Obama edges McCain in latest AP poll (1 Viewer)

[DavidM]

Obama Narrowly Leads McCain in AP Poll
1 day ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — An Associated Press-Ipsos poll shows Democrat Barack Obama would narrowly defeat John McCain if the presidential election were being held now. If Hillary Rodham Clinton were the Democratic nominee, she and the Republican front-runner would be about even.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iP6aoeuUCqIEo5DHDOCMLHyUOCpgD8UO7TPO0


THE ASSOCIATED PRESS POLL
CONDUCTED BY IPSOS PUBLIC AFFAIRS
PROJECT #81-5681-76

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cfm?name=mr080211-3topline.pdf&id=3813

 

[JimEverett]

You rarely see polls like this (or at least I never see them) conducted in states perceived to be battleground states come November. That would be more instructive - even at this early of a date.

I mean does Hillary do better in Ohio? Does Obama do well in Nevada, Arizona, Colorado? Who is strongest in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida?

There is not a whole lot to base an opinion on, but my suspicion is that in those battleground states, Hillary does better.

 

[rob021275]

I'm sure this poll went simply by a popular vote, and thus the lines "would narrowly defeat"/"presidential vote" are misleading as the electoral college is what matters. Of course, the AP is letting just about anybody write for them these days.

BTW: I don't doubt that Obama could win -- I think we're in for a mirror image of the 2000 and 2004 elections.

 

[Saint77]

This country is weirding me out with all this Obama love.

 

[DavidM]

Jim, I agree, the fallibility that exists -- sample size, location, margin of error -- makes it little more than fodder.

What is interesting is that Clinton holds a slight edge (per that poll) among Democrats, and Obama scores slightly more favorably in a general poll. Of course that might not hold up in November -- clearly a possibility -- but the greater amount of doubt regarding Obama's electability seems to come from within the party.

I think this is where you and I have differed. My understanding is you believe Clinton is the more electable candidate, my opinion is that Obama has the better chance of pulling votes from McCain among moderate Republicans, and stands a greater chance of being elected.

Going beyond message, ideology, and policy are other factors for consideration. Among them; which of gender and race represents a bigger subset of the electorate that won't vote for a candidate on those grounds? Also, will whatever tide of animosity for the Clintons have a greater or lesser impact than, for example, Obama's familial ties to Islam? Does a tightly contested Democrat race result in a less-energized/split/disappointed Dem base that might hurt either candidate in November?

 

[xpuma20x]

I think that all the polls about the Democratic party need to be tossed out the window. This is new territory that they're venturing down and the standard polls don't really cut it. Where's the poll that takes into account that the majority of Hispanics are voting for Clinton due to name recognition? Where's the poll that takes into account all the women that are voting for Clinton simply due to her being a woman? Same thing can be said about Obama, where are the polls that take into account he's a man? Or that he's black? -All- of the things I just stated have been discussed before based on "polls". I know a lot of people will start screaming about show me this and show me that, I'm not going to do the homework for you, you can either do it yourself or just toss what I've said to the side lol it doesn't matter to me. The basics of what I'm saying is that polls mean nothing, we've seen that already. Its all depending on who, where and what you ask, that is what gives you the answer.

 

[JimEverett]

Jim, I agree, the fallibility that exists -- sample size, location, margin of error -- makes it little more than fodder.

What is interesting is that Clinton holds a slight edge (per that poll) among Democrats, and Obama scores slightly more favorably in a general poll. Of course that might not hold up in November -- clearly a possibility -- but the greater amount of doubt regarding Obama's electability seems to come from within the party.

I think this is where you and I have differed. My understanding is you believe Clinton is the more electable candidate, my opinion is that Obama has the better chance of pulling votes from McCain among moderate Republicans, and stands a greater chance of being elected.

Going beyond message, ideology, and policy are other factors for consideration. Among them; which of gender and race represents a bigger subset of the electorate that won't vote for a candidate on those grounds? Also, will whatever tide of animosity for the Clintons have a greater or lesser impact than, for example, Obama's familial ties to Islam? Does a tightly contested Democrat race result in a less-energized/split/disappointed Dem base that might hurt either candidate in November?

I agree. And also agree that there is a lot of room for debate.

 

[Complex Kid]

Who cares? We all know the BCS poll is the only that matters.

 

[Shockmo]

Even my Momma is votin' for Obama.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

Obama has been showing an edge over McCain in general election polling, just as McCain has been showing an edge over Clinton.

In the national polls between Clinton and Obama among Democratic voters, most of the polling data shows Clinton with a very small advantage, though some recent polls are showing Obama ahead, albeit by a sliver, for the first time. The Gallup poll that just came out show Clinton ahead by a percentage point. I want to say a new USA poll shows Obama ahead by a percentage point.

Clinton still has a commanding league in the Ohio polls, but these polls should narrow considerably over the next three weeks in Ohio. Obama has the money and the energy. He does do well when people see him. And the working-class voters who instinctively favor Clinton do not closely follow and thus are not moved by the national media's reporting of campaign events outside their state.