McCain would beat Obama and Clinton, LAT/Bloomberg poll says

Source: Los Angeles Times

By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
February 26, 2008

WASHINGTON -- Despite Democrats' excitement over the presidential nomination battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, both candidates would lose to presumptive Republican nominee John McCain if the general election were held today, a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found. The findings underscored the dramatic challenges facing Democrats as they hope to retake the White House during a time of war, with voters giving McCain far higher marks when it comes to experience, fighting terrorism and dealing with the situation in Iraq.

Both Obama and Clinton have made ending the war a centerpiece of their campaigns. But in hypothetical matchups against either Democratic senator, about half of voters polled said McCain, a Vietnam veteran, was best able to deal with the war. Just over a third of voters polled favored the Democratic candidates on that issue.

Overall, McCain would beat Clinton 46% to 40% and Obama 44% to 42%. His lead over Obama is within the poll's three-point margin of error.

The Arizona senator also scored higher marks than Clinton or Obama for experience and strength. On the issue of "honesty and integrity," he beat Clinton and was tied by Obama. McCain is viewed favorably by 61% of all registered voters, including a plurality of Democrats. And the survey showed McCain's advantages extend even to some domestic issues. On the economy, a subject that McCain has joked about his own lack of expertise, voters picked him over Democratic front-runner Obama as best able to lead by an 8-point margin -- 42% to 34%....

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll27feb27,0,5452138.story

those of us who supported the viable candidates, anyway

to think that mccain would beat either of our remaining candidates - well, i just don't believe it.

this poll is flawed and inaccurate.

i can't prove that last statement--it's obviously my opinion

however, it is my strong belief that america is sick to death of republican bullshit--even republicans are getting sick to death of it.

there is no way that warmonger beats out obama, and probably not even clinton

Maybe?

He was the only one of the top three who beat McCain consistently.

my favorite. Sigh, I wish people had voted for him.

it to Obama, come on, we are not ignorant here, who would vote for 4 more years of another * agenda, nevermind don't answer that!

Not that I don't agree with you. He was my choice too, fat lot of good that does in hindsight.

Now we should look at reports such as this as a reason to get out there and work to GOTV between now and November. If we overwhelm them with turnout they can't force McCain down our throats.

I'm still voting Dem in November, but Edwards probably had the best chance in the general election.

Yes he will win.

Too bad we got stuck with the losing candidates.

I find the results of this poll a little hard to swallow.However,even if this poll is off by twenty percentage points,it is a scary thought indeed just how asleep at the wheel too many American voters can be.Still,even though neither of the two candidates were my first choice,I have to believe that both Clinton and Obama would annihilate John McCain in a debate.

was forced out of the LA TIMES.

They are totally Rethug.

guess they are just corporate asshole that nobody likes.

All those republicans aren't crossing over because they've wised up. They're crossing over to select their opponent.

...there is no racial divide. The proletariat are as one.

Too many polls is a threat to democracy.

Every poll thus far has shown at the very least, Obama beating McCain and Clinton sometimes beating McCain.

Something is not right with this particular poll.

Now maybe that's a but high, but average 'em out, and you've got Obama up 5, which I think makes more sense.

Most polls I've seen Obama trounces McCain, & with Clinton the margin was closer, but she was ahead in some polls....

Bunch a Thug-Yuppie gung-ho War types. Barf.

Obama has had tremendously positive media coverage for the past year of the campaign. But starting after Valentine's Day, the attacks have begun, and Obama has been hit.

McCain has gotten people feeling sorry for him after the NY Times flap and has gained.

I think this poll is right on target. McCain is a very formidable opponent.

His ground game is amazing and he should look VERY appealing in the debates next to McLame.
Of course, if it's close I suppose the "stealing it" factor could loom. :-(

So, if exit polls show the Dem candidate leading by 5%, he will lose by 1%
Leading by 4%, loses by 2%
Leading by 3%, loses by 3%
Leading by 2%, loses by 4%
Leading by 1%, loses by 5%

It's been very consistent.
In 2006, exit polls show that the Dems should have picked up
another 20-25 seats, but lost, on this vote flipping phenomenon.

We need to show up in large numbers this Nov. to keep this
from eating more wins.

Hanging chads, butterfly ballots, registered voters list purges, long lines, less machines per voter in democratic precincts, police check points, programmable voting machines, no paper back up. Amazing, the pre-election polls conducted 9 mos. ahead of vote even factor it in. Now get your American flag pin on and shut up.

But the GOP control the electronic voting machines.
How many times have we seen the exit polls on election
night favoring Gore or Kerry, but suddenly within a
30 minute news segment, both are losing, and eventually
lost.

Then the MSM won't release the raw exit poll data. Why?

During the 2006 election, when the Dems took control of the house,
exit polls showed that the Dems were leading in another 20-25 races,
but because they were close, the vote flipping that occurred caused
the Dems to lose those races. They would have lost more, except that
voters showed up in unpresedented numbers that all the races could
not be flipped.

Goggle "Vote Flipping" and you'll read what I'm referring.

Democratic turnout in the primaries is more or less double that of those voting in gop primaries.

We're motivated and angry about just about every gop criminal policy. They want tax cuts and access to our panties.

And yet this poll says mccain would beat our candidates.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

well I don't effing think so.

And they want to shove McLame up our asses. Oh Fuck this poll. Ri-fucking-diculous. They can't steal it this time, people are pissed.

being married to a non American I would love for us to get it right this time.

and we have no reason to believe this pollster in the first place, and it's still 9 months and many many more economic bumps in the road (not to mention daily opportunities for military disaster) before the national Rorschach test we call an election,

WHO GIVES A CARE??

And while I too would prefer John Edwards, I am beginning to think Obama can pull it off, and it will be all right.

There is no way this country can survive another 4 to 8 years of a tax cutting, neocon warmongering fool. Another thing the democratic party has got to make a decision by March 5th, the democratic candidates are damaging each while the Republicans can just sit back save their money, why run adds when the dems are tearing each other apart, that is unacceptable.

McCain represents the governing party and he only gets 42%.

This is a bad poll for McCain, not Obama. Support for the governing party almost always GOES DOWN, not up in an election.

Not to mention the fact that the Democrats are out-polling Republicans in the primaries/caucuses by 2-to-1.

A new NYTimes/CBS poll out yesterday shows Obama ahead of McCain by 12 points.

I wouldn't worry too much about this poll.

to bits, we have to stay focused on this country, does anyone think this country can survive another repig in office, I know the rest of world is just holding their breath on this one, let us not disappoint them or us. Enough is enough, or suffer the consequences.

I did not look into any of the Bloomberg methodology, but I have pretty consistently seen polls posted here at DU that show Obama over McCain by a few points beyond the MOE. This is pretty clearly an out lier.


Laura

interesting to know how it came out differently this time --

Problem with the RW-guided polls is they don't distinguish between likely and unlikely voters.

The poll does NOT show McCain beating Obama. The poll shows a tie.

Polls are based on taking a representative sample of the public. The 3% "margin of error" tells us that there is a 95% likelihood that if different sample were taken on the same day, the results would have been within 3% of the results obtained by this poll. In other words, it is just as likely that another poll that day would have had Obama three points higher than McCain. When the results are within the margin of error, it is a tie.

Another thing we don't know is how they weighted their sample, in terms of numbers of Republicans vs. Democrats. In a situation where the number of Republicans is declining, it's likely that they over-weighted for Republicans. This would skew the results in the Rethugs favor.

nominee. Shame on you Hillary. Eat your peas.

Remember that TV ads are seen not just by Democrats, but by the entire voting public. To someone who can be swayed by fear ads, given the choice between Billary, Obsma and McLame, they'll pick John (bush lite) McCane in their own self interest. By running ads like this and the speehes that proclaim Obama to be inexperienced, untrained, and unprepared to run government and protect us from the faceless bearded hordes waiting to destroy us, she shows them the similarity of experience and background between the two Democrat candidates.

In effect she's telling the independents and possible republican crossovers that they shouldn't trust either Democrat candidate to protect them, which will drive then to who? McLame!

And can anyone tell me who first suggested that Billary should run for President? That's right, none other than that paragon of virtue, that fairminded and upstanding American......KKKarl Rove the Treasonous. And why? Because his polls showed that she's the one candidate with the biggest negatives and smallest positives, and almost ANY repug could beat her. And the polls today are showing just how right he was two years ago.

about this poll. Its the non verifiable voting that worries me.

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cfm?name=mr080225-4toplinerevised.pdf&id=3828

see page 2 at link.

First numbers are the poll from 2/22-24 and the second number is the poll taken on 2/7-10.


snip...

3a. If the election for president were held today and the candidates were (READ ANSWER LIST), for whom would
you vote? (ENTER SINGLE RESPONSE. RANDOMIZE ANSWER LIST.)

2/22-24/08 2/7-10/08
Hillary Clinton, the Democrat 46 43
John McCain, the Republican 41 43
(DO NOT READ) Neither 10 10
DK/NS 3 4


Well, do you lean more toward Clinton or McCain? (COMBINE
INITIAL CHOICE AND FOLLOW-UP CHOICE.)

2/22-24/08 2/7-10/08
Hillary Clinton, the Democrat 48 46
John McCain, the Republican 43 45
(DO NOT READ) Neither 7 7
(DK/NS) 2 2




4a. If the election for president were held today and the candidates were (READ ANSWER LIST), for whom would
you vote? (ENTER SINGLE RESPONSE. RANDOMIZE ANSWER LIST.)

2/22-24/08 2/7-10/08
Barack Obama, the Democrat 48 46
John McCain, the Republican 39 40
(DO NOT READ) Neither 9 10
DK/NS 4 4

Well, do you lean more toward Clinton or McCain? (COMBINE
INITIAL CHOICE AND FOLLOW-UP CHOICE.)

2/22-24/08 2/7-10/08
Barack Obama, the Democrat 51 48
John McCain, the Republican 41 42
(DO NOT READ) Neither 6 8
(DK/NS) 2 2


Not a big fan of polls anymore. the link explains more about how they poll.

Alyce

No fucking way is McCain going to beat Obama or Hillary after 8 years of BushCo.

McCain "transcends" his putrid party and a lot of Dems actually like him for some reason.

McCain (and I know this sounds outrageous) can convincingly run as far as he can from Shrub/Chainee and people will accept that.

acts of crimes done by the *'es, does anyone really want these thugs to be pardoned, or "water under the bridge" while he bombs the hell out of Iran, cause you know he will do it. We have some very sick SOB's in abuse of power.

NT!

Maybe we should start singing "Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" And let them know THEIR children will be doing the fighting and see where that goes. What part of a 100 years of war do people not understand. McCan't can't win against either Dem. Maybe he could try an amnesty for going to war deal to win the hispanic vote.

needs their heads examined.

STOP PEOPLE. WE ARE EIGHT MONTHS FROM THE ELECTION and the Reich wing HATES Gramps.

:hi:

as there a ALOT of people that are going to vote for McCain.

by the time the elections roll around the american people will want nothing to do with any republican

don't be fooled. They hate us more than they love their guy.

on edit: I wouldn't mind you being in the right. In this position, I'd hate to be right, but it's my honest opinion.

I have to agree with you. But if the American voter swallows the TERRA, TERRA, TERRA line, we could be in trouble.

We need to convince the voters that if you want a third term of George Bush policies, then vote for John McCain.

be a BS poll. I don't really know. But, it does underscore that this election will not be a cake walk, as many on these boards seem to feel it will be. If you are seriously considering not voting because your candidate isn't the nominee, going third party, or not voting the chosen candidate for any reason; reconsider. A non-vote IS a vote for the republicans! And every vote is going to be needed for this election. If your here, your supposed to be a Democrat. The nominee is chosen by votes by party members. If you don't support the Dem candidate, you shouldn't be calling yourself a Democrat.

Polling this early in the campaign can be ignored. As I recall Michael Dukakis has a 12-15 point lead on the first George Bush in AUGUST of the election year.

Taken. With a grain of salt.

turnout is going to be a decisive factor. I think we're going to have a big edge with the turnout.

If people weren't outrage last election enough to vote then I don't know if I hold out much hope this time around. How much worse could it have been for people to even consider voting for this animal? The one group that always backs up their talk with action is the right-wing nuts and does anyone here believe they will actually sit this election out?

Much better. I'm taking that as a hopeful sign. People can be a little slow to catch on sometimes. ;)

BTW, Welcome to DU! :hi:

I've been wanting post forever. I know the turnout has been much higher then in past years but its more of a "I won't believe it until I see it"

unified behind - and one who would beat the pasty warmonger easily - what a concept.

the jaws of certain victory by nominating candidates with serious electability issues.

looking forward to voting for Gore - as a way to make amends for having been taken in by the chimp. I told him I thought Gore would run because the country so desperately needed his leadership in the wake of 8 disasterous years of Bush and that he was the only Dem who could easily defeat the R's.

I know ultimately Gore did what he thought was best for himself, but it sure left the Democratic Party in a huge mess. I don't think either Hillary or Obama can win in the fall. (Though hope to be proven wrong.)

And why not --- ??

Stolen election in 2000 --

Stolen election in 2004 ---

And what's going to stop them in 2008 -- ???

close enough to steal. I don't see any blowouts coming. I think it's going to be uncomfortably close, and that can't help but favor the party of the pasty warmongers. They're not going to give up their grip on the WH easily.

He didn't have the time and basically wrote it off. Most Californians have never heard one of his speeches. Nobody I know has. Once they get a chance to know Obama, he will win them over. The numbers will turn before the GE.

We picked the two most beatable candidates. The Repukes picked the one person who was actually electable. McCain is in a good position right now and a lot of Dems may have buyer's remorse when this thing is over.

First off look at the primary numbers. In all primary votes so far, Obama and Clinton get more votes then McCain and Huckabee combined. Next the new owner of the L.A. Times came out and blamed both Obama and Clinton for the poor economy. In other words I feel the L.A. Times is turning into another Washington Times.

is a bush clone,more stolen oil,more wars,are the american stupid enough to elect such a person?

in any poll results bearing their name. Don't know much about Bloomberg. But I canceled my sub with the LA Times over their whorish war-mongering vis-a-vis Iraq. They continue to run op-ed pieces by that neo-con PoS Max Boot. Their paid subscribers are now fewer than 1,000,000 the last time I checked audited subscription numbers for them. This in a metro area with a population of over 15 million.

Many! One thing I'm appreciating about Obama is how fast he is to counterattack on incoming. He went right after McCain on Al Quaeda in Iraq this morning and, MY FRIENDS (couldn't resist), it sounded great.

Amid report banks could crumble, LA Times owner says economy strong
RAW STORY
Published: Wednesday February 27, 2008

Blames Clinton, Obama for describing situation as bad

The billionaire investor who recently purchased Tribune Co., the parent firm of the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune, described the economy as solid for farmers, credit companies and CEOs with strong balance sheets in a CNBC interview Tuesday -- right on the heels of several falling economic indicators.

Sam Zell, the equity fund titan who owns Tribune, ironically has struggled to maintain control over his own paper. The LA Times fired its top editor in January after he rejected a Tribune order to cut $4 million from the newsroom, one year after his predecessor was fired for the same thing.

Zell also blamed Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for "much of the current economic troubles."

The US economy will avoid recession as the housing market begins to recover this spring, according to billionaire investor Sam Zell.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Amid_report_banks_could_crumble_LA_0227.html

I made an OP of this on LBN to draw attention to this tool.

"It's just within the margin of error.

So don't worry, be happy. Really it's going to be all OK."

Obamaunit standard voting unit response 577D6.

If Democrats sit on their butts and don't vote, then McCain will win.

But if it motivates dems to vote... goooooooooooooooood!

just looking at the first one. The polls that show McCain winning, show him "winning" by 1-3% - close to or w/in the MOE.

Obama's wins, however, are 4-12%. Clinton/McCain is closer.

Either way, though, all this shows me is that we do have a lot of work to do. We're going to have to win - by margins huge enough to overcome the GOP vote-fixing machine. It has to be overwhelming, I'm afraid. AND we must truly control Congress again.

Anything less means nothing happens.

Who paid off who for this poll? :eyes:

We're tired with War, we're tired of the direction this Country is going.

NO MORE BUSH AGENDA! It's TIME for a change!

Obama match-up in particular is well w/in the MOE. Nice.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3212487

And didn't the same source just tell us there was no recession?

There's no other explanation.

and gramps, as far as the people's vote goes, does not have a chance at winning the primary.

geez, give me a break, Hillary on the other hand must tone down her endorsement of repig candidate than someone from her own party. Unbelieveable shit.

We can read editorials from the L. A. Times or use our own commond sense. After the disastrous seven years the Republicans have given us, there is no way the American people are going to vote for more of the same. It's just "divide and conquer" scare tactics.