Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Pollster.com update: more good news for Obama [update: Petraeus backs Obama on negotiating]

By

As you can see from the spiffy, constantly-updated electoral college projection map in the upper right-hand corner of the screen, Barack Obama has some more good news today.

  • Pennsylvania (21 EV) has been reclassified as “strong blue” (was formerly “lean blue”).
  • West Virginia (5 EV) has been reclassified as “tossup” (was formerly “lean red”).
  • Montana (3 EV) has been reclassified as “lean red” (was formerly “strong red”).  With the reclassification of WV, Montana is now the only “lean red” state, which suggests that McCain is making virtually no headway with independents and moderate (“Reagan”) Democrats.

Nothing but bad news for Team McCain, as far as the eye can see.

UPDATE: And speaking of bad news for Team McCain, David Petraeus (yes, the guy that McCain invokes every chance he gets) seems to agree with Barack Obama when it comes to negotiating with the bad guys.

   QUESTION: One question, it came up in the debate last night, I know it has to do–

   Petraeus: Oh, I’m not walking into minefields now [laughter from crowd). I try to go around —

   QUESTION: It was a British general who said we must learn how to talk to our enemy. A british general — not a U.S. Can you comment?

   Petraeus: Well, all I would say — I didn’t actually see that [referring to the last Obama/McCain debate], we were doing some other stuff last night — look, I’m trying to go around minefields these days, not blunder into them. But I do think you have to talk to enemies.

   I mean again, you’ve got to set things up, you’ve got to know who you’re talking to, you’ve got to have your objectives straight, all the rest of this stuff. I mean, so I’m not trying to get into the middle of domestic politics. But I mean what we did do in Iraq ultimately was sit down with some of those that were shooting at us. What we tried to do was identify those who might be reconcilable.

Et tu, General Petraeus?  This is verging on being comical, isn’t it?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • I’ve said this when Zogby has favored my candidate as well as when he favors the other side.  I mean, come on — why do you think Zogby, apparently alone among major polling outlets, comes up with the results you cite?

    • Gallup (Obama +11)
      ARG (Obama +4)
      Rasmussen (Obama +6)
      Research 2000 (Obama +10)
      Battleground (Obama +4)
      Ipsos (Obama +7)
      Zogby (Obama +4)

      <

      p>Incidentally, I’m guessing you heard WCRN wrong.

      • I’ll choose Gallup and Rasmussen thank you.  Both of those two polls have larger sample sizes close to 3000 each.  The other polls are surveying 500-600 voters.  What really matters is when you look at the same polls over time.  I’m predicting about 330 electoral votes.  The best source for this stuff is fivethiryeight.com.

        • http://www.fivethirtyeight.com

          <

          p>It’s an election model that takes into account all public polls (national and state) and adjusts for pollster accuracy, demographics, and so forth.

          <

          p>Nothing’s settled yet, but anyone who thinks the race is close right now has a serious head-in-sand problem:

          <

          p>

          <

          p>

  2. Zogby in the Herald:

    <

    p>

    The presidential race is still too close to call and could come down to the very last weekend before voters decide if they like or distrust Barack Obama, a national pollster predicts.

    “I don’t think Obama has closed the deal yet,” pollster John Zogby told the Herald yesterday.

    • The Election Is Kerry’s To Lose

      By John Zogby

      I have made a career of taking bungee jumps in my election calls. Sometimes I haven’t had a helmet and I have gotten a little scratched. But here is my jump for 2004: John Kerry will win the election.

      Have you recovered from the shock? Is this guy nuts? Kerry’s performance of late has hardly been inspiring and polls show that most Americans have no sense of where he really stands on the key issues that matter most to them. Regardless, I still think that he will win.

    • Read it.  But just to help out, here’s the salient portion:

      <

      p>

      I do think you have to talk to enemies.

        I mean again, you’ve got to set things up, you’ve got to know who you’re talking to, you’ve got to have your objectives straight, all the rest of this stuff…. But I mean what we did do in Iraq ultimately was sit down with some of those that were shooting at us.

      <

      p>That’s exactly the position Obama has taken in both debates, and it’s exactly the position that McCain has tried to ridicule as hopelessly naive, if not downright dangerous.

        • He says you have to prepare.  That’s what Obama said.  He says you do have to talk to your enemies.  That’s what Obama said.    McCain is saying he will not talk to the president of Iran, or other undesirables, because they’re bad people (“stinking corpses” and all that).  That’s not what Petraeus is saying.

      • has been that negotiations at the president level should not take place unless preconditions have been met. Whereas he (McCain) keeps pointing to the youtube debate where Obama said he would meet without preconditions…which I think was over a year ago.

        <

        p>But to make the jump that Petraeus now supports Obama’s position is a bit misleading. In fact, taken in context, I don’t think Petraeus was talking about Presidential level negotiations at all.

Archives