I know that polls don’t mean a whole lot this far out from the November elections, but the following Rasmussen polls show that Obama is currently a much, much stronger candidate against John McCain than Hillary Clinton.
Obama: 46%
McCain: 43%McCain: 49%
Clinton: 43%
Obama: 49%
McCain: 39%McCain: 44%
Clinton: 42%
Obama: 49%
McCain: 40%McCain: 45%
Clinton: 42%
Obama: 46%
McCain: 39%McCain: 49%
Clinton: 35%
I actually think McCain is doomed against either candidate. But these polls show that Clinton is a much bigger risk. There seems to be no way, for example, that she could win a state like Colorado. And that could doom the senate campaign of Mark Udall, who is polling even with his wingnut opponent.
Like most observers from both political parties, Straayer said Udall should be considered the favorite to win the race. But a Rasmussen poll released Thursday shows the two neck-and-neck, with 44 percent of voters saying they’d favor Udall, compared to 43 percent for Schaffer.
Meanwhile, Grover Norquist is trying to use Jedi Mind Tricks to convince Democrats that Obama is a “shady Chicago socialist.”
Durbin and Schumer are on Meet the Press talking up their home state senate buddies.
In the nationwide poll, it’s looking good too:
GALLUP Daily Tracking: Feb. 13-15 results
Obama takes significant lead for first time
Clinton 42% Obama 49%
That’s great news. If he can pull out solid wins in Wisconsin and Hawaii, he’ll be in great shape heading into March 4th, with two solid weeks of campaigning to go. I’m worried about WI, though. Hopefully it won’t be as close as these polls say. And I’m trying not to imagine what a Clinton victory would mean.
take some comfort about WI.
The Clintons have scaled back their campaign schedule,here and have ‘picked up their marbles and gone home’ after Bill, appearing in a cow pavillion, scolds Wisconsin.
Wow, Massa Clinton ain’t none too happy, sho’nuff. What an ass. Any idea how this is getting played in the local press? I read the big paper in Milwaukee endorsed Obama, and the Madison paper slammed the Clintons for their “Change begins March 4th” comment.
Ha! A socialist who takes corporate funding.
he doesn’t accept corporate PAC money. What do you want him to do? Return all checks from people at that management level and above at a corporation?
a TPM link.
how about that McCain goading Obama on public financing?
Obama should just say No to that. He already has public financing.
Such hypocrisy? McCain has all those fat cats, Freedom Watch and others ready to spend millions. And also, he turned to Bush advisers who raised millions for the 2000 and 2004 campaigns.
See that hug? gimme a break.
Indeed. Kos had it right here: Take the slight hit in the press on public financing, but hit back by pointing to the million or so donors who’ve given to him, as opposed to the three or four McCain’s got.
there’s another piece on this public financing stuff that Obama made no pledge with McCain. McCain is having dreams.
this business about ‘McCain is a man of his word’ can’t be seriously considered given his flip-flop on waterboarding…. It’s no longer torture. He voted not to ban.
Well, fortunately, the press seems to be picking up the McCain-as-Flip-Flopper meme. I figured they’d play him up as the awesome maverick we’ve been told about throughout his six- or seven-hundred years in Congress, but they seem to have gotten religion on that garbage.
here’s their response to the Will.i.am “Yes We Can” video.
Watch this video: No, You can’t
(h/t; Obsidian))
And yet at the same time a member of Al Capone’s gang. Remarkable man.
I heard that he drives the getaway car.
I wasn’t aware that Norquist was a Democratic superdelegate.
President Bush demanded it be buried in one of the war funding bills and the Dems in Congress caved. Of course it meant they had to hijack the DNC to follow through, but anything dear leader wanted.
he’s a superduperdelegate
but his secret powers involve bathtub drownings… hard to use that one for good….
l didn’t see that in the linked article.
surely you jest. if it’s true, l’d assume they can toss his ass just like they did liebeman’s.
I think we have to give Mark Penn the last word on this electability issue:
So let’s get the superdelegates to vote for Edwards. He won some primaries, back in 2004. That’s good enough for me.
Doesn’t this say something about how the Clinton campaign views us? Penn thinks we’re stupid.
And if that doesn’t work, it’s more of the same — we’ve all been scammed by Obama-mania. In other words, we’re all deluded, i.e., stupid — again.
Rather than convince us of the merits of a HRC candidacy, they’ve relied on what Peter Berger calls nihilation. And if that doesn’t work, screw “the village” and take the nomination by tapping into the good-old-boy network.
May we please choose a winner this time–it’s so damn important.
This column says it’s better to choose the person who best represents what you believe a president should do for the country. I tend to agree. Polls can be so misleading–as the author says here, vote for “who you believe will be the best president.”
…we can toss around poll numbers that claim one thing or another about the general election. But as we’ve learned this year more than ever, polls can’t be trusted (think Clinton versus Obama in New Hampshire last month). And history agrees: In March of 2004, John Kerry was slaughtering Bush in the general election polls; in July of 1988, former Governor Mike Dukakis was trouncing Bush the Elder. If you haven’t heard of Dukakis, take that as an indication of just how unreliable polls can be – especially those conducted months in advance.
SNIP
With all these persuasive arguments swimming around, we can’t be sure which holds the most water, what will occur in the nine months before the election to alter these electability equations, or whose theory will bear fruit come November. As such, Lengle admitted, “Basing your vote on electability is a dicey operation.”
So I beg you: Do not vote for who you believe to be the most electable; vote for who you believe will make the best president.
http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2008/02/12/Opinion/Nicky.Berman.
Trying.To.Find.A.Winner-3202713.shtml
No offense to my school’s newspaper or the author, but I highly doubt that is true. The DP is known for getting significant facts wrong from time to time, and I don’t recall Kerry ever leading Bush by a substantial margin 4 years ago.