Earth calling Obamites: "GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’"

From Politico:


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10585.html

Also, a coupla maps for you:

.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Duh

when Karl Rove was DEAD frickin' wrong, and in the last 3 special elections where Republicans were handed their asses. I sincerely HOPE they do continue to underestimate Obama, that will make his victory all the more sweeter. :)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Unless you are a mole.
Are you a GOP mole?

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

dumb.

HIDE! RUN AWAY!

around with.

I know this map is funky.
Aint no way MI is going GOP this year.

Obama is currently leading McCain in Michigan by a significant margin.

Are these Karl's maps? lol.

Rasmussen currently has both Democrats losing to McCain.

That is inaccurate.

who people vote for in Dem primaries, which probably has an effect even with these national polls too.

BTW - couldn't help noticing this poll outcome too; Obama 52%, Clinton 44% in terms of support among
Democrats these days (not to even mention delegates, popular vote and such).

can't argue with that bulletproof shit. we're fuckin doomed!

her negatives rival Bush and Cheney

now that is one of the better ones, sounds so Mike Malloyish (and I happen to love Malloy), you on the other hand, how about we start panicking AFTER we have our nominee running unopposed from his own party :puke:

Check out his bizarre rantings on Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/user/PerryLogan

it's like a Mike Malloy doppelganger came over from the crazy dimension!!

want you obambi folk to come back in here the day after and blame it on HRC.....Hell, for months we have told you this guy is an empty suit with only a speech.....WE told you so.....If obama wins, well hell he wins.......
'
but what is the goal of this democratic party? To make a point they can name an african american as its nominee, or do they want to win the damn election? If 40% of the folks needed to win an election is not going to vote for the guy, then how can obambi find oh say 40 to 45 million African Americans placed in states to give him a win?

Shalom
Ben David

"can obambi find oh say 40 to 45 million African Americans placed in states to give him a win?" News flash, I live in one of those working class white states, Obama beat hillary and will beat McCain (and my state actually counts in the GE, not like Kentucky or the patently red states). Looks like he doesn't need "black-loaded" (disgusting term, you should be so proud) states to win...

After hilly's latest gobsmackingly stupid gaffe, the polls will shift, and once she has conceded, it will be a campaign focused on mccain, he will lose, and when Obama's the president, i don't want to see you around making your disgusting racist remarks!

HAHAHAHAHhahahahHAAHHAHAhahaahhah That's so funny! You made a funny! And such a penetrating analysis, it's like you're Will Rodgers!

Oh wait, no it isn't. It's another stupid insult. Never mind.

Shalom yourself jackass.

;)

Normally I'd let the insults roll of and not post a reply to something so manifestly stupid. It's just the "Obambi" thing that gets right on my last nerve.

So damn juvenile.

They cant decide if Obama is running an evil, take no prisoners, hit below the belt, paint Hillary as a racist campaign OR a wimpy, I'm too good to fight campaign.

Cant be both can it?

"African American" or "AA" or "black" in it here? I don't think so.

You are obsessed with the race thing. Seek help.

He won't have a Democratic candidate to vote for who panders effectively to AIPAC. Whatever shall you do?

Clinton and her supporters. If that happens, I hope to heaven these vitrolic DGP idiots will find another place to vent their hatred.

Her negatives are too high. She is nothing but a Bush enabling war monger. Educated liberals hate her and there aren't enough uneducated whites who aren't dittoheads to make up for all the independents and young voters who are voting for Obama the candidate, not the democratic party (DLC/Clinton).

This OP will be one of the major talking points for
Bush/McCain Donors!

GET IT? ITS ABOUT SENDING THEM MONEY!
They can't even sell tickets to it.


Kool-aid will be available in the Lobby.

Gimme a break.

Not to mention the fact that some of them are incredibly dated. The West Virginia poll, for example, is all the way back from February.

Wait until Obama's 15 point bounce from the convention and the real campaigning begins. This map will look a hell of a lot different.

which proves all these early pseudo-2 way, but actually 3-way, polls are crap utterly.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May24.html

Plus you'll notice how Obama came from behind and destroyed the presumptive nominee? What exactly do you think he'll be able to do when he's the front runner? Run McCain into the ground, that's what.

Get out of the way Hillary and watch the Obama train barrel through.

David

Most of them hover around 45 Obama 45 McCain and 10 percent undecided. When you consider the fact that Obama's biggest problem is the people who don't know anything about him except Reverand Wright and the the "secret Muslim" crap, he really has nowhere to go but up. Everywhere Obama has campaigned he has improved in the primary. The same will hold true for the general election.

As for McCain... he's been getting a free ride from the Obama/Hillary battle. Lets see how he fairs after the DNC starts blasting him on Keating Five. Something tells me Mr. Straight Talk Express is going to be in over his head pretty soon.

:rofl:

:shrug:

I guess I need this thing next time

:sarcasm:

But yeah, when MYDD started talkin' Obama's electoral strength, I was surprised!

it is not relevant. This is not 2004. The Democrat wins. McCain is a honored veteran coming in to serve a fractured party at the end of its era of dominance. Pretty much like George McGovern, he does not stand a chance. Think Custer and the Indians.

He is running as lil' Bush - - and simply does not stand a chance. It is a shame for Hillary, such easy pickings and she is going to miss out.

since he is our nominee, Democrats in those states in particular better work their collective ass off. Fortunately, McCain will have to spend time and money to defend other states that he won't be able to spend in those.

aren't they? Links? Dates? Polls?

You need some supporting data or links for those maps.

But I guess you fail to see that, right?

It's May, so polls this far out don't mean much. But if we're going to look at these polls, let's take a look at it beyond just Clinton doing better in the EC than Obama.

If Clinton is the nominee, 131 electoral votes automatically become STRONG GOP. Now compare that to Obama, where only 102 electoral votes are STRONG GOP. That's a difference 29 electoral votes.

Now compare WEAK GOP for both Clinton and Obama and you see a dramatic difference. There are 104 WEAK GOP EC votes up for grabs with Obama and only 45 for Clinton. That's a difference of 59. Now go with EXACTLY TIED and you see another big difference, with Clinton only tied for 17 EC votes and Obama tied with 24. Now the big one, BARELY DEM. Obama only has 12 electoral votes that are LEANING DEM, while Clinton has 33. That's a difference of 21 electoral votes. Clinton also has a huge number of WEAK DEM electoral votes at 107, while Obama only has 33 WEAK DEM votes. That's a difference of 74 electoral votes. Obama also has far more STRONG DEM electoral votes than Clinton, coming in with 197 to Clinton's 175, or a difference of 22 electoral votes.

So while Hillary has a bigger lead in the EC, her support is far softer than that of Obama, which should be a concern because it means it could dramatically shift at any moment.

The facts:

Obama runs better than Clinton in the west, as she only does better in two states in the west (Nevada and New Mexico, though Obama wins New Mexico). Obama also does better than her in Washington and Oregon, two states the past two elections that were in play for the Republicans.

Obama runs better than Clinton in typical Republican states, which means he has a far better shot at flipping those states than she does.

Clinton has support, but it's soft support and that's the exact type of foundation we had for Kerry heading into the 2004 election. He was winning the EC at this time 4 years ago, but it was often soft support and once the election began, those states went Republican.

Finally, even your map is outdated, as they've already updated their maps for today and Obama now leads McCain in the EC: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May24.html .

weakness in those states. And Florida is gone as well if Obama gets the nomination.

You got to hand it to the Dems this time around - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

they will see his greatness and the whole country will be blue.

is it?

Everyone knows poll statistics can be manipulated to bolster any narrative.

Your maps come from Electoral-vote.com which is a RW site, well-disguised this year but still with the same people running it that were there in 2004 when they didn't attempt to hide their true nature so well.

Here's a map I created using ALL polls - not cherry-picking or using just the most recent one which could be an outlier. Maximum of 10 polls per state, no polls older than February 2008. For states where there were no current polls, I used the historical record of how they've voted to predict blue/red this November. I took an average between the actual average of these polls and Pollster.com's average (I don't know their full methodology but I believe they give greater weight to the more recent polls - sometimes too much weight IMO - which is why I don't just go with their average).

In each of the last three times I've done this (check my previous journal posts) Obama has done better than Hillary against McCain and shown more promise. Hillary has always needed FL to actually beat McCain, and as we all know this is still a red-leaning state with Repugs in charge and not an easy proposition for a Democrat to win it in November.



http://journals.democraticunderground.com/FlyingSquirrel/22

:applause:

I have tried to argue that same premise, but the math makes it so much easier to get, Thank you!!!!!

The proprietor of http://www.electoral-vote.com is , a Democrat who supported Kerry in 2004. It's not a RW site by any means, and its predictions for 2004 and 2006 were fairly accurate -- see .

In 2004, the site presented different maps, including one using the latest poll for each state and another that averaged the recent polls. Currently it presents only the most recent poll, but that's because, as others in this thread have mentioned, polls this far out aren't very meaningful. It's really not worth doing the work to average them yet. Just today, the updating has flipped the result to an Obama lead over McCain. I can guarantee you that, for each candidate, there'll be some point between now and Labor Day when he's winning comfortably.

By the way, from the main page you can follow links to brief rundowns of and , which are quite informative.

OBAMA: 266 mCsAME 248 (NEW MAP MAY 24)

That is all you need to know about polls this far out.

but that's not the way it works.

It's obvious you don't understand so I'll explain.

We have to take the nomination away from the person who won and give it to the loser. Only the loser of the nomination can possibly win the general election. Not the winner. Winners are losers.

It all makes perfect sense if you can give up on rational thought.

<edoted fir spilling>

once i gave up rational thought, it just all makes sense! :eyes:

guess we'll just have to take our chances now. Maybe you should try to help us get a Democrat elected instead of all this defeatist crap.

Americans have seen this sideshow before, almost word for word, any number of times. Only the brain-damaged Right could still fall for it.

Americans are hurting from six-plus years of Republican-induced megacatastrophes. They're scared about the future. People are turning away in droves from the media that carries the Repub disinformation. The old ad hominem politics just won't work for the right anymore.


Sound familiar?

It's from your own friggin' website, doofus.

On your own website, you're constantly saying that all the Republicans do is lie, they can't be trusted, they spread disinformation... Yet, here you are on DU doing the same thing against a fellow Democrat. and you cite a right-wing rag and rely on GOP strategists to do so?

Incidentally, the stuff you quoted from my website is a thing called "attacking the Republicans." You might give it a whack some time. All it takes is the cojones to beat up the enemy--instead of others within your own party.

In explanation: I hadn't expected the Obama campaign to get so incredibly sleazy, and then blame it on Hillary. I hadn;t expected the strength pof Clintophobia among Democrats. I hadn't expected the Rev. Wright fiasco. I didn't expect the train wreck of Obama, a split party, Republicans licking their chops for the first time since 2006.

In short, you Obamites have made me wrong. Forgive me if I don't thank you.

I guess it's more important to play to "Reagan Democrats," because those latte-sippers and blacks will always fall in line, right?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

have your guys simply run out of new ones to be debunked so you just recycle the old ones over and over again?

But I don't make up bullshit in order to stress how the nominee is going to lose. Two months ago the polls showed Obama beating McCain--of course that was before Hillary started wedging the party apart...

I figure in a couple of weeks she'll be smart enough to stop that, and he'll use the inherent leadership skills that made him my choiuce of the two remaining candidates to bring everything back together for the fall. Ultimately, his leadership is stronger then the bullshit arguments meant to divide us.

I'm sure there are a lot of Washingtonians, like me and my wife, who wouldn't vote for Hillary. But, to think that McNuts has a chance here is beyond ridiculous.

Stop with your Obama bashing defeatist bullshit already.

But if indeed you are right about the out of gas reknucklians having a 'blowout' then I suggest you get to work pumping up Obama.

Or is that what you're desperately hoping for?

There seem to be a few refutations of the numbers in the OP upthread so maybe you could address those? Or I guess you could just crap on our likely candidate.

Up to you really.

"Barack Obama and the Unmaking of the Democratic Party"
Sean Wilentz, Huffington Post



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sean-wilentz/barack-obama-and-the-unma_b_103353.html

wouldn't crash and burn in the GE.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0508/Sean_Wilentz_Fox_provides_campaign_coverage.html

Wilentz] said the best coverage by far came from the Fox News Channel. Wilentz observed that Karl Rove, contributor to Fox News and architect of Bush's two successful presidential campaigns, among others, had sounded "very, very knowledgeable."

"What it showed is that the reporting of politics doesn't have to be bad," Wilentz said. "If you respect your audience without a partisan imperative, then you can have some sophisticated reporting."

Mulling over Barack Obama's "vulnerabilities"? I think "Team Clinton" spent a fair amount of time mulling them over and even trying to "exploit" them.

He was, in theory at least, so inexperienced, and so "vulnerable", that the race was going to be wrapped up February 5, remember?

The GOP has shown very little ability at foresight. However, I do want them distracted by these phantom "vulnerabilities" through at least the end of September, so let's keep the meme running. Keep wispering it in their ears: Obama is weak....Obama is weak.....Obama is weak

1. We don't have a nominee yet and Clinton is still doing well on name recognition alone.

2. Do you see how much barely or weak GOP there is in Obama's map? And how much weak Dem there is in Hills map? 160 barely/weak GOP with Obama to Hillary's 75 barely or weak in GOP states. And she has 107 weak dem to Obamas 33 and Obama has more strong dem.

Comon...

LOL

Obama is going to eat our lunch because we're running Old Balls McAncient?

ANd possibly, depending on Barr's showing and the way it plays out, NC as well.

It is going to take a lot of work, and a unified Party, but Democrats can win the White House, with Obama.

I don't think McCain is a strong as the gop thinks, and I think Obama is stronger than they give credit.

they used gut reaction for several states.

Texas is in a dead heat, and not barely GOP.

Michigan is based off the delegates not getting seated and pinning the blame on Obama instead of the state party.

NH is a state that the GOP has been working on for years, but they haven't been able to break. They always believe that "this is the year".

Polls will be meaningless this election cycle. Most people have no clue on how polling data works or is figured. Obama will turn polling upside down this election cycle.

Six months to go, and some of you Hillary supporters are already claiming defeat.

I'm starting to think that some Democrats will be happier if McCain wins than the Republican party will be. Nothing cult-like about that at all.

"The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. When “leaners” are included, the Democrats enjoy a 260-240 Electoral College lead. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November (results are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants). "

"Rasmussen Reports believes the race is over and that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. We will stop tracking the Democratic race in the near future to focus exclusively on the Obama-McCain match-up. "

link: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

---------------

-----------------------



Average of National Polls:

Obama 46.9/McCain 44.0 = Obama + 2.9

Clinton 46.1/McCain 44.9 = Clinton + 1.2

The general election polls averages the latest polls from Gallup Tracking, Rasmussen Tracking, Quinnipiac,ABC News/Wash Post, Democracy Corp, LA Times/Bloomberg, IDBB/TIPP, Battleground

links:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html

-------------------------------------------

Gallup: Key Clinton voters are shifting to Obama



----------------------------------------------

Rasmussen Markets data gives Sen. Obama a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November:


"The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. When “leaners” are included, the Democrats enjoy a 260-240 Electoral College lead. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November (results are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants). "

"Rasmussen Reports believes the race is over and that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. We will stop tracking the Democratic race in the near future to focus exclusively on the Obama-McCain match-up. "

link: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll


.

Possibly Missouri ... maybe even a southern state, depending on who he chooses for VP.

FiveThirtyEight.com has compiled the latest polls and showing either Obama or Clinton beating McSame in electoral votes. Obama has shown significant gains over the last several weeks. States like Virginia and North Carolina that are leaning McSame are showing much more competitive races than they did a month ago. Barring some unforeseen event, Obama will be our next president.

It's bad I agree, and McCain does have a decent chance thanks to the electoral college.

At the same time however, your first map does not look quite as bad when you analyze it closer.



1. Obama has only 2 states under the "barely Dem" category, New Mexico, and Iowa. While New Mexico has been switching around some overtime, Iowa has consistently been held by Obama by a few points.

2. McCain however has five states listed as 'barely GOP', three of which Obama has won from time to time as polls are conducted. Missouri is a bit of a question mark, seeing as Hillary has carried it sometime, so maybe Obama could gain enough Hillary supporters to win there later on once the primary is over and Hillary supporters get behind him, but maybe not. South Carolina is the only state McCain barely wins that doesn't seem likely to switch in a general election

3. Take a look at the 'weak dem' states, Obama has only three, the other 197 are solidly in his grip. Of those lean dems states, Delaware probably isn't going to be in play. Pennsylvania Obama has been up and down in, but he's up right now. Colorado I think Obama has usually but not quite always had a lead in, and showed signs of going blue in the past. It's likely to stay blue I would guess.

4. McCain however has 8 "leans GOP" states, worth a total of 104 electoral votes. Now lets be real, some of those states like Texas we're not winning, unless McCain really tanks all over the board. But there are some some states in this category that have usually been listed under "weak dem/GOP", or "toss up" throughout the last few months. North Carolina is one of them, Obama has consistently been either tied or only a few points behind there, and the fact that Hillary has it under "weak dem" worries GOP strategists that Obama will get a surge of support there when he gets the Hillary supporters behind him after the primary is over. Florida is a state that while Obama has consistently been losing it by over 5% (but not double digits) from what I see that he could possibly become more competitive in if the "surge" strategists talk about happens once the primary is over. Nevada is another state that Obama has been in the lead at some points in the year, but isn't right now, Hillary however has it under 'leans dem' which is encouraging. Also while it's a long shot, over a month ago Obama had a narrow lead in a few North Dakota polls, and it's 'barely GOP' right now. He could force McCain to spend some money and time there and away from other battle grounds. Also New Hampshire is a state that he could possibly win, though McCain has usually lead polls there, so I'm kind of doubtful right now, but they'll probably get lots of attention from both parties.

5. And then there's the two 'exactly tied' states. Virginia has consistently been a battleground where Obama and McCain have traded places overtime, though McCain's leads tend to be a bit bigger then Obama's. Indiana I know is listed as a tie, but I don't know about our chances of winning it. The fact that Obama is so close to taking the lead there though could force McCain to go on the defense in a state that's usually in the GOP's hands.

6. Lastly take a look at the 'strong GOP' and 'strong dem' numbers. Obama has 197 electoral votes that are looking VERY secured right now, to the point that it's probably not worth McCain's efforts campaigning there. McCain however has only 102 electoral votes that are VERY secure right now, but two of those states (AR and WV) are states that Clinton is winning right now. But to be fair, AR is Bill Clinton's old home state, so that's probably not going to become more competitive later on. West Virginia however has the potential to become competitive enough that McCain has to spend some time/money defending it.

These are the same guys who believe that Bush is the Second Coming of Christ, and still believe Iraq had nuclear weapons.

- you sound like children and it is impossible to take your opinions seriously.

Those maps show Hillary's strongest polling in each state and Obama's weakest polling in each state.

For example:

1. Hillary had 1 of about 6 NC polls where she was ahead... yet it count her as being ahead there.

2. Obama had 5 poll out of about 6 WI polls where he is ahead... yet it counts him as being behind there.

3. I haven't seen ANY polls that show Obama behind in ND. The only poll has him ahead.

4. Hillary has been behind in almost all OR polls and a few times in WA.

I can go on and on and on and on about this.

Of course the posting is crap.

Neither of those are going to happen. And Obama is going to win Colorado and Iowa as well. This site is a good resource for polls but does a poor job when it comes to the actual map. States that show McCain up by 1 whole point are counted in the red column, even if Obama had been leading in the previous 3 polls.

Nice resourse, but poorly executed.

(mccain that is), we will be BLUE again this year:)

.

and give the remainder to me....

That's why he let the comment go.

themselves to blame.

-P

nominee.

Let's get to work! I'm ready.

Thank you for your concern.

Obama's going to win with ALL of the electoral votes!

Don't you know he won the IDAHO primary!!11!!!!!!

:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

based on the turn-out during the primary, we may see more people turning out for this election than any other in decades, which would throw off all the numbers in these surveys.

big states' primaries so he can't win the big states in the GE...but I can"

That's sort of how it went, so let's see : Obama still carries CA, NY, PA and neither carry TX ( I thought hillary was so big there... ). NC goes the other way, too, only exception would be OH. One out of six, so much for consistency and logic.

Second, you might want to address the critique to your "map" upthread.

Third, you actually disqualified yourself with the "Obamites" in the title.

votes in FL, and election machine manipulation. If they win, it will be because of a corrupt election.

Buyers' Remorse: How Rank & File Democrats Rejected Obama Once He Was Declared The "Inevitable" Nominee


http://www.correntewire.com/buyers_remorse_how_rank_file_democrats_rejected_obama_once_he_was_declared_the_inevitable_nominee

I thought you meant a vein or artery during one of his temper tantrums. You know what I think of your maps at this stage of the game? Nothing. Zero. Nada. They have no meaning whatsoever because a) we don't even have a candidate yet and b) even if we did, there are months and months to go. In recent days, for example, McCain has dissed the fundie base and Bob Barr has decided to run as a Libertarian. Neither of those is a good thing for the Republicans. Your only point in this post is to try to make us enthusiastic for a Hillary candidacy and that notion is long, long, long since past.

There is an organized campaign of bald face lying going on
to present Sen. Obama as unelectable - even though the evidence supported by the vast majority of independent and even a number Republican leading opinion monitors - show exactly the oposite.

Here are just some:

Rasmussen Markets data gives Sen. Obama a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November

"New polling from Minnesota was released today showing Obama retaining a double digit lead over McCain. Polling released Friday showed Obama with the advantage in both Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. In both states, McCain had the edge a month ago (see summary of recent state-by-state results).

The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. When “leaners” are included, the Democrats enjoy a 260-240 Electoral College lead. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November (results are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants). "

"Rasmussen Reports believes the race is over and that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. We will stop tracking the Democratic race in the near future to focus exclusively on the Obama-McCain match-up. "

link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

-----------------------



Average of National Polls:

Obama 46.9/McCain 44.0 = Obama + 2.9

Clinton 46.1/McCain 44.9 = Clinton + 1.2

The general election polls averages the latest polls from Gallup Tracking, Rasmussen Tracking, Quinnipiac,ABC News/Wash Post, Democracy Corp, LA Times/Bloomberg, IDBB/TIPP, Battleground

links:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html

---------------------

-------------------------------------------

Gallup: Key Clinton voters are shifting to Obama



----------------------------------------------

Rasmussen Markets data gives Sen. Obama a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November:


"New polling from Minnesota was released today showing Obama retaining a double digit lead over McCain. Polling released Friday showed Obama with the advantage in both Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. In both states, McCain had the edge a month ago (see summary of recent state-by-state results).

The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. When “leaners” are included, the Democrats enjoy a 260-240 Electoral College lead. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 62.0% chance of winning the White House in November (results are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants). "

"Rasmussen Reports believes the race is over and that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. We will stop tracking the Democratic race in the near future to focus exclusively on the Obama-McCain match-up.

link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

According to ALL Poll averaging.

Ohio is wrong Obama polls better than McCain there.(20)
In the two Obama exactly tied states(Indiana and Virginia) Obama wins while Hillary doesn't.(26)
Obama wins WI while Hillary doesn't.(10)
Hillary horribly loses NM while Obama ties it.(5)
Obama takes MI while Hillary doesn't(17)
Clinton does NOT win NC(15)
Hillary doesn't win OR(7)




thats a 60 point shift towards Obama (302 vs 212)
and a 39 vote shift from Hillary. (276 vs 245)


Try using NON gop numbers or find them yourself. Thanks for spreading their message.

don't get it

easily the math could change many times between now and November, as it usually does.

As long as more than one Democratic nominee is in the headlines, voters' attention to the party as being represented by only one of them is subdivided, and so the polling for the general is impacted by perceptions of the primary, and so the math is skewhunky.

Obama, for example, leads McCain in Ohio currrently, although Clinton won the Ohio primary by c. 9%, and if John Edwards is factored in, Obama's Ohio % over McCain goes higher still.

Gore conceded Ohio to Bush in 2000 and still only lost it by 3.4%. Kerry/Edwards, if it did not win and get cheated in Ohio, came perilously close to carrying it.

After 8 long years of cynicism and despair under George W. Bush, I think Ohioans, and many elsewhere, are voting blue.