Wisconsin Research 2000 Poll: Obama 47% Hillary 42 %, Also: OH-PA-FL general polls

[Alhena]

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/02/wi_poll_obama_mccain_in_the_le.html

These Wisconsin results have been tightly clustered around 4-5% lead for Obama and thus seem pretty reliable.

And to save on my 3 post limit- these are general election polls in OH-PA-FL that were on Real Clear Politics yesterday

Battleground State Polls
OH: McCain 42, Obama 40
OH: McCain 44, Clinton 43
PA: Obama 42, McCain 41
PA: Clinton 46, McCain 40
FL: McCain 41, Obama 39
FL: McCain 44, Clinton 42

[ccpup]

1. with a 5% margin of error it's statistically a dead-heat in WI

but I appreciate the link and the info on the other Polls :hi:

[Alhena]

4. No prob- the PA-OH polls seem to suggest that racism is not the reason

for Hillary's big lead in those states, since Hillary and Obama do pretty similarly against McCain in the general election.

[jackson_dem]

12. I'm glad to see an Obama supporter admit that

Far too many blame any setbacks he has on racism.

[Viking12]

8. That's not what the 'margin of error' means

I don't have time to offer a statistics lesson, but here's a primer:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_08/004536.php

[TexasObserver]

2. And now, the end is near, and she faces the final curtain ...

She did it her way, and her way sucked big time.

[Alhena]

3. Honestly, her way would have won most elections ...

she's just had the bad luck to run into an Obama movement that the Democratic party hasn't seen the likes of in decades. The party is not going to be able to turn aside this movement, and it turns out they won't have any desire to since Obama matches up better against McCain.

Hillary would have killed Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry, though- I respect her political skills.

[JeanGrey]

9. I wish I could say I have one iota of respect left for her. I actually

supported her in the beginning but she has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that her own ambition overrides everything. This last ploy to snatch away the Michigan and Florida delegates unfairly is just the last straw.

I used to really get angry at right wingers who would talk about her. Now I'll just keep my mouth shut.

[Alhena]

15. I definitely agree- especially about Michigan. When I heard ...

that she was arguing the Michigan delegates should be counted, even though she was the only one on the ballot, I was sure it had to be a mistake.

NO ONE could make that argument with a straight face, I thought, though later events proved me wrong.

[JeanGrey]

27. Exactly.....................

[arewenotdemo]

32. I totally agree. Her power play for Michigan is the clincher.

No Hillary supporter can honestly defend that.

Denver will be like Chicago in 1968 if she has her way.

[TexasObserver]

20. I have not liked what she's done the past 6 years for ambition's sake, but ...

... But I accept any Democratic senator who can hold a seat, and will vote with the party on party votes, as long as they are representing fairly their State's constituency. I want to see Democrats elected to the Senate and then reelected, and that applies to Ben Nelson, or Max Baucus, or Jeff Bingaman, or Hillary Clinton. Their state gets to choose and I respect that always.

If Hillary had stuck to being a senator from New York, and had not sold out on so many important issues, I'd have never said a word against her. But she has gone berserk in this quest for the presidency, and showed how very little integrity and competence she has. I don't want her anywhere near the presidency, ever again.

[krkaufman]

30. Yeah, I didn't really have an opinion up through the Iowa caucuses ...

... but I started growing irritated when I heard Bill Clinton distort Obama's position on the Iraq war, during the run-up to NH. That, with various other tactics I've seen, have me understanding why many on the Right may loathe the couple. We'd just never felt their attacks before, because neither Clinton had ever had to run a truly competitive primary campaign.

[MethuenProgressive]

5. Is this before or after Obama said "Fuck you" to the Wisconsin Democrats?

By refusing their invitation to a debate in their state before their primary?

[rodeodance]

7. THAT WILL cost him some votes.

[Johnny__Motown]

11. Dream on, they have TVs, they can watch the Texas debate, go watch the adds

[rodeodance]

18. get your brain going--its the fact that Obama dissed them (actuall debate is irrellevant )

[jackson_dem]

13. And with the race so tight that may cost him the state and stop the msm coronation in its tracks

[rodeodance]

21. its hard to measure but listening to people. they are dissed. --not the SWOONED

over types.

[jackson_dem]

23. Are you from WI?

[anigbrowl]

31. She's from Texas

And just telling you what you (and she) wants to hear.

I'd like to see either of you post a news story showing it's hitting Obama's #s in Wisconsin. I think Clinton's failure to campaign there is going to hurt her a lot more. But I guess if she loses you'll say it doesn't count because they didn't have a debate.

[johnnydrama]

26. sorry

Obama will talk to more Wisconsin Democrats this week than would see him in a debate.

[WilyWondr]

14. RU serious?

He has been here Tuesday, Wednesday and today while HRC has been in TX and in OH.

How much do you think that has hurt her here in WI?

I believe it has hurt her more than his not accepting the invitation to a 19th debate.

She had a lead in WI, but sacrificed it to concentrate on the bigger states(ala rudy).

[rodeodance]

22. yes, i am serious.

[dmallind]

6. So tied or slight Clinton edge in big swing states compared to BO

That's slightly troubling but of course plenty of time yet - the campaign has not even started!

[jlake]

10. Those GE matchups against McCain are not encouraging.

[jackson_dem]

16. If he is this weak against McCain now how weak will he be in 7 months?

State polls are what matter, not national polls. Obama's national numbers, which are because he has low negatives right now because the rethugs have yet to attack him, are probably inflated because he gets more rethug support. For example, and this is all just a hypothesis on my part, Hillary may lose Idaho 65-35 while Obama may lose it 60-40. Have this consistently enough and you get a slight edge in national polls but where it matters Hillary is polling better, despite 16 years of rethug attacks on her. She is like a rock.

[WilyWondr]

17. For an idea

look at how he was compared to HRC 7 months ago.


:rofl:

[jackson_dem]

24. Democratic primaries are the same as the general?

President Dukakis? President Bush (on merit in 2000 under your theory)? President Kerry? Has Obama had the rethug machine and msm attacking him over those 7 months? Will he, if nominated? What happened to Kerry's 8 point lead at this time in 2004 by November after the rethugs were through with him?

[UALRBSofL]

19. We all know McCain would have the lead in Florida

So that's no surprise. But he wont carry enough states to win the nomination.

[jackson_dem]

25. He's winning Ohio too

For any Democrat to win we need to take win three states out of Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan.

If McCain is doing this well in swing states he should hold all of the 2004 Bush states and he may win some blue states if we nominate a bad candidate.

[ErnestoG]

34. Surely solar flares and deadly comets will follow!

[krkaufman]

28. (deleted)

[FrenchieCat]

29. These appear to be states where the campaigning either never happened

that is, McCain was all up and down FLorida, but not Obama.

Ohio and PA......Obama has not yet been there at all.

So what I am supposed to take away from these polls other than established name rec polls? :shrug:

[JCMach1]

33. Mo' has slowed for Obama in WI... 4-5%

is about where I thought this would be. A result of less than 4=Obama buyer's remorse.