PPP CO Poll: Double Digit Lead for Obama as Latinos Tip Scale

Update: Mayhill Fowler at HuffPo has much more on Colorado, including the great photo above.

Public Policy Polling released a new Colorado poll (pdf) yesterday showing Sen. Barack Obama with a ten point lead over John McCain.

Obama leads John McCain 52-42, up from a seven point advantage in a PPP Colorado survey three weeks ago. With only 6% of voters undecided and just 6% of those with a current preference open to changing their minds McCain is basically in a situation right now where he will need to take every undecided voter and also every Obama supporter willing to consider changing their mind to have any chance at winning the state.

PPP says the Latino vote has propelled Obama to his surge, and similar trends are seen in New Mexcio and Nevada: [More...]

Most of Obama’s gains over the last three weeks can be traced to the Hispanic vote. Where his lead among those voters was previously 57-36, he has now upped it to 71-21. The breakdown of white voters is exactly the same as it was previously, a 48-47 lead for Obama.

“The overwhelming support Barack Obama is receiving from Hispanic voters in Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada is likely to flip that trio of states into the Democratic column after they all went for George W. Bush in 2004,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “Perhaps more significantly though, they could be the harbinger of a long term movement toward the Democrats in the Mountain West.”

Full poll results are attached to the above link. Also of interest: 49% of those polled said McCain's choice of Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate made them less likely to vote for McCain.

The poll also has positive numbers for Rep. Mark Udall in the Senate race against former Rep. Bob Schaffer. Udall leads by 10%, 49% to 39%.

< Sunday Newspaper Endorsements | Eyewitness ID: A Primary Cause of Wrongful Convictions >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    McCain's fading fortunes in Colorado (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 12:32:47 PM EST
    explain why he's working Pennsylvania so hard. For him, winning Pennsylvania would almost make up for the loss of Colorado and Virginia.

    The problem for McCain is that, in the end, he'll lose all three. That's in addition to his likely loss of Florida and Ohio.

    MUHAHAHAHAH! (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Faust on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 12:35:34 PM EST
    I know (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 12:42:48 PM EST
    It's not normal for the Dems to be in this position, but think of what McCain is faces.

    I believe he is praying for a map looking something like this (mind that the colors are reversed). But he's now behind in Florida and WAY behind in Pennsylvania. And Nevada is a very iffy bet for him.

    I just don't see how he makes this work.


    He makes it work (none / 0) (#9)
    by Faust on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:03:27 PM EST
    by getting down on his knees and praying for divine intervention. Unless there is some kind of "hidden effect" be it a bradley effect or otherwise there is simply nothing left for McCain on the map. I have this strange feeling, not backed up by any hard data, that Ohio could still go for McCain but that by itself does nothing other than keep him in a game that he can lose in many other ways.

    Maybe McCain can convince Obama to whip a flag out of his pocket at the next debate and scream "Death to America" and then set the flag on fire and jump up and down on it.


    Yup, Ohio is tricky (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:07:16 PM EST
    I think McCain may well win there. Florida continues to seem like a better bet for Obama.

    Neveda (none / 0) (#11)
    by koshembos on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:27:19 PM EST
    Clack county, where Las Vegas is, traditionally votes Democrat. The rest of the state traditionally votes Republican. Reno in the north is the larger population concentration of the rest of the state. Reno suffers from competition with the Indian casinos in Northern California and is not in great shape.

    Obama and the unions are planning a strong get out the vote in Reno is an attempt to narrow the Republican win in Reno and the rest of the state. Since I know the guy who plan the "assault" in Reno, I am sure the results will be positive.


    I wouldn't be so quick (none / 0) (#12)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:27:31 PM EST
    to assume McCain will lose Ohio. I believe 2004 polling just prior to the Presidential election showed Kerry in the lead -- not the dead heat I believe we have now, and Kerry still lost. And a focus on getting out the vote in Ohio will not be the solution -- turnout in 2004 was extraordinarily high and contributed to the long lines. Based on the economy, the Dems should have a double digit lead in Ohio, but do not.  I'm not sure what is happening: In 2006, state-wide elective offices in Ohio were taken by the Dems, with the exception of election of judges to Ohio's top court, which I believe now has 100% Republican membership.
    If I were Obama, I'd get together with Detroit &/or __, and make joint announcement of a deal to use some of the $25 billion from the Feds together with private sector money? to build hybrid car manufacturing plants in Ohio (and elsewhere?) in combo with state industrial revenue bonds or whatever.  A proposal, if possible, with specifics, feasibility & commitment, which would also provides taxpayers with a quid pro quo for the tax dollars being used to bail out corporations.  Perhaps somewhat simplistic, but my mom always said, "where there's a will, there's a way."    

    Bush had a narrow lead in OH (none / 0) (#13)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:32:26 PM EST
    on election day and for some time before that.

    But the point is that an Ohio win, while desirable, is not necessary for Obama this year.


    Not to belabor the point (none / 0) (#15)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:47:22 PM EST
    but, I note that Bush's 'average' lead of 2.1 points was within the margin of error of the polls (MOEs ranged from 2.6 to 4.1), and the Columbus Dispatch poll -- with historic reliability (I think) had Bush & Kerry dead even, while majority of polls for the week before had Kerry in the lead.  I guess what I'm saying is that Ohio was a dead heat in 2004 and it seems to be now.  If you are right that Obama has comfortable leads in other states Kerry did not carry with enough electoral votes, then my point is indeed moot.  Thanks for the link.

    Well, here's where the race stands (none / 0) (#16)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:57:53 PM EST
    Obama is pretty much guaranteed all of the Kerry states, and has picked off NM and IA.

    So if he wins one of VA or CO, he's the next President. Ohio alone would seal the deal, and so would Florida. I expect Obama to win them all in the end, but no one state alone is necessary.


    Don't latest polls (none / 0) (#19)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 03:33:19 PM EST
    move Colorado into clearly Dem?

    It makes me very uncomfortable to rely on either  Ohio and FL -- too much history and very little of it addressed effectively.  Thanks for run-down.


    What's that in the bag? Oh, it's the (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by tigercourse on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 12:59:18 PM EST
    election. As I've said before, I hope Obama's got some kind of brain trust (absent Daschle) working overtime to figure out what he does come the day after the election.

    (absent Daschle) LOL :) (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:03:01 PM EST
    I knew Colorado would come in for Obama (none / 0) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 12:28:33 PM EST

    Si, Se Puede!!!! (none / 0) (#4)
    by EddieInCA on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 12:36:51 PM EST
    Got my shirt from CafePress yesterday.  

    Good news. I think Obama is trying (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:02:09 PM EST
    to get the western trifecta (NV,CO,NM) to offset a potential loss in Ohio, which I think he still has problems in, despite the strong polling. Remember that it's highly unlikely that Obama will win this election by more than 5 or 6 points in the pop vote. That means that if Obama wins Ohio, it's my belief that it will be by one or two points max. If Obama wins Ohio by more than 4 or 5 pts, I think that means he will win every swing state, and maybe pull a shocker.

    The Western Trifecta? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:59:28 PM EST
    Please tell me you made this up.  If you did you can't type it or print it anymore.  I can deal with California being the only relevant entity in the West.  I have dealt with it my whole life.  If something new for hot air gas bag pundits to strategize for is birthed out of the West I cannot endorse its creation.  I already have the no Repugs without Ohio, the path to Pennsylvania Ave runs through Pennsylvania, and the Bradley effect...and that's only the beginning.  If we are going to have a Western trifecta now to angle for my brain will explode.

    Heheheh...so funny! :) (none / 0) (#22)
    by lilburro on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 05:18:55 PM EST
    I do like that picture. (none / 0) (#14)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 01:34:56 PM EST
    Granted it is the Republic of Boulder, but seeing the wife of the Democratic candidate drawing huge crowds in a welcome sight.  

    We may not vote for First Spouse, but these days it is an important consideration in how people vote.  

    After seeing MO in the Daily Show the other night, I came away thinking here's someone that I would want to have a long conversation with over dinner.  Screw the whole "someone I would drink a beer with" deal--I can have a beer with any idiot.  Here's someone that I could actually relate to and respect.  Same goes for her husband.  Maybe I just long for the days when being informed, articulate and smart aren't considered bad things. Guess that makes me an elitist or something.

    So J, are you ready to join me in calling CO for Obama yet?

    Sweet! So why is (none / 0) (#18)
    by mg7505 on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 03:30:11 PM EST
    the New York Times Electoral Map still showing a tie in Colorado? According to their numbers, this would put Obama over the top, at 273.

    Bradley Effect, etc. (none / 0) (#20)
    by desertdude on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 03:33:35 PM EST
    So all that remains to be seen is how much "Bradley Effect" there will be between these scientific polls and the final outcome.

    Best not get too confident here...

    As pointed out in der Spiegel a few days ago:

    "One is that Palin's policy failings pale beside her animal appeal, and that she could still be a major asset for the McCain ticket. Last night I saw TV interviews with average moms and housewives out in the heartland -- basic working class white women. They are blithely unaware of Palin's stumbles in her big TV appearances. They are aware of one thing only -- she identifies with them and they identify with her. And we know gut identification historically trumps all other calculations in political decisions, except among political elites (or maybe for them, too; after all, most of the intelligentsia identifies with Obama; he's one of them)."

    It has not been seen in 26 years (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Cream City on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 06:13:57 PM EST
    if it even was evident in Bradley's loss -- which is more reasonably explained by lower black turnout than projected.  Really, why keep talking about it without knowing the questions about it?  Because pundits like Gene Robinson like it, and every time they talk about, they show that they read a paragraph or two about it somewhere.  That's all.

    Mccain's too old.. (none / 0) (#21)
    by caesar on Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 03:47:22 PM EST
    He's showing serious signs of senility, by inciting racial hatred to vulnerable people who don't associate with anyone other than the people within their community (i.e. church, or immediate families). Mccain uses defamotory arguments to target people who are predisposed to believe that Obama is somehow related to Osama, just because of the similarity of the names. This is tenuous and nothing more than inciting racial hatred by pumping smears and fears into the hearts of people who are going to vote Mccain anyway.
    I don't really understand why Mccain is dividing the country so much, when Obama is all about lifting the potential of the Middle-Class up. Also, the fact that the Christian community is making it sounds as if only their religious community is the one who will be voting for Mccain, and that non-Christian people are voting for Obama, is turning a ton of Independent voters toward Obama very fast. That wasn't very wise to embrace that notion.. quite stupid to draw lines like that actually. There are a lot of non-Christians in this vast diverse country. I'll bet all of the Jewish Florida votes go to Obama as a result of this latest Christian polarization... what a dumb move by Mccain.. I just don't understand their rationale.