State of the race, Obama up by six

June 12, 2008

All of the usual caveats apply — we’re still five months away from the general election, and the landscape will change; national polls offer minimal predictive value this far out; and a presidential race is a state-by-state contest. With all of that in mind, though, it’s nevertheless helpful to consider national polls for their general trends, and to offer some sense of voters’ attitudes, especially now that we’re down to a one-on-one campaign.

And right now, it looks like Barack Obama is in reasonably good shape. From the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll:

Obama leads McCain among registered voters, 47 to 41 percent, which is outside the poll’s margin of error. In the previous NBC/Journal survey, released in late April, Obama was ahead by three points, 46-43 percent.

In the head-to-head matchup, Obama leads McCain among African Americans (83-7 percent), Hispanics (62-28), women (52-33), Catholics (47-40), independents (41-36) and even blue-collar workers (47-42). Obama is also ahead among those who said they voted for Clinton in the Democratic primaries (61-19).

Obama leads by seven among white women (46-39), a key swing demographic. What’s more, Americans say they prefer change to experience by a wide margin, and as one of the pollsters behind the survey noted, people just don’t see McCain as an agent of change: “Voters are not convinced that McCain represents the change they want and that he’ll be all that different from Bush.”

For that matter, Americans actually seem to expect an Obama presidency. Putting aside preferences, poll respondents were asked which candidate they thought would win. It wasn’t even close — 54% predict an Obama win, while only 30% said the same of McCain.

So, if all of these factors are leaning in Obama’s favor, why is he only up by six? Because McCain is doing extremely well with white men, leading Obama by 20 points (55-35). White men make up 40% of the electorate, so this makes a big difference. And while Obama leads among women of all ethnic and racial backgrounds, McCain enjoys an edge among white suburban women (44-38).

Nevertheless, one of the numbers that jumped out at me was an “enthusiasm gap.”

The WSJ reported:

Another Obama advantage: his supporters’ satisfaction and excitement with his candidacy. While half of pro-Obama voters say they are motivated mainly by support for him, rather than opposition to Sen. McCain and Republicans, fewer than 40% of McCain voters are motivated by support for him personally. That is a measure of voter energy that could translate into greater turnout for Sen. Obama in November.

If that energy gap persists, Mr. Hart says, “it is going to be a huge problem for Republicans this fall.” Mr. Newhouse agreed: “It is not that these voters aren’t for McCain,” he says. What’s lacking is “the enthusiasm, the passion, the energy” of the other side.

“I think the real story is the shadow that George Bush is casting over this election,” Mr. Newhouse adds. What’s hurting Sen. McCain is voters’ sense that “he will pattern his policies after George W.”

Mr. Hart called the president “a 200-pound ball and chain” around McCain’s ankle, a linkage Sen. Obama and the Democratic National Committee are trying to reinforce daily in voters’ minds. “Unless he finds some way to cut it loose,” Mr. Hart adds, “he’s going to be dragging it right through the election.”

The anti-Bush evidence is overwhelming. The latest poll findings add to the stretch of more than three years in which majorities have expressed disapproval of Mr. Bush’s job performance. And increasingly, voters don’t like him personally. By 60% to 30%, they have negative views of him, his worst showing ever.

With regards to parties, 43% of Americans have a favorable view of the Democratic Party, while only 28% say the same about the GOP. Removing Obama’s and McCain’s name from the equation, 51% of voters want a Democratic president, while 35% want a Republican president.

Yes, that means McCain is running ahead of the generic preference for his party. But as Jonathan Chait noted, “[Y[ou wonder how much better McCain can do…. How much room for growth can there be?”

Sometimes I wonder if even McCain supports McCain.

Yes he wants the presidency, but his heart may not be in it. Deep inside self-doubts about his age have to be percolating. I suspect, subconsciously at least, he knows he is not fit for the job.

There is an inner erosion going on inside McCain…
It will be interesting to see where it leads him as we go on.

  • Can we stop trashing women now?

    I’m amazed that the media – and commenters on this blog – are treating them like emotional twits with no self-control just because a few have gone off the deep end (see hillaryis44.com).

    But the majority of women support Obama.. even though he just humiliated the first serious woman contender ever. I think that takes a lot of emotional strength and foresight. I daresay women in general have a hell of a lot better political instincts than men do.

    So let’s drop the cat lady stereotype?

  • Just a hunch, but between the bad week McCain’s had and the trend towards reunification on the Democratic side, I think we could see a double-digit lead for Obama with the next round of polling.

  • But the majority of women support Obama.. even though he just humiliated the first serious woman contender ever

    Since you asked, Tamalak, it’s precisely statements like this one that reinforce the “cat lady” stereotype you’re talking about.

    How exactly did Barack Obama “humiliate” Hillary Clinton? They ran head-to-head in a fair competition before the voters of this party, and he attracted more votes. She came within a thin margin of winning the nomination, but came up just short. It was a tough primary, a fair fight, and a close finish. How is that “humiliating”?

  • How exactly did Barack Obama “humiliate” Hillary Clinton? They ran head-to-head in a fair competition before the voters of this party, and he attracted more votes. She came within a thin margin of winning the nomination, but came up just short. It was a tough primary, a fair fight, and a close finish. How is that “humiliating”?

    Because she started out with tremendous advantages and an apparent lock on the nomination, and he tore them down with superior managerial skills and better campaigning, while she squandered money and opportunity left and right. Then she spent months after Wisconsin running around desperately while everyone laughed at her knowing that she no longer had a chance. That’s humiliating.

  • Yes, Tamalak, I’ve heard and read comments by a few women who seem to have “gone off the deep end” because of Hillary’s withdrawal. But as a white man, after living through the “Dumb 2000” vote and then the “Dumber 2004” vote, I’d have to say my demographic must be nearly all idiots. It seems like the Bush years have turned all but maybe 10 or 20% of us into Chris Matthews.

    But I think all that’s needed to get Obama elected is to let McCain speak:

    Years in Iraq? “Maybe a hundred. That’s fine with me.”

    When to bring the soldiers home? “That’s really not important.”

    Next?

  • An historical comparison would be helpful — how does this poll compare to polls at this point in the previous five or six presidential campaigns?

  • I’d like to see Obama’s lead in double-digits, but this will do for now. In the coming weeks, the voters will see a lot more of these candidates, and I can’t imagine that McCorpse is going to pull ahead. Unless, he gives another fabulous speech, of course.

  • That’s humiliating.

    Well, I’d agree with that characterization. But as your litany of that campaign’s problems show, he didn’t humiliate her, she humiliated herself. He was just there to pick up the pieces.

    And that’s the key problem here. Internal problems from her campaign and media attacks that were unfair have somehow been affixed to the Obama campaign. I know there’s a desire to want to blame someone for the shortcomings, but that blame belongs to Mark Penn and Chris Matthews, not the Obama campaign.

  • Sometimes I wonder if even McCain supports McCain.

    Knowing how the man flipflops like a fish out of water, ROTF, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Senator Patronizing-Pander-Bear comes out on election night and declares that he voted for Obama, that he’s been a secret Obamist since childhood, and that he’s really the “stealth chairman” of the Republicans for Obama group.

  • people just don’t see McCain as an agent of change

    Goodbye Mr. Maverick meme.

    43% of Americans have a favorable view of the Democratic Party

    I’d bet many of those who have an unfavorable view are angry that there has been no impeachment, no withdrawl from Iraq, and no antidote to Rep obstruction.

    Tamalak (2) Can we stop trashing women now?

    Someone said yesterday that the Republican strategy was to make people hate Obama, because McCain doesn’t have much room to rise. I would go further and argue that this has been the Rep and their media’s intention for a long time now. Pit women vs blacks, old vs young, urban vs rural, etc.

  • This poll confirms what I have been telling you all along: Senator Smarmy has serious problems with suburban white women. He may be managing now to hoodwink Hispanics, Catholics, independents, blue-collar workers and whites in general (wonder what he secretly promised them?), but we women of the ‘burbs aren’t fooled by his fake concern for us. We’re sharper than that and we know he’s a misogynist to his boots. He also thinks he’s too cool for the suburbs, where it’s harder to buy crack on every corner and get blowjobs in limos at any hour. You all are going to be very surprised in November when white suburban women who don’t live in the city because they’re rightfully afraid of black guys like Mr. Danger cost your hero the election.

  • TR is right. Tamalak, you threw out a suggestion at this blog, which AFAIK hasn’t “trashed women” EVER. You could tell us specifically where it happened if you want a different response.

    ———–

    The 200 lb ball and chain around McCain’s leg is also ironically the only thing holding him up. If he tries to cut it loose he’ll lose the wingnuts he has (and he wouldn’t fool many “normal” people anyway, because for once we have a good candidate who knows how to efficiently dispel BS).

    ———–

    fewer than 40% of McCain voters are motivated by support for him personally. That is a measure of voter energy that could translate into greater turnout for Sen. Obama in November.

    Could? HA!

    And this is the opportunity of a lifetime for Democrats. I have never seen this big of an advantage, and we need to work hard to “run the table” so that president Obama has a strong mandate to enact the changes that desperately need to be made. If we slack off, we may well end up with a win but not a mandate, and that would be a HUGE missed opportunity.

    It’s time for all of us to get out there and register new voters.

  • I love how the WSJ uses the word “looking” in their headline “Obama Leads McCain, But Race Is Looking Tight”. They know there’s a huge “voter energy” gap. They know McCain has no chance of distancing himself from the Toxic Texan.

    Whistle past graveyards much?

    LOL

  • The only way to really judge the State of the Race is by looking at how state-by-state polls color the electoral map.

    I go to fivethirtyeight.com to get the current pulse…

  • Well, I’d agree with that characterization. But as your litany of that campaign’s problems show, he didn’t humiliate her, she humiliated herself. He was just there to pick up the pieces.

    And that’s the key problem here. Internal problems from her campaign and media attacks that were unfair have somehow been affixed to the Obama campaign. I know there’s a desire to want to blame someone for the shortcomings, but that blame belongs to Mark Penn and Chris Matthews, not the Obama campaign.

    You are correct, there’s no rational reason to blame Obama for Clinton’s humiliation. And to the degree that Hillary supporters are defecting to McCain, they are irrational. I’m just saying there’s a lot fewer of them than is being suggested by the hyperventilating media. Mary is not representative of her sex.

    Racer, Mr. Carpetbagger has never trashed women on this blog, but I’ve seen many snarky and counterproductive screeds in the comments. I’m just suggesting that we ease up a little, that’s all.

  • Dukakis had a 17 point lead over Bush the Elder coming out of the Dem convention of ‘88.

    Yes indeed. We should not get complacent. In 1988 the economy was biting Bush on the ass, but it wasn’t that bad and wasn’t totally toxic like his son is now. And Dukakis wasn’t half the candidate Obama is. It’s also important to remember that GHWB was running as the heir to Reagan, whose job performance was approved by 57% of Americans in 1988.

  • Yes, first Hillary humiliated herself by calling herself a racist. Then she humiliated herself by making such a big fuss about tearing up in a conversation with a journalist. She really humiliated herself by making sure the media never covered any of her policy statements, and she also made sure they only covered them to make comparisons with Obama, when they did talk about them at all. Then she humiliated herself by giving away MI and FL to Obama. And then she humiliated herself by forcing Bill to be trashed by Vanity Fair. With all that humiliating, she hardly had any time to run a substantive campaign.

  • Tamalak, “Nutpicking” is very easy. I can find “many snarky and counterproductive screeds in the comments” on any topic, and that proves… nothing.

    Clinton shot herself in the foot repeatedly. Just because she did so and some of us (myself included) made fun of that, it doen’t mean we could ever legitimately be accused of “trashing women”. That would explain why we’re defending Michelle Obama.

  • I’m just saying there’s a lot fewer of them than is being suggested by the hyperventilating media.

    Agreed. The media is seizing on the fact that McCain has an edge on Obama among suburban women in the latest polling, when this pretty much coincides with the “Security Mom” nonsense we heard about in 2004, as these women rallied around Bush. They’re ignoring the surprising findings of the polls — Obama has major leads in Hispanics, the working-class, etc. etc. — and going with the narrative they want to push.

    Mary is not representative of her sex.

    Thank God for that. Did someone hear a sad trombone?

  • I don’t thik the hillaryis44.org element is that large. Certainly, the media has blown it out of reasonable proportion. The white men voters are more of problem for him. That’s the core of the Limbaugh crowd, and I think they tend to vote against their own interests more than anyone.

    My take on John McCain: he wants to be nominated, and he wants to be elected and inaugurated, and he wants to be called “Mr. President, and he wants to bomb someone. Other than that I don’t think he has any interest in really being the President. He acts disinterested and almost alittle panicy. My guess is that should he win he’ll be allowed to bomb someone then step aside before his term is over setting up the Republicans’ real choice to carry on. Watch who he picks as his runningmate. He’s a Trojan Horse.

  • Tamalak, “Nutpicking” is very easy. I can find “many snarky and counterproductive screeds in the comments” on any topic, and that proves… nothing.

    Oy! “nutpicking” is taking crazy random comments on a blog and blaming the candidate for them. I’m taking crazy random comments on a blog and blaming crazy random people for them. I’m just saying we should take a collective deep breath. And really, I’m aiming my frustrated comments more at the media, than at this blog. I’m not trying to start anything!

  • shillary’s “BUT I AM THE WHITE CANDIDATE” strategy, underwritten by kkkarl rove, did not help. When more white men and suburban women see who mccain is and what he stands for, his support there will diminish.

    But if Obama continues to work with traditionally disenfrachised voters, they will not matter anyhow – the democratic party will always lose national elections if they place more value on those that don’t support progressive politics in the first place (and many of those folks are part of the “advertise liberally” circle-jerk).

    Endless triangulation and “republican light” is what created the “republican revolution” under bill clinton and swept the neocons into power in the first place

  • Mary – you forgot the most important humiliation:

    SHE BASED HER CAMPAIGN ON KKKARL ROVE TALKING POINTS and tacitly accepted the support of RUSH LIMBAUGH.

    Maybe folks like you think that it is “smart” to use the architect of the dur chimpfurher’s campaigns and current advisor to mccain to structure a democratic campaign too, but gratefully, most disagree.

    And Rush lead the anti-clinton revolution in the 1990’s and now she was willing to accept his support?

    Yeah – sure, made her look very “presidential”, “competent” and politically savvy, didn’t it.

  • WTF is all this Hillary stuff about?
    Look, is is now Obama Vs McCain and the Corp Media (NPR included).
    Think of 2000, and the role of the Corp Media then. They want a horsrace, and the owners of the Corp Media would prefer McCain (that few extra pieces of silver is more imprtant than the country’s well-being).
    The comment about Dukakis is appreciated, and Hillary has said to pull together behind Obama. I think that she would make a great majority leader in the Senate.
    The nominating race is over. Can we focus a bit, please?

  • Tamalak wrote: she squandered money and opportunity left and right. Then she spent months after Wisconsin running around desperately while everyone laughed at her knowing that she no longer had a chance. That’s humiliating.

    Sounds more like Hillary Clinton humiliated Hillary Clinton.

    And even though Obama ran a better campaign, his margin of victory was far from a humiliating defeat for Clinton. Clinton may have been mathematically eliminated after her failure on Super Tuesday, but it was a close race — far from a humiliating blowout.

    That — Obama winning in a humiliating blowout — is what I want to see in November.

  • What’s humiliating is how many women are traitors to their sex, voting for Mis(ter)ogny after he cruelly and viciously attacked Senator Clinton and all women. It’s bad enough that Hispanics and blue-collar workers are too dumb to know when they’re being patronized (we already knew black women were a hopeless case), but that women should let their physical attraction to what they probably see as an exotic and forbidden man of reasonably good looks override the sweet reason that should lead them to vote for McCain is very disappointing. Probably Obama promised each of these voters something and we’ll never know what because he does his deals in the shady corners rather than out in the sunlight.

    I will still fight for the rights and respect of women everywhere, but I’m starting to realize that only white suburban women are smart enough to get it. When we eventually prevail we will have to lead these other women by the hand toward freedom.

  • Two points:

    1. This and 2 bucks will get you a cup of coffee. We live in a country with an electoral college system. Nationwide popular vote totals are meaningless.

    2. Hillary humiliated herself. This race was over after Wisconsin. She could have saved herself a lot of stress and money by doing the math in February.

  • Did this poll take into account the Diebold effect and the ballot shortage most inner cities or other typically minority areas will surely see?

    I think we need to get serious about vote reform now. We know it will be a record breaking election as far as numbers go. There is absolutely no excuse for broken machines, too few booths, and not enough ballots.

    I don’t want to let the fascists lie, cheat, and steal this election.

  • SaintZak@23, I liked your point about McCain just wanting to bomb something or someone!

  • I see these stats about how people “expect” Obama and/or the democrats to win, and they make me extremely nervous. Because that’s what people expected of both Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani. They were the “inevitable” candidates of their respective parties, and look what happened. Giuliani didn’t have even a single primary victory and ended up dropping out fairly fast. Clinton made a much better showing for herself but fell short because she had no plan B for after Super Tuesday.

    So for goodness’ sake, let’s not rest on this. As others have said, we can’t get complacent and start coasting. We’ll have a lot of work to do in the next 5 months.

  • Here’s further good news (from Salon’s War Room):

    Hunter, who helped draft the economic sections of the Contract with America and served as an economist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was quoted as calling the current Republican Party a “dead, rotting carcass with a few decrepit old leaders stumbling around like zombies in a horror version of ‘Weekend at Bernie’s,’ handcuffed to a corpse.”

    Hunter went on to say if the Republican Party doesn’t change its leadership it “will pollute the political environment to toxic levels and create an epidemic that could damage the country for generations to come.”

    As to the “white male deficit”, anyone who spends time at work around white males knows that the majority of white males are an embarassment for their overall stupidity and general idiocy. This white male has been embarassed by the overwhelming majority of white males I’ve met since pre-school.

  • On June 12th, 2008 at 8:48 am, Mary, Mother of Odd, said:
    This poll confirms what I have been telling you all along: Senator Smarmy has serious problems with suburban white women. He may be managing now to hoodwink Hispanics, Catholics, independents, blue-collar workers and whites in general (wonder what he secretly promised them?), but we women of the ‘burbs aren’t fooled by his fake concern for us. We’re sharper than that and we know he’s a misogynist to his boots. He also thinks he’s too cool for the suburbs, where it’s harder to buy crack on every corner and get blowjobs in limos at any hour. You all are going to be very surprised in November when white suburban women who don’t live in the city because they’re rightfully afraid of black guys like Mr. Danger cost your hero the election.
    *******************************************************************************************
    Not only is your post hateful and racist, it shows you are clearly an idiot as well. Obama is LEADING in almost every major category. Once the suburban moms get over their disappointment over Hillary’s LOSS, and once they find out about McCain’s HORRIBLE record on women’s rights, you will see a SIGNIFICANT shift toward OBAMA.

    That scary black guy, OBAMA, who happens to be devoted to his wife and children, is THEIR only hope. Fortunately, most suburban women have some college education and will wise up eventually. They aren’t as dumb and bigoted as you HOPE they are.

  • Suburban women are the problem and I must convert them! So pathetic watching Fox cause their husband’s tell them it’s the real truth and afraid to pull their heads out of their husband’s alpha male crap and think for themselves. Yuck.

  • Stop Bigotry, @35,

    Mary, Mother of Odd is a spoof, a parody of another commenter (Mary). OTOH, Joe (@25 &26) is our little (cross to) bear…

  • Wow, Tom Cleaver, you seem to have more than a little animosity stored up. Personally, I’ve spent the last 20 years working mostly with white men and, while I don’t always agree with them, I would never classify the entire group as “an embarassment for their overall stupidity and general idiocy”. That is really an excessively harsh comment.

    Also, I am not a fan of McCain, but I have yet to hear the Obama camp give any statement of true substance about what they are going to do to really change things. I hear lots of platitudes and pretty statements and lots of swipes at McCain, but no real plan. I need to hear something substantive from them before November. He may look good but I’m still not hearing what I need to hear from someone who will be the Commander-in-Chief. (And this isn’t to imply that I’m hearing it from McCain either.) Oh, and they can tell Michelle that continuing to express shock at the fact that non-blacks are voting for her husband is starting to sound racist to me.

  • Kate @ 38,

    That’s so true!!!

    In my experience, working mostly with white men over the last 30 years,
    I too have seen a few who were intelligent, and not altogether idiots.
    Some even had a grasp of Ironic mode, which I’ve noticed a few persons
    who were not white men seemed lacking….

    Also, I am not a fan of McCain either, but it seems that 8 more years of
    George Bush is a small price to pay, to avoid the embarrassment of a Scary Black Man
    for President.

    I’m not saying we should vote for McCain, but I have yet to hear Obama admit that he’s a Kenya-born Moslem- which is exactly the kind of honesty I would expect from our Commanders-in-Chief. He lies about his race all the time (he’s not really black or white!) and his parents were obviously guilty of miscegenation. Since he married a black woman, he’s guilty of the same thing! And won’t admit that either!

    I’m a Democrat and I support women’s rights and equality, and that is exactly why I’m NOT voting for Obama- because he’s the total opposite. And McCain isn’t the opposite, so that’s why I’m voting for HIM.

  • Let us all vote for Obama. He is nither black nor white. He is above Racial politics.
    Obama is the only candidate can move the country in to a new direction because he is honest and intelegent.
    He is the furure.

    • Comments are closed.