CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcement; PUMAs Grow

This is really omnious. In the first poll conducted entirely after Obama selected Joe Biden as his running mate, CNN found that the race was tied at 47 each. Last month, Obama led 51-44. Even worse news is that the number of PUMAs is apparently growing and is the main cause of Obama's decline. A stunningly low 66% of Hillary Clinton supporters say that they plan on supporting Barack Obama, that's a 9 point decline from last month when it was at 75%. The number of Clinton supporters that are planning on voting for McCain has gone up 11 points since June.

In a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll out Sunday night, 47 percent of those questioned are backing Obama with an equal amount supporting the Arizona senator.

"This looks like a step backward for Obama, who had a 51 to 44 percent advantage last month," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

"Even last week, just before his choice of Joe Biden as his running mate became known, most polls tended to show Obama with a single-digit advantage over McCain," adds Holland.

So what's the difference now?

It may be supporters of Hillary Clinton, who still would prefer the Senator from New York as the Democratic Party's presidential nominee.

Sixty-six percent of Clinton supporters, registered Democrats who want Clinton as the nominee, are now backing Obama. That's down from 75 percent in the end of June. Twenty-seven percent of them now say they'll support McCain, up from 16 percent in late June.

"The number of Clinton Democrats who say they would vote for McCain has gone up 11 points since June, enough to account for most although not all of the support McCain has gained in that time," says Holland.

Clinton and Obama battled throughout the primary season, with Clinton winning more than 40 percent of the delegates. She suspended her bid for the White House and backed Obama in early June, after the end of the primary season.

A majority of registered voters, 54 percent, think Obama's choice of Delaware Senator Joe Biden as his running mate is an excellent or good decision. That number jumps to 73 percent when just asked of registered Democrats. But it drops to 59 percent when narrowed to Clinton supporters.



Display:


Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (2.00 / 1)

there is a huge difference between prefer and won't vote for him at all. just sayin'


by zerosumgame on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:35:32 PM EST

Relax (2.00 / 1)

Relax. I'm sure this is only "first reaction" results. Gallup shows the same thing. Tied. Lets wait until AFTER BOTH the Democratic and Republican convention.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:40:52 PM EST

Re: Relax (2.00 / 1)

As well as a non-weekend poll.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:18:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is sloppy (2.00 / 3)

Biden has been the running mate for about 36 hours. They cannot conduct and poll and analyze the data in that little amount of time and come out with a solid poll. Especially when they're conducting them on the last weekend of the summer.

This just seems like they're trying to push a storyline. I'll wait for a couple of other polls during the convention to confirm this.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:42:44 PM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post (2.00 / 4)

Well, USA Today/Gallup has Obama +3 and ABC has him +6, so who knows what the truth is.


by rfahey22 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:43:09 PM EST

I say ignore the polls, unite the party (2.00 / 4)

and win the GE.


by louisprandtl on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:14:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I say ignore the polls, unite the party (2.00 / 3)

That sounds like a recipe for success to me.


by rfahey22 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:35:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (2.00 / 2)

CNN seems to be in conflict with itself. Their poll of polls has him for 4.

And by al means lets keep the conflict meme going makes for good press.


Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.
by jsfox on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:43:45 PM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (2.00 / 1)

The "Poll of Polls" is an average of multiple polls. CNN does its own polling too. No conflict, just different results.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:46:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied (2.00 / 4)

I've been polled twice by national companies, one of them Rass in the last couple of months.  This poll was obviously worded differently, but I don't know how any poll is accurate this year.  There wasn't an option either time I was polled to say that you were abstaining from the presidential race this year, or that you planned to vote 3rd party, or any other option except voting for either Obama or Mccain.  With so many people planning to abstain or do something else, namely some of the Hillary supporters, they are not asking the right questions or polling for accurate results.  


by Scotch on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:45:35 PM EST

The gallup daily tracking (1.66 / 3)

is a three day running poll. It wasn't dome completely after the announcement.

Nice try, troll.


by IowaMike on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:46:43 PM EST

Re: The gallup daily tracking (none / 0)

Who exactly are you calling a troll?


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:47:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (2.00 / 2)

by playing on hurt feelings to weaken our democratic nominee (and that would be the one that Hillary is encouraging of of her supporters to vote for).


by IowaMike on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:57:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (none / 0)

So, in other words, no one can't post a poll that shows a tied race or a poll that shows some Clinton supporters still won't come aboard the Obama bandwagon because it shows disunity. Is that what you are telling me?


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:00:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (1.50 / 2)

See below, disunity sowing troll.


by IowaMike on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:09:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (none / 0)

That's uncalled for... RJEVANS is not a troll.  He isn't on here telling people to vote for McCain.  I believe he is voting for Obama in fact, although I do not know for sure.  


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:20:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (none / 0)

Wow. I'm stunned by your ignorance. Next time I'll know to expect it.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:37:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (none / 0)

Well, given that a lot of people have agendas unfriendly toward our nominee, and many do have accounts here, it's probably not a bad idea to provide some context and/or analysis when posting a poll as a diary, especially one on this topic. Simply dropping a poll which points to further division in the party might have the appearance of endorsing the results.

Someone else pointed out today that, in the current atmosphere, there's a tendency to feel one has to first ascertain the intentions behind a post before discussing it on its merits. It's annoying, but there it is.


"This victory alone is not the change we seek -- it is only the chance for us to make that change." -- Nov. 4, 2008
by BobzCat on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:14:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Check the poster's (none / 0)

posting history.

It's fine that we don't want people unfairly labeled as trolls. However, this is the Internet, and trolls do exist.


by Neef on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:18:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the poster's (none / 0)

Just to point out, he has been posting here for a hell of a lot longer than you have.  he was an ardent Hillary supporter, but troll is harsh.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:21:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I've been posting online (2.00 / 4)

before mydd was a twinkle in Jonathan's eye. I know what a troll is.

A troll (as in trolling for responses) seeks to elicit a reaction with inflammatory postings. That's a troll. A very good indicator of trolling is a controversial post, without any participation by the original poster. That's a drive-by troll.

I don't use the term lightly, nor do I shy from using it when warranted.


by Neef on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:26:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the poster's (2.00 / 2)

Trolls do exists and the rules define a troll. I find it odd that many people define a troll as someone who has a differing opinion. I find it odd that the mere fact that someone posts a poll that shows Obama losing ground means that person is automatically a troll. The only reason I have limited my appearance on this site is because of the utter disrespect shown around here. It has gotten progressively worse and frankly I'm tired of it.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:42:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not the post (2.00 / 3)

it's the pattern.

The key point is not whether one does or does not like Obama, it's whether one is engaging in discussion or stirring up shit. The latter activity predates mydd by a fair amount, and is trolling.

I still don't see a comment by the diarist.


by Neef on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:34:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who is trying to sow disunity (2.00 / 3)

What is the salute? Sieg Heil or Yes my commisar?
(This site is becoming a place to keep away from, methinks. Too much conformity; too much didactic direction. Too much Bushian "my way or the highway.")Too much immaturity aka the IowaMikes of the world.
by christinep on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:35:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

(This site is becoming a place to keep away from, (1.00 / 1)

Then stay away.


by tonedevil on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:11:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (This site is becoming a place to keep away fr (1.00 / 2)

No kidding.  Go back to Redstate, McTroll.

You FAIL at trolldom.


by phillyandcheese on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:24:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The gallup daily tracking (none / 0)

There is a real national poll today showing the race tied.  Gallup also shows a tie.

Please try not to be so reactive and angry.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:48:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, the poll is crap... (none / 0)

per there own article, "and for Democrats who still support Clinton for the party's nomination, it is plus or minus 7.5 percentage points (margin of error).

Very suspect.


by IowaMike on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:00:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, the poll is crap... (none / 0)

Not really. Clinton supporters are a sub-sample of the poll. Sub-samples are pieces of the poll, therefore smaller respondents and higher margin of error.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:02:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

your title says PUMAS Grow (1.33 / 3)

The part of the poll that would show that is crap (+/-7.5%).

You make it sound like a movement to create a bandwagon effect. Ergo, you are a disunity sowing troll.


by IowaMike on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:08:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your title says PUMAS Grow (2.00 / 1)

Well you're a jackass for not realizing that I did not post this diary and that I am simply pointing out a fact. The reason there is a large margin of error is because it is a sub-sample. Simple as that.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:35:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your title says PUMAS Grow (none / 0)

Which makes the title wrong.


by IowaMike on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 09:09:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No (none / 0)

While I think IowaMike is a little overboard here. There's not solution to the problem put forward here. What's getting tiring and quite frankly is counterproductive is posting a diary saying "Clinton supporters won't vote for Obama. You all suck for nominating him. Now we're all screwed. Morons!"

Not that this is one of those diaries, but you can't say they haven't been all over the place lately.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:08:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, the poll is crap... (none / 0)

The poll being crap and you not noticing that they aren't talking about today's gallup poll are totally unrelated.  Please try to play nice.

As for the poll being crap, I don't know.  Nate Silver says that at the least they are trying to sow disunity by manipulating the storyline.  

See: fivethirtyeight.com


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:06:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The gallup daily tracking (none / 0)

Sorry to disappoint you, but Gallup actually has Obama up by 3, and by 4 with registered voters.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8 /24/192837/112/301/574322


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:23:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The gallup daily tracking (none / 0)

I was talking about today's daily tracking poll, which was a 47-47 tie.  If you bothered to read the thread, you may have figured that out.

Also, before you say things like, "sorry to disappoint you", you should look at other people's history.  Because it is clear that I am and have always been an Obama supporter, you just look like an asshole.

Thanks for playing.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:50:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The gallup daily tracking (2.00 / 1)

Okay, sorry about that.


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 03:08:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

To Be Expected (2.00 / 1)

MyDD is a more informed and more angry microcosm of the democratic party.

They don't know what it is called, but many Clinton supporters are re-fighting the primary wars this weekend.  They, like most people here, will come around in the end.  Just give them a couple days.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:47:19 PM EST

Agreed with your first sentence... (none / 0)

Found your last three sentences rather unfortunate.


by louisprandtl on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:18:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Agreed with your first sentence... (none / 0)

I imagine that a lot of low info HRC supporters assumed she would be VP.  They are probably surprised and a little hurt.

They will come around.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:27:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Being a low information person myself, (2.00 / 1)

I don't know how to take your comment. I can tell you that when at DKos bloggers started referring HRC supporters as low info folks, it stuck with me...

I was not that surprised as the news leaked out in July that HRC was not really in contention. I think most HRC supporters (Barring the PUMAs and JSND folks) are doing their best for the party unity as HRC asked them to do. Most Obama supporters are doing the same barring the ABC Mctrolls...now it is upto the party leaders to make this a united party which they have stunningly failed to do thus far.


by louisprandtl on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:40:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I heard a story (none / 0)

from a high ranking Clinton official back in June, before I left my job in New York and moved to Italy, about an incident Clinton had while campaigning in South Dakota that led her to not want to be considered for Vice President. I knew then it wouldn't be here unless Obama forced her to do it.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:46:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I would be interested in the nature of the (none / 0)

incident at South Dakota. I'm not sure what would lead her not to be wanted to be considered for VP. As far as I can gather from the media reports, it seemed right after the primary end in early June, she was positive about the VP position, if nominated by Obama.


by louisprandtl on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:53:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The story I was told (none / 0)

was somebody said he or she would vote for her if she was on ticket because "Obama won't be President for long anyway" and Clinton was upset by that. I wouldn't be surprised if she decided she didn't want it because some of these PUMA would make it their business to see Obama out of office so that she can "get what's rightfully hers"

I think she made the decision she didn't want to be VP to send a message to her supporters that she will not be President, not now, not ever, so Obama is our choice and we must support him.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:07:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There are simply scary folks out there.. (2.00 / 2)

I don't doubt the incident but not sure whether that's the reason..(it is plausible though).

In the African American community there is a grave uneasiness and underlying fear about this..


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:19:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I know (2.00 / 1)

as a matter of fact my cousin back home asked me what I thought about Biden and in the e-mail he told me he feels better voting for him because "Biden would make a good President"

For the record, he wouldn't vote for Obama if he put Hillary on the ticket, because for him, the VP is the 45th President. He grew up in Oreana, Illinois where his friends would spend Saturday nights driving into Decatur and throwing eggs at the "negros" He knows REAL racists.

You know where I am going with this.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:24:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It is a sad picture of our country that we are (2.00 / 1)

still living in fear about this..


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:26:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah (2.00 / 1)

but it's not specific to America. Here in Italy, I lived here a week before a story broke that two dead Gypsy girls were found dead on a beach near Naples and people just left them there, dead, while they sunned themselves, played in the surf and built sandcastles. A father actually took his son over and had the boy poke the bodies with a stick.

The thing is, no Italian political party would ever allow a Gypsy to stand for Prime Minister. We're making a huge gamble nominating a black man...deep inside, we all knew that.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:30:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

To be honest Gypsies had been historically (none / 0)

treated horribly throughout European history. Even today in the Balkans, Central Europe et al, Gypsies are a poor minority whom most Europeans would like to sweep under the rag...


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:43:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

sound familiar? (none / 0)

we just don't have as long a history as Europe.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:44:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yeah (none / 0)

I have no problem nominating a black candidate and losing because the country is racist.  

The problem is that candidate's resume should look like Colin Powell's not Obama's.

That candidate should understand they are pushing the envelope on race and NOT push the envelope everywhere else.

That candidate should have a base in the democratic party that wins the primary because it is bigger, not depend on non democrats to win.

Obama and friends have almost intentionally thrown this election.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:05:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I heard a story (none / 0)

post in new diary.


"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."
by vcalzone on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:05:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I heard a story (2.00 / 1)

thank you i am sitting here in ny knowing that there are pending indictments of some of her donors over campaign funds and that Bill is still messing around and everyone is acting like she was automatically going to be VP.  granted these might be rumors but I don't think Obama can afford to be risky. It seems like everyone is forgetting he is black and can't make any mistakes.


"They are ever so much nicer at Tiffany's!"
by epiphany on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:06:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think it's possible too (none / 0)

that she had something in her past that would disqualify her or wouldn't past vetting and she didn't want something to come to light and A.) end her career or B.) make it look like the Democrats are trying to push her aside with scandal.

But the story I heard from one of her campaign staffers led me to believe in June that she wouldn't be considered because she wouldn't want it. I was on embargo with that story when I heard it, but that was two and a half months ago, I don't work for PBS anymore and I live in Italy.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:10:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think it's possible too (none / 0)

Yes yes, you live in Italy, we know.

You've already mentioned it a thousand times.


by phillyandcheese on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:33:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think your assessment is correct.. (none / 0)


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:23:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think your assessment is correct.. (none / 0)

it might not be about Bill, nut the campaign funding thing is true (from her run for the Senate).  


"They are ever so much nicer at Tiffany's!"
by epiphany on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:29:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think your assessment is correct.. (none / 0)

oops-but the campaign


"They are ever so much nicer at Tiffany's!"
by epiphany on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:29:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Being a low information person myself, (2.00 / 2)

Wow.  Not what I meant at all.

From my perspective, 99% of the population are low info voters.  This is not related to supporters of an individual candidate.  HRC, Obama, McCain all have low info voters.

Seriously that wasn't a dig at Clinton or her supporters at all.  Most of Americans just have no idea what is going on.

Hillary's low info voters, people that didn't experience primary wars and didn't see the balancing act of Unity, NH or the decisions relating to paying off debt or having a recall vote;  these people assumed she would be VP.  Now they are surprised and a little angry.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:51:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Being a low information person myself, (none / 0)

Role call not recall.  Was talking about Grey Davis today, guess it stuck.  Whatever happened to that guy?


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:57:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wiki says he is working at some top (none / 0)

law firm..don't they all do the same after their political life? law firms, lobbying firms, et al..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_Davis


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:10:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh good..I was being surprised to see that (2.00 / 1)

coming from you because it reminded of the DKos bloggers from early this year..I'm glad I was wrong in thinking so, as I couldn't really place you in that category given our past interactions in MyDD. Sorry about that..

You made your point clear..it was well put..no misunderstanding here...


by louisprandtl on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:59:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh good..I was being surprised to see that (2.00 / 1)

People are really on edge today.  On re-reading my original comment, I understand the misinterpretation.  

I have been trying to be so careful in my language here, but I missed that possibility.

Thanks for asking instead of fighting.  It is appreciated.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:08:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No thank you for taking the time to clarify... (2.00 / 1)

The day I've to fight folks like you, I'll quit blogging for good. It is utterly useless of me, if I cannot have a civil conversation with good folks..


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:15:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Being a low information person myself, (2.00 / 2)

Also, don't call yourself a low info voter.  You're not.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:53:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't know..DKos definitely gave me a complex (2.00 / 1)

that I have to work upon.

Being referred to as a low information person is ok with me, as high information would mean higher expectation of me..:)
 


by louisprandtl on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:06:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Funny thing about it. (1.50 / 4)

They are doing this against their self interest.  I have read some of their diaries on other sites such as Alegre's...they are obsessed in making sure Obama loses and they think they will get Hillary to run in 2012 and will have time to reform all of us Obama supporters in the interim and have time to kick Dean, Pelosi, and Reid out of office.  For any PUMA's and like minded...let me explain this to you as clear as I possibly can and I think I can speak for a great deal of Obama supporters.  

If you should succeed with your selfish scheme and cost us the race and another four more years of Bush style policies...beware our wrath because you will not reform us...we will not forget what you have done and we will pay you back two fold, we can play the same BS game...you are warned.


by netgui68 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:53:14 PM EST

Re: Funny thing about it. (none / 0)

Wait, wait, wait, wait...

Now, I'm not a PUMA, but I was a Clinton supporter, but are you saying if Obama loses, you will blame it on Clinton supporters?


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:58:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No (none / 0)

PUMA.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:06:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What I said was (1.66 / 3)

PUMA and like minded.  Not clinton supporters in general. Many Clinton supporters have acted in good nature and joined forces with us for a common cause.  I am talking about those spiteful people who have made it their mission to see Obama lose and would prefer to have McCain elected even knowing how pitiful and dangerous he is.  There is not enough difference between Hillary and Barack to drive anyone to McCain, which does not share our progressive values. I just makes my blood boil.


by netgui68 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:06:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Many will (none / 0)

and there is no percentage in us arguing about it here, since we can't affect those people.


by Neef on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:19:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Or (none / 0)

McCain is going to get us all killed eliminating any possible election in 2012.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:04:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll make a prediction now. (2.00 / 2)

I think this PUMA demographic number in the polls is going to grow through the convention and possibly shortly thereafter before it peaks and declines.  Obama's overall poll numbers may actually improve during and after the convention, but the PUMA number will still increase in the short-term.

Why?  Because it has become the prominent narrative of the convention.  We are going to have days of CNN anchors going on like, "How will the angry Hillary supporters react to this latest news at the convention."  That's what it was like last night and all today on CNN.  And with the Clintons getting such prominent treatment on at least two days of the convention, the talk on those days will be about whether Bill and Hillary will or can help Obama get back their voters.

I think it is only after the convention is over and the focus moves on to McCain and the general election and all the Clinton stuff is behind us that we'll get past this.  Regardless of whether you love the Clintons or hate them, we should all want the Clintons to just take a much lower profile for the rest of the election.  We want this election to be about John McCain and George W. Bush's stewardship of the country for the next eight years, not about whether Bill and Hillary are better than Obama.


by Dumbo on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:58:15 PM EST

Re: I'll make a prediction now. (none / 0)

Tuesday will be telling.   I think it depends on how she handles it.  If she gives a speech like the one when she finally pulled out of the race on that Saturday, then all will be good.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:17:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think it could be the best speech in the world (2.00 / 1)

and everything I have said will remain the same.  I'm pretty much assuming that she will give Obama a full endorsement.  And we should be ready for the fact that no matter how gushing it is, the media will analyze it for any flickering signs of "tension," because that is now the narrative.  And the usual trolls will be on here saying that Hillary was mistreated again no matter how Obama tries to embrace her and thank her.  

That's all almost irrelevant!  These things take on a life of their own.  As long as the focus remains even slightly on whether or not Hillary and Bill harbor resentment or whether they were treated shabbily or whether there are holdouts on the Internet or whether McCain is going to try to exploit it, all of that keeps the focus of the campaign away from what really matters and what really hurts McCain: the last eight years of Bush.

And Bill and Hillary, even on their absolute best behavior, can do nothing to help.  They would do better for Obama by just putting on some sunglasses and funny moustaches and going on a cruise after this convention is over.  They need to disappear as a topic of conversation.  


by Dumbo on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:24:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and don't forget (2.00 / 1)

those who will say she gave the speech and released her delegates because she was forced to. Expect to see them lighting up prime time.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:27:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

A two day weekend phone poll... yeah, that's scary.   No cells, on a  weekend (traditionally the worst polling days for Obama.)


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:04:26 PM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

Concern troll is concerned.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:11:57 PM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (2.00 / 1)

Another "unity" diary?

This is starting to get repetitive and extremely lame.


Welcome to a landslide WITH white working class, latinos, women and holding on sweeties!!!
by spacemanspiff on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:16:28 PM EST

I just looked at (1.50 / 2)

your past diaries.

You sound like nothing more then a concern troll.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:17:21 PM EST

Oh Noooooo! (2.00 / 1)

First The engels purs forth with damning data showing that we're all doomed and then youcancallmeray comes up with the kicker!  The message is crystal-clear: we're on a slow boat to China that is sinking while the deck chairs being rearranged by party hacks who don't represent the will of the rest of the party who've turned their back on the rest of the party who have spurned them and... Sorry, I'm losing my place, but it is still absolutely perfectly clear.  

I'm going to go & watch the Biden vid again to lift my sagging spirits.


A drink whenever Palin makes a Well-argued, Semantically Intact, Logical and Lucid Argument -- or WASILLA for short.
by January 20 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:20:51 PM EST

Re: Oh Noooooo! (2.00 / 1)

Actually that was meant to have read "First The engels pours forth..."  But now I really wish I had written that The engels purrs forth.  


A drink whenever Palin makes a Well-argued, Semantically Intact, Logical and Lucid Argument -- or WASILLA for short.
by January 20 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:12:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Remember it is the state polls that matter (2.00 / 1)

not the general numbers.

I would also argue that it is better have closer poll numbers BEFORE the convention so there could theoretically be a higher bounce.


by puma on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:27:48 PM EST

When will this vindictive impulse subside? (2.00 / 1)

Soon I hope.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:31:14 PM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (1.00 / 2)

Oh my goodness who could have possibly predicted this????

Poor Obama.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:02:17 AM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (1.20 / 5)

God, go the fuck away.


by turtlescrubber on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:24:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ignore it (2.00 / 1)

it just wants to start fights. This diary and a few others have actually steered the discussion AWAY from disunity and fighting. That means it's time for the dtaylors of the world to come back, start fights, and keep alive the PUMA movement.

ignore it.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:32:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ignore it (1.00 / 0)

It?

As in it puts on the skin cream?  Is that you?

It never hurts you to call someone s/he instead of it.

If you don't give people basic levels of respect it reflects more on you than it does on me.

After all if I call Obama it is he diminished?  or am I?


by dtaylor2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:29:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dire warning (2.00 / 1)

"This is really omnious."

You must live a pretty insular life for a poll to be not only ominous.... BUT really ominous..

jist sayin' ya know...


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:16:39 AM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

So your suggesting that the Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton are a significant factor in a Republican having an ominous parity with a Democratic presidential candidate in year widely assumed to be favourable to Democrats?  If that were so, which isn't entirely clear, doesn't that say more about Hillary Clinton and/or her supporters than it does about the nominee and his current campaign?  


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 12:23:23 AM EST

Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

It has been obvious since early in the primaries that the coalition which supported Clinton is not enamoured with Obama. Many here have been surprised at how little Obama has done to try to win them over. He has done quite the opposite, in fact, pushing them away instead as I repeatedly pointed out during the primaries. His campaign has described them as old coalition Democrats who he does not rely on to win. Hillary Clinton and many others pointed out that this was a mistake, that any Democrat would need these voters to win. That is why she worked so hard to win them over in the primaries. And as you know she worked very hard to win them, they were not with her at the beginning.

So yes, the current situation tells you something about her supporters which happens to be true of any voter, you won't get their vote unless you ask for it.

What do you think it says about Hillary Clinton or her supporters?


by souvarine on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:11:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

He's toured with her and helped her to cover her debt.  Not much else he could do.  We're talking about a large number of older women who felt like this was "their time" and felt entitled to the nomination.  He has asked, and that's all he can do.


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:19:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

The 3 am phone call saying its Biden?

Was that Obama reaching out too?

Obama sowed his own downfall.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:21:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

3am (none / 0)

It was meant to go out at 8am but CNN trumped them. They had promised people they would find out by text so had to bring it forward.

It doesn't matter what he does you and your like would not be happy short of him dropping out.


by conspiracy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 11:49:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (2.00 / 1)

It's not clear to me that it is her women supporters Obama has a problem with, yet. Most reports suggested it was the working class males he is losing. Touring around was obviously not helping, I'm not sure why you or Obama thought it would, these are not voters who are impressed by gestures. Choosing Biden for VP is a more concrete move, and if Obama is wise enough to take Biden's advice he may stem that bleeding.

Each choice has a cost, of course, and my bet is that Obama's recent choices will start the bleeding in the area you are concerned about. Obama's persistent flirting with evangelicals puts him on dangerous ground with Democratic women, since a large part of the evangelical political program involves controlling women. Many women are more attuned to gestures and what they signal about the actor's attitude toward women generally. If Obama mishandles the convention, and specifically the role of Hillary Clinton's delegates, then that bleeding could become a real problem.


by souvarine on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:36:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

It's the older white women who are the force behind PUMA in general, at least as reported by the women representing PUMA when they're talking on TV.  Obama has a hard time with working class white men because he's black.  We knew that from the beginning, and there's only so much we can do about that.

Fortunately, outside the Appalachian corridor, he does fine.  If Biden can appease a few of them, so much the better.


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:49:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

I wouldn't know, the only TV I see is clips on youtube. The cable news shows can give you a pretty twisted sense of what is happening in the world, despite their apparent presence on TV PUMAs do not appear to be showing up in great numbers in the polls.

I think you are mistaken about the cause of Obama's problems with working class white men, though from what I can tell the campaign agrees with you. Jesse Jackson did much better with working class white men in the 80s primaries than Obama did now, in what I think we can both agree was a more racist time. Obama's problem with working class white men is his free market oriented message.


by souvarine on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 02:00:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

No, Jackson did not do well with white working class voters.  He brought in some union votes in Minnesota and Michigan, but he tanked in Appalachia and the south.  I'm not making judgments.  Many of them said as much in the W. Virginia primary.

I think if he emphasizes populist themes and economic issues he'll win some over.  But it can't be his sole emphasis this election.  He'll push the issue enough to win Pennsylvania.  


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 03:05:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's supporters (2.00 / 1)

Personally, I think it suggests, for the very slender yet vocal minority of supporters which are the diarist's example if I understand it correctly, a sense of anger and entitlement which is inappropriate and counter-productive.  Hillary, through various subtle and not-so-subtle messages both inspired and enlisted these emotional narratives in her campaign.  That Democratic politics would become so personal, to the point of jeopardising the election if at all possible, seems to speak for itself.  And we were the 'cultists,' if you'll remember.

Frankly I think the acrimony far outweighs their numbers but the sheer hubris of the 'movement' and the irreconcilable, and unjustified, demands of it's spokespeople, both in the national media and among diarists here, suggests to me that there is an emotional rather than an ideological issue at the core of their position.  Seems inappropriate in light of what is at stake for the party, the electorate and the country at large.  Just my two bob's worth on the subject, I mean, for pity's sake look at the diary list.  Can you condone diary after diary intended to discredit or otherwise hamper the nominee on a progressive Democratic website three months out from election day?  


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 06:35:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

Well, if this is what Clinton supporters are about, I'm damn glad she didn't win!


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:05:26 AM EST

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

IF this is what Obama supporters are like I am glad he won't win.

=p


by dtaylor2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:07:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

Oh, he'll win.  I doubt most PUMAs really want their daughters to lose the right to choose, even if a few psychotics are willing to make that sacrifice just to act out.


by Drummond on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:17:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcemen (none / 0)

So are you really looking forward to 12 more years of GOP rule?   You keep saying that it is ONLY Obama and ONLY Obama supporters that are dissing the other side, and that your hands are as clean as the driven snow.  

Do you really think that if you work hard to defeat Obama in 08 that you can get Clinton elected in 2012?    Do you really think that the 18 million+ voters who supported Obama are going to just forgive Clinton supporters like you when they are working so hard to defeat him, and are working hard to support McCain?


by gavoter on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:21:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ignore it (2.00 / 1)

Dtaylor has been trying to engage me in name calling and fighting. I'm not responding. Ignore it. When it realizes it has no power and no one cares what it thinks, it'll stop.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:24:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

CNN: Obama, McCain Tied Post-Biden Announcement (none / 0)

CNN makes a stupid error in considering "people who would prefer Clinton be the nominee" today as the same group that existed in June.  

The question wasn't, "did you vote for Hillary in the primary"?  Which would give an accurate representation of how Hillary's voters feel.  Instead they choose to ask it only of those who still prefer Hillary be the candidate.  Which anyone who gives a damn about the dems winning in November would realize that a change in nominee now would be disastrous.  The result?, a much small group of people today would prefer Hillary be the nominee than in June, yet they treat the two as equals.  

It would be nice if CNN would release the specifics.  They make no mention of how big the "people who prefer Hillary" sample is.  It could've been 200 respondents in June and only 20 yesterday, but they are sitting on their methodology and specific results so we don't know.


by matchles on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:22:19 AM EST

Yep, looks like a disaster in the making (none / 0)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/080 8/12782.html

I fear at the end the egos of Obama and Clinton will cost Dems the election.


by ann0nymous on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:27:06 AM EST

Re: Yep, looks like a disaster in the making (2.00 / 1)

Wow, those "prominent Obama backers" sound just like some of the dimmer posters here. Going on about "bitter enders" and "Japanese soldiers in the South Pacific still fighting after the war is over." I am completely mystified as to why Obama has permitted this attitude to fester in his campaign. There is no way they can win over the apparently growing number of disillusioned Democrats if they see Clinton in this light.

And can anyone explain why in gods name Obama waited till the last minute to invite President Clinton to speak? If you push off dealing with complicated situations they are bound to blow up in your face as the pressure mounts. You are supposed to nip them in the bud early.


by souvarine on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:47:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Bill might have held out (none / 0)

until the last minute. He's not an unmotivated actor in this situation.

As far as what the Obama camp feels, it is what it is. Obama can make all the rah-rah speeches he wants, but his staff will come to their own conclusions. Note how Hillary is doing everything she can, and yet still she has to set up a "whip" team to basically hose down her own supporters.

The mob has long since surpassed those two.

I will tell you what is concerning me though...this trend towards leaks from the Obama campaign. That wasn't something you saw in the Primaries.


by Neef on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 02:08:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill might have held out (1.00 / 0)

I think something happened.

Its just set up too cute for the 3 am call to be Hillary.

The Obama quotes were too tailored for Hillary.

He either made a massive tactical miscalculation in how he unveiled his VP or he made a last minute switch in VPs.

Evidence in that Hillary only declared she didn't want it in the last minute.

The 3 am phone call was bad form imo and if that as the plan does not bode well for the future.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 02:24:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

CNN got a leak (none / 0)

and broke the story at 12:45am. Knowing that the story was true anyway, Obama abandoned his plans to announce at 8am and did at 3am anyway, since word was already spreading and the West Coast was still awake when the news broke.

Knowing the media how I know it, my theory is that the news media was so desperate to find out who it is after Obama announced he picked someone that someone literally send a reporter out to meet someone from the Obama campaign at a bar in Washington for Friday night cocktails to talk about the convention. He or she fed the campaign person one two many Margaritas and Mr. or Ms. Can't Hold Their Tongue After Tequila slipped the name and BOOM!

Sometimes I think some journalists should be in the CIA


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 02:30:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill might have held out (none / 0)

From most reports Bill Clinton was waiting for the Obama people to contact him and did not hear from them until after he engaged in some pushback on Aug 4th over the race allegations. Robert Gibbs' non-denial denial that Obama was holding back confirms that Clinton's account was accurate.

As for leaks, the Obama campaign was the most prolific off the record leaker in the Democratic primary. They may have lost some control of their message recently, but I'm not convinced these leaks serve any different purpose than the similar leaks in the primary served. Its just that people are starting to realize that trashing the Clinton's may not serve the purpose of getting elected.


by souvarine on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 02:40:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

weekend polls? really? (2.00 / 1)

I mean, we all know that polls on Saturday freaken night will have an accurate representation of Obama supporters.

I know I was sitting by the phone this weekend just waiting to talk about how much I like Joe Biden.


by hello world on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:30:55 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.