Obama surges ahead in key swing states

Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio — all three are now in the Obama camp, according to Quinnipiac polls released today. Only a month ago, McCain had led in hypothetical races in both Florida and Ohio. Now he trails as voters face the reality of McCain and Obama head to head. Obama has spent this week in Michigan, but he will be heading to Florida next week.

Florida: 47 - 43

Ohio: 48 - 42

Pennsylvannia: 52 - 40

Issues for debate: (1) Are some of these numbers former Hillary supporters, given the change since last month? (2) Is this all Obama needs to seal the electoral victory, or should he continue his 50 state strategy in earnest? and (3) will Obama take advantage of McCain’s and Bush’s synchronized flip-flop on offshore drilling when he goes to Florida?

I believe women are coming around to Obama, especially as they become aware of the difference between him and McCain on women’s issues. I do, however, think Obama needs to stick with his initial grassroots strategy of pressing in all 50 states. I’m a big fan of Colin Powell’s doctrine of attack with massive force. And I do believe that Obama will make hay of oil soaked beaches in Miami and Tampa when he takes his campaign to Florida.

I won’t count on Florida until the official vote is tallied. Bad memories. And we still have a Republican gov – Charlie Crist – and the Secretary of State is his appointee, not independently elected.

He’s peaking too early. Not a good sign.

How do you know he’s peaking?

We don’t know the details of these polls, but I would think only the PA lead is big enough to be statistically significant.

Nevertheless, I’d rather be ahead than behind.

I’ve noticed McCain has started a heavy roll-out of TV ads here in MN. Obviously a state he hopes he can grab despite being down pretty far in the polls.

All good news, but I would hope Obama continues his 50 state strategy in earnest. It is a good plan and hopefully the winning plan. No matter how far ahead he surges, he should keep up the clean and good campaigning until the last polls close on election day.

In addition to winning, if he could somehow pull off a Reagan landslide, it would give him far more clout to enact changes and end the war sooner.

Are you joking or serious? I cannot tell for sure.

If you are serious, could you please elaborate.


Not always. After a cigarette, maybe he can peak all over again! :slight_smile:

  1. Most certainly. From the referenced site,
  1. Both. All he needs is Kerry +17 ((286-252)/2), so any of those states should do it for him. Regardless, he’ll be seen as a much better candidate if he doesn’t disregard select states.

  2. Of course. Why wouldn’t he?

I think that most of the Hillary supporters are going to Obama, despite all the threats to go to McCain. McCain went through a lot of the same thing in his own party, and his base has grudgingly accepted him because what else are they going to do?

Besides the Democratic voters staying home (which shouldn’t be a surprise in either party), I think a really significant indicator is the poll showing Barack Obama running away with indepenents with a 52-30 percent lead. Appeal to indies is supposed to be John McCain’s strong suit. The fact that he is currently trailing by more than 20 points among indies tells the real story, I think. It seems to me that the McCain camp has been trying to treat independents like partisans – like they were McCain’s natural base and that he could take them for granted. They thought he could suck up more and more to the right, and embrace Bush’s policies, and that the independents would stay with him. Only it doesn’t work that way with indies. The more McCain abandons his former “Maverick” identity and the more he defaults to GOP boilerplate, the more he loses his appeal to the indies.

I also think his “I hate war” commercial is backfiring on him. It just makes him look hypocritical. He is not going to appeal to either women or to independents by try to cheerlead for continuing the Iraq occupation.

Speaking of women, what has John McCain offered to all those Hillary supporters to convince them he would be anything other than a self-defeating protest vote?

IIRC, wasn’t the main reason that the Dems went along with the Primary move, despite the penalty, was that it would make Florida have to use verifiable paper ballots in November? Granted, the Chad were paper too; however, I just can’t see the Obama campaign folding that fight as quickly, should such a thing come up again. But at least they can’t be Diebolded on this one right?

This reminds me of Major League. “It’s too high…”

:confused: I recall no connection between the two issues. Cite?

Give me a minute, I thought I remembered Rep.Wexler at the RBC saying that’s why the Florida Dems went along with it.

The Florida Republicans added a paper trail amendment to the bill that moved the primary forward. This was the Democrats’ fig leaf for voting for the bill.
To the OP’s #2 - Yes, he should keep up the 50-state strategy. There are more offices than just president being elected in November, and Obama has the potential for some VERY long coattails. Democrats need to remember that the downticket races are just as important as the main event.

Found it

I wish this would have gotten more coverage than it did; in light of it, I think the Dems had to suck up the Primary move and penalties. Though the point should have been made by Obama or Clinton, like Wexler did at the RBC(still can’t find that quote), that they were in fact trying to make sure that *all * of Florida’s votes count.

It’s over four months till the election. We might as well be casting chicken bones for all the predictive power these polls have.

As of right now, there are 139 days until the election. It’s way too early to make any predictions.

Probably one of the statements that shows your inherent anti-Obama bias the most. I’m not saying that you dislike him, but whatever part of your brain is responsible for thoughts like this is certainly hoping he loses.

It could be peaking, but it could also be “consolidation.” Remember we just finished dealing with the unending primary season and now that it’s over it’s only natural that this would happen.

Really there’s no reason for him to be peaking right now. That would have happened directly after his victory over Clinton. That was half a month ago, remember? We are now in the doldrums of the cycle.

When would he normally peak? It would be after the convention. But you have to ask what it really means to even peak? Peaking would entail a period when a lot of new people get to know the candidate before getting the chance to form negative opinions about him.

'Course McCain seems to have peaked in sometime in 1999 - maybe even 1998.

I don’t dislike him. If the election were held today, I’d vote for him. I’m offering an alternative analysis, which I think is as valid as any at this point in time. Look at where Kerry was vs Bush at this time in the last election cycle. You want to peak in October, not June. Maybe there will be other ups and downs between now and Nov, but surge early on isn’t necessarily a good thing.

I missed your alternative analysis in May saying that about McCain.