New Rasmussen Poll: McCain/Obama statistically tied in Washington; Rossi up 6

Rasmussen Reports ^

[swmopatriot]

WA: Obama 49, McCain 47 Gregoire 46 Rossi 52

[HairOfTheDog]

Been a few threads on this already...

I was actually one of the ones polled for this. That’s what changed it :~)

[Califelephant]

You need Washington’s 11 electoral votes, Obama, but they are slipping away.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

Owen, erosion in WA, one of the bluest of blue states, shows that your battlegrounds are going to flip or be held as well.

[goldstategop]

Only if she can select her own running mate. She will NEVER play second fiddle to someone else. Either she gets to be President or nothing. I can't think of any reason why Hillary would settle for less than The Prize. Would you?

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[aegiscg47]

Great point. It will be interesting to see where he closes down operations and which states get the big ad buys. If Obama had good fundraising totals in August we would have heard about it by now, which means that he is probably running low on cash. I agree with you that he has a massive staff and there's no way he's going to be able to keep all of them. If he lets them go the psychological impact alone from the media reporting could give the GOP another 1-2% at the polls.

[Chet 99]

Palin may help in Washington due its proximity to Alaska. There’s a lot of AK to WA transplants.

[jmaroneps37]

A new poll shows barack mcgovern just + 2 in Washington. I guess it is true that he is like a burning tire around the neck of down ballot democrats. This is great news!

[Keith]

Hillary is not stupid.

There is NO WAY she is going to try to cushion his fall.

He made his bed, he’ll have to lie in it.

[shteebo]

I’m in a Seattle suburb. A few days ago, a couple of guys in their early 20s came around campaigning for Rossi. Never had a Republican campaigner visit before.

[The KG9 Kid]

There are a lot of small-’C’ “conservative” Californian expatriates that have moved to WA state in recent years too.

[nathanbedford]

In 1960 they said that Lyndon Johnson and Jack Kennedy would never occupy the same ticket if for no other reason than Bobby Kennedy wouldn't stand for it.

It is almost impossible to know what might motivate Bitch Clinton in her calculations. She will have considered that nearly a third of modern vice presidents go on to be president.

That is, if they win. If they don't win, she is virtually the automatic nominee in 2012. I do not suggest that these arguments are conclusive but they are certainly persuasive and no one can guarantee that Hillary will not go for it.

[word_warrior_bob]

If Obama can’t win Washington, it is over for him.

__

He can’t and it is.

Washington is part of my landslide scenario. Some of these shifts have moved so fast that they only need to keep moving at glacier speed to ensure victory.

HOUSE OF REPS in play-—BIG TIME.

[11th_VA]

LOL !!! What if Nobama won NM(5) and NV(5) and LOST WA(11) [I think those numbers are right]. That would still be a net loss of minus 1 !!!

[101voodoo]

I agree it was stolen and the reason Rossi is on top now is that he handled like a gentlemen. No whining, no claims of thievery, no name calling.

The people of Washington State know what happened and it may just be a different story this time.

[pburgh01]

I can’t imagine any scenario where Hillary could be on the ticket now. Here is why.

1. If she was on the ticket she would have to wait till 2016 when she will be in her 70’s.

2. Joe Biden will never be a patsy and take the fall through some huge lie or plot to get rid of him. He won’t resign willingly. He is in safe position in the party apparatus and they would not risk him shooting his mouth off and defecting and sinking the Obama\Clinton ticket

3. Adding Clinton does’nt automatically add to his vote totals and plus him picking her would make him look vacillating and transparent and is way to risky a strategy.

4. Hillary is a loser just like Obama and Loser+Loser != Winner. She brings out a whole other layer of hatred in the Republican base. She is shrill, wild eyed and prone to losing it.

I agree with Collins blog, this deal is over September 30th and the DEM party will focus on keeping territory they currently own, the Senate and House. Like Rush said..”A Black Marxists from the Chicago corrupt political machine...good luck with that.”

[SuperSonic]

From Rasmussen Reports...

Polling released earlier today shows McCain gaining ground in the traditionally blue state of Washington. Obama’s lead is down to just two percentage points. Rasmussen Markets data now shows gave McCain to be a slight favorite for victory in November. These figures are updated on a 24/7 basis by market participants and currently give McCain a 51.7 % chance of victory. Expectations for Obama are at 46.6 %. Prior to this past week, expectations for a Democratic victory had generally been in the 60% range.

[Political Junkie Too]

I'm not sure about the repeated use of the phrase "statistically tied." There is a real difference between the results. Let me demonstrate.

Rasmussen polling has a margin of error of +/- 4.5%. When he reports Obama has 49% in Washington, that means it could be as low as 44.5%, and as high as 53.5%. McCain's 47% means that it could be as low as 42.5%, and as high as 51.5%.

If you stack these ranges side-by-side, you'll see that Obama has an uncontested zone where he wins outright, and a larger zone where either candidate could be ahead. The uncontested zone increases as the separation increases.

If you simulated an election by randomizing a number between the +/- ranges of margin of error, and then giving the win to the candidate with the higher random number, you'd see the real impact of a 2% spread in the poll result.

Look at the probabilities of winning for each point of separation in a poll with a 4.5% margin of error:

• +1% = 60.27%
• +2% = 69.38%
• +3% = 78.15%
• +4% = 84.71%
• +5% = 90.30%
• +6% = 94.58%
• +7% = 97.65%
• +8% = 99.37%
• +9% = 100.00%

I'd say that a 2% difference that results in a 69% chance of actually winning is not a statistical tie. Am I wrong?

-PJ

[AuH2ORepublican]

In its most recent poll, Rasmussen has Obama leading McCain in Washington State by only 49%-47% (and Dino Rossi leading the RAT Gregoire by 6%). This is confirmation (and then some) of the Survey USA poll from a couple of days ago that showed McCain cutting Obama’s WA lead to only 4% (49%-45%) and Rossi taking a narrow lead. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2077844/posts

If WA is this close, so must be California (President Bush got only 1.28% less in CA than in WA in 2004, and CA’s demographics are actually a bit tougher for Obama than WA’s demographics because Obama doesn’t do as well with Hispanic and Jewish voters as with other Democrats). I can’t wait for the next poll out of CA to come out; if it shows McCain within 3%-5% of Obama, as may well be the case, liberals’ heads will explode.

There’s a real chance that McCain/Palin may end up winning over 400 electoral vote and Obama will be remembered as this generation’s Michael Dukakis. However, we need to keep fighting for the next 53 (or whatever) days and not take and votes for granted.

[NeoCaveman]

Hillary is not stupid. There is NO WAY she is going to try to cushion his fall. He made his bed, he’ll have to lie in it.

As CM55 says. The Dems have bought their ticket, now they shall take their ride.

[impeachedrapist]

I can’t wait for the next poll out of CA to come out; if it shows McCain within 3%-5% of Obama, as may well be the case, liberals’ heads will explode.

Next up - Illinois! :-D