MyDD :: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Electoral Votes

Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Electoral Votes

by Jacob Freeze, Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 11:51:12 AM EST

The liberal blogosphere has been ignoring bad polls for Obama and celebrating every uptick. What else is new?

But for some strange reason, a huge chunk of the country isn't ready to accept the self-evident wonderfulness of "the most likely Democratic candidate for President according to non-binding expressions of preference by super-delegates," and whatever momentary lead Barack Obama attains in one poll can quickly disappear in the next.

It isn't exactly what you would expect for a wonderful, wonderful candidate running against a psychotic dinosaur like John McCain, a Republican Party endorsed by a whopping 22% of likely voters, and the most unpopular President in history.

Survey USA and Rasmussen are telling the same sad story about the probable division of electoral votes at the moment, with many states too close to call:

Survey USA: Obama 253, McCain 258
Rasmussen: Obama 221, McCain 238

How is this possible? According to Obama's disciples, the only possible reason for voting against Obama is racism, and it looks like more than half the voters are racists one week and enlightened the next.

Racists one week and enlightened the next? It's just another mystery in the incomprehensible (but wonderful!) candidacy of Barack Obama!

Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain (all tags)

Permalink :: 55 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Survet USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (1.88 / 17)

by spunkmeyer on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 11:56:12 AM EST

Re: Survet USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (2.00 / 3)

I think it might be French anyway. Survet?

by conspiracy on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 11:57:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survet USA and Rasmussen: (none / 0)

Although surveyusa did an excellent read during the primaries vs others. I can't see him being tied though; I mean too many other polls swinging his way.

If it were just zogby or newsweek or LA times who have been out-liers all this season, I could see some credence to being tied. But local polls conducted by instate houses and not national polling houses are giving him some really good numbers.

And it was local polls that were right in the primary (was there even one which was wrong?)

Rise / Repeat / But for god's sake don't spin!

by aliveandkickin on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 11:58:16 AM EST

Re: Survet USA and Rasmussen: (none / 0)

Too many SUSA polls have McCain and Obama tied among 18-34 YOs. Far from believable. MO, and MN. Ohio is probably closer to the truth.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 11:35:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We saw this coming. (none / 0)

We saw the same thing happen in the TN and MD races, Kweisi Mfume was leading Steele by wide margins but ended up losing in the primary and Harold Ford leading Corker and ended up losing. There is a Bradley affect in the polling data when Black candidates are involves, we just don't know yet how voters will decide on the national security question in this presidential race.

by olawakandi on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:00:54 PM EST

he better be leading big by November (none / 0)

because of Bradley, his lead in the polls will likely be larger than the margin of victory he gets, if he gets victory. It will be very close, but you can't tell that to the Daily Kos, who thinks he'll win an LBJ landslide. His crowd actually thinks Alaska could be a battleground. Thats a snowball's chance in hell. The good thing is that he's going against John McCain, who himself doesn't generate any enthusiam. They could cancel each other out. It could likely end up a 49-49 election as we saw in 1960, with hopefully Obama on the winning side, and winning over 270 electoral votes. He is going to get cremated in Dixie, the black vote is too small compared to the white vote in those states, and they're not gonna register a million of them, but he will blow McCain out in the blue states, and I believe he will win New Hampshire.

by Lakrosse on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:15:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: he better be leading big by November (2.00 / 3)

They think Alaska could be a battleground because the current polling suggests it IS a battleground. Now it might not turn out that way but they at least base that belief on something. Now if people were claiming Alabama or Idaho or Wyoming or Utah then you might have a point.

by conspiracy on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:23:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You and your facts (2.00 / 2)

You can use them to prove anything that's even remotely true.

by JJE on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:58:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ford wasn't leading Corker (2.00 / 0)

He was ahead at one point in the race, but as Election Day approached, he fell behind dramatically in the polls, and all indications were that the momentum was swinging Corker's way. Kos even suggested on his front page that we give up on Ford and send donations to other candidates.

Pollster's averages had Ford down 4 or 5 points. The last nonpartisan poll showing Ford ahead was from a month before the election.

John McCain

by MILiberal on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:22:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ford wasn't leading Corker (2.00 / 1)

I believe Ford actually performed BETTER than the final polls if memory serves me correctly. Though that still wasn't enough of course.

by conspiracy on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:24:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We saw this coming. (2.00 / 0)

I live in the Memphis area. Ford was a lousy candidate. His family is viewed as a bunch of corrupt politicians. That was probably enough to keep him out of office. He still might have won if the GOP hadn't gone very racist towards the end of the campaign.

Memphis politics can be very racist. The current mayor, who is black, always runs on race. This is the only thing that keeps this inadequate hack in office. Much like Coleman Young in Detroit for all those years of mismanagement. Memphis has a high enough black majority to ensure a black candidate wins the mayoral race. Thankfully, there are plenty of highly-qualified blacks in Memphis. Hopefully, one of those will challenge him in the next election and prove strong enough to take down his machine. Typical big city politics with race thrown into the mix.

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:49:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We saw this coming. (2.00 / 2)

Ford's quite smart and campaigned hard. Frankly for a black Dem to have won, what, 48% of the vote in a Tennessee Senate race is no small feat.

But I was disappointed.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:53:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We saw this coming. (none / 0)

The Bradley Effect is a myth.

by IsaccBurn on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 03:59:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We saw this coming. (none / 0)

Ford also lost in part because Kerry made that comment about the troops and he was co-campaign manager with the Kerry camp.

by olawakandi on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:09:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survet USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (2.00 / 10)

Jacob, Jacob, Jacob... What's your point other than to trash Obama? Oh, that's right. You don't have any other purpose on this site. Of all the polling places out there, you came up with this obscure site. Then you cherry-picked what data and content to use so it fit your goal of making Obama look bad. How about posting their numbers based on recent polls instead of these that use some polls that are more than 3 months old?

Latest Poll Per State 289 249

This effort was as weak as any of your other anti-Obama postings.

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:01:29 PM EST

Re: Survet USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (2.00 / 10)

Scott Rasmussen himself (published today) says:

''The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Barack Obama leading in states with 200 Electoral College votes while John McCain leads in states with 174 votes. When leaners are included, Obama leads 284-240.''

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/election_2008_electora l_college_update

by conspiracy on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We need better trolls. n/t (2.00 / 5)

by Pragmatic Left on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:14:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We need better trolls. n/t (2.00 / 5)

I don't think we need better trolls. The ones we have are amusing. Sort of like small children acting silly in a roomful of adults so they can get attention.

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:23:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We need better trolls. n/t (2.00 / 1)

If we had better trolls, they wouldn't be trolls. We have good dissenters.

If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.

by vcalzone on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 01:24:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survey USA and (1.60 / 5)

90% of all statistics can be made to say anything.

50% of the time.

Jerkass.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 12:47:19 PM EST

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen (2.00 / 4)

Jerome? Please?

John McCain isn't evil. He's just wrong about a lot of things. Vote Obama!

by proseandpromise on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 01:03:54 PM EST

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (none / 0)

Carter led Ford by 30+
President Gore led Bush by 10+ points
President Dukakis led Bush by 15% in August
President Kerry had a near double-digit lead....

And let's not forget presidents Dewey and Perot.

NONE of these polls are worth VP Garner's bucket of warm piss at this point.

So best to ignore all of them and wait til the battle is really joined - and when all the real pollsters move to a tighter, more reliable set of filters to try to figure out just who might actually vote. Right now pollsters are measuring whimsy, not opinion.

by M1513 on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 02:17:02 PM EST

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (none / 0)

Shit.

If it was current polling, I might be worried.

But if you click through to the source data, so much of it is based on March, April and May numbers that it bears no resemblance to even current reality, much less the fall.

by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:43:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (none / 0)

Did Gore really lead Bush by 10? I thought he was down almost wire-to-wire.

And I don't remember Kerry being up by more than 5 or so against Bush.

by BlueEngineerInOhio on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 12:11:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The New Jersey Results Are Flipped (2.00 / 1)

They switched the numbers for Obama and McCain in NJ. Obama leads big, not McCain.

by DaveG on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 02:31:10 PM EST

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads (none / 0)

Why don't you go spout your repug shi## on a repug blog???

by Spanky on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 03:09:09 PM EST

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (2.00 / 0)

Actually, Rasmussen has Obama ahead 284-240. It's easier to figure out where they have the election by reading their website than a second-hand account of their website. Good try though.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/election_2008_electora l_college_update

by gorebeatbush2 on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 03:10:32 PM EST

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (none / 0)

I linked through the Web site he's referring to, and went to the original data that blogger used, and so much of the data is based on March, April and May polls that it's ridiculous.

by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:40:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't worry DNCC will select the president! (1.00 / 1)

They are pretty good at overturning results. It is simple Donna B would take electoral votes from McCain and would give them to Obama. All the DNCC members would then praise her for her wisdom. They would base the distribution on today's poll numbers.

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 03:24:53 PM EST

Re: Don't worry DNCC will select the president! (1.50 / 2)

The DNCC? Is that like the DNC and DCCC mixed together? If you're going to push moronic conspiracy theories, at least get the names right.

by IsaccBurn on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 04:03:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Democratic National Convention Committee (none / 0)

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:01:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's with the Donna Brazille thing? (none / 0)

I'll never get that. Out of all the people to hate on, the lunatics choose some a lady who has never served elected office, whose last meaningful contribution to Democratic politics was during the Clinton Administration, who didn't explicitly endorse Obama for most (all?) of the primary?

Seriously, this is the culprit in the crazy DNC conspiracy theories? A TV analyst?

I'm so glad you guys don't have credence with anyone anymore.

UNITY!

by The Great Gatsby on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:21:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh, Good Lord (none / 0)

Did you see how much of that is based on March data?

by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:17:22 PM EST

Re: Oh, Good Lord (none / 0)

Lots of April and May numbers too.

This is ridiculous.

by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:18:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh, Good Lord (none / 0)

So let's see:

They have McCain and Obama tied in Pennsylvania.

And McCain cleaning Obama's clock in Michigan and New Jersey.

Yeah, sounds like data you can trust.

by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:34:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's Obvious That... (2.00 / 1)

God, Barack Obama is the greatest person since Jesus. He's FAR smarter than that Einstein ever was. He's also the most experienced man ever to win a presidential nomination. He NEVER even farts at all. And ANYBODY who dares say a word against Barack Obama is a racist or even worse something called a "troll".

by handsomegent on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:20:20 PM EST

Re: It's Obvious That... (none / 0)

You know it's possible to criticize a candidate while still maintaining a grasp on reality and choosing not to insult all of his supporters.

I know, it sounds amazing, but it's true. When you unhinged dead-enders finally figure this out, we'll really be in trouble.

Until then, we just laugh at you for clinging to a failed candidacy.

Like this: LOL.

by IsaccBurn on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:51:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Obvious That... (none / 0)

Laugh all you want. I've been a Democrat since 1971 and have NEVER voted anything but Democratic---except for this year.

by handsomegent on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 05:56:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Obvious That... (none / 0)

And why am I supposed to care?

Party identification makes you no less of a ridiculous idiot.

by IsaccBurn on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:10:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Obvious That... (none / 0)

Kind of funny when these people say they've been Democrats for 35 years, but aren't going to be Democrats anymore because Hillary lost.

Then they call the Obama supporters cultists.

by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:43:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Obvious That... (none / 0)

I will stand for Hillary and against the bias of the press by refusing to vote for Obama. And there will be millions of us despite what you say or think.

by handsomegent on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:52:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Obvious That... (2.00 / 1)

You're not standing for Hillary anymore. Get that straight right now.
Hillary is supporting Obama now. Her supporters are as well.

by skohayes on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 07:28:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Obvious That... (none / 0)

Somehow I doubt that.

by Skaje on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 08:08:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survey USA and Rasmussen: McCain Leads in Elec (none / 0)

GO here

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ maps/obama_vs_mccain/

by NY Writer on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 11:26:28 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.