SurveryUSA: Gen election head to head ..Clinton, Guiliani...16 states

[SaveElmer]

State Giuliani Clinton

Alabama 53 41
California 44 49
Iowa 41 47
Kansas 53 41
Kentucky 47 44
Massachusetts 42 52
Minnesota 41 50
Missouri 47 46
New Mexico 44 50
New York 38 56
Ohio 46 49
Oregon 44 48
Texas 54 37
Virginia 48 44
Washington 47 44
Wisconsin 46 47

Hillary wins California, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Wisconsin

Guiliani wins Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Texas, Virginia, Washington...

Hillary flips 3 red states in this scenario

Hillary within MoE in Kentucky, Missouri, Virginia, Washington...

[mckeown1128]

1. Can I have the link....

Is this the one with Bloomberg in it?

[SaveElmer]

2. Nope...

They polled both...this is head to head...

[SaveElmer]

5. Oh sorry...here is the link....

Breezed past the subject line...

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_surveyusa_16_giuliani_vs.php

[earthlover]

3. Hillary did better with Bloomberg running....

Still only a 5 point margin in California. This is shocking, so soon before the election. With this scenario, the Dems would have to pump big bucks into retaining California that could have been used normally to agressively go after other states instead of desperately trying to defend a state that would mean certain defeat if Hillary loses it.

Hillary only wins Wisconsin by 1 point. Again, resources need to be sent there from other states.

Guilliani flips Washington. Bad news there.

Oregon only Dem by 4 points? Bad news there too, gotta take resources away from other areas to defend.

Ohio, Hillary is leading but by a similar margin to Kerry was in the polls. Will it be enough?

Come on, this poll shows the scenario for a nail biter, not a clear Hillary win. If I was a Republican, I would view this as the best scenario I could hope for after 8 years of Bush.

Hmmm....do we have a similar state by state match up with Obama? Edwards? Gore? Others? Why just Hillary?

[SaveElmer]

4. Compare poll to 2004 results...

Keeping in mind we are 17 months away...


Wisconsin - 1 point is exactly what Kerry won the state by

Oregon - 4 points is exactly what Kerry won the state by

Ohio - Hillary outperforming Kerry(Kerry lost the state)

Iowa - Hillary outperforming Kerry (Kerry lost the state)

Minnesota - Kerry won by 3, Hillary ahead by 9

New Mexico - Hillary outperforming Kerry (Kerry lost the state)

Kentucky - Hillary down by 3, Kerry lost by 20

Virginia - Kerry lost by 8, Hillary down 4

Missouri - Kerry lost by 7, Hillary down 1

Washington - Kerry won by 7, Hillary down 1


SO as you can see Hillary underperforms Kerry's number in only one state(Washington), matches his performance in two states (Wisconsin, Oregaon), and outperforms him in 7 states...

[earthlover]

7. you would think that a democratic candidate would do better

look at how American public opinion in general has changed since 04. Still, with this poll, Hillary is in a nail biter. Even California is not safe, neither is Oregon and Washington. Without a sweep of the West Coast, it will be difficult to win.

I don't see much in your poll results that is encouraging. Having to defend California will cost BIG BUCKS. Dollars that could have been spent elsewhere.

Wouldn't it be easier to find a candidate who has the normal strength in California, so we can take advantage of the fact that right now we have the best chance in years to win?

Why nominate someone who barely squeaks by in what should be a landslide?

It is unthinkable to let the Reps win this time.

[SaveElmer]

8. Of course you do...though I daresay...

Were it anyone but Hillary with these results...and I am willing to bet neither Obama or Edwards does a whole lot better...you'd be touting them to the heavens...

Simply another example of the bar Hillary has to leap being set ever higher when the latest anti-Hillary talking point is shown to be false...

[earthlover]

10. Not true...

If Obama or Edwards did not have the West Coast in the bag and had similar numbers elsewhere as this poll, I would be even more scared!

What is scariest about the poll numbers touted is not whether Hillary or Obama or Edwards do better. What is scary is that if this is the way things stack up going into the campaign, we are in big, big trouble.

In the past we have been able to pretty much skip California, since we had it in the bag. Good thing. California is a GIGANTIC AD BUY. So we have had money to spend on other states ....like Ohio, etc.

We do have some states that we have a serious chance of switching colors. If we spend the time and resources and money in these states to put us over the top.

If we have to spend these resources, time and especially money just to keep California, it will decrease our chances of making pickups in states where we otherwise would have had a chance. States like MO, VA, OH, IA, etc. Of course, OH is a must win, so much of that will go to OH. Which means the states that will suffer will be the rest. States like MO and VA went blue in 06 senate. Maybe they will have to be skipped if we have to pay for CA.

This is the reality. It is not national polls. It is the electoral college.

Sorry, but the ONLY thing I see positive in this poll is Kentucky looks like it might be in play. That is, if we have any money left after defending the West Coast.

Depressing.

[SaveElmer]

11. Absolutely bizarre...

Only on DU could these poll numbers be considered bad news...

California is not in jeopardy...even if undecideds broke 3 to 1 Republican Hillary would get over 50%...she flips three red states, and three others are in play...

All in an electorate I am told over and over again is not yet engaged in the process...

Sorry, these polls are very good news!

[earthlover]

12. who says CA is not in jeopardy? if these poll numbers are any indication

of what they would be, the Dems would have to spend mega-bucks in CA to defend a scant 5% lead. Why? Because if we lost CA, we would be sunk.

You can ignore a 5% lead in CA....what is the margin of error in the poll? 5%? So you can ignore a lead in CA within the margin of error at your own peril.

The Dem planners would NOT see this as good news. They would be shitting bricks that they would have to spend all that money in what always has been a safe state. Not to mention WI, OR and WA.

[SaveElmer]

13. No...a 49-44 lead ...

Seventeen months before the election does not indicate a state in jeopardy...I know you want it to be to continue your Hillary is not electable theme...but it is just not correct...

Hillary is exactly where Kerry ended up in Wisconsin and Oregon...and outperforms him in virtually every other state...

Only Washington does she underperform...

Democratic planners would be very happy that states like Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, Missouri, New Mexico, and Iowa are now in play again...

[earthlover]

14. 17 months before the election....

and about 14 months before the total swift boating of Hillary. Is the lead big enough to maintain?

The closeness in Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, Missouri, New Mexico, and Iowa, WI WA and OR are indeed arguments that the race could go either way.

What is frustrating is that the money we would normally put into these states would have to be curtailed if CA was within 5 points of oblivion.

What also is frustrating is that today's poll numbers are not just 17 months before the election in the sense of a long time. We are also deep in public antipathy towards Bush that is no doubt influencing today's polls. Since BUSH IS NOT RUNNING....and since the Rep candidate is sure to distance himself from Bush....the Reps stand to gain on these numbers once Bush is out of the picture.

Now, if Hillary can IMPROVE on these numbers, that is a good thing. I sure hope we look at them as something to be improved upon rather than something to point to as a talking point for Hillary!

[SaveElmer]

15. Of all the candidates...Hillary is the least likely to be swiftboated...

Swift boating requires a willingness on the part of the public to believe that the accusation is true. SO it requires someone who hasn't been attacked in that way before, who hasn't had their entire political life opened up to attack...

It worked against Kerry because there was hesitation in peoples minds over whether it could be true or not...combined with an ineffective response from Kerry and the story just kept going and going...

Exactly what could Hillary possible be swiftboated with? She has already been accused of everything from murder, to lesbianism, to perjury, and just every other smear the righties could come up with...all proven false

Even folks that don't support her have discounted these attacks before they are even leveled...

Now I don't think there is any doubt that whoever the nominee is they will a swiftboat attempt will be made...that is a given. Frankly I would rather have someone who has a history of dealing with it successfully. The only Democratic candidate that applies to right now, is Hillary Clinton...

[earthlover]

17. so Hillary is immune from swift boating...that's a hoot!

The memes have already been planted years ago. When they re-plant them they will only remind folks of the doubts they already have towards Hillary.

It will be Monica this and Monica that. Hillary will be pillaried because she didn't send a philandering jerk of a husband packing. She will also be pillaried because her daughter as well as Hillary was humiliated by Mr Zipper and she basically did nothing because of advancing her career. We will relearn all about Whitewater. We will hear again all the rumors that circulated during Clinton's presidency. And if she fights back, others will say that just shows how bitchy she is.

Now, I don't agree with any of that crap. And crap it is. But that is just a small down payment of the nonsense we are going to have to endure if she is the nominee. No, she is not immune to swiftboating. And as to a willingness of the people to believe the stuff is true, all the Reps have to do with Hillary is remind folks of what they have thought was true for years!!! With a new candidate, they would have to invent a whole new smear. With Hillary, all they have to do is give a rerun.

I, for one, am not looking forward to a campaign where nobody pays ANY attention to the issues and 100% of the attention is bashing Hillary and Hillary trying to fight back. This is a lose-lose scenario. Even if Hillary wins in such a fight, nobody will know what she fought for because the entire time they were talking about Monica.

Of course this is not fair. But Hillary has a decided disadvantage in dealing with this stuff. She is a known quantity. She cannnot reinvent her image. It is already there. I really wish this were not true. But the proof that Hillary faces an incredible challenge is demonstrated by the fact that Hillary has found it necessary to triangulate her message for years. And she still is viewed by the general public as too liberal. Go figure.

[SaveElmer]

18. Just the opposite has proven to be the case...

Hillary has been pilloried for years...and the result...?

A two term senator and frontrunner for the Democratic nomination...


In contrast, swift boating of an untested national figure running against the most unpopular incumbent to win reelection in American history...results in 4 more years of W...

No, history shows just the opposite of what you say has been the case...

No one will pay any attention to Monica crap from the media...nowhere for the story to go...I doubt they even attempt it...

[earthlover]

19. ok...they won't even mention Monica....

Come on. You have made intelligent arguements for Hillary. But that is not one of them. Of course Monica will be mentioned. Of course....fact is, maybe she won't even HAVE to be mentioned.

[SaveElmer]

20. They may try...

Leno and Letterman will do the jokes they haven't stopped doing...but it won't go anywhere...

What's the story...?

The media feeds off of "new developments," new revelations that keep the story going...

The Monica thing has been beat to death and the voters have made their judgments about it...

In 1998, in the middle of the impeachment proceedings, for the first time in decades, the party holding the White House gained seats in an off year election, and forced Newt Gingrich from his speakership...that was their judgment...

Bill CLinton left office with a 65% approval rating...that was their judgment...

Hillary Clinton was elected to two terms as a United States Senator...that was their judgment...

No one cares about Monica, or Whitewater, or Vince Foster anymore...

If anything, the more the Republicans and the media go overboard on it, the more backlash there is to the Clinton's benefit

The swiftboat thing worked cause it was new, Kerry was an unknown nationally, and every day some new "revelation" came out about it...combined with Kerry's ineffective response...the story never died...

[NewYorkerfromMass]

9. Those numbers are not so great

You are right. There is no excuse for the Dem being behind in Washington state. I am also fairly certain we will lose Wisconsin next time too.

[AlinPA]

6. If Hillary gets our nomination, she will need double secret service; there is a lot of hate

out there. With Fox News spitting their hatred 24-7 and the talk radio crazies, there will be more nutjob right-wing republicans than ever out there to make sure she doesn't win. They are afraid of her. Same goes for Obama; he will need extra protection everywhere he goes.

[rufus dog]

16. These Number SUCK

And there is no way to spin it. Without any negative campaigning she is in a race. The current leader of the Repub party has approval ratings below thirty and she is in tight races in Oregon, Washington, Ohio ... she should have seven to to point leads.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. 3 way 11 state comparision: Edwards wins 9 states, HRC 4, and Obama 2

This poll is interesting. It shows that HRC appears to have improved her GE prospects from about 2 months ago.

The reason I am posting the prior poll is because it gives us a snapshot of how our three candidates fare relative to each other. Edwards flips even red states like Kentucky and VA while Obama manages to lose even in Massachusetts (although to be fair, some other polls show BO doing the best in GE trial heats. However, those are national polls. That could be because he is piling up big wins in some big states like California and Illinois)...

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_surveyusa_10_state_ge_res.php

Massachusetts Giuliani 40 Clinton 52
Massachusetts Giuliani 45 Edwards 46
Massachusetts Giuliani 48 Obama 41
New York Giuliani 42 Clinton 53
New York Giuliani 49 Edwards 44
New York Giuliani 51 Obama 42
Ohio Giuliani 45 Clinton 48
Ohio Giuliani 42 Edwards 50
Ohio Giuliani 51 Obama 40
Missouri Giuliani 48 Clinton 45
Missouri Giuliani 43 Edwards 48
Missouri Giuliani 50 Obama 42
Iowa Giuliani 48 Clinton 45
Iowa Giuliani 40 Edwards 54
Iowa Giuliani 44 Obama 49
Wisconsin Giuliani 45 Clinton 44
Wisconsin Giuliani 39 Edwards 49
Wisconsin Giuliani 45 Obama 43
Minnesota Giuliani 45 Clinton 48
Minnesota Giuliani 41 Edwards 49
Minnesota Giuliani 49 Obama 43
Kentucky Giuliani 48 Clinton 46
Kentucky Giuliani 44 Edwards 47
Kentucky Giuliani 54 Obama 38
Virginia Giuliani 49 Clinton 44
Virginia Giuliani 45 Edwards 45
Virginia Giuliani 53 Obama 38
New Mexico Giuliani 47 Clinton 45
New Mexico Giuliani 46 Edwards 43
New Mexico Giuliani 50 Obama 40
California Giuliani 41 Clinton 53
California Giuliani 42 Edwards 49
California Giuliani 45 Obama 46

[earthlover]

22. poll conducted in APRIL...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

28. See post 29 nt

:hi:

[SaveElmer]

24. Kind of an old poll...

Month and a half ago...

Latest poll from the same outfit has Hillary winning New Mexico, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio

[draft_mario_cuomo]

29. I noted both those things (I said HRC has improved since then)

This is the only 3 way state-by-state comparison I have found. If you have another, let's use that.

Ghouliani has fallen so I bet all three Dems improved. The discrepancy may remain. I doubt Obama suddenly caught to Edwards (9 for 11 vs. 2 for 11, even losing Massachusetts!).

[MadHound]

23. And this is relavent how?

A poll, taken sixteen months out, taken in less than half the US states. What is this supposed to do? It certainly doesn't provide any meaningful data. It's highest possible value is that of propaganda. . . oh, wait, never mind, I get it now.

Get back to me in a year with a full poll, consisting of the two known candidates. Then we'll actually have something meaningful to talk about.:hi:

[Capn Sunshine]

25. encouraging numbers

but I don't consider Iowa, Ohio and New Mexico "red" states. Stolen , yes. Red. No.

Isn't Rudy the weakest candidate of the field?

[rinsd]

27. Rudy has the strongest head to heads of any of the GOP (nt)

[alfredo]

26. Look at the electoral votes for those states.

Hillary wins:
California- 54
Iowa- 7
Massachusetts- 12
Minnesota- 10
New Mexico- 5
New York- 33
Ohio- 21
Oregon- 7
Wisconsin-11

Total- 160



Guiliani wins:
Alabama- 9
Kansas- 8
Kentucky- 8
Missouri- 11
Texas- 32
Virginia- 13
Washington- 11


Total- 81