Friday, March 21, 2008
Of course polls are meaningless when they have bad news and meaningful when they have good news. But in light of the frenzy of poll-mongering going on in the last few days, pouncing on every shred of "damage" to Obama's "electability" evident in the numbers, it's worth looking at the evidence of a spate of new polls out today from Rasmussen and SurveyUSA:
Minnesota: McCain beats Clinton by 1; Obama beats McCain by 4.
Iowa: McCain beats Clinton by 4; Obama beats McCain by 6,
Kansas: Obama loses to McCain by 7 points fewer than Clinton.
New Mexico: Clinton and Obama both beat McCain by 6 [these numbers came out before the Richardson endorsement of Obama today.]
New York: Obama beats McCain by 5 points fewer than Clinton.
Oregon: Obama beats McCain by 3 points more than Clinton.
Virginia: McCain ties Clinton; Obama beats McCain by 1.
Washington: Obama beats McCain by 6 points more than Clinton.
Alabama: Clinton loses to McCain by 9 points fewer than Obama.
So what do we have here? Out of 9 states polled, Obama fares better than Clinton in 7 of them. In the swing-states of Minnesota, Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, and Washington, (and go ahead and throw in New Mexico after Richardson), Obama is doing better than Clinton against McCage. Obama is winning swing states that Clinton is losing.
The only states in which Hillary does better than Obama are New York (which does Dem), and Alabama (which goes GOP).
Maybe a new conversation about Hillary's electability problems needs to begin now.