|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 05, 2020, 03:09:33 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  2008 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  OK: Survey USA: McCain defeats Obama 2:1
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: OK: Survey USA: McCain defeats Obama 2:1  (Read 2369 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,725
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 08, 2008, 11:42:50 pm »

New Poll: Oklahoma President by Survey USA on 2008-09-07

Summary: D: 32%, R: 65%, U: 2%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2008, 11:59:02 pm »

Remember when Clinton was going to make this "close."

LOLOLOL
Logged
jimmie
jamespol
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,706


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2008, 12:00:35 am »

Remember when Clinton was going to make this "close."

LOLOLOL


Believe me, Hillary Clinton would have made Oklahoma an extremely competitive state..
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,990


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2008, 12:04:19 am »

Let the mocking of BushOklahoma commence.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,742


Political Matrix
E: -0.84, S: -3.04

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2008, 12:05:31 am »

Remember when Clinton was going to make this "close."

LOLOLOL

Remember when some people argued he might get to 38-40% here because of U of Oklahoma and Oklahoma St?
Logged
Vsanto5
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 290
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: 3.23

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2008, 12:06:25 am »

I wonder if people there think Obama is a muslim, they should do a poll on that sometime.
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,613
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2008, 12:08:38 am »

Remember when Clinton was going to make this "close."

LOLOLOL

Remember when some people argued he might get to 38-40% here because of U of Oklahoma and Oklahoma St?
No.
Logged
jimmie
jamespol
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,706


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2008, 12:09:35 am »

Hillary would have probably lost Oklahoma but only by 3 or 4 points.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,742


Political Matrix
E: -0.84, S: -3.04

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2008, 12:14:03 am »

Remember when Clinton was going to make this "close."

LOLOLOL

Remember when some people argued he might get to 38-40% here because of U of Oklahoma and Oklahoma St?
No.


It's entirely possible that he could actually. That's not the surprising part here. The surprising part is that McCain is only at 52%. I expect by election day that he'll be over 60% but Obama getting 38% is hardly unreasonable.

Need more polls to get a trend. Remember that in 2004 there were also 2 polls that showed Kerry trailing by just 12%. Anyway, I could see Obama getting 35-38% in OK.

There is no chance that Barack Obama will get more than 38% of the vote in Oklahoma this Election. If Obama does manage to get more than 38%, there is something wrong with the Oklahoma electorate. It goes against the electoral grain of wood in Oklahoma, if a liberal African-American Senator running for President of the United States manages to get more than 38%.

Or its just a great year for the Democrats as I think it will be.



Well, 35-38% .. it seemed to me like people thought he could do well in Oklahoma for a Democrat in this thread. I guess your memory is just pretty bad.
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,910


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2008, 12:14:42 am »

I could see Clinton getting like 43% max here.
Logged
jimmie
jamespol
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,706


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2008, 12:15:50 am »

I could see Clinton getting like 43% max here.

No, 48%
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,613
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2008, 12:18:02 am »

Remember when Clinton was going to make this "close."

LOLOLOL

Remember when some people argued he might get to 38-40% here because of U of Oklahoma and Oklahoma St?
No.


It's entirely possible that he could actually. That's not the surprising part here. The surprising part is that McCain is only at 52%. I expect by election day that he'll be over 60% but Obama getting 38% is hardly unreasonable.

Need more polls to get a trend. Remember that in 2004 there were also 2 polls that showed Kerry trailing by just 12%. Anyway, I could see Obama getting 35-38% in OK.

There is no chance that Barack Obama will get more than 38% of the vote in Oklahoma this Election. If Obama does manage to get more than 38%, there is something wrong with the Oklahoma electorate. It goes against the electoral grain of wood in Oklahoma, if a liberal African-American Senator running for President of the United States manages to get more than 38%.

Or its just a great year for the Democrats as I think it will be.



Well, 35-38% .. it seemed to me like people thought he could do well in Oklahoma for a Democrat in this thread. I guess your memory is just pretty bad.
Well, even so, 35-38% isn't so far off from the 32% he's currently polling. I don't think he has a shot at doing any better than Kerry (especially not with the Palin pick), though.
Logged
CultureKing
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,197
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2008, 12:20:24 am »


No, 40%
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2008, 12:21:40 am »

Well, 35-38% .. it seemed to me like people thought he could do well in Oklahoma for a Democrat in this thread. I guess your memory is just pretty bad.

I don't see any mentions of U of Oklahoma or Oklahoma State in there.
Logged
Aizen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,514


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -9.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 09, 2008, 12:32:36 am »

What an absolute joke of a state
Logged
jimmie
jamespol
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,706


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2008, 12:33:14 am »


No, they just saw through Obama's nonsense. It would have been Clinton country.

It is one of the better states!
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,742


Political Matrix
E: -0.84, S: -3.04

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2008, 12:43:23 am »

I agree with James. It's clear that Oklahoma would be a swing state in this election if the Democrats were to nominate Hillary. That state and a few others. I could see this as a plausible map if they had been smart enough to nominate her:



She would've already had the election won, James!


Logged
jimmie
jamespol
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,706


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2008, 12:46:31 am »

I agree with James. It's clear that Oklahoma would be a swing state in this election if the Democrats were to nominate Hillary. That state and a few others. I could see this as a plausible map if they had been smart enough to nominate her:



She would've already had the election won, James!




No, no no. IA and WI would still be Clinton but narrower then Obama vs McVain.

MO and KY should be DEM on this map.. and TN grey.
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,422
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2008, 02:47:33 am »

I agree with James. It's clear that Oklahoma would be a swing state in this election if the Democrats were to nominate Hillary. That state and a few others. I could see this as a plausible map if they had been smart enough to nominate her:



She would've already had the election won, James!




No, no no. IA and WI would still be Clinton but narrower then Obama vs McVain.

MO and KY should be DEM on this map.. and TN grey.

LOL
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,697
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: September 09, 2008, 02:51:59 am »

I agree with James. It's clear that Oklahoma would be a swing state in this election if the Democrats were to nominate Hillary. That state and a few others. I could see this as a plausible map if they had been smart enough to nominate her:



She would've already had the election won, James!




Oklahoma red? Heck, why not Texas. I mean after all, politically, Oklahoma is basically Texas without the parts that vote Democratic.
Logged
Cubby
Pim Fortuyn
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,075
Israel


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: September 09, 2008, 03:12:58 am »

I agree with James. It's clear that Oklahoma would be a swing state in this election if the Democrats were to nominate Hillary. That state and a few others. I could see this as a plausible map if they had been smart enough to nominate her:



She would've already had the election won, James!


Is that a joke? It must be, a map showing Oklahoma more Democrat than Connecticut and Wisconsin is either very old or very wrong.
Logged
The Ex-Factor
xfactor99
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,111
Viet Nam


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -6.43


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: September 09, 2008, 04:29:51 am »

I suppose the TV stations in Oklahoma need something to spend their money on.
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,271



WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: September 09, 2008, 04:33:50 am »
« Edited: September 09, 2008, 04:35:32 am by Ebowed »


No, they just saw through Obama's nonsense. It would have been Clinton country.

If there are honestly a good 20% of voters in a state who would have voted for Clinton, but choose McCain over Obama, can you really attribute that to anything other than subtle racism and scare tactics?

I was talking to an old classmate who now resides in Alabama the other day who referred to Obama as "not only liberal but black and formerly Muslim and has one year of experience in the Senate."  There is no getting through to these people.  (I didn't bother correcting him on the Muslim charge, by the way, because is he really going to change his mind?)
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,602


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: September 09, 2008, 04:41:43 am »

Let the mocking of BushOklahoma commence.

It's ObamaOkla...no, wait, it's McCainOklahoma now. Wink
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,098
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.77, S: -2.09


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: September 09, 2008, 08:06:18 am »

Yeah, even Clinton wouldn't have made this close.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines