« New Hillary Campaign Video Seeks To Revive Samantha Power Controversy | Home | Last-Ditch Talks Continue On Revote Between DNC, Michigan Dems And Clinton And Obama Camps »
SurveyUSA: Obama Losing Big To McCain In Ohio, Missouri And Kentucky
A new set of polls by SurveyUSA shows that Barack Obama's electability has taken a serious drubbing as a result of his recent setbacks, and he now does much poorer than Hillary Clinton does against John McCain in the three tested states:
Ohio
Clinton (D) 50%, McCain (R) 44%
McCain (R) 50%, Obama (D) 43%
Missouri
McCain (R) 48%, Clinton (D) 46%
McCain (R) 53%, Obama (D) 39%
Kentucky
McCain (R) 53%, Clinton (D) 43%
McCain (R) 64%, Obama (D) 28%
The internals show that in all three cases Obama gets a smaller share of the white vote than Hillary does, without room for his improvements among African-Americans to make up the difference.
(Via MyDD)
Late Update: One thing also worth noting is that these polls were conducted before Obama's speech yesterday on race relations, so we simply don't know yet what impact it might have in turning these numbers around.
Advertisement















And the post about how much better Obama performs in Colorado than Clinton is...where?
March 19, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
"And the post about how much better Obama performs in Colorado than Clinton is...where?"
OK here's a little math for you.
Ohio - 20 electoral votes
Colorado - 9 electoral votes
And while we're at it, pissing off Florida and Michigan looks this way:
Michigan - 17 electoral votes
Florida - 27 electoral votes
You really think Colorado is as important as Ohio; not to mention MI and FL?
March 19, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Last time I checked, the Democratic National Convention was being held in Denver, not Cleveland.
March 19, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know little about electoral realities in Ohio and nothing about Kentucky, but Missouri is my home and native land. This poll rather accurately reflects my own sense of things. Sen Clinton has a very definitely ceiling of support in this state, and that ceiling is under 50%. There is no way that she can win here. Obama has no such limitations, but by the same token it is not a forgone conclusion that he would win here, and l'affaire Wright is certainly not a help to him in our fair state. I could very easily see him losing 55/40 to McCain in MO.
Mind you, I am not predicting with any confidence that these results will hold up in November. There is a lot of time for things to change, especially given that summer will almost certainly see an uptick in violence in Iraq, which will hurt McCain. I am simply saying that it is very easy to believe that McCain could win and win big here.
March 19, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN had a poll today showing that people are linking the state of the economy to the war. If Obama can reinforace that connection, I think he's got a shot in any swing state especially if McCain keeps wandering around like a doddering old man running on the past. The more people want change, the better chance Obama has for giving them the opportunity to really emphasize it with their vote.
March 19, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Much poorer" in Ohio? Can you read at all, Eric?
That award for Prosecutorgate must have gone to the TPM staff's head- it's been all downhill around here since then.
March 19, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why pick on Eric for accurately reporting a poll?
March 19, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew this would happen.
I'm shocked that Hillary is within 10 points in Kentucky. Also shocked that Obama, having been leading big in MO, has now plummeted. Wow.
If this trend continues, Obama would go down in a Mondale-like defeat in the general. Tragic.
March 19, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
To what are you refering when you say "has been leading big in MO"? I am unaware of any polls which show him in the lead in MO. Certainly not SUSA's previous 50 state poll, which had him losing to McCain by 6% in MO.
March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you check out the last polling results from SUSA (Kos posts them unlike TPM) you will see Obama had a 10 point lead over McCain in Missouri on 2/28.
March 19, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this snark?
Particularly:
Because when you go to pollster.com, and look at the Missouri data, it's hard to reach the conclusion that Obama was ever leading "big" in MO. So what are you referring to, if you're serious?
Link to Pollster page: Obama-McCain matchups in MO (from Pollster.com)
What are you talking about?
March 19, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kentucky?
Also, since we're posting polls from SUSA and Gallup, I guess it's about time to post that Rasmussen that people have been talking about today.
March 19, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's plan is working. She will damage Barack so much that he will lose the election in 2008 (even though there is no possible way for her to win the nomination at this point). But mark my words...we will not forget in 2012 when she tries to run again. I will vote for anyone but that back-stabbing, self-serving, scam-artist. I am embarssed by the Clintons. I can't believe I defended them in the 1990's. They need to take their hate-mongering and shove it where the cigar don't burn.
Good Job Clintonistas! Good Job!
March 19, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like Clinton forced Obama to support Wright.
Also, I believe that Clinton has been very restrained in her attacks on Obama but even given that your view is correct would you rather that such attacks were made by her or by the Republicans in the GE?
March 19, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lanny-davis/two-questions-for-senator_b_92386.html
This is just for information only. Just so you know the Clinton campaign is trying to keep this Wright flap going.... Don't respond or comment, just make note of it.
March 19, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
*sigh*
the ubiquitous Lanny Davis. Mr. Davis sure has been sounding very like that pompous Dick Morris, of late.
March 19, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
MyDD? Isn't that Hillary Central where many of the odious Clinton supporters are?
March 19, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
In defense of MyDD, although it's always been pro-Clinton, it wasn't the seething troll-fest that we're seeing now since the Kos "strike".
In fact, in the week leading up to the so-called strike it seemed like many of the pro-Clinton people at MyDD were coming around to how destructive Clinton was acting, and beginning to waver.
To that end, it's my feeling that the "strike" was timed as much to reaffirm Hillary's net-support as it was to work the refs. After all, it worked against the traditional media by complaining about MSNBC and Shuster.
March 19, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"seething troll-fest"
what a great phrase.
March 19, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
after 2 weeks of fabricated controversy, the subject of that controversy takes a hit in the polls. tell us more, o' Great and Prescient One.
that the controversy involved the subject being painted as "the Black candidate" results in a hit in white voter support is an astounding development i'm SURE nobody saw coming. what a blindside. let me pick myself up off the floor, i fell out of my chair in shock.
it's too bad there's not 6 months to go until the General Election and that the Democratic party has already chosen a nominee to rally around and support, or he might have a chance of turning these numbers around.
March 19, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
You DO realize that all three polls were taken from 3/14 - 3/16 right?
You realize this indicates NOTHING in regards to how much Wright has hurt Obama until his answering of the problem can be taken into the equation.
Basically, at the height of the controversy the poll asks "Are you shocked?"
OH, MO, KY " Hell Yeah!"
Later that week, Obama responds....
Polls: No data yet.
March 19, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
After about a week of the Obama vs. McCain national campaign, these results will be flipped, and from there it will keep getting worse for McCain.
The landslide cometh.
March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah!! this is GRrrrreat!
Hillary is movin on up!!
Obama man is movin on down.....
sorry Obama supporters. Tell you god, he needs to go ahead and step down, for the good of the party.
March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
as if Obama was ever doing good in Kentucky and Ohio, two states that Hillary won in the primaries.
March 19, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah!! this is GRrrrreat!
Hillary is movin on up!!
Obama man is movin on down.....
sorry Obama supporters. Tell you god, he needs to go ahead and step down, for the good of the party.
March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
inanity in triplicate IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
March 19, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
DRINK MORE KOOL-AID!!! TASTES GREAT!!! GOD-DAMN AMERICA!!!!
March 19, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't give much credence to these. You might as well be polling "How well would Obama do with Rev. Wright as his VP nominee against McCain?"
Obama wins the nomination, both he and McCain announce VP picks, and then perhaps the polls will give us some credible insight.
March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah!! this is GRrrrreat!
Hillary is movin on up!!
Obama man is movin on down.....
sorry Obama supporters. Tell you god, he needs to go ahead and step down, for the good of the party.
March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
SurvayUSA is one of the BEST most Accurate polls out there too!
March 19, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Baaaaahhhhh! You're delusional. Baaaaaahhhhhh!
Survey USA has been consistently wrong and skewed in the clintons favor since last august. I don't understand why the skew is almost always favorable to the clintons. Maybe they are paying the freight.
March 19, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed they are, although I would note that their Missouri results were badly off the mark in Feb. That said, these results jibe with my own sense of the state of the race here in Missouri at the moment. I am not convinced that this tells us much of anything about how the race will stand by November, but I think that if one were to hold the GE in Missouri tomorrow, the results probably would look a lot like what they predict above (except that Clinton's numbers would actually be a bit lower, more like ~40-45).
March 19, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Must you write your inane comments thrice? That's 10 seconds of my life I'll never get back.
March 19, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL...
I'm sorry for wasting that 10 seconds... that was funny tho.
I don't know how that got posted 3 times.
March 20, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep in mind these were taken on 14-16.
March 19, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The polls right now are completely skewed by the Wright remarks.
The first thing we need to do is wait until the effect of his speech yesterday gets boiled into the numbers.
Next, it is only mid March. An eternity in politics.
Come the conventions we get the glowing re-introductions of the candidates to the public, the tear-jerker videobiographies of them and we start the game ALL OVER.
March 19, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
This poll was BEFORE Obama Race and Iraq speech and during the worse weekend he's had since campaign began. It also conflicts with Rasmassin and CNN polls during the same time period showing Obama with over 50% of the vote to Hillary's 45%.
Just wait -- you'll be seeing these polls change if the media starts talking about Iraq, Economy, health care (the issues) instead of trying to drive the news with race.
March 19, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do Rasmussen and CNN have state polls of the general match-ups? Just wondering. If so, I'll have to take a look.
Also, something I noticed in these SUSA polls is that they have a sizeable number of Democrats who say they would vote for McCain in the general. I am assuming they are Hillary supporters who say they will switch to the Republican if she doesn't get the nom. My guess is many of these Dems will come around after the primary fight is over, though I could be wrong.
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
These polls were taken at the height of the Wright controversy in states that it would resonate in. Not surprising at all.
If the polls still show the same thing in a month, then I will be more concerned.
March 19, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
hillaryhub.talkingpointsmemo.com I think is now a more appropriate name for this place.
March 19, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would also like to point out how Hillary TOO was ahead of Obama in each state UNTIL he took her on by going into them and campaigning.
McCain had best be improving on his CONVERSATIONS about Iraq and al Qaeda, otherwise HE will soon be dropping in the polls.
March 19, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
New Rassmussen Poll:
Obama Increases Lead Over Clinton 47-42
March 19, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's Ohio that has me concerned. Granted, the poll was taken at a particularly weak moment for Obama. But I'd really like to have those Ohio electoral college votes in the fall.
March 19, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Points Memo is firing all its guns today, I tell ya.
Hill's going down, boys. Smoke 'em if ya got 'em!
March 19, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the prejudiced white masses got the excuse they were looking for to reject Obama's candidacy. It was always a matter of 'when', not 'if' this country rejected Obama because of his race. What a waste.
Scared shitless white people love bombing brownies
Scared shitless white people love hating dark skinned immigrants
Scared shitless white people love rejecting black politicans because they're (or are secretly) 'angry'
March 19, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Screw this country. I'm a Californian first, American way down the list. I have nothing in common with the crypto-racists/homophobes from my native midwest.
All I want from the U.S government is for California to receive in outlays what it gives up federal tax receipts. No more welfare from California to the bigots in the South and Midwest.
March 19, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Er, thanks. We crypto-racists in the midwest love you too.
Whatever...
March 19, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know the kind of people who flipped because of the Wright 'controversy'. Downscale, shit-for-brains voters who vote year, after year, after year based not what is best for the country (or themselves), but based on what doesn't offend their backward attitudes.
March 19, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great Avatar, crappy attitude.
Not much on the convincing side either. Why post if you hate so much?
March 20, 2008 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
According to ABC - Hillary's schedules:
Hillary Clinton spent the night in the White House on the day her husband had oral sex with Monica Lewinsky, and may have actually been there when it happened, according to records of her schedule released today by the National Archives.
We knew this was coming .....now it's Hillary's TURN to answer questions -- where was she and why did she stay knowing THIS?
March 19, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't. Just let that shit stay in the past.
March 19, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with the sentiment, but the republicans don't. They will be doing where are they now montages of all the clintons' scandals from lewinski to mcdougal and back again the month leading up to the election on all the right-wing corporate media networks. To ignore the reality by pretending it isn't there dooms dems in november. The clintons cannot win the general election.
March 19, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stop it. Just stop it. It's loathsome when the Clinton campaign tries to keep a "scandal" alive. Rise above that, and stop referring to this the Lewinsky situation. It was sleazy and tawdry then, it's sleazy and tawdry now. Just. Let. It. Go. Be better than that.
And if an appeal to your better angel doesn't do the trick, consider this. You appear to be an Obama supporter. I can guarantee that if people keep bringing up the Lewinsky stuff, it's going to piss off a whole bunch of people who may wind up switching to Clinton.
So let it ago, either because it's the right thing to do, or because it's tactically the right thing to do.
March 19, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, she was in the same mansion when the event happened. Uh-oh. I'm sure she's scared by this revelation.
Just out of curiosity, where did you expect her to be?
March 19, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose the polls are real enough, but why are you linking to a hate site?
March 19, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's getting to a point where Obama really needs to start thinking of stepping down for the good of the party.
Just my .02
March 19, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, given what a big Obama supporter you were before, this is really a stunning surprise.
March 19, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama stepping down for the good of the party is EXCELLENT NEWS FOR OBAMA!
March 20, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Quite a few Obama supporters are losing it.
Every amateur misstep of Obama's campaign is answered by his supporters with an attack on Clinton. As if she controls the weather and everything else.
Obama can only blame himself for "Rev." Wright. It must be said, to her credit, she hasn't cut an ad with that lunatic in it! And you know she knew about it from day one.
What you have are Obama supporters unable to make an argument for their candidate, so they attack others as "odious" and as "trolls."
Get used to politics, people! Just because Obama says it is, doesn't make it so. There's no such thing as contention-free politcs.
March 19, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still waiting for the response to the "I knew this would happen" comment from above. So far, crickets.
I guess it's easier to toss out sweeping statements that are unencumbered by reality than it is to back stuff up with, you know, evidence....
March 19, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you are actually saying that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is lying to us when she tells us that a campaign between her and John McCain "would be the most civilized non-contentious campaign in our entire history!
Did you happen to see John McCain, with his dear friend Joe Lieberman by his side, say that Shiite Iran is actually arming and training Sunni Al Qaeda.
Did you happen to see where Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has endorsed that same John McCain for Commander in Chief, ahead of Senator Obama.
Hillery is the new Lieberman.
March 19, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reality Check:
Hillary Clinton had bigger National and State leads than this before the Iowa caucuses and she could not hold on to them. There was a time, just a few weeks before the primary, that Hillary was dominating the Texas polls.
This stuff is just daily rubbish, akin to daily astrology predictions.
March 19, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
Until any of these polls gives Hillary a gain of about 170 delegates, they mean nothing.
March 19, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Ohio numbers are a concern, Missouris a bit of a surprise. Kentucky? Home of Mitch McConnell and Jim Bunning? Not so much.
It looks like the damage done by HRC's intraparty cannibalism about NAFTA lingers. Pity she didn't have the integrity to lose with grace and honesty.
(Seriously: MyDD?)
March 19, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm surprise that people are surprised that Obama turns out to be not quite invincible or that Hillary is in this thing to win this thing.
This is politics folks not bean bag!
March 19, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Obama was a little surprised, yes- surprised that a fellow Democrat would stab him in the back, praising a Republican over him, in the name of getting elected.
March 19, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, any monkey could've seen it coming. Obama jumped on it really quick. I don't think many other Dems did, though. I saw the possibility but didn't think she'd actually pull the trigger, so when it happened it just went into my "yowza" drawer.
March 19, 2008 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Captain Trite for your mastery of the obvious!
March 19, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
BlewinColorado, why do you practice the politics of division with your animus towards Senator Clinton?
Oh the audacity to hope that Obama supporters would practice what Obama preaches.
Oh well ...
March 19, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to ask "animus towards Clinton"? WTF?
You mean the trumped up story about NAFTA that she still recycles?
What animus is that?
March 20, 2008 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
With the economy crashing Americans will come to their senses and vote for change coming in November. These recent polls reflect the recent attacks by Hillary, her friends at fox, and that fat pig Linbaugh. Hopefully, Obama will recover. Should Americans get distracted, and vote for the status quo, myself and family will prolong our permanence here in France.
March 19, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh Eric, the Holy Poll Master - Now we are reduced to linking MyDD. Too lazy to link to actual SUSA. Way to go man. Seriously..
March 19, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric -
Your first polls were full of shit, so now you're desperate, eh?
Seriously, what is going on with TPM? I thought this place was supposed to be a haven against this kind of yellow journalism.
March 19, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are you blaming Mr Kleefeld? SUSA produced the poll, not Mr Kleefeld. What kind of site would this be if they did not report a poll by such a prestigious firm as Survey USA. I am just as much an Obama supporter as you are, but I want to know about these polls and am obliged to Mr Kleefeld for announcing them when they arrive. It beats the heck out of checking in on each survey's website three times each day.
March 19, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. I see nothing wrong with what Eric has posted. I do not put much faith in polls this far out, but I do not see some hidden agenda by Eric behind it all.
Obama started out in Iowa much further behind that these polls reflect. He also was down more than that in Texas just a short period before their primary was held.
What are they going to do with the poll results from Ohio and Missouri. There primaries are over. Those polls could not be any more meaningless. Who the hell is squandering money on them?
March 19, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The poll isn't BS, but it's fair to ask why the Rasmussen tracking poll didn't get a headline today. Maybe some of the cries of bias would stop if TPM stated a policy or philosopy on posting poll results . . .
March 19, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the point is that they're linking to MyDD and crediting this as a source, instead of going right to SUSA. Brings into question where Election Central is pulling its news sources from.
Also, I think there's a bit of a resentment against some of the selective linking and promoting of polls, with little effort to provide proper context.
March 19, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
and dont forget this poll was taken before the full out republican attack machine. when obama gets the nomination how many democratic house and senate seats is obama going to take down with him?
March 19, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. One week TPM pulls for Hillary. the next week they pull for Obama. Fair and Balance, you know./snark
;)
March 19, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
March 19, 2008
CLINTON 49%, Obama/Rev. Wright 42%
Gallup Daily: Clinton Moves Into Lead Over Obama
Hillary Clinton holds a significant 49% to 42% lead over Barack Obama in Gallup Poll Daily tracking on the Democratic presidential nomination. John McCain has an advantage over both Democrats in the latest general election preference polling.
The Reverend Wright and his Greatest Hits, the gift that keeps on giving through the General Election.
March 19, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Such polls mean nothing, period.
In May 1988, in the run-up to the general election, Michael Dukakis was on the top of the world, with a 49% - 39% advantage over George Bush, Sr. according to the New York Times. He went on to lose by 8%.
Why? Because, his party chose safe, boring Dukakis over talented young Al Gore.
March 19, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's already WON the nomination with more popular votes, more elected deletes (by 157) and by total delegate count and by 30 out of 44 states won.
Experts say there is no way she could win now...without cheating and going against the DELEGATE count being the RULE.
Unless Hillary STEALS the election like Bush did in 2000 - Obama will be our next President -
March 19, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The RULE is that elected delegates can switch their support, Superdelegates can vote for anyone they want, no matter who has the lead in either popular or elected delegate. That's the RULES. Also, neither O or H have won the nomination. The nominee needs 2025 delegate votes to win the nomination.
I love how the RULEs only apply when they benefit Obama.
March 20, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
These numbers mean nothing until we actually have our candidate.
We haven't seen this kind of primary in recent history. Polls might historically show some real data at this stage of the game, but when one party is still divided (passionately) the polls can't mean a THING, especially against McCain. I'll start looking at those polls in September...maybe.
There will be huge united democratic support for whomever gets the democratic nomination (assuming it happens some day...)and all of this will be noise.
I'm thinking it'll be Obama...and when 40% of the democrats don't feel like they have to make up reasons to dislike him, or jump on every negative band wagon (and YES, I make this same argument for Hillary if she gets the nod), we'll be a powerful force. The polls will look very different.
March 19, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I WANT TO FIX HILLARY CLINTON FOR STAYING WITH BILL WHEN SHE SHOULD HAVE DIVORCED HIM OVER:
1. HIS ANTIMASTURBATION
2. HIS CHEATING ADULTERY
ALSO IM AGAINST HER NOT LISTENING TO ME ABOUT VOTING AGAINST THE ANTI POKER BILL (PHONE CALLS, LETTERS) AND RECEIVING FUNDING FROM HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES WHEN THEY ARE ALREADY OVERCHARGING AND AGE DISCRIMINATING. I ALSO BELIEVE LIKE JOE LIEBERMAN THAT BILL CLINTON SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED AFTER ILLEGALLY CHEATING ON HIS WIFE.
March 19, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, enough already. You are giving us anybody but the clintons for a third term people a bad name.
March 19, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Obama and Hillary would both likely lose in Kentucky to anyone who is not hopelessly stuck in the 19th century. That's a statement about Kentucky, NOT the candidates.
I am hoping to be one of those who keep that from happening this fall.
March 19, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
My suggestion would be for both John McCain and Hillary Clinton to buy the nicest paper they can find, and print out a copy of these polls. Then they can go together to staples, get them laminated. From there they can take a short trip to the "Things Remembered" store at the mall and each pick up a frame that has "Ahh.. The Good Old Days" on it, and put their laminated copy of these polls in it. Then when this race is over they will have some happy times to look back on.
They can even, at some point in the next few years, bring their framed memories to the white house to visit Barack Obama and say, "remember this".......and everyone would laugh (in a friendly sense).
March 19, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
OH! I forgot to mention that Obama also has the problem of NOT being white and Clinton is the wrong gender.
What nonsensical reasons to vote for someone who doesn't know the difference between Sunni and Shia but supports keeping their war going.
March 19, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Experts say there is no way she could win now...without cheating and going against the DELEGATE count being the RULE.
Nope, actually the rule is they can vote however, and whoever they want. Are these experts at MSNBC and Dkos? And when he has 2-3 scandals he seems to always be juggling, I don't know I would have a hard time sending into 527 heaven. Step aside with grace.
March 19, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Via MyDD"
It would be appropriate to just put that at the top of the page, next to the Election Central logo.
March 19, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I admit, the leads in MO were never as big as I remembered, but he was leading in several. For example:
2/17 Obama 49 McCain 42 (Survey USA)
2/12 Obama 47 McCain 45 (Research 2000)
Pollster's average is McCain 47 to Obama's 43.
The point I was making above remains intact: Obama's wounds are gushing blood. SUSA poll today: 53 McCain 39 Obama. White people are scrambling away in droves.
Do we want to win in Nov 08 or do we opt for the poison? That's the reality and choice we face.
March 19, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
So a month ago were you strongly for Obama, because he was the one with unrealistically high poll numbers then? And if so, why do you imagine that today's numbers will be any more constant than last month's?
The general election is still 8 months away. To ask "Do we want to win in Nov 08 or do we opt for the poison?" at this point strikes me as rather more than a little premature.
March 19, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Knowing the racist nature of this country, I don't believe there is any going back for Obama.
March 19, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough. I guess we will see. Are Obama's numbers doomed to go nowhere but down from here on out, or will they go back up (and down, and up, &c) like they have again and again so far? Only time will tell.
March 19, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the electability argument needs to be taken out behind the shed and an entire clip needs to be emptied into its head, and then another clip into its heart.
Kerry was "electable" and look at what that got us.
March 20, 2008 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was a mistake for Obama to give that speech yesterday. Instead of taking care of a political problem he started a big "national conversation on race" that nobody asked for. Now he owns it. It's the economy, stupid.
March 19, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
So at worst Hillary is successfully killing our chances of winning in November, and at best, it is just a temporary fluctuation in one poll.
I'm going for the latter, but the danger of Hillary to our party can't be overstated.
March 19, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
yellow journalism? they've been in the tank for obama for months now. they overlooked many problems already that cost other candidates their campaigns in years past.
josh already claimed hillary put out the piece of video on fox with wright in it...and that is unsubstantiated. but he did it because he's as frustrated as the next obamaniac.
and to you clowns who assert hillary is mathematically eliminated from this nomination, WHAT PLANET ARE YOU LIVING ON?
How many times have we put the last nail in the political career of a CLINTON?
We learned one thing today....Hillary will run better vs McCain than Obama will. And MCCAIN won't slow-peddle the Wright ordeal , like Hillary had to...and the media will still blame Hillary for Obamas relationship with Wright (josh did)
March 19, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
The polls will fluctuate but one things seems clear. Obama can claim all he want that his candidacy is not about race. But the elctorate has a different agnda and to many people race is still a factor in the privacy of the voting booth.
Obama has maxed out the black constituency. Therey are already voting and pollng with him almost unanimously. But that group represents a small minority of voters. Add into this all the mounting doubts about his authenticity and his history and here is what you have:
Many whites, latinos and asians, who would vote for Clinton, would vote for McCain rather than Obama. You may wish it was otherwise but that is the case.
Obama is a losing cause. Question is, will he do the right thing and release all his delegates to vote for whomever they want? Deal with it.
Obama-The Great Deceiver
March 19, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This isn't reflected in the crosstabs of the poll. Does that matter?
March 19, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a circular argument. If Clinton is successful, she'll be the nominee and won't have to worry about whether is damaged goods, will she?
March 19, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, no doubt. I have said it before and will say it again: if Clinton wins the nomination, I will be only too happy to vote for her, because it will prove that she really is the stronger candidate. If she can come back from that far behind and win it, she really is a force to be reckoned with.
That said, I really do not expect that she can. Obama is going to get the nomination, and I will be very happy to vote for him, because his unbelievable come-from-behind victory will prove that he is the stronger candidate. I just want a democrat in the White House, so I want the stronger candidate to take the nomination. If Clinton can prove me wrong and demonstrate that she really is the stronger candidate of the two, I will gladly admit that my predictions were wrong and get behind her candidacy.
March 19, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
its hard to take seriously these commenters who claim Hillary winning would be cheating...cuz rules are rules. And she's following them. You maniacs who are asserting the suerdelegates have to vote for Obama and CANNOT vote for Hillary...are fucking insane.
You sound like Republicans I've know all my life now.
March 19, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You, sir/maam, are a fucking idiot.
March 19, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's just much too easy, in the day-to-day (and, on the Internets, minute-by-minute) goings on of a campaign, to lose perspective.
Yes, Obama had a tough couple of days. After those stupid sound bites of Wright aired how many hundreds of times, it was probably inevitable that his polling numbers would go down.
I'm willing to bet that after yesterday, they will bounce back to where they were before, or even higher. Maybe my faith in the American people -- or in their ability to make the right judgment even when the news media that is their source of information fails them -- is higher than it should be, but we'll see.
Regardless, why can't we take the long view Obama did in his speech yesterday, chill out a little bit and give this more time. It's still over a month to Pennsylvania, 10 weeks or so until the last primary, five months or more until the Convention and seven and a half months until the general election.
March 19, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is really very funny...
Earth to Obama supporters: THIS IS NOT OVER. There are, what, 10 contests left. He could lose every one of them and she could overtake him in both the popular and delegate vote counts.
Get it? North Carolina has gone from 9 point Obama advantage to dead heat today, in a fairly short amount of time.
Obama is playing the INEVITABILITY card. Get it? Does that sound familiar? If you remember the inevitability card, you remember it worked out pretty sh*tty for Sen. Clinton.
INEVITABILITY CARD = POLITICS AS USUAL.
March 19, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The racists in the GOP, as well as in Clinton's base of support, have done quite well of late. With the help of the MSM, of course.
No worries, however. This will pass and the numbers in these states will tick up again. The MSM hasn't concentrated on Hillary in well over a month, so once they do, she'll tick back down.
And let's be honest, she can't win the general b/c she's pissed off African Americans and quite a few whites the past 2 months. The party isn't stupid enough to have her on top of the ticket.
March 19, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
The clintons also pissed off Iowa, New Hampshire, and every other state that they didn't win calling them insignificant among many other things. So, how many electoral votes do they wind up with? 150 or thereabouts. I don't think that's enough to win the presidency. Last time I checked it was 270.
The clintons can't win in november, deal with it. It will be either obama or mccain, not the clintons. The country already has clinton fatigue and can't believe a word that comes out of their pieholes and they haven't even reclaimed the presidency yet. It took a couple of years after the king was sworn in for that to happen to him. No integrity and no honesty equals loss in november. Please wake up people.
March 19, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
"We learned one thing today....Hillary will run better vs McCain than Obama will."
... until the next poll comes out showing Obama running better.
March 19, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
After seeing todays polling, I, for the first time since Obama pulled off the 11 consecutive victories, feel like Hillary's plan of tearing Obama down could actually succeed.
If she had gotten out the race after Wisconsin, which is what she should of done, the Ohio primary would have been a Obama-love-affirming event. Bill and Hillary could have even trumped around the state and shored up the support of white working class voters on his behalf.
I think in the last week we've gotten a bit of a taste of what it might feel like if Obama is actually "brought down".
The media as well as the big left wing bloggers like Kevin Drum, Atrios, and Josh have not publicly speculated much, if at all, on what exactly that is going to feel like.
Personally, I think if this happens, it's going to be A LOT more cataclysmic than any of the talking heads seem to be acknowledging. The amount of hurt, anger, betrayal, disgust by 30 - 40 percent of the party is going to not just be painfully intense. IT'S GOING TO BE IRREVERSIBLE
The democratic party will be ripped in two. Not in half, I'm sure %70 of its constituency will stick around, although many of them begrudgingly.
BUT, mark my words, 1/4 will leave.
IT WILL BE THE END OF THE 2 PARTY SYSTEM AS WE KNOW IT.
So you see, there really is a silver lining in all this.
100 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON
.
March 19, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ever get the feeling you're in a car, headed for the edge of a cliff with the pedal to the floor and all anyone wants to do is talk about how cushy the upholstery is and how pretty the motor sounds?
March 19, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is the best description I have heard during this whole mess! May I quote you? My God, what the hell are we doing?
March 19, 2008 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
They're all important.
March 19, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
A Modest Proposal:
Time to conduct a search for a unity candidate that can be a living symbol of racial and gender reconciliation. Some one who black, brown, and white, male and female can support.
Time to find a candidate who happens to be a freckle skinned hermaphrodite.
That person should be able to unify the country.
Ladies and Gentlemen; Start your search engines!.
March 19, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a lot more offensive to me than Rev. Wright. Scary and appalling. Despite Mother Jones article in 2007, this has NEVER been discussed in MSM. Very scary read.
Barbara Ehrenreich: Hillary's Nasty Pastorate
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-ehrenreich/hillarys-nasty-pastorate_b_92361.html
There's a reason why Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she's a lot more vulnerable than Obama.
March 19, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am sitting here trying very hard to say the following in a measured, even voice. But I cannot.
IT'S MARCH 19!! MARCH!! NINETEENTH!! MARCH!!
THE GODDAMNED CONVENTIONS AREN'T EVEN THREE MONTHS AWAY! THE ELECTION IS IN 8 MONTHS! EIGHT! A WOMAN COULD GET HIT A CLUB, GET DRUNK, TAKE A STRANGER HOME, GET HER SWERVE ON, HAVE A SEED PLANTED (CUE "THE CIRCLE OF LIFE" FROM THE LION KING), START GETTING NAUSEATED, GO TO WALGREENS, BUY THE TEST, PEE ON IT, PRAY LIKE HELL, SEE THE PINK CROSS, SCREAM, CRY, BEGIN THE MORNING SICKNESS, HAVE A TALK WITH HER ONE-TIME HOOK UP, CRY MORE, START TO GET THE MUNCHIES, WAKE UP EVERY MORNING FEELING ANGRY AND HUNGRY AND HAPPY AND SAD ALL AT ONCE, START TO BROWSE THE FAT PANTS SECTION OF ANNE TAYLOR LOFT, CRY, START A PRENATAL VITAMIN REGIMEN, THROW UP MORE, START PLANNING HER BABY SHOWER WITH HER GIRLFRIENDS, CRY, START TO SHOW JUST A BIT, FEEL ELATED, BUY "BABY'S FIRST YEAR" AND READ IT COVER TO COVER, HAVE THAT AWKWARD BUT ULTIMATELY HEART-WARMING VISIT WITH HER PARENTS, GAIN WEIGHT, GET BIGGER BREASTS, CRY, GET THAT FIRST LIFE-CHANGING ULTRASOUND, CRY, TAKE HER FIRST VISIT TO BABIES-R-US, START TO SHOW MORE, HAVE HER BEST FRIEND'S KID ASK TO TOUCH HER BELLY, CRY, START THE NATURAL BIRTHING CLASS, SUBMIT TO THE JEANS WITH THE ELASTIC IN THEM, EAT A WHOLE GALLON OF ICE CREAM WHILE WATCHING DESIGN ON A DIME AND NOT FEEL THE LEAST BIT GUILTY, CRY, START SWEATING FOR NO REASON, HAVE TO GO TO THE BATHROOM EVERY THREE MINUTES, START TO GET THE THIRD-TRIMESTER SECOND WIND BACK, CRY, BUY THAT SWEET STROLLER SHE HAS BEEN EYEBALLING, PAINT THE NURSERY, CRY, ATTEND MORE NATURAL BIRTHING CLASSES, YELL AT PEOPLE FOR NO REASON, START TO LOOK AT THE CALENDAR CLOSELY, SUDDENLY GET SHARP PAINS, REALIZE IT IS COMING OH GOD IT'S COMING A LITTLE EARLY, CRY, RUSH TO THE HOSPITAL, SAY F*CK THE NATURAL BIRTHING GODDAMNIT AND GIVE ME THE EPIDURAL RIGHT F*CKING NOW, CRY, PUSH PUSH, BREATH, PUSH PUSH, BREATH, "I SEE THE HEAD! I SEE THE HEAD!", BIG PUSH THIS TIME, AAAAAAAAAAAGH! AND WATCH LI'L JOHNNY SPEND HIS FIRST FEW DAYS IN THE NICU BEFORE THE ELECTION WILL OCCUR!
IT'S MARCH! MAAAAARRRRCCCHHHH!
So let's all settle the hell down. Okay?
Otherwise this navel-gazing will drive you insane.
March 19, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, how do you really feel? I'm still digging at lint.
March 19, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for the first good laugh I've had all day. :)
March 19, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately, the only way Obama is going to reverse this trend is to attack Hillary relentlessly. He's got to put the focus on her and get her on the defensive. I don't see that happening, however. He just doesn't seem to be inclined to play the game that way. Too bad. While I admire him for it, staying positive and on message is no way to win a race against the Clintons or the Republicans.
March 19, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sort of off-topic, but prompted by someone's comment above...
Can someone explain how you legally cheat on your wife? (As opposed to illegally cheating on your wife...)
Anyone?
March 19, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess it depends on what the definition of what legally is, is? Maybe we should ask the clintons.
March 19, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Change your name to Newt or Rudi, and register as a Republican, and you will be then able to legally cheat on your wife, or if you are between the ages of 45 and 50 you can excuse it as "a youthful indiscretion".
I hope that clarifies the Family Values legal philandering rules for you.
March 19, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, very much so.
Shorter liam: IOKIYAR, right?
March 19, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
When are we going to start asking questions about Hillary's religion "problem"?
"There's a reason Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she's a lot more vulnerable than Obama.
You can find all about it in a widely under-read article in the September 2007 issue of Mother Jones, in which Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet reported that "through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as "The "Fellowship," a k a The Family. But it won't be a secret much longer. Jeff Sharlet's shocking exposé The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power will be published in May.
Sean Hannity has called Obama's church a "cult," but that term applies far more aptly to Clinton's "Family," which is organized into "cells"--their term--and operates sex-segregated group homes for young people in northern Virginia. In 2002, Sharlet joined The Family's home for young men, forswearing sex, drugs and alcohol, and participating in endless discussions of Jesus and power. He wasn't undercover; he used his own name and admitted to being a writer. But he wasn't completely out of danger either. When he went outdoors one night to make a cell phone call, he was followed. He still gets calls from Family associates asking him to meet them in diners--alone."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich
March 19, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing is, Obama won't attack her for it (too nice, not that kind of campaign, etc) and McCain can't do it (Hagee, plus, he wants her to be the dem. candidate...), so in the absence of widespread real journalism...we won't know what's up.
***This is all without reading the story or having any idea of it's credibility, BTW. In the wake of Wright, I'd be cautious about judging without hearing the whole story--meaning both sides.
Hillary and McCain (or his media surrogates) are both aggressively fighting Obama, trying to make him look bad. There are some "attacks" on Hillary and fewer on McCain, but nowhere near the bludgeoning Obama is getting from both sides right now. This makes sense...to a degree, because we know less about Obama and maybe everyone already knows Clinton/McCain's skeletons, but on another hand, it's just plain ganging up.
Still, this is what a person must endure to survive politics, I fear. Obama seems to do it with a grace and calm that I could never muster under such circumstances.
If Obama can survive this phase (and after yesterday he clearly can) he's golden.
As for figuring out who Hillary "really" is? Well, Obama says that's not the point (it's the economy, right?) and I'm with him. Let's talk about the war. And my mortgage.
March 19, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
That, too, will come to pass.
I NEVER figured on Obama winning Kentucky anyway. As for Ohio, he'll take it as the Democratic nominee.
http://OsiSpeaks.com
March 19, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great YouTube Video for Obama fans.Obama's Bra 54 Double "D"...Black Minister trashes Obama.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU
Black face with a white mama.
March 19, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hate this time of the year when a big thaw sets in and floods sewer rats like you out of your natural habitat.
March 19, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
The reason wingers like Marginal Player love this Wright fiasco is that it allows them to let slip their own thinly veiled racism.
March 19, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
How the FUCK is that relevant to the current discussion?!
You are just a drooling, hateful son of a bitch, aren't you Marginal? You've devolved into a slobbering moron with nothing to say.
March 19, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
beseiged by trolls, the fellowship carried on....
March 19, 2008 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Marginal Player:
It will be good day when people like me don't have to live on the same land with people like you.
I'm almost half your age so I'm still hopeful.
BTW it has nothing to do with Hillary or Obama.
I read your comments and say to myself Wright's comments are not fully insane after all.
March 20, 2008 3:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
who gives a darn about a blue dress. to bring this silly crap is of no interests to me. i was not married to the guy. unless you were or want to marry/sleep with him what's your point? get your own relationship/life and keep your nosey arse out of someone else's marriage.
March 19, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain is going to look good for a few months, but once the Dem nomination is decided the Iraq war, the economy, and the simple fact of his GOP affiliation are going to hit him between the eyes like a sledge hammer.
Once the full national light is turned on McCain he's going to look like an aging man with a dinosaur understanding of the world and America's place in it.
March 19, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama can't win without superdelegates voting for him.
But what superdelegate is going to want to have on his record a vote for a nominee who, because of a problem entirely of his own making, in the person of Jeremiah Wright, manages to pull defeat from the jaws of victory in 2008?
And what do these polls suggest other than an historic rout if Obama becomes the nominee?
Can you even begin to imagine the recriminations and loss of clout that would come in the train of such an outcome? Imagine the implications if down ticket Democrats are damaged across the board in red and purple states because they are associated, through the Democratic nominee, with the America-hating and racism of Jeremiah Wright. After all the efforts to find Democrats, such as Jim Webb, who counter the perception that Democrats are unpatriotic, what would it say if Democrats choose a nominee whose association with the very worst of the radical left could not be more intimate?
The superdelegates have to worry about the "math" alright -- the math of an electoral rout if the Democratic nominee becomes our worst nightmare, someone who can readily be depicted as in bed with a radical, unpatriotic, America-hating left.
March 19, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good anticipation of rightwing divisive talking points:
Excellent!
March 19, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't thank me for providing the America-hating, unpatriotic example -- thank Obama and his pastor Jeremiah Wright.
Or are we supposed to believe that someone who says "God Damn America" and "the US of KKK A" actually harbors great love for our country?
If Jeremiah Wright didn't exist, Anne Coulter would have had to have invented him.
March 19, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't seem to understand that some of us will vote for Hillary when Hell freezes over after the slash and burn campaign she's run plus on the 5th anniversary of the war I can't stomach the thought of a ballot with a choice between two candidates who got us into the greatest foreign policy disaster in our history.
March 19, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, but you sound like a troll.
As you well know, we could point out questionable associations with every candidate who runs. For instance, Hillary's brother Hugh has been involved in some really sleazy business. And her mother-in-law used to hang out at the horse track all day. McCain is famously an adulterer, in the pocket of an S&L crook, and we have photos of him embracing one of the biggest war criminals of modern times.
See how easy that is?
I would have never guessed that Hillary supporters would become avid fans of Karl Rove and would so enthusiastically embrace his playbook.
March 19, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
All of my relatives are in Missouri. I would be friggin' shocked to see Obama win that state. They are very nice people, but racist, backwards thinking morons.
Sorry Greg. I know that doesn't take into account the whole state, but they are out in the rural part. And yes, I know there are people like this all over...I'm just saying.
Again, that's how I see that state going. Hope I'm wrong.
March 19, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Clinton Campaign has been trying for months to make Obama the black candidate.
And Wright is not running for president. Obama is. I would bet that many of us have racist family members whom we haven't cut out of our lives, because they are family.--even though we may find their beliefs repulsive. I also know many Catholics, and not one of them left the Roamn Catholic Church after the pedophile crisis.
Obama is not perfect. He is human. But he is also extraordinary. It saddens me to think we are passing up the opportunity to have an extraordinary leader because of carefully orchestrated, bogus attacks.
March 19, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
More faulty logic from the Obamaphiles -- “Racist relatives"? Yeah, maybe like Obama's grandma? But do you go over to the racist relatives’ house every sunday for dinner for 20 freaking years? Not unless you’re just like Obama.
Irreparably damaged goods -- Obama.
March 19, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the fundamental self-serving falacy that the Hillary supporters now reveling in the Wright fallout fail to understand:
By the time of the general, this issue will be as buried as the hundred Clinton scandals out there.
So the question doesn't come down to a "clean" candidate vs. a candidate with the Wright stigma.
It is a choice between a candidate that can be made to look like a racist through questionable associations with a made-up pastor image, or one that can be made to look like a murdering, drug trafficking, terrorist pardoning, land dealing crook who let Al-Quaeda run away and was responsible for 9/11.
Nobody in the Obama campaign will mention it, because they have the class to understand that democrats aren't supposed to tear each other down.
But you'd better think about it for a bit before you decide on who would be the best candidate.
March 19, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have really given me something to pass along. I am so sick of the faux controversy that I am sick to my stomach. Now I hear that Hannity has suggested that it is more likely that Senator Obama would be...not get this..."assassinated" because of this ridiculous story. This was on this maniac's website! Wow. This is more than disgusting. I am starting to wonder the value of citizenship in this country.
March 19, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
More delusional logic from the Obamaphiles -- "By the time of the general, this issue will be as buried as the hundred Clinton scandals out there."
Have you been living on another planet for the last 30 years?
If Obama's the nominee, he will face a republican named John McCain and several hundred of his 527 friends. In the last six days Obama has handed the republicans an almost unlimited suppy of ammunition to destroy him and the democratic party he proposes to represent, not for this election but for several to come.
Irreparably damaged -- Obama.
March 19, 2008 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel the same way. I feel he is beyond the ordinary, and that more conventional politicians are trying to take him down with conventional tactics.
If we're stuck with Clinton or McCain, their supporters will say "Tsk tsk, that's just politics. Americans are just stuck with unpleasant prepackaged, repackaged in-the-boxers. Welcome to eternity."
The "audacity of hope" is taking on a whole different meaning now, isn't it?
March 19, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary as first lady trumpeting NAFTA:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/clintons-1993-n.html
March 19, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Been where when it happened? And WTF does this have to do with anything? Is she unqualified because she wasn't spying on her husband? Or are you saying something even more grotesque?
Sheesh.
March 19, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
So much for figuring out html tags.
March 19, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
This kind of poll is bewildering, because it's impossible to know what the people who prefer Hillary are saying in answer to the question, Would you prefer Obama or McCain. The converse (or some such) is true. Will someone please check my reasoning here?
March 19, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The rural parts of Missouri are tough for Democrats and have been for some time. McCaskill proved that you just have to get the best numbers you can in the rural and small town areas. The Dems win with the metro areas around Kansas City, St Louis, and the college towns.
Missouri would be a climb for Obama or Clinton. It's not impossible but it would take a lot of work for a Dem win here. It won't be done with media buys.
March 19, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, they don't like your candidate and they don't drink latte I guess a good method of winning them over is to call them names.
I live in a state where the policy preferences of many of the voters are well to the right of my own and know that you have to conduct political campaigns to account for this.
March 19, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, what happened to Sinbad? I miss him.
March 19, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, what happened to Sinbad? I miss him.
March 19, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's probably off negotiating a peace treaty somewhere.
March 19, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Polls are generally meaningless at this point. I say generally because I think there is some value in comparing the results of current general election polls to what has actually occurred historically between democrats and republicans in a given state -- typically it takes an extraordinary event to result in red state switching to blue in one election cycle for example.
What is clear today is that the Rev. Wright fiasco and his response to it have taken a toll on Obama, and in my opinion, will continue to do so. He's irreparably damaged goods. The euphoria over the speech, mostly by Obamaphiles will die down soon (may already have) and the tough questions for Obama will begin -- why the inconsistencies between the weekend interviews everywhere and the speech? What does this say about your judgment? How can you claim to be a different kind of politician when you waited so long to address the views of Rev. Wright? What’s the difference between Rev. Wright and Don Imus? Who are you, really?
Time for Obama to do the right thing for the democratic party and step aside and allow Hillary Clinton, the only democratic candidate who can beat John McCain in November, to claim the party’s nomination. At this point, I can’t even see the VP in Obama’s future -- irreparably damaged.
Obama has to do it for the good of the party.
March 19, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you a republican? Seriously. That party throws people under the bus, runs over them, and burns the remains. In your zeal for Hillary, you would just love to have Obama supporters pick up the remains, dance on them, and brush them out of the way so that Hillary supporters could march to the Whitehouse. Bad form. Bad for this party. Very republican like!
March 19, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are truly naïve – the democratic part AND the republican would throw Mother Teresa, the Dali Lama, and Jesus Christ himself under the bus for a pass to the whitehouse. WAKE UP! democrats don’t win; democrats don’t govern. You want John McCain to appoint the next two maybe four supreme court justices? Nominate Obama.
March 19, 2008 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whether or not Obama is damaged beyond repair I cannot say. The idea that Clinton is the only candidate who can win against McCain, however, strikes me as rather rich. Clinton was never able to win against McCain in the first place and if she has succeeded in making sure that Obama cannot win against McCain, then this is simply as much as to say that McCain is a sure thing. I will vote for her if she gets the nomination, but it will be a case of spitting into the wind. Clinton v McCain will be Mondale v Reagan all over again.
March 20, 2008 12:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I mentioned in another thread about Hillary astroturfers all using nicknames that sound like Compuserve or AOL names circa 1998. See above.
March 19, 2008 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great -- you know you've got someone stumped when all she can do is criticize your nickname.. Typical Obamaphile -- all rage and no reason.
March 19, 2008 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
To anneeliz,
Don't waste your time trying to figure out and "out" so-called astroturfers. Just continue to say what you believe and let the rest of it go.
As for my two cent's worth: This "Hillary is destroying the party" business carries its own baggage. You are feeding the MSM just what they want.
Look at it this way, there was a day when the conventions actually meant something. There was a time when nobody knew until the votes started coming in on convention night who would be the nominee. There was actually tension as the representative stood up and said, "The great state of Ohio casts it 162 votes for the next president of the United States of America ....". Now, unfortunately, the convention is just a party.
Do get a grip folks, McCain will still be McCain after Denver and the only thing that can destroy our party is the unending wailing by us of impending destruction. We all should be putting out to the MSM how amazing it is to have such a heated race between two such accomplished and capable candidates and how we will all come together after the convention. And, just think, this could be a return to honest to goodness conventions. Great spin for the media idiots. After all, it's all about spin.
To next year in the White House.
March 19, 2008 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I've given a few hundred dollars to Obama. And I've voted for him.
But because of these polls today, I've decided that I'm giving up on him. I don't care that he is 150 plus points ahead in delegates. I don't care that he is beating Hillary in 3 of the 4 national polls released today on Real clear politics. I don't care that Hillary's support in North Carolina did not go up from 43% between the 3/3 and 3/17 poll.
Obama has had a horrible March. He only won 3 of six primaries and has only increased his delegate lead by a couple dozen points since 3/1.
And even though he is being savaged in the media 24 hours a day he has only lead Clinton in 7 of the last 8 national polls released.
How can I back this poll-leading, delegate-leading, popular vote-leading loser?
March 19, 2008 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops - just saw the new NYT poll. Obama is leading in that one too.
I'm definitely dropping my support for him.
March 19, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is the notable thing about Marginal's comments... specifically:
CLINTON 49%, Obama/Rev. Wright 42%
"Obama/Rev. Wright". You probably just think of that as childish Dittohead drivel.
Wrong again, gang. Think back (if you can) to the election of 1988, Bush I vs. Dukakis.
Recall if you will the brag by one member of the GOP slime machine, during a moment of unedited hubris (paraphrasing): "By the time we're through introducing America to this Willie Horton character, they're gonna think he's Dukakis' RUNNING MATE!"
These bastards don't even change the game plan. They just recycle the same old shit, 20 years on. Because they know they CAN.
Well... don't let them. And know this Marginal Player for what he is: a Marginal Player *in the GOP slime machine*, sent here amongst the progressives to demoralize your asses. Don't let him do that, either.
March 19, 2008 11:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Think back to the election of 1988" I can't believe any of the obamaphiles on this site were born before 1988.
By the way it wasn't the GOP that first ran the Willie Horton ad in the 1988 race -- it was Al Gore during the primary. The ad never cut with democrats, but republicans picked it up and ran with it in the general election and the rest they say is history.
Unfortunately for Obama and the obamaphiles, the Rev. Wright = Obama ads will cut with white democratic primary voters and right up through election day.
Obama - irreparably damaged.
March 20, 2008 12:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I voted for Dukakis and plan on voting for Obama. If Obama=Wright, does that mean McCain=Hagee? Hagee is seriously off the deep end and McCain actively sought and got his endorsement. True, McCain isn't a member of the congregation, but you have to wonder why he would want to be associated with such a person.
March 20, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jorge, I'm with you. Poor loser just thought that giving speeches compared to Lincoln's, setting records for fund-raising from small donors, bringing out record numbers of new voters, oh, and winning the most states, popular vote, and delegates would make him electable. Too bad the Clintons know better.
March 19, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's Philadelphia speech calls for just reason and princple.
If democrats vote against Obama in the remaining primaries on the basis of the Wright controversy or if the superdelegates elect Hillary to avoid "race" controversy-I hope and fully expect to see the black community to seek or vote for a third-party candidate in the General.
I really do.
It's not like the democratic party made any significant difference to the community anyway.
May be the last eight years are not enough to make us serious about what's at stake this election? Otherwise the charade of the last week would never take center stage.
If Hillary runs on issues fine. But it's clear the "Blacks" versus "whites" campaign is in force since the OH debate and now it has potential to consume the democratic primaries. If that's the case I hope and expect for democratic party to fall apart.
I don't think many "latte drinking" Obama supporter will stand behind a party with no convictions.
March 20, 2008 3:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ohio is a MUST WIN for any Democratic candidate.
Missouri and Kentucky would be welcome, but any Democratic candidate would have to win 2 of these 3 states: Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania.
March 20, 2008 4:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
As we go one Clinton will win PA....Edwards will side with Clinton and see wins NC.....cards start to fall and we hit a deadlock. We enter the Convention with Obama not being on top of the ticket because of the Wright issue and the Rezko trial smell. Clinton will save him and put him on the bottom of the ticket and he will take it.
Clinton/Obama 08
March 20, 2008 6:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
March 19, 2008
Gallup Daily: Clinton Moves Into Lead Over Obama
Clinton 49%
Obama 42%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/105205/Gallup-Daily-Clinton-Moves-Into-Lead-Over-Obama.aspx
This is the first time Clinton has held a statistically significant lead in over a month. She last led Obama in Feb. 7-9 polling, just after the Super Tuesday primaries. Since then, the two candidates have usually been in a statistical tie, but Obama has held a lead in several of the polls, most recently in March 11-13 polling.
Looks like the Reverend Wright is not going away.
March 20, 2008 8:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Talk to me in a month and see where we're at.
March 20, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it looks like they found their Willie Horton.
Question is: who do we send the "Congratulations!" card to, the GOP or the Clinton campaign?
(Or both? Maybe save a stamp, and send it right to Karl Rove?)
March 20, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink