The Candidates
Some of the strangest general election polls so far have been ones showing Obama within striking distance in states like Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, and Texas — all supposedly reliably dark red states — as well as McCain within striking distance in Massachusetts.
As part of one of SUSA’s poll dumps back in February, they sprung a McCain +1 in Texas against Obama poll on everyone that folks rejected out of hand as an outlier. In a state that has voted Republican the last 28 years (and which Bush won by 23 points), this couldn’t be the case, right?
Well, a new Rasmussen poll confirms that McCain is struggling in the Lone Star State:
And it’s not just Obama that is making Texas close - Hillary is within 6 there as well. The last time Texas was this close was in 1992 - when there was a major third party challenger - and we know how that one turned out. The additional negative of this poll is that it comes during what was supposed to be Obama’s roughest patch in the election season thus far. The positive thing about this poll is there’s still five months until the general election, and McCain still is in the lead.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I am not worried about this at all. States like Alaska and North Dakota and Texas are close with Obama because many voters don’t know that he’s that liberal. They know Hillary is liberal and know they don’t want her, but they are unsure about Obama. Once the voters get to know Obama, McCain will win all these Republican states by a large margin. Now Texas might become a swing state in 2016 or 2020 because of the increase in the Hispanic population, but it is way out of reach for Democrats this year, unless the national vote were a landslide.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Texas won’t be close.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Matt C is our resident buzzkill on a nearly daily basis.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:30 am
Clarence, if they know Hillary is liberal and don’t want her, why is she within 6 in Texas? This is a state in which McCain should be leading by double digits over at least one of them.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Sorry, Alex - just trying to bring a small dose of reality.
I think McCain can certainly win this election, but I think if we just sweep aside things like “Obama Republicans” and the close polls in states like Texas, we’re all in for a big surprise.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:34 am
I don’t buy this. In 2004 I saw polls showing Republicans within MoE in NJ and HI too. Texas is not ultimately going to be in play this year. Neither is Massachusetts.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Trust me, the only true battleground states will be the same ones as every year:
Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, and maybe Colorado/Nevada.
Massachusetts, NY, Texas, Alaska, and New Jersey will NOT be in play.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:53 am
48 to 43 means that there are 9 percent left to decide. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the black vote and latte liberal white vote is pretty much decided. So of the undecided whites left over I wonder which way they will break. In Texas.
May 7th, 2008 at 10:55 am
I suppose I also shouldn’t mention that the national Democratic registered voter advantage over the GOP is at 10% - the largest in the six years that Rasmussen has tracked the data.
Two years ago, it was 36-33; last year it was 37-31; now it is 41-31.
We are not a 33-33-33 country any longer - we are a 40-30-30 country with the advantage going to the Democrats.
We have GOT to reorganize, retool, and reclaim the Republican party label in this country or we’re in for a long haul in the wilderness.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:01 am
MattC, Texas is a slightly different animal than Alaska and North Dakota. There is a large increase in Hispanic voters that she is popular with. Texas will be closer than it was when Bush ran, but I think McCain will still win by at least 5 points there. Look for Texas to be a swing state in the middle of the next decade though.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Here’s the problem with assuming these polls are accurate.
There’s no demographic likely to shift in enough numbers to swing this result.
That means the close results from New York, Massachusetts, Alaska and Texas are all polling mirages.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:06 am
“We have GOT to reorganize, retool, and reclaim the Republican party label in this country or we’re in for a long haul in the wilderness”
Absolutely! I couldn’t agree more. But if you really think we’re really in danger in Texas this year then we all might as well just tune out of politics until the election is over.
As more Hispanics register to vote, Texas will “purplify” - but suspect it is going to take another 2 or 3 cycles before the state is really in play.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:09 am
And Matt C,
I would point out that in the 1980’s the Democrats had a 40-30-30 registration - or worse - for the GOP.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Let’s also realize that McCain is virtually off the radar while Obama and Clinton own the news media. Once the general election campaign relly gets underway, and we see McCain in public again, these numbers will become realistic again.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I’m not necessarily concerned with Texas going blue this election… what I’m more concerned about, as I alluded to in my OP, was what this portends for the rest of the country.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
We’re talking the end of the 2004 electoral map most certainly, but for every Texas there’s a New York. The fact that McCain is not a tough-talkin’, brush-choppin’ Texan who attends an evangelical church goes both ways.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
“The fact that McCain is not a tough-talkin’, brush-choppin’ Texan who attends an evangelical church goes both ways.”
You would think with McCain joining the Baptist church that would have helped with the Evangelical community.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Bush is United Methodist. I didn’t know they were brought into the evangelical tent.
Next us Lutherans will be dragged in
May 7th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Matt C,
“I suppose I also shouldn’t mention that the national Democratic registered voter advantage over the GOP is at 10% - the largest in the six years that Rasmussen has tracked the data.”
Yes, but the Democrats have had the only meaningful primaries for about 2 1/2 months now. All the media focus is on their race. I wouldn’t read too much into registered voters. Now I know the number of self-identified Democrats is way up. That is a problem, but many of them will find out over the next 6 months that they are not Obama Democrats.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
McCain has made it clear that he is going to make a big play for Latino votes. Combine that with the fact that Hillary has won the Latino vote overwhelmingly because of the Hispanic problems with Obama, and we have our best oportunity to significantly neutralize the Hispanic vote since 2000.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
MWS,
I actually agree with your last post….miracle of miracles.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Hispanics in Texas are far more conservative than hispanics in California. I think hispanics over time will assimilate with the rest of Americans just how previous waves of immigrants assimilated. Blacks are really the only ones who haven’t assimilated, and that’s because of the racial discrimination that took place in the past and the bitterness over that. Hopefully, in a few generations, they will assimilate as well. Also, conservatives tend to have more children than liberals. White liberals are a vanishing breed. The long-term demographics are good for Republicans. The short-term is the problem.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
McCain is talking amnesty again, he’s not my candidate nor border state friendly.
May 7th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
“Bush is United Methodist. I didn’t know they were brought into the evangelical tent”
Ehhh not all Methodists are evangelical just like not all Baptists are but there certainly are evangelicals within both of these churches.
May 7th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
The United Methodist church is the third largest denomination in the U.S., behing Catholic and Southern Baptist. The vast majority of them are not evangelical at all. I grew up in one, and lots of relatives are still Methodist.