Oh puuuuleeeez. He won't get his nomination bounce until the clintons' drama, whining, bs, vp crap, and all the clinton garbage is off the front page, off of the news, and there aren't any more posts on tpm about the clintons. I would say in about 2 weeks or so, we will see the bounce and I would surmise its around 52 or 53 to 39/40 for mcbush. I'll bet a lunch, any takers?

McCain is going to get a bit of a boost when he unveils his latest campaign slogan. "John McCain A Leader You Can Depends On".

I hate CNN and don't trust anything that comes out of their organization. Their right behind Fox IMO.

Well yeah, if a CNN poll is the ne plus ultra of what is the reality out there.

[rolls eyes]

Hate to keep doing this, but this is an interesting read. Dean is the bomb as dnc chair and I hope he keeps on as chair for a long time to come. He is doing wonders for the party. We all owe a big thank you to Howard Dean.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/06/clintons-what-if-ickes-ab_n_105744.html

Can anyone imagine ickey as chair? We'd still be whining about the republicans controlling the house and the senate and we would be looking at going down in flames this year because the clintons would be the nominees. Thank God for Howard Dean.

When it comes to taking the crew over at CNN as credible...Wolf, Anderson, John,etc...there is a good old boy saying..."i'd rather take a shit anyway but thanks!" CNN is to be taken a media corporate machine of stirring the pot!

A three point lead with a margin of error of +/- 3 points IS NOT A TIE. Obama is as likely to have a 6 point lead as a tie. This is basic statistics and it drives me nuts. End rant.

Wow - 500 days. I didn't know it had been that long.

All you folks who get agitated (positively or negatively) about polling in June need to remember that in the summer of 1988 Mike Dukakis had a 17-point lead over Papa Bush but ended up losing by 8 points because of cumulative damage from Willie Horton, Dukakis' ACLU membership, Duakakis' debate answer about the murder of his wife, etc.

Also, almost all these national polls are of registered voters -- not likely voters (so they overstate Dem strength).

The state-by-state polls are more meaningful than national ones at any stage of the game.

Intrade has Obama at 59 and McCain at 36.

CNN Poll shows that Senator Obama currently has a three point lead on Senator Bush McCain, even though McCain has been running unencumbered, and at full speed for the past three months, where as Senator Obama was running all that time with a ton of Klintonite on his back.

Hey guys, I'm new here. Be gentle... Sure is nice here now that Obama has the nomination wrapped up. I only hope that more MCain trolls come to post here because I'm going to miss you all beating down Hillary's Obama haters.

Obama has tapped into the pulse and the soul of this nation. It us our obligation now to do all we can to get him elected. You guys are awesomely (probably not a real word)funny, witty, and sharp.

Yeah, it means little now, BUT...
Funny, how when Obama is ahead by 3, Hillary McSame are in "a dead heat with Obama."
Yet when either is/was ahead by a point or two, they were "ahead of Obama."
What Bullshit.

Liberal blogosphere is increasingly resembling FOX "news". It is becoming an echo chamber of people reinforcing each othes views.

Reaction to this poll is an example of this. This poll is bad news for Democrats.

Just think; Bush is at 25% approval, 80% think the country is on the track, GOP has an old nominee with a record of supporting Bush 99% of the time, economy is tanking, Dems have a nominee who has received glowing press coverage and very little vetting from the press.

And they are even at the polls. This before the Right Wing Noise Machine even raising a glove on Obama.

The vetting is about to begin. The GOP has at its disposal a Right Wing Noise Machine which will go after him. There will be pseudo scandal after pseudo scandal. There will be other pastor Wrights. And in October they will start the Red Alerts, reminding people McCain's military credentials.

So if they are even now when he is riding high with gushing coverage imagine where he will be then.

All you folks who get agitated (positively or negatively) about polling in June need to remember that in the summer of 1988 Mike Dukakis had a 17-point lead over Papa Bush but ended up losing by 8 points because of cumulative damage from Willie Horton, Dukakis' ACLU membership, Duakakis' debate answer about the murder of his wife, etc.

This is what I mean about liberal blogosphere resembling FOX "news". Many people here have no sense of history.

A tie in June under the present political climate is bad news for Democrats. They should be at least 20 points ahead.

In 88 Dukakis had a 17 point lead. In 92 Clinton had an 18 point lead. Both leads were gone by election day. Why? Because the demoralized voters of the opposition party always go back to their party. They flirt with voting for the other guy with hopes of something better but eventually go back and vote the way they always vote. That leaves about 5% of the population that is the true swing voter. They decide in October. And they always decide not on the issues but on impressions of candidates. And the GOP is very good at shaping/creating impressions. Look what they did to Dukakis, Gore, Kerry. This is the strenght of the GOP. This is why they are good at winning presidential elections. They are able to define the opposition. Gore is a serial liar, Kerry is a flip flopper etc. It always works.

After all, McCain can't possibly win on the issues with Clinton supporters,

This is the mistake Democrats make in election after election. Voters don't always vote based on issues. Which is why lots of pro choice women voted for Bush.

Kerry kept repeating Roe v Wade......it did him no good.

Pro choice women also voted for Reagan.

McCain will have tremendous appeal to moderate/conservative blue collar Democrats, especially in states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania. These people voted for Reagan. They are culturally conservative.

But what about Traitor Joe Lieberman? He's working all the angles - fear, lies, Muslims, terrorism - to discredit Obama and pump up his master McCain. Lieberman thinks this 2004 tactics will work.

Obama is still largely unknown to a significant portion of the GE who did not follow the primaries.

Exactly. My point.

He is largely unknown to a significant portion of the GE and that is to his advantage. Voters are unhappy with the current regime, he is a blank slate to them and they are projecting their hopes to him.

The blanks will be filled and it will not be to his advantage. It never is. Check out his negatives. He started out with negatives in the single digits. It is even now with McCain. Why? Familiarity breeds contempt. The more the public gets to know a politician the higher the negatives get. This rule applies to all politicians. Higher the scrutiny, higher the negatives.

In spite of all your whimpering to the contrary she came nowhere near being as bad as the Repubs are going to be.

This is what worries me about the whole cult like mindset here.

They complain about the "beating" Obama took in the primary. It is laughable. I do not remember a candidate of either party receiving such gentle treatment from his opponents in the primaries. I remember the Ford/Reagan right. I remember Mondale/Hart fight. They shred each other to pieces.

I think it is because a lot of these people see Obama as a kind of Messiah. Someone who is beyond criticism. Because any criticism of him amounts to racism. During the primaries Dem candidates were terrified of criticizing him for fear of being called a racist.

The GOP has no such fear. By October they will turn Obama into Farakan's twin.

The scare tactics used in previous elections won't work this time.

When did I hear this before? In 68, 72, 80, 84, 88, 2000, 2004.

Why wouldn't it work this time? Because Obama is the Messiah?

I swear, this place is turning into Free Republic. Same mindset. Different party.

In reply to liam:
I, too remember JFK. Your linkage of Mr. Obama to JFK is far from the first such comparison I have seen floated; there have been a number of other politicians compared to JFK. I understand the hope that is invested in Mr. Obama, and I understand the excitement generated by hope. But this in itself does not mean that Mr. Obama is another John Kennedy. This hope is nowhere near establishing that Mr. obama will ever be what John Kennedy was, in terms of stature. Potential is one thing, accomplishment is another. In time, who knows what Mr. Obama may accomplish. But it is far, far too early to be linking Mr. Obama's name with that of John Kennedy. I strongly feel that Mr. Obama would be quick to say so, himself.

Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but doesn't "dead heat" mean actually tied, as opposed to just being within the margin of error?

Well looks like the children have gone to bed.

Blue Heron: I appreciate your concern about choice on abortion. As long as we get the Supreme Court appointments we should be OK with that.

douglasfactors: dead heat is usually applied to any poll within the inner margin of error, meaning as long as the difference between the candidates is no greater than the margin of error, it will usually be referred to as a dead heat.

Now of course with a 3 point MOE even a 6 point lead could actually indicate a tie, but in those cases, "dead heat" is seldom used.

Dead Heat
A neck-and-neck race
A statistical tie
More twists and turns
Get ready for a five month battle...

HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead
HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead
HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead

Lather, rinse, repeat.

"Plus Hillary's endless litany of how she is the stronger candidate and how she has "won" the popular vote, how Florida and Michigan have been getting "disenfranchised," just like Florida in 2000 and Zimbabwe."

Yuh, you forgot her odious balderdash about how her losing largely through her own incompetence is such a sharp smack in the face to women everywhere. Which all sorts of misguided people continue to lap up at her malevolent invitation.

Kerry was also in a dead heat with Bush at this point. But Kerry wasn't as liberal and he had more experience.

"Kerry wasn't as liberal?" Pass me a pipe of whatever you're smoking! Outside of his regrettable vote to authorize the Iraq war--not a particularly good political selling point for this election--he was just as liberal, if not more so, than Obama. In any event, after New Orleans, after the war, after the past 7 years, "liberal" isn't quite the game-ender codeword that it used to be.

The smart money is on Obama.

http://intrade.com

Obama Buy 62.3 Sell: 62.0

McCain Buy 36.3 Sell: 36.2

NO ONE should believe an other poll between now and November, the media wants to milk this for all its worth and they will have to make it look close or no one will give Johnny a penny, except the maxed-out donors who must now give through the Republican Party.

Why do you all suppose we hear NOTHING about McCain's fundraising felonies? Because the media does not want to give up all that advertising gravy that comes with the season of lies.

There won;t bew another reliable oll until late September, between now and then, we'll get a virtual tie every poll.

Curious isn't it, that just out of the gate after Clinton's peech we get these "50-50" all knotted up general election poll numbers?

PT Barnum was right, there is a sucker born every minute. And media has no intention of givng them an even break.

If you believe any polls between now and November, you are one of them!

Obama won(barely) the Dem nomination by putting together the McGovern coalition. He won the votes of the liberal elite plus the african american vote.

And he won mostly in caucus states where the most passionate base votes.

General election is a whole different game. It resembles a primary more than a caucus.

Hillary ran a campaign geared for the general election. She and her husband know to win a general election you need the votes of working class whites. She tailored her message to win over waitress moms and firefighters. And she won those votes.

To win the general election the Dem candidate needs the votes of; african americans+liberal elites+hispanics+working class whites.

Working class whites have been the achilles heel of Dem candidates in the past. They lose presidential election after presidential election because they can't win over the the people who "cling to their guns and religion".

As Ron Brownstein writes to win the general election Obama has to forget about the usual winning Dem coalition and put together a new coalition. He won't be able to win states like Ohio and Florida. Southeast Ohio which chooses the winner votes for Hillary by huge margins, as high as 70% and these people said they would not vote for Obama. McCain will win them. Bush won them in 2004.

Which means Obama will have to win other states. He will have to win Virginia, Colorado and some red states to make up the deificit. I just don't see him winning enough red states to make up the loss of Florida/Ohio/Michigan and probably Pennsylvania.

My guess is that once Hillary has fully conceded neither of the Clintons will be very active in supporting Obama. Their interest was strictly the dream of Hillary as president . . . more a personal drive for power than interest in serving their country. That lost they'll slowly sink out of the political picture except for a few token publicity shots.

I don't think you will see the Clintons campaign against McCain. They will make polite comments about unity etc. campaign for Dems across the country but they won't launch an all out assault on McCain. They are both friends with McCain.

If Obama loses Hillary will feel vindicated. She will immediately start organizing for 2012. And if Obama loses big, like McGovern, it will be an even bigger vindication for her. She will argue about he need for Dems to regain Reagan Democrats.

Michael A: Oh puuuuleeeez. He won't get his nomination bounce until the clintons' drama, whining, bs, vp crap, and all the clinton garbage is off the front page, off of the news, and there aren't any more posts on tpm about the clintons.

This will ensure Obama gets no bounce, as his supporters continue to piss all over Clinton and her 17 million plus voters.

McCain's biggest asset?

Obama supporters.