Wednesday polls: Strong day for Obama who leads big in PA, OH, WI and ME and within the margin of error in VA and FL

Quinnipiac released its eagerly anticipated set of swing state polls, and after two weak showing by Obama in the waves of early April and mid-May, he has improved significantly over the past month by solidifying the support of registered Democrats. Though his lead in all three of these states is inferior to where Clinton stood last month, it still represents a significant shift towards the Illinois Senator:

• In Florida, Obama is ahead 47% to 43%. He trailed by 4% in May.
  
• A month ago, he trailed among independents and got 71% of the Democratic vote. In June, he leads indies by 10% and has the support of 82% of Democrats. 19% of those who voted Clinton in the primary would choose McCain, however.

• In Ohio, Obama leads 48% to 42% -- no doubt boosted by Bush's dismal approval rating of 22%! He trailed by 4% in May.
  
• He has improved his share of the registered Dem vote from 69% to 80% and trails by 3% among independents. Among Clinton voters, however, he only leads 63% to 25%.
  

• In Pennsylvania, finally, Obama crushes McCain 52% to 40%. He led by 6% in May.
  
• Obama gets 78% of registered Democrats compared to 71% in May. He leads by 11% among independents, though his support among Clinton voters remains tepid (66% versus 24% for McCain).
  

This seems to be the first Florida poll to ever find Obama ahead of McCain, too early, then, to know whether something is actually changing (this is also the first Florida poll released by any institute since Quinnipiac's last poll a month ago!). But note the uniformity of the bounce in Obama's favor: He has improved by 6%, 6% and 8% in these three states, suggesting about the same size bounce that we witnessed in Rasmussen and Gallup's tracking. The margin has narrowed again in those trackings and that we will have to wait for confirmation that Obama has jumped up in those states from other surveys (PPP yesterday showed Obama up 11% in Ohio). Also, black support in favor of Obama is particularly strong and is what is helping the Democrat create some space: He gets between 90% and 95% of the African-American vote, much stronger than what Kerry got in 2004.

As Quinnipiac points out, no candidate has won the election without at least two of these three states in 48 years, so for Obama to get even two would make the road to the White House very difficult for McCain. However, Michigan now appears to be just as competitive as these 3 states and muddies the equation a bit, as picking up Michigan could help McCain offset the loss of Ohio. Meanwhile, a number of other polls were released today from other crucial states that Obama seems intent on contesting:

• First, Zogby's latest national poll shows the Democrat leading 47% to 42%. Other good news for Obama: he leads by 22% among independents. The bad news: He is only ahead 54% to 44% among Hispanics and 54% of respondents say he does not have the experience to be president.

• In Virginia, PPP finds Obama edging out McCain 47% to 45%. He gets 78% of Democrats -- a strong showing in a Southern state.

• In Wisconsin, SUSA finds Obama ahead 52% to 43% -- up from a 6% lead in May. This includes the support of 91% of registered Democrats (!) and a 23% lead among women.
  
• SUSA also continues to provide completely useless VP pairings: Which poll respondents has ever heard of Carly Fiorina?

• In Maine, Obama crushes McCain 55% to 33%, up from a 13% lead last month in a new Rasmussen poll. There's no breakdown by congressional district but with this sort of lead there is no doubt Obama is ahead in both.

• In Alaska, finally, Rasmussen continues to find competitive races, with McCain ahead 45% to 41%, down from a 9% lead last month.
• McCain and Obama have comparable favorability ratings (58% to 53% rspectively) but the enthusiasm level really varies, both among very favorable opinions (29% Obama and 18% McCain) and very unfavorable (31% Obama). This is a pattern we are seeing in many red states.
  

Wisconsin's lead confirms other polls we have been seeing and my hypothesis that the "Dukakis 5" states are coming home, slowly removing 5 blue states from the list McCain can contest. The Alaska poll is stunning, of course, though it is unclear how much the campaigns will look in that direction (it is rather far, after all).

And I have resolved to no longer express wonder and amazement when a Virginia poll shows a tie or Obama narrowly ahead, as every poll recently released from the Commonwealth shows that result -- including one released early this week. That the state's 13 electoral votes are in play are a nightmare for McCain as they expand the map in a region the GOP has long not had to defend. With Mark Warner set to destroy Jim Gilmore, there could even be reverse coattails -- as the PPP poll confirms:

• This Senate race is no doubt polled so much because Virginia is competitive at the presidential level, but we are still waiting for Colorado to be polled this much. PPP finds Warner crushing 59% to 28% and the worst news for Gilmore is that no one is surprised...
  

• In more interesting Senate news, Susan Collins continues to slip in Maine. The latest Rasmussen poll finds her ahead 49% to 42% -- under 50% and within single-digits for the first time. Last month's poll, finding her ahead by 10%, was already the tightest the race has ever been.
  
• Proving that Collins is in a Chaffee-esque situation of being driven down by her party rather than by her own liabilities, she has a shockingly high 70% favorability rating.
  

• In North Carolina, Elizabeth Dole rebounds in a new Civitas poll: Barely ahead 45% to 43% last month, she is now leading 48% to 38%.
  

• In another congressional poll from that state, this one from NC-08, Larry Kissell is narrowly ahead of Rep. Hayes 45% to 43% in an internal poll conducted by Anzalone Liszt.
• This is a district that voted Bush twice (including by 9% in 2004) but Obama leads McCain 50% to 37% (should we take that as a sign that the poll oversamples dems? A 23% swing from where we were 4 years ago is perhaps a bit much).
  

Maine has long been a disappointment to Dems, as Collins has been ahead by more than 20% in many polls taken since the fall of 2007. But as partisan passions heat up in the coming months it looks like Collins could get dangerously close to being this cycle's Linc Chaffee and suffer from her party's dismal ratings. As Al Franken's situation is worsening in MN, the DSCC would be delighted to get Maine back in the picture. As for NC, Dole is still under 50% in the Civitas poll but this is the second pollster (after Rasmussen) among those that had shown a tied race in May (after Hagan's primary victory) to find that Dole has rebounded. There are clear reasons for that, too: (1) Hagan's primary bounce faded and (2) Dole has been running TV ads over the past few weeks. Still within striking distance for Democrats but no reason to be as euphoric as the DSCC was last month.

Monday polls: Virginia is indeed a toss-up, and is it worth looking at Kansas?

It is one thing for David Ploufe to insist that the campaign does not need to win Ohio and Florida to get to the White House, it is quite another for pollsters to impose a seeming blackout on polls from these two mega-battleground states. No survey from either has been released since mid-May and in the meantime we got plenty of polls from states like Washington and just today two from New York. A new survey from Virginia released today keeps things interesting:

• Rasmussen finds that the presidential race in this traditional red state is a toss-up, with Obama edging McCain 45% to 44%. This is a small swing from last month's survey, in which McCain led by 3%.
• While McCain's favorability rating is a bit higher, Obama has a higher proportion of respondents who say they have a very favorable impression of him. However, the familiar pattern of Obama's very unfavorable rating also being much higher holds in this poll.

• In New York, two polls confirm the Democrat's overwhelming advantage. The Sienna poll has Obama leading 51% to 33%. He led by 11% last month and 5% two months ago.
• The New York Times poll, meanwhile, has Obama leading 51% to 32%.

• In Kansas, finally, Rasmussen finds McCain ahead 47% to 37%, down from a 21% lead last month.
• Obama has a mediocre favorability rating, however (49% versus 62% for McCain) and very low very unfavorables (31% versus 12% for McCain).
  

Of these polls, the Virginia survey is naturally the most interesting. While I did not hesitate to include it in the list of toss-ups in my first electoral college ratings, it is always somewhat of a shock when Obama performs so well in a poll from the Commonwealth. This is, after all, a state that has not voted for a Democrat since 1964. Yet, Rasmussen's poll is certainly not a surprise. The latest SUSA poll showed Obama leading by 8% three weeks ago and Obama has made no secret that flipping it will be one of his priorities, so far so that there are 3 potential VP picks that come from the state (Webb, Kaine and Warner). He even organized his first general election campaign stop in Virginia. There is no question that McCain losing this state would make it very hard for him to get to 270 electoral votes.

Meanwhile, a number of down-the-ballot polls found some interesting results as well:

• In Virginia, Mark Warner is widening his lead over Jim Gilmore and is now ahead 60% to 33% in Rasmussen's poll! Warner has a 70% favorability rating compared to 46% for Gilmore... and don't forget this is a GOP-held seat!

• Dems get more good news in Louisiana, where Mary Landrieu is up 49% to 33% in a new poll. However -- and this is a big one -- this is an internal poll conducted for and released by the Landrieu campaign. But until Kennedy responds with his own poll (and he did release an internal showing him ahead in December), this is positive for Landrieu.

• In Kansas, meanwhile, Pat Roberts continues to post surprisingly low numbers for an incumbent that no one is really paying attention to. After 3 polls from 3 different polling groups showing him up 12% against former Rep. Slattery, Rasmussen's latest survey finds the incumbent under 50% and in single-digits, leading 47% to 38%.
• Roberts's favorability rating remains high, however, at 60%.

• In Nevada, Mason-Dixon polled two House races (both currently held by Republicans) and found good news for both parties. In NV-01, Rep. Porter and Dina Titus in a toss-up with the incumbent up 45% to 42%. Porter's job approval is a dismal 36% to 56%. Note that Titus ran a statewide gubernatorial race in 2006, so she is better-known than your average House challenger.
  
• In NV-02, Rep. Dean Heller has a much strong lead against Democrat Jill Derby in a rematch of their 2006 race. Heller is up 53% to 39%.

• In TX-10, a poll taken for the Democratic challenger in a race few people have on their radar screen (and which I confess I have not included in my latest House ratings) shows the incumbent Mike McCaul leading Democrat Larry Doherty 43% to 34%.
  
• As SSP points out, an independent poll from IRV that I managed to miss just last week has Doherty trailing by only 6%, 52% to 46%. Doherty's decision to release a poll today that shows him faring a bit worse is no doubt due to his desire to prove that the IRV survey was not an outlier and that TX-10 is indeed competitive.
  

• Finally, a poll from New York's gubernatorial race of... 2010, which will interest everyone given how chaotic the state political scene has been lately. This is also important because whether Mike Bloomberg decides he should run will determine whether he tries to change the term limits law in NYC in the coming months. The Sienna poll referred to above has Bloomberg ahead 45% to 34% in a match-up against recently promoted Governor Paterson (who is not that much ahead of AG Andrew Cuomo in a primary).

The Kansas Senate race is too me the most interesting poll of this group because it confirms -- and accentuates -- the results of three polls that have been released in close proximity (here, here and here). Looking at the latest Rasmussen polls of the second and third-tier of Senate races, Roberts now looks weaker than Dole and Cornyn and he has repeatedly polled lower than Sen. Collins ever has in Maine (well there was one poll showing her leading by only 10%)! Even Chuck Schumer, when trying to tout his attempts to expand the map, refers to Oklahoma more readily than Kansas. So at one point does the DSCC start looking in Kansas's direction? Given Schumer's determination to test the vulnerability of incumbents, it would not be a surprise if the DSCC conducts a poll and sends in a few staffers.

Electoral maps: Quinnipiac's "big state" polls find trouble for Obama in FL and OH, SUSA shows him strong in VA

It is hard to deny that general election polls are consistently showing Barack Obama to be weak in Ohio and Florida. The latest Rasmussen polls from those states, which both showed Clinton running significantly better than Obama, led me to consider the implications for Obama's electoral map, and the choice his campaign will likely make to privilege states that they believe will be more receptive to Obama's message.

Today, the latest wave of "big state" polls from Quinnipiac confirms that Clinton's electoral map would have centered on Ohio and Florida in a way that Obama's map will not:

• In Ohio, Quinnipiac finds that Clinton beats McCain 48% to 41%; Obama trails 44% to 40%. McCain has improved his margin by 3% against both Democrats.
• Clinton gets 85% of the vote of registered Democrats, Obama only gets 69%. He also trails by a wider margin among independents and does 17% worse among working-class whites.
  

• In Florida, Clinton leads 48% to 41% also while Obama trails 45% to 41%.
• Clinton wins 86% of the registered Democrats vote, while Obama only gets 71%. Obama also trails by a wider margin among independents. In a key measure, Clinton loses the working-class white vote by 2%, Obama by 20%.
  
• 43% of Floridians say Obama's association with Wright makes them less likely to vote for him... the same number that says McCain's association with Bush makes them less likely to vote for the Republican nominee!
  

• In Pennsylvania, Clinton leads McCain 50% to 37% while Obama is ahead 46% to 40%. McCain has improved his numbers by 1% and 3% respectively.
• Clinton gets 86% of the registered Democratic vote, while Obama gets 73%. This is one state in which Clinton looks much weaker among African-Americans, as she gets only 78% of the black vote as opposed to 94% for Obama.

These polls might be used by the Clinton campaign to bolster their electability case to superdelegates. But there is no reason to believe that superdelegates will be affected: We have known for a long time that Obama and Clinton's electoral maps would take different forms, and that Ohio and Florida would be more important for the Clinton campaign. Furthermore, with the competitive part of the Democratic primary over, these polls are certainly more important for what they tell us about the coming general election.

In short, I would like to frame the conversation in terms of electoral maps rather than electability.

A problematic area for Democrats is that both candidates lose the independent vote in Ohio and in Florida. Independents massively turned to the Democratic Party in 2006 and it is that choice that allowed the party to make gains in the midterms. When asked to rate Bush's performance or in down-the-ballot polls, independents are still behaving as Democrats. But McCain is able to stop his party's bleeding and hold on to a lead in two of the major swing states against either Clinton or Obama.

For Obama, these numbers are one more reminder that he cannot take the vote of registered Democrats for granted. Some argue that these are just disaffected Clinton supporters who will easily return home once the nominee is chosen. There is no doubt that some of them will, and that Obama certainly has the capability of capturing the support of most Democrats who are reluctant to support him. But it would be a grave mistake to assume that registered Democrats will back the party's nominee no matter what. They have left the party in the past, and the appeal to (1) conservative Democrats and (2) Hispanics lies at the heart of McCain's electability.

The Obama campaign will have to spend a significant amount of time and resources solidifying the Democrats' blue-collar base and Hispanic supporters, especially if he wants to keep Ohio and Florida competitive. The good news is that a secure and unified base might be enough to win this election: More voters are identifying themselves as Democrats than they have in a long time, and if Obama is trailing by only 4% with weak showings among registered Democrats it does suggest that the answer lies with Democrats rather than at the center or in attracting Republicans.

And just in time to confirm that Obama's campaign is looking to emphasize other states and construct a different electoral map, SUSA released a poll from Virginia:

• In this red state, Obama leads McCain 49% to 41%, including a 66% to 27% lead in Northern Virginia.
  
• This is a poll testing VP choices, so Clinton is not included and you can check all the VP choices here. As always, the best Democrat by far is John Edwards as he bolsters Obama's numbers among registered Democrats, but that is also a name recognition factor.
  

Some Democrats worry that replacing OH and FL by states like VA and CO might be risky considering that these states have not been kind to Democrats in presidential elections in the past. But polls like SUSA's confirm that Obama does have an opening in those states (a poll yesterday showed Obama trailing by 8% in VA, but the numbers looked weird considering how weak the Democrat was in NoVa). You can be sure that this is a debate that will be waged for the coming weeks, as the Obama campaign tries to settle on a general election strategy. But whatever map they choose to go with they will have to move to secure the Democratic base -- perhaps not with John Edwards's inclusion on the ticket, but some strategy will have to be devised.

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.

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.
  

Sunday polls: McCain remains solid in Rasmussen surveys

Rasmussen and Survey USA are probably the two most prolific pollsters, as they have released most of the state general election surveys we have seen in recent months. And it is hard to not notice that SUSA's results are regularly more favorable to Democrats than Rasmussen's, for whom McCain generally comes out stronger. Both institutes have had a solid track record in recent elections, so we will have to leave it at that, unable to decide whose turnout model matches more closely with what we will see in November 2008.

Rasmussen released two very good polls for the Republican nominee today from two of this year's most important states: Virginia and Wisconsin.

• In Wisconsin, McCain is edging Obama 48% to 46% and crushing Clinton 50% to 39%.
• The favorability numbers tell the story: McCain's is a high 61%, Obama's an acceptable 54% while Clinton's is a dramatic 39%.

• In Virginia, McCain crushes Clinton 58% to 36% and beats Obama 52% to 41%. That's a dramatic change from last month, where Rasmussen showed McCain enjoying a 10% and 5% lead against the two Democrats.
  

SUSA's Wisconsin poll two weeks ago showed Obama winning by 4% and Clinton by 1%. In Virginia, SUSA had Clinton tying McCain and Obama edging him by 1%.

Wisconsin was one of the tightest states in both 2000 and 2004, and Democrats can ill-afford letting go of its 10 electoral votes. Virginia, meanwhile, voted solidly for Bush in 2000 and 2004 but it is a state Democrats are confident they can finally pull in their column, drawing upon the successes they met in the state in 2005 and 2006. In fact, the belief that he can turn states like Virginia and Colorado are at the center of Obama's electoral map.

Also, it is worth pointing to today's Gallup national tracking poll. I do not report on its numbers every day, but today's poll shows a strong enough trend to be emphasized. Obama has reached a 10% lead, the first time he has reached a double-digit advantage in a Gallup poll. It seems that Obama's Wright buzz being replaced by Clinton's Bosnia controversy has allowed Obama to regain his footing.

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.

More polls, with a bunch of general election numbers

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• General election polls

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

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


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


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


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

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

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

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

Catching up on some forgotten polls

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

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


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

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

Evening polls: Obama takes the lead in Iowa!

The news of the night: A new Washington Post poll has Barack Obama in the lead for the first time in quite a while in the Iowa caucuses. It is all within the margin of error, but it breaks the remarkable consistency of polls showing Hillary Clinton slightly ahead... and it is sure to change a lot of the narrative of the race in the coming days:

• Obama gets 30% to Clinton's 26% and Edwards 22%. Richardson stays in double-digits, at 11%.
• The internal numbers are pretty bad for the New York Senator: First off, 50% of her supporters say they have never attended the caucuses, against 43% for Obama, which goes against the conventional wisdom that his backers are the least likely to show up at the polls. And the key statistic for Edwards: Only 24% of his supporters would be first-time caucus-goers, which confirms his support is among the core base... which is great news for him and keeps him in the running for the win.
• And in what is perhaps the worst news of the poll for Hillary: When asked to choose Obama, Clinton or Edwards, voters who choose someone else first go for Obama at 34%, Edwards at 28% and Clinton at 15%. Now this will happen on caucus night, as caucus-goers will only be allowed to caucus for candidates who are getting 15% of support at their caucus-place. So if these numbers are correct, Clinton could very well be destroyed and sink to third place.
• What explains this shift? The poll finds that only 15% say Clinton is the most honest candidate, versus 31% for Obama and 20% for Edwards. Similary, 76% and 73% say that Obama and Edwards speak their mind, versus only 50% for Clinton. The constant attacks against the front-runner are starting to stick in Iowa.

This is great news for Obama whose campaign is frustrated after last week's debate. They need to win Iowa, they know it, and the Clinton campaign knows it too. Most of the action in December will happen here... and numbers could change dramatically. And remember that gap can be created fast, especially if a candidate has a big share of second choice support as Obama seems to have. Clinton would likely be very hurt by a third-place finish, though it remains to be seen how much she would slip in later states if she came in second here. It would probably depend on how far behind she is, so she really has to minimize losses here.

Some good news, however, for the Clinton campaign out of a national Harris poll that has Clinton breaking 50% again, which she had not done for a while. She has 52% here. But Obama is also unusually high, polling at 29%. Edwards is left further behind than usual, at 11%. But this should at least reassure the Clinton campaign that her rivals will have a lot of catching up to do even if they win Iowa.

• Romney expands New Hampshire lead

Meanwhile, no such slip-ups for Romeny. Quite the contrary, as a new New Hampshire poll has him significantly expanding his lead, now ahead 33% to McCain's 18%, Giuliani's 16%. Ron Paul confirms his good form with 8%, while Thompson collapses into a humiliating (and probably fatal) 4%, behind even Huckabee's 5%.

This is great for Romney, who needs to show his nomination is inevitable with a IA-NH dual win. But McCain needs to make a move fast. He probably cannot content himself with a second-place showing here, unless it is very strong. He needs a win, or he will likely be left out, for where else could he strike? But Giuliani needs a second-place here for his "surviving January strategy to work," so look for Giuliani to take McCain down just as McCain needs to rise... which should all help Romney.

• Democrats still competitive in Virginia

The first poll that had Democrats leading in Virginia was deemed by all a probable outlier, until poll after poll showed Clinton and other Democrats competitive. And today's new SUSA poll is no exception -- only John McCain manages to put the state away for his party, though Rudy Giuliani at least manages to tie Clinton this time:

• John McCain beats Clinton 51% to 42% and Obama 51% to 41%. Giuliani narrowly leads Obama 47% to 43% but ties Clinton at 45%.
• The two Democrats comfortably lead Romney (48-41 for both) and , and Huckabee (50-40 for Clinton and 50-38 for Obama).

Put this together with yesterday's poll from Missouri and the GOP will have a lot of defending to do on its home turf.

• Gov. Blunt on his way out?

And one down-the-ballot poll to conclude. With LA and KY's gubernatorial elections resolved, the most vulnerable governship now is Missouri's, rated a toss-up in the latest governor rankings. And a poll released yesterday by Research 2000 shows just how vulnerable Governor Blunt is, as he trails Attorney General Nixon (who pretty much started campaigning in 2004) 51% to 42%. Blunt has bad favorables (43-53, compared to Nixon's 47-41). Nixon's advantage comes from independents, who break his way 59-32.