latest Quinnipiac/Washpost battleground polls

http://thepage.time.com/ ^

[ExtremeUnction]

He has to hold OH., FL., VA., and win NV., and CO.

He will. The economy issues will stabilize and he will win.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Welcome to FR.

[bushsupporter30]

The polls in June from the same outfit

CO: Obama 49 McCain 44
MI: Obama 48 McCain 42
MN: Obama 54 McCain 37
WI: Obama 52 McCain 39

So McCain has made significant increases in all of the states based on this last poll.
Also look at the internals that state the party ID.
As DJ Drummond posted in Wizbangblog.com, based on the last 10 elections are so on Gallup, the electorate is 33% Dem, 33% Rep and 33% Ind approx. These polls have a Democrat sample of over 5%. So keep that in mind.
I am amazed at WI. No wonder Palin and McCain have been there lately.

[Mr Rogers]

McCain has no one to fault but himself. There is a clear case that Democrats and a few RINOs created the mess, but he refuses to attack them.

Instead, he attacks ‘greed’ and ‘profit’ - ANYTHING to avoid mentioning his fellow Senators. If he would make the case, he could be leading in all these polls.

[bushsupporter30]

Take a look at the internals that Quinn is using.
http://www.beyondthepolls.net/2008/07/quinnipiac-polls-look-at-party-id.html
There is a 3-8 point differential against the Republicans in all of the polls based on actual electorate.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Your points, as the are, one by one:

Palin’s favorables are in the stratosphere. She’s the single biggest thing to hit the GOP since Ronald Reagan.

You say the dems slime campaign “worked”, past tense. That presumes a willingness to surrender to it, this poster finds distasteful. You go ahead and quit then.

Getting Palin out there more IS EXACTLY the answer. McCain’s “message” is stammering the phrase “my friends” over and over.

Talk to women about Palin.

Try it ... you’ll be amazed. Try to find one who’s as far left as you can imagine. One criteria: avoid asking a lesbian, if you can figure out that one data point.

Women like what Palin stands for. They’re frankly a bit shell-shocked, but could rally behind her in a wave of monumental proportion.

They will NOT rally behind John McCain and another 100 or so reps of the phrase “my friends”.

[StarFan]

He tried to get major reform legislation through in 2005 - 2006; the Democrats blocked the legislation, but few know it.

Agree which leaves me scratching my head. I read his floor speech so why aren't we seeing a McCain ad summarizing the salient facts? Instead we see the gaul of Dodd and Schumer pointing accusative fingers at the GOP very effectively if we're to believe the polls.

[kabar]

That's an easy one to answer. America has moved increasingly left the last few years.

Demography is destiny. Half of the children under 5 today are minorities. By 2023 half of the children under 18 will be minorities and by 2042 half of the country will be minorities, i.e., non-Hipanic whites will be 50% of the population down from the current 67% and the 89% they were in 1970. Dems win the majority of votes from minorities.

87% of the 1.2 million LEGAL immigrants who enter this country each year are minorities and almost all of the 500,000 to 1 million who enter illegally each year are minorities. Today, 1 in 8 residents of this country is foreign-born, the highest it has been in 85 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade or so it will be one in 7, the highest in our history and by 2050 it will be one in 5. Generally, immigrants vote Democrat, especially those who come from Latin America and have a different view of the role of government than conservatives.

Like the proverbial frog being slowly boiled alive and fails to recognize it before it is too late, the political landscape of this country is being [not so] slowly changed to make the Dems the permanent majority party. And witless Reps like McCain who support amnesty are just hastening the process.

Is America moving Left. Of course it is, but the cause is demographic not attitudinal.

[bushsupporter30]

60,000 in Florida.
15,000+ in Media PA.
11000+ (4k more than the Messiah last week) in Green Bay WI all for the Sarahcuda.
But yeah, she has lost her appeal blah blah....

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

If Kerry was doing so poorly in 2004, why was he beating Bush in states like Ohio and Florida? Those states are swinging GOP again, but earlier in the campaign.

Yes W enjoyed a huge bump in the polls after the convention, but that lead quickly evaporated and Kerry took a slight lead in late September. Sound familiar?

[kabar]

The current polls are becoming more relevant this cycle. Early voting may actually result in more than a third of the votes being cast before election day. Early voting starts this week in VA. In 2004, early voting accounted for 53% of ballots cast in Nevada, 47% in Colorado, 51% in New Mexico and 36% in Florida.

[HamiltonJay]

Well I haven’t seen the internals, but there is no way Fauxbama is up 5 in WI or 4 in MI, at least not among the folks who actually likely to show up and vote.

[ncalburt]

I am fed up with the same tired scam and some as these posters that fall for it again and again. The Wash Compost
is a JOKE . These Dem party operatives at this Obama rag were openly campaigning for Webb in 2006 and openly trashing Allen every day on the front page for three months .
Please note some of worst Webb propagandists at the Compost moved over the latest Obama front group called “The Politico “.

[Fishrrman]

A little birdie tells me we’re going to lose in Colorado this time.

However a victory may be stitched together for Mr. McCain, the victory strategy had better come up with something withOUT Colorado involved....

Just my thoughts. And I hope I’m proven wrong...

- John

[Republic Rocker]

I still feel deep down the pollsters backed by these media types are creating a feeling their pony is winning....

[Fishrrman]

“America hasn’t moved left.
The GOP went to sleep.”

I respectfully disagree.

States like Colorado, Virginia, and North Carolina _are_ “turning” from red to purple — and eventually may turn to “full blue”.

This IS NOT because conservatives in these states have become any less conservative. Not at all.

It IS because conservative demographics in those states are not growing as rapidly as those of the ‘rats.

Consider the twenty million (or more?) illegals in the United States, most of them Hispanics and a large part of that Mexicans. No, they cannot vote today. But every - EVERY - baby born to an illegal woman is automatically an American citizen, who will SOMEday have the right to vote. Consider also that historically, the children of illegal Hispanics actually end up _worse off_ than their parents (probably due to the social insularity and isolation of Hispanics, egged on by “multicultural” liberalism). Consider that Hispanic women, as a group, tend towards the fecund. And consider how this HUGE cohort of “future voters” will someday vote in the political arena.

If all these are to be taken as givens, it does not look good for conservatives in the future, at least in those “high-growth” states of today that have high proportions of non-Euros. New Mexico is already a “white minority” state, with a high proportion of Hispanics, and this is EXACTLY why it has gone to the ‘rats and will probably STAY with them in the coming years.

It is not the “GOP” that “went to sleep”. More succinctly, it is the Euro-Americans who have done so. And after we’ve engaged in our Rip Van Winkle snooze for the last two generations, we’ve awakened to find that our home has been invaded in our neglect to protect it - and that our cultures, values, mores - and our very nation - is in danger of falling apart around us.

- John

[HamiltonJay]

Will you stop with the hand ringing:

" Repubs have a history of NOT fighting back in a way that causes people to listen"

Are you kidding me?? Please, go look historically at the election history for the president of the united states since Abraham Lincoln (the first republican). With the exception of LBJ, who rode the assassination of Kennedy to a huge victory, and FDR during the war, no democrat has won the White House by any sizeable margin in a 2 way race, in fact few others have, and when they have its been by the narrowest of margins. In fact in my lifetime only 1 democrat has won the white house in a 2 way race and it was by the slimmest of margins, and frankly if Ford had not gaffed in the debate he would have won.

I ask you to THINK people, THINK. For Fauxbama to win, he must hold every state Kerry won AND take 19 more EC votes. Now Kerry had the blue dog democrats, Fauxbama doesn't. There is no way Fauxbama is going to win the election without carrying blue color/moderate dems by a good margin. Its IMPOSSIBLE for any democrat to win without that group.

CO is all of 9 EC, even if it stays Dem until election day, and IA is 7. Assume the worst case and he gets both of these states and HOLDS all the Kerry states, he's still 3 EC votes shy of winning. Now, I don't believe for a minute Fauxbama can do that. I doubt he'll get both IA and CO at the end of the day, and I know damned well he will not hold every Kerry state.

NH is very likely to flip (-5 from the Fauxbama camp), and the true battleground states are WI, MI, PA and MN. Fauxbama cannot lose ANY of these states and win the white house. The idea that VA, FL or OH are swing states is LAUGHABLE, these states are NOT going to go to D.

PA is 21 EC votes, and in 2004 Kerry won the state by about 140,000 votes, and that was with the blue dogs and the state machine going all out for him. That's not happening for fauxbama, he's not even getting solid support in PHILLY/NE PA Region... And the Governor, is in the tank for Hillary, he is not going to mobilize the state machine beyond token for Fauxbama.

Look at the 2004 breakdown in PA:

Now, look at the internals of ANY poll in this state, and compare the support numbers for Fauxbama by demographic to the numbers Kerry got in 2004, and you'll find Fauxbama's numbers are down, and down significantly ACROSS THE BOARD from Kerry's, there is no way, he's going to win the election. PA is lost to Fauxbama and has been since the day he was chosen the nominee, and frankly of WI and MI I doubt Fauxbama will not lose at least 1 if not both of those states. MN while its certainly IN PLAY which has got to scare the crap out of the dems, I am less certain will move, as the state machine probably will make sure it stays D, but you never know. The point being the real battle is a defensive one for the dems, not an offensive one.. (I'd also keep an eye on WA, I think you are going to see the pundents and MSM wake up to the fact this one is going to be a sleeper for the R's in the next few weeks)

Frankly the polls are losing credibility IMHO with some of the crap they've been publishing lately, you can't show your internals with Fauxbama losing support in every demographic, yet he's surged 5 points? That doesn't pass the smell test.

To give you some more perspective, here are the results from the 2004 NATIONAL election by demographic:

Now go compare internals of any national poll to these numbers, I challenge you. Fauxbama is NOT getting 90%ish among his own party, he's 4-6 points behind in party support from McCain, yes, McCain's not at 93% like Bush was, but he's polling mid to upper 80s party support, while Fauxbama's in the low 80s, females Fauxbama is not getting 51% support, and most importantly FAUXBAMA is NOWHERE near 50% support by "independents".

McCains been winning the moderate and independent vote from the get go, in fact the real threat to McCain was him not being able to unify the base behind him. The Palin choice has pretty much removed this issue. So with the base behind him and him winning the swing vote by a wide margin, there is no statistical way Fauxbama can win the election, I don't care what daily tracking polls are telling you.

I offer an open invitation to anyone, FR, or DU lurker or anyone to show me one remotely reliable poll that where you look at the internals and it shows Fauxbama having any shot of winning.

[stefan10]

That´s not true. Bush had a lead after the convention until the end

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/chart3way.html

The problems are not the polls he has to get back ti the issues. At the moment Obama dominates the debate. That has to change

[thingumbob]

Yes, I know......however, you always lose a little after your convention. Have you seen the "Villages" crowd in Florida?

Watch the crowd.....if O'bomber has only close ups...it's likely crowds are thin, especially in the more rural areas. Look to see how many people are around the candidates.......if you can see some space, likely crowds are thin if not, well then the crowds are very large.

Also it's helpful to note where these crowds are located. Dimrat voters can get to the event in a big city easier because of public transportation......but if we're in the countryside it takes more effort to get there.....translation - More excited voter base.

[LS]

Good point: Drudge has a piece, only 6,000 showed up in WI where Obama is feeling the heat. Palin drew ten times that many in FL.