Obama unelectable? He is losing to McCain...in Massachussetts

http://www.surveyusa.com/electionpolls.aspx
Nuff' said about his electability.

McCain 50, Obama 45
Clinton 49, McCain 45

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportPopup.aspx?g=ad723bad-3bee-40ac-9b99-ab9b2043c2b3&q=40146

JDNE

McCain won't do well in the primaries in states that don't allow Independents to vote and those are coming up. He has done well in the first contests because Independents can vote but that is not the case in many states.

Him being from Massachusetts does not explain Hillary running 11 points better than Obama against him.

therefore he can't win the nomination.

Before that it was 1956.

Clinton taks California by 19 and Obama only by 6 with a 6 margin of error. Too close.

Clinton also takes NEW York by 13 and Obama takes it by 6 with a 6 moe. Too close again.

Something wrong in these states for Obama.

I am not worried about it. McCain has the celebrity status that Rudy used to have, for now.

Remember when everyone in the media had nothing but good things to say about Giuliani? That is what McCain has right now. Obama doesn't get that. Just like America liked Rudyless the more they got to know him, the less America will like McCain when they get to know him.

You are making the mistake of regarding polls as some sort of proof. Plenty of polls show Clinton not doing well.

Even now the press is as positive about him as they are about McCain.

to think that.

Aren't you due for a new anti-Obama thread?

Even though they'd help your case.

Whoever it is. I know my home state.

is that when people get to know Obama better his numbers go up. Hillary's numbers have done nothing but remain stagnant or gone down over time. There's no room for improvement with Hillary like there is with Obama.

Talk about expanding the map...We need to be fighting on their turf, not trying to protect perhaps the most progressive state.

Trends are that Obama wasn't as well known at the start and continues to gain in popularity as people get to know him better. Another trend is that Hillary has plateaued and will never do better in the polls than she's doing now. I suppose that makes Obama a gamble, but he's a better chance than betting on a sure loser.

Obama started with 80% name ID and has not improved in match ups with the Rethugs over the past year. Hillary has.

Your argument is Obama may win Massachusetts. If he barely will win here, under a "hopeful" scenario, how badly will he lose Florida, Ohio, Missouri, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Colorado?

If he will struggle to win Massachusetts he has no shot in the swing states...That makes him unelectable.

If you were really interested in a Democratic victory, you would put your time and energy into getting BEHIND a candidate. Instead, you seem absolutely obsessed with destroying Obama, which will do nothing to guarantee victory in November.

But I wish you'd remind Obama supporters also.

I'm not too crazy about anyone in the race....

...This poll shows both candidates are 50/50 with mccain.Which is outstaninding for all those who said Braack can't do it and Barack hasn't peaked yet.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

I was looking at the results in most of the large states....

I'm a tepid Edwards supporter - so I don't have a dog in the Clinton vs. Obama fight but people know very little about Obama and I think when more dirt comes out about him his numbers will only go down. I didn't know about the slumlord and all of the nonvotes until the debate - and it didn't sound too good to me.

I haven't heard a good explanation of those two issues in the mainstream media - so only people who really follow these things would know the truth about them. Maybe there's a good reason for it. I haven't been on Dem Underground for a while so I'm sure people here have been picking this all apart.

People already know all the dirt about Hillary.

We cannot afford to lose to a Republican in 2008. I'm leaning Clinton if Edwards doesn't have a chance.

I agree with you. If he is getting spanked in a state that even McGovern won right now it is shaky whether he can win it in November. If he can't win this state he is going to set up a rethug sweep of the swing states.

Interestingly, Edwards has the same name ID as Obama yet does much better than him in such polls, when he is included. JDNE

What you said is a big reason why Hillary is my second choice after Edwards.

10 days ago ,Obama was winning mass. by 2% over mcCain but McCain has overtaken him in Mass, and pulled right up to him in California and New York in the last 10 days but Hilary has still maintained her big leads over McCain in these 3 states whereas Obama is dropping against McCain, thats not a good sign.

We are fucked if we nominate him. :scared:

Hillary beats McCain by 19 in California and Obama only by 6 with an MOE of 6.

Hillary wins NY by 13 and Obama by 6 with an moe of 6.

I mean wtf. These are easy dem states.

I don't really like anyone this time around - Edwards comes the closest.

Losing Massachusetts by 15? Losing New York and California by 6? Guess what that means for Ohio, Florida, Missouri, Colorado, etc...

n/t

If there is one state you can count on to give the Dems it's electoral votes it is this one.

what the hell is going on with MA? After maybe RI, they're about the most Democratic state in America. If the race is that close in MA, whether it's Clinton or Obama as the nominee, we're "screwn" nationwide. I'm hoping that something was flawed with the methodology of that poll, or else we really need to hope that McCain does not end up the Repug nominee.

a state dems carried by better than 60% in '00 and '04? Sounds like she's a pretty weak candidate too and that we should really fear a McCain nomination.

and HRC with a 5 point lead, i'll take that thank you.

Survey USA Is hardly the accute poll.Remember 2006.SOme polls were wrong like here In Missouri.In fall 2003 Bush was leading all the Dems candiates In their home states.Be more worried about Hillary
If she Is the nominee and how some Indepenedents and Denmocrats feel about her.

So its more trusted than the others.

1
Asked of 658 likely republican primary voters
Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 3.9%

If the Republican Primary for President of the United States were today, would you vote for ...(names rotated) Rudy Giuliani? Mike Huckabee? John McCain? Mitt Romney? Fred Thompson? Ron Paul? Or some other Republican?

9% Giuliani
36% Huckabee
17% McCain
19% Romney
11% Thompson
5% Paul
1% Other
3% Undecided

SurveyUSA 1/7/08

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=c545964a-6c4c-4753-93de-04c12afb3975

Anyone who lives here knows that.

What matters in GE however is feistiness. Obama & supporters think that the present MSM lovefest will carry on. I have news for them: it was never a love fest - it was all to try to get rid of Hillary. Had Obama made it to GE, there wouldn't be whining enough in the universe for his reaction to the onslaught. if he thinks fighting 2 Clintons is hell....Maybe he's better off not knowing.