jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:03 AM
Original message |
Obama gets only 79% of female Democrats, 65% of Clinton supporters against McCain |
|
Diving deeper into the great Pew poll that offered a lot of subgroup analysis these two numbers are nothing short of horrifying to anyone interested in Democratic victory in November. The often mentioned "25% of Clinton supporters will vote for McCain over Obama" is accurate but not all of the remainder goes to Obama. 65% does. That means it is conceivable that McCain could win up to 30% of the Clinton vote if Obama is nominated.
Gender among Democratic voters
Female: Obama 79, McCain 15 Female: Clinton 93, McCain 5
Male: Obama 84, McCain 14 Female: Clinton 84, McCain 12
Primary preference
Obama vs. McCain
Clinton supporters: Obama 65, McCain 25 Obama supporters: Obama 97, McCain 3
Clinton vs. McCain
Clinton supporters: Clinton 98, McCain 1 Obama supporters: Clinton 86, McCain 10
These are the current numbers. Obama's negatives have continued to increase for a year. How bad would these numbers be by November if he is nominated? To put this in perspective Reagan won 24% of Democratic votes in 1984. The result? A 49 state landslide for him. Yes. Obama, the greatest politician ever, is flirting with Mondale level party defections. It is not inconceivable that when it is all said and done 25-30% of Democrats vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee. Of course there is also the possibility that the party rallies around Obama, although don't expect Obama to come close to matching the performance of every Democrat from 1992-2004 (the Dem average of the Democratic major party vote during that period is 93%). Besides that is a massive gambit. No party wants to go into an election gambling with party unity. The party formally united around Mondale too after a bruising primary and he still lost 24% of Democrats. Mondale's problem was Reagan was very popular; Obama's problem is many voters simply do not think he is qualified to be president. This explains the discrepancy between his favorablity/unfavorability rating, which while consistently in decline, still remain pretty good and his performance against McCain. Mondale could at least hope that Reagan's popularity would slip for some reason, such as scandal. Where can Obama get on the job training over the next year?
|
Alamom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:06 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Thank you for posting. nm |
flor de jasmim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:08 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Do these figures include the "new" voters? |
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
The much hyped new voters, just like Dean's new voters, will vote for Clinton just like Dean's voted for Kerry.
|
ej510
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
44. It's funny how they never poll the the black community. |
|
Edited on Mon Mar-17-08 09:54 AM by ej510
Because I can promise you that if the democrats and the media continue this shit. We will stay home in november. It's been all over the black radio shows nationally. Whether you want to hear it or not. We are mad as hell at the DNC! We are putting together a movement called the blackout. Alot of us are hurt because we could never imagine that democrats would treat us like republicans have. This election has opened up my eyes and others in ways that we would never imagine. The DNC is coming a part at the seams.We've noticed the secret words like empty suit when this man was president at the Harvard Law Review. Keep it up with this bullshit. Keep it up!
|
goddess40
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:09 AM
Response to Original message |
3. That accounts for the republican cross over vote |
|
they weren't going to vote for Clinton in the regular election either.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. These numbers are for Democrats only |
|
Edited on Mon Mar-17-08 07:10 AM by jackson_dem
Obama is doing worse than Dukakis among Democrats, significantly worse than Dole did with rethugs in 1996, and is flirting with Mondale level of party defections and we are only in the middle of March with the rethug machine still waiting on the sidelines...
|
goddess40
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
12. so registered democrats are going to vote for McCain over Obama |
|
If that's true then they are really democrats. It's some type of mental illness for a democrat to vote for McGrandpa over another Democrat. I think it's called Joementum.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. It happens every year. In 1984 24% of Democrats voted for Reagan |
|
There is always crossover voting. Clinton won 13% rethug support, Gore 8%, Kerry 6%; Bush won 11% of Dems both times and Dole 10%. Reagan won 24%. The problem is Obama may be bring us closer to the Reagan number than the Gore/Kerry ones...
His chief problem is he simply is not seen as qualified to be president by many voters. There is a reason no one has become president with as little experience/accomplishments (such as being a war hero) as him.
|
goddess40
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
24. McCain isn't more qualified than Obama -don't buy into that lie |
|
With all the reports about McCain's instability no one should want him in the White House, granted just like Bush and Reagan he wouldn't really be in charge, but he could still do a hell of a lot of damage. To vote for McCain is to say you love the way the last eight years have gone and you'd like four more of the same.
Besides what good would it do to take control of the House and the Senate if we have McVeto in the White House? If someone really thinks McGrandpa will be open to anything the Dem's want I'd like to know what they've been smoking as I might need it if the idiots of this country put McCain in the White House.
|
Iceburg
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
43. Sure they will. Don't you remember here at DU in 2004 many posters urged Kerry |
|
to ask McCain to be his VP. There was a very active letter writing campaign at DU to draft McCain.
|
JVS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:10 AM
Response to Original message |
6. So Hillary has succesfully demonized Obama to her supporters. |
|
Great job senator Dumbfuck.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. There is no evidence of that. Obama's problems are very fundamental |
|
Edited on Mon Mar-17-08 07:12 AM by jackson_dem
He hemorrhages support with certain groups, chiefly women, senior citizens, and whites (particularly white working folks). Obama's favorabiltiy ratings with Democrats are fantastic (as are Clinton's in the real world, although they suck in the alternate universe know as the blogosphere). His biggest problem is many folks who like him don't think he is qualified to be president. I am sure the Clinton polling showed this, hence the "3 AM" ad.
|
Rydz777
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
19. Good analysis. I voted for Hillary on Super Tuesday, after |
|
long hoping for Gore and then supporting Edwards. She was my default choice, but I've grown to admire her. It is certainly possible that the Obama campaign is in deep trouble and that Hillary will be the last one standing. If so, I will be glad to vote for her again in November - and she will win. It will be "the economy, stupid."
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-18-08 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
50. yes, it is the "the economy, stupid." |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
35. BO is responsible for his own problems. Blaming others makes you look petty. |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
36. "Great job senator Dumbfuck."--and name calling makes your look IMMATURE |
Bullet1987
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:15 AM
Response to Original message |
8. I think some of Hillary's supporters are actually Republican women as well |
|
And that's something that hasn't really been talked about. It would only make sense that some conservative women would also feel empowered by a woman running for President and don't particulary care for Obama...or any other Democrat for that matter.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. No. These numbers are for Democrats only |
billbuckhead
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
10. Preachergate give whites a reason to vote against Hillary's opponent |
|
It's now dead man walking for the Rezko backed machine politician from the Chicago.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. He was at 29% among PA whites before pastorgate |
|
He could be below the 25% mark. Why is this significant? That is Jesse Jackson land.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
38. very interesting. thanks |
niceypoo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/430821/survey_republican_women_support_hillary.html">Hillary getting support from Republican women Actually these numbers aren't that unusual, Bill Clinton had support from 15% of Republicans overall in 1996.
|
BlueManDude
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:25 AM
Response to Original message |
11. post link to this analysis please nm |
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
18. The numbers are from the pew poll--that was before pastorgate... |
BeyondGeography
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:36 AM
Response to Original message |
15. Angry losers...many will actually get over it once Bill does his aw-shucks Obama's a great guy |
|
routine and Hillary pretends she really wants Obama to win.
People often grow to despise the candidate who beats their own. It rarely turns them into Republicans in November. Hillary and Obama have the same policies 98% of the time.
You're way off base, as usual.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
17. Walter Mondale is that you? |
PVnRT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-18-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
51. Mondale was a shit campaigner with no charisma |
|
Combine that with the Amerika Uber Alles Reagan campaign, and that's why he won his landslide.
IOW, Mondale =/ Obama
|
stray cat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:39 AM
Response to Original message |
16. Well it fits with Hillary's endorsement of McCain over Obama |
barack the house
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:55 AM
Response to Original message |
20. Obama has plenty Republican support to make the difference. There is no barriers of repub voters GE |
|
Edited on Mon Mar-17-08 07:56 AM by barack the house
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
22. He gets 8% rethug support against McCain, Clinton gets 5%. Both are in the Gore/Kerry range |
|
Gore got 8%, Kerry 6%.
It is an insane strategy to divide your party and gamble on winning indies and rethugs. A Democratic candidate should be getting about 90% Democratic support and a rethug 2-3 points more. To gamble that on whimsical indies, especially against McCain makes no sense--especially when you have Obama's electability steadily decreasing. He could be losing indie by the the time autumn arrives.
|
MattBaggins
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 07:57 AM
Response to Original message |
21. so we should just quit |
|
because you're bigots and little children who will throw a tantrum if you don't get your own way.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
23. It isn't bigotry. Many folks simply think Obama is unqualified for the world's most important job |
|
Just as you need experience to run McDonald's some folks they you need experience to be president. There is a reason no one has ever won the presidency with as little experience/accomplishments as Obama.
|
BeyondGeography
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. Glad you find him inferior to George W. Bush circa 2000 |
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #25 |
26. In the eyes of voters six years as governor of the second largest state is enough |
|
Bush is actually a reason why experience is more valued this time around since the "he will have experienced advisers so don't worry!" defense doesn't work as well post-Bush...
|
BeyondGeography
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
32. Bush was an evident moron to much of the country...his sole resume point did little to assure |
|
many of us.
Where have you been this campaign, anyway? Obama has dispatched a horde of experienced candidates, and the Clintons are next. Obviously, many people see something in him that you don't.
|
MattBaggins
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
|
His so called lack of experience is easier to overcome than the dislike large sections of this country have for Hillary.
We have had Presidents with as little or less "experience" than Obama.
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #27 |
29. His negatives are rising. The Hill has high negatives cards is a joke anyway |
|
Any nominee will have high negatives by he fall.
Many voters would rather vote for someone they dislike or even disagree with if they believe that person will prevent a plan from flying into downtown.
A handful had less political experience but they had extraordinary accomplishments, such as winning the Civil War or WW2. Obama has one speech in which he said nothing groundbreaking.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-18-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #27 |
49. The 'electabilty" meme for BO was a myth to start with and now it is going PUFF |
PVnRT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-18-08 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
52. What in the poll results leads you to that conclusion? |
|
All I see are numbers for X versus Y, not why people would vote for one over the other.
|
Metric System
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:23 AM
Response to Original message |
28. Great analysis! Obama supporters just don't seem to realize that we Hillary supporters feel just as |
|
passionately and strongly about her as they do about Obama. He's not the only one who inspires.
|
totodeinhere
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #28 |
30. So that means if Clinton doesn't make it you won't vote for Obama? |
|
This tells me that too many Clinton supporters are not loyal democrats. That really tells me something about them.
|
Metric System
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
46. How do you draw those conclusions based on what I wrote?!? |
totodeinhere
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #46 |
|
The analysis said that "Obama gets only 79% of female Democrats, 65% of Clinton supporters against McCain." If that's not disloyalty toward our probable nominee, then what is? 35% of Clinton supporters won't vote for Obama if he is the nominees. That's shameful.
|
moobu2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:31 AM
Response to Original message |
31. Last time we had numbers like this we had 12 years of puke rule. |
niceypoo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:34 AM
Response to Original message |
33. 3% of Obama supporters would choose McCain over Obama? |
|
I find that just a tad strange.
25% of Clinton supporters will vote McCain over Obama? Looks like Obama supporters policy of attracting Hillary voters by trying to destroy Hillary is going over like a lead balloon.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #33 |
41. The constant mockery by Obama on Hillary and by his supports it taking its toll. |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 08:58 AM
Response to Original message |
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:01 AM
Response to Original message |
39. Any poll taken in the heat of a primary is going to look like this. nt |
Orsino
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:01 AM
Response to Original message |
40. I can't believe how stupid Democrats are... |
|
...continuing to vote for this guy they won't vote for. :rofl:
It seems that Obama is getting plenty of OJT defeating a candidate as popular as Clinton.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:12 AM
Response to Original message |
42. Thanks once again for your detailed analysis |
moobu2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-17-08 09:46 AM
Response to Original message |
45. You don’t have a link for this do you? |
PaulaFarrell
(840 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-18-08 09:18 AM
Response to Original message |
|
horrifying to think Democratic women would be so childish and petulant if their candidate doesn't win. I'll believe it when I see it personally.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 06:49 AM
Response to Original message |