News from Rasmussen

[Jim]

Missou - McC 48 BHO 41     can't say I'm surprized with this one
Michigan - BHO 47 McC 40     but one point better  I really think they'll go red
Wisconsin - BHO 47  McC 43  was 50-39  and now I'm hopeful for the landslide

Mild improvement in a few other states including a 3 pt gain in Mass

This is very significant and a stake in the heart for quitter/dove BHO

The number of Americans who believe getting the troops home from Iraq is more important than winning the war there has fallen below 50% for the first time since Rasmussen Reports began polling on the question in May. Forty-nine percent (49%) of voters still feel that way, while 42% place more importance on winning the war in Iraq.

I really like this one and i hope McC starts pounding it like hell...

Americans overwhelmingly believe there is an urgent national need to find new sources of energy, and this need is more important that reducing current energy usage, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

With energy issues taking center stage in the presidential campaign, 81% of Americans see development of new energy sources as an urgent priority. Only 9% disagree.

For nearly two-thirds (65%), finding new sources of energy is more important that reducing the amount of energy Americans now consume. Twenty-eight percent (28%) think reducing current usage is more important.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

[Tess Anderson]

FWIW, and it's about worthless, McCain is ahead by one in Rasmussen's daily tracking poll today. Barack Hussein Obama has hightailed it back to Hawaii for the week, supposedly to visit his typical grandmother. 

You are very right, energy is fast becoming THE issue of this election year:

Data released yesterday shows that voters overwhelmingly believe it is more important to find new sources of energy. Sixty-seven percent (67%) believe McCain shares this priority while just 29% believe Obama holds that same view.

Most voters—55%--believe that Obama’s top priority is reducing the amount of energy we consume. Only 12% believe this is McCain’s primary focus on the energy issue.
Republicans, Democrats, and unaffiliated voters all see McCain’s top priority as finding more energy sources.

link: rasmussenreports

This as a major issue can only help the GOP - BHO can't win IMO but he shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, I could be wrong - he'll have to debate McCain one way or the other. That stat from Michigan alone should be a big red flag to the DNC, but they're the DNC.

[franksolich]

The news on the ground from Nebraska, which doesn't count for much, we having only 5 electoral votes:

Nebraska is generally one of the reddest states in the country, despite a vigorous Democrat party.  The Democrats do pretty good here.....but NEVER on the presidential issue.  There was one time not long ago the majority of the Nebraska congressional delegation to Washington was Democrat.....at the same time the first George Bush and Robert Dole racked up impressive margins in the presidential races.

The last time Nebraska voted for a Democrat for president was in 1964, Lyndon Johnson carrying the state over Barry Goldwater in a razor thin margin.

What's remarkable about the numbers in Nebraska (and this also applies to South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana) is the steady drop in total votes for the Democrat candidate over the decades and generations, while the total Republican vote continues creeping, sometimes racing, upward.

This would be important, but we're not talking about a whole lot of votes here; it irks me that a corrupt inner-city ward boss in Cleveland can create more "votes" out of thin air, than all the honest votes cast in any of these states.

The Incompetent One (1977-1980) holds the top two records for "lowest votes ever received by a Democrat candidate in Nebraska," in 1976 and 1980.  George McGovern, who lost Nebraska in a massive landslide in 1972, got more votes from here, than did the Impeached One in 1992 and 1996.

The primitives are prancing around alleging Barry "Goldwater" has a "good chance" to win South Dakota and North Dakota, and a "chance" to win Nebraska.  But as usual the primitives don't know shit.

It's too early yet, and anything can happen.  But if things continue to go on as they have, it's reasonable to expect that Barry "Goldwater" Obama will get fewer votes here than the disastrous McGovern did in 1972.  I don't know if he'll get even less than the Incompetent One (1977-1981), though.

There's just something about the Incompetent One that has always driven Nebraskans to distraction.

I wish reports from other states, other places, were just as good, but while I'm not God, I suspect there's much reason for optimism.

[docstew]

just saw a tv ad for O on the olympics talking about his energy plan... the imagery was almost exactly the same as the one M's been running except without the oil rigs... he's pushing "fast-track for alternative fuels" like we aren't already doing that.
to me the ads are so similar it does more to highlight his unwillingness to drill, which would have a much faster impact

[djones520]

I'm holding high hopes for Michigan.  The troubles going on in Detroits government will not work in the Democrats favor.  And like it or not, N. Michigan is a pretty racist area.  Obama will probably drive a lot of people up there to vote Republican.  And I bet a lot of democrats are real pissed about the treatment they got in the primaries.  Michigan will be a battleground state this year, and it'll tie up a lot of effort that Obama could otherwise spend elsewhere.