home

Drilling Down Into The Poll Numbers: FL, PA and OH

We now have ARG joining Quinnipiac in putting Obama ahead in Florida. To me this is the most stunning and welcome development of the general election campaign and I am wondering how it happened. I have seen no major campaigning by Obama in Florida, no ad blitz, no nothing really, to explain it.

So I want to drill down into the numbers a bit to consider what is going on. The Q-Poll has the following demographic breakdown for Florida:

Florida women likely voters back Obama 50 - 40 percent, while men go 47 percent for McCain and 44 percent for Obama. White voters back McCain 50 - 40 percent while black voters back Obama 95 - 4 percent. Obama leads 57 -35 percent with voters 18 to 34 years old; he splits 48 - 46 percent with McCain among voters 35 to 54, and 44 - 46 percent with voters over 55.

Let's compare that to Florida 2004:

Bush won whites (70% of the electorate) 57-42; Kerry won African American (12% of the electorate) 86-13; and Bush won Hispanics (15% of the electorate) 56-44. Bush won Florida by 4 points.

It is surprising that Q does not provide the Latino breakout, but for the sake of argument let's assume a 56-44 split for McCain. The real story here is Obama capturing 40% of the white vote. The 95-4 on the African American vote will, imo, hold up in virtually every state for Obama. The real issue is will the 40% of the white vote hold up? John Kerry captured 42% of the white vote so it SHOULD be possible.

ARG has Obama within 3 of McCain with the white vote in Florida:

McCain leads Obama 48% to 45% among white voters (73% of likely voters). Obama leads McCain 88% to 8% among African American voters (11% of likely voters). And McCain leads Obama 50% to 41% among Hispanic voters (16% of likely voters).

Now let's dig into the Q poll's Ohio numbers:

Obama leads 51 - 39 percent among Ohio women likely voters, while men go 46 percent for McCain and 45 percent for Obama. White voters also are narrowly divided with 47 percent for McCain and 44 percent for Obama, but Obama commands black voters 90 - 6 percent. The Democrat also leads 58 - 36 percent among voters 18 to 34 and 49 - 42 percent among voters 35 to 54, while McCain has the 47 - 43 percent edge among voters over 55.

Let compare to Ohio 2004:

Bush won whites (86% of the electorate) 56-44. Kerry won African Americans (10% of the electorate) 83-16 and Latinos (3% of the electorate) 65-35. Bush won Ohio by 2 points.

Again, while Obama is assured of winning African Americans by 95-5 in Ohio and probably increasing turnout, the real story here will be if Obama can match or exceed Kerry's share of the white vote in Ohio. If he can, he will win Ohio easily.

Finally, in Pennsylvania, the Q poll says:

Obama tops McCain 57 - 34 percent with women as men go 47 percent for McCain to 45 percent for Obama. Obama leads 61 - 33 percent among voters 18 to 34 years old, 51 - 41 percent among voters 35 to 54 and 48 - 43 percent with voters over 55. The Democrat inches ahead 47 - 44 percent among white voters and leads among black voters 95 - 1 percent.

(Emphasis supplied.) The funny number is the 95-1 African American split but it is realistic to me. Obama will capture 19 of every 20 African American vote cast and there will be more African American votes cast in this election than in any other in history. But the important number is the white vote. Q has Obama LEADING among whites in Pennsylvania. Let's compare to Pennsylvania 2004:

Bush won whites (82% of the electorate) 54-45. Kerry won African Americans (13% of the vote) 86-13 and Latinos (35 of the vote) 72-28. Kerry won Pennsylvania by 2.

To win Pennsylvania, Obama need only match Kerry's performance with white voters (45%). Right now, in the Q poll, he exceeds it. If that holds up, Pennsylvania is safe. And I believe it is.

What is the upshot of all this data? To me it is pretty simple - McCain and the Republican will have to play the race card to have a chance. they have to push down Obama's appeal to white voters to have a chance. They always do of course. But now they must do it against a vigilant Media who are supporting Obama. A tough road to travel for the Straight talk Express.

But the prospect of a landslide loss is staring them in the face.

By Big Tent Democrat

< Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread | Divergence >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Two words. (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:41:16 PM EST
    And they may not be well received around here, but whatever: Unity Bounce.

    Obama had been underperforming the D vs. R fundamentals in his polling.  Now it appears his numbers are reflecting them better -- America just doesn't want another Republican president.

    In order to win this election, McCain's going to need Obama to wet the bed.

    don't underestimate the Obama ground game (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by thereyougo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:13:30 PM EST
    That worked for them in the primary, no reason to be rid of it.

    If Hillary comes out for him big, the women will put him over the top. No question Hillary's endorsement is showing up in the polls. Its a good thing, but I'm still sad about it.

    [ Parent ]

    400 Obama Fellows (5.00 / 2) (#138)
    by 1jane on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:46:51 PM EST
    have been sent to Florida. The Obama grassroots oganizing will go to a whole new level. Florida will go to Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    She said she would 'do her part' ... (4.00 / 0) (#64)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:19:23 PM EST
    ... along with other Dems, but I think it remains to be seen what happens after the convention.

    I hope she's enjoying her well-earned rest. She worked like a champ despite the unprecedented hobbling by her own party and deserves a place of honor in the Dem Hall of Fame.

    [ Parent ]

    These numbers make me think a (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by sarissa on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:48:11 PM EST
    female VP pick like Sebilius (sic?) could really put the nail in the coffin or that McCain will go female as well given how that segment of the vote is apparently killing him.

    It seems Obama (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:06:02 PM EST
    in his heart of hearts wants to put Sebelius on the ticket.  She is from Kansas, as is his white gradparents....Midwestern he trusts....

    But he needs someone with a higher profile....Biden would be good--he skewered Rudy pretty good again today...Or Clark....

    [ Parent ]

    Sebelius?? (none / 0) (#50)
    by smott on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:13:20 PM EST
    On the SUSA polls I've been following, Sebelius is the only one that can really flip wins for BO into losses...

    Edwards gave BO the most bounce vs McCain.

    And for McCain, survey says...the Huckster!

    [ Parent ]

    Yup (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:18:53 PM EST
    But that may be just name recognition....

    He needs someone to needle McCain, take him on rhetorically.....Biden would be great at that.....Clark could really take McCain apart on foreign policy.

    [ Parent ]

    Biden: Right, because (none / 0) (#119)
    by brodie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:38:44 PM EST
    nothing quite says Change like putting a guy on the ticket who's been in the senate since before the Senate Watergate Comm'ee began its hearings.

    Clark would be great if he'd only lasted longer as a viable candidate in 04.  As I recall that one, he came out of the starting blocks with tremendous pre-annoucement momentum and proceeded, on Day One, to fumble an easy and obvious question about how he would have voted on Iraq.

    He also is not exactly deeply steeped in domestic issues.

    Though, once again, compared to certain other choices available these two would be far preferable.

    [ Parent ]

    so McCain raises Condi Rice to the Dems (none / 0) (#59)
    by thereyougo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:17:28 PM EST
    female, it would split the AA vote. Oy vey.

    [ Parent ]
    I doubt it would be Rice (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:24:04 PM EST
    You can bet they can see the ads run with her testifying to the 9-11 Commission on the horizon with that choice.

    [ Parent ]
    Condi hearts Barack (5.00 / 3) (#81)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:24:49 PM EST
    She was blushing around him during her confirmation hearing....Obama voted for her, and she has repaid the courtesy by saying it is remarkable he won the nomination, and during the Wright fiasco talked about slavery being the birth defect in our nation's founding....

    And, Condi's pro-choice.  So, nix that.

    Carly Fiorina, maybe, but she's not all that warm and fuzzy.

    Gingrich wants Jindal--arch conservative (he has written of personally participating in an exorcism and how faith promoting that was) but ethnically diverse.....Only 36 or some such....

    [ Parent ]

    I'd love for McC to tap Condi -- (5.00 / 5) (#131)
    by brodie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:43:58 PM EST
    it would bring into further relief the clear fact that he's running for Bush's 3d term.  And her pro-choice predilections raise some interesting possibilities for intraparty dissension and annoyed Rs staying away from the polls in droves.

    This one though is shaping up to be an election where McC will probably find it necessary to make a bold move for VP, since the issues and the economic/political conditions are working strongly against him.

    No Jindal -- far too young and inexperienced (there goes the decent argument against Obama), serves to further highlight, by stark contrast, the considerable age of McCain himself, and has no broad-based appeal outside of his home state.  

    An anti-choice non-nutcase woman senator or governor for McCain, would be my guess.

    [ Parent ]

    Please let it be Liddy Dole n/t (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:03:12 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    unity ticket (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:48:12 PM EST
    appears like a lot of wasted energy now.

    The reasons are very simple (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:49:33 PM EST
    The Republican brand is in the trash right now.  It is at historically low levels.  

    It will get worse as we get closer to the election.  Sure there will be some ebbs and flows, but Obama will continue to gain a bigger and bigger lead.

    This could be a win of 1932 proportions.

    Yup. (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by sweetthings on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:53:23 PM EST
    It's not so much that Obama is winning, it's that McCain, like Republicans everywhere, is losing.

    [ Parent ]
    Well don't lose sight of the fact that (5.00 / 2) (#190)
    by abfabdem on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:34:25 PM EST
    the RNC has over $50MM in their warchest and the DNC barely $4MM.  

    [ Parent ]
    I'd love that (5.00 / 6) (#19)
    by indy in sc on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:54:31 PM EST
    to be true, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves.  This is just the beginning of what is going to be a looong summer.  I hope Obama is going to be able to weather whatever the Rs throw at him during this campaign.  I believe he will, but if he ever treats this race as anything other than a squeaker, he is going to be in trouble.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree that the Republican (5.00 / 2) (#155)
    by stxabuela on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:56:40 PM EST
    brand is at its nadir.  The tragic flooding in the Midwest is going to hit every American, due to massive crop damage.  Sharply rising food prices, energy prices through the roof, and a continued housing slump spell disaster for Republicans.  

    However, this is not a cake walk for Dems.  The 527 slime machines will be working overtime from Labor Day onward.  Obama does have less experience than McCain, a small percentage of women and Latinos may switch parties or skip the race, and younger voters tend to need a lot more encouragement to turn out at the polls.  I believe the race card will be played by the 527s in the South and Southwest.  

    I think the most problematic issue for Obama is being tarred with the "inexperienced" brush on the issue of national security.  That is the strong suit for the Republicans, and I hope team Obama is preparing for it now.      

       

    [ Parent ]

    I know BTB says... (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by smott on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:51:00 PM EST
    ....it's all in the demographics...

    But it may be that McCain's stepping in it in FL by hyping off shore drilling. I'm no Floridian but from what little I know that is highly unpopular politically....

    The Republicans say there have been no oil spills (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:59:28 PM EST
    Maybe not a mega spill like the Exxon Valdez, but there are always little spills....

    The oceans of coastal California are dying.....The oldtimers talk of abalone, kelp forests and sea otters all up-and-down the coast....Not anymore....

    [ Parent ]

    Orcas endangered, (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by oldpro on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:11:35 PM EST
    coastal salmon fishing restricted now...

    [ Parent ]
    McCain is old enough to remember (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by magster on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:19:16 PM EST
    the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill from off-shore drilling. Footage from this spill would make a good commercial in Florida.

    Only 10 million barrels....

    [ Parent ]

    I thought there was already off-shore drilling (none / 0) (#17)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:52:36 PM EST
    off the coast of FL.

    [ Parent ]
    This is an underreported fact (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by magster on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:05:31 PM EST
    that I hope gets more attention.  Sen. Tester was talking about underutilized leases already authorized on oil fields on the ND-MT border.

    The oil companies are just land-grabbing.

    [ Parent ]

    its my understanding these lands harbor (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by thereyougo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:21:47 PM EST
    huge crude oil holdings, in the billions, but the technology isn't yet available to get at them.

    America has huge resources but unattainable. Hard to believe. NOT! Just like they held off on gas  efficient cars until recently.

    [ Parent ]

    Diary on your point at Kos (5.00 / 0) (#46)
    by magster on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:08:56 PM EST
    here

    [ Parent ]
    hey could you copy some of the finer points (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by thereyougo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:23:09 PM EST
    off that diary sos we don't have to bother ?  ;)

    [ Parent ]
    You're Correct (none / 0) (#62)
    by Niffari on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:19:04 PM EST
    The oil companies are looking for anything that helps them scam the American people out of more money. I'm pretty surprised though that there were any Floridian politicans willing to go along with this plan.

    [ Parent ]
    Are you kidding? (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:02:43 PM EST
    Crist is now talking about his girlfriend publicly. He wants to be VP bad. Changing his position on off shore drilling is no stretch at all.

    [ Parent ]
    wow (none / 0) (#176)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:11:38 PM EST
    now that is way different from talking publicly, girlfriend!


    [ Parent ]
    Do a little homework (none / 0) (#180)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:16:58 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    not sure what that means (none / 0) (#182)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:19:45 PM EST
    but there have been rumors about his orientation for years.

    [ Parent ]
    Ok I mis-understood you (none / 0) (#184)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:20:55 PM EST
    My apologies.

    [ Parent ]
    no problem (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:09:56 PM EST
    I am often to ambiguous for my own good.  but I know one when I see one.

    [ Parent ]
    California Pacific Rim (none / 0) (#76)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:23:11 PM EST
    I thought it was Alaska and the Pacific Rim they want. BTW, as I understand it, the oil there is not the type we need for cars. So we would end up exporting it as we do the Alaskan Pipe Line.

    And for  those of you living in Souther California, have you noticed the derricks in people's back yards while driving up Interstate 5? They are the little dinosaur types.

    [ Parent ]

    Today's Tallahassee Democrat (none / 0) (#197)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:56:41 PM EST
    Crist is now for the lifting of the federal moratorium.  This is today's paper:

    With pain at the pump hurting Florida's tourist economy and new technologies making offshore drilling safer, Gov. Charlie Crist said Tuesday coastal states should be free of a federal moratorium on oil and gas exploration.

    Jubilant Florida Democrats pounced on Crist's support of Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain's position as a retreat on offshore oil drilling -- long a sacred cow in Florida politics. The state Democratic Party produced a list of previous Crist quotes and positions stating his opposition to offshore rigs.

    Crist said he agrees with McCain that "it should be left up to individual states to make the final decision" on oil and natural-gas exploration.


    [ Parent ]

    Really good and surprising polls (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:55:43 PM EST
    The polls may reflect the 4% lead he has in national polls.

    It is astonishing he has any lead at all; his candidacy was always so improbable.

    McCain may begin to feel he needs what he views as a Hail Mary--Jindal as VP; but right now he is flip-flopping his way into Bush's positions, and is clearly going the wrong way.

    Obama needs to go to Europe (at least Germany if not France) when he goes to Iraq and Afghanistan.  A trip to the Knesset is a must too.  He will receive a rousing welcome from the Germans who think he is JFK--the contrast with Bush's recent boring trip will be unmistakable.  And, the enthusiasm of Germany and Europe for Obama will show that people love America for its ideals, not its bombing campaigns; and Obama would be able to credibly show that he has the better chance over McCain of enlisting German and NATO support in Afghanistan.

    Well, excuuuuuuse me... (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by oldpro on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:18:30 PM EST
    but if he wants NATO support in Afghanistan, maybe he should call a subcommittee meeting or something...ya know?  Isn't that the point of being chair?  Maybe hold a g. d. hearing or two (if he's not too busy).  

    Won't be long before McCain brings THAT up...and rightly so...and the longer he goes without ever having convened a substantive meeting of a committee he lobbied to chair re national security, the more vulnerable he is to McCain and the 527s on that subject.

    Big mistake.  Huge.

    [ Parent ]

    He has conducted (3.00 / 2) (#106)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:33:23 PM EST
    subcommitte hearings--not just the one hearing on the ambasssdorship for the guy who funded the swifboating of Kerry--but a substantive hearing a few weeks ago.

    And, I do not think that the subcommittee has jurisdiction over NATO issues--it is not all that powerful a subcommittee.

    [ Parent ]

    You are mistaken. (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:37:08 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Caution: you also may be labeled a (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:48:14 PM EST
    "contrarian."

    [ Parent ]
    pfft (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:08:38 PM EST
    hasnt seemed to slow you down.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually, it did for a couple hours as I (5.00 / 1) (#209)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:13:10 PM EST
    couldn't come up w/a suitably snappy rejoinder.

    [ Parent ]
    what is the margin of error (none / 0) (#161)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:59:34 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    In FL we seem to have fallen (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:57:59 PM EST
    into an election dead zone since the end of the Dem primaries. I have seen very little news of either candidate.  I don't think the GE campaign has really begun here yet.

    But to be starting from a dead start ahead of McCain is indeed great news.

    I don't trust the FL data (4.50 / 2) (#200)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:02:38 PM EST
    I was a Voting Rights Attorney for Kerry in Northern FL.  While there are many registered Dems there, they overwhelmingly voted Repub and do so in the Presidential elections. They have one issue only (or at least then did) and that was abortion.  They register as Dems for local elections more than anything else.  This was all explained to me by the Election Commissioner and her staff. Note, I spent a week doing this.  I would be shocked if this region voted for Obama.  In the primaries they went overwhlmingly for Edwards.  It is more like the South than what people perceive as Florida today. These are people who have been there for generations.  I also note there is no breakdown fo rthe Latino vote either.

    [ Parent ]
    The Republicans (5.00 / 0) (#35)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:03:03 PM EST
    are being awfully quiet, aren't they?  Why is that?  I don't know, but don't start buying the balloons just yet.

    Maybe... (none / 0) (#202)
    by Thanin on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:06:14 PM EST
    theyve finally realized they have nothing important to say.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, is that the troll-rater? (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by madamab on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:03:39 PM EST
    LOL! How sweet.

    Wait a tick. :D (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:05:04 PM EST
    Did you say that you think Pennsylvania is safe? Didn't we have an argument two days ago about that, where I said it was safe and you said it was swing?

    Anyways, the FL numbers aren't so surprising. The McCain talk about drilling offshore there is unpopular in Florida, especially along the Space Coast, and I recently saw a CNN report where Obama's position on Cuba was actually starting to attract some of those Cuban-American voters. We'll see, I guess.

    I cannot believe ... (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:19:38 PM EST
    that people are again believing Obama's strong polling.

    Are our memories that short?

    aparrently they are (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:32:49 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Short enough to know... (none / 0) (#208)
    by Thanin on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:11:52 PM EST
    the republican brand name is trash.  Personally Im starting to suspect the McSame camp is hiring the same guys that brought us New Coke.

    [ Parent ]
    You have been giving out 1 ratings (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:20:34 PM EST
    for mere disagreement for a while now.

    Pick one (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:27:53 PM EST
    Ohio, or Florida. If McCain loses either, he has essentially no chance of winning this election. I don't think he has enough money to keep PA close, defend Florida AND win Ohio. He needs a steady 7-10 pt lead in Florida, like he had before, or he's probably sunk.

    Uh (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:28:19 PM EST
    I really don't agree with the logic that says the race card is the only chance McCain has of appealing to the white vote.  Everything is an appeal to the white vote.  Offshore drilling is an appeal to the white vote.

    It's an appeal to all the other votes too, of course, but the assumption seems to be that the numbers for Obama's black support are not malleable.  (Arguably, they're not particularly malleable in any other year either.)  That doesn't prove that McCain couldn't pick up non-black votes simply by making a non-racial, issue-based appeal.

    Obama's white vote numbers in these states (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:30:39 PM EST
    seem better than they ever were during the primaries. I don't know how that's possible, but there it is. Seems precarious to me.

    [ Parent ]
    Because there aren't two dems splitting the vote (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by MikeDitto on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:49:12 PM EST
    And because unaffiliated people don't vote in primaries. Even in states with open primaries, unaffiliated people don't vote in large numbers.

    [ Parent ]
    That's not really an explanation (none / 0) (#152)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:54:05 PM EST
    It could be that white Democrats felt more strongly about Hillary than white voters of all stripes fell about McCain. If so, that would be a good thing. I suspect it is not so.

    [ Parent ]
    I Wondered About the 'White Men' Numbers (none / 0) (#183)
    by daring grace on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:20:51 PM EST
    I'm not savvy about polls, but I thought white men were the meat and potatoes of Republican voters, Those numbers look awfully close to me.

    Shouldn't McCain be carrying a larger share?

    [ Parent ]

    Isn't BTD reprising the same offensive (5.00 / 0) (#112)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:34:53 PM EST
    pap that the Obama camp used against Hillary?
    I want none of it.
    There are LOTS of great reasons to oppose Obama; unfortunately for McCain, there aren't many good reasons to vote for him.

    [ Parent ]
    bottom line is: (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by A DC Wonk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:35:23 PM EST
    McCain is on the wrong side of almost every issue.  The only reason to vote for McCain, imho, is if you think the country's been doing great the past eight years.  McCain stands for continued strong presence in Iraq, making Bush's tax cuts permanent (actually expanding them), privatization of Social Security, expanding wiretapping power, torture, gas-tax-holiday, poor energy policy, poor environmental policy, against Roe v Wade, no talking with Iran or Syria, opposes windfall profits tax for oil companies, etc etc.  I don't see how anyone who is politically left or center could possibly countenance voting for him.

    [ Parent ]
    I saw what looked like a pattern (5.00 / 0) (#96)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:29:59 PM EST
    and figured I'd ask.

    As for the rest of it...whatev...

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:30:12 PM EST
    You doth protest too much.  Lots of people are arguing that this thing is basically in the bag already because of the overall political landscape.

    These numbers are a positive indicator for Obama. (5.00 / 0) (#108)
    by demps on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:33:33 PM EST
    That is all. They prove nothing indisputably, only November will, but certainly such polling is positive news for the Obama campaign. Everyone should really grow up.

    Polls mean nothing (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by Left of center on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:37:36 PM EST
    until Hillary is officially out of the VP slot. 56% of Democrats want Hillary as the VP, and after that doesn't happen, Obama's numbers till take a dive while undecideds climb.

    "Hispanic" (5.00 / 3) (#129)
    by MikeDitto on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:43:35 PM EST
    It's a tougher breakdown in Florida than elsewhere, and I think you've touched on that before.

    Florida's Cuban immigrant population is not necessarily going to vote in a bloc with Florida's Mexican and Central American immigrant population, which is not going to necessarily vote in a bloc with Florida's fairly sizable community of Puerto Ricans.

    I don't think you can break out the "Hispanic" vote and have it be as meaningful in Florida as you could in, say, California--because California's Latino population is fairly homogeneous by comparison. I imagine you could break out the subgroups, but it would likely require a significantly larger sample size (and thus be more expensive) to get a statistically significant result. I'm sure the DNC and Obama are doing just that in their internal polling, but the news orgs might only do that once or twice before the election just due to the expense.

    This poll was double the sample size (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:48:45 PM EST
    of a normal state poll. I wish they had broken down (of Cuban descent, etc.), but even if they didn't, they should have reported a Hispanic crosstab. There are many variations within the white vote--Jews aren't given their own crosstab here, for example--and yet that is reported too.

    [ Parent ]
    Weird (none / 0) (#151)
    by MikeDitto on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:52:45 PM EST
    I wonder if they failed to ask the subgroup question. I commissioned a poll for an organization in 2006 and someone screwed up in the programming and the computers failed to prompt the phoners for a couple of the questions. It happens.

    [ Parent ]
    I suppose it's possible (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:57:29 PM EST
    Respondents were asked about their demographic details. There are enough hispanics in Florida for some to have said "I'm not white or black." I wonder if most hispanics just reported themselves as white. That's not something I would expect, but I don't really know.

    [ Parent ]
    Cuban registered as Repubs in FL (none / 0) (#212)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:18:36 PM EST
    as high as 69% as of 2007.  Would take a lot of crossover voting for Obama to swing that group.

    Dominicans in Fl:
    So, how can Dominicans be significant this year in the presidential election? There is a way! Remember Florida in the Bush-Gore race (could we forget?) If 1/3 of the Dominicans in Florida can legally vote, that's a 30,000 vote block, which has proven to be enough to swing states and elections.

    [ Parent ]

    Of course (none / 0) (#213)
    by MikeDitto on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:22:21 PM EST
    How could I forget to mention Dominicans? I used to date a Dominican. 30,000 is not a huge number, but it's nothing to be sniffed at either.

    [ Parent ]
    These Florida numbers (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by nr22 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:49:02 PM EST
    may force McCain to pick Crist for VP, which would prevent him from making a more aggressive pick. McCain cannot win without Florida.

    The long primary (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:51:10 PM EST
    I am of the mind that the long primary made the Republican talking points/platform irrelevant.  They have no chance with people being sick of the Bushies and their brand being totally marginalized the whole primary season, they are out of here.  

    Now one caveat besides slime.  I think they are working on some kind of big Middle East breakthrough, mind you, not necessarily real, but they will come up with something.  

    Or, they will throw in the towel, and rebrand after the two years of the DNC presidency.  

    dont worry to much (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:52:45 PM EST
    I plan to be around when it intrudes on you guys.

    Wow, I hadn't even considered that pasttime (5.00 / 0) (#160)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:59:26 PM EST
    But you just made my day :-)

    I'm flexing to lazy summer hours after working my @ss off on double shifts all winter.

    I never considered Freelance Pestering before but -- gosh, just thanks is all!

    [ Parent ]

    Those polls are great news. (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by halstoon on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:58:09 PM EST
    After the primary, I was afraid Obama might have more of an uphill battle, but apparently people really do understand the choice presented to them. John McCain would be a terrible choice for president, and most Americans can see that. The more they see of the GE, the worse it'll get for McCain. I think Obama could win a huge victory.

    This is awesome news (5.00 / 6) (#166)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:06:01 PM EST
    Since so many think he will win in a landslide, I think Sen. Obama should start acting like a leader NOW. On FISA, on health care reform, on Iraq, on Medicare financing. If he has this much of a following, let's see some actual leadership with policy specifics. Let's see some frickin' bold ideas. NOW.

    I want to look at something else (5.00 / 2) (#167)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:06:24 PM EST
    SUSA's Florida poll from February. We are really not too far from what that poll reported. If Obama were able to bump up his Hispanic anywhere close support to the levels Hillary was getting at the time, it would explain where he is now.

    Sooo (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:11:15 PM EST
    ARG and Q-P agree.  Does that mean that ARG is suddenly credible or that Q-P has suddenly gone in the gutter.  Or both?

    Can you glean anything at all from the fact that Q-P agrees with ARG?  Maybe ARG does the dart-board thing like Zogby and copycatted Q-P.

    Somehow this reminds me (4.88 / 9) (#22)
    by frankly0 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:56:45 PM EST
    of when the Laker fans were celebrating being 24 points ahead of the Celtics in the 4th game of the finals.

    Except that Obama isn't ahead by anything like the equivalent of 24 pts.

    Look, people, Dukakis was ahead by 17 pts in a poll later in the election season than this, and got trounced by 8 pts in the election -- a 25 pt turnaround.

    Can anyone act as if they understand this? Or are we all born yesterday?

    I am completely indifferent (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:28:13 PM EST
    to the results of any polls coming out today.  

    My prediction is based on looking at the political landscape.  

    This is not 1988.  1988 was more like 2000 than 2008.  This is more like 1932, 1952, or 1976.  

    [ Parent ]

    I don't see a single person (4.25 / 4) (#29)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:01:16 PM EST
    saying it's time to sit back and coast.  It's OK to look at the facts and say that while it's a long summer and fall, the way things are going now, Obama will win handily.  It's a harmless (and true) observation, and nobody's confusing good news with good results.  

    There's no reason to think the Obama campaign is taking their eye off the ball, meanwhile.

    [ Parent ]

    No, evidently this morning (none / 0) (#174)
    by Redshoes on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:09:02 PM EST
    but you hope's not such a bad thing.

    [ Parent ]
    A Reagan third term looked (none / 0) (#196)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:56:00 PM EST
    a lot different than a Bush third term....Peace and apparent prosperity.

    [ Parent ]
    I just returned from 5 days in FL (4.50 / 6) (#56)
    by bjorn on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:15:24 PM EST
    and the people there do seem to be in love with Obama, Republicans and Democrats.  I think the train is starting to leave the station.  BTD is probably right about the race issue as the Republicans only hope at this point. Somehow I think it is not going to work this time.  For the first time I am starting to believe that everyone has underestimated the people's desire for change.  I heard a lot of people admit that Obama was a risk but in the same breath they would say we have to take the chance, we have to send a message.  It will be interesting to watch the momentum for change carry Obama to victory unless something really devastating happens before the election, and even that might not be enough to stop Obama's momentum.  I don't think it is even about him any more.

    Can't we just be blunt (4.33 / 3) (#25)
    by davnee on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:58:34 PM EST
    and admit that this election entirely comes down to the swift boats?  And BTD you are actually pretty blunt at the end of your post.  But seriously, the R's never stood a chance in this election given political conditions unless the Dems ran a fatally flawed candidate that could be undone by a negative campaign.

     My gut still tells me that Obama is that fatally flawed candidate (and it isn't race per se, though race is inextricably bound up in Obama's problems of inexperience and radical roots).  But there will be absolutely no way of knowing that until after the conventions when the swiftboats pull up anchor.  Either they will be effective or they won't.  Tough to know how American voters are going to reconcile their disgust with Bush with their misgivings about turning the keys to the car over to a novice who has always run with a scary crowd.  My money is on the latter being more powerful than the former, but I've never beaten the House at anything, so I could be wrong.  We shall see.

    I don't know about that. Look how the (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:06:08 PM EST
    primaries went. Obama's brand really tanked  with Democrats towards the end, as voters got to know him better. I'm sure that most voters still need to get to know Obama. The things Hillary said mildly--e.g. about Obama's appalling lack of relevant experience---will be stated bluntly as fact from now on. Obama will do fine, if voters don't look at him closely. If they do, then it will be a tough choice.

    [ Parent ]
    End of the primaries as ominous foreshadowing? (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by davnee on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:26:14 PM EST
    I admit that is how I looked at them.  As those deeply tuned in to the primary campaign got a closer look at Obama his fortunes started to fade.  He really limped across the finish line.  Was that the Wright/BitterCling effect, or the effect of an opponent that finally got her groove on and just blew his doors off at the end, or just the nature of the calendar that had fortuitously front-loaded all his good states?  Maybe all the above?  In any event, he'll need to be sure not to replicate that fade in the GE.  

    Taking a closer look at the factors that dogged him late in the primary:

    1. Wright/BitterCling - If this is the fundamental explanation for his late primary fade, then I think he is toast in the GE.  The swiftboats will only magnify these character issues.

    2. A superior opponent - Is McCain as likely as Clinton to find a phenomenal groove and just come to dominate in debates and stump performances and closing ads.  I'm skeptical on this.  I think McCain has room for improvement, and if he can outmaneuver Obama and get him into settings like Town Halls, he may have a chance.  And the media is a big wildcard in this.  This is the battle of two darlings.  The press is going to have to turn on one of them.

    3. Calendar - Obama was one lucky sob when it came to the primary calendar.  Good territory for him was frontloaded and he got unbelievably lucky with the disenfranchisement of MI and FL.  I seriously doubt he'd be the nominee today if those states had been regular contests all along.  Of course everybody votes at once (and no caucuses!) in the GE, but the calendar issue from the primary highlights the changing demos from state to state.  As BTD says, demographics are destiny.  I guess we just need to figure out how Appalachian every electoral rich state is, and we might get a good sense of the expected outcome come November.


    [ Parent ]
    PA and OH are quite appalachian (none / 0) (#93)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:29:06 PM EST
    so Obama really needs his leads in those states to hold. If McCain is going to play the race card, it will be in the Pittsburgh media market.

    [ Parent ]
    Well, McCain does not look strong (none / 0) (#94)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:29:24 PM EST
    right now. I would say that has a lot to do with Obama's poll numbers.

    [ Parent ]
    What is the color of the sky in your world? (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:30:09 PM EST
    By the end of May, Obama had a comfortable lead against Hillary among Democrats nationally.  His lead hit its high water mark in May.  

    [ Parent ]
    The primary voters overwhelmingly (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:32:39 PM EST
    rejected him in several later states. The national ratings are essentially meaningless, right? That is especially true when the primaries are finishing.
    Obama got less than 10% of the vote in many counties of KY---that is just unbelievable.

    [ Parent ]
    Nice job cherrypicking (3.66 / 3) (#114)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:36:04 PM EST
    In 2 states where a black man is NEVER going to win, he lost badly.  Surprise!  

    National numbers are extremely good for judging.....  Democratic support for the candidates which was what you specifically referenced.   Why didn't the voters of Oregon reject Obama?  

    [ Parent ]

    Oh, there's PA and IN too. (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:39:02 PM EST
    and OH.

    [ Parent ]
    for the umpteenth time (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by A DC Wonk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:47:26 PM EST
    would you please consider the possibility that OH, PA, et al, did not reject Obama, but rather chose Hillary as the better of two good candidates?  Look, Hillary won in NY and CA, too, but does anyone in a million years think that Obama is in danger in NY or CA?

    OH and PA ware Dem primaries.  Just because Obama was the second choice doesn't mean they would pick McCain over Obama.

    See Pollster.com on Ohio to see a trend line that pretty favorable towards Obama, and see Pollster.com in Penn. for even better news.

    Does this mean he wins those two states in Nov?  Not necessarily, but it's sure better to be ahead and have trend lines going up at this time, than the reverse.

    [ Parent ]

    McCain didn't insult huge groups of voters (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:54:15 PM EST
    ... with belittling, degrading names as Obama has.

    All the Repugs have to do is put those actual degrading labels in a loop with Obama whining to McCain to stop the ancillary comments about Michelle Obama.

    Or they could just loop Obama's own considerably more vicious treatment of Sen. Clinton.

    No one has to approve that message for it to come across loud and clear.

    [ Parent ]

    if that's the case (5.00 / 2) (#162)
    by A DC Wonk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:01:12 PM EST
    then why are Obama's poll so good (granted, it's early, but the polls look good)?

    Further, some think that going negative is just not going to work nearly as well in the past (e.g., both Gingrich and Huckabee have been publicly telling McCain to start promoting something positive, rather than think they will win by going negative)

    We've got a long way to go.  But if you think that "all the Repugs have to do is xyz" to win, I think you're mistaken.  It will take a whole lot more than that.

    [ Parent ]

    Yup going negative's ALWAYS never supposed to work (1.00 / 0) (#169)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:07:12 PM EST
    Strangely, gloopy Unity Hopey Changey messages directly contradicted by a slick politician's actions and deeds sicken people just as efficiently.

    [ Parent ]
    Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by Veracitor on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:48:56 PM EST
    ... with belittling, degrading names as Obama has.

    What?  Calling some woman "Sweetie" on one occasion?  That's worse than calling your wife a name that can't be repeated on TalkLeft?

    Looks like "some people" have been wrong about everything - especially that women and blue collar workers in Ohio and PA would not support Obama.  And now Florida.

    These polls point to a potential landslide.

    [ Parent ]

    Way too early to predict that (none / 0) (#214)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:25:41 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    And a few national polls, too... (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by anydemwilldo on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:09:10 PM EST
    ... that show Obama with a significant lead over Hillary in pretty much every poll taken from April on.  The late states aren't any more indicative of "Obama's brand tanking" than the early states were of a "Clinton collapse".  They're different states.

    Guys, can we please stop fighting this ridiculous primary.  It's over.  Move on.  If you don't think Obama can win, but want him to, try to help.  If you don't want him to win, there's a different candidate you can support.

    [ Parent ]

    What? (none / 0) (#132)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:44:43 PM EST
    He lost Indiana by 1 point.  PA and OH were good wins for Hillary but hardly an indication that the voters "rejected" Obama.  

    [ Parent ]
    Blue, what is the color in your world? (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by davnee on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:52:20 PM EST
    Clinton did a phenomenal job chasing Obama down and passing him right by against a media and money headwind of epic proportion.  She notably reduced his margins in slam dunk states like NC and OR, even beat him on his own favored territory in places like IN and SD, held off every conceivable attempt he made to close her out in the big battlegrounds like TX, OH and PA, and dealt him astonishing humiliations in WV, KY, and PR.  She won far more votes and delegates at the end of the process than he did.  She sprinted across the finish line and he limped.  That's just the way it is.  But because she limped and he sprinted out of the gates to start, that gave us a photo finish ending, that the SD's called in Obama's favor.  But you can't pretend he wasn't the one sucking more wind waiting for the call.

    But none of this matters now, because he's the nominee.  So we all have to deal with it.  But let's not pretend there are not lessons to be learned from the way Clinton was able to chase him down at the end.  Don't you want your nominee to learn from the primary close call and not repeat the same mistakes or fall prey to the same shortcomings?

    [ Parent ]

    Ah yes, the mythical "fatal flaw" (4.66 / 3) (#44)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:07:45 PM EST
    that I've been hearing about for over a year now.  No, seriously folks, I swear it's there somewhere!  I sense it deep down in my gut!  

    [eyeroll]

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah, people like you (5.00 / 0) (#67)
    by frankly0 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:19:40 PM EST
    were telling us how Rev Wright and friends would of course do Obama no harm, that they represented no real electoral flaw.

    Look, how about facing facts here? We haven't heard about Rev Wright and company for a long time, and so people aren't thinking about that a lot at this time.

    I'm sure the right wing has any manner of methods to raise those doubts again, and indeed present them in ways that no Democrat was allowed to pursue.

    So why don't you keep your smugness to yourself until that day arrives, why don't you? Or is that just not the Obama way?

    [ Parent ]

    That's a good point. To my mind, the (5.00 / 0) (#78)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:23:42 PM EST
    biggest missing attack---the one that says Republicans really wanted Obama to be the nominee, is a discussion of his teen and early 20s recreation habits.

    [ Parent ]
    And here we are, months later, (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:24:55 PM EST
    and they've done him no lasting harm; his negatives and overall poll numbers are back where they were before Wright erupted onto the scene.  Funny how that worked out, isn't it?

    [ Parent ]
    what part (5.00 / 0) (#101)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 02:32:13 PM EST
    of "they have not started yet" are you not understanding?


    [ Parent ]
    I don't think the story can have the same impact (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 03:15:19 PM EST
    the second time around.  Most voters already know it (the airwaves were saturated with it for a long while) and have made their minds up one way or another.  

    Wright's not going to be their silver bullet.  Guilt by association doesn't have a good success rate, anyway.

    [ Parent ]

    dont get me wrong (none / 0) (#204)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 04:06:58 PM EST
    I dont think Wright will be any kind of silver bullet for anyone.  he will be an important part of a frame they will construct.  but there will be many other aspects to the frame.

    [ Parent ]
    <