PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Obama unable to defeat McCain in Ohio match-up



Laisrean
May 23rd, 2008, 01:31 AM
Link (http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2008/05/19/daily29.html)


As Sen. Barack Obama comes progressively closer to nailing down the Democratic presidential nomination, a new poll of key swing states indicates his bid to win over Ohio might be tougher than expected.

A poll of 1,244 Ohio voters conducted earlier in May and released Thursday by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute shows Obama losing to presumptive Republican nominee John McCain 40 percent to 44 percent. In a matchup between McCain and Democratic presidential contender Sen. Hillary Clinton, however, McCain loses with 41 percent to Clinton's 48 percent.

In addition, half of all surveyed Ohio Democrats would rather see Sen. Hillary Clinton win the nomination, versus 37 percent for Obama. Democrats who back Clinton say they would vote for her 95-4 over McCain, while only half would vote for Obama over McCain.

Is this a sign of things to come? Ohio is a swing-state, and as such it is an excellent barometer on the way the entire country may be leaning.

WokeUpDead
May 23rd, 2008, 01:35 AM
There's still 5 and a half months left until the actual election. The answers you get now mean about as much as a 6 year old saying he wants to be an astronaut when he grows up.

memnoch
May 23rd, 2008, 01:49 AM
I will say in fairness to Obama, that the poll is very small and could be located in specific areas. Being an Ohioan we have two different states politically. We have the cities, Cincy, Columbus, Dayton, Cleveland, and Toledo, that are extremely liberal. We also have a vast amount of farm land and small communities where there is a church every other block. I think Ohio would be close, however I do think it McCain will win, here is why. McCain will get the republican vote, I doubt even Barr would fair well in Ohio. Hillary won by a decent majority. There are many Hillary supporters that will not vote Obama for 3 reasons. The first is the nasty battle they have had. The second is the people who voted Hillary ONLY because she is a woman. The third is the people who will not vote for a black man or believe he is muslim (insert other rumors here)

Faery-Wings
May 24th, 2008, 07:29 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/oh/ohio_mccain_vs_obama-400.html

This site avg's several fifferent polls, and the avg come out with Obama on top +1.3 %, obviously very close.
However, I think that there are still a lot of Clinton supporters who are so adamant about not wanting Obama that they won't even consider him t this point. I think (hope and pray!) that once the primary is over they will pull for Obama, and that can hopefully swings things more in his favor.
and OTOH, memnoch is 100% right that there are some people who will never vote for him- insert rumor ;)- which makes me wonder how "Democratic/Progressive" they really are if they are truly voting on *issues*

memnoch
May 24th, 2008, 08:47 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/oh/ohio_mccain_vs_obama-400.html

This site avg's several fifferent polls, and the avg come out with Obama on top +1.3 %, obviously very close.
However, I think that there are still a lot of Clinton supporters who are so adamant about not wanting Obama that they won't even consider him t this point. I think (hope and pray!) that once the primary is over they will pull for Obama, and that can hopefully swings things more in his favor.
and OTOH, memnoch is 100% right that there are some people who will never vote for him- insert rumor ;)- which makes me wonder how "Democratic/Progressive" they really are if they are truly voting on *issues*

Most people don't vote on the issues. I've argued many times that you should have to pass a basic civics test before being allowed to vote for that reason. And the "idiots" (I use that term for anyone who doesn't vote on issues) come from both sides.

Bush was elected originally due to the fact many people thought he was "like them"
Clinton was elected originally due to the fact many women found him attractive, and he seemed like a down to earth guy.
Carter, see Clinton.

Faery-Wings
May 25th, 2008, 08:51 AM
ITA- cracks me up (in a sick ironic way) when you read some of these political blogs- the stupidity and lack of any clue on issues as they comments spout crap about Hussein and lapel pins and pantsuits. Its like, WTF is important to you people?

When our economy tanks completely, do you think a million lapel pins will save us?:geez:

pawnman
May 29th, 2008, 08:31 AM
ITA- cracks me up (in a sick ironic way) when you read some of these political blogs- the stupidity and lack of any clue on issues as they comments spout crap about Hussein and lapel pins and pantsuits. Its like, WTF is important to you people?

When our economy tanks completely, do you think a million lapel pins will save us?:geez:

No, but I do think the inability to do that small gesture, or put your hand on your heart during the National Anthem, or having grown up going to a Madrassa, or lying about what your dad did for a living, or telling everyone you'd meet with our enemies AND carry out military action against our allies, or that you'd raise taxes even if it lowers the overall revenue...

It's not each individual thing. It's that, all taken together, they provide a picture of a man I REALLY don't want in the White House.

David19
May 30th, 2008, 02:45 PM
No, but I do think the inability to do that small gesture, or put your hand on your heart during the National Anthem, or having grown up going to a Madrassa, or lying about what your dad did for a living, or telling everyone you'd meet with our enemies AND carry out military action against our allies, or that you'd raise taxes even if it lowers the overall revenue...

It's not each individual thing. It's that, all taken together, they provide a picture of a man I REALLY don't want in the White House.

While I can agree with you about the last 4 things, are the first 3 that important, if he had good policies. I'm not saying I support him, as I think the last 4 policies aren't that great (although I do think negotiating with people can accomplish a lot, maybe not with every terrorist or terrorist organisation, but some), but I don't see why not singing the National Anthem or placing your hand on your heart during it, etc is a big deal (again, I don't know why he doesn't do it, and I'm not supporting him, it just seems there are better things to criticise him about, IMO).