CA: Rasmussen: Clinton Leads CA by 5%; Obama Leads by 7% (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 09:16:18 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  2008 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  CA: Rasmussen: Clinton Leads CA by 5%; Obama Leads by 7% (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: CA: Rasmussen: Clinton Leads CA by 5%; Obama Leads by 7%  (Read 15782 times)
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,074


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« on: April 17, 2008, 05:07:01 PM »

Obama has the same numbers in the SurveyUSA poll. He might be able to outperform Bush in California.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,074


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2008, 02:08:36 PM »

California will not be a 15% victory for Obama unless he wins in a landslide. Honestly, this state is not as blue as a lot of people think it is on this forum. Why would Republican strongholds like Orange, San Diego, and Ventura counties have a heavy Obama turnout? Why is that an argument that everyone uses. "Oh well turnout will be heavy for Obama in _____ county!!!"

There is no basis for your arguments. Stop playing this guessing game!
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,074


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2008, 03:50:36 PM »

What people forget about California is that the mosdt important fact about this state is not veter registration or demographics or ideology or the economy.

The most important fact about this state is its sheer size.  We have nearly double the population of New York.  Its amazing how often this gets forgotten.

Because of the size of the state there is tremendous inertia that favors Democrats.  Democrats clearly have an advantage here in generic terms of maybe 8% or so in most years.  What I mean bythat is that if everyone in state showed up to vote and knew nothing about the two candidates except their party affiliation the Democrat would win by 8% or so.  This year, the Democrat would win by more than that because the year will not be a good one for Republicans.

In order to break through this inertia that favors Democrats, you must spend a massive sum of money to advertise in huge, expensive media markets.  If a Republican cannot advertise himself as an individual who is compelling to voters he cannot win here.  He will be no more compelling than his party affiliation, which is to say he will not be very compelling at all.

If John McCain had Bush's or Obama's fundraising prowess and this were not such a Democratic year, he could win California.  He does well among latinos, suburbanites, and independents (The three most important groups for California Republicans to win).  But he simply does not have the money required to run competitively here, and even if he did, this is such a Democratic year that even a herculean effort would be unlikely to win California.

Yeah I agree Mccain could win California if he took some socially liberal position and the republicans had a good year. But to the best of my knowledge Mccain has not taken any socially liberal position and this is not a good year for republicans. Plus Obama is a good candidate for California as he maximizes his vote amongst the affluent areas here in southern california. But Mccain is strong with hispanics which could get him a victory yet i am guessing after the whole immigration issue, hispanics arent really itching to vote republican.

I don't agree McCain would need to move left on social issues to win California in a normal year.  He is already left of the GOP on gay marriage and the environment, and he does not emphasize things like abortion and guns.

I also disagree that Obama is very well suited to California.  He has little appeal among upper class whites thanks to his ceaseless promise of higher taxes.  I suspect Obama will underperform in the south and over perform in the north.  Latinos have shown tremendous resistance to voting for Obama and a Democrat can't win California without a large majority of them.  Obama is not an ideal California candidate.  This is, after all, the state that gave us the term "Bradley effect".

I agree. I do not believe he will get all of Clinton's Hispanics when he clinches the nomination. People tend to forget that they are not a homogeneous voting block like the blacks. McCain is the perfect Republican to appeal to Republicans in southern California in San Diego and Orange counties. He's already said that he wouldn't mind gay marriage and never talks about abortion. I don't know what else he needs to soften his stance on. I happen to believe he'll do well in California, as Obama does not fit the state as well as many people think.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,074


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2008, 07:36:24 PM »

Also, those rich, affluent white people in Orange and San Diego counties are Republicans, and after all the gaffes, I doubt they are going to be tempted to go out and vote for Obama over the very acceptable McCain.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 14 queries.