« Poll: GOP Senate Incumbent Trailing In Mississippi | Home | What's Obama's Route To The White House? »

Poll: Obama Losing To McCain In Michigan -- But Hillary As VP Might Help

So, would Hillary as veep give Barack Obama a better shot of holding on to the crucial industrial swing state of Michigan? It all depends on which poll you read.

The latest polls of Michigan from SurveyUSA and Michigan-based EPIC-MRA agree that John McCain has a narrow edge over Barack Obama in a pure match-up, with a very high number of undecideds. But testing tickets of McCain with Mitt Romney against Obama and Clinton yields dramatically different results between the two reputable firms:

SurveyUSA
McCain (R) 41%, Obama (D) 37%
McCain/Romney (R) 45%, Obama/Clinton (D) 40%

EPIC-MRA
McCain (R) 44%, Obama (D) 40%
Obama/Clinton (D) 51%, McCain/Romney (R) 44%

The EPIC-MRA poll has Hillary bringing an astonishing 11 points into Obama's column, putting him well ahead of McCain in this must-win state. On the other hand, SurveyUSA shows her not really bringing anything at all.


158 Comments

| Leave a comment

The EPIC-MRA poll was taken before the RFK comment.

Again, means jack shit FIVE MONTHS before the election!!!

user-pic

And the "dramatically different results between the two reputable firms" is exactly why this isn't worth the, um, bandwidth it's printed on.

user-pic

Romney as VP?????


ROTFLMAO!!!!

Seriously. We can only hope that Mr. Varmint Hunter is the Veep choice.

Yep, I'd love to see Romney on the ticket.

Overall I agree that Romney would be a poor choice for McCain, but he would be a great help to McCain in MI, where the Romney name is still quite popular.

Is Michigan really a "must-win" though?

I think so. 17 electoral votes is a considerable chunk. If we can hang on to everything Kerry won and then add (for instance) Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada (none of which are long shots) then we win where Kerry lost. If we start losing states that Kerry carried, however, then the number of states we need to flip starts to grow. I like our chances in Virginia and Missouri (for instance), but I do not like the idea of having to count on them. If forced to choose between putting the effort into keeping MI or into flipping VA, I would consider the former the more prudent course (although Lord knows that Obama's judgement is more trustworthy than my own).

Whoops, I just realized that you probably meant to ask whether MI is a "must-win" for McCain, not Obama. I would say that the answer to that is "no." McCain can definitely win without MI (as Bush proved twice). Indeed, there is almost certainly more to be lost for McCain by choosing Romney than gained, but I was simply pointing out that while Romney's weaknesses outweigh his strengths, one of his strengths is that he would be a help in MI (for whatever that is worth).

If we have to make that choice, we're hosed no matter what we do.

I'd trade Michigan for Ohio, however.

Yes. It is a must win. Michigan is part of the Kerry states.

With Michigan, Obama wins if he gets all of Kerry's states and flips:

one big state (Florida or Ohio), or,

Two medium states (Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri, Colorado, Iowa), or,

One medium state and two to three small states depending on how big the medium and how small the smalls are.

Game it out here:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/ecc/calculator.htm

Without Michigan, the whole thing goes to shit.

That said, the idea that we should pick Hillary for veep solely because of Michigan, and risk the damage she does to us in some of the other states we have to have, based on polling six months out is lunacy.

I hope to GOD McCain is stupid enough to pick Romney!

Oh, and according to pollster, McCain and Obama are tied in MI.

user-pic

[pounding forehead bloody on keyboard]

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

Hillary? A Republican - Romney?

This poll is utter bullshit.

Also, what is EPIC-MRA?

I'll take a wild guess and say it's just a polling outfit that has generated numbers favorable to Sen. Clinton; hence its sudden elevation of authority here at TPM Election Central

*yawn*

i believe epic-mra is the largest polling outfit in michigan.

Let's go over this again...

We have five months left until the election. Once Shrillary is out, everything will shift to him.

Once she is out, states like California, New York, Massachusetts, (possibly) Ohio, (possibly PA), etc. will go to him! Right now there are TWO Democratic candidates...in November, there will be ONE candidate.

Just because Obama lost California in the primary does NOT mean he will lose it in November!

The fact that some people still need to be told this (present company excluded...I'm talking about her supporters) shows just how low America's IQ has dropped over the last eight years.

If you want to know what the current polls tell us abut November, just go back and look at where Hillary
stood in the National Polls compared to Obama
last December. How did those poll projections
work out. Exactly. Current polls about what will
happen in November are about as credible as some
fairy tale about a Tuzla airport sniper attack.

user-pic

Or how about the polls went during the Primaries in 92 (or any other year), before the GE campaign started.

These polls are absurd!

The EPIC-MRA poll has Hillary bringing an astonishing 11 points into Obama's column, putting him well ahead of McCain in this must-win state.

So, basically, a truthier headline to this item would have been, "Why Eric Kleefeld thinks Hillary should be Obama's Veep."

must-win? Jesus, Eric, biased much?

And, by the way, who's to say that adding Romney to McCain's ticket didn't push that "astonishing 11 points" to Obama?

Not that I admit AT ALL the veracity of a poll I've never fucking heard of!

user-pic

well, no offense, but I think they manage to be truthy enough.

Interesting. But more interesting will be seeing polls taken once it is heads up between Obama and McCain. I can't help thinking these numbers are skewed by the fact that Hillary remains in the race.

Thanks, I finally bookmarked that site.

Enough with the hypotheticals.

I agree totally. Unless it's talk about who Obama is going to pick for VP besides Hillary. That's kinda fun...

Eric never fails to give us his daily dose of Shrillary spin.

Give it up!

Just to give you some flavor, the Survey USA poll has McCain getting 26% of the African-American vote. It might help if someone at TPM-EC did a bit of analysis on these polls. I just don't see John McCain getting 26% of the black vote ANYWHERE.

user-pic
I just don't see John McCain getting 26% of the black vote ANYWHERE.

Really?


Seriously, though,
thanks for pointing out a result that pretty much calls into question the relevance of this poll.

I would like to think so, but I think that you will find if you look back over the history of this race that SUSA has had some really quirky internals all along, but manages to get the final outcome fairly right despite that fact. In other words, while I agree that the 25% African-American support for McCain is dubious, I am not sure that this suggests that McCain is not really ahead among MI voters right now.

SurveyUSA got burned on the African-American vote in PA, NC and Indiana. For whatever reason, they seem to overstate Obama's opponents ability to pull the African-American vote. And frankly, McCain hasn't exactly been a "friend" to the African-American community (MLK Day comes immediately to mind).

Good catch. Too bad Kleefeld was too busy promoting his "Hillary as VP!" spin to, y'know, actually look at the crosstabs.

This is a stupid poll.

Obama can take Michigan alone, other polls have shown this. Michigan is not a problem for Obama.

Put Romney on the R ticket and see how they do in the Deep South. Florida and Texas included.

Hillary As VP Might Help
No. Non. Nein.

Too soon, means nothing at this point. I think these polls are silly.

By the way, after going a tad over the top yesterday, I decided I'll resist jumping to conclusions on Eric and Greg's intentions and abilitie.

Thank you for providing both poll results for us to make our own judgement. One poll says Hillary helps and the other polls says she doesn't do a damn thing to help Obama.

Well, each flank can pick their own poll to make a claim.

The more reputable poll says she doesn't do a damn thing...Just sayin'

I think in the long run to November, she would distract from his message, and actually, with her history, be hurtful to his chances.

user-pic

The minute Bill Clinton opens his mouth (if Senator Clinton is the veep choice), the media coverage will be wall-to-wall, 24/7, and any message that Obama had would be drowned in the ensuing uproar.

She'd be a drag.

these polls out of MI and FL are bullshit

simply because Obama is only winning 68 some percent of dem voters cause of the delegate fight.

once hill is out and we get this party UNITED then he will be winning 88 some percent and he will be well ahead of McCain in MI and close in FL.

again its a long way to election time. no way MI goes for McCain

user-pic

"... But Hillary As VP Might Help..."

How do you know what will happen in November?

However, what will help is for this morbid trainwreck to end -- After MT and ID have voted -- Obama will be the nominee and it is up to the SD's and for the Democratic Party leadership to get behind the nominee -- up until that moment the Democrats will continue to be deemed as weak -- hence, I believe, as shown by these polls.

After Tuesday this has to end. JMHO.

user-pic

or...

...until the Democrats can finally announce, and get behind their nominee, Democrats will be deemed as weak -- This is what I believe is being revealed in these polls.

Note: please can we have the edit function back...

I am not woebegone about our chances in MI, but I do think that both of these polls get an important truth about Michigan - the democratic party brand there is badly tarnished right now. For better or worse, Gov Granholm and Sens Levin and Stabenow have not been able to reverse Michigan's rapidly declining fortunes. Add to this that Kwame Kilpatrick keeps re-appearing in the news (never for good reasons) and you have a state very well poised to buck the democratic wave sweeping the rest of the nation. Moreover, John McCain is a very strong candidate to ride that wave in MI. An important portion of the electorate in MI is made up of Vietnam vets who greatly admire McCain as a former POW. Obama will need to spend a great deal of time and effort on MI, because we need to keep it in our column this time around and it is not a foregone conclusion that it will stay there.

user-pic

I would think that the Kwame Kilpatrick saga would be over before the fall, so that perhaps might help.

But more generally: why would a state in such an economic tailspin vote for a candidate who admitted he didn't know much about the economy? A phrase that will, no doubt, be repeated ad infinitum once the general election gets going. And why would a state vote for a Republican brand when the economy is in the toilet?

SurveyUSA has McCain winning 26% of the African-American vote.

SurveyUSA is a pretty good outfit, but that's silly.

All I can say is he'd better pick her for his VP. There's a whole lot of mess coming, and he's going to have to pull the Democrats together in a hurry. The Jeremiah Wright mess isn't over yet by any means. A quick glance at the recent video of all those black parishioners at Obama's church waving their arms and shouting approval as the guest preacher dredges up slavery and blames white America tells you what kind of divisiveness to expect this Fall.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Mocking_Hillary_at_Trinity.html

user-pic

You mean the white, Catholic priest guest preacher?

How's Randi Rhodes on Air America these days, anyway?

user-pic

Hillary has got her Marc Rich and all the other shady characters that haven't surfaced yet...

Stuff that comes out during the VP vetting process ... Stuff which I'm sure as a Hillary supporter you would like to remain behind closed doors?

haha, is that the best you got?

Unless Wright bleached his skin a la Michael Jackson, I think you just prematurely ejaculated in your pants.

Of course, this could damage him with the hardworking, White Americans who weren't voting for him in the first place. Oh wait...

user-pic

they blame white america for slavery? the nerve!

user-pic

next thing you know, holy joe will blame the holocaust on the nazis! no, i guess that wouldn't happen -- he knows hitler was god's hunter, necessary to get the jews to the promised land. at least that's what he'll say at hagee's party.

user-pic

LOL!

Two extremely well done comments.

Otto: OMG, take a breath. This is just so silly. Have a beer :)

Oh, Eric, Eric, Eric...I know it's hard to let go. The Hillary ride has been exhilarating, I'm sure. But, it is coming to an end. You're going to have to accept that. It's time.

Damn it, no. That is not what this poll says. All this poll says it that given their sampling constraints they can't tell who's in the lead. That's it. Based solely on this poll it's a 50/50 toss up who is actually ahead. I'm going to start mailing journalists stat textbooks.

Maybe you should write a blog post and explain it.

f you want to know what the current polls tell us about November, just go back and look at where Hillary stood in the National Polls, compared to Obama, last December. How did those poll projections work out. Exactly. Current polls about what will happen in November are about as credible as some Fairy Tale about a Tuzla airport sniper attack.

Of course, they want President Clinton.

Count their votes, democracy haters.

Nancy Pelosi sez NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Nancy Pelosi is walking on some very thin ice here in San Francisco. A group of very influential women here recently got together over $400K for Clinton support.

400K??

Only $19.6 million to go!

user-pic

.

!

Your avatar is the word "OWNED" plastered over an African-American man's photo. Are you just a bit dim or are you 100% Appalachian?

Aww. That's so cute.

Yes! She's winning the popular vote... in your mind.

Another example of how we are making it easy for the Terrorists to claim that we are in Iraq as "Crusaders".

Someone please ask Senator Bush McCain why we are still doing such stupid things as this:


Iraqis claim Marines are pushing Christianity in Fallujah


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/38820.html

Excerpt:


FALLUJAH, Iraq — At the western entrance to the Iraqi city of Fallujah Tuesday, Muamar Anad handed his residence badge to the U.S. Marines guarding the city. They checked to be sure that he was a city resident, and when they were done, Anad said, a Marine slipped a coin out of his pocket and put it in his hand.

Out of fear, he accepted it, Anad said. When he was inside the city, the college student said, he looked at one side of the coin. "Where will you spend eternity?" it asked.

He flipped it over, and on the other side it read, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16."

"They are trying to convert us to Christianity," said Anad, a Sunni Muslim like most residents of this city in Anbar province. At home, he told his story, and his relatives echoed their disapproval: They'd been given the coins, too, he said.

If members of the military are not allowed to be politically active, how come they are allowed to proselytize?

I am not big on the TPM bashing but the editorial on here is not too bright.

a) Obama has spent a day in MI whereas Clinton is a household name.
b) MI is in the midst of a delegate fight - which Obama is unfortunately on the correct side of but not if you are a MI voter.

Clinton may help at the moment in MI but she will be downright toxic in WI, IA, CO, VA, GA, IN etc.

He's not going to lose Michigan, unless possibly if Romney is the VP. And even then I doubt it.

Pol Pot 44%, Mandela 40% (see footnote 1)
Mandela/Thatcher 51%, Pol Pot/Mugabe 44%

(1) Please note that some Thatcher supporters may have voted for Pol Pot in protest in the initial match-up, in protest of the perceived unfair treatment of their candidate during the Mandela vs. Thatcher primary contest.

user-pic

Obama Losing To McCain In Michigan -- But Hillary As VP Might Help

It will also help when she gets out of the race. At the current time, there are apparently some substantial number of Democratic Hillary Clinton supporters who are telling pollsters, for whatever reason, that they prefer McCain in an Obama-McCain head-to-head. I think any sensible observer recognizes this is predominantly a temporary effect caused by the extreme polarization wrought by the primary campaign, and that once Clinton has suspended her campaign, the vast majority of these Democratic voters will settle down, and return to the fold.

Let's see these poll numbers again, three weeks after Clinton gets out of the race. I expect to see a 5% Obama surge, at least, in most states.

Obama Fares Well With Key Voting Blocs The AP reports Obama "is competing strongly against" McCain "for women, Catholics and other groups that have shunned him in the Democratic primaries but will be pivotal in this fall's presidential race, early polling shows." Besides "women and Catholics, these include the elderly, the less educated and suburbanites, leading" primary rival Hillary Clinton "to argue she is her party's stronger candidate." But polls "this month show" Obama "leading McCain among women, running even among Catholics and suburbanites and trailing with people over age 65."

The Wall Street Journal reports for the "first time since the presidential election of 1988, the observant white Catholic vote might be up for grabs this November." The shift "may be bad news for" McCain, "but "it also poses a challenge for Sen. Barack Obama in some critical swing states where a majority of Catholic voters supported Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries."

And in a New York Times op-ed, Democratic pollster Mark Mellman says, "Democrats running for president have been losing white, non-college-educated voters since before Mr. Obama was elected to the Illinois legislature." Al Gore "lost them by 17 percentage points while winning the national popular vote," and John Kerry "lost them by 23 points and the country by fewer than two and a half points." By comparison, Obama "is only two percentage points behind John McCain among these voters in the latest New York Times/CBS News poll."

from U.S. News.com

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080529.htm

Catholics are up for grabs.....

Tim Kaine for VP!!!

My mom is Catholic, and there is no way in hell she will vote for Obama, all because of the abortion thing. McCain is actually worse than Bush in Roe v. Wade, from what I have garnered.

Clinton won't help Obama at all with the pro-life vote either.

Well, she might like what Tim Kaine has to say....

"I have a faith-based opposition to abortion. As governor, I will work in good faith to reduce abortions by:

1. Enforcing the current Virginia restrictions on abortion and passing an enforceable ban on partial birth abortion that protects the life and health of the mother;
2. Fighting teen pregnancy through abstinence-focused education;
3. Ensuring women's access to health care (including legal contraception) and economic opportunity; and
4. Promoting adoption as an alternative for women facing unwanted pregnancies.

We should reduce abortion in this manner, rather than by criminalizing women and doctors. Too often politicians are interested in scoring political points, rather than in reducing the number of abortions. Many of the legislative proposals introduced in the General Assembly, like the ones to require unnecessary building standards for doctor's offices that perform abortions, are just political grandstanding. They encourage division and lawsuits rather than contributing to the goal of reducing abortions."

Not my personal stance, but one that could help win the election. What do you think your mom think of a stance like that?

For what little this one particular Catholic's opinion is worth, I love Tim Kaine. That said, I am already a far-gone Obama supporter, so he ought not to choose a VP in order to get my vote.

OK. Eric.

Obama will pick Hillary as his VP for the state of Michigan.

Are you happy now ?

Now, can he pick someone else for other 49 states ?

If you read between the lines ..... the polls show that Obama likely will not win Michgian unless Hillary is is VP.... also if you read between the lines... it shows that he would likely lose the state of michigan if they had a re-vote primary between hillary and obama... it also shows that if obama's name would have been on the ballot, hillary still would have likely won.....

all you have to do is read between the lines....

the math adds up too:)


I hope hillary uses this poll to her advantage come this saturday... as to why they should allow the delegates to be seated 100% with full vote power......


GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!


Obama sure is going to lose the general election.... all of you who want him to win.... show me, how he is going to win the general election... i can't see it.... :(

you can't see that Hillary lost the primary race.

Attempting to show you anything is futile.

user-pic

.

!

user-pic

More mood stabilizers, please.

I admire your enthusiasum, HC08, but am compelled to point out that Hillary's chances of winning a revote in Michigan have absolutely nothing to do with the validity of the vote conducted in January?

The rules violation happened independent of the voting results and one has no impact on the other.

user-pic

You can't see a lot of things, HillaryClinton08, and your babbling yesterday about "HUSSEIN HUSSEIN HUSSEIN!!!!" revealed that you're not as "sweet" as everyone around here thought you were.

i can't see it.... :(

This is the crux of your problem. She lost after Super Tuesday.

Perhaps you should get your ass out there and work on his behalf. I mean if you think he's at such a risk of losing. Or is it all about Hillary and no one else?

Good point. It seems to me that the time for playing up Obama's negatives is past. Any democrat with concerns about Obama at this point should be working to overcome them rather than grousing about them.

Two points,

1) I have a hard time following how you arrive at any concusions vis-a-vis Clinton from this poll at all. There is just nothing here to indicate how Clinton would do at all because her name just was not included in the presidential match-ups.

2) Neither SUSA nor EPIC-MRA included Clinton in these most recent match-ups. However, in the last round which each did, Clinton vs McCain was an option, and both of these outfits found that Clinton does even more poorly against McCain than Obama does. As such, it is hard to see how this poll might bolster Clinton's case to the supers.

user-pic

Hillary would be a shitty VP, and she'd hate the job. Can you imagine her playing second fiddle to Obama? Seriously, the job sucks. Why would she want it?

Hillary could be the first female liberal lion of the Senate. She could be the next governor of New York. She could even be a Supreme Court justice. She just can't be the first woman president. Because she lost.

user-pic

Why again are we parsing random polls months before the election, before either candidate has a running mate and before the Democratic party has coalesced around its nominee?

It seems Andrew Golis's tut-tutting admonition that people should quit posting diaries/comments arguing against Clinton could equally apply to his fellow officemates who daily post the latest irrelevant polls and whispered sweet-nothings from Harold Ickes.

Why again are we parsing random polls months before the election, before either candidate has a running mate and before the Democratic party has coalesced around its nominee?

What else is there really to talk about in politics now?

the war, the economy, how we have to defeat John McCain, how more and more people are plunging from the middle class to povery, there's a big global warming vote next week....

Who wants to talk about issues when you can talk about process!

A jackleg former senator from Texas, whom you might have heard of, lobbying for a Swiss bank awash in U.S. subprime mortgages while, at the same time, advising a certain geriatric presidential candidate on economic policy, which would include what to do to fix the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis.

Maybe it's me, but I find that interesting. And deeply disturbing.

Now that's a story worth watching.

Phil however is a bit of an amateur at corruption. In that regard he'll never measure up to his wife Wendi. Now that's someone who knew how to be corrupt.

yes. very important. especially with troops losing their houses while they are overseas...

No direct correlation of my spoof candidates to the actual candidates intended. My point is that these polls are poop at this stage of the game.

Lifting his right leg, and crossing the fingers on left hand might help, too. Who cares?

Michigan is one the poorest states in the Nation. If they are stupid enough to vote for a Republican.... well, you reap what you sow....

Never underestimate the stupidity of Michigan politics. They had John Engler in the governor's mansion for a decade, and the Democrats have only won the governor's seat since then by near default.

Ah the fat snivelling John Engler, who took apart the school funding based on property taxes and replaced it with nothing. Now, all cities in Michigan resemble Flint. Tragic, this decades-long death from the fall of the Big Three. There will be no replacing it.

Clinton Superdel Gov Granholm could have prevented this trainwreck by not signing the relevant primary election law. Voters in MI are free to eject her from office.

In the meantime, rules are rules.

Pax,
M.

user-pic

Don't look now, but Granholm never wanted to avoid this mess. She and Hillary purposely created this mess.

Hillary is now taking advantage of the mess she and Granholm created in order to take advantage of it.


Levin is at least as guilty as Granholm in this matter.

user-pic

I agree. It wasn't just Granholm, it was also Levin and they're the ones all the anger and resentment - if there is much, really - Michigan Democrats feel ought to be directed at.

Originally they thought that would wrap all this up by Feb 5. When it didn't, they decided to take advantage of the situation as it stood.

And have done a pretty masterful job, I must say. They got everyone thinking the way they wanted them to.

They got everyone thinking the way they wanted them to.

Again, typical Michigan politics.

Ah, the Clintonian politics of throwing sand in the air, hoping no one notices them sneaking in the back door...

Michigan is going to vote republican and so is Florida.... that is what the DNC and Obama get for not having a re vote!!!

And you base this on.....what? ESP? Out of the body experience? Prayer?

Of course, at this stage in 1984, Mondale was beating Reagan; in Summer 1988, Dukakis was beating Bush. Those predictions turned out REAL well.

OT: What did you all think of Murdoch saying Obama will win and McCain has a lot of baggage, and basically no economic sense?

I think that's the first time I agree with Murdoch.

user-pic

I think Murdoch follows the money and he thinks Obama is going to win and that's where the money is.

In other words - I think Murdoch is making a business calculation.

Murdoch's empire doesn't make the cultural curve, it follows it - with a vengeance. As long as far rightwing lunacy sold, he was for it. Now that it no longers sells as well, you are likely to see Rupert become a flaming liberal.

Shiva H. Vishnu, does that mean FOX is about to become an Obama lovefest?!?

The "ick" factor of this has many dimensions...

Exactly right.

user-pic

This brings to mind the statement Obama made last summer, to those Wall St. types (and no, don't have a link), about how if you wanted to know whether to believe in him, watch how he runs the campaign.

Maybe Murdoch has done just that: watched the campaign, and been impressed.

Still, this is the same individual who pays Roger Ailes' paycheck, so much as I like the sound of this, the image of Sean Hannity prevents me from doing a little happy dance.

user-pic

Murdoch said that?

Do you have a link? Was this recent?

Signed,

Out.Of.The.Loop.

user-pic

Someone posted a link on an earlier thread, CT, so I know there is one.

Let me see if I can find it.

user-pic

Yep, here it is. I couldn't believe it myself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/rupert-murdoch-says-obama_b_104018.html

Amazing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/


Carlsbad, CA -- Tonight at the "All Things Digital" conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch -- Chairman of News Corp, new WSJ owner, and longtime torchbearer for conservative politics -- said this about Barack Obama: "He is a rock star. It's fantastic" "I love what he is saying about education." "I don't think he will win Florida.....but he will win in Ohio and the election". "I am anxious to meet him." "I want to see if he will walk the walk."

user-pic

THANKS EVERYONE!

Signed,

No.Longer.Out.Of.The.Loop

user-pic

And I might add, that's "no excess body fat ROCK STAR" to you, Mr. Murdoch.

user-pic

I hope obama names his vp quickly so that we can stop with all the clintons for vp and co-presidency nonsense. I look forward to the day when the clintons are not in the press every gd day. Where was all this attention and press when clinton was standing up against the war and pointing out that the senate shouldn't give the president a blank check based on lies? Oh, that's right it was only a dream.

Watch the troll inventory. Watch who shifts their diabtibes to supporting McCain. Hillary has been a brilliant foil for the Spineless Community. We will see true colors soon enough.

Born and raised in Detroit,I can tell you Romney's support is largely due to name recognition.If Obama spends a little time there and is successfull in linking McSame/Bush he'll have no trouble winning with a substantial margin.He needs also to let Michiganders know McSame's chief financial advisor is an architect of the forclosure fiasco that's hitting them harder than anywhere else.Oh, and also he should emphasize McSame's "fend for yourself" attitude regarding said sub-prime crisis. Yes We Fuckin Can!

That sounds exactly right to me. Obama's strongest suit in MI is to emphasize McCain's economic ineptitude. He would also do well to spend a good deal of time in western MI, because a lot of the Dutch Reform types out there distrust McCain and might be persuaded to become Obamacans. Showing up with the right clergy surrogates (like Rick Warren) could help that process along.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wait! Wait! Wait!

Go over to Politico...

Ben (who tends to be in the bag for Hillary) says the Survey USA poll has Obama only winning 68% of the African American vote in their breakdown of voting groups.

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

68%? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Try 95%!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh my gosh this polling is a joke! What is the sprad when Obama takes 90 to 95 percent of the African American vote in MICHIGAN? I'm going to say Obama up by 6 at least.

Good lord you have to read the fine print on this crap!

68%?!? That's rich!

user-pic

I wouldn't be surprised if those polls were paid for by clintons, inc., or a subsidiary. It's all about methodology and the clintons love playing with the polls.

What an insightful bit of paranoia.

68% sounds right, given that MCCain is a military man.

Many many many blacks serve in the military and have the highest regard for McCain based on his military service.

You need to stop laughing because that number is most likely quite valid.

For what the situation looked like 4 years ago, Check out this map from Ben Smith at Politico to see what the electoral map looked like, according to polls, on May 28, 2004. The prediction for the electoral college was Kerry 327, Bush 211.

Just say no to Clinton on the ticket. I couldn't stomach voting for Clinton in any shape or form after her bahavior in this campaign.

I don't care if every poll known to man shows McCain winning Michigan. He won't.

The Dems will win Michigan without breaking a sweat, regardless of candidate. Bank it.

And Romney is not popular in Michigan, regardless of what a lot of pundits who've never lived there tell you.

Aye and indeed. Romney's dad was beloved, but not the son. I would be furious with and working against Gov Granholm if I still lived there. And Carl has lost some of his stature over this. Michigan has such bigger fish to fry than this.

I really loved Gov Granholm when I lived in MI. I think that she gets a lot of blame for messes that she simply inherited from Engler. That said, there is no denying that her scheme to move up the primary was a class-A fiasco and she does deserve some blowback on that account. It is a pity.

user-pic

Lately the polling and in particular the pundits are like an elephant sitting on my head.

Today I read an "analytical" piece from an AP writer who allegedly knows South Dakota, yet his basic premise was so far off I wondered if he bothered to do even the slightest amount of work.

Basically, he said that South Dakota's demographics favored Hillary because South Dakota was white like West Virginia. Never mind that South Dakota's white voters have a lot more in common with North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Iowa, and Minnesota than they do with Appalachia. Never mind that South Dakota is actually less white than West Virginia (WV~97%, SD~89%), and South Dakota's chief minority group is Native Americans (~9% of the population), unlike West Virginia.

Nope, none of that seemed to factor into the pundit's analysis. SD is just like WV and therefore favorable to Hillary. End of story.

That's not to say she might not do well here, but the entire premise was wrong.

So once again, why are we discussing all these hypothetical polls and listening to half-*ssed pundits? The stupid, it burns!

I saw that too, and came to the same conclusion.
Anyone who thinks West Virginia and Kentucky are "similar" to South Dakota, hasn't ever been out of their house, or visited any of those states.
Chalk another one up to journalistic laziness.

Veep Thoughts.

Who I do not want to see Senator Obama pick.

Please post your comments at:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/05/veep-thoughts.php

COLORADO (Rassmussen):

McCain 47
Clinton 44

McCain 42
Obama 48

Quit worrying about states we've got in the bag and start working on the one's we can steal.


Just wait until JSM goes back into Michigan with his Pro-NAFTA, the jobs-ain't-comin-back line.

Remember, Obama has not really campaigned in MI yet.

McCain has already campaigned in MI extensively.

Wow, that's a terrible pair of polls for McCain, because right now, especially in FL and MI, it's pretty much his best case scenario. Once Obama actually campaigns there, gets his operation up to full speed, McCain would have to choose Gordie Howe as his running mate to win MI.

Or maybe Mickey Lolich.

'68 Tigers much? ;)

In Virginia, McC is ahead of Obama by an average 1.3 points. If Hillary were the nominee, he would be ahead by an average of 10.

A bit early to tell, anyway.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/virginia.html

Maybe someone has pointed out the obvious.

But in my home state, Michigan, there was no real Dem primary campaign.

Obama spoke here for the first time just a couple weeks ago.

Our airwaves were not flooded with Obama commercials. Our local news media did not cover Obama since he wasn't visiting.

McCain, on the other hand, did campaign here. He did flood the airwaves.

I saw the first general election add for McCain on local TV yesterday.

Obama has some work to do here.

But, hey, Murdoch's the guy who brought us headlines like "HEADLESS BODY IN TOPLESS BAR." Who knows what the tabloid version of progressive journalism might yield?

So much "Hope"...So little reality.

People. I look at them and I don't see much to like.

Until the nomination process it's just not even an interesting measurement.

Hillary is not the VP.
There is no way that you invite a woman who brought up assasination when asked why she was still in race to be your VP... even if she says it was 'unintentional'.

The Clintons have been lying, distorting and manipulating every day. It sickens me to see them use the american people the way they do. Senator Obama has run on bringing change to Washington... that doesn't happen with the Clintons in tow...

Thanks, but NO THANKS!

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address