Rasmussen: Ohio gives its 20 electoral votes to Hillary, but not to Obama

[NJSecularist]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/ohio/election_2008_ohio_presidential_election

McCain: 45
Obama: 44

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Ohio shows a toss-up between John McCain and Barack Obama. McCain attracts support from 45% of the Buckeye State’s Likely Voters while Obama earns support from 44%. Nationally, the race between McCain and Obama is also very competitive in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

In Ohio, McCain leads by seven percentage points among men but trails by four among women. The presumptive Republican nominee is supported by 77% of GOP voters while Obama attracts 65% of Democrats. Among unaffiliated voters, Obama leads by McCain by thirteen percentage points.

Following a pattern visible in many other states, McCain leads among middle income voters, those earning $20,000 to $75,000 annually. Obama leads among those who make less than $20,000 and those earning more than $75,000 a year. McCain also leads among those who attend church regularly while Obama leads among those who rarely or never attend services.

Hillary: 50
McCain: 43

While it is unlikely that Clinton will win the Democratic Presidential nomination, she does outperform Obama in Ohio. She leads McCain 50% to 43% and is supported by 83% of the state’s Democratic voters (compared to 65% for Obama). Clinton has a significant lead over McCain among Ohio voters who earn less than $60,000 annually.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of Ohio voters say the economy is the top issue of Election 2008 while 14% name National Security as the most important voting issue. Eleven percent (11%) believe the War in Iraq is the highest priority. Among voters who name the economy as the top issue, Obama leads McCain 53% to 35%. Among those who believe National Security is most important, McCain leads 86% to 5%. Voters who see the War in Iraq as the top issue are fairly evenly divided between Obama and McCain.

There is very little chance of the Democratic nominee winning the general election without Ohio. And yet again, like we see with pretty much every poll coming from the three big swing states (PA, OH and FL), Hillary performs better in all three. If Obama is our nominee, we could lose all three and have a Dukakis-like showing. Without Ohio's 20 electoral votes, it's very hard to see how any Democratic nominee will win the election. And Obama already has us behind the bell-curve in that regard.

[sfaprog]

1. Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Not fair! I'm better! I should have won! waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[MonkeyFunk]

4. If she can win Ohio and Obama can't

then yes, she should've won. But she still might.

[sfaprog]

13. Oh, it's all about Ohio now, huh?

:rofl:

[Texas Hill Country]

29. ohio has decided more than 1 general election....

[SOS]

70. True

The Democratic Presidential candidate got slightly more than 50% of the Ohio vote in 1940 and 1964.

[datopbanana]

92. So because she POLLS better in OH in MAY we should override the voters in all the other states

[jefferson_dem]

21. LOL. Funniest post i've seen today.

It's all about how Hillary polls in one state - OH - in one poll - Rasmussen - right now - May 19. Nothing else matters.

Fuck the delegates. Let's have Scotty Rasmussen pick our nominee...

:spray:

You guys are a hoot.

[MonkeyFunk]

37. No

I was actually making a larger point that if we lose in November because of states like Ohio, then in retrospect, we'll say that yes, we should've nominated someone who could win those states.

I'm not saying one poll in Ohio should decide this. Just that it's silly to dismiss entirely the "electability" argument, as the person to whom I replied did.

[Hola]

58. I agree

it should be down to 'electability' based on polls. The current nomination system should be scrapped, a few of the dem 'party elite' should get together (smoking optional) and decide who the candidate should be.

OK?

[Occam Bandage]

27. Down by one with six months to go means "Obama can't?"

[K8-EEE]

85. Yes apparently the election is to be held today, I'm missing it!

What a bunch of nonsense, LOL.....McCain is sinking like a stone and will continue to do so.

[cali]

34. That's just ridiculous. She's lost. This is now

just going through the motions. Letting the primaries play predictably out. And please note that it's six months before the election in November and that McCain is not beating him: That's a statistical tie while we still don't have an official nominee and while hillary is still trying to pretend she's viable.

[still_one]

65. anone who would support Hillary and yet not support the Democratic nominee over mccain

is BULL

It does not even make sense, just looking at how similar bush and mccain's policies are

I don't believe this poll for the very fact that it was the republicans, and the support of republicans like mccain for the presidents policies why the country is in the position it is in

Americans are stupid, but they are not that stupid, especially at 4 bucks a gallon gasoline and the price of food going through the roof

It was the republicans who controlled the show for the past eight years

[eridani]

64. Clinton can win OH, therefore Obama can't

Nice logic there, especially since Obama is far more proactive against vote suppression.

[Spider Jerusalem]

103. No, she won't

and the polling numbers are meaningless and will change once she's out of the picture.

[rodeodance]

8. that is a nic pic of you.

[sfaprog]

14. Let me let you in on a little secret:

Hillary will never step into the WH as anything but a visitor for the rest of her life.

[rodeodance]

18. as i said. nic pic of you. you are still crying. bye

[sfaprog]

25. Let me let you in on a little secret:

Hillary will never step into the WH as anything but a visitor for the rest of her life.

[hokies4ever]

126. Hilarious!

I love Hillary's, "It's my turn!" argument. Always good for a laugh.

[bowens43]

2. not this shit again.

This is less then useless. It's completely irrelevent until Nov.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

3. Ok, I changed my mind.

I want Hillary to be the nominee now, because of an Ohio poll six months before the general election.

[NJSecularist]

7. And Florida. And Pennsylvania.

You know, the three big swing states with 68 combined electoral votes?

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

38. Hey, you don't have to convince me!

I know that Obama can't win any state in the general election that he didn't win in the primary. In fact, I'm convinced those states will all go to Hillary in a massive write-in vote!

[aquarius dawning]

66. Obama doesn't need swing states, he's got Oregon.

[Hawkeye-X]

106. Hey ex-Obama flip-flopper,

Florida, PA will be going Obama's way - and so will Ohio once it's all said and done.

See you on the other side...

Hawkeye-X

[Changenow]

9. They should cancel the next elections

and just nominate her.

[papau]

11. No point - Hill Hate must include no VP spot plus splitting the party - election is a must do

[BeyondGeography]

5. He's down by a point and you're down to one thread

:thumbsup:

[Adelante]

32. YaY - let the real day begin nt

[Starbucks Anarchist]

6. This reminds me of Hillary's strategy.

Assume nothing at all will change in the next several months and not having a backup plan as a result.

[papau]

10. The Starbucks/AA colege town crowd does not care that Hill wins and Obama loses - Hill Hate is

worth splitting the party and and losing in Nov.

Look for the final nail in the party split to be a non-Hill VP choice - Obama's supporters would not have it any other way.

[sfaprog]

19. Listen to yourself!

Hillary HAS LOST. She will never be President of The United States, or even Vice President.

The sooner you accept that, the happier you will be.

[Lilith Velkor]

91. Don't put this on AAs

Most black people want her on the ticket. It's the pundit-addled blog zombies that want to burn her @ the stake.

[CreekDog]

12. NJ's daily "to do" list

Obama "collapsing" in X state (check)
Obama currently behind in a state that Hillary wins (check)
Obama losing white people but winning black people (check)

:applause:

[skipos]

15. OMG! Someone tell the supers!

Obama is down in OH by one point and the election is only about 6 MONTHS AWAY!
SAVE US HILLARY!!!

[RoadRage]

16. Well.. it's 6 months before the election an ONE FUCKING POLL gives one state to YOUR candidate..

so let's all throw in the towel and just give Hillary the nomination even though she hasn't won delegates, popular vote or ANYTHING for that matter.

Good God.. seriously, quit crying - quit looking at Polls until October, and accept the fact that you have to pick between McCain and Obama.

[TheDonkey]

96. You are telling me that we shouldn't just select a nominee because a poll in OH 6 months from Nov???

are you CRAZY!!! THIS MEANS EVERYTHING!!!1!!!

:sarcasm:

[Alexander]

17. It's within the MOE and you're suggesting it's a win for McCain?

Have you been totally blind to the massive upswing in Democratic turnout this year?

Are you aware that a 1% lead is statistically insignificant and essentially means a tie?

Are you really this new to politics?

[NJSecularist]

22. With Hillary as the nominee, no matter what kind of campaign McCain runs in Ohio..

Hillary will likely win the state.

The state is in considerable more doubt with Obama as our nominee.

[jefferson_dem]

28. Just like VA, CO, NM, WI, MN, and so on... are in more doubt if she would have been the nominee.

This is merely theoretical anyway. The primary contest is over...and you know it.

[Alexander]

35. And we're at risk in blue states like Connecticut, Washington and California with Hillary...

Explain to me how we can win the White House without California!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[MidwestTransplant]

41. AND MN and WI

[Drunken Irishman]

88. And Oregon.

[NJSecularist]

49. Hillary is not losing California, Washington or Connecticut.

Neither candidate will lose any of those states.

[Alexander]

59. These polls all disagree with you.

Connecticut

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1163&What=&strArea=;&strTime=120

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/connecticut/election_2008_connecticut_presidential_election

California

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/state_toplines/california/toplines_california_presidential_election_april_16_2008

Washington

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=254081ec-e21b-4a73-91f3-a6cc8e4ba75d

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/state_toplines/washington/washington_toplines_may_12_2008

Not only that, Obama does better than Hillary in New Jersey.

http://www.northjersey.com/news/elections/McCain_trails_both_Obama_Clinton_in_NJ.html

Isn't that what you are basing this incredibly asinine OP on? One poll? I've got 6 of them. I win. You lose.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

71. He won't listen.

In another thread, he claimed Obama can only win in states with heavy AA demographics.

I pointed him to the Wisconsin primary that Obama won and the three black people living there, yet he said it was an "outlier."

:rofl:

[bvar22]

76. Idaho, Utah, Oregon, and Wyoming were also "outliers".

:rofl:

[gmudem]

84. He always runs away when I show him that information

He says "she will never lose those states," then I show him those polls and he doesn't respond. He's a weasel.

[sfaprog]

39. Right now Big Bird has as good a shot as Clinton of being the nominee

How does Mr. Bird do in Ohio based on one poll today? I'm telling you, he can take it!

[rockymountaindem]

98. I'd vote for him

His heart is in the right place and I really think he'd increase our national profile, what with being 10 feet tall and bright yellow. And a talking bird.

[SeaLyons]

20. K&R

[cali]

23. um. Obama and McCain are in a statistical dead heat in your poll, you poor

thing. And we're still in the primary, desperado. You really should be awarded the worst loser prize. Sorry, Obama will beat McCain soundly. He's ahead in national polls already and still in a contested primary. And your candidate is toast. Tough. Suck it up and get over it, Baghdad Bobby.

[grantcart]

24. you got polls we got polls

[Texas Hill Country]

26. Obama will loose the entire iron/rust/coal belt.

[cali]

36. He's pulled ahead in PA and MI

He'll win OH. He'll certainly win Illinois. He'll beat McCain handily.

[Carrieyazel]

89. What makes you so certain about Ohio? Very tough state for him to win.

PA and MI are also too close for comfort, depending on which poll you're looking at.

[NJSecularist]

47. Yup. And the only place he'll do better than Kerry is in the granola belt. n/t

[Hawkeye-X]

107. Not if Obama stops the outsourcing which he will - and win votes.

What does Gramps have? WAR AWAR WAR WAR WAR!!!11111 OUTSOURCE!!111

[NotThisTime]

30. Just pathetic... grasping at straws much?

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

31. He doesn't need Ohio. Or Florida. He's working off a new electoral map--one that actually works.

Colorado, NM, Nevada, Iowa--all red last time--lean his way already. There's more, but I'll wait for you to flame me on this part first.

[Carrieyazel]

86. Nevada leans Obama's way? Not really.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/nevada/election_2008_nevada_presidential_election


Nevada is the toughest of the three possible Mountain West states for Obama.

[Hawkeye-X]

109. Not if he picks the right Western governor for the job.

and I'm talking about AZ, KS, MT, or WY governors.

They are highly credible.

Nevada will be in play if the right person is chosen.

Hawkeye-X

[NJmaverick]

33. Was there an election? As far as I know Ohio isn't giving anyone

a single electorial vote, for nearly 6 months.

[totodeinhere]

40. Any poll is meaningless this far out.

We shouldn't be worrying about these meaningless polls at this point.

[KansasVoter]

42. You are worse than Kiki Mclain! LOL.

[SoFlaJet]

43. Fellow democrats; LET THIS ONE SINK!!!!!

don't feed in to this guy's crap. Remember NJS was one of the biggest anti-Clinton and (supposedly) pro-Obama maniacs on the boards up until he saw that Clinton would win Pennsylvania-then he switched and went off on this current insane tangent

[Apollo11]

44. Hillary's problem is that making the electability argument is not enough ...

I found this interesting and persuasive (post-Indiana primary) commentary by Mr Rasmussen himself.

For Superdelegates, Electability Isn’t Enough

A Commentary by Scott Rasmussen

May 9, 2008

(...)

Clinton’s belief that she is more electable rests upon the assumption that she can get the nomination without tearing the Democratic Party apart. That’s not a credible assumption in the minds of Superdelegates. The conventional wisdom is that handing the nomination to Clinton would create a Democratic civil war. No matter how it was explained, a fair number of Obama supporters would sit out the election or vote for a third party candidate. Some might even vote Republican. The bottom line is that the very process of handing her the nomination would make her unelectable.

But, in that scenario, the problems for Democrats would go far deeper. If Obama is denied the nomination, the collateral damage could reduce the number of House and Senate races that Democrats win this year. Why would any Superdelegate want to risk that?

So, for Senator Clinton, the challenge is not convincing Superdelegates that she’s more electable. Even if she could convince every single Superdelegate of that fact, it’s not enough. The standard now is much higher--Clinton also needs to convince Superdelegates that the party will stay unified behind her if Obama is denied the nomination. Unfortunately for Clinton at this time, that’s a question she cannot answer.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_scott_rasmussen/for_superdelegates_electability_isn_t_enough

[iamthebandfanman]

45. to bad she lost eh ?

bwahahaha. deal with it.

[Apollo11]

46. In fact, Hillary won the Ohio primary

Still, I am surprised that only 65% of Ohio Democrats are ready to vote for Barack Obama if he is the nominee.

[mod mom]

68. by 8.8% INCLUDING REPUBLICAN CROSS-OVERS:

Ohio GOP roots for Hillary
BY HOWARD WILKINSON | [e-mail]
One of the worst-kept secrets of the Ohio presidential primary is that Republican party leaders have a candidate they are rooting for on the Democratic side.

Her name is Hillary Clinton, and they believe that if she wins the Ohio primary and goes on to become the Democratic nominee, she will be the one who unites their dispirited and divided party and give them their best chance of keeping the White House this fall.



It is a belief that the Clinton campaign says is wrong-headed and they will campaign across the state for the next three weeks making the argument that their battle-tested, experienced candidate is the only one who can go toe-to-toe with John McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee this fall.

She’ll need to do some convincing, fast. For Clinton, Ohio’s March 4 primary is looking more and more critical.

-snip

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080213/NEWS01/302130097


HERE'S RUSH LIMBAUGH ADVOCATING FOR HILLARY:

What might have actually happened in Ohio and Texas? Tin foil hat?
▪ Clip:
: "Rush, I understand that the Rush Limbaugh audience is mobilizing in Texas for Hillary. Am I hearing that right?"

: "I don't know if the audience is mobilizing or not. I am urging people — I am using a phrase — the Republicans — our nominee is chosen. It's John McCain.

Texas is open. And I want Hillary to stay in this, Laura. This is too good a soap opera. We need Barack Obama bloodied up politically, and it's obvious that the Republicans are not going to do it and don't have the stomach for it.

As you probably know, we're getting all kinds of memos from the RNC saying not to be critical there. Mark MacKinnon of McCain's campaign says he'll quit if they get critical over Obama.

This is the presidency of the United States you're talking about. I want our party to win. I want the Democrats to lose. They're in the midst of tearing themselves apart right now. It is fascinating to watch, and it's all going to stop if Hillary loses.

So yes, I'm asking to cross over and, if they can stomach it — I know it's a difficult thing to do to vote for a Clinton — but it will sustain this soap opera, and it's something I think we need. It would be fun, too."

http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=609&Itemid=113







Turned away at poll? Click here
Some are told to wait - or come back later
BY JESSICA BROWN AND BARRETT J. BRUNSMAN | [e-mail] | [e-mail]

-snip
In that heavily Republican county, officials weren't prepared for the high number of Democratic ballots requested. Some voters waited for more than an hour for new ballots to be delivered; others were asked to come back later or asked to go to the county Board of Elections to vote.

The reason: a wave of "crossover" voting, in which normally Republican voters asked for Democratic ballots. In Clermont County, turnout surged to 43 percent Tuesday - compared with just 31 percent in the 2004 presidential primary.

-snip

Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said there was also a "crossover problem" in Akron and elsewhere in Summit County where many Republicans and non-enrolled Ohioans voted Democratic.

-snip

Of Clermont County's 128,128 registered voters, 37,714 are registered Republicans and 14,496 are registered Democrats. With all precincts counted, 26,279 people had cast Democratic ballots and 28,032 had cast Republican ballots.

Warren County has 12,440 registered Democrats and 41,377 registered Republicans. With all precincts reporting, that county was reporting 27,855 Democratic ballots cast and 28,683 Republican.

-snip
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080305/NEWS01/803050380&template=printpicart


GOP voters crossing over in large numbers
Posted by Tom Ott, Michael Scott, Joe Wagner & Maggi Martin March 04, 2008 14:51PM
Categories: At the polls

Poll watchers throughout Ohio are noting large numbers of Republican voters crossing over to vote in the Democratic Primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

In the Republican roost of Chagrin Falls, veteran poll worker Liz McFadden was amazed at the number of people jumping the party's ship. Democrats accounted for 70 percent of the voters in her precinct, one of seven at the village's high school.

"That's a complete reversal of what it normally is, even more so," she said. "I've never seen a switch like this."

The defectors had motives both pure and sinister.

-snip
http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/03/gop_voters_crossing_over_in_la.html

FROM OSU ELECTION LAW:

Cross-over voting under Ohio law

March 4, 2008

Edward B. Foley
Director, Election Law @ Moritz
Robert M. Duncan/Jones Day Designated Professor of Law
Moritz College of Law


Blogs at both the Plain Dealer and Dispatch are reporting Republican cross-over votes in the Democratic candidate for Senator Clinton on the ground that she would be an easier nominee for Senator McCain to beat. It is unclear how widespread this phenomenon is and whether, if calculable, could make a difference in either the statewide total popular vote or the awarding of delegates between Senators Clinton and Obama. There is also the question whether it is legal, and if not, whether it is remediable in any way.

Although it is widely reported that Ohio permits Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary (and vice versa), that is not technically true. Ohio law does permit voters to switch party affiliation on the day of the primary, but it has a rather awkward mechanism that attempts to ascertain that the switch is sincere—and to prevent insincere “party-raiding” of the kind that (as described above) is being reported today.

Section 3513.19 of the Ohio Revised Code states that it is the “duty” of poll workers in Ohio “to challenge the right of person to vote” in a particular party’s primary if a poll worker “doubts” the person’s eligibility based on the ground (among others) that the person is "not affiliated with or is not a member of the political party whose ballot the person desires to vote.” The same section further specifies that the poll worker is to determine the voter’s previous party affiliation by examining the voting records of the past two years. If those records show the voter to be a Republican, for example, then before giving the voter a Democratic ballot in the current primary, the statute then directs the poll worker to have the voter sign a “statement, made under penalty of election falsification, that the person desires to be affiliated with and supports the principles of the political party whose primary ballot the person desires to vote.”

This statement is supposed to be the test of the voter’s sincerity in switching party affiliation. Section 3513.20 of the Code make clear that a voter who refuses to sign the statement is to receive a provisional rather than regular ballot. Indeed, even if the voter is willing to sign the statement, but the majority of poll workers at the precinct believe the voter is not sincere in switching parties, then the poll workers are to give the voter a provisional rather than regular ballot.

-snip
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/freefair/articles.php?ID=367


Can GOP Voters Spoil the Dem Race?

Wednesday, Mar. 19, 2008By HILARY HYLTON/AUSTIN

As if Democrats didn't have enough problems deciding upon their presidential nominee this year, now they must contend with the possibility that Republicans are deliberately crossing party lines to prolong the bitterly contested race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. In recent weeks, conservative talk radio stars Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham have urged loyal listeners to vote for the much-despised Clinton in open Democratic primaries so as to prevent Obama from sealing the nomination, and there are some indications that their calls have already been heeded in states like Texas and Mississippi.
Even in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania, where the April 22 primary is closed to independents and Republicans, there are signs that some Republicans are going so far as to switch their party registration by the March 24 deadline to participate in what Limbaugh has dubbed "Operation Chaos." In the last five months, there has been a 2.2% increase in the number of registered Democrats in Pennsylvania versus a tiny dip of 0.12% in Republican numbers. Veteran Pennsylvania pollster Terry Madonna expects some 100,000 new Democrats to vote on April 22, about 5% of the total expected to vote. In historic Gettysburg, Adams County Elections Supervisor Monica Dutko told the local newspaper, The YorkDaily Record, she was a seeing an unprecedented steady stream of switchers, some of whom volunteered they were changing registration from Republican to Democrat at the urging of Limbaugh.
Madonna, however, believes most of those new Dems will go for Obama, which goes against the Limbaugh conspiracy theory. It is also exactly what the upstart candidate himself has been working toward. Obama, who until recently was winning the lion's share of Republican votes in open Democratic primaries, is running radio ads in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia calling on voters to register as Democrats this week.
The first clue that Republicans might be making this kind of mischief came in the crucial Texas primary on March 4, a contest that most observers claimed Clinton had to win — along with Ohio — to keep alive her hopes for the nomination. Dave Mann, a political writer for the progressive Texas Observer, was driving to Fort Worth on that primary day when he heard various callers to the Laura Ingraham radio show claiming they had followed her and Limbaugh's call. One even admitted he would now have to go to confession and repent his sins. As he listened, Mann dismissed the idea that Republicans would have a significant impact on the Democratic outcome in Texas.
-snip
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1723756,00.html


Poll: 28% Percent Of Hillary Supporters Would Back McCain If Obama Wins



Gallup finds that Hillary supporters say they're more likely to bolt to McCain if she doesn't end up as the nominee. That's compared to 19% of Obama supporters who say they'd support McCain if Obama's not the nominee.

[BayouBengal07]

48. How about this...

Hillary will not be the nominee. We've established that much. Now, with several months to go until the general election, instead of complaining about the impossible, why don't you work to win Ohio for Obama? It's only one point.

[Douglas Carpenter]

50. Rasmussen Markets data gives Sen. Obama a 62% chance of winning in November

"Rasmussen Markets data gives Sen. Obama a 62.0% chance of winning in November (results are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants)."

"The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189"

"Rasmussen Reports believes the race is over and that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. We will stop tracking the Democratic race in the near future to focus exclusively on the Obama-McCain match-up"

link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Real Clear Politics NATIONAL Average: Obama 47.2/McCain 43.4

The general election poll averages the latest polls from Gallup, Rasmussen, Quinnipiac,ABC News/Wash Post,POS/GQR and LA Times/Bloomberg

link:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rasmussen Markets data gives Sen. Obama a 62.0% chance of winning in November (results are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants)."

"The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189"

"Rasmussen Reports believes the race is over and that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. We will stop tracking the Democratic race in the near future to focus exclusively on the Obama-McCain match-up"

link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

[Yanez Houston Jordan]

51. OMG! Has Ohio opted out of the general election??? Will there be no campaign in Ohio this fall???

[indimuse]

52. Kand R

[nichomachus]

53. In June of 1992 -- polls had Bill Clinton as a third-place loser

[Pab Sungenis]

54. Come on, horse, wake up!

[Thrill]

55. Call me when the campaign starts. That doesn't mean shit right now. Kerry was up 12 points

at this time

[barack the house]

56. Bob Barr. Take care see you at the inaugaration.

[grytpype]

57. I can't wait until this HillBilly bullshit is over.

[still_one]

60. I don't believe anyone in Ohio who would vote for Clinton won't vote for Obama

If that was the case then they are complete and utter idiots, and have no idea why they support Hillary

Healthcare
The Supreme Court
The Iraq War
Medicare
Social Security
Jobs

The positions on those issues between Obama and Clinton just isn't that much different. However, the positions on the issues by mccain verses the Democrats is a MAJOR DIFFERENCE

The poll makes NO SENSE, to support Hillary, and not support WHOEVER the Democratic nominee is over mccain

[stevietheman]

61. Enough. Obama is the nominee. n/t

n/t

[LanternWaste]

62. I'm confident that either one of the...

I'm confident that either one of the Democratic nominees will roll over the GOP in the general elections-- both electorally and popularly.

What's unfortunate is how many people on DU are offended and saddened by that statement...

[mod mom]

63. BS!!! The Poblano Model + Democratic SOS:

first off, if Ohio had counted those uncounted votes and not disenfranchised Af Am voters under SOS/bush Cheney co chair Ken Blackwell, then Ohio would have delivered the presidency to Kerry Edwards.

Don't believe me? read the House Judiciary Dem Staff' Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio":

http://www.nvri.org/about/ohio_conyers_report_010505.pdf

Second, Ohio now has a Democratic SOS with integrity so watch those votes be counted this time.

Third, Poblano Model + Vote for Change Voter Registration Drive:

May 08, 2008
POBLANO'S MODEL
My latest NationalJournal.com column, about the remarkable success of the non-poll statistical model created by Poblano ofFiveThirtyEight.com, is now online.
-- Mark Blumenthal

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poblanos_model.php


Sunday, May 11, 2008

Black, Youth and Latino Turnout, and Obama's Electoral Map

This analysis is prepared in conjunction with Progress Illinois, which has posted a separate article on the findings. The Progress Illinois blog is relatively new to the scene -- just as mine is. But it's extremely well designed and extremely well written, and I hope that you'll get in the habit of checking it regularly. Thanks to Josh and the rest of the gang for their assistance.

As the Democratic primaries come to their slow, if increasingly certain conclusion, the media narrative has tended to focus on the alleged inadequacies of each candidate: Hillary Clinton's lack of support among black voters, or Barack Obama's supposed inability to resonate with certain types of white voters. What has been lost, however, is a story that could turn out to have far more relevance for the general election campaign in the fall: the emergence of a "big tent" Democratic electorate that has increasingly begun to reflect the full diversity of America.

What follows is a table comparing the composition of the Democratic primary electorate in 21 states in which exit polling data is available in both 2004 and 2008. We focus on three particular groups: black voters, Latino voters, and young voters. As a fraction of the Democratic electorate, African-American turnout has increased from 19.8 percent to 21.5 percent -- a 7.8 percent increase. Latino turnout has increased from 5.3 percent to 7.5 percent -- a 41.9 percent increase. And turnout among voters aged 18-29 has increased from 9.0 percent to 13.7 percent -- a 52.4 percent increase.

-snip
The ability to bring new voters to the polls remains Barack Obama's most significant electoral advantage, both relative to Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Indeed, current polling may already be underestimating Obama's strength against McCain if it does not account for improved turnout among Democratic-leaning groups like young voters and African-Americans, who have participated in record numbers in this year's primaries. If Obama can parlay that advantage with a strong ground game, he very much could redraw the electoral map.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/black-youth-and-latino-turnout-and.html

[nichomachus]

67. YYSSW

[graycem]

69. I don't understand

why Obama just doesn't quit before he embarrasses himself. Everybody knows, As Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, California, New York, Puerto Rico, and any state that isn't a caucus state, that Hillary won goes, so goes the nation... PoliSci 101 Obama, geeze!

[haymakeragain]

72. I bet you're bummed Hillobeans ain't gonna be on the Nov. ballot huh?

Makes those polls even more meaningless than they already are.

[BigDDem]

73. Not to worry, he'll take Vermont

[MilesColtrane]

74. After "it's the map, not the math" fails to suade Democratic super delegates,...

...the Clinton campaign switches to the bolder, "it's the geography, not the arithmetic...unless she actually ends up winning the popular vote...then it's the arithmetic".

[sellitman]

75. Pathetic.

Fail

[shadowknows69]

77. One point? Bwah ha ha ha ha ha ha

Hillary isn't going to be the nominee so why not post a thread with positive remarks for Obama being so close to beating McCain. Don't you support our nominee?

[Lucky 13]

78. Hell, why don't we stop all these silly primaries and just let OHIO decide for the rest of us.

:eyes:

[DemGa]

79. Obamas don't need Ohio - they've got Mississippi!

[anonymous171]

80. Good thing it's not Nov.

[gmudem]

81. OMG they held the election already!!??

How can Obama come back from that huge lead McCain has?? We're dooooooomed!

Oh wait, there in a statistical tie with 11% undecided and 5 1/2 months until the GE. There is no way Ohio is going to vote for a Republican this year especially one that "isn't an expert on the economy."

[LSK]

82. SHIT!!! THE ELECTION IS TOMORROW!!! WHAT WILL WE DO??

:eyes:

[Robbins]

83. Ohio

Obama Is only 1 point behind Mccain In Ohio.This Is a dead heat.Obama Is the nominee.Hillary will
not be.Throw all the polls from May all you want but It will not change reality.Ohio Is In play for Obama.

[PseudoIntellect]

87. This just in: 1% difference in an Ohio poll 6 months out with over 10% undecided =

certain loss in General Election.

[Carrieyazel]

90. This is the 3rd straight Rust Belt state poll that has McCain +1.

Could be cause for concern. In the latest Rasmussen polls:

Pennsylvania, Michigan and now Ohio have McCain up on Obama by a single point.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

93. FACTS....

they can't hear

[NJSecularist]

102. It's a shame, isn't it?

We are giving the nomination to someone who can't win the important states, but can win low-turnout caucuses in Republican states like Alaska and Idaho.

[Bleacher Creature]

94. Crap -- did I forget to vote in the general?

[my3boyz]

95. You can stop posting that because HIllary will not be the nominee. nt

[Cali_Democrat]

97. You're like athletes foot

stinky and damn annoying

[madrchsod]

99. ...we are all doomed....!

[samsingh]

100. would the independents in ohio be stupid enough to vote for mccain shit?

[Bensthename]

101. And in the end, she loses.. It doesnt matter how many she got.

She's lost. Get over it.

[AZBlue]

104. "There is very little chance of the Democratic nominee winning the general election without Ohio."

Why?

[NJSecularist]

112. Look at the math. Obama is unlikely to win every state in the Southwest

So he needs to win Ohio or Florida. Florida looks extremely unlikely. Ohio less so, but it's unlikely that he will win the state.

[AZBlue]

114. Where are you getting these "results" from?

[DesEtoiles]

105. not with Diebold doing the counting

[stratomagi]

108. So you proved????

He can't win Ohio in May with Hillary still in the race. Too bad the election is in November and Hillary won't be on the ballot.

[democracy1st]

111. i know this sh.. is freakin ridiculous

[Perry Logan]

110. That farting sound you hear is Obama's momentum pooping out.

[lsusteel]

113. We can definitely win without Ohio

Furthermore...

Obama is down 1 with only 65% of the Democratic base.

The base will coalesce (it almost always does) - I'm guessing at least 10% of the outstanding 35%. That's enough to give Obama a victory.

The further we get from this hard fought primary, the more the bitterness among Hillary supporters will subside and the more Obama's poll numbers will go up.

Any state where Obama is within 7% or so is a definitely winnable state.

The key numbers to look at at this point are independents, where Obama outperforms Hillary in every poll I've seen.

[NJSecularist]

115. No, we cannot win without Ohio.

Obama doesn't put any significant states in play that Kerry didn't in 2004. So we need to win Ohio.

[lsusteel]

117. You mean states like...

New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Virginia (49 electoral votes)?

And don't forget longer shots such as Texas, North Carolina, and Montana...

[NJSecularist]

118. Obama ony puts New Mexico, Colorado and Iowa in play.

And he is not putting Indiana, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina or Montana in play.

[lsusteel]

119. The compilation of polls electoral map says otherwise

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/



Texas is solidly red there, but a recent poll had him only down 5% while only pulling 69% of Democrats.

[NJSecularist]

120. He is not winning reliably Republican states like Indiana and Texas.

I don't care what one outlier poll says.

[lsusteel]

121. Texas being "reliably Republican" is based on biased elections

The last two times there was a Texas neutral election (no ticket with someone from/representing Texas) were 1976 and 1996.

In 76, Texas went Democratic. In 80 and 84, GHWB was on the ticket as VP. In 88 and 92, GHWB was the lead on the Repub ticket.

96 was relatively Texas-neutral and Clinton only lost by 5%. 2000 and 2004 had GWB.

Texas is very much in play, particularly if turnout is high.

[NJSecularist]

123. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were from the South.

Obama is not from the South, and Texas has changed since 1976. Not to mention that Ross Perot was the only reason why Bill came close in 1996 in Texas.

[lsusteel]

124. Do I think Obama will win Texas?

Nope.

But it will be within 8%. Take it to the bank. And that means forcing an already relatively poor candidate to spend money there which has a ripple effect for the other states I mentioned.

Anyway, quit your bitching and rally behind the nominee. As I said in another thread, Obama losing would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, since the only reason he trails in polls is lack of support from you Dems.

[NJSecularist]

125. If he comes within 8% in Texas, he will have won the election.

He'll lose by 11% or 12% in a 50/50 election.

[VotesForWomen]

116. you are correct. O could go down in dukakis-like proportions.

[dugggy]

122. Obama will soon join Kerry, Dukakis, McGovern and others

considered left of center. If Hillary is the nominee
she has an excellent chance of joining Bill Clinton,
LB Johnson, John F Kennedy, Harry Truman and other
centrist democrats.

Gore is perceived as centrist on economic issues and
he actually beat Bush in popular vote. The SCOTUS handed
it to BUsh.

[tranche]

127. He'll take the state.

He'll campaign there and win the state. The Republican party is broken and he'll have time to point that out.