MSNBC/WSJ Poll Giving Obama 6 Percent Lead Over McCain Has Warning Flags
A new MSNBC-Wall Street Journal poll showing Democratic presumptive nominee Senator Barack Obama with a 6 point lead over virtually certain GOP nominee Senator John McCain has some red warning flags for McCain and the GOP.
Perhaps the best analyses of aspects of the polls comes via the political junkie’s increasingly indispensible site MSNBC’s First Read. Here are three key portions on the polls. MSNBC notes that:
1. Obama is showing strength in areas where many pundits and pollsters found he was previously weak, such as blue-collar workers and white women:
Days after becoming his party’s presumptive nominee and receiving Clinton’s endorsement, Obama has opened up a six-point advantage over McCain (47%-41%) in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, which is up three points from Obama’s lead in April. Perhaps the most fascinating numbers are in the crosstabs, and some of the numbers will surprise folks who memorized every exit poll from the Democratic primaries. Obama leads McCain among African Americans (83-7), 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). Meanwhile, McCain is up among evangelicals (69-21), white men (55-35), men (49-41), whites (47-41), and white suburban women (44-38).
However, Obama has a seven-point edge (46-39) among all white women. How important is that lead? NBC/WSJ co-pollster Neil Newhouse (R) explains that Republican candidates always expect to win white men by a substantial margin, but it’s white women that usually decide the race. “If a Republican wins among white women, we usually win that election,” he says, noting that George Bush carried that group in 2000 and 2004. The poll was conducted of 1,000 registered voters from June 6-9 (Clinton endorsed Obama on June 7), and it has a +/- 3.1% margin of error.
LIKELY IMPACT: Obama still has a lot of work to do in winning over women, particularly women who were former Hillary Clinton supporters. But now that Clinton is out of the race, what would be considered to be normal Democratic constituencies are returning to the party faithful fold.
2. The anchor that is weighting McCain down is someone named B-u-s-h. MSNBC:
We hate to sound like a broken record, but just how bad is the political environment for McCain and the Republican Party? Let’s start with Bush, whose job approval rating is just 28%, up one point from his all-time low. Then add this: 54% say that they’re looking for a new president who would bring greater changes to current policies, even if that person is less experienced and tested. By contrast, 42% say they’d rather have a more experienced and tested person become president, even if that means fewer changes to current policies. “The 200-pound ball and chain around McCain’s foot is George W. Bush,” says NBC/WSJ co-pollster Peter D. Hart (D). “Unless he figures out a way to cut it loose, he’s going to be dragging it throughout this election.” Newhouse adds: “Voters are not convinced that McCain represents the change they want and that he’ll be all that different from Bush.” Indeed, according to the poll, 48% say it’s likely that Obama will be real change to the country. Just 21% say that of McCain.
In other words:
Voter are asking more than an oil change for their increasingly hard-to-operate cars. They are seeking to trade in their car for a new car. Can McCain present himself as a new model? Or will voters conclude they don’t want a Ford and Obama is a Chevy but McCain is just another model made by Ford? McCain’s balancing act has always been virtually impossible. But now he must distance himself from Bush and retain his party base. What’s the most likely way to do that? Keep going on attack against Obama and make Obama the issue (and hope that voters will forget they want to trade in their car).
3. If you look at past MSNBC/WSJ polls there is a historical trend — and McCain is fitting into it. NBC’s Mark Murray:
In the latest NBC/WSJ poll, Obama leads McCain by six points (47%-41%) among registered voters. While polls can’t accurately gauge an election five months out — after all, so much can still happen — it’s worth putting Obama’s lead into this perspective: Bush never trailed Kerry in the 2004 NBC/WSJ polls that measured registered voters’ preference for Bush, Kerry, and Nader. And Bush’s lead was never bigger than four points.
Bush won that presidential election by three percentage points, 51%-48%.
And this doesn’t even factor into the equation the likely impact of Libertarian Presidential Candidate Bob Barr…
Can McCain get the swing voters, independent voters and centrists that are needed to cross over and pad out the voting ranks of the party faithful? And can he get the votes of the party faithful if he shows he’s seems like he’s breaking too much with B-u-s-h?
16 Responses to “MSNBC/WSJ Poll Giving Obama 6 Percent Lead Over McCain Has Warning Flags”
During WWII my grandfather owned and ran an award winning newspaper in the Midwest. He was a stalwart republican and told us that nearly every major media outlet is republican-owned.
It's easy to see this today.
Bear that in mind as well. When you read about “polls” you have to understand the motivation and the fabrication. Big (republican) Media will make it appear as if Obama has a strong chance against McCain until after the Dem convention in August. The reason is simple: they don't want to chance a defection to Clinton.
At the stroke of midnight and upon a vote of Obama as the official nominee (which he is not right now by the way), the “polls” will start to reflect McCain gaining a lead. They will then systematically give Obama the same treatment as their other real opponent they just successfully help to bury (Hillary) with Obama's help. He will get exactly the same “kind” “fair” and “balanced” coverage she did. And if you think they gave Hillary a hard time, you ain't seen nothin' yet..
Mark my words.
[...] MSNBC/WSJ Poll Giving Obama 6 Percent Lead Over McCain Has Warning … The Moderate Voice – USA LIKELY IMPACT: Obama still has a lot of work to do in winning over women, particularly women who were former Hillary Clinton supporters. … See all stories on this topic [...]
Do we really need polls and analysis to deterine that Senator McCain is a lousy candidate who has no chance of winning. The Republicans will lose in a rout that will probably give the Democrats 60 seats in the Senate.
In January 2009, the Republicans Party will be irrelevant to the politics process and will have finished its death spiral.
I would say the next tipping point is when the Republican State Parties in the northeast give up and fold leaving New England with one relevant political party. The rest of the Republican Party will quickly follow once the last few groups that donate money realize that giving to the Republican Party does not buy them anything.
It would be nice to have more than two major parties. But I'll settle for two if the other one, whose demise SD has heralded here for a year at least, wakes up and gets back to believing in the Constitution, the rule of law and balance of powers. They and we will be lucky when (if) the Dems reverse course on the “unitary executive” BS.
Greendreams,
Considering that the Demoratic Party does not really believe in free speech, equal rights, or property rights, it is hard to believe that either party really gives a damn about the constitution. When the left pushed through the idea of compelling interest, all freedoms and rights along with the rule of law collapsed.
It's worth noting that that “white suburban women” sub-sample included only 110 respondents. The margin of error for that group was 10%. In other words, they shouldn't have even published that number.
They oversamples Latinos in order to get a better reading on Latino preferences. Next time they should oversample “white suburban women” to get an accurate picture.
[out of original order]
“Do we really need polls and analysis to deterine that Senator McCain is a lousy candidate who has no chance of winning.”
McCain has a chance, as exhibited by his survival-of-the-attrition to date. But this is really Obama's and the Dem leadership's to lose. I doubt they'll repeat what Gore did, actually losing the debates to someone like Dubya, who was himself the GOP's “brand name” desperation candidate in 2000, and go on to lose the election. (Would Obama and the Dem leadership try to steal it if they lost, again, though?)
” The Republicans will lose in a rout that will probably give the Democrats 60 seats in the Senate. “
Agree completely — must assume the GOP will do worse than in 2006 and yes, 60+ seats for the Dems in the Senate. Obama in the White House, Dems in control of both Congressional houses, filibuster-proof Senate — I just wonder what limits there may be to the arrogance and conceit as well as ambition of the Dems to ram through Washington and onto the citizenry whatever they wish.
About the only thing the Dems need to fear is politically-driven overreach between now until November out of overconfidence. I told my radical friend in DC that it's obviously hard for the Dems and other liberals not to be overconfident at this time.
But they shouldn't be overconfident, not if they remember 2000. (They were just delusional in 2004 with Kerry.)
“the left pushed through the idea of compelling interest”
Or more precisely, a Rousseauian “general will” of “the people” located in DC, where “ideally” or ultimately all decisions would be made (and where would come all entitlements).
Which is how things “should” be, and which they want the courts (their political weapon) to substitute for law. (McCain would do better if he were to emphasize he gives us Hope [tm] of less likelihood of activist judges while many backing Obama want to defend and even extend illegitimate judicial activism in place of law and rule of law.)
“In January 2009, the Republicans Party will be irrelevant to the politics process and will have finished its death spiral. “
Wow, you're advancing the end of the Late, Far-From-Great GOP. In the worst case, they'll be impotent and irrelevent for a year or two, but I wouldn't write them off yet.
“Republican State Parties in the northeast give up and fold leaving New England with one relevant political party.”
That's pretty much the case now and has been for years!
(Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, etc., are Dems in GOP drag.)
“Can McCain get the swing voters, independent voters and centrists that are needed to cross over and pad out the voting ranks of the party faithful?”
Between now and November both candidates' campaigns will not only be concerned with McCain pull factors (McCain's attraction of voters, something I doubt will happen to any serious extent) but also with Obama push factors (Obama's repelling of voters, if he threatens to be too far left). Overall, McCain is not impressive and many who vote for him will be holding their noses as he will simply be the lesser of two evils (less liberal and Dem partisan and liberal a threat than Obama).
Obama voters have to hope (pun intended) that McCain not only plods in a mediocre manner the rest of this year but commits errors that cost votes.
“Can McCain present himself as a new model?”
Not bloody likely. The American appetite for anything remotely resembling the tragically incompetent status quo of the last 7 years will be in short supply. If you don't think so now, just wait awhile. The first couple debates ought to be pretty interesting. I can't imagine John McCain is much looking forward to them.
the political junkie’s increasingly indispensible site MSNBC’s First Read.
Yes, if you are addicted to biased and inaccurate political junk. The Wall Street Journal's Jackie Calmes has an entirely different take on this which an Obama sock-puppet would tend to want to not quote, and so you do not.
In 2000 at this time Gore was ahead of Bush in the polls, in '88 Dukakis was far ahead until the tank & Boston Harbor incidents. Clinton was far behind GHWB in '92 until the media levitated Ross Perot into a serious candidate. Even Mondale was ahead in a campaign where I was on his staff at national HQ around this time. To cite GWB in '04 as an accurate precedent demonstrates the shallowness of MSNBC's commentary.
And of course, you and MSNBC would never mention the “Bradley Effect” as that would be a pretense at actual journalism.
[...] [...]
[...] work to do in winning over women, particularly women who were former hillary clinton supporters. …http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20346/msnbcwsj-poll-giving-obama-6-percent-over-mcc…Review: Sandler’s ‘Zohan’ short on substance, but long on laughs The News-Press”You Don’t Mess with [...]
[...] [...]
Dave, your use of the phrase, “Obama sock-puppet”, goes a long way toward disqualifiying your commentary as anything very credible. Perhaps that's a trade-off you're comfortable with.
[...] TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish. …Rest Easy, Gentle Democrats the Moderate Voicehttp://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20346/msnbcwsj-poll-giving-obama-6-percent-over-mcc…Friends poems, Friends reunited poems, Best friend quotesI wish you could erase that day and that [...]
[...] [...]