Talk Elections

The daily tracking poll goes back to July 16th.

Today's (12/05) results:

Clinton 34
Obama 24
Edwards 16

Huckabee 20
Giuliani 17
Romney 13
McCain 13
Thompson 10


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history

For some reason I find this amusing.

I would love an Obama-Huckabee race. Not because I think it would be a big Dem victory, but because I like both of them, even if I would never vote for the latter. The only other GOP candidate I like is Ron Paul, but I oppose his economic platform.

In January 2004, I was annoyed that Dean's loss to Kerry in IA changed the results of all the primaries after it. But this time the same process would be good for my candidate (Obama).

If he does win Iowa, he will improve in the other states where he is very low right now, like California, New York, Florida, Ohio, etc. There was an article a few months ago that says he has low support among Hispanics, which would explain CA.

I agree, except for the Dem victory wouldn't be "that" big.  It would be close to what it was last year, though the electoral map might shift more east/west.

Yes, would be interesting. I could see something like this happening in the case of Obama vs. Huckabee:

()

Whoever wins 2 out of the 3 deciding states in the West will be President.

I think Obama would have a big improvement over Kerry in all non-Southern states. The map might  look almost like it did in 1904 or 1924, only with the parties reversed. Huckabee would do about as well as Bush did in the South, since a large majority of white voters there are already voting Republican anyway. As long as Obama stays away from gun control and doesn't seem like to much of an environmentalist, he could do well in the Mountain West (not necessarily win a lot of states there, just improve over Kerry). I think the environmental issue is what hurt Clinton in the West in '96.

Somehow looking at those candidates and assuming that attitudes towards Obama's race (or Huckabee's "jesus juice" ftm.) won't be too big an issue, I'd have to say we will probably see an even greater shift of wealthier more "middle class" states into the Democratic column than we have already.

This is of course just a guess knowing what I do about both candidates and US politics (though I'm still Al and the likes could add more.)

If Huckabee's wins btw it would show that alot of the opposition to GWB has been more "personal" than "political"; supersoulty is right here, a vote for Huckabee is a vote to re-elect GWB; except with more protectionism. From what I can see.

I hope that map doesn't come true. I think Obama could possibly win Virginia (where race would unfortunatly be an issue) and Ohio (where it wouldn't be). I don't want another 51% mandate.


I agree. If Huckabee is nominated it would be terrible for the GOP in the Northeast. Not only would he lose all 9 states (which is a given at this point) but they'd lose even more Congressmen than last year's wipeout.

I don't even like thinking of a Huckabee victory at this point. A Baptist Minister as our President? The current president is too intrusively religious as it is.

True about the North East (Though should we really count PA among that category? MD is actually a better fit in all but geography.)

Though I was mainly thinking about states like Colorado, Arizona (a little), Florida and Virginia. Under that matchup I would except also to be see big D swings in Alaska and Indiana (though probably not enough to win them either state.)

On the other hand; with Huckabee in the driving seat; The GOP wouldn't have to worry about AR (obviously) or WV. And possibly IA too. Might even do better in MI, MN and WI: Assuming that religion isn't too big a factor.

I still think this nationwide Huckaboom will be transitory, except perhaps in Iowa, though I have no idea who will pick up the pieces if he goes back down.

LOL. That word made me laugh.

It may very well come down to Colorado next year. The senate race there will most likely be a Dem victory, which may help push the state into the Dem column...with Obama, but not if Hillary is the nominee. Virginia could also be interesting, but Huckabee would win between 3-4%.
Also, I think IA should be "green" on your map...remember that it switched from Gore to Bush.

Iowa probably goes Dem. There's been a lot of backlash against the GOP there, just not quite to the extent as say, NH. And I agree, Ohio doesn't really like Obama so that would make the race come down to Colorado, wouldn't it? Colorado is a good state for Obama though as is Nevada and New Mexico. 2008 could be the year the West comes into play. Aww yeah.

Historically, racist voting in the States has been every bit as common in affluent suburbs as working class areas. Just saying.

I never said it didn't. (nor with religious voting; that is why specifically I didn't mention North Carolina or Florida on my list.)

I was not aware of any GOP backlash in Iowa. Could you please elaborate?

The GOP lost two seats in Iowa. The first congressional district you can argue wasn't really off of GOP backlash but the second congressional district definitely was. Plus the fact that 50% of Iowan Republicans want out of Iraq doesn't say much for Iowa's chances of going GOP in 2008.

So you're a populist.

Daily Tracking Update:

Clinton´s national lead against Obama down to 7 points !

Clinton: 33%
Obama: 26%
Edwards: 15%
Richardson: 6%

Huckabee: 21%
Giuliani: 18%
Romney: 12%
Thompson: 11%
McCain: 11%
Paul: 8%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com

:)

I bet he overtakes her in about a week.

No, I don't think of myself as one. I like protectionism in theory but not in practice. And populism (at least the way I've heard it described) is socially conservative, which I am not on most issues.

33% is Clinton's lowest score since the daily tracking poll began as well as her smallest lead over Obama (though Obama reached 29% in October, so this isn't his highest; at the time Clinton had an 11-point lead).

Obviously, 21% is also Huckabee's highest. 18% is tied for second-lowest for Giuliani; his lowest was 17% yesterday. 11% is also Thompson's second-lowest; his lowest was also yesterday, at 10%.

Seven points behind nationally, (barely) ahead in Iowa, gaining in New Hampshire, and tied in South Carolina. We've finally got ourselves a race!

This is your chance to become President, Barack. Don't screw this up.

It's not just Giuliani's lowest point in Rasmussen, it's his lowest in any national poll in the past year.  Has he ever been as low as 17-18% in a national poll before this week?

So why do you like Huckabee? Cause of his smile?

Possibly not, but confirming that would take a lot of effort I don't feel like putting in :P Suffice to say that Giuliani is in deep trouble.

He just seems more authentic than any of the other GOP candidates. He's not using 9/11 to his advantage (Rudy), not a hollow, plastic shell of a man with no real beliefs (Romney) and not a former Freedom Fighting Hero who has come crawling back to the Party base begging for forgiveness (McCain, unfortunately). Huckabee talks about issues that the GOP avoids like the plague (such as race, the income divide, etc.) He's a nice change from the usual hacks they nominate, even if he's a fundie. He's personally okay, but his politics are downright scary.