A new Gallup daily tracking poll taken 3/7 through 3/22 finds that 28% of voters who support Clinton in the Democratic primary would vote for McCain if he were pitted against Obama in the general election, while 19% of voters who support Obama in the primary would vote for McCain if he were pitted against Clinton.
On February 1st, 2008, Obama said “I am confident I will get her votes if I’m the nominee. It’s not clear she would get the votes I got if she were the nominee.”
Perhaps Barack should take a look at what the voters say, and not just believe something because he thinks it to be true. This could really damage the Democratic party if he actually gets the nomination.
(Update: Here is the link. The poll was based on 6657 national Democratic voters)
link to March 7-22 Gallup poll.
<
p>Note that in the discussion of this poll, the Gallup pollster suggests that these party-switching threats are not very likely to be carried out in November.
<
p>Thanks for your concern Matthew.
The Gallup poll says:
<
p>”It is unknown how many Democrats would actually carry through and vote for a Republican next fall if their preferred candidate does not become the Democratic nominee.”
<
p>And also:
<
p>”Still, when almost 3 out of 10 Clinton supporters say they would vote for McCain over Obama, it suggests that divisions are running deep within the Democratic Party. If the fight for the party’s nomination were to continue until the Denver convention in late August, the Democratic Party could suffer some damage as it tries to regroup for the November general election.”
<
p>As far as the discussion saying that party switching threats are not very likely to be carried out in November, I never found them saying it was “not very likely”. The closest I found was “Additionally, some threat of deserting the party always takes place as party nomination battles are waged, and this threat can dissipate.”
<
p>”Can” does not equal “not very likely” to me. Maybe I missed something?
your diary greatly exaggerates the likelihood that the party will somehow be damaged if Obama is the nominee and pretends that there would be no damage if Clinton is the nominee. In any case, it is dangerous to base your arguments on one poll, because then you will look stupid trying to argue why we should ignore some other poll that suggests something you don’t like such as today’s NBC-WSJ poll showing Clinton sinking to her lowest positive rating (37%) since 2001.
<
p>What is going to cause more damage to the party, failing to cave to bitter Clinton supporters or pissing off the majority of people who participated in the more than 50 fairly contested elections by overriding their will at the convention?
<
p>Also, do you actually believe that Clinton is so vindictive as to refuse to campaign enthusiastically for Obama if he wins or that Clinton’s leadership skills are not going to be up to the task of convincing her supporters to switch to Obama when the time comes? Because if you believe either of those things, why do you think she would make a good president?
Because year after year by far the greatest determinant for how a person will vote is party identification. Typically, all but about 6%-12% of the chickens come home to roost.
<
p>You see this already on the Republican side. With McCain locking up the nomination, the vast swaths of conservatives/Republicans who stated that they would never vote for McCain has already dropped and the most vocal proponents of that view (i.e. McCain) are already backtracking.
<
p>Incidently, if this data were actually true in November (28% and 19% of Democrats switching), then the next President would be McCain, regardless of whether Obama or Clinton were the nominee. So the data will not work as a pro-Clinton talking point.
I meant (i.e. Rush Limbaugh), not (i.e. McCain). Obviously McCain was not a vocal critic of McCain (though maybe the “100 years in Iraq” comment means he’s his own worst ememy…)
…McCain kinda is a fierce critic of McCain. McCain attacked people who succored the tobacco industry and violated campaign finance laws wholesale…people like McCain 2008.
Link to Clinton-McCain polls:
http://www.electoral-vote.com/…
<
p>Link to Obama-McCain polls:
http://www.electoral-vote.com/…
<
p>Obviously, things can change several times between now and November. In some cases the only thing we have to go on is 2004 numbers. Also, I think there are states that could easily be added to the Democratic column in both cases by the time November rolls around.
Apparently, Republican voters are re-registering to turn out in droves to BACK Clinton in the democratic primaries.
I could see how these account for the “3 in 10” that would vote for McCain. However, were Hillary the nominee, these same 3 in 10 would STILL vote for McCain. The reason? Simple. They are Republicans.
“For weeks now Limbaugh has been imploring Republicans to re-register as Democrats and vote for Hillary Clinton in an attempt to extend the nominating contest thereby (theoretically) weakening the eventual nominee. Code named “Operation Chaos,” Limbaugh took credit for pushing Clinton over the top in the popular vote in Texas and giving her a larger than expected margin of victory in Ohio.
Limbaugh has been pushing just as hard in Pennsylvania and the other remaining contests, so you have to believe a portion of those newly minted Democrats in the Keystone state are really Republican foot soldiers executing “Operation Chaos.”
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/operation_chaos.html
All along, I’ve been hearing that many Republicans were crossing over to vote for Obama, demonstrating his crossover appeal. Now we hear that they may be crossing over to Hillary, and this is evidence of weakness?
I've been hearing that INDEPENDENTS have been coming out for Obama.
But what we hear anecdotally does not carry quite so much weight in my mind as a widespread media campaign to meddle in the opposing party's primaries.
Such meddling is illegal in some states, BTW. Limbaugh has been encouraging Ohioans to violate the law.
we (and I mean I) may be: fiercely partisan, thoughtful, enthusiastic, passionate, biting, overwhelming, compelling, asinine, self-righteous, stubborn, wrong, and even stupid, but I (and I mean we) aren’t suicidal.
<
p>Let’s be clear, neither Obama or Clinton will destroy our party. Let’s not put this on them. If anyone does throws the election to another four terrible years of McBush, it’s us, not them. We already know what happens when we place bitterness & purity above political unity – Bush/Cheney 2000.
<
p>We may be many things, but I believe we Democrats love our country more than we may sometimes hate each other, even in a year like this.