Presidential Polls Form MI, OR, VA and NC

Here is something to take with you into the weekend. If you read the comments below, in addition to having a lot of time on your hands, you may have already seen these polls. Here are new Presidential poll results from Scott Rasmussen for the states of Oregon, Michigan, North Carolina and Virginia.


Clinton (D) 46%
McCain (R) 40%
Obama (D) 52%
McCain (R) 38%


McCain (R) 44%
Clinton (D) 44%
McCain (R) 45%
Obama (D) 44%


McCain (R) 47%
Clinton (D) 41%
McCain (R) 47%
Obama (D) 44%


McCain (R) 43%
Clinton (D) 40%
McCain (R) 48%
Obama (D) 45%

The NC and VA polls were done May 8th and the MI and OR polls were done May 7th, all among 500 likely voters.

these numbers do change the Electoral College Watch in opposing directions. Hillary pickups Michigan and extends her lead to 290-248 over McCain. On the flip side, giving Michigan to McCain puts him over 300 electoral votes in his match up against Obama.

Posted by Dave at 6:42 pm
Filed under: 2008 President | Comments (36)

36 Responses to “Presidential Polls Form MI, OR, VA and NC”

  1. Eph Rove says:


  2. Eph Rove says:

    How does Billary pick up Michigan?

    What math are you using Dave??

  3. lisab says:

    how do the dems lose michigan?

    perhaps the economy is not in a recession, but michigan’s economy certainly is

    detroit was once the 4th biggest city in the usa

  4. Howard Dean says:

    Who is losing their bearings now?

    Hillary will exploit this issue.

  5. Howard Dean says:

    Folks, this could cause SUPERS to flee Obama.

    Too cozy with terrorists.


  6. Cory says:

    How meany ROCKEDs is that now Howard?

    There have been 9 DISASTERS,
    12 COLLAPSEs,
    18 FATAL developments,
    and 379 instances of people within the Democratic party getting NERVOUS.

    I have some breaking news too:
    Obama just ate DINNER.

  7. Howard Dean says:

    cory, That’s a great question.

    You see, the R’s and I’s already understand this candidate.

    The D’s need at least 15 major scandals before they figure someone is unelectable.

    We’re almost there!

  8. Howard Dean says:

    One of Barack Obama’s Middle East policy advisers disclosed today that he had held meetings with the militant Palestinian group Hamas – prompting the likely Democratic nominee to sever all links with him.


    Another one under the bus!

  9. rdelbov says:

    Same disclaimer that I used on the Senate entry. I somewhat disavow these polls, but honestly really need more information to analysis them completely. I am too cheap to pay for polling info from Rasmussen.

    That being said here are my general problems with polling firms right now. Rasmussen seem to be the best, but even he can come a cropper with a poll.

    1st determing partisan breakdown. Age, Sex, Race and party breakdown should all be jiggered to get a poll accurate. Now 25 states register people by politcal party. A pollster should factor that fact into his base. In a poll of registerd voters for Oregon (where they register by party) a pollster should start 39D-36R-25In base. The 1st question should be “what party are you registerd as?” If you do a poll of 500 registered voters you need 195 registered democrats. Case closed. Any thing else and you are not correct in my opinion. If start by asking “are you a republican. democrat or independent?” Guess what you going from it subjective and cannot be accurately measured to what is completely objective. Party registration.

    Did anyone notice on the NC exit polls. Its a semi-closed primary in NC as you must be a D or an Indie to vote. 5% of the primary voters identified themselves as Republicans. Stupid. The question should have been are you a registered democrat or a registed independent.

    One of the principles of research is deal with facts and not subjective opinions. As stated you can start with a measured pool of 1000 registerd voters broke down a certain way then determine likely based on interviews.

    Now as to why these polls may be off is that they require a judgement call on partisan breakdown of the pool of likely voters. I suggest Rasmussen does not randonly call a 1000 to determine this breakdown for Oregon. I suspect he calls these likely voters and then includes folks based on a pre-determined ratio of D’s R’s & Indies.

    I suspect from what I can tell his ratio is too shy of R’s in these polls.

    So while I am picking these polls out I have a basis for my opinion.

  10. Benjamin says:

    Please Supers

    looked at these numbers!!!!

  11. Howard Dean says:

    Analysis: ‘Hillary Democrats’ could be up for grabs

    By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 5 minutes ago

    WASHINGTON – With the racially tinged Democratic race drawing to an awkward close, Barack Obama and John McCain face the challenge of winning over “Hillary Democrats” — the white, working-class voters who favored the former first lady over Obama’s historic candidacy.

    Could be?

  12. rdelbov says:

    I guess to continue my point from a pratical view.. In Oregon to have 30% in a poll say they are Repulbican when 35% of the state is registered republican seems to under-estimate the repulbican vote. Admittingly not all registered republicans will vote republican, but the % of people calling themselves republican should exceed 30%

  13. rdelbov says:

    Things I look for in polls

    1. Partisan breakdown of responsdents

    2. % of democrat-republicans-indies ‘s votes for each candidate

    3. ethnic/age/ breakdown% among candidates

    4. if enough voters are involved geographic %

    somethings this can tell you when a poll is accurate or not. When only 8% of democrats in NC defect from Obama to McCain. That poll needs some help. Of course I have no details for the polls above. I am guessing, however, that the number of democrat defections in MI & NC appear to be close and on a historical basis that’s just what’s happening.

    Of course if I say the MI’s numbers look about right and discard NC’s that picking and choosing. I would rather question the internals and determine what looks right and what does not look right.

  14. Zipota says:

    With Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) about to emerge as the Democratic presidential nominee against the Republican one, John McCain (R-AZ), here is what I think as to who would win the states outlined in this blog entry:

    MICHIGAN (17 EVs): Leaning Obama/Tossup (Although McCain has the lead in the recent poll for Michigan, it is very insignificant. I want him to do alot better than that.)
    NORTH CAROLINA (15 EVs): Solidly McCain
    OREGON (7 EVs): Solidly/Likely Obama (The state’s anti-Iraq War electorate is a huge challenge for McCain, who supports the Iraq War.)
    VIRGINIA (13 EVs): Likely/Leaning McCain (Republican presidential nominee is still favored in Virginia, but cannot take the state for granted.)

  15. rdelbov says:


    as always I take your points. As an accountant I admire your conservative approach. As a self employed part time financial planner (with one customer-my family) I like the conservative approach.

    I always like to say campaigns matter. keep your hands on the reins, riding low and whipping that horse until you cross the finish line.

    If I had to quibble with 270 vote web site is that you cannot have shades of red or blue. strangely I have not had to post my five point post this week so polls have generally been good to McCain. I can explain away little dips here and there.

  16. rdelbov says:

    I might also add that I am a white, a hard working, white American.

    Clinton has a solid lead among hard working white americans as white college professors and students lean heavily towards Obama

  17. Howard Dean says:

    MAJOR race riot (black vs Hispanic)at L.A. High School.

    Over 600 involved!!

  18. Dariel says:

    With Obama as the presumptive Democratic Nominee, I think Michigan is a definite toss up with an edge to McCain. There are a lot of people in Michigan who are very upset with the Obama campaign for blocking the re-vote for our primary.

  19. L TePaske says:

    Between 7-10% of Michigan Dem voters say they will support a third party if their candidate isn’t the nominee.

  20. Zipota says:


    With the Democratic infighting for the party’s presidential nomination about to wind down in which Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) will be its nominee, John McCain (R-AZ) would have to reach out to Senator Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) supporters as much as possible by a substantial portion while turning out his own conservative base, which has often been distrustful of him for well-known reasons, to his side in large droves as well, which will no doubt be tough. Even though both of the aforementioned Democrats are ahead of McCain (with Clinton doing better than Obama) in recent general election matchup polls, at the same time, several state-by-state electoral college analyses show McCain barely beating Obama while losing kind of big to Clinton, I just can’t understand this!

  21. Tim says:

    I’d like to se that same poll, two months from now.

  22. rdelbov says:


    these matters with a popular vote-nationwide polls-electoral college are very hard to understand. Just ask Al Gore. Climate change (hey its getting cooler) is easy to understand , but US Presidential politics and as it will play out in six months is quite hard to understand completely right now. To paraphrase and twist the good book “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but later face to face “. I take to mean one day it will be perfectly clear to all of us.

    Here what clarity I can give you and others right now.

    1st the electoral map from 2000-2004 was in near gridlock-NH flipped one way and NM & Iowa went the other way. This is unprecedented for a two election span. Record amount of no change from one election to the next. Moreover many states moved in lockstep with the national vote or varied just a 2 or 3%. So the under current flowed mostly the same way.

    2nd look deep into those dark currents of the Clinton cycles of 1992-1996 and you will the basic electoral frameworks still are in play, but with a layer of Perot to filter and allocate. Perhaps WV & AR have moved Red while a few states that went blue under Clinton stayed that way in 2000 & 2004.

    So I see your questions as two fold. A. How to reconcile National polls, state polls and the electoral college within the framework of the 1992 to 2004 cycles. B. Will the basic electoral playing field stay aligned? ie will North & South Dakota stay republican or will Maine stay democratic?

    I believe the answer to both A & B is Yes. The stars will align and the gravity of the electoral solar system will hold. Take Missouri if you believe +6 McCain is solid there that’s about what his National lead really is. Polling 600 people there is like polling 27,000 people nation wide. Its a great cross section state in my opinion. Granted it ain’t LA or NY or Boston, but it ain’t Floyd County GA either or Baldwin County AL.

    I think the electoral & popular vote model from 2004 will fairly hold together this year. You may see some states a little less red and some a little less blue, but the model will hold. Especially in battleground states. +3 vote gain in PA will translate I believe in +3 gain nationwide for whichever candidate.

    I am also coming to the conclusion that the pollsters missing the vote on the hispanic vote. I see it nowhere as strong for Obama as the polls are showing now. Either Hispanic voters against Obama do not want to say so or they are not being truthful.

    I personally place more faith on state polls then national polls. To me its the logic of numbers. 800 people in WV will always be more accurate then 1200 people nationwide. You just have to analysis that 800 for accuracy or it will be garbage in garbage out.

  23. Tim says:

    Floyd County? How did you know about it? You ever been there?

  24. Tim says:

    Floyd County? How did you know about it? You ever been there?

  25. rdelbov says:


    I have been a reader of the Almanac of American politics since 1976. I also have a strange ability to remember county names and their political affliation. I have been close to Floyd County (does hartsfield count?), but have never been there.

    I comment here every once and a while that geography is destiny. North Georgia is a good example of that. That hilly swath of North Georgia was less suitable to planation style farming common in Southern Georgia. Guess what he has less Black folks then South Georgia. Guess what generally speaking its more republican overall then South Georgia.

    NW Georgia (like NW Miss with Memphis) also benefits growth from surburban exits from urban Chattanooga. geographically being over the line help from TN helps. You can be urban without the urban problems.

  26. rdelbov says:

    Oh that reminds me Obama has been to 57 states during his campaign (I guess he supported that plan to split CA four ways)

  27. Tim says:

    Just wondering, because Floyd County is where I was born and raised. And, you assessment of the area is fairly accurate. Except for one County. Chattooga, just north of Floyd, has never elected a local Republican. Yet, it is rural, and has an 11% A-A. Go figure.

  28. Zipota says:


    Historically, for most of the presidential elections to date, the popular vote has been in sync with the electoral vote unless the popular vote margin has become too close. And with the current political environment that still strongly favors the Democrats, Senator McCain really needs other strategies and perhaps a miracle as time is kind of running out, many people have still seen him identifying closely to President Bush, who is still a bane for much of the nation, he hasn’t really shown much vigor the way he did in 2000 as he was vying for the GOP presidential nomination back then. And in regards to the Hispanic vote, aside from Cuban-Americans who would still vote Republicans, McCain needs to outperform President Bush’s 2004 vote total among Hispanics, especially Mexican-Americans, who have been angered by GOP’s anti-immigration platform in recent years, they have already sent a message to the GOP in 2006 Midterm Election and they are poised to do it again. After all, Republicans can no longer carry the white vote alone to win elections as they did in the past.

  29. Aaron_in_TX says:

    Yeah, its hard to say what hispanics will do, but I foresee them being the swing electorate. He needs CO & NM. Hispanics are key there.

    It appears that Obama will get 92-96% of the black vote. I think he can count on 33-37% of the white vote to start with, and its very possible he could pick up the 10% more he needs from independents. He appears to be able to split whites when he really campaigns hard. I think he’ll be closer to 40 than 50 in the GE, but whether its 44 or 42% could be key.

    Hispanics are different in every state – VERY different in SoCal than in south TX or New Mexico. They have strong machine democratic politics in the hispanic areas. I find it hard to believe they’d vote republican in large numbers – they’ve just been taught since childhood that democrats are the party that supports them. Things like the border wall that republicans support are extremely unpopular down there.

    Bush did OK among them because he speaks a little spanish, and was moderate on immigration as governor and president. Also he was friendly with Mexico and the former Presidente Fox.

    The Arizona exit poll showed the latino vote going 55-41-5 Clinton-Obama-Edwards; New Mexico 62-36 (but more agreed with Obama than Clinton on the immigration question); California 67-32; Texas 66-32; and I’m really upset there’s no exit poll for CO.

    So they tended to vote for Clinton, but in NM, TX, and CA, they identified as Democrats by over 80%, very few indies.

    So McCain has a dilemma. Does he moderate on immigration? To do so would alienate 10-15% of the republican base who thinks this is issue #1 or #2. However, even though the democrats will take a majority of the hispanic vote, vs. Obama it looks like he could pull a really good % among them, maybe 45 or so. He would have to pander to them, though.

  30. Howard Dean says:

    So McCain has a dilemma. Does he moderate on immigration?



    He’s liberal on immigration.

    He’s speaking to LA RAZA in July.

    Remember, those Latino voter #’s you reference are only from D primaries.

    Doesn’t include the R’s and I’s.

    Obama will have big problems with the Latino vote.

  31. Aaron_in_TX says:

    There are not that many latino Indies and even fewer R’s. They are strongly democratic.

    If they are R’s or right-leaning indies, they likely vote more like white people.

  32. rdelbov says:

    I take your points on the Hispanic voters. Polls saw McCain winning between 20 to 45 percent of the Hispanic vote against Obama. I think that vote is low.

    Hillary has made the claim she is stronger with Hispanics. In primaries situations that is certainly so.

    I see McCain matching Bush’s near 40% for a variety of reasons.

    1st he does not have the Bush baggage on immigration.

    2nd he has won the Hispanic vote in AZ and very well may do it again.

    3rd Hispanics are heavily catholic and Obama has certainly slipped in that community. Is it any wonder that heavily catholic midwest shows Obama trailing while the upper midwest and northwest where there are far fewer catholics show ahead of Bush 2004?

    4th and finally Nafta-Mexican truck issues. I have noticed no comments from Obama supporters on my Nafta/Mexican truck claims. How will it play when Obama stands shoulder to shoulder with Teamsters on Mexican trucks. Has any noticed Mexicans are Hispanics? The idea that American trucks can drive into Mexico is okay, but not vice versa? I might add that with Nafta as Obama’s economic advisor proclaimed. Hey its not Canada we have a problem with its those Mexicans? I guess it would surprise people to know that nearly all hispanics in NV, NM and Co can trace their heritage to Mexico?

    To be accurate many hispanics in the SW can trace their roots to pre-1776, but that is another issue altogether. Nafta bashing has an appeal of sorts in Ohio, but its political poison in the SW.

  33. rdelbov says:

    Aaron just a note on CO.

    CO did not have an exit poll because it was Caucus? The pool of hispanics was probably too small for a meaningfull poll.

  34. As an Obama supporter & Virginia resident I’m thrilled to see him down by only 3% in VA. I have a very good feeling he will win VA – and if he wins VA it seems exceedingly likely he will win the whole election.