Indies not warm to Obama-Clinton ticket

[babylonsister]

Indies not warm to Obama-Clinton ticket
Posted: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:20 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton, Obama

From NBC/NJ's Mike Memoli


Today’s Quinnipiac numbers for three key battleground states suggest that Obama may have indeed gotten a “bounce” after Clinton’s exit left him the undisputed, presumptive nominee. Yet a closer look at the poll finds that -- at least in these states right now -- there would be no sizeable benefit for Obama to make Clinton his running mate.

Only 21% of Florida voters, 23% of Ohio voters, and 25% of Pennsylvania voters say they’d be more likely to support the Democratic ticket if Clinton were a part of it. In each case, a slightly smaller percentage said they’d be less likely to vote for that “dream” ticket, with a majority saying it would make no difference.

Most significantly, Quinnipiac found that independent voters in those key battlegrounds believe that the Illinois senator should not select his New York counterpart -- and by double-digit margins in two of the three.

“If Sen. Obama seriously is thinking about picking Sen. Clinton as his running mate, these numbers might cause him to reconsider,” Quinnipiac’s Peter Brown said in a release.

more...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/18/1152577.aspx

[lojasmo]

1. Exactly what I have said ALL ALONG.

Obama is winning women, middle class, blacks, hispanics, and independents.

Clinton only detracts from the ticket.

[maxsolomon]

3. my reagan dem parents will vote mccain if HRC is on the ticket

i'm having a tough enough time fighting the muslim rumors with them. don't add to my burden.

[babylonsister]

8. Wow. So are they really Dems? How can that be?

Then again, my father threatened to vote for McCain if Obama got in; we haven't talked politics in months, so the current thinking of the paternal unit is unknown.

[Riktor]

11. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but...

... the Democratic party is an umbrella party that appeals to Americans that identify themselves as center-left to left in political outlook. Because there are only two political parties, neither can be too extreme in their positions as to alienate the middle-ground. Consequently, there is a high degree of variance in intra-party political ideology. For example, the Democratic party is made up of social liberals, fiscal liberals, unionists, environmentalists, social democrats, classical liberals, and so on. In some cases, these ideologies may be diametrically opposed.

So, yes, it is possible to a conservative Democrat. There are hundreds of thousands of them in the southern and mid-western United States. Do the names Robert Byrd and Zell Miller ring any bells?

[maxsolomon]

16. REAGAN democrats

meaning they voted democratic up until Reagan in 1980, then got fooled because reagan promised to lower their taxes. every impulse they have is liberal but they are ruled by their fear & voted for * twice - they listen to WLW & bill cunningham a LOT.

[Blondiegrrl]

10. I agree 100%. n/t

[Cha]

14. Like Michelle said on The View today

when Barbara tried to pin her down on that question.. paraphrasing.."Obama gets to chose and it will be someone who has his vision for what AMerica should be"..and she said she had "nothing to do with that!"

What I said from the very beginning:)

[Colobo]

2. Obama/Biden is a winning ticket.

[rpannier]

4. I'm not going to dispute the numbers on the polling

But, this similar to what we heard in 2000.

Polling showed that Independents did not like Clinton and Gore built part of his campaign around this item.
He distanced himself from Clinton.
He didn't want Clinton campaigning on his behalf -- Hell, he didn't want Clinton to campaign in Arkansas.
As we got closer to election day, Gore had Clinton out campaigning for him in some places.
The places where Bill campaigned they had a larger than expected turn out and it went in Gore's favor.

I put very little stock in these polls about what independents think, because they are usually off the mark.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

18. You're wrong. The places where Gore used Clinton were not places

where there were a lot of Indies or Reagan Democrats. You saw Clinton strong in historically/traditionally strong and liberal-leaning areas, many of them black and Hispanic. Gore didn't have Clinton campaigning in places like OH and the FL panhandle and for good reason.

Also, Bill Clinton's negatives are still a bit higher than Hillary's, whether fair or unfair. This is a problem that Hillary Clinton has always had to contend with. She has generally always had high unfavorables and those unfavorables translate into a loss of Indies and blue-collar voters for the general election. Sure they voted for her against Obama but there is no indication that they are going to stay with that ticket if she's on it. They are essentially more Repug-leaning anyway.

[blm]

19. People forget that Clinton lost Arkansas for Dems after Lewinsky scandal.

Clinton did campaign in Arkansas for Gore - but, by then the shame factor in that state was palpable. It took a fuckup as huge as Bush2 to get many in Arkansas to forgive and forget.

[Thrill]

5. Obama/Kaine its a winner!!

[bunnies]

6. It wont fly in NH either.

Where Indys are the largest bloc.

[Zhade]

7. Hey, what do you know? We were right - not only does he not need her, she hurts his ticket.

Thank goodness he's unlikely to make the strategic blunder of putting her on his ticket, since mcLame could easily prove her a liar by playing the Tuzla video (and he's already using her "Obama has a speech" line in his ads).

[Cha]

15. That's one of the stupidest lines

they could have in their ads..'cause it turns out Obama's speech was prescient and basically brilliant.

Al Gore talked about The Speech in his endorsement speech in Michigan. If we had listened to Al Gore and Barack Obama instead of the bush enablers like mccain we wouldn't have lost all our Blood and TReasure over lies.

mccain needs to go down.

[NC_Nurse]

9. Good neither am I. I will vote for it, but I'd rather have a better VP choice.

[polichick]

12. I know I've said it a million times, but it would kill the movement...

The coalition Obama has built is about a peoples movement ~ Clinton represents what we're moving away from.

[greguganus]

13. I agree. Obama stands for change, not the same 'ol song n' dance. n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

17. This confirms what many of us have stated all along.

There's something about Obama that many Indies are attracted to. Put Clinton on the ticket, and they run back to the Repugs. The Indies could swing this election in either direction and the Obama-Clinton ticket is a losing one. It is baffling why the Indies can see it but Democrats who support that ticket can't. Bascially, the Indies are warning us that it's a bad idea.

[old mark]

20. Clinton came in second for a reason-

More people want Obama. It would be a terrible choice, and I can't see it happening.

mark

[Johonny]

21. VP rarely help, hurt candidates

just look at Cheney. The guy has always polled huge negatives, yet apparently few indie voters used this to influence their decision. In general VP choices may give small bumps at the time of announcement and may give small regional help to a ticket, but the very rarely affect how people vote.