McCain Popular in Colorado
April 17th, 2008 at 07:12am Mark Noonan
For the Democrats to win the White House, they will have to pick off two or three States President Bush won in 2004 - without, of course, losing any of the States Kerry won. One State the Democrats have high hopes for is Colorado, which has been one of the most Democrat-friendly Mountain-West States in recent years - unfortunately, things are not going too well for their prospective presidential candidates at this point, from Politico:
Brent Seaborn, late of the Giuliani campaign and now back at his consulting gig, sends over some up-ballot numbers his firm, TargetPoint, took for a third-party effort out in the Colorado Senate race.
Per their polling, McCain would defeat Hillary in Colorado 52-40 and beat Obama 51-39.
It’s one mere poll in April, but given the state’s blue-ward tilt in recent years and the hopes many Dems (especially Obama backers) have to pick it off, the numbers underscore the need for the Dems to not just come together but to also chip away at McCain’s image.
(It was taken from 604 likely general election voters the first week in April)
As the report notes, this is an April poll - and I advise strongly against reading too much into it…but, still, its gotta worry Democratic leaders to see polls like this in a year when they thought they were going to cake-walk into the White House.
Memo to Democrats: You’ve got a fight on your hands; we GOPers concede nothing.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
13 Comments
1. John McCain News » &hellip | April 17th, 2008 at 7:44 am
[…] Read the rest of this great post here […]
2. Lifelike | April 17th, 2008 at 9:43 am
“Memo to Democrats: You’ve got a fight on your hands; we GOPers concede nothing.”
We got the message in 2004. Never in a million years did we think conservatives would tear apart someone from the military to the point of handing out Purple Heart band aids at their convention. The art of Swift-boating was a lesson liberals took to heart. Therefore conservatives on BFV should not whine that liberals are challenging every crazy idea wingnuts propose.
And don’t be surprised if come October you start to see blogs start to bring up Karl Rove stooge Ted Sampley’s words from 2000 that accused McCain of being a weak-minded coward who had escaped death by collaborating with the enemy. Sampley claimed that McCain had first been compromised by the Vietnamese, then recruited by the Soviets. 2000 and 2004 might have changed presidential politics in this country for ever.
3. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 10:18 am
For the Democrats to win the White House, they will have to pick off two or three States President Bush won in 2004 - without, of course, losing any of the States Kerry won
Mark, you’ve brought up this statement a few times. Why do you think that wouldn’t happen? Regardless if it is Clinton or Obama, they both are significantly better than Kerry was AND they both bring with them better options in states that Kerry didn’t. Obama in Iowa and Indiana being close neighbors to Illinois come to mind (remember he won the Dem primary where McCain came in what? 4th?). Obama is some of the southern states from South Carolina down along the gulf states. Clinton in Ohio where Clintons are quite popular. Virginia is also very much in play. With a stronger candidate New Mexico, Ohio and Florida could go either way. And yes… amazingly Colorado and Montana are a couple of western states that could also be in play.
So I am curious why you continue to bring up that statement as if states have never changed before. If that was the case, then how did Reagan ever beat Carter? How did Clinton ever beat Bush I? How did W beat Gore? In each of those examples, they had to win states that previously went to the other party.
As for the thread itself… it is just an April poll and of course this poll is from someone that was working for a GOP Presidential candidate, so this poll and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee at Dunkin Donuts.
4. Amanda | April 17th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Nationally, however, McCain and Obama are statistically tied and McCain slightly beats Clinton. I fail to see the importance of this post…
5. sam | April 17th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Mark likes to post stuff to make himself feel better. The truth is that the GOP will lose convincingly. when 80% of the country believes that the country is going in the wrong direction…..those polls are wrong, but when we see an april poll about an election 7 months away, its accurate…hahahahaha..silly mark.
6. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Since we are bringing up meaningless polls……
According to surveyusa, in IOWA, Obama is leading McCain in polls 50-44 (survey from mid-March). There is one state that Bush beat Kerry in.
According to surveyusa, in NEW MEXICO, Obama is leading McCain in polls 51-45 (suvey from mid-March). Clinton is leading 51-45 as well.
According to surveyusa, VIRGINIA is a dead heat (Obama by 1) regardless of who the Dem nominee is. Survey from mid-March.
According to surveyusa, in OHIO, Clinton leads McCain 50-44. Obama would be behind.
According to surveyusa, MISSOURI is a dead heat with Clinton vs McCain
Plus, if you look at the states Kerry won, those are all the northeast and the far west. I would say the GOP nominee would have a harder time trying to win any of those than the Dem winning some of the others.
So… again. Why do you make it sound like such a long shot for the Dem candidate to win a few of the states that Bush won in 2004?
7. kimberly4victory | April 17th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
I’d like to see those polls on surveyusa taken again after Obama’s “bitter” remarks!
8. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
I don’t have those polls k4v. I do have polls that show Obama vs Clinton has no change after the “verbal gaffe”.
I’m guessing head-to-head with McCain it probably hurt a touch just because the only people that this really bothers are “right”-leaning folks anyway.
But again….. polls in March and April are about as useless as well….. they are pretty useless.
If all you people can be happy about is that McCain is doing well in Colorado, then all the more power to ya.
9. Amanda | April 17th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
kim,
As of April 16, Zogby had McCain and Obama tied at 45%, and McCain leading Clinton 46% to 41%.
For another reference, as of today, Gallup has Obama up 46% to McCain’s 44%, and Clinton over McCain, 46% to 45%.
I think we can all agree that these numbers come well after Obama’s comments. It seems like they really didn’t piss anyone off except… you.
10. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Deleted - off topic.
11. kimberly4victory | April 17th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Aman: Who said I was pissed except … you?
12. Rich | April 17th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
“The Republican party (and this Administration specifically) have done such a great job “protecting” us”
Joe- I take it from your comments that you feel the Democratic controlled congress has no role to play in this? Why haven’t they done anything about this?
13. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Rich,
I never claimed the Dems have done a great job since they took power. They should be doing a HELL of a lot more.
However… keep in mind that no matter what they do, the Repubs are either blocking in Congress or the Prez vetoes it.
Of course….. the GOP did have the White House AND Congress for 5 years after 9/11. the GOP does claim to be THE party to protect America and they claim the Dems are the ones that are weak on terrorists.
So sure, deflect and blame the Dems all you want. Just glance right over the GOP role in this.