Newsweek: Three top Dems beat Repubs...Hillary fares best against Guiliani

[SaveElmer]

Obama does best best against McCain...Edwards best against Romney (though all clean his clock), and Thompson (same thing)

Hillary also top choice for Dem nomination...

Hillary 43
Obama 27
Edwards 14


Against Repubs

Hillary 51
Guiliani 44

Obama 49
Guiliani 44

Edwards 48
Guiliani 46


Hillary 50
McCain 45

Obama 51
McCain 41

Edwards 50
McCain 44


Hillary 55
Romney 40

Obama 53
Romney 37

Edwards 57
Romney 36


Hillary 53
Thompson 42

Obama 53
Thompson 39

Edwards 54
Thompson 38

Basically the same results with Bloomberg included

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19373524/site/newsweek/

[ShortnFiery]

1. Another day, another 10 threads started by SaveElmer anointing HRC the Dem Nominee.

:eyes:

[SaveElmer]

2. Funny...

How the news that our Democratic candidates are polling well ahead of the top Republicans is viewed as bad news by Fiery here...

Oh well...par for the course in DU land I guess

[ShortnFiery]

3. Yes, sometimes you "cover" by mentioning the rest of the candidates.

However, whenever I read one of your threads, I know exactly where the true agenda lies. ;)

[SaveElmer]

4. Wow...wait...you mean...

That on a political website devoted to electing Democrats, that people are advocating for their Democratic candidates? I'm shocked...shocked I tell you...

[ShortnFiery]

5. You line was wrong, the 2 points difference between HRC and Obama is within the margin of error.

:thumbsdown: Even when you're winning in the polls you have to erroneously stack the odds.

IMO Shameless. :(

[SaveElmer]

6. Yep it is...

So I guess the note I put in that Obama fares better against McCain I will rescind as well since that too is in the margin of error...

I find it amusing though when Obama or Edwards is ahead within the MoE then they are ahead, but when its Hillary its a tie...

[ShortnFiery]

9. If you look at the FEW points between the Dem Candidates it's a statistical dead heat.

HRC fairs no better than Obama. Against Thompson and Romney, Edwards fairs best - but still a statistical DEAD HEAT. :eyes:

But you don't report these findings. You take an insignificant lead and deceptively USE it. Also you make sure to put HRC's name first even when she lost a match against Obama.

I don't find anything amusing about such "shady" tactics. Second to open intimidation the use of HRC people's MANIPULATION of the statistics, this is dishonest.

But why am I surprised. Like Rove would support: The ends justify the means. When the opponent is down, kick them in the ribs to make sure he stays down.

You're winning and still you have to misinform and lie about the statistics. :eyes:

[SaveElmer]

10. What a crock of shit...

But not surprising from supposed "progressives" who cannot accept good news when Hillary is involved...

I was not deceptive at all, posted the numbers as they were published and included a link...

Grow up!

Oh btw: You never answer this question. You once told me free-trade was one of the primary reasons you despised the DLC and DLC members, yet you have a rampant free trader as your avatar...what's up with that?

[ShortnFiery]

12. Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. Frank Luntz may want to sign on with HRC?

BTW please consider not using that eroneous DLC label (progressive? :P :wtf:) on me?

I'm an unabashed LIBERAL. ;) :hi:

[SaveElmer]

14. ...

Where did I call you DLC...? You do act like a true "progressive" though...

I am asking you why your avatar is of a rampant free trader and NAFTA supporter....since these are things you supposedly revile...

[ShortnFiery]

16. I know, the DLC promotes their followers to degrade us with the "progressive label"

What? I can't read up on their unhanded strategies because I'm a LIBERAL? ;)

[SaveElmer]

18. SO why not answer the question....

Why would someone so opposed to free trade and NAFTA in particular have an avatar glorifying a free trader and NAFTA supporter?

[ShortnFiery]

20. Let's do lunch sometime? - I'm not letting you hijack the subject.

I didn't fall off of the political turnip truck yesterday, ya know. ;)

[SaveElmer]

21. Well I'm not surprised you wouldn't want to answer...

Pretty big contradiction....

Lunch sounds good!

[niceypoo]

27. Firey, why do you bother?

OK, so you hate Hillary.....vote for the GOP candidate if you please, but spare us the pathetic gaffawing.

[William769]

32. "I know exactly where the true agenda lies"

We all do, the next President of the United States.

[kikiek]

7. That is good news. People are finally seeing the light.

[SaveElmer]

8. Yeah that's what I thought...

But apparently some feel differently

[iamjoy]

11. Let's Stop Quibbling

Really people, let's stop quibbling. ALL of all the top 3 Democratic candidates beat the top Republican candidates. You could look at this two ways

1) This means NOTHING. We are over a year before the election.

2) This is AWESOME. Since often people may want Democrats to win, but vote for the Republican candidate (because they like the person better), our guys (and gal) are leading their guys. This is particularly encouraging for people who like Hillary but worry that her negatives would spell out a loss for us, people who think Obama doesn't have the experience or that Edwards couldn't do it. We have some GREAT candidates.

note: I'm backing Edwards, but would enthusiastically campaign for Hillary or Obama and possibly Richardson too if one of them should be nominated.

[flpoljunkie]

13. Survey Methodology...

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,001 adults, 18 and older, conducted June 20-21, 2007. Results are weighted so that the sample demographics match Census Current Population Survey parameters for gender, age, education, race, region, and population density. The overall margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4 percentage points for results based on 1,001 adults and 831 registered voters. Results based on smaller subgroups are subject to larger margins of sampling error. The margin of error is plus/minus 7 percentage points for results based on 422 registered Democrats and Dem. leaners and plus/minus 8 percentage points for results based on 324 registered Republicans and Rep. leaners. In addition to sampling error, the practical difficulties of conducting surveys can also introduce error or bias to poll results.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19373524/site/newsweek

[ShortnFiery]

15. Thank you flpoljunkie - It's a statistical DEAD HEAT among the Democratic Candidates. n/t

[SaveElmer]

17. I find it fascinating...

How Obama supporters are all of a sudden sooooo concerned with MoE and making sure we call a statistical tie a tie...

Somehow I doubt that when Obama is shown ahead by the MoE the same standard will be applied...

[ShortnFiery]

19. As a scientist, I'm always concerned, not only with the margin of error but also the design

of the study.

This small sample Poll does not tell us much. Basically, Democratic Candidates on the first tier, fare better than Republican candidates (on the first tier) ACROSS THOSE TWO DAYS.

If I would have reported "Obama fares best against Guilliani" I would have blushed, but I would have been rightly called on my smarmy interpretation of an insignificant lead (2 points with 4 point MOE).

You got busted! That's why we're a diverse group - to keep each other straight. I'm not above it either, but I'm trying to use my less basal instincts.

I'm not disrespecting you ... just keeping it honest. :hi:

[SaveElmer]

22. Gee lets go back and see how often you "busted"

Obama or Edwards supporters for this "heinous crime"...

I'm thinking I won't find any...

[niceypoo]

28. He is an ardent Hillary Hater

But somehow its always someone else who has the problem...Amazing....

[saltpoint]

23. 'Am encouraged by any Republican slip in public approval and

uplifted by Democratic gains, hoping for the best of all possible outcomes for the 2008 election, and the bluer the better.

In particular, I'm pleased that Giuliani is getting lackluster polling results. Had he stayed in the New York Senate race against Hillary Clinton, I think she would have whomped him good in that one. At our house, Richard Speck, Pol Pot, and Joseph Stalin are all outpolling Rudy Giuliani.

[TwilightGardener]

24. What's amazing to me is that McCain is supposed to be dead in the water,

and Rudy is supposedly hitting a wall, and yet they still match up the best against the Dems. Is it still name recognition that keeps 'em going? I would think folks would know who Thompson and Romney are by now.

[BeyondGeography]

25. The Republicans are loath to admit that McCain is their strongest candidate

His unfavorables are consistently around 30%, which is impressive considering he has been on the national stage for so long. He is also capable of running as the anti-Bush (which is the only way they can win next year) even with his full-throated embrace of the war, because of his anti-torture, pro-campaign finance reform positions, and since he has been fairly consistent about emphasizing deficit reduction over tax cuts. His immigration stand is also closer to the mainstream than that of the base.

Of course, for those reasons, he is hated and running far behind in the polls (and lagging in fundraising). More evidence that the Republicans are determined to make the worst of a bad situation in 2008.

[TwilightGardener]

26. He's probably their most-qualified candidate, certainly--

it's amazing to me that they would discard him, and fish around for someone who has much less substance and qualifications (Thompson) but has his ACT down. This warped view, that a leader is simply someone who looks/acts like a leader, is what we've been subjected to for the last 7 years, and is why we're in the mess we're in. The GOP loves its hollow men. McCain, for all his faults, is not hollow.

[William769]

29. Was there any doubt?

GO HILLARY!

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

30. Dude, relax. Your posting all these threads is just....WEIRD

Cut it out ok?

[William769]

31. Pot meet kettle.