Korean Job Discussion Forums

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

If we've heard it once on these forums, we've heard it a thousand times. Hillary Clinton is widely disliked across the political spectrum, therefore, she is less electable. Well, now that Barack Obama is the frontrunner, we turn to his electoral chances.

Obama supporters, here's the good news: Obama is polling better in general election polls today compared to Hillary Clinton, when each is paired against McCain (Obama has a 50% to 43% lead and Clinton holds a 50% to 45% edge).

Here's the bad news, Obama fans:

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

Real Clear Politics average has it:

McCain 43.3% to Obama 47.6%
McCain 46.3% to Clinton 45.5%

I don't know why people are still computing Clinton's chances against McCain since that isn't going to happen.

As far as I can tell, none of the polls has figured out a way to measure the impact of first-time (or very infrequent) voters, and they seem to be the ones that have been giving Obama his big margins of victory.

In addition, national polls are misleading. We don't vote for president as individuals, we vote as states. The polling companies need to take that into account and report state-by-state results. Which candidate gets the 270 electoral votes needed to win?

Has anyone seen numbers on that? I haven't.

Czarjorge · Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject:

Obama has been screwing up polls all election season. Why would you think this one accurate?

We should just bump Bush and let Obama into the White House next week. It would save everyone a large amount of money, time and effort.

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

Milwaukiedave · Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong

Yes, there are going to be a lot of pissed off people because Clinton lost the race. However, maybe those people should keep in mind Clinton had an advantage in name recognition, resources, campaign staff, etc set up before the primaries took place. It was her campaign plan that was faulty, that's not Obama's fault. She (and her campaign) made consistently bad choices in terms of how and where they were going to campaign.

A few examples:

-The pissoff 40 state strategy-By saying caucus states, smaller states and red states don't matter, she alienates voters.

-The stupid stuff-Accusations of plagiarism, calling Obama's supporters a cult (although this likely came directly from Clinton supporters), whining about media coverage, using surrogates to go on attacks, letting Bill run his mouth, etc.

-The "big" screw ups-Not preparing well for caucus states, mismanaging campaign funds, not having a decent strategy, running a negative campaign, not apologizing for her war vote and ending the issue with that, etc.

In terms of Republicans, I've read countless places that Clinton supporters have said that Republicans are only looking to "spoil" the Democrats Primary. It's an argument that doesn't hold much weight seeing as though there are many people who have been brought back into the Democratic Party by Obama.

If you look back in retrospect, there is going to be an interesting outcome from this, someone is going to write a book about the complete implosion of the campaign that will serve as a guidebook for future campaigns.

Czarjorge · Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject:

Whoa, don't alert the feds. I meant just move the transfer date to next week and let Obama have it. Not anything sinister. Sheesh. I know sarcasm doesn't always translate without emoticons, but c'mon.

As for men jumping ship on Obama to vote for McCain, I don't see it. The poll you provided shows Obama ahead in all but the old white people categories. Those that are Dems will support him, and those that aren't won't. Otherwise I expect most others to support him. I would shocked if McCain gets even the 30% of under 30's the poll predicts, and the kids are coming out to vote this time. Plus, never underestimate a kids impact on their parents. My Father, Grandmother, Aunt and Uncle have all been swayed to Obama's side just because of discussions I've had with them. I doubt I'm alone there.

Tiger Beer · Joined: 07 Feb 2003

McCain doesnt have a chance against either one of them.

He's a seriously old-looking man who seems to have aged significantly in the last eight years, and he looked old already.

New voters don't come out of the geriatrics wards. McCain's base of voters has already been solidly decided. However, a person like Obama are just going to keep attracting more and more of those who don't or haven't voted before.

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Milwaukiedave · Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong

The sad fact is, as I've pointed out the Clinton camp has no one to blame but themselves. They have botched this entire campaign and continue to do so.

I didn't take time to read the full article this morning, but just now took a look. Pew is a pretty reliable source, so it was interesting reading.

Most of the Democrats who are undecided will likely come back around once the nomination has been settled. My guess is third party candidates like Nader will draw the rest of them.

The eight percent difference is not that big of a gap among Democrats to make up. There are some hard core Clinton supporters that probably wouldn't vote for Obama no matter what he said. That's to be expected.

One of the things you left out though was that Obama does much better among indies then Clinton does.

In fact, Obama beats Clinton in every category, except those over 50. In that category they tie.

sundubuman · Joined: 04 Feb 2003 Location: seoul

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee · Joined: 25 May 2003

truthfulchat · Joined: 30 Sep 2007

In my opinion it is time to laugh at Clinton because she started using the same fear ads used back in the 70's she even about cried at one of the debates. I think Clinton should just give the nomination to Obama.

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

stillnotking · Joined: 18 Dec 2007 Location: Oregon, USA

Three things.

1. I'll prefer a candidate who runs a 50-state, shoot-for-the-moon strategy over one who aims for "50%+1" any day of the week. I agree that it's unlikely for Obama (or any candidate) to win by the kind of margins we saw in the 1980s. The electoral landscape has changed too much since that time. It's entirely possible for Obama to get 55% of the popular vote, though, and that would guarantee a win.
2. Independents, who are the bloc that really decides elections in the US, prefer Obama over McCain and McCain over Clinton.
3. Hillary's negatives are already sky-high, and eight months of relentless negative campaigning would drive them far into the red zone. By the time the Republicans got done with Hillary, she'd be lucky to keep her Senate seat.

One more data point you might want to keep in mind: only 66% of Hillary's supporters think she is the most electable candidate in the general. Nearly 90% of Obama's supporters think the same of him.