McCain Tied with Obama and/or Clinton

This should answer the spin that some Dems were putting out that a protracted primary was beneficial to the Dems because it kept them in the headlines.

Barack Obama’s once double-digit lead over John McCain in a hypothetical match-up has evaporated, according to a just released Associated Press poll.

Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are now statistically tied with McCain, suggesting the Arizona senator may be benefiting from the drawn out Democratic primary race.

1. a hypothetical match-up

   statistically tied

   Kind of says it all.

   What self respecting conservative could bring themselves to vote for McCain?

   Stay home, don’t vote.

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 0001 hrs




2. As Clinton continues to trash Obama, it only stands to reason that they’ll both lose some standing in the polls. McCain is doing the smart thing by keeping a fairly low profile.

   Once the Democratic nominee is decided, and it’s almost certain to be Obama, the Democrats will be able to start putting out a unified message:  “John McCain has said he’s going to do pretty much the exact same things George W. Bush has been doing”. This has two benefits for the Democrats--1. It’s true.  2. With 80% of the population saying the country is on the wrong track, well…

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 0907 hrs




3. What self respecting conservative could bring themselves to vote for McCain?

   Come on pjr… Lesser of 2 evils.  The voting public has been doing so for years. 

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 0932 hrs




4. With 80% of the population saying the country is on the wrong track, well…

   I’m pretty confident that has been the general concensus for years.  Over many administrations.

   Lets be really honest with ourselves here.  REAL change isn’t going to happen with donkeys or elephants in the white house.

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 0937 hrs




5. What self respecting conservative could bring themselves to vote for McCain?

   Just pulling on some chains around here based on some of the posts and comments before McCain became the defacto GOP candidate

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 1108 hrs




6. I’m pretty confident this has been the general consensus for years. Over many administrations.

   Wrong.

   http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/07/ cnn.poll/index.html

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 1114 hrs




7. well, rasmussen has a poll of Pennsylvania out today that shows both Obama and Hillary clobbering McCain, which is a complete change from the last survey.  So, it looks like the long contest is very much helping the Dems there.

   Posted by on April 11, 2008 at 1750 hrs




8. National polls are great, but what matters most is that, when compared to Clinton, Obama struggles more in head-to-head matchups in battleground states.

   Obama, by virtue of lots of things (his race, his political inexperience, his occasionally condescending rhetoric), is going to have a harder time than Clinton competing against a Republican for the votes of blue-collar workers, rural white voters, and culturally conservative Democrats (i.e. the ones who go to church regularly).

   That doesn’t bode well for Obama in Florida (where RCP has him down 8 to McCain), Ohio (down 5.2), or Pennsylvania (down 1.5).  It will also make Obama’s road more difficult in Michigan and Wisconsin (though he could be helped by increased turnout in Dane and Milwaukee Counties).

   Based on the ‘04 map, Obama needs to flip a minimum of 18 electoral votes to win.  That probably means winning Ohio, or Missouri OR Virginia AND some other southern state.  Unfortunately, Obama is going to have to spend a boatload of money to HOLD Pennsylvania and Michigan, which could make spending elsewhere more complicated, even if he does become the first candidate ever to decline public funding in the general.

   If McCain can hang on to OH and FL (probably more likely than not at this point), and can somehow win PA, then Obama needs to find a total of 39 electoral votes in states that were red in ‘04 to win outright.  To put that in perspective, it would mean winning Missouri, Georgia, AND Virginia.  Even if McCain were to completely concede Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, AND Iowa (which Bush carried in ‘04), Obama would still need 32.

   That’s extremely difficult, by any measure.

   For two candidates that are separated by about 2 points in their total popular vote thus far, Clinton is clearly more competitive in battleground states than Obama.  And if Obama supporters really think that he’s somehow going to “change the map” this November, I think they’ve got another thing coming.

   If you’re a Democrat, all you have to do is win Pennsylvania and Ohio and HOLD everything else you had in 2004.  Pick Clinton and you’ll probably eke out an ugly win.  Pick Obama, and you may well fall flat on your face by reaching for the stars.  Is that a gamble Democrats are dumb enough to make?

   Yeah, probably.

   Posted by Recess Supervisor on April 11, 2008 at 2018 hrs




9. You make a couple of pretty good points, but I think there are a couple of things you’re not factoring in.

   First, turnout for all the Democratic primaries has completely dwarfed GOP turnout. In more than one instance, the third place Democratic finisher got more votes than the GOP winner. If that edge holds even remotely steady in November, then that electoral math is different.

   Second, you can’t really compare it to 2004. We’re likely to be in a recession around election day. That’s never good for the incumbent party, and neither are those bad ‘country is on the wrong track’ numbers, which, let’s face it, have been abysmal for several years now.

   Now add a candidate who says, “Count me in for more of the same”. Pretty much the same economic policies. Same policies on an incredibly unpopular war. Not really any plan at all on health care.

   If the campaign can continue to be about nothing but lapel pins and patriotism, or what somebody’s preacher said 10-15 years ago, or about “Is America ready for black president?” instead of substantive issues, then it can be close.

   Hell, it’ll probably be close anyway.

   Posted by on April 12, 2008 at 1001 hrs




10. It will likely be a close election. It is hard to figure out why it will remain so as McCain has embraced the status quo as tightly as he has.

    Patriotism has different looks but it basically means fighting for what is right for all the people and the future of our country. When we consider McCain more patriotic because of his POW status 30 years ago and not on his more recent actions, we are selling ourselves short.

    I am not belittling his status as a war hero, my father was in three wars and I have much respect for that. McCain is pandering to the far right now and will back peddle to the middle when the general election comes closer. He has not been standing his ground on many issues which is losing him support. The conservatives who were against him early but support him now will disapprove when he begins his trek back to the middle to court independents.

    McCain used to stand for the middle and blew it when he changed his tune to bring the conservatives back into the fold. He could have represented the change the country needs but now he is standing for more of the same policies.

    His indecisiveness will cost him the election.

    Posted by on April 12, 2008 at 1121 hrs