Posted on 05/18/2008 1:03:31 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
Recent polls are showing trouble for Obama. His numbers are tanking at an unprecedented rate. As of late, a poll from ccAdvertising shows that Obama's numbers are way worse than any one of us thought. This company is mostly used by the GOP, but they have shown to be more accurate than other polls in the past. Still, I don't use these numbers in my map, but there's a point to be made after you see these numbers.
From May 1, 2008 through May 5, 2008, ccAdvertising completed a survey to a combined total of 90,000 homes in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania (10,000 homes from each state) extracted from the ccAdvertising database.
Results for McCain vs. Hillary and McCain vs. Obama. Scores are how much Hillary or Obama are ahead of McCain. +is a win for Hillary or Obama. -is a loss.
Hillary Obama Difference (for Obama from Hillary) California +15.82% +12.88% -2.94 Colorado -5.44 -1.98 +3.46 Florida -11.46 -25.52 -14.06 Illinois -2.29 +9.23 +11.52 Missouri +3.97 -10.61 -14.58 New Hampshire -5.9 -6.67 -0.77 New York +7.88 +1.31 -6.57 Ohio +1.02 -18.18 -19.2 Pennsylvania +7.51 -5.95 -13.46
From what I'm hearing on the ground and from Nebraska and Colorado is that there is ZERO chance of Obama carrying these. For some numbers, look at the Feb caucus where Obama took it 68% to 32%. In the May 13th non-binding primary, Obama won 49% to 46%. Either his numbers are tanking horribly or caucuses aren't a valid way to gauge voter preference. Some may argue that non-binding primaries don't mean anything. That same argument may be used for polls. But these are people that came out even though they knew it did not count. That leads one to believe that these people have firm commitments for their candidates. When people do things even when they don't have to, that shows true intentions. And you can bet they will vote in November.
So what is going on with Obama's numbers? No doubt they are tanking. I can no longer put CO, NM or FL in Obama's column. It's simply not realistic. And I never did put NE in Obama's column because I knew that was not realistic. If I put it in his column, I'd have to give Hillary the same chance as Obama. This goes for VA, NC & SC as well where they are polling identical in one case and nearly identical in others. I have doubts with Obama's capability to carry OH & PA, but we'll leave them alone for now.
Let's take a look at IA and WI.
On April 27 & 28, Obama was polling with these numbers against McCain.
IA: Obama vs. McCain: 49% vs. 41% (Obama +8%) (Research 2000) WI: Obama vs. McCain: 47% vs. 43% (Obama +4%) (U of WI)
On May 7th for WI and May 15th for IA.
IA: Obama vs. McCain: 44% vs. 42% (Obama +2%) (Rasmussen) WI: Obama vs. McCain: 43% vs. 47% (McCain +4%) (Rasmussen)
Obama went down 6% in IA and went down 8% in WI.
Yes, some of this can be due to different methodologies. But note that Rasmussen regularly polls Obama higher than reality. If you'll also note that there have been no recent polls in FL for a very long time. This is no coincidence. There are indications that neither Democrat has a really good chance of carrying that state because of the delegate removal fiasco. Hillary has a long shot. But Obama has no shot at all.
Let's see what Obama's map looks like today.
(more at source)
WI often “flirts around” and looks like it could go GOP for President but usually stays loyally to the plantation masters election after election. And to think how WI people hated slavery!
I’m having a hard time following..
Caucuses aren’t a valid way to gauge voter preference.
I still want Obama to get the nomination first - THEN we can talk about his demise.
According to Rove, caucuses are not good predictors of election results. Not that many people show up for caucuses, so those that elect nominees may well represent a minority of the party’s voters. This, he believes, gives Mohammed Barak delegates from states where the majority of Dem voters may not back him.
Lots of vote fraud in Milwaukee. Democrats have blocked requring a photo ID. Gore won WI by only 4,000 votes in 2000 and Kerry by 11,000 in 2004.
Ping FWIW
ya, let Obama get the nomination, then we can see him fall in a McGovern style landslide. And if we’re lucky, maybe Republicans will gain seats in Congress; he might hurt the down ballot races too.
No...! - not yet. He can tank in September.
Well, McCain does like to "reach across the aisle".
I do believe that pa and nj are voting blue, just like they have for 2 decades now.
Well, I am another one who worries about that, and I sincerely hope that we are wrong about an Obama/Clinton ticket.
A short video every American should view.
http://www.frugalsites.net/911/attack/
The numbers are in columns at the actual site and make more sense there. I don’t really see much evidence of Obama’s numbers tanking, but I do agree with the author’s view that Obama faces a tough electoral vote map.
There appears to be a direct correlation between KNOWLEDGE about Mr.& Mrs. Obama’s history and positions and his loss of support from NON-Black voters.....
There simply aren’t enough racist blacks, loony Leftists, white guilt self loathing assholes and Islamists in America to elect an Obama to the Presidency......
EXCEPT - an Obama running against McCain....
McCain is perhaps the ONLY candidate who could lose to Obama...
We’ll soon learn....
The rnc nor mccain have been demonstrably attempting to define bho as the flawed candidate he is. The conundrum the dems have is how to pull the tablecloth from that table without upsetting the place settings. Deep down, they know bho can not win the general....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.