| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:33 am Post subject: Obama leading Clinton in California and Georgia |
 |
|
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are running neck-and-neck in California, New Jersey and Missouri two days before the sprawling "Super Tuesday" presidential showdown, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Sunday.
Obama has a slight lead in California and is virtually tied with Clinton in New Jersey and Missouri heading into the biggest day of voting ever in a U.S. presidential nominating campaign, with contests in 24 states.
Obama, an Illinois senator who would be the first black U.S. president, also has a comfortable 20-point lead in Georgia fueled by a more than 3-to-1 advantage over Clinton among black voters. |
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0249533620080203 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vicissitude
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| This is good news. I've been hearing for weeks how Clinton was predicted to win ahead of Obama. I guess things are changing. I just have a feeling that whichever Democrat wins in California on Super Tuesday is the one who will get the Dem. nomination. The game is pretty much over after Tuesday and then it's on to Dem. v. Rep. as usual. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank god for Lunar New Year! I'll be home all day Wednesday to follow the results of the primaries.  It should be an exciting day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But the Democratic numbers are the shocker. Clinton, a longtime California favorite, saw her once-commanding lead slip to two percentage points, 36 to 34 percent, in the new survey. That's down from the New York senator's 12 percentage point lead in mid-January and a 25 percentage point margin over Obama in October. |
| Quote: |
| Clinton now clings to a bare 45 to 43 percent lead over McCain in a projected California presidential vote, down dramatically from her 17 percentage point margin just two weeks ago. Obama now holds a stronger 47 to 40 percent margin over the Arizona senator, but that's only half the 14 percentage point advantage he had in mid-January. |
And that's in CA, a state that leans more to the left than most others.
SF Chronicle article |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But the Democratic numbers are the shocker. Clinton, a longtime California favorite, saw her once-commanding lead slip to two percentage points, 36 to 34 percent, in the new survey. That's down from the New York senator's 12 percentage point lead in mid-January and a 25 percentage point margin over Obama in October. |
| Quote: |
| Clinton now clings to a bare 45 to 43 percent lead over McCain in a projected California presidential vote, down dramatically from her 17 percentage point margin just two weeks ago. Obama now holds a stronger 47 to 40 percent margin over the Arizona senator, but that's only half the 14 percentage point advantage he had in mid-January. |
And that's in CA, a state that leans more to the left than most others.
SF Chronicle article |
McCain will be weak in the general. His economic arguments will not go well with the independents.
A Republican victory is well nigh impossible at this point, and McCain is a Republican. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Thank god for Lunar New Year! I'll be home all day Wednesday to follow the results of the primaries. It should be an exciting day. |
Ya-Ta,
I'll be over at the in-laws with CNN on Wednesday morning trying not to scream too loud. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
And that's in CA, a state that leans more to the left than most others.
|
This is an overstatement of the reality. Both Reagan and Arnold have served as governors there. California can't be all that left-leaning.
No proof, but the Kennedy endorsement might be a factor in the change in the polls.
I too feel that McCain will be weak in the general election. Much of the hard core Republican base hates him. They are less likely to work for him, contribute to his campaign, come out on election day and vote for him. My impression is that the support for him is shallow and begrudging. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Both Reagan and Arnold have served as governors there. California can't be all that left-leaning. |
The Bay Area and Hollywood (think "Streisand"), and other specific areas, as well as people like Jerry Brown, Gray Davis go to the left or sometimes even way to the left. Most others go back and forth -- Earl Warren, for example -- or clearly lean to the right, such as "the Gobernator," Pete Wilson, Reagan, Clint Eastwood, and let us not forget "Tricky Dick."
Complex place, California. But I would not have it any other way.
These snapshots and polls, incidentally, do not mean a thing. Wait for Tues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| An average of polls is far more accurate than any single poll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassexpander
Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Location: Someplace you'd rather be.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've said it before, and i'll say it again... Hillary can't beat the Republicans. Obama can. Too many people hate the Clintons.
If Clinton leads the Democrats, then they lose to the Republicans in a close race. If Obama wins, the Democrats win the presidency by at least 10 percent.
It amazes me that many Democrats just don't get this. They're so mesmerized by the Clinton thing that they can't see straight, and it may cost them the whole ballgame. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No polling has been accurate so far in the D primaries. The SC polls were off by unheard-of margins. The NH polls were also off, not by quite as much but they got more publicity because they predicted the wrong winner.
I honestly would not be surprised if either candidate pulls off a blowout in CA. No one can predict the race at this point. It's even possible that no clear winner will emerge after Super Tuesday, which would be an historically rare occurrence.
On the R side, McCain will seal the deal. To the great displeasure of Ann Coulter.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bassexpander wrote: |
I've said it before, and i'll say it again... Hillary can't beat the Republicans. Obama can. Too many people hate the Clintons.
If Clinton leads the Democrats, then they lose to the Republicans in a close race. If Obama wins, the Democrats win the presidency by at least 10 percent.
It amazes me that many Democrats just don't get this. They're so mesmerized by the Clinton thing that they can't see straight, and it may cost them the whole ballgame. |
ME TOO.
I am constantly baffled at the inability of so many Democrats to admit that Obama is by far the stronger candidate. Whatever you think of his policies -- and they are almost indistinguishable from Hillary's in most areas -- this should be an overriding concern.
Oh well. No doubt the Democrats will nominate Hillary, lose in a bruising race with McCain, and spend the next four years whining about moral victories, and how the GOP doesn't play fair.
If all goes as planned, I will be in Korea and will have to endure little of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Too many people hate the Clintons.
|
Is this why Bill won the presidency in '92 and '96? Wasn't his support/approval ratings somewhere in the mid-60% range when his final term ended?
I am constantly baffled by the number of people who forget those inconvenient facts.
Clearly the Clintons bring some baggage, but Obama also presents the Republicans with the obvious opportunity to play the race card, which worked quite well for them in '68, '72, '80, '84, '88 and '00. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
And that's in CA, a state that leans more to the left than most others.
|
This is an overstatement of the reality. Both Reagan and Arnold have served as governors there. California can't be all that left-leaning.
|
Massachusetts elected Mitt Romney and Bill Weld as governor. Minnesota, which hasn't voted for a Republican to be president in my lifetime, presently has a GOP governor. There is no state in this country that sticks to strictly one political side. Hence the word: lean. It should also be noted that Arnold did not have much political success until he reached out to dems and hired some to be on his staff, including his present chief of staff. Lastly, CA demographics have changed significantly since Reagan was governor decades ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
Too many people hate the Clintons.
|
Is this why Bill won the presidency in '92 and '96? Wasn't his support/approval ratings somewhere in the mid-60% range when his final term ended?
I am constantly baffled by the number of people who forget those inconvenient facts.
Clearly the Clintons bring some baggage, but Obama also presents the Republicans with the obvious opportunity to play the race card, which worked quite well for them in '68, '72, '80, '84, '88 and '00. |
Bill had the perot advantage of 1992. And he was a successful president, which led to his 1996 re-election. Throw in the strong economy when he left office and you have a high approval rating. Hillary is no Bill and people are ready for change. While Obama might not bring that change, people are more likely to believe he will. McCain probably won't bring that change, but his name doesn't have Clinton nor Bush in it; that's enough for some. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
