Talk Elections

New Poll: North Dakota President by Rasmussen on 2008-07-08 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3820080708016)

Summary: D: 46%, R: 47%, U: 7%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/north_dakota/election_2008_north_dakota_presidential_election)

Tied 43-43 without leaners.

Here

We

Go

Finally a ND poll !

Given the strange IL poll that was also conducted yesterday, a good result for Obama. :)

I like this poll so I'll choose to believe it. :)

Um...

Wow

You beat my to it! Anyways, my I be the first to say ND is a swing state in 08.

After all, we don't have enough partisans on this site already.

At least he's open about it.

May I be the millionith one to say your an idiot

hmmm....  This statement can be read a number of ways, so I'll just leave it at that.

We put in NJ without leaners yesterday. Are we including leaners, or not?

I think we should, with the rest adding up to 100% as "Undecided".

..........

No

Way

Is

North Dakota

A

Swing

State

What are the chances that both this and the Montana poll are outliers? 1/400?

there should be a wink after this, ugh...  ;)

In their upcoming WI poll, Rasmussen will show McCain ahead by 10 ...

Why am I an idiot?

Yeah it is summer polling, what do you expect? The only info we can get from the MT and ND polls is that the states will be much closer this time around and that we have to assume SD will be the same way.

I'm pretty gullible and can't tell whether this is a joke or not so.....link?

It´s a joke ... :P

phew.....

Well it isn't very funny. :P

Folks, the only thing worse than getting your panties in a wad over a summer poll is getting your panties in a wad over a fake summer poll...  :P

Very strange...

What if you don't where panties? Then what, Mr. No it all? ;)

This poll is not surprising at all.  That makes three North Dakota polls that have shown wildly different results compared to what happened in '04.

The state, despite its miniscule 3 EVs, could be the surprise of the election.

I still say it goes to McCain, but by a surprisingly modest margin that will have the Republicans shaking in their boots on election night.

Obama only doing 12 points better in Illinois than he is in North Dakota??  Riighttt....


Both polls are awful.   This poll might be a bit closer to reality than the Illinois poll and Obama will do decent for a Dem in ND, but no way its within a point.

kansas values or not, i still dont see much of a way obama wins nd.

republicans will eventually come home once mccain starts acting like a presidential candidate.  he will win nd by at least 5 points.

here is a question to the experts and josh, if clinton couldnt win nd in 92 or 96 (with the help of perot)  how does obama win in 08?  i would argue that bill clinton fits the state better than obama.

Clinton wasn't particularly popular in the plain states or the rocky mountains to the best of my knowledge.

If it's close (within 5%) come October, the Republicans will likely be there, so long as the election is actually close.  If the election is not close, they will be in other places - just watch. 

Actually, the chances of those two events occurring are quite low now that I think about it - but not impossible.

when was the last time colorado and montana went democrat?

()

It is 4 am on the morning of Wednesday November 5th and Obama leads McCain 268-267, with only North Dakota yet to be called.  Estimates say it will be within 100 votes, not impossible for a state that size.  Would that not be the political story of the century? 

When ross perot actually ran.

No he never was. This was the area he fitted least actually.

:)

I wonder how McCain's going to do in those hordes of dry counties that North Dakota is just filled to the brim with. I'm sure he'll landslide those areas where it's absolutely impossible for find a liquor store or bar for miles and miles that are soooooo common in ND. I know because WalterMitty said so.

Why

So

Serious?


Well, I'm very happy for the North Dakota cult we have on here at least.

Yes, and on Nov. 5 it turns out that - over the summer - the Obama campaign secretly relocated 200.000 hippies from neighboring MN to ND ...

This will only be topped by the 300% turnout in Gary and a few counties in AL and MS ...

()

Obama - 268
McCain - 267

Or...

()

After a shocking night, with high turn-out in the young and black voters in NC, Obama wins by 1%, Romney helps carry MI and NH. NM and CO, both won by Obama by 3%. It is now McCain: 268 Obama: 267 with ND out still and it race will be won by very small margin.

Despite all the snark on here, having ND within the margin of error, and assuming that McCain eventually has to advertise or visit here, only helps in OH, MI, and VA.

1. Obama's from the Midwest.

2. Republicans outside the South and a few other spots (Utah, Orange County) are alienated from the current party in a way they weren't in the 1990s.

Neat. :)

I don't post often, but we shouldn't completely discount the possibility for ND to be unusually close.
Obama's strength in Minnesota and Montana (and the entire northwestern quadrant of the country) suggests he ought to be strong in ND. Obama's unopposed advertising and campaign stop should also give him higher standing in the polls than he would have otherwise. I think that the *trump card* the Obama campaign has is McCain's opposition to agricultural subsidies and the farm bill. Agriculture is the largest industry in ND, and opposition to agricultural subsidies is like opposing their way of life.

And people wonder why so few females bother with the forum...

If Obama's doing this well in ND, shouldn't he be ahead in SD as that's slighly more favourable to Democrats? What does anyone reckon polling currently is in SD?

We've had this discussion before, and it's hard to pin-point.  South Dakota is more an anti-incumbent, anti-establishment state than North Dakota is; Bush probably underperformed.  North Dakota also has more moderate Protestants.

In the 2004 exit poll, a full 54% of North Dakotans were moderate, while 33% were conservative and 13% were liberal.  In South Dakota, things are a bit more polarized -- moderates were 45%, conservatives 39%, liberals 16%.

So, take the 2004 numbers and adjust both states to Kerry winning moderates 58-42.  This is totally arbitrary, and ignores the swings with other groups, obviously, but go with me.  The end result would swing South Dakota from Bush +23.8 to Bush +14.4 (swing=9.4).  However, in North Dakota, the swing would be from Bush +27.2 to Bush +11.6 (swing=15.6).

In other words, North Dakota has more moderates, and they tend to be more fluid.  It's not surprising that he'd be doing better in ND than SD.  But I do want more polls from both.

1. obama is from hawai'i...raised in indonesia (as he mentioned many times when he attempted to explain his foreign policy credentials).  he decided to locate to chicago, the second city, after law school to become a poverty pimp (pc translation: community organizer).  how does this fit in with nd?

2.  the republican brand wasnt in good shape in 92 either.  although granted they werent as bad off as they are today.

Polling's been sparse for both states. The one time both were polled at the same time was SUSA way back in late February, when Obama led by 4 in North Dakota and trailed by four in South Dakota. SUSA has not done a poll of either state since then. Rasmussen had McCain leading by ten in South Dakota in March, but that was also during the Wright scandal, and there was no poll of North Dakota at the time. There was also a useless university poll with huge undecideds that had Obama running better in ND.

The conventional wisdom seems to have settled on North Dakota being much more favorable to Obama than South Dakota. I am not going to deny that this may well be true, but the evidence for it is shaky at best. If Rasmussen were to poll South Dakota tomorrow and find, say, an eight-point McCain lead, I wouldn't be surprised in the least, but I think it at least reasonably possible that such a poll would turn up a two-point Obama lead. There just don't appear to be any factors--at all--which would suggest North Dakota as more favorable to Obama than South Dakota in terms of demographics or voting patterns unless a Canadian infiltration of North Dakota is the prelude to invasion.

Yes, we know that Obama will win NC. Stop it now.

Obama lives in Chicago and has served in state government and as a U.S. Senator from the state of Illinois.

Oh North Dakota you slaaaaay me.

Whilst I thought that Barack Obama's support in North Dakota was quite high during the 2008 Democratic Primaries, I never expected Barack Obama to narrow the gap between himself and John McCain in North Dakota to just 1% in the General Election polling. Although I am pleased with Obama's result here in North Dakota, we'll have to see what Obama's polling is like here in September/October to see if he is the real McCoy.

That's not true. SD has the rapidly growing Sioux Falls area, that while more liberal than most of the state and ND, also has far more partisan Republicans who'll never change their vote. And it also has Rapid City, which is even moreso partisan. ND doesn't have any equivalent the size of Rapid City, nor does it have anywhere comparable to suburban Sioux Falls (suburban Fargo isn't as big.)

I also strongly dispute that SD is slightly more favorable for that reason. All the 2004 results show is that the floor for the Democrats in SD is higher than it is in ND. And even then Kerry no doubt over-performed due to SD's anti-incumbent streak. Probably not much of a difference (compare Bush's numbers in both state in 2000.)

Isn't North Dakota the only state in the union without voter registration?

Maybe North Dakota lacks some of the extreme style of partisan style of is so characteristic of most of the rest of the country.... not sure that this explains the purported dichotomy between ND and SD however.

Quite right, unless something has changed.

Currently I could vote in any ND elections. I probably won't be able to in November since I will have gotten my driver's license changed over by then.

Yeah, that was approximately what I wanted to add to what Alcon said.
Glad I read the whole thread first.

Just in the interests of balance, could be a good idea to mention to Mitty Hillary's long standing links with NY before being elected to the Senate ;)

Not to mention McCain's long standing links with AZ before being elected to the Senate.