Posted on 05/23/2008 6:10:11 PM PDT by FocusNexus
Key to Obama's strength in California, at this point, is the group that was largely ignored in the run-up to the primary: men. Overall, Obama held a 10-point advantage over McCain among men, while Clinton split men with McCain. White men gave McCain a three-point advantage over Obama, and a wider 15-point edge over Clinton. Nonwhite men sided with the Democrats in landslide proportions.
With Republicans now only about one-third of the California electorate, GOP candidates must reach deeply into the ranks of moderates if they are to win statewide. There, McCain was faltering. He was losing moderates to Clinton by 24 points, and to Obama by 30 points.
He was also having a difficult time holding on to his own party members. One in five Republicans surveyed by the poll sided with Obama in their matchup. McCain won only 70% of his party colleagues, not enough to offset losing independents and 75% of Democrats to Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Now THAT is distressing.
I smell bs in the air
Where are the quotes around “Republicans”?
I don’t buy it.
McCain does much better among independents in many polls, esp. in OH, PA, and even New England.
It’s called the “Wilder effect”.....
Odds are good that any Republican will get 2/3 or more of the men in California once gay marriage takes over the Fall campaign.
I still think California's a swing state this go around, especially if Obama’s team decides to ignore it. But during the primaries, I heard many a Republican state that they'd never vote for McCain.
California going Democrat is not news....and McCain has huge problems...going left will not solve them.
LA Times selects the facts that fit to right the story they want. I can see 20% of the he republicans not voting for McCain But it doesn’t mean they will vote for Obama.
Oh dear, and I thought the propaganda machine in North Korea was good but this is so blatant./Just Asking - seoul62.......
Where are the details of the poll? Californians? Registered Voters? Likely Voters? How did they select likely voters?
Screw California. President Bush have showed in ‘00 and ‘04 that there’s a strategy to win the electoral college bypassing california, illinois and new yawk.
The poll was limited to those likely to take it up the rear.
One in five Republicans still support liberal george W. Bush so I find this statement to be very possible.
LA Times? I wouldn’t believe the date they put on the top of the pages.
Remember, Los Angeles is mostly black and hispanic....they will go with Obama.
LA Times is just worried that 40% of Hillary voters will sit it out or vote for McLiberal as a better alternative.
This is their lame attempt to counter it. The sheeple might be dumb enough to go along.
In Californistan, wouldn't that be the Bradley Effect?
Not exactly a revelation that CA will be in the Democrat column come Nov. At least, it should not be news to anyone that is not mentally impaired.
Yep...you ARE correct.....in California it’s the “Bradley Effect.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.