MyDD :: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers

MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers

by American1989, Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:56:41 PM EST

More Proof that Hillary is electable that Obama:

Fame for its independents, Hillary tied with McCain 47M-44C

Meanwhile, the guy who is supposed to bring Independents to his side, not so good:

McCain 49
Obama 43

McCain +6 which is outside the MoE

http://www.unh.edu/survey-center/news/pd f/gsp2008_spring_nhpres50308.pdf

SHOCKING DATA: Amongst Independent voters: CLINTON 30% McCAIN 53% BUT....... OBAMA 27% McCAIN 61%

Tags: New Hampshire (all tags)

Permalink :: 22 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (none / 0)

Hillary's GE numbers are inflated because the Republicans haven't even started attacking her yet. They're throwing everything they have at Obama instead. Her GE numbers now represent her high-water mark - if Hillary were to somehow get the nomination, the Republican attacks would begin, and she has nowhere to go but down.

by Angry White Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:00:30 PM EST

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (2.00 / 3)

oh come on. Obama supporters and the MSM never stop reminding us that Hillary has high unfavorable ratings.

There isn't much new about Hillary that the GE doesn't know about by now. If you listen to hate-radio, you would know that the right still attacks her.

by colebiancardi on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:03:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (none / 0)

Not much new about Hillary? Well, let's see - there's the whole sniper fire thing, which just happened recently.

And it was only a few weeks ago that we found out that Bill Clinton took $800,000 from Columbia free traders. How do you suppose that'll play in Ohio in November?

The Republicans are giving Hillary a pass for now, but should she somehow get the nomination, they will have plenty of ammunition to use against her, believe me.

by Angry White Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:12:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (2.00 / 1)

LOL yep Obama has been the front runner since the elections started and even before that. Hillary has never been scrutinized by GOP and MSM.

That is called a dream world.

by Sandeep on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:07:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (none / 0)

No, it's reality. Whether or not you like it, it's true.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?u uid=9C7B3821-3048-5C12-00984C8A5502BF08

The Republicans are giving Hillary a pass and attacking Obama with everything.

by Angry White Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:09:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That (2.00 / 3)

is the stupidest thing I have read all day- the GOP has been attacking Hillary since 1992- stop pretending. They have only just begun attacking Obama.

by linc on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:25:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Um, no (none / 0)

Sorry, you're wrong. See for yourself:

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?u uid=9C7B3821-3048-5C12-00984C8A5502BF08

The Republicans are giving Hillary a pass and are focusing all their attacks on Obama. That's why her GE numbers are inflated.

by Angry White Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:32:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Anybody who says (2.00 / 2)

Republicans haven't started attacking Clinton yet either JUST woke up from a 16 year coma, or is an idiot.

by dhonig on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:08:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anybody who says (none / 0)

You'd have to be an idiot not to see that the Republicans have been giving Hillary a pass while launching nonstop attacks on Obama.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?u uid=9C7B3821-3048-5C12-00984C8A5502BF08

That's why her GE numbers are inflated. She's getting a free ride from the Republicans for now, but you'd better believe that would change in a hurry should she somehow get the nomination.

by Angry White Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:10:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (2.00 / 3)

Really. No one has been attacking HRC non stop the last four months. Just how much more can they attack her.

david

by giusd on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:18:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (none / 0)

A lot more than zero, which is how much they've been attacking her lately.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?u uid=9C7B3821-3048-5C12-00984C8A5502BF08

by Angry White Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:11:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (none / 0)

He was hit by Wright's reappearance, at least in NH. Those results are very similar to Rasmussen's from the other day: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/new_hampshire/election _2008_new_hampshire_presidential_electio n2

by eumc on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:01:05 PM EST

6 months before the election (none / 0)

Well, that is CONCLUSIVE evidence. We may as well pack our bags.

Let's see, 6 months before the primary I'm pretty sure Hillary was the favorite and was expected to run over any competition.

You sound desperate by pointing to daily polls. Why don't you point to a number that has remained relatively constant for almost a decade. Like Hillary's unfavorability; and her reputation for dishonesty.

A daily tracking poll doesn't tell you anything.

by highgrade on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:02:14 PM EST

Re: 6 months before the election (2.00 / 1)

hey, something is better than nothing. I am not posting irrelevant Rasmussen numbers which have been unreliable

by American1989 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:06:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

my point (none / 0)

is that 6 months before the election, nothing is "better than something."

I am willing to concede to you that Obama will have his hands full taking independent votes from McCain - both of the Dem candidates will.

I'm just saying that it looks silly to point to one poll months before the primary season even ends, as some sort of proof that your candidate is the stronger opponent to McCain. Do you honestly think that this poll should convince anyone of your argument?

The one universal truth is that if Hillary is our nominee, we will probably go into the election with the greatest deficit in favorability/honesty among the two candidates that we've seen in a loooong time. And one thing we should NEVER forget is that even though the American people are almost always on our side when it comes to the issues, most of these presidential elections are won/lost on perceived character issues. Gore, according to the media/public was an exaggerating bore; Kerry was arrogant and puffed his resume. Hillary, fairly or not, will go into the election with 1/3 of DEMOCRATS saying she is dishonest. Those numbers do not bode well for our chances.

by highgrade on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:20:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: my point (2.00 / 1)

and what about obama, who is seen as a snobby, Wright apprentice?

by American1989 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:47:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: my point (2.00 / 1)

Well if Obama starts losing independents to McCain what is he left with? We already know Reagan Democrats are going McCain way if Hillary isnt the nominee. Obama needs to keep his flock together (if he has one which is only proved in a long run and we are already seeing the signs of lost mojo).

by Sandeep on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:10:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not Another One (none / 0)

Another GE Poll when we're 7 months for the GE and the Dems have not even started on McBush yet....Silly, silly, silly...

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:14:04 PM EST

MORE PROOF: NH General Election Poll Numbers (2.00 / 2)

Obama is radioactive in New Hampshire. His campaign accused the state of racism and of the Bradley Effect the day they lost the primary. Again, when Obama loses a state, he never looks in the mirror and wonders why. Instead, he blames the state.

"It's their problem!" (re: New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio)

2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.

by BPK80 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:14:24 PM EST

HRC and mirrors? (none / 0)

It's good for him he's only had to do that half as many times as Clinton.

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:16:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I bet... (none / 0)

...Clinton supporters would like to go back 7 months and use those polls...They were right on target, eh?

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:15:20 PM EST

I hate to break it to ya, (none / 0)

but the difference in the matchups is NOT statistically significant.

You are correct, M-O is outside the margin of error. But both of McCain's scores are within each one's margin of error (47 and 49) and Clinton and Obama's scores are as well (44 and 43).

There is a way to calculate for sure if the difference is statistically significant and I'm pretty sure it will tell you the same thing.

But whatever, I think its pretty clear that the long this goes on, the worse it is for whoever is the candidate. And I doubt a poll showing that McCain is slightly up on Obama and possibly also up on Clinton is going to convince superdelegates.

democracy!

by BlueGAinDC on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:50:44 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.