AZ: Rasmussen: McCain up 9 in his home state

[Tender Branson]

New Poll: Arizona President by Rasmussen on 2008-06-25

Summary: D: 40%, R: 49%, U: 5%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details


McCain leads by twenty-seven points among men but trails by six among women.

The Arizona Senator is supported by 81% of Republicans and enjoys a twelve point lead among unaffiliated voters. Obama gets the vote from 75% of Democrats.

Overall, McCain is viewed favorably by 60% of Arizona voters, Obama by 47%.

[Reaganfan]

Woah gender gap.

[charltonNick]

hardly commanding in his home state. to me, this suggests surrounding states like Nevada, Colorado and New mexico are Obama's for the taking

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

You have to think if McCain can't break 50% in his home state something's wrong. It's not like AZ is a "swing" state that you expect to be down to the wire.

[Reaganfan]

You have to think if McCain can't break 50% in his home state something's wrong. It's not like AZ is a "swing" state that you expect to be down to the wire.

You have to think that polls aren't as gap filled as election results. Rarely are states decided with under 50%...even if polls show it. Bush won AZ by 10 pts...McCain will likely do that maybe a bit more.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

yeah, I did get 49+40=89.

But McCain should be stronger - even in that circumstance. It basically reflects that poll which shows that in spite of all the acrimony in the Dem race - more Dems were satisfied with Obama than Reps with McCain.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Big gender gap, seems odd.

[Tender Branson]

yeah, I did get 49+40=89.

But McCain should be stronger - even in that circumstance. It basically reflects that poll which shows that in spite of all the acrimony in the Dem race - more Dems were satisfied with Obama than Reps with McCain.

It´s interesting that Obama does better than Kerry, despite losing Independents by 13 as well as losing more Democrats to McCain than winning Republicans from McCain. I don´t know the internals of this poll, but I think that Democrats and Republicans must account for about the same percentage to get these results. Lets compare this July 2004 SurveyUSA poll from AZ and SurveyUSA's February survey. In the 2004 poll, the composition was 44R, 31D and 25I - about what the 2004 Exit Poll from AZ showed (44-30-26). The July 2004 poll also showed Bush beating Kerry 53-41, which is about as accurate as it can get. Their February 2008 poll meanwhile suggested a composition of 41R, 37D - with McCain leading Obama by 12 then. The 2004 AZ exit poll showed a 14-point turnout advantage for the Republicans, the 2006 exit poll a 8-9% advantage. Could it be that in the last 2 years Democrats narrowed the gap to lower single digits ? If yes, these Rasmussen results make perfect sense, if not and turnout is like 2004 or 2006, I think they are heavily underestimating McCain.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

yeah, I did get 49+40=89.

But McCain should be stronger - even in that circumstance. It basically reflects that poll which shows that in spite of all the acrimony in the Dem race - more Dems were satisfied with Obama than Reps with McCain.

It´s interesting that Obama does better than Kerry, despite losing Independents by 13 as well as losing more Democrats to McCain than winning Republicans from McCain. I don´t know the internals of this poll, but I think that Democrats and Republicans must account for about the same percentage to get these results. Lets compare this July 2004 SurveyUSA poll from AZ and SurveyUSA's February survey. In the 2004 poll, the composition was 44R, 31D and 25I - about what the 2004 Exit Poll from AZ showed (44-30-26). The July 2004 poll also showed Bush beating Kerry 53-41, which is about as accurate as it can get. Their February 2008 poll meanwhile suggested a composition of 41R, 37D - with McCain leading Obama by 12 then. The 2004 AZ exit poll showed a 14-point turnout advantage for the Republicans, the 2006 exit poll a 8-9% advantage. Could it be that in the last 2 years Democrats narrowed the gap to lower single digits ? If yes, these Rasmussen results make perfect sense, if not and turnout is like 2004 or 2006, I think they are heavily underestimating McCain.

Of course, that's taking everything on face value. So your point is important.

[Flying Dog]

Would Obama be winning Arizona if he weren't running against McCain?

[charltonNick]

Would Obama be winning Arizona if he weren't running against McCain?

it would be very similar to New Mexico and Colorado if McCain weren't running. Rememeber Clinton won here in 96.

[classical liberal]

From the sex sub-tabs, the sample must have been 53-47 women-men, rather than the 51-49 from the 2006 exit polls.  That 4% times the 33% gender gap translates into a 1.3% underestimation of the margin from McCain.  Correcting such would give a result of McCain +10.3 of the overall vote, or +11 of the vote excluding the 6% who say they will vote 3rd party--an absurdly high figure in my estimation.

AZ was 6% more GOP than CO in 2004.  If Obama is up by ~5% in CO (excluding the people who claim to be 3rd party), then, absent home-state effect, he should be down ~1% (idem.) in AZ.  Instead he is down ~11% (idem.), which gives McCain a home state bounce of ~10% (idem.), which is about what I would expect.

[Aizen]

In line with the other AZ polls we've seen. Around 10 points is what we're looking at.


Still embarrassing for McCain.

[Eraserhead]

Pathetic showing for McCain. Obama should campaign a little there. Why not?

[AkSaber]

I gotta wonder if, as the campaign drags on, will Senator McCain's Arizona lead widen?

[Verily]

Would Obama be winning Arizona if he weren't running against McCain?

it would be very similar to New Mexico and Colorado if McCain weren't running. Rememeber Clinton won here in 96.

Not that strong, but Obama would probably be running no more than five points behind, probably closer. It depends on who the Republican replacement candidate is, too. (Anyone in favor of amnesty loses the minuteman vote but does okay among Hispanics, Romney would increase Mormon turnout, etc.)

Arizona does have a stronger Republican presence than the other Southwestern states as a result of a very wealthy white population in Phoenix and Tucson and a high Mormon population. (Nevada also has the latter, but its white voters are not as high-income as in Arizona.) Arizona's major Democratic demographics, Hispanics and Native Americans, turn out at rates less than half that of the state's white population.

[War on Want]

Would Obama be winning Arizona if he weren't running against McCain?

it would be very similar to New Mexico and Colorado if McCain weren't running. Rememeber Clinton won here in 96.

Not that strong, but Obama would probably be running no more than five points behind, probably closer. It depends on who the Republican replacement candidate is, too. (Anyone in favor of amnesty loses the minuteman vote but does okay among Hispanics, Romney would increase Mormon turnout, etc.)

Arizona does have a stronger Republican presence than the other Southwestern states as a result of a very wealthy white population in Phoenix and Tucson and a high Mormon population. (Nevada also has the latter, but its white voters are not as high-income as in Arizona.) Arizona's major Democratic demographics, Hispanics and Native Americans, turn out at rates less than half that of the state's white population.

What he said.

[Brittain33]

Would Obama be winning Arizona if he weren't running against McCain?

it would be very similar to New Mexico and Colorado if McCain weren't running. Rememeber Clinton won here in 96.

I wonder if a comparison with Florida wouldn't be even closer, for many reasons.

[War on Want]

Would Obama be winning Arizona if he weren't running against McCain?

it would be very similar to New Mexico and Colorado if McCain weren't running. Rememeber Clinton won here in 96.

I wonder if a comparison with Florida wouldn't be even closer, for many reasons.

I don't think so. Obama would probably make Arizona very, very close by recent standards, but he would probably still loose by more than 5 points against someone like McCain out of state. It would be a whole different story with Romney or Huckabee though. Huckabee would loose 70% of the time, and with Romney it would be almost a tossup.

[Aizen]

Arizona will be a swing state in 2012. By then it'll be worth more EVs too (12 instead of 10)

[auburntiger]

Arizona would already be a swing state this year if not for McCain.

[Brittain33]

I don't think so. Obama would probably make Arizona very, very close by recent standards, but he would probably still loose by more than 5 points against someone like McCain out of state.

But wouldn't that be a reasonable predicting for Florida this year, too?

The two states have much in common. A conservative, anti-government heritage; lots of old people, particularly from the Midwest; lots of transients of all income levels; large minority communities with many people who don't vote, and which aren't in the bag for Democrats; heavy emphasis on construction and development; rapid population grwoth.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

AZ is not "conservative" in the same way as FL is.

[Ronnie]

Wow, this is pretty embarrassing for McCain.  Though, this IS summer, and I  expect McCain to take the state by more than a 9 point margin.

My prediction:

McCain 54%, Obama 40%, Other 4%

[CARLHAYDEN]

New Poll: Arizona President by Rasmussen on 2008-06-25

Summary: D: 40%, R: 49%, U: 5%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details


McCain leads by twenty-seven points among men but trails by six among women.

The Arizona Senator is supported by 81% of Republicans and enjoys a twelve point lead among unaffiliated voters. Obama gets the vote from 75% of Democrats.

Overall, McCain is viewed favorably by 60% of Arizona voters, Obama by 47%.

Once again the "Other" category at six per cent exceeds the "Not sure" at five per cent!