Some More State of the States.

Electability update: In case you missed the recent state poll findings showing that at least nine swing states choose Obama over McCain and McCain over Clinton (totalling 100 electoral votes, if you throw in Michigan below), the polling firms have crunched some more numbers. Here are a few more where the party winner doesn’t change, but the margin of victory/defeat is considerably better for Sen. Obama:

  • Kansas: McCain beats Obama by 6 (50%-44%), McCain beats Clinton by 24 (59%-34%).

  • Michigan: Obama beats McCain by 8 (47%-39%), McCain and Clinton are tied (44%).

  • New York (yes, Sen. Clinton’s home state): Obama beats McCain by 21 (57%-36%), Clinton beats McCain by 11 (52%-41%).

    The only state examined thus far where Sen. Clinton outpolls Sen. Obama by a significant margin is Florida. (McCain beats Clinton by 6 (49%-43%), McCain beats Obama by 16% (53%-37%)) That margin seems to have a bit to do with the Florida delegate fiasco, however: “Most notably, just 55% of Sunshine State Democrats say they would vote for Obama over McCain.” One would presume that figure would change after the convention, and after Sen. Obama has a chance to campaign in the Sunshine State.

  • One thought on “Some More State of the States.”

    1. As you can imagine, Kevin, this has been the subject of considerable debate down here in Florida. The short(er) version of a terribly long story is that this is all tied up in the politics of Florida’s “disenranchisement.” Right now Clinton is more popular with some Democrats because she is perceived as fighting to have the delegates seated and thus giving our vote a voice at the convention. Then there are those of us who recognize that Obama is just trying to abide by the rules of the game, set up by the DNC.

      If anyone did any disenfranchising, it was the GOP-led Florida Legislature who voted to move the date of the primary here.

      From my perspective, I see Clinton’s attempt to seat delegates in states (Michigan included) as a cynical ploy to count votes *where there was no campaign.* I think that’s just silly.

      So, at the bottom line you have a state where no Democrat has been allowed to campaign all year, and now suddenly you have one whose opportunistic (in the nicest phrasing) motives happen to benefit us locally. Sure, she’s going to be a little more popular here, maybe.

      As you say, let Obama win the nomination, let him campaign some here. Those numbers will be written off in history as a quirk, a fluke, I guarantee it.

    Comments are closed.