 by 10% despite being as high-profile a Democrat as the party can hope for here. So don't cross your fingers for TX-32. For now, there is very little to see.

Can Obama put away the Dukakis 5?

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

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

Today, two new Rasmussen polls confirm this trend:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Slow day in polls and superdelegate news

Sunday is a slow news day. After 17 superdelegate endorsement in the space of 48 hours on Friday and Saturday, only 1 announced her support today: Young Democrat Crystal Strait announced she was endorsing Barack Obama explaining that, "Barack Obama has shown a real commitment to young voters in his campaign and in response young people have overwhelmingly voted and caucused for Obama in these primary contests."

However expected, this endorsement gets Obama one vote closer to the nomination as the pool of uncommitted superdelegates continues to decrease. Note also that 46 superdelegates (about a sixth of the total of "uncomnitted superdelegates) have yet to be chosen because they are add-ons states in which the state party has not yet finalized selections. Most of the add-ons (though by no means all) that are designated tend to already be supporters of a candidate, so the pool of superdelegates that Obama and Clinton are hoping to convince is even smaller than it looks; this is obviously bad news for Hillary.

Meanwhile, three new general election polls have been released this week-end. First, the LA Times-Bloomberg national poll:

• Both Democrats lead McCain. Clinton leads 47% to 38%, while Obama is ahead 46% to 40%.

• Clinton performs much better among voters with an income of less than $40K: She leads 50% to 29% while Obama is only ahead 43% to 45%. Among the highest-income group, however, Obama is slightly stronger than Clinton: She trails by 6, he trails by 1.

• The two Democrats also differ based on gender (Clinton leads by 21% among women, trails by 12% among men, Obama leads by 13% and trails b 3%), partisan affiliation (Obama is 9% weaker among registered Democrats but 10% stronger among independents). Contrary to what we might think, it looks like Obama's weakness among Dems comes from people who identify themselves as liberal (he is 13% weaker in that group), so not necessarily the white blue-collar base.

With the Democratic primary drawing to a close, polls testing both Clinton and Obama will become more rare so this might be one of our last opportunities to reiterate how different Clinton and Obama's general-election coalitions are and how remarkable it is that the two Democrats are arriving at roughly the same final numbers poll after poll considering the different paths they take to get there. Obama's relative weakness among women, registered Democrats and lower-income voters is compensated by his relative strength among men, independents and higher-income voters.

What this confirms is how different their two electoral maps would have looked and how the electability difference rests on a state-by-state basis rather than a national analysis. Rasmussen's new general election poll from Oregon, for example, confirms that Obama is much stronger in the Northwest (Oregon and Washington):

• Obama has opened a double-digit lead, 51% to 39%. Clinton has strengthened her position and leads 46% to 40%. Last month, McCain led Clinton by 6% and Obama led McCain by the same margin. Obama has always looked strong in Oregon.

• Rasmussen also polled Michigan, however, and finds troubling news for Democrats as McCain continues to be surprisingly strong. He edges out Obama by 1 percent, 45% to 44%, and is tied with Clinton at 44%.
  

Conventional wisdom would hold that Oregon is a tighter state than Michigan in the general election, but Obama's appeal to Western independents could help him put the Northwest away, concentrating on a state like Colorado; but he certainly cannot afford to lose a state with as many electoral votes as Michigan and the GOP is certainly preparing to make the argument that Obama was nominated on the back of Michigan voters if the DNC does not resolve the rogue primary mess in the weeks ahead.

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.
  

General election polls: Obama strengthens his hand, Clinton struggles

A week ago, Barack Obama's poll numbers had undoubtedly plunged, as surveys were showing him weakening in primary and general election match-ups with remarkable consistency. But this was in the heat of the Wright controversy. Since then, Obama's speech helped the Senator stop the bleeding. But the question now is whether he has regained some of the lost ground.

Two primary polls released 48 hours ago suggested he was back to his pre-Wright form, jumping to a huge lead in North Carolina and looking up in Pennsylvania. Now, four general election polls released today show him posting the type of numbers he needs. In fact, it is Hillary Clinton who is weakening and looking in difficulty in all four polls. First, a national poll from NBC:

• Barack Obama is leading John McCain by a narrow 44% to 42% while the Republican edges out Clinton 46% to 44%.
• In the primary match-up, Obama and Clinton are tied at 45%.
• In a confirmation of yesterday's Gallup poll, NBC finds that about 20% of Obama and Clinton supporters would vote for McCain if their candidate did not win the nomination.

But the most interesting number from this poll is Hillary Clinton's favorability number: 37%! This is the lowest she has ever been in in an NBC poll since early 2001, two months after she left the White House. This includes a 12% drop among African Americans, who appear to be blaming her for the Wright scandal despite the fact that she did not say anything about it until 2 days ago. Obama's numbers, meanwhile, are slightly in decline but less dramatically so, though it is worth noting that Obama loses some ground among independents and Republicans.

Meanwhile, we also get three state polls this morning -- all from blue states that Kerry and Gore both carried:

• In California, a PPI poll shows that neither Democrats manage a double-digit lead against McCain. Obama leads 49% to 40% and Clinton is up by a much narrower 46% to 43%.

• In Connecticut, Quinnipiac released a survey showing Obama is leading 52% to 35%, including 45% to 38% among independents. Clinton only leads 45% to 42% because of a differential among independents: She trails 48% to 36%.
  

• In Oregon's Rasmussen poll, finally, Obama is also stronger (though this one is less surprising, considering WA and OR have always been two states in which Obama has looked better). He leads McCain 48% to 42% while Clinton trails 46% to 40%.

It is worth noting that it is not coastal blue states that will determine whether Obama has successfully turned the page of the Wright controversy, so these 3 state polls are maybe not the most useful in that direction. But they still suggest that McCain won't have that easy a time contesting a state like Connecticut in which the Republican is placing hopes. Oregon looks tight, but it has not been a reliably blue state in past cycles. This morning's most worrisome numbers for Democrats come from California. A single-digit lead is certainly not enough to keep McCain away from the state, and the last thing Democrats want is to have to play defense in their #1 must-win state.

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).

Sunday polls: Wisconsin and Texas remain tight and Obama takes a lead in general election polls

Hillary Clinton just got some good news in the form of two primary polls:

• A new poll from Wisconsin shows her with a 49% to 43% lead. There is a huge disparity between the 62% of registered Democrats who favor Clinton by 26% and the 38% of independents who favor Obama by 25%.

• Meanwhile, the latest poll from Texas, released last night by Insider Advantage shows a 48% to 41% lead for Hillary Clinton. No internals are provided besides the general statement that Barack Obama leads among black voters and Clinton among Latinos.
  

(1) The Wisconsin poll should not alarm Obama supporters too much, however. The previous ARG poll (released a week ago) had Clinton up 9%, and it was the only survey showing her ahead. If anything, the trendlines (always a very important measure, since it measures momentum within a pollster's stable methodology) is favoring the Illinois Senator.

(2) In Texas, the race is also obviously tight, even more so when you consider that Clinton will have to beat her rival by a healthy margin to get any sort of delegate lead. As I explained on Friday, the Texas system will boost Obama's delegate share both because a third of delegates will be attributed through a caucus and because most of Clinton's strongholds are 4 delegate districts, meaning that the split will be 2-2 unless Clinton gets 62% of the vote.

It will be a very interesting dynamic to see whether the Clinton campaign can spin a victory in votes but no in delegates better than it did in the Nevada caucuses. Considering that the race is now a delegate fight and that Clinton has to make up her deficit (which stands at 127 according to Campaign Diaries's latest count, the failure to cut that margin in Texas could be dramatic. But it could also provide an opportunity for Clinton to make an argument against looking at the delegate count, perhaps providing cover to some superdelegates who are wavering.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen released two state general election polls, and confirms that the polling group is now consistently showing Obama running much better than Clinton in most states that are being polled, as well as in the national numbers where the disparity between their numbers when paired up with McCain keeps growing. In fact, McCain is improving his position in the daily national tracking against both Democrats. That suggests that the treatment McCain is getting right now (as the newly presumptive nominee) is strengthening him for the general, and that only Obama's press is able to match McCain's at present:

• First, Rasmussen released a Pennsylvania poll, an all-important battleground, that shows Obama leading McCain 49% to 39% with McCain leading Clinton 44% to 42%.
• In Oregon, Obama trounces McCain 49% to 40%, but the Republican edges Clinton 45% to 42%.

Oregon has been one of the states -- with Washington and Colorado -- where Obama has looked consistently more electable than Hillary has. The Pennsylvania numbers contradict the Quinnipiac poll released a few days ago that shows Clinton running 5 points ahead of Obama when paired up against McCain.

More polls: Clinton and McCain rise nationally, but Nevada has tight races (plus g-e surveys with more good news for McCain)

Let's start by recognizing John McCain's incredibly strong poll numbers today. Combine this morning's poll diary with this one, and he leads in every single primary poll that has been released -- and there are six of them: He has big leads in two South Carolina polls, and is ahead in Michigan, in Nevada and in Florida (two polls there) -- and though some of these are by small margins he has barely campaigned at all in NV and FL for now. He is also surging in the national polls and looks very strong in the blue states of WA and OR in the general election (see below). It could all go very quickly if McCain wins Michigan tomorrow (and that's a big if; if Romney gets Michigan the GOP race could sink into further chaos).

And now let's see the details of those polls. First up, Nevada, which is the un-polled contest, the state that no pollster is delving into given that Nevada is holding caucuses, notoriously hard to survey (the only reason anyone tries Iowa is that there is a lot of previous experience in the state). But Research 2000 delved into it today and released the following survey:

• In the Democratic race, it's a three way tie: Barack Obama gets 32%, followed by Hillary Clinton at 30% and John Edwards at 27%.
• Among Republicans, it's 22% for McCain and 18% for Giuliani, followed by Huckabee at 16% and Romney at 15%.

There are two striking results in this poll. First, John Edwards is very much still in the race here, and you be sure that has much to do with the fact that this is a caucus. Though the big problem that Edwards is facing is that he has even less support from labor than he did in Iowa: The SEIU here is supporting Obama and so is the biggest labor group (the culinary workers' union).

The second striking result is Romney's coming in fourth. He is without a doubt the candidate who has spent the most resources and time in Nevada -- and he is likely to do so even more in the coming days now that he seems to have conceded South Carolina. The press seems to be treating Romney as the favorite in Nevada for that reason, but this poll suggests Romney does not have an advantage in these caucuses after all.

But as we said, look at the poll with a skeptical eye. The way pollsters can figure out who is a "likely voter" is by looking at whether they have caucuses before; but this is the first time Nevada has played a role like this in the nominating process, so most indicators that are available are muddied.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen released a primary poll from South Carolina in both parties:

• In the Republican primary, McCain is pulling ahead, now leading 28% to 19% for Huckabee and 17% for Romney. Thompson is at 16%, a 4% rise in a few days -- almost all of it at Huckabee's expense (remember that Fox debate last Thursday?). Rudy is only at 5%.
• In the Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton has cut the margin by more than half, trailing 38% to 33% "only" while she was down 12% last week. Obama is ahead by 23% among black voters and Clinton is up by 19% among white voters, with Edwards taking 31% of that group's vote, ahead of Obama as well -- which is further proof of how racialized the vote in this state is becoming. Note that this morning's PPP poll of SC showed no such tightening.
  

Clinton and McCain's rise in South Carolina are parallel to their surges in the latest national Gallup poll, that has McCain going up from 19% to 33% in a week, with Huckabee and Giuliani to 19% and 13% respectively. In the Democratic race, it was a 33-33 tie last week, with Edwards at 20%. Now, Clinton is ahead at 45% with Obama at 33% and Edwards at 13%. And before we dismiss national polls, don't forget that February 5th is pretty much a national primary day so these polls are going to become relevant very soon -- possibly for the first time in primary history.

Finally, SUSA released three general election polls today -- and they confirm that John McCain is the most electable of the Republicans, by far (just as in Saturday's CNN national poll that has McCain running about 15% better than his rivals):

• In Missouri, first, John McCain defeats Clinton 50% to 44% and crushes Obama 51% to 40%. Huckabee also does very well, edging out Clinton 47% to 45% and Obama 51% to 41%.
• Clinton and Obama both beat Giuliani (47-43 and 47-44) and Romney (49-42 and 48-43).


• Oregon is even more striking. Compare the domination of Clinton and Obama against Giuliani (52-39 and 56-35), Romney (54-38 and 57-34) and Huckabee (54-40 and 55-38) and the stunning strength McCain displays, beating Clinton 49-45 and tying Obama 47-47.


• Results in Washington are similar but less dramatic, though Clinton runs weaker than Obama. She loses 49-46 to McCain but Obama beats him 52-43. Neither trembles against Giuliani (51-38 and 57-35), Romney (54-38 and 63-32), and Huckabee (54-40 and 60-35).

Two observations on electability. First, among Democrats. As we have often noticed over the months, Clinton runs slightly better than her rival among traditionally red states and especially in the South, and while Missouri is not in the South it has trended Republican lately. On the other other, Obama is often found to poll better out West.

It is much easier to draw conclusions in the GOP race. McCain's strength is so consistent it is really difficult to doubt that he would be the strongest general election contender. What is striking is how well Huckabee runs in Missouri and how poorly he does in Washington and Oregon; not that it is very surprising given the difference in the reception Huckabee received in Iowa and New Hampshire. For now at least, Huckabee's base is the evangelical vote -- and that base is much stronger in the Midwest than in coastal states.

Evening polls: Iowa up for grabs with Clinton, Huckabee slightly ahead

Two new polls today from Iowa, one from each party:

• Rasmussen has Democratic numbers: Hillary is ahead with 31%, with Obama at 27% and Edwards at 22%. Among those who are "certain" to participate, it's Clinton at 29%, Obama at 28% and Edwards at 22%.
• As always, second-choice looks good forEdwards, picked by 28% versus 22% for Obama and Clinton at 15%.


• The Washington Post/ABC poll of the GOP field has Huckabee ahead of Romney 35% to 27%, with everyone else in single-digits: Thompson has at 9%, Giuliani and Ron Paul at 8%, and McCain at 6%.

We've had three polls of Iowa in 24 hours, and three different leaders in the Democratic race -- underscoring the fact that the race is completly tied up 16 days from Iowa. On the GOP race, it was Huck up thee times -- but not by a lot, and his lead no longer looks all mighty.

• Dole vulnerable in North Carolina

A new Research 2000 poll of the North Senate race has worrisome news for Elizabeth Dole, who looks particularly vulnerable:

• She leads state Senator Kay Hagan 46% to 39%, and banker Jim Neal 47% to 37%.

Any incumbent under 50% is in danger -- especially when her lead is in the single-digits against an unknown opponent. A PPP poll released earlier in the week had Dole leading with a slightly bigger margin -- but still in the danger zone.

With numbers like this, Democrats have to regret they did not manage to get a better-known Democrat in the race, or entice either the Lieutenant Governor or the Attorney General out of the gubernatorial race and into the senatorial race. But with the DSCC failing to get its top recruits in Nebraska and Kentucky, they will likely pay more attention to North Carolina, which makes Elizabeth Dole much more endangered than she was a few weeks ago.

• SUSA polls NM, OR, and WA

Survey USA came out with some of its frequent general election polls this evening: Oregon and Washington are firmly leaning Democratic, and New Mexico looks as all over the place as it was in the past two presidential cycles.

• First up, New Mexico, Clinton leads Rudy 49-46, Romney 50-44, Huckabee 49-45, while McCain is ahead 48-45.
• Obama trails all Republicans, though within the margin of error: 49-44 against Rudy, 46-44 against Romney, 46-45 against Huckabee, and 51-40 against McCain.


• In Washington, Clinton is up by big margins: 52-43 against Giuliani, 55-41 against Romney, 54-41 against Huckabee, and she holds on 49-47 against McCain.
• Obama demolishes all GOPers: 55-38 against Rudy, 57-35 against Romney, 55-37 against Huckabee, and 50-43 against McCain.


• In Oregon, finally, Democrats are strong as well: Clinton leads Giuliani and Huckabee 50% to 42%, Romney 51% to 40%, and is tied with McCain at 46%. Obama is ahead of GIuliani 50-40, of Romney 50-38, 51-40 against Huckabee, 46-44 against McCain.

Washington and Oregon have been tight in previous cycles, but they are both definitely must-win states for the Democratic nominee. New Mexico was probably the tightest states over both 2000 and 2004, and it will likely be hotly be contested next year -- though it won't be a priority given it has only 5 electoral votes. But for Democrats who like to think that the West is drifting towards them, they definitely have to win states like New Mexico to strengthen their argument and advance their party in that region.

• NBC's national numbers

NBC came out with a national poll, and it has the GOP race in a complete toss-up -- and Obama running better in the general election

• In the GOP primary, Giuliani has lost its massive national lead: It's now tied at 20% between Giuliani and Romney, with Huckabee at 17% and mcCain at 14%, and Thompson at 11%. A month ago, Giuliani had a massive lead with 33%, with McCain at Romney at 11% and Huckabee at 8%... Would seem like a crazy outlier, only Giuliani's collapse is confirmed by most polls at this point.
• In the general election, Clinton beats Rudy 46% to 43%, but Obama does much better, coming on top 49% to 40%. Against Huck, it's Clinton 46% to Huckabee's 44%, and here again Obama runs massively better, beating Huck 48% to 36%.

GOPers skip a debate, and trail in various polls!

Fox News has just come out with a new national poll, and it contains great news for Democrats. Not only is Bush's approval rating back down at 34%, but Clinton has built a healthy lead against her Republican rivals:

• Against Giuliani, she wins 46% to 39%. If Bloomberg is added to the race (why are they bothering polling this anymore?) Clinton's lead goes up to 10: 42% to 32%, with 7% for Bloomberg.
• Against Thompson, Clinton leads by 13% (48-35) and 7% against McCain (46-39)
• Barack Obama does more poorly: He only beats Giuliani by a point (41-40), McCain by two (42-40). He does beat Thompson by 12, however (40-38)

While Clinton is supposed to be more polarizing, notice that she also gets much high percentages of the vote than Obama: She also has more people willing to vote for her no matter what. Also in the poll are some interesting numbers: The Democratic Party has a 50/40 favorable rating, while the Republican Party has only 44/47. Now, look at the numbers for the NYT (47/22) and MoveOn.org (11/22). A full 56% have never heard of MoveOn, and not many voters are ready to condemn the NYT after two years of accusations of unpatriotic journalism. In fact, with the GOP's approval rating lower than the Times's, are Republican accusations perhaps not improving the NYT's reputation?

• Oregon leans slightly Democratic
  

The SurveyUSA poll onslaught continues (seriously, how awesome is it?) with a survey from Oregon. Democrats lead 8 out of 9 contests, while Obama-Giuliani is tied. As always, Democrats fare much worse against Giuliani than the other major Republicans:

• Clinton leads Giuliani by a small 46-44 margin, while she leads against Thompson 49-41 and against Romney 51-38.
• Obama and Giuliani are tied at 46, while Obama has a 5 point edge against Thompson (48-43) and 18 against Romney (53-35)
• Edwards beats Romney 47-44, Thompson 51-36, and Romney 52-34.
  

Oregon is not the most important of swing states, but it could be indicative of how things go in the country. Both Gore and Kerry won the state by small margins. If things are better in 2008 for Democrats, it could mean less worrying about states like Oregon and Minnesota. In MN, SUSA showed a very strong Democratic edge yesterday (see yesterday's poll). Things are a bit less rosy in Oregon, but the state is still light blue.

And one quick question: Isn't Edwards electability argument (he does run the strongest in this poll after all) undercut by his decision to opt for public financing?

SUSA polls from the past two weeks: Minnesota, Ohio, New Mexico, Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, Wisconsin.

• The Republicans debate on PBS

The Republican candidates were invited to debate minority issues on PBS, and only the six "minor" candidates (including Alan Keyes) showed up. McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and Thompson all cited scheduling conflicts; as a result, they spent most of the past week being criticized by many representatives of the African-American community and many Republican figures. Mike Huckabee said he was "ashamed," and analysts pondered how much the GOP stood to lose. Not that Republicans have that much support to begin with among black voters, but the party has been attempting some sort of outreach effort. The GOP candidates also skipped Univision's Hispanic debate last month, an even more problematic move given that Latinos are a key swing constituency.