New WaPo/WSJ Poll Sure To Make Dems Nervous

As the Rocky Mountain News reports:

John McCain has edged ahead of Barack Obama in Colorado and now leads the Democratic presidential contender by 2 points, a poll released today says.

The Quinnipiac University polls shows McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, the top choice among 46 percent of likely Colorado voters. Obama is the top choice among 44 percent of likely voters.

A month ago, Obama held a 49-44 percent lead over McCain in the same poll.

And in the U.S. Senate race, Republican Bob Schaffer has closed the gap against Democrat Mark Udall. Udall was ahead a month ago by 10 percentage points, but the latest numbers show a dead heat – 44 to 44.

The poll, conducted for the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal, zeroes in on key battleground states – Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin – where the presidential contest is expected to be very close.

82 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. RedGreen says:

    There are some big shifts from the same poll released just a month ago.

    Here’s a link to the Quinnipiac release, which includes detailed analysis on the poll (and First Lady preferences!).

    By a 50 – 39 percent margin, Colorado voters say a candidate’s position on energy policy is more important than their position on the war in Iraq. Voter split 33 – 33 percent on which candidate has the best energy policy, with 34 percent undecided.

    Support is basically flipped among men and women; Obama wins Hispanics; and, the older you are, the more you like McCain:

    Obama leads 50 – 39 percent among Colorado women likely voters, while men back McCain 55 – 37 percent. White voters back McCain 51 – 41 percent as Hispanic voters go with Obama 57 – 29 percent. Obama leads 51 – 43 percent with voters 18 to 34 years old, while voters 35 to 54 are tied 46 – 46 percent. McCain leads 51 – 37 percent among voters over 55.

    Bush is slightly more popular in Colorado than in the other three battleground states polled:

    President Bush’s approval ratings are:

    31 – 62 percent in Colorado;

    25 – 69 percent in Michigan;

    28 – 66 percent in Minnesota;

    26 – 68 percent in Wisconsin.

    You can follow the link to see the First Lady ratings. Suffice it to say, they’re pretty much as you’d expect, splitting strongly between the sexes.

    • jericho says:

      Three and a half?

      I feel like this presidential race has been going on for years now. (What’s that? It has?)

    • dwyer says:

      If the Dems have an energy policy, they have failed to articulate it where it matters. Airlines are going into bankrupcy; gas is sky high and the price of oil is fueling inflation…Bush lifts the ban on off shore drilling, and the price of a barrel of oil starts to come down….even I can see the connection….

      The dems can not blather about the environment. Obama and Udall have to have a well thought out plan which makes sense…today…not next year…..being able to do long term planning is a conceit of the rich…

      people are hurting today…really hurting…and scared…the dems are doing a victory lap and it is insulting to people who are suddenly caught in a bad fix….

      • ThillyWabbit says:

        1. A lot of people can’t afford to fly at any price

        2. They need to raise their fares and stop counting on stupid nickel nd dime fees as the source of their profit margin

        3. The credit card companies are responding to the credit crunch by increasing holdbacks, thereby reducing the airlines’ liquid cash.

        The Democrats have articulated a plan to lower gas prices in the short term that might actually work (though it is doubtful that it will do much). The Republicans have articulated a plan that will work never. Not ever.

        Much to the dismay of people who are hurting, there are actually some problems that can’t be fixed overnight.

        • dwyer says:

          And, I don’t have a clue what the specifics of the democratic energy plan are…….renewables, conservations, blah blah…..

          Energy speculation is part of the equation and it is impacted immediately by policy decisions…such as promoting domestic drilling….dems are against that….repubs are for it……

          There is a real flip flop occurring in this election…Obama is now the foreign policy expert….and McCain is going to reap the benefits of a bad economy…

          people who are hurting are going to vote Republican..and your elitist attitude that “much to the dismay of people who are hurting” is exactly the “elitist” attitude which pisses the average voter, like me, off.

          • ThillyWabbit says:

            Here are the things the Democrats have been up to, despite a severe lack of media coverage:

            * Releasing 10% of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (after passing legislation last month to suspend purchases, which has let to larger than expected supplies and has driven the price of oil down over $20/bbl)

            * Expanding drilling in Alaska’s NPR-A

            * Dropping or eliminating the tariff on Brazilian sugar cane ethanol

            * Cracking down on speculation (a major source of the price hike)

            * Cracking down on price gouging

            * Mandating that oil companies use the 68,000,000 acres of leases they already have (which includes over 80% of the available oil on public land)

            * A responsible exit from Iraq, as the military operations in Iraq have caused the military (already the largest single consumer of oil in the world) to use vastly more oil

            Some of this legislation has already passed, but much of it is being blocked by the Republicans who are much more interested in having a winning political issue than in having short-term relief for families.

            If you think it’s elitist to acknowledge that people are hurting (my family included) then I suggest that you don’t know what the word elitist means.

            • dwyer says:

              I am not arguing that the dems don’t have a plan…I am arguing that it is esoteric; blocked in Congress,…etc.etc.etc.and   I can’t figure out how or when it will help….

              the repubs have a simple plan, easy to understand, which apparently had immediate impact and it is: DRILL

              The following comment is the one I found elitist:

              “Much to the dismay of people who are hurting, there are actually some problems that can’t be fixed overnight.”

              And I said, long-term planning is a conceit of the rich…and I meant it…my immediate response to your comment was the hell they can’t …..dump the dems and overnight the price of oil will go down and we will drill all over the place…

              ThillyWabbit, are you the ThillyWabbit who came after Jimmy Carter when he was in a boat (!) and the ridicule helped to sink his reelection……

              Carter said that we needed long-term solutions…but his attitude was patronizing…and belittling towards people who were in a bad bind….as my family was at the time…

              • ThillyWabbit says:

                Whatever slight price reduction that results from increased drilling is 10-15 years off. We’re talking a penny a gallon cheaper gas in 2025. There aren’t enough drills nor enough rigs nor enough oil to ramp up production any faster.

                Just saying “drill” does not magically make more oil appear. You’re being fooled by Republicans.

                • RedGreen says:

                  has had an immediate effect on oil prices by taming speculation.

                  Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

                  But voters seem to be falling for it.  

                  • Kos has the results of a survey up that seem to refute all the Dem handwringing on GOP oil schemes.

                    The majority of those polled say that drilling will have little to no effect on oil prices.

                    • RedGreen says:

                      One of the most interesting results on the Quinnipiac poll is the precisely even split between which candidate can best help with energy prices, falling 33 for McCain, 33 for Obama and 34 undecided. The Republicans’ more aggressive “drill now, drill often” message might be cutting through the clutter, though, because at least it sounds like action.

    • Stagarite says:

      This is yet another example of media failure. If the MSM was actually competent, it would be telling the story of ANWAR and offshore drilling in terms of the new “gushers” as a percentage of current or, better, projected demand. For example, Energy Information Administration (EIA) data indicates that 1.9 to 4.3 billion barrels of oil could be extracted from ANWAR over 12 years (see: ). In the context-free world of the MSM that sounds like allot. But it isn’t. In 2007, according to the EIA, the US consumed 7.6 billion barrels of oil. Thus, even on the most optimistic estimate all of the recoverable oil under ANWAR amounts to only 57% of the oil consumed in the US in 2007. So even given steady demand and high-end estimates of supply, all  the oil in ANWAR would last for about 7 months. Why the MSM can’t do the research and simple arithmetic needed to point this out is beyond me. It seems to me that even the lowest of low information voters can figure out the difference between “big” and “little.”

  2. Q-Poll is pretty good…

    Not sure of their record here in Colorado, but they’re very reputable for their traditional Eastern stomping grounds.

    Of course, this poll conflicts with the Rasmussen poll just posted; average them together and we’re still looking at a narrow Obama lead, but Colorado’s definitely showing its battleground status.

    • RedGreen says:

      for the disparity between the two polls, and the wild swings from week to week we’ve been seeing (two Ohio polls this week had Obama up by 9 and down by 10) … these polls are showing very low undecideds, and that’s not my experience talking with regular folks. My impression is, people are very conflicted between the two candidates and want to put off making a decision.

      I wonder how the pressure on leaners and prior questions (Do you support leaving Iraq? vs. Do you think drilling is the answer to high gas prices?) are influencing the results, making voters sound more firml than they are and easily moving, depending on that day’s news or whether respondents just filled up. Just a thought.

  3. indipol says:

    wake me up in October.  A July poll here means nothing.  Day after Obama’s convention speech he’ll have a 10-point lead in the same poll.

    Aside from that, while Q isn’t the worst pollster out there it certainly hasn’t been the best, either, and I wouldn’t give it two ounces of cred to figure out how to handicap a western mountain state.

    • Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

      People without home phone are not polled – many of the people under 35.  

      The youth vote – we just don’t know how many are coming out.

      The white vote – many of you will get in the booth and just can not bring yourself to vote for a Black man, even though publicly you say you can.

      The women’s vote – many Hillary woman are still mad and intend on staying that way.

      This election is a test.  A test of race, a test of generations and even a test of gender. A test of America.

      So, indipol you are correct, I will look at polling in Oct.

      • Danny the Red (hair) says:

        As to the poll.

        I think the the GOP “oil rig in every backyard” energy policy is having some effect.

        If I was in the GOP I’d keep hammering the point.

        I know its bad policy and won’t help prices, but it is action and it looks like the GOP is doing something.

        The D’s have to find a counter message on this issue.  Energy is the only issue that GOP messaging is better on this election.

  4. Gilpin Guy says:

    commissioned poll that shows McCain valiantly in front.  I’m shocked I tell ya.

    Anyone know who qualifies as a “likely” voter.  Do you have to be a registered Republican?

  5. Dan Willis says:

    As more and more people move away from having home phones, a larger segment of the population is not even being considered in polls. For example I am a 35-55 white male which puts me in one of the higher voting demographics, but I do not have a home phone so I will not be polled.

    Also those people who do have home phones are now more likely to have privacy measures put on their phone line making it more difficult for polling companies to ID them.

    There are also several what I call “dishonest answers” this year. Examples:

    “Does Obama’s skin color make you more or less likely to vote form him?” Almost no one will admit to as pollster that it makes them less likely, but there is an unknown quanity of people who do actually feel that way

    “Is John McCain too old to be president?” Again very few will say they think he is over the hill, but an unknown number more do believe it.

    “Do you support the President?” There is a significant portion of the population who would view a “No” response as un-American and would not be willing to voice it.

    The list goes on, but those are a few examples.

  6. DavidThi808 says:

    I think some of this is due to Obama & Udall’s run to the center. In their effort to show that they are not much different from their opponent, they have convinced many voters that… they aren’t much different from their opponent.

    • RedGreen says:

      the Rasmussen poll released yesterday had Obama moving from dead even to a 7-point lead over the last month.  

    • Ralphie says:

      Is hurting him in Boulder.

      How many electoral votes does Boulder have again?

      • DavidThi808 says:

        …uh, maybe Berkley & Madison.

        Seriously, I think it hurts, not so much for the specific policy positions in Obama’s case as the fact that it makes him look like just another politician.

        In Udall’s case I do think it hurt him amoung his base, which is a large part of the people who actually have an opinion right now. But most of those people will probably hold their nose and vote for him.

        But as others have said here, it’s way too early to worry too much about this.

        • Go Blue says:

          why do you keep worrying about it?

          Colorado is a battleground state and anyone who takes it for granted, or who toys with the idea of letting Schaffer or McCain win this state should think about this.

          Dobson is ready to endorse McCain if he Doobie gets a say in who is appointed to the Supreme Court. Think real hard and deep about that.

  7. dftoad says:

    I am getting damn tired of this guy Obama being President.  He such a humorless ____! I want change, so I am voting for that feisty white-haired guy from Phoenix.  

    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

      are you standing on your porch in black socks and sandals with a pair of bermuda shorts pulled up to your navel yelling at the paper boy to get off your lawn when you’re not blogging?

      Yep McCain’s the candidate for you.

  8. Aristotle says:

    Why don’t you ever post good news for Republicans or bad news for Democrats?? There you go again!! Want some cheese with that whine? You know a dem’s lying because his lips are moving!! Nurse Ratched, where’s my thorazine?

  9. ColoradoPolitical says:

    A week ago the Coloradopolsters were debating the future color of the oval office drapes. Now they are saying that the Washington Post conducted an inaccurate poll.

    Senator Obama is dropping faster than Michael Dukakis. Does anyone out there remember him? The guy who was up 18 in August and lost in a landslide

    • Skyler says:

      This will be an incredibly close election. If you think otherwise,  you’ve got another thing coming.

      I’m definitely not a McCain supporter, and I’m not overtly supporting Obama, but this will be a fight.

    • Gilpin Guy says:

      Colorado hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since Shelp was a pup.

      It is going to be really really tough for Obama to carry Colorado.  It would have to be a landslide year for that to happen.

      • Dan Willis says:

        Clinton carried the state and yep it was a landslide year (1992). The electorate is a-changing here. The GOP used to be able to count on a significant portion of the Unaffiliated vote. Higher percetnages of that block are tracking Dem now.

        That does not mean the GOP does not have their solid bases of support in the usual places, it just means the places that are typically swing vote places are swinging Dem this yar.

  10. sjintheknow says:

    You Liberals are going to burst a blood vessel!

    I love it when McCain is winning Liberal comments are, “I don’t put much stock in polls”, “They polled old people”, “How many months away are we from the election.”, “July polls mean nothing”.

    When Obama was leading in the polls you were all dancing.  Liberals just can’t take the truth.

    This is the down hill slide for Barak Hussein Obama.  Like I said, July in the last election Kerry led Bush by 10 points.  

    People need a Leader like McCain not a Dreamer Like Obama.  Life is tough and dreaming will not get you through.

    Aristotle thank you for recognizing me… I may get you to for vote for McCain Yet!

    • Gilpin Guy says:

      Isn’t gloating one of the seven sins?

    • It’s obviously much easier for you to repeat the (mc)same crap than it is for you to read my posts debunking your statements.

    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

      Bush is a nightmare, McCain will continue the nightmare.

      Wake up before McCain drives the bus off the cliff.

      • sjintheknow says:

        Obama is not Presidential Material…I have reservations about McCain on how conservative he really is but he is a millon times better than a president with a Muslim name – Barak Hussein Obama.

        Oooo, am I racists because I said that, Yes because I believe Obama when he said, From Audacity of Hope: ‘I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.’

        Obama is the nighmare.

        • Arvadonian says:

          that quote in context?

          I’ve not read the book, but I can certainly speculate.

          Probably something like this:  “If the political winds shift in an ugly direction, and bigots begin targetting Muslims in the United States with discrimination and violence based on their religion, I will stand with the Muslims.”

          McCain hasn’t said that, but I think he is the type of person who would also.

          • sjintheknow says:

            You really need to read the book.  Your scenario is not correct.

            • Arvadonian says:

              If Danny the Red (hair)’s summary below is correct, then I’d say my speculation was pretty much spot on.

              For your re-reading pleasure, I’ll post his comment and then my own:

              Obama’s words:

              “‘…they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'”

              My speculation of Obama’s comments and their context:

              “If the political winds shift in an ugly direction, and bigots begin targetting Muslims in the United States with discrimination and violence based on their religion, I will stand with the Muslims.”

              Granted, his words are much better than my own, but they relay pretty much the same sentiment.

        • Danny the Red (hair) says:

          or just you

          Here is the accurate and more complete quote:  

          “Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging.  They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

          Do you hate the Japaneese too?  How about other people who came from countries the US fought wars with like vietnameese Americans, German Americans, Italian Americans, spanish americans, mexican americans, British americans, native americans?

        • Aristotle says:

          You’re not, based on your posts, a racist.

          You haven’t said you won’t vote for Obama because of his ethnicity.

          You said you won’t vote for him because of his Muslim heritage.

          That’s called bigotry.

          And it’s just as bad as racism.

          • Danny the Red (hair) says:

            Mrs. Duke (just a guess at SJintheknow’s identity) said:

            Obama is not only risky because he is untested newcomer, he is risky because of WHO he is…


            She didn’t say what he BELIEVED.  If the objection was soley on faith, it would be that he believed in Islam.

            Instead she attacked who he IS. Given that she has quoted incomplete lines from Dreams of my father (a book that I recommend to everyone), where Obama comes to grip with his absent father and his multi racial extended family, to imply that Obama is some sort of blame whitey type, indicates she is a racist.

            I agree she is also bigoted against Muslims too.

  11. Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

    that are not all cut from the same cloth?  I do.  So, I am surprised that Republicans on this blog believe that McCain has a shot.  My republican friends, from across the nation, have said they believe Barack will win.  They don’t agree with his politics, but they agree he is the best choice for America.  

    John McCain is truly an embarrassment and I even liked him 2000.

    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

      I liked him calling out the religious right.

      I was much more moderate then (I was neck deep in international banking–anyone to the left of GHW Bush was Mao–hard to be a liberal).

      George Bush brought me back to my liberal youth–Thanks George.

    • Laughing Boy says:

      It’s going to be a close election.  If you want anecdotal evidence, I was having a discussion with one of the most powerful Dems in the city on Wednesday.  He’s a good friend, and we do a lot of charity work together.

      He’s nervous about some of Obama’s policies, especially his free-market oppositions, but he’s a supporter.  Not the “HE’S THE MESSIAH! HE’S THE MESSIAH!” kind of fawning we’re seeing  here, but a supporter nonetheless.

      He’s also nervous about Obama’s chances in a general because he (Obama) is so very far to the left.

      Most of the R’s I talk to know we’re in for it, congress-wise, but feel reasonably sure that we can keep the White House.  Many aren’t happy with McCain, but compare that to the fairly open rebellion that still exists among the supporters of the initially presumed next POTUS, HRC.

      I think it’s going to be pretty close, but if Obama steps in it, which he’s prone to do off the teleprompter, or if the Republicans have some damaging video they are waiting to drop in October (also fairly likely), McCain’s going to win.

      I’m a little torn.  I’d almost rather see 4 years under Obama and a Dem Congress in order to send ideas like socialized medicine, bad trade policies, higher taxes and an appeasement-based foreign policy will off to the wilderness for 20 years or so.

      I’m resentful that I’m seemingly not allowed to philosophically oppose Sen. Obama on a purely policy-based basis without being called a racist. I could care less what his fucking middle name is, or if he’s a Muslim (he’s not), but I have a right to believe what I want in terms of policy.  Opposing viewpoints are what create a sensible middle, and that’s what the founding fathers intended.

      Now, common sense is much closer to my viewpoint that Senator Obama’s, but I respect his right to believe whatever he’d like.

      I’m just not going to vote for him.

      Why does McCain suddenly have to become an “embarrassment” simply because he’s running against your candidate?  For all the drivel I see here about ‘hateful’ Republicans, I sure see a lot of venom communicating that point.

      Obama’s not an embarassment – he’s an inspiration.  But he’s not in line with what I want to see in a President.

  12. Arvadonian says:

    McCain doesn’t even have North Dakota in the bag.

    If North Dakota is in play, then that is a VERY bad sign for McCain’s campaign.

  13. sjintheknow says:

    Hey, it does not matter if some people do not vote for McCain… that happens.  What matters is if the polls are correct and McCain remains in the lead in enough states he wins.

    Winning is what matters.

    If McCain is not leading in ND just wait it takes time for people to get interested in the election.  

    • Arvadonian says:

      people are not paying attention then the news in this poll (the North Dakota one) should be even more troubling to McCain.  People who are not paying attention tend to go with their “default” position…ie: “I always vote for the Republican/Democrat, so that is how I will answer.”  As it is, these people who are not paying attention are at least willing to consider voting for Obama.

      A Democrat has not carried North Dakota since 1964…and a democrat has only carried it five times in the past 100 years (Wilson and FDR each carried it twice and Johnson carried it once ’64).

    • adam.kretz says:

      It’s not as though Barr and Nader will receive a combined 14% of the vote…except maybe in Alaska and Georgia (and even then, I’m skeptical).

      What is interesting about the polls you keep pointing to as McCain “winning” simply show him at the same numbers with Obama moving up and down. Some of it is statistical noise, some of it is that those on the left are upset with some of his current positions, and some of it is voters who are still wary of some positions (or a lack of experience, whatever that means).

      When your candidate is stagnant at 42-43 percent in most states, you should be concerned.

  14. Danny the Red (hair) says:

    Reagan’s landslide challenges the pulse-taker profession

    For weeks before the presidential election, the gurus of public opinion polling were nearly unanimous in their findings. In survey after survey, they agreed that the coming choice between President Jimmy Carter and Challenger Ronald Reagan was “too close to call.” A few points at most, they said, separated the two major contenders.

    But when the votes were counted, the former California Governor had defeated Carter by a margin of 51% to 41% in the popular vote-a rout for a U.S. presidential race. In the electoral college, the Reagan victory was a 10-to-l avalanche that left the President holding only six states and the District of Columbia.

    In 80′ Carter was the known quantity, Reagan was the “risky” outsider.  Today McCain is the known quantity, Obama is the “risky” outsider.

    The fact that McCain can not poll better than the mid 40’s when he is so well known and Obama polls in the high 40’s when there are so many people like our new troll pushing false stories, reminds me of 1980 when there were fears about Reagan being a bomb throwing lunatic were alleviated during the debates.  Even the Chaieman of the American Conservative Union agrees with me.

    I expect a Obama breakout at some point in October.  Maybe not a Reagan 10, but a plus 4 pop/electoral blowout.

  15. sjintheknow says:

    Carter won because people like me worked hard for him.  I was stupid then I believed the crap the Democrats promised and well I hated Nixon what a dummy for Watergate.

    Obama is not only risky because he is untested newcomer, he is risky because of WHO he is…  

    From Dreams of My Father: ‘I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa…

    I Never Practiced Islam – NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run for an American government office.

    4-3-08 Article ‘Obama was ‘quite religious in islam”

    This man should never be President of the United Stats of America.

    • Arvadonian says:

      and all that we stand for?

      Fron the Constitution of the United States:

      Article VI.

      Clause 3

      “… but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

      You seem to be spouting the KKK line do they have a shill points program like McCain?

      Who you going to believe CNN or WND who published racist essays like the one that got Rep. Jim “some of my best friends are black” Welker into trouble

      Racially charged e-mail stirs outrage

      Rep. Jim Welker, a Republican, said Thursday morning that he forwarded the article because of its message about society victimizing people by making them dependent on government programs.

      He said he didn’t agree with everything in the essay.

      One passage says, “President Bush is not to blame for the rampant immorality of blacks.”

      BTW Welker’s “Best” Black friend says

      “Some of my best friends are of different skin color, like Ed Jones,” said Welker, referring to Sen. Jones, a Colorado Springs Republican who is black.

      Jones said that he and Welker are friends, but not best friends.


  16. sjintheknow says:

    I need to go make dinner Liberals but keep writing.  I just love to log on later to see how much you all can cry, complain, and of course whine.  

    Oh yes, and insult any conservative that tells the truth.

    See ya!  

    • Arvadonian says:

      any conservative who tells the truth….Provided I ever meet one….

    • Gilpin Guy says:

      a Bush lover thinks.

      They say that Bush is as dumb as a rock but the people who voted for him twice are even dumber.

      Why would I care about the opinions of someone who is dumber than a rock?

    • Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

      Barack Obama – 17,900,000 votes in the primary

      John McCain – 9,900,000 votes in the primary

      So, 17,000,000 Americans disagree with your crazy baseless statements.  

      Also, put your money where your mouth is.  $52 million in one month, compared to $21 million.

      You can poll all you want, the only poll I would concern myself with is the one taken on November 4, 2008.

      The rest of your comments are not worth my thoughts

  17. DavidThi808 says:

    Great article at Real Clear Politics

    To be specific, the number of registered Democrats in party registration states has grown by nearly 700,000 since President George W. Bush was reelected in November 2004, while the total of registered Republicans has declined by almost 1 million.

    That comes out to a shift in party identification of 1.7 million toward us Dems.

  18. DavidThi808 says:

    from Larry Sabato

    While no election outcome is guaranteed and McCain’s prospects could improve over the next three and a half months, virtually all of the evidence that we have reviewed–historical patterns, structural features of this election cycle, and national and state polls conducted over the last several months–point to a comfortable Obama/Democratic party victory in November. Trumpeting this race as a toss-up, almost certain to produce another nail-biter finish, distorts the evidence and does a disservice to readers and viewers who rely upon such punditry. Again, maybe conditions will change in McCain’s favor, and if they do, they should also be accurately described by the media. But current data do not justify calling this election a toss-up […]

    Barack Obama is not a national hero like Dwight Eisenhower, and George Bush is no Harry Truman. But if history is any guide, and absent a dramatic change in election fundamentals or an utter collapse of the Obama candidacy, John McCain is likely to suffer the same fate as Adlai Stevenson.

  19. DavidThi808 says:

    If Mississippi is in play then this election is over. It means McCain is now down to about 5 safe states. If he has to work to win Mississippi then he is going to have to work just to hang on to the states that were supposed to be safe Republican.

    From the DailyKOS poll (by Research 2000) we have:


    Wicker (R) 45 (46)

    Musgrove (D) 44 (42)


    McCain (R) 51 (54)

    Obama (D) 42 (39)

    With Obama getting 19% of the white vote – in f@#cking Mississippi! And the poll shows 15% of African-American voters “undecided.” Gee, which way do you think they’ll go when they decide?

  20. CO Democrat says:

    The fact is, this is a battleground.  It always has been.  You can take this poll with the same weight that you take the other poll from yesterday that had Obama 7 points ahead.  This is no time for either side to be complacent and thump their chests.  It’s going to be a fight to the finish.  

  21. dwyer says:

    the conventional wisdom that when economic times are bad, the dems win ..doesn’t take into account what happened in 1980….inflation sky high…interest rates around 20%……and Carter sprouting an energy policy…which if we had followed, the country would be in hog heaven, now, energy wise and global warming wise……

    What happened?  Reagan landslide.  

  22. sjintheknow says:

    McCain is gaining ground in many states and this will lead to President McCain.

    Keep talking Liberals… Americans will not elect Obama bin Laden!

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.