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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Can Obama put away the Dukakis 5?

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

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

Today, two new Rasmussen polls confirm this trend:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tuesday polls: Why is Washington polled more frequently than OH and FL? (Updated with... 2nd poll from WA!)

A few surveys were released over the past day but it is worth noting that we have still not gotten a comprehensive set of state polls since Barack Obama clinched the nomination. The most recent polls from FL, OH and PA, for instance, all date back to mid-May. Yet, the trickle of surveys from second-tier races continues. We at least got a new poll from Michigan, which is shaping to be one of the most premier battleground states this year:

• In Michigan, Rasmussen finds Obama with his first lead since early February -- though it remains within the margin of error, 45% to 42%. Last month, McCain edged Obama by 1%, a finding confirmed by many other Michigan surveys. Obama also has a slightly lower favorability rating than his rival.
  

• In New York, Quinnipiac finds Obama to be leading 50% to 36%. This remains perhaps tighter than Democrats would like to see in the Empire State, but it is a slight progression for Obama and a significant improvement among white voters.
  

• In Washington, which has long been one of Obama's strongest states, SUSA shows him crushing McCain 56% to 39%.
  
• He gets 89% of registered Democrats (!) and the margin of his lead is entirely due to the shift of the partisan breakdown (40% Dem-28% GOP versus 36-33 in the 2004 exit polls).

• Update: Well, it seems I chose the headline of this entry appropriately as we got a second poll from Washington this afternoon. This one (released by Rasmussen) shows Obama leading McCain 53% to 35%, a larger margin than SUSA's poll (and up from 11% last month), confirming that the state's 10 electoral votes are more solidly in the blue column than they were in 2000 and 2004.
  

• In Georgia, finally, a new Rasmussen poll finds McCain leading by a substantial though certainly not overwhelming margin, 51% to 41%.

Michigan is shaping up as one of the blue states that Obama is the most endangered in and the biggest along with Pennsylvania. Obama's hope to have a second path to the White House that would accomodate losing Ohio and Florida, a path that wins the Southwest and perhaps Virginia, would only be valid if he can hold on to the 38 electoral votes that come in PA and MI, and up to today it is the latter states that has looked more troubling for the Illinois Senator. Democrats hope that Obama will regain his footing as the conversation turns to the economy and we will be monitoring Michigan numbers very closely.

That Obama has a stronger lead in Washington than he does in New York State confirms the Illinois Senator's strength in the West. This is often coupled with a relative weakness in states East of the Mississippi (starting with the Appalachia region) but as long as Obama holds on in the Northeast and strongly contests Ohio there is a lot of potential for him in Western states. Georgia, meanwhile, is an interesting state as it is part of the "second-tier" of Southern states (along with SC and MS) that some Democrats believe will get competitive once Obama conducts a massive registration drive and drives up black turnout. The numbers are not there right now for Obama to pull this off, and we will know whether he can make those states competitive as much from registration data as from surveys.

Meanwhile, four down-the-ballot polls find no surprises -- though some of these findings are important:

• In New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg is ahead 48% to 39% against former Rep. Zimmer in a new Quinnipiac poll. Independents favor the challenger by 8%.
  

• Washington's gubernatorial race is still a toss-up, with Christine Gregoire edging Dino Rossi 50% to 47% in SUSA's latest poll.

• Update: A second poll of this match-up was released by Rasmussen and finds Gregoire ahead by 7%, 50% to 43%. That's actually an improvement for the Republican.
  

• Indiana's gubernatorial race also favors the incumbent as a Benenson internal poll taken for the Long Thompson campaign finds the challenger trailing Gov. Daniels 46% to 39%. This is the second poll of the race in three days. The previous one found Daniels ahead by 16%.
  

• In Georgia, Saxby Chambliss looks safe as he beats his 3 Democratic challengers by margins ranging from 15% to 23% in a Rasmussen poll.

The New Jersey Senate race looks like it might remain tight for a few months, and winning the Democratic primary has not given Lautenberg a bounce. This is the second poll in a week that finds him up single-digits. In fact, it might have highlighted the problem of his age. But Democrats should feel no panic and Republicans should develop no hope about a New Jersey race until early October. If there is any lesson we learned in 2004 and 2006, it is that New Jersey likes to tease Republicans. Yet, the second poll finding a competitive race is certainly an unexpected and positive development for the NRSC.

There is no better confirmation of the tightness of the Gregoire-Rossi rematch than the fact that, in the same sample, Barack Obama leads by 17% while Christine Gregoire struggles to stay ahead. Polls taken since 2004 have shown that this race will go down to the wire and that Washington Republicans have not forgotten the shady recounts of 2004.

As for Georgia, it looks like Senator Ensign, the chairman of the NRSC, will get his wish and Chambliss will be part of his "firewall" to salvage 41 seats. Of course, Georgia was never really on the Democrats' target list and the DSCC would love nothing more than or Ensign to cultivate this 15% margin rather than protect more endangered seats.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Poll update: When Wyoming becomes a (congressional) battleground

The Rules and Bylaws committee is about to convene, and it is remarkable that the Democratic primaries have made a meeting about party rules must-see political spectacle. It will take a few hours to figure out what decision -- if any -- comes out of the committee, so for now let's start with the day with a look at the latest polls. I never thought the day would come when I would lead a poll update post with a survey from Wyoming, but a Research 2000 poll released yesterday is certainly noteworthy:

• In the open and at-large House seat currently held by Republican Rep. Cubin, Democrat Gary Trauner narrowly leads Republican Cynthia Lummis, 44% to 41%. Among independents, Trauner leads 58% to 32%.

• In the presidential match-up, John McCain is leading Obama 53% to 40% in a state Bush triumphed in 2004 69% to 29%. Obama has the narrowest of leads among independents.

There are many signs that the GOP is in trouble in the Mountain West and that the Republican brand is suffering in many states in which the party is used to dominate. Wyoming is too red a state for Democrats to have a chance at the presidential level, but a Trauner victory would be a shocking development that seems very much in reach. Keep in mind that at-large congressmen positions are often stepping-stones for statewide office, either the governorship or the Senate, so a House victory by Trauner could cost the GOP a Senate seat down the line (see North Dakota, for instance, where the entire congressional delegation is made up of Democrats).

Meanwhile, three general election polls were released yesterday by three different polling institutes:

• In Wisconsin, SUSA found Obama ahead of McCain 48% to 42% in its latest installment of VP match-ups. Obama leads McCain by 17% among independents. When vice-presidents are included, the range varies though there is little surprising that cannot be explained by name recognition.

• In California, the all-important Field Poll finds both Democrats leading McCain by 17%: 52% to 35% for Obama and 53% to 36% for Clinton.

• In Washington, the Elway poll finds Democrats leading as well, 44% to 38% for Obama and 41% to 36% for Clinton. 74% of Clinton supporters would vote for Obama, which is certainly a decent number.
  

No surprises in those match-ups, except perhaps the fact that Obama does not run stronger than Clinton in Washington. After all, the Pacific Northwest is a region in which Obama typically runs better than Clinton. Also, the latter poll suggests that Washington State is not quite as secure for Obama as some have been suggesting. It is true that Obama's appeal will be strong here, but the McCain campaign believes that it, too, can find a way to woo Washington independents. As for California, there have been some polls in recent weeks that have found a single-digit race but most surveys found McCain lagging far behind. This is key, for Democrats cannot afford to waste any time and money defending the Golden State without which they have no electoral path to the White House.

Friday polls: Preparing for May 20th, and new results from Alaska and Maine's Senate races

The political world's attention has turned away from the Democratic primaries -- to the great frustration of the 5 states and territories that have not gotten a chance to vote. So close to mattering, Kentucky and Oregon will still decide the conditions in which the Democratic candidates finish the race, how much talk there is of Obama's general election vulnerabilities and also -- and this could obviously prove important -- whether Clinton is at all in a position to drag this thing to the convention. Two new polls from ARG suggest Clinton could have a very good day on May 20th, when Kentucky and Oregon hold their primaries:

• In Oregon, ARG finds Obama to be ahead only 50% to 45%.
  
• Oregon's primary is entirely mail-in and 58% of respondents said they had already turned in their ballot. Among those, Clinton and Obama are tied at 49%. Note that this is the second poll in which Clinton is tied with Obama among this group of voters but trailing overall (SUSA was the first a few days ago) suggesting the Obama camp might be demobilizing.

• Meanwhile, ARG shows Clinton crushing Obama 65% to 29% in Kentucky, including 73% of white voters. Note that Edwards is once again on the ballot here so we will see if he can repeat his West Virginia exploits.

In the list of "what if"s that must be haunting the Clinton campaign is something they had no control over and that no one really thought would matter until the morning of February 6th -- what if West Virginia and Kentucky were scheduled to vote in the latter half of February instead of, say, Maryland and Louisiana. Or Virginia and Wisconsin. Would Obama have built the same unstoppable momentum, putting Clinton in an untenable position in the run-up to March 4th? The quickness with which the race went from "this is a pure toss-up" on February 6th to "is there any path for Clinton to win the nomination" on February 13th was one of the most remarkable stretches of time of this entire campaign.

Meanwhile, general election polls were released today:

• First, a Strategic Vision poll from Georgia shows McCain leading Obama by a 54% to 40%.

This is not as huge a margin as Republicans can hope, but it's hard to see a path for Obama to make this state competitive for now, despite talk of that in some Democratic circles. Georgia has been one of the states that has been trending the most Republican in the past few years. It was the only state where Republicans got close to winning a Dem-held seat in 2006 (not one, but two!) and consider that this same Strategic Vision poll shows that the leading Democrat in the senatorial primary is someone who professes to have voted for Bush in both 2000 and 2004... Also:

• A Rasmussen poll from Kansas shows McCain not trembling against either Democrat in this deep red state. He leads Obama 55% to 34% and Clinton 53% to 39%.
  

• A Rasmussen poll from Maine shows both Democrats leading McCain 51% to 38%, a good margin in a sometimes-tight state where a close victory would mean the loss of an electoral vote.
  

• Also, a Rasmussen poll from Washington confirms that WA will be less competitive this year than in 2000 (it wasn't at the front of Dem worries in 04). Obama leads 51% to 40%, Clinton 47% to 42% -- very similar margins to yesterday's SUSA poll.

• Finally, Alaska is the big surprise of the day as polls continue to show a single-digit general election race in what is supposed to be a Republican blowout. Research 2000 finds McCain leading 49% to 42% (Clinton trails 55% to 37%) and Rasmussen finds McCain leading 50% to 41% -- slightly larger but still underwhelming.
  

Alaska's tightness is the only shocking finding of these numbers, though McCain was certainly hoping to keep both Washington and Maine closer due to his appeal among independents. Maine has been a state where both Kerry and Gore have feared losing one of the districts and thus an electoral vote (ME and NE are the only non-winner-take-all states) and Democrats would not like to have to spend money to defend just one electoral vote come the fall campaign.

Finally, three down-the-ballot polls, both from Rasmussen, give something to spin to both parties:

• In Washington, Christine Gregoire has opened a surprising 52% to 41% lead against challenger Dino Rossi in the gubernatorial race. All polls of this race have shown a complete toss-up, with the animosity of the 2004 campaign translating to fixed positions in 2008. So until there is confirmation that there has been movement, consider this to be an outlier.

• Meanwhile, in Maine's Senate race, Rasmussen finds Susan Collins leading Tom Allen by 10 percent, 52% to 42%. This is down from a 16% lead last month.

• Finally, a new Rasmussen poll from Alaska shows Mark Begich leading Ted Stevens 47% to 45% -- a confirmation of the trouble Stevens is in after a Research 2000 poll showed him trailing by 5% earlier this week. The previous Rasmussen poll showed Stevens leading by 1%.
  

It's hard to know what to make of the Maine Senate race. This has been one of the Democrats' top target since the beginning. But a series of polls in the fall showing Collins with huge leads against Allen showed that this would not be a repeat of Rhode Island's 2006 race and that Collins had a much more solid base among independents and Democrats (a base any Republican Senator needs in Maine). In this poll, she gets 34% of Democrats and the two candidates are tied among independents. Also, this poll finds her with a 70% favorability rating, including 32% saying they have a very favorable impression of her. And Tom Allen is no unknown...

Yet, in a Democratic year in a Democratic state with a strong candidate, Democrats are not out of the running yet. A 10 percent lead is still not enough to make this a top-tier race, but it looks like the increase of partisanship could be making Collins more vulnerable, and the disparity between her favorability rating and her vote percentage is telling of the same difficulty that plagued Chaffee in Rhode Island. But she remains above 50 percent so we will wait for confirmation that there is any tightening at all here.

Thursday polls: Color Arkansas red

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A bad polling day for Clinton

It is ironic that, on a day in which most state polls look bad for Hillary Clinton, the most talked about survey is Gallup's tracking poll. After 11 days by a statistically significant margin, Hillary Clinton has moved within the margin of error, 47%to 44%. That's a 4% improvement since yesterday and a 7% improvement in the past 3 days -- implying the movement started before the ABC debate.

If this movement is confirmed in the coming days and if the debate is found to move numbers towards Clinton, it would naturally be a significant development. But the most important polls released today suggest that Clinton is declining. A Newsweek survey shows Obama gaining a tremendous amount of ground in the past month, now coming in 19% ahead of his rival, 54% to 35%. If a few more polls confirm the existence of this massive a gap, it will be increasingly difficult for Clinton to hold off the superdelegate flight.

But it is the three polls from the upcoming primaries that are the most threatening to her survival past Tuesday and past May 6th:

• A Rasmussen poll of Pennsylvania, taken entirely yesterday, shows Clinton leading by a tight 47% to 44%. In the previous Rasmussen poll, released on Monday, Clinton was up by 9%.

• Zogby's tracking Pennsylvania tracking poll, meanwhile, shows Clinton leading by a narrow 47% to 43%. Yesterday, she was only ahead 45% to 44%, so today's numbers are a slight post-debate improvement. Zogby adds, however, that "22% of Catholic Democrats and 18% of white Democrats choose McCain against Obama."

• Meanwhile, the most surprising poll comes from Indiana: At the beginning of the week, SUSA found Clinton leading by 16%. Today, a new SUSA poll (conducted entirely before the debate) finds Obama ahead by 5%, 50% to 45%.
  
• The two SUSA polls were not conducted with the same turnout model or for the same outlet; so the two surveys are not directly comparable. However, the poll is clearly bad news for Hillary; the LA Time's poll a few days ago also showed Obama ahead by 5%.

There have been two movements in Pennsylvania polls. First, Obama picked up ground and threatened Clinton's dominance; then, Clinton managed to rebound and create some space. Polls today and yesterday suggest that the electorate is very volatile right now and most anything could happen on Tuesday.

Complicating matters for Clinton is that she will have to immediately work to survive May 6th if she gets past April 22nd. North Carolina has been a lost cause for a while, but it looked like Indiana held premise for Hillary -- the LA Times and latest SUSA poll indicate that Clinton will not have an easy time ensuring solid results in three weeks.

Finally, we also got interesting general election polls results today:

• Newsweek's national poll shows both Democrats ahead of McCain by the same narrow margin, 48% to 44% for Obama and 47% to 43% for Clinton.
  

• In Indiana, SUSA also conducted a general election poll and found a much tighter contest than what we have been accustomed to in the state: McCain leads Obama 51% to 44%. He is ahead of Clinton 53% to 42%. Bush got 60% and 57% in 2000 and 2004.

• In Washington, SUSA (again) found both Democrats leading McCain by differing margins: Obama leads 53% to 40%, while Clinton is ahead 48% to 45%. There is a huge difference among independents: Clinton loses them by 3%, Obama wins by 21%.
  

• In Colorado, meanwhile, Obama leads 46% to 43% against McCain; Clinton is trounced 50% to 46%.

• Finally, a Quinnipiac poll of New York shows McCain too close for comfort (just as yesterday's poll from SUSA) with Clinton ahead 49% to 37% despite only getting 65% of the black vote; Obama is held in single-digits, 47% to 39%.

One of the most consistent electability results is that Obama is much stronger than Clinton among independents out West -- Oregon, Washington and Colorado have consistently shown Clinton faring much worse than Obama. In fact, Colorado is one of the first states the Obama campaign they can take away from the Republican column; it is at the top of Obama's "alternative electoral map" that does not go through states like Ohio and Florida. On the other hand, Obama is more in danger in some of the bluest states, with SUSA yesterday showing him leading in single-digits in CA, NY and MA -- a dangerous finding confirmed by today's Quinnipiac poll.

Tuesday polls: Clinton faces series of potentially game-ending contests

A number of primary contests looming in the next few weeks have still never been polled, though Survey USA corrected the most glaring of these omissions today by releasing the first public survey of Oregon, which votes on May 20th:

• Barack Obama leads Hillary Clinton 52% to 42%. He is the one who benefits from a very large gender gap (+37%), as he leads by 30% among men.

Oregon's voting is conducted entirely by mail, with all the ballots counted the night of May 20th. That could create a different turnout pattern than what we have witnessed in other states. Another important fact about Oregon is that it holds a closed primary in which only registered Democrats can vote. This could be crucial for the Obama campaign since one of Clinton's main arguments against him is his weakness among registered Democrats and his reliance on independents to win primaries; if Obama maintains a strong lead in Oregon, expect his campaign to use these numbers to counter Clinton's criticism.

Meanwhile, Clinton's main preoccupation is Pennsylvania, for she doesn't have much to expect from any May states if she cannot hold her own on April 22nd. All the polls over the past week showing a dramatic tightening of the race, with Obama even leading in one of them and tying Clinton in a second. Today, three new polls from the Keystone state show very differing trends:

• Quinnipiac's second poll in six days shows yet another tightening, with Clinton's lead now down to 6%: 50% to 44%. The margin last week was 50% to 41%. Looking at the shifts among internals, there is no particular group who has moved more than others.

• Rasmussen's survey brings good and bad news for Hillary: She is leading by only 5%, 48% to 43%. But this margin has remained stable in the past week, making Rasmussen the first institute to release a poll without movement away from Clinton.

• And then we get the surprise: SUSA's new survey shows Clinton jumping back up to a very significant lead, 56% to 38%. Last week, Clinton was leading by 12% (so SUSA never went in the low ranges that other polling institutes are showing).
  
• SUSA points to a lot of groups that shifted in the past 3 polls over the past month's (finding shifts among men and Southeast PA voters especially significant), but concludes that "The complete absence of movement among whites and among women is striking. Among white voters, Clinton polled at 61% in all 3 tracking polls. Among women, Clinton was at 62% a month ago, 62% last week, and 61% today."

The combination of these three polls confirms that the run-up to April 22nd will be very interesting, and that the debate next week could be crucial to the results. It goes without saying that a mid-single digit lead is much less than what Clinton needs to win by on April 22nd -- and there are too many polls showing the race to be trending against her for Hillary to be comfortable here. But at least the SUSA poll suggests that (just as in Ohio) Clinton has not lost her upward potential and could recover enough of the ground she has lost lately to survive beyond Pennsylvania. However, the Obama campaign is rapidly gaining confidence in its Pennsylvania numbers and this could lead them to invest even more in the state than they had planned. They do not have to believe that they will win the state, just that they will hold Clinton as low as possible.

Finally, the last primary poll comes from North Carolina, where PPP has found Obama leading Clinton 54% to 33%. This is the same margin that he posted last week, though that can certainly not be held against him given how massive his lead already is.

Pennsylvania, Oregon and North Carolina vote on three different dates; all three Election Days could mean instant death to the Clinton campaign which has very little room for error left. They first have to win Pennsylvania convincingly and they have to post great results on May 6th and May 20th; it seems to me that Clinton can survive without winning North Carolina and Oregon (as long as she wins Indiana and Kentucky comfortably) but she has to keep it close in both of these states -- and right now it doesn't look like she is managing to, at least in North Carolina.

• General election polls: Washington and Alabama
  

The day's two general election polls come to us from (who else?) SUSA and Rasmussen:

• In Washington, SUSA comes out with Obama leading McCain 51% to 44% while the Republican edges out Clinton 46% to 45%. McCain progressed against both Democrats in the past three weeks, when another SUSA poll showed him trailing Clinton by 5 and Obama by 11.
  

• In Alabama, Rasmussen finds McCain leading Clinton 51% to 40% and Obama 55% to 37%. McCain's favorability rating (60%) far distances that of Clinton (46%) and Obama (39%).
  

While no one expects Alabama to be anywhere on the list of competitive states in November, it is worth pointing out that Bush won 63% to 37% in 2004. As for Washington, it is a state both Kerry and Gore had to worry about but ultimately carried more comfortably than neighboring Oregon -- so Democrats better hope to take a firmer control of the state's 11 electoral votes.

Monday polls: McCain edges Democrats in 5 out of 6 matchups in blue states

McCain continues his strong streak in Rasmussen's general election polls. He led all four match-ups yesterday in Virginia and Wisconsin. Today, Rasmussen released 3 new general election polls, all from relatively reliable blue states -- and McCain leads in 5 out of 6 of the match-ups.

• In Washington state, always competitive but clearly leaning Democratic, McCain stays very competitive against Obama (he trails 48% to 43%) and leads against Hillary: 46% to 43%.

• In Michigan, also a tight state which Democrats have come to depend on, McCain looks well positioned to score a major pick-up. McCain edges out Obama 43% to 42% and Clinton 45% to 42%. While both match-ups are toss-ups, even that much is dangerous for Democrats in a state they absolutely need. And these numbers are confirmed by other states which also show McCain competitive.
• The favorability ratings also put the Republican on top: McCain is at 55%, Obama at 50% and Clinton at 47%.

• In New Jersey, finally, McCain also edges out both Obama (46% to 45%) and Clinton 45% to 42%. That's a stunning turn-around from last month's Rasmussen numbers, in which Clinton led 50% to 39%; Obama already trailed 45% to 43%.
• The favorability numbers in this blue state are also noteworthy: McCain is at 61%, Obama at 58% (a 6% improvement) and Clinton at 50% (a 6% drop).

It goes without saying that McCain's strength in all three of these states should greatly worry Democrats. It is hard to imagine an electoral map for either Clinton or Obama that does not incorporate New Jersey, Michigan and Washington. While it is certainly mathematically possible to get to 270 without them, this group of state would not be the first to go and would signal that Democrats are too busy defending states that should be reliably blue to be looking into picking up Virginia, Colorado, Ohio and Florida.

As I pointed out yesterday, Rasmussen's polls tend to favor McCain more than other surveys, but that is not reason enough for McCain's chances to be dismissed in these states. The whole point of his general election strength is that his appeal to independents could endanger states like New Jersey and Michigan that have tended to vote Democratic in recent cycles but that have always flirted with the Republican nominee. Add to that the problem of the Michigan delegates and the ill-will that could create in the state against the Democratic nominee.

It's early in the game, but we have enough indications that much more states than we expected could be in play in 2008 with both sides putting in play states that weren't considered that competitive in 2004.

Meanwhile, ARG released its first North Carolina primary poll of the year:

• Obama is leading 51% to 38%. That includes a 78% to 17% lead among black voters, while he trails Clinton among whites 49% to 37%.

Obama seems to have taken back a double-digit lead in North Carolina poll, with this survey actually on the lower-end of the 3 polls we have seen from the state over the past 2 weeks (PPP and Insider Advantage being the two others). As I have explained elsewhere, a large Obama win in North Carolina could be as hurtful to Clinton than if she loses Indiana.

Update: PPP released its new North Carolina poll and shows Obama up 54% to 36% -- pretty much where it was last week when Obama was leading by 18%. He gets 36% of the white vote and 81% of the black vote.

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.

The electability question revisited, with new general election polls

The electability debate has been raging for months now and has served as an important subtext of the Democratic primaries. In fact, electabilty arguments were invoked far less in the GOP primaries, surprisingly so given that the polls were much more consistent in who would be the strongest Republican in a general election. And now that McCain is the presumptive nominee, we will probably no longer see general election polls from very red states in which Democrats manage a tie or even lead (a poll even had Clinton competitive in Texas some time in the fall!).

In the Democratic race, however, it has been much more difficult to find a pattern of electability. I have addressed this question many times in the past few months, the first time at the beginning of September when an Ohio poll had Clinton running significantly better than Obama and a Colorado poll had her much weaker than her rival.

Over the next few months, I attempted to find some pattern, some consistency and the only conclusion I have been able to reach is that (1) Clinton polls better than Obama in red Southern states (which Clinton often looked competitive in) and in the Northeast (Obama often struggles against McCain in polls from New York and Massachusetts) and that (2) Obama is stronger in the Southwest and Northwest. That hypothesis is usually confirmed by surveys and, as we will see, this week's SUSA surveys give more evidence for that. I first stated this theory in November, after a poll of Alabama showed Clinton surprisingly strong and a poll of Oregon showed Obama outpacing her.

In the rest of the country (especially in the Midwest) it has been seemingly impossible to find a pattern of electability. That same day, I also wrote , "Hillary looked more electable in this week's MN poll, while Barack looked more solid in the Iowa poll from the day before."

Today's new polls show that it remains very difficult to judge the electability case of the two Democratic front-runners. First, there is Time's national poll that will likely be often cited in the coming days:

• Time has Obama leading McCain by 7%, 48% to 41%, while Hillary is tied at 46%.
• Commenting on these numbers, Time's pollster says, "Independents tilt toward McCain when he is matched up against Clinton But they tilt toward Obama when he is matched up against the Illinois Senator."

We also got this week a series of three state polls from SUSA. They all tested Romney, whose results I am including as an indication of McCain's relative strength:

• A Kentucky poll has McCain leading Clinton 53% to 43% and crushing Obama 61% to 32%. Clinton manages a lead against Romney, 48% to 46%, while Romney trounces Obama 55% to 38%.


• In Indiana, the two Democrats poll equally. Clinton trails McCain 51% to 42% and Obama is behind 50% to 40%. Both also lose against Romney, albeit by smaller margins: 49% to 44% and 47% to 44%.


• Finally, in Washington state, it is Obama who does much better, as he destroys McCain 55% to 38% while Clinton is forced into a tie at 46%. Against Romney, Clinton leads 51% to 41%, but that's far weaker than Obama's 61% to 31%.

These results do not contradict my theory of which regions Obama and Clinton are strong in; Kentucky in particular has been a state in which Clinton has been consistently competitive. Despite this, the media inexplicably keeps running with the story of Clinton hurting down-the-ballot Democrats in those states.

The internals of the SUSA polls have a few other interesting clues relating to the electability question. First, on the gender gap:

• In Kentucky, Clinton runs 20% better then Obama overall. And that margin entirely comes from the female vote. Among men, both candidates are running roughly equal (Obama trails 62-30 and Clinton trails 60-36); among women, Obama trails 60% to 34% (no gender gap whatsoever) while Clinton actually leads 49% to 46%, 29% better than Obama.
• In Washington, on the other hand, it is the male vote that makes the difference between Clinton and Obama. Both candidates have a slight lead againt McCain among women, but look at the male vote: Clinton trails 47% to 43% while Obama leads 62% to 32%. That's a 34% swing.

A third characteristic that holds across those polls is that Clinton is much stronger among registered Democrats than Obama, who gets more cross-over votes from Republicans:

• In Kentucky a full 44% of Democrats vote McCain if Obama is their nominee, versus only 28% if the nominee is Clinton.
• In Indiana, McCain takes 18% of the Democratic vote against Clinton, and 30% against Obama. On the other hand, Clinton takes 9% of the GOP vote and Obama gets 19%. (Clinton does a bit better among indies).
• In Washington, Clinton does better among registered Democrats but she only takes 6% of Republican votes, while Obama gets 25%.

Obama and Clinton both will have significant strength and weaknesses in a general election. Obama is stronger among men, but Clinton causes female voters to massively vote to Democrat. Obama attracts the center and can get votes from the right, but what use is that if he cannot hold is his base? Clinton does that holding very well, but she needs to appeal to independents to get to the White House.

The Latino vote will also be very interesting to look at. They have gotten Clinton out of trouble many times over the past few weeks, starting with Nevada and ending with New Mexico and California. On the GOP side, John McCain is the only one who potentially could appeal to Hispanics given that he never fully followed the lead of fellow candidates towards nativism and immigrant-bashing. Will a McCain-Obama showdown help the GOP attract more Latino votes than they were expecting to this cycle? Can Clinton offset McCain's strength among the Hispanic community? Or will the GOP's increasingly harsh and nativist language on immigration doom any chance McCain has of winning the Latino vote? Given that immigration will be a big issue in November, it is unlikely that McCain will be able to distance himself from those in the party who Latinos justifiably will reject.

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%.