Poll: Obama Way Behind In Kentucky, Narrowly Ahead In Oregon
Although Barack Obama is on his way to clinching a majority of pledged delegates tomorrow, a new round of polls from Suffolk University shows that it might not be by much on the day it actually happens.
Obama is headed for a landslide loss tomorrow in Kentucky, while it could be a close race in Oregon, where he's favored:
Kentucky
Clinton 51%
Obama 25%Sample size: 600 likely primary voters.
Margin of error: ±4%Oregon
Obama 45%
Clinton 41%Sample size: 600 likely primary voters.
Margin of error: ±4%
Obama's popularity varies immensely between states -- he's viewed favorably by only 43% of Democratic respondents in Kentucky, and by 73% of respondents in Oregon.
Advertisement
Kentucky isn't going to go blue in November anyway, is it? I don't think they'd vote for her vs. McCain any quicker.
May 19, 2008 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt they'd be handing over any electoral votes to HRC, either.
May 19, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
4 pts in Oregon? Umm.......no.
May 19, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
My thoughts exactly.
Fox News yesterday night was saying he had a narrow 12% lead in Oregon over Hillary, that's right Fox News said that.
My bet is Oregon will look just like NC.
Kentucky, well that was a loss given since Obama ran for presidency.
May 19, 2008 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
This poll was just criticized on CNN by an Oregon journalist who said that the poll misleads in that independents were included in it -- and they cannot vote in the Oregon Democratic primary. He says the poll that shows a double-digit spread (SurveyUSA, I'm pretty sure) has been consistently on target in Oregon is more representative of what's expected.
May 19, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama doesn't win by at least double that, I'll kiss John McCain's ass on top of the Space Needle and give him 30 minutes to draw a crowd!
-
Obama/Olbermann '08!
May 19, 2008 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think you'll have to pay up on that debt, Aubrie, but if you do, it won't take 30 minutes for the mob to gather...
They'll be there waiting.
This has become a comedy of errors for Mccain, watching the desperate R's trying to derail Obama's locomotive steamroller is going to be an historic lesson in the politics of futility.
Unfortunately, Hillary is writing the foreward to that lesson book.
May 19, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd love to see the "internals" on this poll--the Portland Tribune one conducted by Tim Hibbitts (respected local pollster) had Obama ahead by 20! Did the poll include those who had already voted?
While entirely anecdotal, I have found overwhelming support for Obama while canvassing in Portland. And yes, Portland is a blue bubble full of latte drinkers, yet my understanding is there has been very strong support for Obama in suburban/rural areas as well. So I would be surprised if this poll turns out to be accurate. Still hoping for a 12%+ win.
May 19, 2008 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and it is 100% mail-in. Also, Obama's field director in New Hampshire ran campaigns in Oregon. I would bet dollars to donuts that he is going to blow Clinton out of the water there. Superior organization in a mail in state = an ass whooping for the bad guys.
May 19, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I still don't like how the MSM is making the lack of Appalachia support HIS problem. If these folks are clinging (yeah I said it) to misinformation spread through email, even when confronted with the fact that the information is in fact false, then it says a lot more about those folks than some inherent weakness in Obama. These folks should be ridiculed just like Rev Wright was when he was talking about the US government creating AIDS to destroy black folks. It's the same ignorance at work.
May 19, 2008 9:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice comment.
Excellent point - it's not his problem and it's not his fault that they are ignorant - you're right.
And since when did we let Appalachia pick our presidents? Please -there are a significant number of married first cousins and uncles and nieces in Appalachia -not our most brilliant part of the population - not to put too fine a point on it.
At least according to everything I've read about it. I don't claim to have spent any time there.
May 19, 2008 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've spent the past 16 years here (dear god) after moving up from TX. It's a totally different mindset- people in Greece were more familiar than people in the hollers here. But you really need to understand that until very recently most of these people were *isolated*. The only time anyone ever made an effort to connect with them was to screw them over once again.
Give them time. It's getting better, just not as fast as we would wish.
May 19, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's why I hated to say anything.
I want it to get better in Appalachia, just like I want it to get better in the rural deep south and up in rural Maine, where there is a lot of prejudice against French Canadians who immigrate.
It's not just Appalachia - there are pockets of dirt ignorance and poverty all over the country and those do nothing for America but pull the whole country down. And that's a major argument for why the government ought to pay attention to these areas.
Not that the people there necessarily want the government to pay attention. That's also part of the problem. Like rural areas of northern New Mexico where no one has ever spoken English - for 400 years or more. They really want to be ignored. So there is likely resistance where ever people have been living more or less isolated lives.
May 19, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are half right. It is not his fault but it is his problem. It is a small problem that can be overcome by finding votes elswhere, by educating the educable, or some combination of the two.
May 19, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
As much as I hate to, given our last conversation, I agree with you.
I shouldn't have included "problem" in that comment and knew it when I typed it and let it slide anyway. Yes, he needs to be aware, but I can't imagine he isn't.
May 19, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I almost always agree with you. An ocasional disagreement is inevitable.
May 19, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena,
I know you're an equal opportunity offender, but you should know that that "inbred mouthbreathing dullard" stereotype is really, really hurtful to people from the Appalachians, almost as much as the "lazy and genetically inferior" stereotype is to black people.
Appalachia is basically an exploited imperial colony stuck into the heart of the Eastern U.S. Its economy, and its politics, have always been strikingly similar to those of former European colonies for similar reasons--an exploitive economic system in which locals are employed to extract minerals that are owned by, and economically benefit, absentee owners.
For more than a century, when we've fled the rampant unemployment and poverty, we have faced rampant discrimination because of the way we talk (I slip back into dialect every time I go home within an hour or two) and where we're from. We get it in Cinncinati, in Chicago and in industrial cities across the miswest, as well as from the people in the lower parts of our own states. Its hurtful and thoughtless at best, and hurtful and mean-spirited at worst.
May 19, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
oops, posted it below by mistake...
Lets hybridize these terms..."inbred mouthbreathing lazy and genetically inferior dullard.."
Sounds more like a description of some of the Young Republican following Karl Rove down through the seven levels...
May 19, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Even we, as ignorant people from Appalachia know how to find Texas. You just go west til you smell it, then south til you step in it. I find you to be one of the most obnoxious posters here at TPM. You are in a word, disgusting.
May 19, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
"And since when did we let Appalachia pick our presidents? Please -there are a significant number of married first cousins and uncles and nieces in Appalachia -not our most brilliant part of the population - not to put too fine a point on it.
At least according to everything I've read about it. I don't claim to have spent any time there."
Well, then comment away Tena! Look, as one who lives in Kentucky, its kills me that the vast majority of the Democrats registered in this state will vote for Hillary. But it kills me more when a post is made about Kentucky, because I know it brings out comments which are just as shortsighted and as ignorant as the writer's claim Kentuckians are in "Appalachia."
There is no question that some of the criticisms I have read about Kentucky have some truth. But the generalizations (see above) are very hurtful. Kentuckians are conservative, but believe me when I tell you, Kentuckians are some of the hardest working people I have ever met and they do just about anything for anyone they consider a friend.
Obama was down big in a lot of states, but he always closed the gap after campaigning hard. He chose not to do that in Kentucky. I wish Obama would have spent more than the two hours he spent last week in Louisville in the run up to this primary. I don't necessarily blame him, but I really believe it would have made a difference.
May 19, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
More like Oregon fell for Obama's 6-month, intense smear campaign, when his hired operatives hijacked all of the youth-oriented democratic blogs like Big Orange Urinal.
May 19, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know we are not supposed to feed the trolls... but man, I needed the laugh this morning. Thanks!
May 19, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
How does the poll factor in Oregon's all-mail-in voting? My guess is that 90 percent+ of the votes have already been cast. I also would surprised if he won there by single digits, though it really doesn't matter since the race is over.
May 19, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
If these folks are clinging (yeah I said it) to misinformation spread through email, even when confronted with the fact that the information is in fact false, then it says a lot more about those folks than some inherent weakness in Obama.
This is precisely what is happening, and not just in states like WV and Kentucky. I had a relative from Michican call me and express all sorts of concerns about Obama, all of them right out of the email trail you refer to here. And this is a bright person we're talking about. I had all I could do not to alienate her with condescending outrage.
May 19, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was truly an awesome, probably unprecedented crowd. One word of pre-election caution, however. (Excuse me while I pick up this bucket of cold water.) Obama's mega-crowds don't always translate into election results. Of course Obama is highly favored to win Oregon, but perhaps not by the mega-margins such a mega-crowd might immediately suggest. There's a heck of lot of rural Oregon south of Portland. The latest polls I've seen on the race (ARG a few days ago and Suffolk today) show Hillary only 4 to 5 points behind. I know that sounds almost impossible given the staggering proportions of yesterday's crowd. Still, at this point, with these expectations, a win less than what Obama achieved in North Carolina will seem tepid by comparison, especially when preceded by another monster win for Hillary in Kentucky. Which reminds me, most of the East Coast-generated news tomorrow night will be about KY and how badly Obama is doing with "hard-working white Americans". Oregon's results won't start coming in until quite late EST. This from an seasoned pessimist who hates like hell to be disappointed.
(This is a re-post from an earlier string's tag-end.)
May 19, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with jefo. I think Oregon will look like NC. Remember, there were polls out the day before that had Obama's lead at 4 or 5 points.
I found the internals for the Suffolk poll. Here is the link http://www.realclearpolitics.com/RCP_PDF/Suffolk_Final_Oregon_Marginals.pdf
Only 32% of those polled had already voted. I had heard at least 60% of ballots had been turned in for Dems.
May 19, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Glen Beck just said Obama wants to control our thermostats.
May 19, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Glenn Beck is a racist. He's one of the most overtly racist rightwing screamers with a podium from which to spew his racist crap.
He's just a straight up, no holds barred, racist.
May 19, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
What is it about CNN giving hateful pricks their own shows? Much to my dismay, I flipped past Lou Dobbs last night, and I was appalled by the stuff he and his guests were bantering about. One woman (didn't catch the name) was apparently working from the Kevin James playbook, saying, "Well, as we all know, talking is a form of appeasement"--and nobody calls her out on her bullshit!-- least of all Dobbs, nodding solemnly. This stuff is more pernicious than Fox News in many ways-- with Fox you know you're getting a partisan perspective, but CNN still makes claims to objectivity. And to the simpler journalistic mind, "objectivity" equals splitting the difference/equal time, not accuracy. And so CNN "balances" centrist Dems like Begala with racist nuts like Beck and Dobbs. But wait! It is worse! Begala (or another center-left equivalent) doesn't have his own show-- so what CNN is doing is effectively conceding the "liberal media bias" argument to the right wing nut jobs, by using Glenn Beck to "balance" magazine shows that don't specific partisan agendas, such as Anderson Cooper. "OK," they say. "You're worried that Cooper looks like an effete liberal who will turn your kids gay? Larry King a little too Jewy for you? Here are some Minutemen and John Birch Society members to balance things out." Well, fuck that. This election cycle, we're taking over.
May 19, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Takes one to know one.
May 19, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's rubber
You're glue
May 19, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
neener neener neener!
May 19, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
apparently 32% of those Oregonians polled had already voted.
May 19, 2008 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Portland is not the only "blue bubble". Are you forgetting the cities of Salem and Eugene? Especially Eugene. Corvallis is also turning blue. The larger cities and towns in Oregon have always been a little bluer that the rest of the state. It's the rural areas, where I live, that are conservative. They, however, have often expressed frustration because their voices are often drowned out by Portland and the rest. It's is that mixture that makes this state a very deep purple.
What will decide this election in Oregon, both the primary and the general, will be the swing voters, some of whom are independents, and those fed up with the state this nation is in.
May 19, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
About Oregon:
Their seems to be a lot of confusion about how our primary works. Several polling firms have reported surveys of "those who have already voted" showing the race closer than expected. This is not an indication of the eventual outcome.
The early vote crowd skews heavily in Clinton's direction. Older voters and rural voters consistently return their ballots early. Portland's voters routinely turn in their ballots at drop off stations on the last two days. More than half the total vote usually comes in from the mail and at the drop off site during the last two days. This late vote will be an avalanche for Obama. I will eat my Obama hat if he wins be less than 10% and I suspect that the recent poll by Davis Hibbits showing him up by 20% is about right.
I find it shocking that national polling companies seem to lack basic knowledge of the historic pattern of voting here in Oregon. Any one with any knowledge of the state could tell them that they are using a flawed approach.
May 19, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Suffolk's track record isn't the greatest.
http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/surveyusa-report-cards/
May 19, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lets hybridize these terms..."inbred mouthbreathing lazy and genetically inferior dullard.."
Sounds more like a description of some of the Young Republican following Karl Rove down through the seven levels...
May 19, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Poblano should check in on Oregon soon.
May 19, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Huckabee bigotry influence claims its first victim...
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-longbeach19-2008may19,0,5230251.story?page=2&track=ntothtml
Mike, for a preacherman you sure have something of the devil in you. Although that seems to hold true for the figureheads of every major religion.
May 19, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, seriously, does anyone really believe Obama is only four points ahead in Oregon?
May 19, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
We will find out at the watch party.
May 19, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly, I have already moved past the primaries, but Clinton may do better in Oregon than expected.
May 19, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton to Obama: There's no nominee yet
"So I'm going to make my case and I'm going to make it until we have a nominee, but we're not going to have one today and we're not going to have one tomorrow and we're not going to have one the next day," Clinton said. "And if Kentucky turns out tomorrow, I will be closer to that nomination because of you."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/05/19/politics/p085314D76.DTL
May 19, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but Idaho's going to go blue in November for Obama? Or how about Nebraska, Utah, Alaska, Mississippi or South Carolina?
May 19, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
75,000 Obama supporters went to his big rally yesterday in Portland. That has to have had some effect on that Suffolk poll, when 75,000 of his supporters spent the day out of the house on Sunday. I feel like at least a few of them would have been sampled.
May 19, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
And I'll bet their urine was not clean.
May 19, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama 56
Clinton 43
May 19, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. I'm thinking somewhere around that - I'd go even higher: Obama 57, Clinton 41.
May 19, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton to Obama: There's no nominee yet
"So I'm going to make my case and I'm going to make it until we have a nominee, but we're not going to have one today and we're not going to have one tomorrow and we're not going to have one the next day," Clinton said. "And if Kentucky turns out tomorrow, I will be closer to that nomination because of you."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/05/19/politics/p085314D76.DTL
May 19, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Everyone else to Clinton: Yes there is.
May 19, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary 51%
Obama 25%
Total 76%
Where's the other 24% of these Kentucky voters?
May 19, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here we go:
John Edwards: 6%
Uncommitted: 5%
Undecided: 11%
Something tells me Kentucky will be closer than people think.
May 19, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric - Can you update this post to reflect the Survey USA numbers for Oregon? I think their poll shows an 11-13 pt lead for Obama.
I'm not exactly a polling geek, so I can't say they've always been right this season, but I do remember they put a lot of California egg on Zogby's face.
May 19, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Toilet paper polling.
Obama will win Oregon by double digits in a walk.
May 19, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink