Talk Elections

The Public Policy Institute of California survey was conducted from March 11-18. The margin of sampling error for the 1,077 likely general election voters was plus or minus 3%age points.

Obama: 49%
McCain: 40%
Undecided: 11%

Clinton: 46%
McCain: 43%
Undecided: 11%

FAVORABILITY

Barack Obama - 61% favorable, 34% unfavorable.
John McCain - 49% favorable, 45% unfavorable.
Hillary Rodham Clinton - 45% favorable, 52% unfavorable.

http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp?S=8076231&nav=9qrx

oh geez hillary. your suckiness  in the west knows no bounds. now you're putting california in play (disregard the fact that ive never heard of this pollster)

lol @ Hillary's favorables in Cali. People are really getting sick of her.

Does anybody really believe Hillary would lose CA? Or even put in in play? From what I'm hearing from the Repubicans, John McCain and his great "independent-ness" would put every Democratic state in play, even Massachusetts and California.  ()

Looks like it. If Clinton is nommed, the numbers will be EVEN LOWER!!

Massachusetts is competitive with McCain against Obama. No poll has shown Barack ahead by more than 5% to date.

Why would it be?

You're delusional. You stick with the polls and I'll stick with reality. McCain doesn't put Massachusetts in play nor does he win it against Obama. I think McCain has better electoral prospects than other Republicans, but put down the McCain kool aid for a second and think. It's a crazy as thinking Obama will put Texas in play for the Democrats.

Yeah, same thing goes for HillDawg and ArKansas. It used to be that she had a commanding lead, now she does about as well as Kerry as Obama will be lucky to break 40 there.

Colorado and Nevada seem to be real deals for Obama so far. It remains to be seen if McCain can do well on the west coast.

Color me skeptical of McCain prospects on the west coast.  Neither California, Oregon, and Washington have been carried by a Republican since 88 I think.  No reason to think that would change now - even against Hillary I'd doubt it.

Christ. Here is one to start you off.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/massachusetts/massachusetts_2008_presidential_election

I could see Clinton do horribly on the West coast. McCain is the right brand of republican for much of the west and Clinton clashes with the west coast (she is seen as a dragon lady). Basically everything except for Washington, California and Hawaii would go to McCain (at this point in time at least), and Washington would most likely be competitive. Obama however would do quite well in the west, many because he is so very pragmatic. Pesonally I know that I would not volunteer for a Clinton campaign, and I would even consider not voting for her (many around here voice the same opinion).

Did I ever say I felt he was going to win it? I said he would be competitive, meaning, he'll probably hold it to a 10-15% margin or so. It won't be a blowout. I have evidence to back that claim up. Nice try on trying to treat me as an Obama supporter, though. They are walking about saying Kansas, North Dakota and such are in play when they are shown within 10%. At least McCain is showed as tied in many polls.


I'm so sorry, 7%. That's really a world of difference. McCain has also been shown as tied and leading as well. Will he win Massachusetts? Of course not, but its no more ridicules when an Obama fanboy talks about him winning states he hasn't even sniffed the lead in, yet, or is close in one, unsupported poll.

There goes Hillary talking point.

Hillary is not going to lose California, perhaps 54-45.

If she continues to struggle among Western independents, and loses the election, I could see her doing even worse than that.  California isn't as Democratic as people tend to remember it being - Kerry won it by under 10 points in 2004.  It was only a few points more Democratic than Washington and less so than Hawai'i.

We're all getting our respective knickers in a twist.

With Clinton/Obama still being played out - McCain is not in the main game yet.

He isn't being challenged, he isn't really being questioned. He's going to ride well in the polls until the Nomination is decided. There's no real evidence to suggest that Clinton would have a harder time in CA.

McCain's tightrope-act will not last out a proper political campaign.

Than Obama?

I disagree.  Western independents didn't poll favorably for Clinton even before Obama was in the race.  It is not a group she will ever fill Obama's potential in.  I don't think California will be competitive in even a semi-competitive race - I'm just saying, McCain could do better than 54-45.  In fact, in an even race, 54-45 isn't a bad prediction.

Yeah, California's Democraticness is a bit overstated on here. It's not gonna swing with either candidate though.

Of course Hillary's not going to lose California. The point is this destroys her braindead talking point that Obama would lose California (and New York too for that matter.)

If Clinton or any of her supporters believes Obama would lose California then they're the height of stupidity. That's assuming any such thing has been stated.

In the end both Clinton and Obama would get around the same % +/- 3