Recently in Poll Category

Yesterday the PPP Poll looked at Ohio and put Obama up significantly. Today, McClatchy reports Quinnipiac University has OH! Bama up in Ohio too, but not by as much, but he's also leading in Florida which all the punditry says he'll have trouble winning, and up by 12 points in Pennsylvania, where they're "clinging" to the hope that Yes! They! Can! believe in change.

You can't stop the Obamafication of the nation (or all the dumb things we're going to do to his name over the better part of the next decade). My advice to all you conservative dead-enders out there -- just pretend it's consensual sex and relax, enjoy it.

[Take that media narrative.]

From Taegan Goddard's Political Wire

A new Public Policy Polling survey(pdf) finds Sen. Barack Obama begins the general election in Ohio with a double digit lead over John McCain, 50% to 39%.

Fully half -- not a mere plurality -- and double digits!

This is a huge change from more recent polls that showed the narrowest of margins in Obama's favor.

Yesterday much was made over the offhand comments the despicable Ape Pee highlighted (and of course are available elsewhere from more responsible and less rapacious news outlets) that Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe told doners, "the Illinois senator can still become America’s first black president even if he loses the two key battleground states of Florida and Ohio."

While the Lizard Brains take this to mean Obama is conceding the states Bush stole in the last two elections, if reported fairly and read correctly, the campaign is saying that these big swing states "will not be considered must wins by themselves, but only part of a conprehensive plan to compete in more states."

It's called the 50 State Strategy -- you might have heard of it.

Meanwhile, from the watch what they do, not what they say Department: "Obama Beefing up Florida Efforts, Padding Out Staff." They're also doing some serious community organizer training here in Ohio, where unlike Florida where he didn't campaign, he has an organization in place.

Roper, meet dopes.

[Caveat on the PPP Poll. Inside the numbers, the poll skews heavily towards Democratic Party identification, 55%, 30% GOP. Even then however, Obama gets 10% of self-described Republicans. Worrisome is McCain capturing 17% of self-described Democrats. The good news is that Obama wins those who don't consider themselves part of either major party 45% to 32%. Any way you cut it, this is a major improvement from the last time PPP polled Ohio in March which indicated McCain winning Ohio by 8 points.]

"Summer's here and the time is right..."

In the comments on another post, EricM wanted to discuss his pick for Obama's VP. So instead of discussing it there, I've posted a poll here.

Note that you can pick more than one name if you like. I did this so I could create a "short list" and poll again later. You can also "write in" a name not shown here.

So make your choice(s) and tell me why you like that pick.

P.S. I randomized the choices...

I have no desire to predict what will happen in Indiana and North Carolina today. Pollsters (and political minds greater than my own) have ventured their opinions and predictions. Kos, who at least admits that he pulls his predictions out of his you-know-what, has consolidated a bunch of predictions in this diary. It's worth a read. Bottom line: CW says each candidate gets a win and the delegates are split more or less 50-50.

MSNBC's Chuck Todd, whose numbers-crunching skills someone likened to Data the android on Star Trek, rightfully points out that tonight's returns will be the last ones where the voters decide how the majority of delegates left on the table will be divvied up. After this, says Todd, most of the delegates will be apportioned via backroom deals (e.g., super-delegates) and/or trench warfare (e.g., fights over how to seat Florida/Michigan).

Meanwhile, on the Republican side, Newt Gingrich predicts disaster for Congressional Republicans unless they abandon hopes of sinking the Democratic Congressional candidates by tying Obama or Clinton around their necks. His suggestion? Why nothing short of a new bullet-point list of initiatives -- a contract, if you will, with the American people. What a concept!

This document (which needs a catchy title -- I propose "A Dog's Breakfast for America") would include the following initiatives:

1. Repeal the gas tax for the summer
2. Redirect the oil being put into the national petroleum reserve onto the open market.
3. Introduce a "more energy at lower cost with less environmental damage and greater national security" bill
4. Establish an earmark moratorium for one year
5. Overhaul the census and cut its budget radically
6. Implement a space-based, GPS-style air traffic control system
7. Declare English the official language of government
8. Protect the workers' right to a secret ballot
9. Remind Americans that judges matter

My favorite? GPS-style air traffic control system: now there's a proposal that will capture a lot of votes -- from people who want their own personal jet-pack. The whole thing reminds me of the time Bush announced in his SOTU that we were going to ... Mars!

And of course, I love that part about reminding the American people that "judges matter," although I suspect that won't include FISA Court judges.

And WTF is up with the Census Bureau proposal? Turns out, it's part of this meme that says we should just turn the whole Federal bureaucracy over to ... Fedex! I heard McCain say the same thing about giving the contract to Fedex to track population migration after the next major hurricane or forest fire. Sounds good, but you just KNOW that Fedex will probably outsource it or -- worse yet -- double the price and cut their expenses to the point where the only happy people would be Fedex shareholders.

No thanks -- at least when the government does it, you can throw their asses out of office if they screw it up by voting against them. On the other hand, Fedex is simply not accountable. For example, you can't vote against Fedex unless you own shares in the company. And then if you have 100 shares you're simply not as powerful as the guy who owns 10,000 shares.

That's what I call Republican Values: One Dollar, One Vote.

(Cross posted at Daily Kos, with poll)

"Those who live by the crystal ball eat broken glass."

---- Michael Swanson, Wells Fargo Bank economist, 2004.

I'm not much of one to make predictions, but I do like looking at every possible angle. So with that in mind, I thought I'd collect a couple of the better pieces of electoral analysis for you today. They're pretty brief, but they take a look at the field the same way I might.

For the Democrats:

You don't need me to tell you that Iowa is close. It could be taken by any of the top tier Dems. Blitz boy, in an excellent diary that I'm summarizing here, has the Democratic race looking like this:

• IF Edwards wins Iowa AND IF Clinton comes in second, Obama is wounded. Clinton probably takes NH, MI and NV. Super Tuesday spells the end of the race: Clinton wins.
• IF Edwards wins Iowa, AND IF Hillary comes in third, then NH is a three-way race.

  Here's where it gets complicated:

  • IF Hillary then wins in NH, THEN she's the nominee.
  • However, IF Edwards is the NH winner AND IF Clinton is second, THEN Obama is toast. Clinton probably wins NV, SC and the nomination.
  • Lastly, IF Obama wins in NH AND IF Clinton is second, THEN she will still win MI and recover in NV. She's looking good on Super Tuesday.
  • Regardless, IF Clinton is third in NH, THEN she's toast and the race is between Edwards and Obama. Advantage: Obama.
• IF Obama wins Iowa AND NH, THEN he wins the nomination.


• IF Clinton wins Iowa, THEN it's over. She wins the nomination.

On the Republican side, Pat Buchanan has it this way:

• First off, IF Romney wins Iowa, THEN he'll win NH and MI and will probably be the nominee.
• However, IF Huckabee wins Iowa AND IF McCain's recent progress in NH is for real and he wins there, THEN Romney is on life-support. At that point, McCain has a real chance at the nomination by becoming the anti-Huckabee, especially if Thompson drops out and endorses him before SC. However, IF Huckabee wins SC, THEN Huckabee has the inside track.
• In fact, IF Huck wins Iowa AND IF Romney wins NH, THEN its curtains for everyone else and it will be a two man sprint to the finish: Mitt vs. Huck.

Summary observations on the rest of the field:

• Giuliani is close to toast. He'll lose Iowa and NH, then MI and SC. Even now, his firewall in Florida is crumbling. By Super Tuesday, IF he is 0-5, THEN it's over for him.
• Same for Thompson. He might have a good showing in Iowa (IF Romney and Huckabee rip each other apart), but he probably won't win there. He will also not win NH (where he is polling behind Ron Paul). Nor will he win in MI. After all that, he may not even make it to SC (where he is polling #3 behind Romney and Huckabee), let alone win it. In fact, IF he flops in Iowa, THEN he'll drop out and endorse McCain (see above).

So, two weeks out from Iowa, here are the odds, according to Pat Buchanan:

• Giuliani: 20-1
• Thompson: 20-1
• McCain: 6-1
• Romney: 3-2
• Huckabee: ?? Buchanan isn't taking bets on Huck, although he does see him likely finishing in the top two.

What do you think?

by Mark Adams

You have got to see these numbers!

Verfiy the Numbers (pdf)

Read The Story

General Election Polling Review

CNN / Opinion Research - National: December 11, 2007

Vs. Mitt Romney

Clinton - 54%
Romney - 43%

Obama - 54%
Romney - 41%

Edwards - 59%
Romney - 37%

Clinton leads by 11%, Obama leads by 13%, Edwards leads by 22%

Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Clinton - 51%
Giuliani - 45%

Obama - 52%
Giuliani - 45%

Edwards - 53%
Giuliani - 44%

Clinton leads by 6%, ! Obama le ads by 7%, Edwards leads by 9%

Vs. Mike Huckabee

Clinton - 54%
Huckabee - 44%

Obama - 55%
Huckabee - 40%

Edwards - 60%
Huckabee - 35%

Clinton leads by 10%, Obama leads by 15%, Edwards leads by 25%

Vs. John McCain

Clinton - 48% !
McCain - 50%

Obama - 48%
McCain - 48%

Edwards - 52%
McCain - 44%

Clinton trails by 2%, Obama is tied, Edwards leads by 8%

Averages

Clinton leads the Republicans by 6.25%
Obama leads the Republicans by 8.75%
Edwards leads the Republicans by 16.00%

Over the past month, and despite some ups and downs, the prediction market Intrade.com is showing the following:

• Clinton, up (and still the overall market leader)
  
• Edwards, down (a nickel stock)
  
• Obama, down
  
• Giuliani, up (still the Republican market leader)
  
• Romney, up
  
• Thompson, down (crashing into nickel stock territory)
  
• McCain, up (another nickel stock)

If you're wondering how Clinton's "debate stumble" and/or the others holding her feet to the fire is affecting her numbers, well, the results are mixed. While many of the polls show a decline in her support, a nearly-equal number of polls show nothing of the sort. Regardless, her lead is still in the double digits.

Chris Bowers has a round up and offers an excellent analysis as well:

I imagine most people reading this blog are either happy that Clinton is somewhat down, or at least not disappointed. However, they should be careful what they wish for.

In this case, what appears to be a Clinton drop in the polls was largely fueled by the same media machine that, most of the time, happily reinforces Republican narratives as conventional wisdom. The lesson here, I think, is to remember that the corporate, established media is still very good at creating national convention wisdom as they see fit.

While in this case that conventional wisdom might make many people in the netroots happy, most of the time it won't. It is still a powerful institution that Republicans and conservatives are better able to control than Democrats and progressives, and we shouldn't forget that.

After the fact re-branding of debates remains of the biggest reasons George Bush is President instead of Al Gore, for example. Their after the fact coverage of Howard Dean's concession speech in Iowa, or General Petraeus's rosy portrayal of Iraq are even more gratuitous examples.

Most of the time, it feels as though the conventional wisdom machine works against us, and even in instances where we might enjoy the conventional wisdom that is being created (and I admit that I enjoy it simply because a blowout campaign is a boring campaign), we shouldn't forget that.

Speaking of William Kristol and Hillary Clinton...Kristol challenges Giuliani's "electability" argument:

The difference in Rudy's relative performance and Thompson's [versus Hillary in the polls] really isn't that great. And it's not as if Rudy is defeating Hillary while everyone else is losing. They're all losing, in accord with the current generic gap between the parties. Indeed, six months ago Rudy was running 4 points ahead of Clinton (in the Real Clear Politics average), whereas he's now 6 points behind. So the notion that Rudy would significantly outperform other Republicans in the general election, or that Rudy alone can magically save the GOP from defeat, or that longer exposure to him helps with swing voters - all of this is far from clear.

OK, so Kristol buries the lede: Giuliani has lost 10 points to Clinton in the last six months. And all the others are doing even worse than Giuliani.

And this doesn't even begin to address the possibility that Christian evangelicals will peel off and vote for a third-party candidate -- or even just stay home -- if Giuliani gets the nod.

And, frankly, we haven't even gotten to the point where people -- independents -- have begun to dig into Giuliani's crackpot past, e.g., the miles and miles of audio tape from his NYC radio show. Wait til that starts to sink in.

P.S. Speaking of Christian evangelicals. Why aren't they supporting Mike Huckabee? He's polling below the margin of error and his fundraising totals are abominable. Shouldn't he be their guy? He's got it all -- and he's loads more personable than Sam Brownback. IJS.

Gosh, it's only 6:23 am and I already have a quote for the day:

"It's always darkest right before you get clobbered over the head with a pipe wrench. Then it actually does get darker," said a GOP pollster who insisted on anonymity in order to speak candidly.

UPDATE: Dang, Ramone! It's 8:23 pm and I found a better quote, from Al Gore, no less:

I fear that I’m losing my objectivity where President Bush and Cheney are concerned. Not much surprises me anymore. I have a lot of friends who share the following problem with me: Our sense of outrage is so saturated that when a new outrage occurs, we have to download some existing outrage into an external hard drive in order to make room for a new outrage.

Now that's funny.

(HT to senate2008guru)

Yep: 18% approve of the job Congress is doing. That's as low as it's been for a generation -- and much lower than the approval ratings for the president. Does this mean that the people are somehow siding with the president? Or, more to the point, does it mean that the Republicans will have an advantage in the next election because people think the Democrats are jerks? The answer, below.

Glenn Greenwald, as usual, gets to the heart of it:

Congress is so unpopular, particularly among Democrats, because of their ongoing capitulations to the Bush administration, their failure to place any limits on his Iraq policy, and their general inability/refusal to serve as a meaningful check on the administration. Democrats and independents overwhelmingly dislike the President. Thus, the weaker Congress is in defying the President, the more unpopular Congress becomes.

Contrary to the general impression created by the media when discussing this polling data, Congress' extremely low standing does not undermine or dilute the intense unpopularity of Bush and his party among Americans. To the contrary, it bolsters it and arises from it.

This is both good news and bad news for the Democrats. The good news is that the country wants more from them. The bad news is that they're afraid to provide it.

So as long as the likes of Senator Leahy talk tough but fail to follow through, the Dems will continue to disappoint and anger the electorate.

P.S. As long as we're on the subject of polls, here's a figure for you: 64% of Republicans approve of the job Bush is doing. Remember that the next time you watch any part of a Republican debate. All of those guys are ready and willing to bring us Bush's Third Term.