New Poll Shows No Real Imbalance In Potential Dem Defections To McCain

Yesterday I flagged a new Gallup poll showing that 28% of Hillary supporters say they'll flip to McCain if Obama is the Dem nominee, while only 19% of Obama supporters would do so if Hillary won.

Today, Pew has some new numbers out with different findings -- while sizable numbers would desert either candidate for McCain, there's no real imbalance between the two sides:

Among Clinton's backers, 32% say they would vote for McCain if Obama is the Democratic nominee, and among Obama's backers, 28% say the same if Clinton wins the primary race.

Pew qualifies...

Many of these "defections" come from independent voters who only lean Democratic. When the analysis is limited to those who identify themselves as Democrats, just 20% of Obama supporters say they would not vote for Clinton in the fall, and 25% of Clinton supporters would not vote for Obama.

Yesterday a number of readers wrote in to say that it's far too early to worry about such numbers. There's no question that they are partly a product of temporary circumstances -- lack of aggressive coverage of McCain; intense media scrutiny of both Dems; and the white-hot acrimony between the two Dem campaigns and some of their supporters.

Still, anyone who wants to see a Dem in the Oval Office in 2008 would be remiss for not viewing these figures with some concern.

Separately, the poll has tons of other interesting stuff -- it finds that Obama has basically weathered the Wright storm, though it also finds that persistently large numbers still wrongly believe he's a Muslim. Have at it.


Comments (70)

avatar

Hmm... A Muslim with a racist Catholic pastor.

How do their head not explode trying to digest all the spam they read?

My guess is that this is also the same portion of the population that has won the lottery in Nigeria.

I had a colleague say with a straight face that she thought it was extremely possible for Obama to be both a Christian and a Muslim simultaneously. She "didn't know" that he wasn't a Muslim, even if he attended church on a regular basis.

I was at a complete loss for words. How do you respond to that? (and still keep your job?)

avatar

Funny, I overheard someone say the same thing about Obama being both a Muslim and Christian. My theory is that some Americans must consider "Muslim" to be a race/ethnicity. For instance, I have seen nasty right-wing blog postings calling Obama a "camel jockey" and similar-but-worse things that seem to be racial slurs more than religious ones.

avatar

That's it. You've hit the nail on the head. Thanks so much.

i don't know if this poll is any more encouraging than yesterday's... let's just hope that things calm down after there is a nominee.

i've said it before, but i think it's important to play this out to the very bitter end. it would be best if the so-called "elders" like dean and pelosi keep their noses out of it.

there has to be resolution, so that no one feels cheated. there has to be resolution regarding FL and MI... both sides have to be satisfied that the process worked. short circuiting the process after all this would ensure that one side or the other feels cheated.

btw, CNN is showing new video of Hillary begging people NOT to vote for mccain in november regardless of who the dem nominee is... i suppose all those hillary-haters out there won't give her credit for that, since it doesn't fit with the "hillary as the cause of all evil" theme.

I'm not a Hillary hater, unless anyone who doesn't support Clinton is a Hillary hater...but if she's talking about defeating John McCain, and continues that theme, and spends more time on that than trying to shred Obama, then she deserves credit.

avatar

I haven't seen the video, but if it is as you have described, I applaud her for it. I think both the Clinton and Obama campaign look at the polls and should realize that they need to both campaign a little more heavily against McCain. And I think we're seeing that happen.

As for the party elders "sticking their noses in", the sad truth is they are going to have to do that at some level, at some point, no matter what. It is improbable bordering on impossible that the nominee will have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination. As such, the super-delegates will have to decide, whether it is to ratify the pledged delegate and popular vote winner, or to overturn that choice.

It is perfectly legitimate for them to make this decision (or announce their intentions to make this decision) before we actually get to the convention.

CNN ran the video with a bold font "new video" in the corner during the 5:00 hour of the Situation Room with Wolfie... Hillary was asked specifically about yesterday's poll showing how many of her supporters (and obama's) said they would vote for mccain if their candidate didn't win... Hillary, said, (i'm paraphrasing): "i really hope people stop and think for a minute, because that would really be the wrong thing to do. above all else, it is most important that we put a democrat in the White House in january of 2009." (she said more than this, but that's the essence of it.)

as for superdelegates making up their minds before the convention, i think that is fine. more than half of them have already committed (softly or otherwise)... but until one candidate or the other "clinches" with the needed 2025 or whatever, then the voting should continue without dean or pelosi or anyone else saying otherwise. this is about giving closure to the supporters of the losing candidate. if you want the greatest possible number of them to vote dem in november, then i think you have to let the process play out.

and that goes for FL and MI, too... we can't write off those 2 states (in the primary season)and hope to win them in November. it is not the fault of the voters in FL and MI that their primaries were declared invalid. if i lived in one of those states, i'd be pissed! americans feel entitled to vote and to have their votes count. the DNC can't take that away, nor can their state legislatures. i suppose the DNC can say we won't seat your delegates at our convention, but the risk is having enough dems in FL and MI get so pissed that they vote for mccain (in protest) or stay home in november.

i have always said that i will vote for obama if hillary doesn't get the nomination, but if i lived in FL and MI i can see myself sending a message to the democratic party by staying home in november if they refused to count my primary vote... i really can... this was the stupidest thing the DNC ever did. up until now, i thought that dean was doing a pretty good job. now he's on the hook for this mess... he had better fix it, and make sure that it stays fixed for 2012 and beyond... otherwise, he should pack his bags and let someone else run the DNC.

Yeah and this poll is not credible:

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=27301

avatar

Three things:

1. Wrong poll.

2. Check out either the front page of TPM or scroll down on the main TPM Election Central page for a post that explains why Taylor Marsh just lead you astray.

3. Don't ever, and I do mean ever, link to anything over at Marsh's place as evidence of anything other than proof that Clinton-fever is a real disease. Ever.

1) Your link refers to a different poll.

2) The claims listed in the post you link to have been debunked by another post on the homepage of this very website.

3) Taylor Marsh is possessed. She is the Dana Barrett to Clinton's Zuul. When she opens the refrigerator door, a voice says "HILLLLLARY."

I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

avatar

Nothing on Taylor Marsh is correct, you should know that.

avatar

That's a different poll.

You goofball. Taylor Marsh? And Greg is referring to the Pew poll, not the NBC/WSJ poll.

Oops.

There is a reason folk will vote for McCain if Obama wins the Democratic Party's nomination . . .

McCain-Clinton '08
avatar

Obama: 49%
Clinton: 39%

avatar

Oh, and the buried lead is that Obama is ahead by 10%

Obama: 49%
Clinton: 39%

That lead is pretty much unchanged since Feb 24th.

Yet another reason for the Supers to support Obama.

I have known in my head for a while now that Obama had won the nomination. Now is the first time that I feel it in my heart. For me this race now seems more like the McCain/Huckabee one, except that the part of Huckabee is being played by a rabid hyena.

avatar

I think people are lying to the interviewer on purpose.

This is the old GOP tactic -- everyone parrots the party line. Even they know its bs.

10% of Dems think Obama is Muslim?!?

That's crazy!

avatar

The 10% gap is made up of Muslim terrorists supporting Obama to weaken the nation.

avatar

You failed to mention that Obama has a 10% lead over Clinton in that poll, 49% to 39%.

avatar

Did the poll ask how many also believe Obama is an insect being from the planet Milktor?

Sometimes I really think people are just shining the pollsters. Then I remember the two drugstore clerks who asked me in all seriousness to settle their bet and tell them if dinosaurs and people existed at the same time.

I try not to think about that too often - cause it makes me want to hide under the bed from now on.

avatar

My wife got polled the other day about a local election neither of us knew a thing about. She just picked a name at random then hung up.

I was beside myself. "Don't do that," I said, "don't you know what that does to political junkies like me?"

She thought my reaction was funny.

Did the poll ask how many also believe Obama is an insect being from the planet Milktor?

AH HAH! DAMN YOUR HIDE YOU ANTI-MILKTORIAN!!! I WAVE MY THORAX AT YOUR ANTIES YOU AND YOUR KILLER-QUEEN HEE-LAH-REE -WHICH ANY SELF RESPECTING MILKTORITE KNOWS TRANSLATES IN OUR LANGUAGE TO "SHE WHO HOLDS THE MAGNIFYING GLASS OVER OUR LARVAE"!

THE PINCER-PROTECTORS ARE OFF AND YOU SHALL PAY!

(ok so I have too much time on my hands)

avatar

Methinks folks are trying to hold onto any negative piece of information they can to justify not voting for/supporting Obama. It happens and it is, frankly, unremarkable.

Nice to see his national lead over Clinton/McCain has held through all of this....

avatar

ok, im not much with numbers, so someone help me out.

If 30% of her voters would support mccain in a general against Obama, how is he beating mccain in match-ups? I don't know if those have any relation to one another, but its been confusing me.

I think its funny that Clinton's voters are supposedly the "real Democrats," yet so many of them are willing to vote for a neo-con...

avatar

I suspect these numbers underestimate the number of defections from Obama supporters: so many young people are only on cell phones.
When Frank Lunz (Republican) pollster did a Fox programme at a college on the day of the Ohio primary almost all of the students were voting for Obama (a few for McCain) and all of the Obama kids said they were only there because of him and wouldn't come out for Clinton in the general.

avatar

I have been a lurker here for a long time and decided finally to post because it seems pretty incredible to me that this is the ONE thing that gets featured on this post. No mention of the 10% spread between the two candidates. Or the other cross tabs which are thrown in the last graph as an afterthought.

I hear hear Patagonia for posting it.


Hillary, your death wish comes true. Here comes the sniper Dodd.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Dodd_to_Dems_Find_a_way_to_end_the_race.html#comments

avatar

Is Hillary Rambo Clinton really a secret Muslim?

Why else would she have her Money Goons making "Veiled Threats" to Nancy Pelosi.

Did Hillary issue The Fatwa on Speaker Pelosi?

It's also good to note that BOTH Hillary and Obama are beating McCain in the General.

That's good news for Democrats, no matter who you support.

Hi Greg - thanks - and a quick question (naturally!).

Are you going to post the Gallup results out today? I read that it is back to Obama 48, Clinton 44 today but haven't seen any of the tab details anywhere yet.

Best ~
Ardanien

avatar

We are trying to discourage him and Eric from breathlessly posting the national tracking polls. They are meaningless at this point.

People still believe he's Muslim?

They have not seen the endless Fux News loops of the Crazy Rev. Wright?

That's gotta be good news. Fux's viewership declining?

avatar

Fux's viewership declining?

Nosediving.

Their demographic is nursing homes and wherever Dick Cheney happens to be.

Remember, too, that the pollsters and media were completely into the same basic story when McCain seemed a lock for the Republican nomination. Think of all those dreary conservatives from Dobson to Rush who swore they'd never vote for McCain. This story about Democratic defections is being overplayed. Once Brooks published his column, it became the insider's theme of the week.

avatar

"Separately, the poll has tons of other interesting stuff -- it finds that Obama has basically weathered the Wright storm, though it also finds that persistently large numbers still wrongly believe he's a Muslim."

Arguably, the the latter fact is the main reason why the Wright storm failed to damage him. :o)

More likely, it's evidence that a lot of people still aren't following the campaign too closely (or ever will). A lot of people online have developed strong opinions one way or the other that just seem strange to people who don't live on the internet. And probably vice versa.

Don't forget those who tend to find the Democratic Party in general, and especially Hillary in particular, too right-leaning.

There's a number of progressive folks who have been waiting for a candidate like Obama as a reason to rejoin the national Democratic Party. No Obama, and you're gonna see a lot of votes go Green if not walk away from the ballot box all together this Fall.

avatar

More likely, it's evidence that a lot of people still aren't following the campaign too closely (or ever will). A lot of people online have developed strong opinions one way or the other that just seem strange to people who don't live on the internet. And probably vice versa.

I know my husband has told me that he doesn't want to hear another thing about the election until September at the earliest.

It really is early. I don't think that many people are following things that closely.

avatar

Wouldn't that be a bit late for polling about the Obama-Clinton race? The lede here is:

OBAMA 49%, CLINTON 39%

OBAMA WEATHERS THE WRIGHT CONTROVERSY.

Have your husband take a look.

avatar

Have your husband take a look.
Posted by

Don't push it - I don't push him. He's voting for Obama and that's all that I care about. No sense in boring the man to death. ;)

But thanks for the thought.

avatar

I'm just using your post as a pretext to complain about the buried story here. Hope you don't mind. Last week people were wondering whether the Wright thing was going to destroy Obama altogether. They were saying, with grave intonations, we'll know more by the middle of next week. Well, it's the middle of next week, and people are saying: Ho hum, Obama's still ahead. Personally, I think this type of lead is nothing short of AMAZING.

avatar

Amazing? I don't think so. I think we're all just way too close to the whole thing.

Sure, it's fun. But there are skillions of people in our beautiful country who prefer football, basketball, baseball, soap operas, late night movies or porn.

avatar

Separately, the poll has tons of other interesting stuff -- it finds that Obama has basically weathered the Wright storm, though it also finds that persistently large numbers still wrongly believe he's a Muslim.

1) I can't remember. How many people thought he was Muslim before the Wright flap? Has there been any progress on that front?

2) 10% is a large number to be persistently (perversely?) wrong about something? We're talking about Americans, remember?

3) The 10% who still think he's Muslim probably belong to the group that thinks racial equality has gone too far in this country and that interracial dating is a bad thing. Do you think Democratic fortunes in November depend on these people at all? Uh...don't think so.

2) 10% is a large number to be persistently (perversely?) wrong about something? We're talking about Americans, remember?

Actually, the response probably should be only 10% continue to believe some demonstrably false detail???

In the light of the fact that a sizeable chunk of the population continues to believe that Sadaam Hussein had something to do with 9/11, 10% looks pretty snappy by comparison....

avatar

Am I missing something.. I only saw that Obama was ahead 49 to 39 when I read the comments. I know we're trying to disavow the tracking polls, but this isn't a tracking poll.

avatar

The Pew Research poll (out today) does seem to be a slight outlier in terms of Obama support. But that will be apparent (or not) as more data become available.

In any event, the first comment in this thread is utterly nonsensical. Not only does it refer to the wrong poll, (NBC/WSJ), the comments on the Taylor Marsh website suggest that none of the folks there understand the concept of "oversampling."

Suffice to say that when a poll "oversamples" a subgroup, it's for the purpose of being able to draw more reliable conclusions about that subsample. The results from "oversampled" respondents are then "weighted" to cancel the effect of the "oversampling." A single semester course in statistics is all that's required to understand such a technique. As long as (a) respondents are chosen randomly and (b) appropriate weights are applied to oversampled respondents, the effect is to diminish the poll's "margin of error."

avatar

To quote the Tom Ricks book "Fiasco", your co-worker is "crack smoking stupid".

Too lazy to read the fine print - does this poll address how many people will simply not vote or vote some 3rd choice? I won't vote for McCain, but I also will not vote for Hillary, i.e., I will not vote for anyone I believe is going to war with Iran, including Obama if he should get persuaded to promise to destroy villages to prove he's tough enough to be CIC.

avatar

The problem is that the Muslim thing also gets Jewish voters upset. There needs to be a concerted Jews for Obama effort or something, because whether or not people think he's Muslim, and the polls show that too many still do, a lot think that he's anti-Irael. That NEEDS to be fixed, because those are such easy defections to McCain, and they shouldn't be. I read somewhere that, next to African Americans, Jews are some of the most steady supporters of Democratic candidates.

avatar

I wouldn't worry about that too much. Jewish Americans will get the facts before they make a final decision. We can't do anything about right wingers, but they are a minority in the community. Here is your link:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/JewsforObama

avatar

Thank you SO much! ^o^

avatar

Immediately, politely and honestly. Correct the facts and let it drop.

avatar

"There's no question that they are partly a product of temporary circumstances -- lack of aggressive coverage of McCain; intense media scrutiny of both Dems; and the white-hot acrimony between the two Dem campaigns and some of their supporters"

I think lot of people are underestimating the depth of the anger and resentment among Clinton supporters.. Isn't it a surprise after media serially dismissing her chances (some say 10%, some say 5%) everywhere in cable, print, blogs and talk-radio she is still going toe to toe with Obama in all the tracking polls? even after counting her out over and over again she consistently maintains over 40% support. that tells you one thing for sure. There is a solid base of support for Hillary and they aren't moving an inch. Contrary to what many here think, its not the sniping coming from Obama campaign that's hurting (It's expected in a campaign that it will happen), it's the continuous unfair media bias against her that is pushing these people more and more to the edge and they'll be going over to Mccain. The current headline story in this blogsite "TPMtv: Summa Bosniatica" did it for me. For a long time, i thought this website was fair, but i guess i was wrong. Seeing one of the democratic candidates whom i support being parodied like this in a left-leaning website has left a real bad taste in my mind and i can't see myself siding with the same people again, PERIOD!
I'm sure the same thing is happening with lot of other hillary clinton supporters who watch evening news or cable news! It's not the criticism, it's the vitriolic nature of the criticism, the tendency of piling on by fellow democrats that is making lot of people cringe and run away from Obama.

Considering that Hillary was the "inevitable" choice, how did we get where we are? The vitriol you see from the left is a backlash against the establishment party that's been brewing for a long time. Hillary figured she didn't need to bother with us just as she figured she didn't much need to bother with Iowa. If Hillary had won Iowa, Obama would have been finished. If Hillary had simply tried harder to win over the left side of the party on peace issues, civil liberties, etc., had she tried to connect with the grassroots earlier, had she not used a royal strategy with the press early, refusing interviews and acting like she'd already won the race --- she would be the nominee today.

avatar

Well, if that is your attitude, then it doesn't make you any different from the wingnut part (talk-radio) of the republican party, does it? Its my way or highway is what you are basically saying. So, for you Hillary Clinton or John McCain is the same thing? unless someone agrees with your point of view you are going to throw them under the bus irrespective of which party they are in. Well, i can tell you, if that attitude persists, very soon one day you'll find yourself in the same place where talk radio found themselves in with john mccain as republican candidate. in other words, "irrelevant".
In any case my point wasn't really concerning the left-wing blogs only, it was the whole media pile-on. And it happened so many times, before new-hampshire, before super-tuesday, before march 4th and its continuing even now. There is a point at which this pile on gets to the breaking point and many Clinton supporters just say enough is enough and they'll move to the other side.

avatar

Listen, I'm an Obama supporter but the Letterman video mash up of him saying unh... during his CNN interview about Rev. Wright was hysterical. He did say unh too much and he got ridiculed for it, so there it is. Now Sen. Clinton's getting ridiculed, and rightfully, over her really ludicrous whopper of big fish tale. And because you can't defend her lies and they're an embarassment to you, you're taking it out on TPM, as if they're the ones who have to answer for themselves. But it's Sen Clinton who's accountable here. The mess up is hers and you really can't expect everyone to ignore it. I mean, that's just childish. So look at it this way. Things could be worse. At least it's not as big a mess as Eliot Spitzer's.

avatar

I wonder if these surveys control for dittoheads and if not what kind of impact that would have on the results. It seems to me that they should also ask Clinton voters if they intend to vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination and also ask Obama voters if they intend to vote the same way in the general.

avatar

See here again is the shortsightedness of the Obamites. Assume the Wright scandal is not the death blow for the Dem nomination. Should he be the nominee, it will kill him in the general. The Obamites don't really care, they just want to beat Clinton. It seems that most Obamites dislike Clinton more than McCain. And once again it is the Dem circular firing squad in action.

Ready, aim,......

avatar

"See here again is the shortsightedness of the Obamites. Assume the Wright scandal is not the death blow for the Dem nomination. Should he be the nominee, it will kill him in the general. The Obamites don't really care, they just want to beat Clinton. It seems that most Obamites dislike Clinton more than McCain. And once again it is the Dem circular firing squad in action.

Ready, aim,......"

The same is true, obviously, of Clinton supporters and the Bosnia video.

And Mark Penn's comments about the red states' lack of "significance".

And Clinton's failure to rally the Democratic base despite being the presumptive favourite.

And the fact that a greater number of Americans trust John McCain more than her to answer the phone at 3 AM.

And the fact that Clinton doesn't think pledged delegates ought to vote for the candidate they've pledged to vote for.

Party rules be damned. Can you honestly not see how the Republicans can use that to cast suspicion on Clinton's campaign promises? Can you honestly say yourself that you believe she's going to do everything that she's "pledging" to do?

avatar

Spitting Image-thanks for proving my point.

avatar

Why would anyone care about any poll when it comes to elections is beyond me. Polls are designed to sway votes, in my opinion. I agree not everyone tells the truth when they are interviewed for a poll. Anyways, people shouldn't vote based on some poll that we all know is not accurate. I vote on merits, character and the issues. NOTE: Not that I'm telling anyone what their criterias should be when voting.

Fogu, none of those things are actually true. I actually used to think Hillary would be a good president, but I have never thought she was electable. I will see you a Wright and raise you Hillary misspeakings--her Dukakis in the tank. Her approval ratings right now are almost Bushian. All that matters to me is beating John McCain an the Republicans. The fact that I believe Barack Obama is in an unique position to heal the country after these past eight years are an added bonus.

Please don't put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head. It does no one any good to demonize and marginalize every single one of your opponents supporters. (Unless your opponent is George Bush.)

And, fogu, since you are so concerned about the circular fighting squad, I look forward to hearing how you will support Obama in the general should be the nominee, and in fact lessen your rhetoric now.

avatar

CNN has an article on their website about the low turn out of voters from either camps. Democrats are not only defecting to McCain if their candidate is not nominated, they just won't vote in Novemeber.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/27/dem.turnout.poll/index.html

I still don't buy it. Dems may be feeling resentful and beat up now, but by November, nearly all of them will be back in the fold. The Republican Convention will reignite the petulants and Republican attacks will help us rally around the nominee.

A backroom deal at the convention, however, would make it harder to make peace and unify.

avatar

Regarding the disparity between the percentage of voters who would flip from Clinton to Obama should he win the nomination versus those who would go the other way, I have a thought. More of Clinton's supporters (28%) say they would flip to Obama because her voters are traditional Democratic voters who have been more involved in the process though the years, and see the election of a Democrat to the White House as paramount, whereas only 19% of Obama supporters say they would flip to Clinton should she become the nominee, because I think he has attracted so many new, previously uninvolved voters to the process, and they are personally attracted to him, more than the idea of reclaiming the White House for the Democrats. I fall in the category of a Clinton supporter who will support Obama if he should win the nomination.

I think you've got the sense reversed. 28% of Clinton supporters said they would flip to McCain should she not get the nomination. 19% of Obama supporters said the same for their guy. It's the Obama supporters who appear more loyal to the party and the Clinton supporters who appear more driven by the candidate... in fact, this was immediately raised as counter-intuitive by some analysts.

Post a Comment

Poll Tracker

View more polls »
Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address