Another Inconvenient Finding for Barack Obama
By PsychoDrew on March 10, 2008 at 10:02 PM in Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton
Originally posted at Daily Kos.
The widely celebrated Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll report that reported a statistically insignificant 2pt lead for Barack Obama among Likely Democratic Primary voters contained another piece of worrying news about a Barack Obama nomination: the economy.
New polling released today shows that voters trust Clinton more than McCain on the economy and McCain more than Clinton when it comes to reducing government corruption. Those preferences are reversed when McCain was compared to Obama.
Rasmussen is reporting that voters trust Hillary Clinton more than John McCain when it comes to the economy. No shock there. The Clinton name is associated with a strong, growing economy and balanced budgets. What is shocking is that another poll showed that John McCain is trusted more on the economy than Senator Obama.
Could this be a problem for Senator Obama in November? The most recent poll I could find was a CBS/NY Times poll conducted Feb. 20-24. When asked which issue was most important to voters, 33% said the economy. The war in Iraq was second at 20%. Health care was third at 7%.
Barack Obama needs to work on his economic credentials because the economy is important to voters and his message is not resonating with voters. These findings may explain why Hillary carried Ohio with a double-digit margin. Remember that her controversial 3am ad did not air in Ohio.
I was raised in the Northern Panhandle of West Virginia. This tri-state area has suffered economically as the industrial sector of the economy has declined over the last 20 years. I, personally, find Obama’s appeal about hope and change and new politics very exciting. It happens that I find Hillary more appealing. As much as I genuinely do like Barack Obama, his message is not resonating with these blue-collar voters.
In 2000, Gore lost West Virginia. The reason he lost was a speech he gave in 1992 near my hometown. He promised to enforce trade laws and protect local voters. When the Clinton administration refused to enforce trade laws to stop steel dumping from China and Brazil, voters in my area took their anger out on Al Gore. They looked at Al Gore and saw a politician they didn’t trust and they looked at George Bush and say a politician who wouldn’t be any more helpful, but they agreed with his views on social issues. One painful irony for me is that George Bush’s steel tariffs saved my father’s company and his pension and his job.
Although I am a Clinton partisan, I am fond of Barack Obama and I am committed to supporting him, should he be the nominee. The point of this diary is not to attack him, but to point to a very big weakness that needs to be addressed. Blue collar voters don’t get Barack Obama the way many other progressive voters. John McCain, on the other hand, makes a lot of sense. He’s easier “to get.”
Just an aside. One more finding in the poll should give all of us, both Obama and Clinton partisans, some pause:
The General Election remains essentially tied. McCain leads Obama 45% to 44% while Clinton leads McCain 46% to 45% (see recent daily results). Both single-point leads are statistically insignificant. In each match-up, McCain benefits from a significant number of voters who preferred the other candidate in the Democratic Primary. This suggests that if the Democrats can unify their party by fall, McCain could be at a significant disadvantage. On the other hand, McCain could benefit greatly if the Democratic battle spins further out of control.
This is consistent with findings in some state polls, as well. Rasmussen released a poll on Saturday that found Obama leading Clinton by 14 points in Mississippi. It also found that many of their supporters have negative views of their opponents:
One measure of a deepening divide in the party is that just 56% of Obama voters have a favorable opinion of Clinton. Just 34% of Clinton voters have a favorable opinion of Obama.
If Obama is nominated, just 47% of Clinton voters say they are even somewhat likely to vote for Obama in the general election against John McCain.
If Clinton is nominated, 65% of Obama voters say they are at least somewhat likely to vote for her against McCain.
Similar results in a poll of Michigan voters released on Friday:
If Clinton wins the nomination, just 50% of Obama voters say they would be even somewhat likely to vote for her against John McCain. Thirty-five percent (35%) say they are Not at All Likely to vote for Clinton in the general election.
On the other hand, if Obama wins the nomination, just 52% of Clinton voters would be even somewhat likely to vote for him against John McCain. Twenty-five percent (25%) say they are Not at All Likely to vote for Obama in the general election.
At the end of this battle, it is critical that we rally around the nominee. The only way this happens is if the supporters of the loser believe that the winner fairly the won nomination. Therefore, it is absolutely critical that the Michigan and Florida issue is settled in a way that satisfies both sides. The cannot be shut out, and their delegations cannot be sat as is. I hope our party leaders are taking this seriously.
Thanks for posting here, Drew! Very interesting piece, and stats.
I found this worth chewing on:
Blue collar voters don’t get Barack Obama the way many other progressive voters. John McCain, on the other hand, makes a lot of sense. He’s easier “to get.”
Definitely. Reflexively, they’ll trust McCain far more easily than Obama.
Thank you, Susan!
The conservative, blue-collar workers where I grew up just don’t get Senator Obama. They are angry about NAFTA and GATT and they are cynical about politicians.
When Teddy endorsed Obama, my mother called me and told me that word in circles was that Teddy did it because he thought he could play pupper-master to the next president. Senator Obama sounds like a used-car salesman to these voters. We can’t afford to these voters again.
Say, how did your diary go over at Daily Kos? I haven’t checked out the comments (linked at the top of Drew’s story).
And I found something about Kos that I’m going to post later tonight … it is devastating. Oh heck — here’s the link. But I’m going to post it as a new story later on. SCROLL to the bottom to see the last paragraphs, a devastating indictment of Kos and what his site has become.
That was a very sound, scientific explanation for what transpired with the videos. It also explains why all the music videos I like to watch are of such poor quality. Thanks for the info and Kos is an idiot.
It went okay. Mostly a lot of “Oh, my god. What can Obama do?” Only one person called the blue-collar voters racist.
Yeah, Kos is turning his website into an anti-Clinton smear machine. That really angers me because I first heard about it as standard-bearer for progressive blogging so I tuned it to check it out. Now its become a wing of the Obama campaign, and an ugly wing at that.
I can hardly wait to read that diary. Kos is someone that needs to be exposed for what he is and taken down a few notches.
Hi susan, thanks for the link. I am not at all surprised that dkos has lost a lot of advertising. Who would want to advertise to that crew of double digit thinkers.
kos is not a bad guy and he created a great blog for awhile. but he is mistaken if he thinks all the damage done by this primary is going to go away after the nominee has been chosen. The purpose and mission of the site has been destroyed. Does he really think all of those freepers for Obama he has allowed to take over th site are going to unite behind Hillary when she is chosen?
The place is run by gangs these days and even the gang leaders are disgusted and leaving.
WOW !!!!!!!!! DOUBLE WOW!!!! times a billion.
I am fairly new to this site but you folks blow me away with your research. You are great. This is fantastic factual based information.
I am sending it to Thom Hartmann and asking him to publicly apologize to the Clinton campaign for repeating and giving air time to the Daily Kos smear.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
You give me hope for America. Can’t wait till you post your full report.
Don’t expect an apology from Hartman. Air America is so AirObama anymore that I quit listening to it a long time ago. And that includes MSNBC’s new female shill, Rachel Maddow. I used to have so much respect for her intellegence and integrity. Guess she’s still smart, not much integrity though. Just another Hillary Hater. So sad really. I really do miss Air America. But I’ll never listen to them again.
Really nice article but I take exception to a couple of things.
1. Thinking that the dems have an advantage over McCain due to some wacky, poorly done poll is pretty silly. Those things are almost never right and they almost always heavily favor the dems at this stage. I seem to remember that Dukakis had a 19 point lead over Bush at one point. Common sense says McCain is the strongest candidate based on national security, taxes and his war hero status. See that op-ed hit piece Ken Blackwell wrote. His decades of experience certainly won’t hurt him either.
Now in a head to head matchup I think Hillary fairs much better than Obama for a ton of reasons. One is that blue collar guys like myself don’t get Obama. One caveat here, I’m a blue collar guy who is currently writing a dissertation. I’m as academically qualified as ANY Obamaton and the only thing I can figure out about the guy is he is a duplicitous serial liar who is corrupt as hell. I think everyone should go look at the electoral college map and tally up the automatics in McCain’s favor. Couple those with some swing states like Fla, Ohio, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Texas and some others that are solidly in Hillary’s reach but virtually impossible for Obama and you see that Hillary is the much, much stronger candidate.
2. I genuinely do not like Obama as he pretty much stands for many things I do not. I am fond of honesty, integrity, and for showing up and actually working at your job. I mean 80%. He didn’t vote 80% of the time. Illinois ought to recall him. He is an embarrassment. If he can’t represent the people of Illinois how in the hell can he represent the United States. I definitely don’t get this man. Of course, I am blue collar and have worked for everything I got including my undergraduate and graduate degrees. It really makes me sick to think someone like this who skates through life is getting a free pass all the way to the white house.
3. I will never rally around someone like Obama. He isn’t deserving of my support or anybody’s support. As bad as the republicans, they aren’t this bad. They aren’t willing to disenfranchise their own voters or compromise their core values. Obama backtracks every single day. On a college campus today he is for legalizing drugs, tomorrow at a policemans convention he’ll say we need to crackdown on drugs. In liberal states he’s for gun control. In republican states he’s agains’t gun control. The list goes on and on and these aren’t trivial issues we are talking about either.
Thank you for your comments!
I’m not under any illusions about this fall. I’m not taking for granted that we have an advantage. The point I was trying to make is that we are much stronger if Obama and Clinton coalitions cannot unite around whomever the nominee is, and I believe in my heart that person will be Hillary Clinton.
Interesting comments. I have a difficult time warming up to Obama. He lies with such frequency and has convinced so many people that he is telling the truth that I have no real respect for him.
Me too. I can’t even watch him in the debates. He gets the bush treatment on my TV, he comes on and the channel gets changed.
The reason is that I can not stand to watch the masses be hypnotized by the hostile garbage he spouts.
Terrific Analysis.
Thank you for posting here, and giving us all a great round up of points.
people just think she’ll do a better job, and there’s a lot of objective evidence to suggest that she’s better prepared than obama is. i think a lot of the partisanship obscures the fact that the american public is results-oriented. they want someone who wants to do the job, not just someone who wants the job.
Based on Obama’s comments over the NAFTA gate today, it has the appearance of trying to subdue the rhetoric and displeasure with the Super Delegates!
I find it really tone setting with his remarks towards the banter about a joint ticket as well today by Obama! So much as unifier!
Seems every time this man opens his mouth, all the claims made against Clinton are actually the reality of Obama!
If anyone watched Kerry last week on Larry King defending Obama, it was really poorly done, like grasping at straws when the truth was right in everyones face!
Maybe the time has come for Super Delegates, especially those who have changed their position, such as Lewis, to revisit their posture taken 2 weeks ago, fear of retaliation or not, otherwise as history has proven, it is your last positions people remember the most, even if it was a wrong one, all that preceeded that one mark in history become mute!
Here’s the text of his remarks today — there are so many lies or distortions, I don’t know where to begin:
http://healthybagofpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/03/barack-obama-in-his-own-words.html
That’s a pro-Obama site.
MEL, are YOU brave enough? Are you? (See the end of his post.)
not allowed to post there anymore Susan…lol
wanted to post again this:
Meanwhile what Obama really meant to say today was: I went to Canada and told them not to worry over NAFTA, but denied it! I voted for a 30% interest rate on credit cards! No one knows where the photo came from, but what the heck blame the Clintons, it is just politics! That dam 3AM ad made people think and they aren’t suppose to think, people thinking is destructive to me! Don’t you people get it, I want to be President, Rezko needs the get out of jail card and that is me, only if I am President, so support me, I promise you nothing, proof by my Senate Oversight committee chairman actions! Let us all party!
It really gets to him that the Clintons are saying he could be V.P. He can’t bear the thought of being 2nd. They really know how to get under his skin. Because they know — like we do — that all he cares about is winning and getting money.
One thing which is OT a bit, but wonder why since it became a bit of a media circus 10 days ago, how come no one has pointed out that Prince Harry, a real royal and not a self proclaimed one, sees the inportance of the war in Afganistan and yet Obama doesn’t, since he never bothered to decline the Chair of the Oversight committee or hold a hearing on it!
People remember that nineties economy I think. And well they should. Bodes well for Hillary.
I actually think that Hillary’s reputation as a partisan warrior is helpful among blue-collar voters. They watched her go to the mat for health care in 1993 and they want that kind of passion on their side. When she talks about universal health care, voters know that she is willing to fight hard for it.
Speaking only for people in Ohio that I spoke with and met, Hillary is respected here because she is a fighter with a good track record of standing up for the right issues and winning.
I love that she’s a fighter. What I find really…ironic? about the current Presidential debate is that in reality, she’s shown herself far more able to work across partisan lines than Obama, who uses accommodationist rhetoric but who doesn’t have enough of a track record to determine what he might actually accomplish.
The NAFTA remarks he made today strike me as Swiftboating at its finest.
The only fair way to settle the exclusion of Florida and Michigan is to allow a re-vote and count their votes and delegates completely. Anything less makes a mockery of our democracy.
Hopefully Obama will stop dragging his feet on this.
But Obama supporters are saying that it’s Hillary who objects to the revote.
I don’t know where they get that kind of idea. And when I asked them, they can’t tell.
Mel -Prince Henry thinks xxx -who the hell cares?
Wow. almost everybody on here is bashing Obama. He might not be as perfect as he is being portrayed, but he’s a decent man for a politican & has really done no crimes. Again, he is not the perfect man, but I know a few people I respect in DC, that overall respect Obama.
There is so many revelations being made every day about the Bush administration, I would hope this blog could sink their teeeth into that meat & not be on a cyclops like mission to smear Obama.
Correction Paul. He hasn’t been convicted of any crime, YET! Regarding his house purchase, why would the owner suddenly decide to subdivide the property? (Michelle O was elected to the planning commission at the time)Why would the owner accept an offer of $300K below asking price from Obama but Resko buys the adjacent lot at an inflated price (for a piece of ground, that given the “set-backs”from neighboring houses and streets he couldn’t even build a tool shed on it). Doesn’t something smell about this? Don’t you think that Resko will eventually “sell” the lot to Obama for next to nothing.
First off…back up a minute bud…
This site has been, and remains dedicated to dealing with Bush’s crimes, so don’t pull that crap. You can learn more about the intel failures, wiretapping, torture, and other right here all the time.
You can hold two thoughts in your head at the same time.
The extended amount of coverage at NQ about Obama is directly proportional to the LACK of coverage done about Obama in the MSM. We do not know what unethical issues Obama has until we cover some of the appearances of impropriety that warrant scrutiny and the questions related to his judgement.
I’m glad you feel comfortable with calling Obama a “decent man” but that is your opinion, not mine. I feel he might POSSIBLY be a decent man, but because of some very questionable situations around him, relations he has with many different quarters, and the scoffing at asking anything about him, I’m not very trusting of him, Axelrod or his messages.
Smear….interesting word.
Deelee,
“He hasn’t been convicted of any crime, YET”
Let’s get real. Please show me where Obama has broken the law?
Why bother. Anything short of a conviction upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court will be spun away with “explantions” by the Obamabots anyway. I guess that this standard cannot be met to your satisfaction until a special prosecutor is named to look into the issues, and findings are issued after several years of investigations and expenditure of about $100 million, since the mainstream media does not want to take their blinders off. Hillary has undergone this vetting process, but Obamabots go apeshit if anyone even asks questions concerning the behavior, statements, or integrity of their messiah.
In my view, Obama has been focusing on winning the nomination assuming that Hillary voters will automatically support him in GE. His campaign and his supporters alienate Hillary supporters. The damage to his chance in GE has already been done.
“At the end of this battle, it is critical that we rally around the nominee.”
I’m sorry, this may simply not be acceptable in th end for me because I’ll have to see how much further down the damn rabbit hole Obama is willing to go with his naive arrogance. If he continues his fraud of hope and change and gets the nomination, I will definitely vote 3rd party. He’d have to make a serious about face on his bullshit to get me at a “hold my nose” vote.
I held my nose and voted for that loser jackass John Kerry when his VP choice was fairly acceptable to me. Edwards got canned again because of the groomed 2 candidates.
Clinton has earned my vote. I’ve been very clear here at NQ that I used to dislike her quite a bit. But I’ve done my homework on the issue and I can vote for her without qualm. Even my most liberal ’she’s a freakin war hawk’ friends cannot sway me about her because they too only fall back on unfounded comments.
But Obama has a major credibility issue that comes along side his youthful arrogance and dismissive attitude towards his elders and the supporters of his opponent.
AND BE REAL CLEAR
If that sorry piece of shit cannot update his info about the Kenyan photo controversy while pointing and blaming Clinton, then he’s definitely a fucking fraud. I’ve sent materials to the campaigns to prove the article didn’t originate from the Clinton campaign. And yet, as you can see from the link above, he went from “take her word” on it in Ohio debate to blaming the Clinton campaign without a shred of evidence.
He denied NAFTA convo with the Canadians, called it a smear…then was busted with a memo completely blowing their credibility.
So, sorry if I’m not buying in November.
WOW Chris.
You definitely speak for me also.
I don’t know if anyone else saw this at Talkleft this morning, but BTD has a very informative post about the RULZ. I can’t get the link to work, but you know where it is. This is long but incredibly important to mention to all those RULZ fans:
And Yet More Inconvenience
We’ve previously heard the name Penny Pritzker as the Obama campaign’s finance chair. But wait, there’s more. Penny Pritzker was the board chair for Superior Bank of Chicago, which collapsed in 2001. So what?
Two points. One is the story of the collapse; two is where I’m currently reading about it.
Consortium News, headed by Robert Parry, has had editorials about the current election campaign which more often than not favor Obama. In spite of that, we now find posted there a writing called “Obama’s Sub-Prime Conflict” by Dennis Bernstein. It’s posted at
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/022708a.html
and to be sure, it is informative reading which in spite of where it’s posted, seems to cast yet another shadow on Obama’s judgement, by detailing the sub-prime mortgage involvement and other sleaze underlying the collapse of Superior, with the obvious fact that Superior’s COB was Penny Pritzker, Obama’s campaign finance chair.
Maybe one reason it’s posted there is because it also mentions that Penny’s brother J.B. is a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.
Have at it folks.