Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Clinton Retains Advantage Over McCain, Obama in Key Battleground States

Bookmark and Share

Hillary Clinton's few remaining arguments for why she should be the Democratic nominee include:

1) She will have won more popular votes during the Democratic primaries and caucuses (the "Al Gore 2000" argument); this assumes Puerto Rico pays off big for Clinton.

2) She will have won more "Electoral College" votes, when states are so weighted, and

3) She is in a position to do better than Barack Obama against John McCain in several key battleground states.

Recent polling data suggests Clinton can indeed make that third argument. For example, all the battleground states Clinton won during the Democratic primary are still leaning towards the junior Senator from New York in general election matchups, while Obama generally struggles when matched up against McCain.

  • In Florida, the latest poll by Quinnipiac of 1,419 registered voters (May 13-20) gives Clinton a 7-point lead on McCain, 48 to 41 percent. Obama lags 4 points behind McCain, 45 to 41 percent. Clinton advantage over Obama: 11 points.
  • In Ohio, another Quinnipiac poll of 1,244 registered voters (May 13-20) likewise gives Clinton a 7-point advantage over McCain, 48 to 41 percent, with Obama again trailing the Senator from Arizona by 4 points, 44 to 40 percent. Clinton advantage over Obama: 11 points.
  • In Pennsylvania, a Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters (May 22), gives Clinton an 11-point lead on McCain, 50 to 39 percent, and Obama a 2-point lead. Clinton advantage over Obama: 9 points.
  • In Kentucky, Rasmussen (May 22, 500 likely voters) also finds Clinton defeating McCain, by 9 points, 51 to 42 percent. McCain trounces Obama by 25 points, 57 to 32 percent. Clinton advantage over Obama: 34 points.
  • In Nevada, a Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters (May 20) gives Clinton a 5-point advantage over McCain, 46 to 41 percent, and McCain a 6-point lead over Obama 46 to 40 percent. Clinton advantage over Obama: 11 points.

While Obama maintains his relative advantage over Clinton in some of the battleground states he won during the primary season, that advantage is much more narrow.

  • For example, in Minnesota, a mid-May Star Tribune poll of registered voters finds Obama defeats McCain by 13 points, while Clinton defeats McCain by 9 points. Obama advantage over Clinton: 4 points.
  • In New Mexico, a Rasmussen poll of 500 likely votes (May 14) finds Obama up 9 points on McCain, 50 to 41 percent, and Clinton up 6 points on McCain, 47 to 41 percent. Obama advantage over Clinton: 3 points.

However, Clinton has also surpassed Obama in general matchups against McCain in several states that Obama won during the primary season:

  • A SurveyUSA poll of 1,523 registered voters in Missouri (May 16-18) finds Clinton up two points on McCain, 48 to 46 percent, and McCain up 3 points on Obama (48 to 45 percent). Clinton advantage over Obama: 5 points.
  • In Alabama (a state neither Democrat will win), a new Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters (May 27) finds McCain beating Obama by 28 points, 60 to 32 percent, and Clinton by 20 points, 54 to 34 percent. Clinton advantage over Obama: 8 points.

In short, polling data is almost unanimous in demonstrating that Clinton is currently better poised to win the states Obama won during the Democratic primary than Obama is poised to win the states in which Clinton was victorious. Whether Clinton can successfully demonstrate this to undecided superdelegates is another matter.

Previous post: Obama Sustains Advantage Over McCain in Iowa
Next post: Would Pawlenty Deliver Minnesota to McCain As VP Nominee?

3 Comments


  • This assumes that, somehow, an Obama 2 point win in Pennsylvania is somehow less than a 9 point win for Clinton. It's not. The question isn't X advantage over X, it's the electoral map (as it stands today) for each candidate.

  • Except a 2-point lead today by Obama over McCain in Pennsylvania puts that state much more in doubt for the Democrats (as of today) than it does if Clinton was on the ballot. (Not to mention a 2-point lead is actually within the margin of the poll's error, whereas Clinton's lead is not).

    So, without getting into the internals of the polls, this is another way of measuring 'strength of support' within a state, rather than simply saying "Obama and Clinton would both win Pennsylvania."

  • So, who is going to win?

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting