Looks like Bush moved the numbers-New Gallup poll out

[Tropics_Dude83]

How on earth is somebody with approval ratings worse or equal to Nixon able to move the numbers in a democratic primary race. I saw the Bush Knneset remarks yesterday and just thought no one cares or agrees with what he says. He is irrelevant. I thought that he would just be taken for the joke that he truly is. I certainly thought the Obama campaign response was effective and the democrats pounded Bush into the ground over his unprecedented political attack on a fellow american oveseas. That is something that just does not happen.

Well, guess what. http://www.gallup.com/poll/107296/Gallup-Daily-Obama-50-Clinton-44.aspx.

Gallup had Obama leading 50-44 for the last three days. Last night, the article notes that Clinton moved into few point lead. John Mccain had also been trailing Senator Obama by 1 or 2. Now he is in the lead. WTF!

Why are people still listening to Chimp. They did in 2004 so I guess I should not be all that surprised but I thought his credibility was totally destroyed by now.

Especially after the powerful Edwards endorsement and block SD endorsements, I certainly did not expect this.

Anyway, here are the disturbing details from Lydia Saad:

At the same time, the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking data on the national election, from May 11-15, finds John McCain moving slightly ahead of Obama, 47% to 45% among registered voters, after the two were tied at 45% in Thursday's report. There has been no change in voter preferences in a McCain-Clinton race, with Clinton holding a 3-point advantage, 48% to 45%. -- Lydia Saad

Gallup Poll Daily interviewing on Thursday, May 15 showed Clinton leading Obama by a few percentage points, after several days of Obama in the lead. The resulting slight narrowing of the race -- returning it to a statistical dead heat -- is typical of the way the contest has gone over the past several months, with neither candidate able to maintain a significant lead among national Democratic voters for very long. (To view the complete trend since Jan. 3, 2008, click here.)

Obama's spat with President Bush Thursday about U.S. diplomacy with Iran may have focused voters' attention on Obama's limited foreign policy credentials and could be a factor. However, media coverage of the campaign is conveying a growing sense of inevitability around Obama getting the nomination, and John Edward's endorsement of Obama on Wednesday seemed to prove it. With this kind of momentum in his favor, one might expect Obama to be stretching his lead over Clinton among national Democrats, not still struggling to surpass her.

[anonymous171]

1. This is why we choose nominees by lead in pledged delegates.

[MonkeyFunk]

32. No

there's nothing that says that's how "we" choose our nominee.

[anonymous171]

40. So we hold primaries for what reason? To waste money by bashing other dems?

[MonkeyFunk]

56. You made an assertion

that we choose our nominee by who leads the pledge delegates. Prove it.

There's no such requirement. No such rule. You guys would LIKE that to be the rule, but saying so doesn't make it true.

[Labors of Hercules]

87. funk, you're just not going to be reasonable no matter what, are you?

You know damned well the delegate math matters more than anything else in determining the nominee. trying to say it's otherwise because the rules don't specify is just overt irrational gamesmanship. It's the same game Terry McAuliffe is trying to play, and we all know there's NO WAY IN HELL it will work.

So Please, just give it a rest. :boring:

[skipos]

2. No.

I know everyone likes to look at the most minute fluctuations in the polls and attribute them to whatever they want, but this is a bit ridiculous.

[msallied]

3. Clinton, like Bush, is irrelevant. Just like this poll.

[cali]

4. Please, I beg of you: Go back to supporting Hill.

It's a much better fit for you.

[K Gardner]

7. I second this. Your "concern trolling" for Obama is getting a bit wearying.

[Tatiana]

11. Thirded. n/t

[shadowknows69]

24. Double agent trolls must die

[NeedleCast]

5. Tropics Dude, Relax

Gallup had Obama leading 50-44 for the last three days. Last night, the article notes that Clinton moved into few point lead. John Mccain had also been trailing Senator Obama by 1 or 2. Now he is in the lead. WTF!

Dude, these polls have been bouncing around almost daily for months now. Taking one poll in a day by day basis is no real indication of what the real picture looks like. Its like seeing a picture of a bear attacking a camper and assuming that bears only eat campers. Just relax. The Primary is over, and I think we'll win the GE, as Obama has proved that he can mobilize voters and McCain is still having trouble getting the base of his own party to support him.

[jenmito]

6. Why don't you just skip this phase and go right back to supporting Hillary?

:shrug:

[WeDidIt]

8. Your concern is noted

as is your questionable support for Obama.

[Texas Hill Country]

9. the last sentence is the most important one in the whole article.

[charlie]

10. Disturbing

Dismaying. Shocking. My face is set in a permanent rictus of fright.

Maybe I should quit these matinee showings of Tropical_Diseases' Carnival of Obama Doom.

Really dude, cut the pretense and bullshit. Either you're a baby-powdered neophyte or you're a clueless gadfly -- or something worse. If there was a Candidate X is My Guy And OMG He's Gonna Get Us All Killed party, you'd be a shoo-in for national chairman.

[Tropics_Dude83]

13. I agree with Texas Hill Country

About the last sentence:

With this kind of momentum in his favor, one might expect Obama to be stretching his lead over Clinton among national Democrats, not still struggling to surpass her.

I expected 52-38 or 55-40 in Gallup by now for O. Mccain shot up big time in Gallup tracking after he won the critical Florida primary against Romney. I was hoping to see the same for Obama after IN and NC. Why we have not seen is very weird.

[Texas Hill Country]

15. it's like talking to a brick wall here... most of them refuse to see, much less admit reality

[charlie]

23. The two of you can't be that daft

Has Hillary's trajectory been seemlessly ascendant or descendant this season? Was the poll pop she got during Bitter and Wright permanent forever and ever, Hail to the New Chief, amen? Is this y'all's first election?

THC, you've at least got a reason or two to see the OP as kindling for an Obama flameout. But you're sidling up to an obstensible Obama (nee Clinton, nee Obama) backer who'd regard a dangling participle as an unrecoverable gaffe.

Take him back, please. I'm sure you'll enjoy missives about Hillary's bad hair days ensuring generational Republican dominance more than I do.

[Leopolds Ghost]

85. Exactly. Although I draw the line at bad hair days.

Those are unforgivable in any candidate.

[anonymous171]

16. It's because of WV and KY.

[Texas Hill Country]

18. not just WV and KY - Reverse the positions and think about it... If

Hillary had a lead of 200 delegates by now, do you think Obama would be even close in national polls?


Replace that with a nameless candidate... If candidate A was essentially crowned the nominee by the media, with the meme repeated over and over and over that the math was impossible for Candidate B to catch up, and Candidate A had the endorsement of the majority of the party leadership...

Do you seriously think there is ANY WAY POSSIBLE that Candidate A would be down in the NATIONAL polls compared to Candidate B?

I say no.


The problem is that Obama owes a large majority of his lead to caucus states... something like 125+ of his delegates come from caucuses IIRC, and he had a MUCH better ground game... even busing people in to different districts to take over (and dont tell me that he didnt do this, I saw it with my own eyes and it has been reported in the media). He knew he couldnt win the big states, so he racked up the smaller ones.

Well, caucuses are well known for not reflecting the actual will of the people, which is why we dont have causes in the GE and why a huge variety of pundits and experts are now arguing to get rid of them.

This is the issue.

[Tropics_Dude83]

20. Bravo Texas Hill Country

What a post. It sums it up.

I support Obama because whenever I see him on TV, I like him, and I have signed up for his website and e-mails and stuff. It is just that I am under no illusions that he has a lot of work to do to get back on track. Polls like these are not encouraging.

[anonymous171]

21. Tells me that he needs a well known, very experienced (foreign policy) VP

[Texas Hill Country]

35. well, i would say two things... First, people dont vote for VPs, they vote top of the ticket. look

at Edwards... what did Edwards get Kerry... pretty much zip. Edwards was to be Kerry's gateway to the working class and to the south.


Kerry lost both.


Second... Foreign Policy is generally THE JOB of the president. the president is an advocate for domestic legislation and can use the power of the podium to influence congress, but the presidents realm and job description is to take care of Foreign Policy... and if his weakness is FP that needs to be shored up by a VP... then he is not the right guy for the job.

[anonymous171]

37. The VP helps assuage peoples' doubts about the ticket. It will get the fearful on Obama's side.

[Texas Hill Country]

45. that's the theory anyway... rarely pans out that way.

[anonymous171]

48. Bush/Cheney ticket worked (got elected)

[Texas Hill Country]

53. ok, point taken... i should have said "for Dems"

[juajen]

46. Where have we heard this before?

Perhaps O should make C his VP?

[Radio_Lady]

58. Ding--ding--ding! We have a winner!

[K Gardner]

25. So, you're cheering on one of the most rabid Obama-bashers on the board. You're fooling no one any

longer. You can take your Obama "support" and shove it.

[Texas Hill Country]

31. I am not an "Obama Basher"... I am a realist. I am very realistic about Hillary's strengths and

weaknesses, and I am realistic about Obama's.


Since people here seem to love to talk about Hillary's weaknesses, plus invent a few more, I have no need to discuss those.


Just because I point out weaknesses one candidate has, does not mean I am bashing them. I am addressing the problem, pointing out the issues I have, awaiting responses.


I am not a lemming. I will continue to question and to be honest with my feelings. I am also a pretty fair person, though I admit that sometimes my emotions get the best of me, when called on it, I do apologize.


And if you are unable to discuss the weaknesses your candidate has, whether that be Hillary or Obama, in a constructive manner or even address the issues at all, then you may want to step back and rethink.

[charlie]

30. "I support Obama because whenever I see him on TV, I like him, and I have signed up for his website"

"...and stuff"

That says it all. You like him on TV. And stuff. Except when you liked Hillary on TV. And stuff. And they both have websites. And stuff.

[Texas Hill Country]

36. did you get real excited at the stadium and pass out because he was so dreamy too?

lol, i realize i will get shit for this, but get a sense of humor, that is funny.

[charlie]

47. A guy whose pole star is his TV crushes

and appreciation for website schwag. I'll pass on taking his concerns seriously.

[DefenseLawyer]

49. Generally, when you feel it necessary to insist that your own joke is funny

right after you tell it... well... don't quit your day job Carrot Top.

[Texas Hill Country]

55. perhaps i should have said that I found it amusing? would that suit your tastes better?

[indimuse]

64. How Much Of Obama's Strength Is "Inflated" From The Cuacuses,

going into the GE ...IF he get's the nom? really?

[shadowknows69]

26. You agree with THC because you're a Hillary supporter

And a loser for acting like anything else.

[Texas Hill Country]

39. no, its because i use logic... post a response to my argument. who knows, you might actually win?

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

12. how abouts we just check in on Monday's numbers?

[JackORoses]

14. you are damned annoying

What is your goal with all of this?

[Tropics_Dude83]

17. My goal is resolution of this primary and on to the GE

The national polls show that democratic primary voters do not seem willing to head that way yet. Ugh.

[anonymous171]

19. I wish people would realize that Obama and Hillary have identical positions on 95% of the issues

[K Gardner]

22. Your GOAL is to support Hillary by pretending to support Obama with your "concern" posts. Ugh indeed

[HCE SuiGeneris]

43. No! This poster is not a supporter of either candidate.

He is here solely to create an aura of worry... Everyone responding to this BS needs to stop.

[jenmito]

27. Do you support Obama or not? Why don't you just remove your avatar?

[jefferson_dem]

29. Haven't you changed positions like three times this primary season?

Chill. Obama's the nominee. The primary race is over. It's time to focus on smacking McSame around like bobo doll he is.

[indimuse]

67. 5 more states...count ALL the votes..see ya in Denver!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlATFrHhMQc HILLARY THE TRAILER..


http://bp1.blogger.com/_y7akKaUErMI/SC2TSJMyP7I/AAAAAAAAAOc/v8aJll_KHqg/s320/Oregon+banner.jpg

http://bp2.blogger.com/_y7akKaUErMI/SCyZMpMyP0I/AAAAAAAAANk/1r9N2Wh0HTU/s200/Oregon+Brick.jpg

[jenmito]

79. I guess you choose to ignore her own words:

"... So from my perspective, you get up every day and you get out there and you make your case and you reach as many people as possible. That's what I intend to do, so I'm in it for the long run. It's not a very long run. It'll be over by February 5th.”

"Well, you know, It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

[indimuse]

81. It would "PREMATURE" at this point to RUN FOR PRESIDENT "

-BO. He was elected to get thing done in Chigaco, The "UN_Committed" that he is, Just couldn't help himself!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. It Would Be Nice To Discuss This Dispassionately But That Is Impossible

I can see why Tropic Dude's opinion is questioned due to his wavering loyalties...

I have some thoughts but I will keep them to myself...

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[thewiseguy]

34. May I add my input

1- Those who still support Hillary will continue to support her until she drops out. Therefore do not expect Obama's numbers in Gallup to skyrocket.

That however does not mean this primary season is not over. :)

2- Bush has an approval rating of 30%. What he says about Obama should not and will not hurt him in the GE. In fact to the contrary that might help Obama.

3- Obama's numbers in GE against McCain will only be relevant when Hillary drops out.

4- Hey Tropics. I thought you had found yourself or that you were going to be a bit tougher. I guess I was wrong. :(

[Tropics_Dude83]

38. I still support him thewiseguy

But I would like to see him resolve some of his electability issues, which I am sure he will in June.

[thewiseguy]

42. Your focus in this OP was what Bush said

I would like to know what that has to do with Obama's electability? America has elected presidents before who said they would talk to our enemies.

[jenmito]

63. Then why the Hillary avatar???????

:eyes:

[democrattotheend]

77. So how come you have a Hillary avatar?

[paulk]

41. it's interesting that despite the MSM calling this race over

(along with the Obamanation) - the voters, the rank and file out there, seem to have different ideas.

[thewiseguy]

44. The race is over because Hillary can not win but as long as she is in it

Her supporters will be behind her. Given how many errors her campaign has made and the support that she still pulls, you would believe these are her most loyal backers who would not switch their pledge unless she quit this race.

[juajen]

50. Actually, her removing herself from this campaign does not

mean that her supporters will "make nice" after they've been nuked time and time again by Obama and his faithful. You've perhaps forgotten that a hell of a lot of women will get revenge, one way or the other.

The point is, there are good people who support Obama. Thse people should have stood against the treatment that has been meted out to Hillary. obama does not deserve her supporters, nor does the democratic party.

I personally will not ever vote for a republican, but I can and will write in Hillary Clinton for President, as the dem ptb do not need our vote and like men all over the world, take women for granted. Frankly, we've had it. In case I have not been clear, I also will not vote for an Obama/Clinton ticket. Flame away. I won't be here.

[thewiseguy]

52. I am sorry but I have read your posts too on GDP

And you were not particularly being a saint either. I have not forgotten some of the things that Hillary supporters on this board said to me.

Now that Hillary is pretty much out, you want to act as if you were mistreated by the Obama supporters and thus will not vote for him in GE. LOL!

:rofl:

[woolldog]

51. Gallup poll is a 3 day rolling average.

It's too early for Bush's remarks to have had an impact, imo.

[Renew Deal]

61. I agree

I don't think most people would have noticed them. Edwards was a huge event. It might be that.

[grantcart]

54. a couple point variation is nothing what is so spectacular about the poll is that

Clinton is cemented in at 44%



The reality is that Clinton hasn't moved beyond the ceiling she established in the fourth quarter of 07


Never has there been a clearer example of a campaign flatlining on a national level.

[Raine1967]

57. CELLPHONES

Does gallup call people who don't have land lines?

I really feel like this is a big issue going on with a lot of these polls.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

59. Gallup Is One Of The Few Pollsters Who Call Folks With Cell Phones

They can do this because they have more resources than most pollsters...

[Teaser]

60. oh sweet christ, it's just random flucttuations

.

[jenmito]

62. kick-check out who a certain poster is supporting NOW (again)

[thewiseguy]

66. I think he neither supports Hillary or Obama...I suspect the worst

[jenmito]

69. So do I. And the same goes with another "switcher." It's obvious.

[kid a]

70. you mean the nj thing

[jenmito]

72. Yup-you got it!

:hi:

[thewiseguy]

74. Its a perfect cover for them to keep switching

That way they get to bash both candidates and nobody would suspect them to be McCain supporters.

Either that or they are just kids.

[jenmito]

76. I agree. I can't believe just 2 days ago you asked him if he still supports Obama and he said yes..

with a "Hillary" avatar now by his name.

[democrattotheend]

65. Whoa, you switched your avatar again?

I thought you were back in the Obama camp.

[jenmito]

71. Check out post #38.

:eyes:

[kid a]

68. his is the next "hardly knew ya" thread...no credibilty and begging for a slice of pepperoni

[jenmito]

73. Sadly he's still here, though.

[MadBadger]

75. And now Obama opens up an 11 point lead...you gonna come crawling back?

[Arugula Latte]

78. What say you now, Schizo Boy?

:rofl:

[jenmito]

80. Looks like he's gone to "regroup"...

:rofl:

[VolcanoJen]

83. Doh!!!

Why anyone bothers with these schizoid daily tracking polls is beyond me... but using them as some kind of talking point is just plain goofy. :silly:

[anigbrowl]

82. Sigh...lying again.

"Gallup had Obama leading 50-44 for the last three days. Last night, the article notes that Clinton moved into few point lead. John Mccain had also been trailing Senator Obama by 1 or 2. Now he is in the lead. WTF!"

Mention Obama's lead over Clinton (which is entirely unchanged).
Then say Clinton moved into a lead (a lead over McCain, not Obama).
Then say McCain is leading over Obama (he's tied; deliberate misquote of the gallup spokesperson).

You're dishonest, and you're not even a good liar.

[Leopolds Ghost]

84. DUers, please realize we only have a few more days/weeks to get rid of concern trolls.

before they become "one of us" and blend in with all the people
legitimately concerned about every bad poll or poor campaign tactic for
the next 6 months / years etc. and claim to have always supported Obama.

I'm an independent populist who reserves the right to criticize Obama when
he slips up. I don't want to see that opinion tarnished by Bush-supporting
assholes like (oh, I don't know, I could name two) who can't even keep
straight which Democrat they are PRETENDING to support and have equally
idiotic things to say about both candidates (usually involving
criticisms that make McCain and Bush look good.)

NOT that I'm saying Tropics_Dude is one of those people... far from it!

I never alert on people, but double-agent sock puppet trolling is just
creepy and wrong.

[OzarkDem]

88. So Dems who want to win in the GE are Bush supporters?

I think you'll find you're wrong on that one. And you'll be costing Obama more and more support from fellow Dems.

[Leopolds Ghost]

90. At least you are honest about who you support. Tropics_Dude is not.

You can support Hillary Clinton all you want and BE right-wing for all I
care. Because your politics come through honest and the same either way.

I don't alert or ignore right-wing populists, "radical centrists" or
"white working class are still ignored in this country" folks
because I respect their right to express their concerns and "bitterness"
even though their politics are terrible. Sometimes I even see where
they are coming from... AS LONG AS THEY ARE HONEST about who they are
trying to support. I am a populist and I don't think Obama is a saint.

The fact that you are defending Tropics_Dude when he changes sides
every week and posts nasty things about your candidate is unfortunate.
That's just manipulation on his part.

Like I said, you Ozark Dem could be a right-winger in the privacy of
your own home for all I care, and still support Hillary or even Obama
vociferously for months (there's a few folks who support Obama
because they buy into the whole ridiculous notion that Hillary
is the working class candidate and they are actual "liberal" elitists
who are angry at the white working class for not supporting Obama.
Likewise there are "liberal" culture warriors who refuse to support
Obama because they only care about one social wedge issue,
not much different from the RWers.)

But switch-hitting to get a rise out of people, like certain OTHER posters do,
is just despicable trolling of the traditional, non-political sort -- designed to
disrupt an online community.

If one is going to troll, Don't Ask, Don't Tell. That is my feeling.

And some of these concern trolls are chock full of "tells".

That way everyone has the right to at least PRETEND to be a liberal
or conservative democrat.

The standard of liberal discourse is "charity" -- always ASSUME
the most charitable interpretation on the part of your opponent's
argument unless their arguments are so specious that you are
compelled to recognize them as a fraud.

[OzarkDem]

91. I support Clinton

and I'm a lifelong Democrat. Does that make it clear enough to you?

[Leopolds Ghost]

92. Fair enough.

But you seem awfully upset about Obama not being the "working man's candidate".

I for one am glad that someone fortunate and affluent like Obama
is concerned about working class white voters' legitimate gripes
and yes, bitterness.

while Hillary prefers to beat around the bush and inflame passions
while hiding her immense wealth and support for NAFTA, etc.

But this post is about Tropics_Dude and other switch-hitters.

They are obviously not life-long liberals, nor do they have a
single consistent gripe that they are prepared to hammer either
candidate for. Instead, they sieze on every issue that makes
Republicans look good and use it to trash whichever Democratic
candidate is handy at the moment. It's so obvious.

[OzarkDem]

86. Clinton's ahead of McCain, Obama falls behind

Not a good endorsement of the DNC leadership's choice of Obama.

[SoCalDem]

89. all determined by whom they call, the time of day they call, and

when they stop polling..