Obama Beats Hillary 303 EV to 224 EV in General Election Matchups (with MAPS)

Several days ago Survey USA released their 50-state polling matching Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton against John McCain.  Their polling indicated that currently Obama would receive 280 electoral votes while Hillary would receive 276.  While SUSA is by far my favorite pollster because of  their relative accuracy, I went ahead and examined results from other state polls available.  In addition to the 50 state polls SUSA released, another 37 state polls were conducted recently.  I look at data from these polls – including all polls from the last 30 days only (all polls included are therefore done beginning at least two days after the Feb. 5 "Super-Tuesday".)  

In this diary I have included data for ALL of the current state polls available – the data from the SUSA 50 has been averaged (when applicable) with the other 37 available polls to help us obtain an even more accurate picture of where things stand.  You will notice that for virtually every swing state, at least two polls are available.  For several states, more than two are available (three for Iowa, New Jersey, Oregon, Texas, Wisconsin; four for Florida and Ohio; and five for Pennsylvania).  All the data used and links are at the bottom of the diary.

When data from all 87 available state polls from the last 30 days is examined, we can see that Barack Obama currently performs significantly better than Hillary Clinton in general election matchups with John McCain.  According to this analysis, Obama currently beats McCain by 303 EV to 235 EV while Clinton only gets 224 EV to McCain’s 297 EV (with Michigan tied).  The only states that Clinton carries but Obama does not carry are Arkansas and West Virginia.  On the other hand, the following ten states are ones which Obama carries (in many cases comfortably) but which Hillary loses:

Colorado (average of 2 polls):
Obama 48 – McCain 40
Clinton 38.5 – McCain 48.5

Iowa (average of 3 polls):
Obama 49  – McCain 39.3
Clinton  39.3 – McCain 47.3

Minnesota (average of 2 polls):
Obama 51 – McCain 40
Clinton  44.5 – McCain 45

Nevada (average of 2 polls):
Obama  48 – McCain 39.5
Clinton 40.5 – McCain 49

New Hampshire (average of 2 polls):
Obama 47.5  – McCain 40
Clinton  42 – McCain 45

New Mexico (average of 2 polls):
Obama  47 – McCain 43.5
Clinton 42.5 – McCain 48.5

North Dakota (1 poll available):
Obama 46  – McCain 42
Clinton  35 – McCain 54

Oregon (average of 3 polls):
Obama 48  – McCain 39.7
Clinton  41 – McCain 46.3

Washington (average of 2 polls):
Obama  48 – McCain 41.5
Clinton  42– McCain 47

Wisconsin (average of 3 polls):
Obama  46.7 – McCain 42.3
Clinton 43  – McCain 47.3

Additionally, in the case of Michigan (average of 2 polls), Obama wins against McCain while Hillary ties the Arizona Senator, while in the case of Nebraska (1 poll available), Clinton loses big, while Obama earns 2 out of 5 electoral votes due to that state’s unique system of proportional (by Congressional district) electoral vote allocation.

Another significant difference when looking at the average of all 87 available state polls (versus just looking at the SUSA 50) is that Obama does not lose New Jersey and Pennsylvania to McCain.  In fact, the average of 5 available Pennsylvania polls shows that Obama performs slightly better than Hillary when matched against McCain in the Keystone State.  (It should also be noted that Obama does marginally better against McCain than Hillary does in the state of Ohio, according to an average of the 4 available polls from that state).  Last, but not least, is the fact that, according to an average of 4 available state polls, both Democrats lose Florida to John McCain; the Sunshine State may be a tough nut to crack no matter who our nominee is.

One last thought is that, when looking at a map of the most competitive Senate races, we can see that out of the 12 states in that category, Obama performs better than Hillary in the general in 10 of them (Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota and Virginia) while Hillary does better in only 2 (Louisiana and Mississippi).  In many cases, the difference between how Obama does against McCain and how Hillary does may be the deciding factor in the Senate race.  Obama simply may have much greater coattails.  The difference in some of these states is amazing -- in particular: Alaska -- Obama performs 17 points better than Clinton, Colorado (Obama better by 18 points), Minnesota (11.5 points), Nebraska (24 points), New Hampshire (10.5 points) and Oregon (13.7 points).

Alabama:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 40 – McCain 54
Clinton 41 – McCain 51

Alaska:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 43 – McCain 48
Clinton 34 – McCain 56

Arizona:

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/...
Obama 38 – McCain 49
Clinton 33 – McCain 57

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 39 – McCain 51
Clinton 39 – McCain 54

Arizona average:
Obama 38.5 – McCain 50
Clinton 36 – McCain 55.5

Arkansas:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 33 – McCain 53
Clinton 51 – McCain 40

California:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 51 – McCain 40
Clinton 50 – McCain 40

Colorado:

http://rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 46 – McCain 39
Clinton 35 – McCain 49

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 50 – McCain 41
Clinton 42 – McCain 48

Colorado average:
Obama 48 – McCain 40
Clinton 38.5 – McCain 48.5

Connecticut:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 55 – McCain 34
Clinton 50 – McCain 40

Delaware:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 50 – McCain 41
Clinton 46 – McCain 41

Florida:

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/...
Obama 39 – McCain 41
Clinton 42 – McCain 44

http://rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 37 – McCain 53
Clinton 43 – McCain 49

http://www.wesh.com/...
Obama 37 – McCain 47
Clinton 40 – McCain 49

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 45 – McCain 47
Clinton 51 – McCain 42

Florida average:
Obama 39.5 – McCain 47
Clinton 44 – McCain 46

Georgia:

http://www.peachpundit.com/...
Obama 40 – McCain 48
Clinton 40 – McCain 47

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 41 – McCain 54
Clinton 35 – McCain 56

Georgia average:
Obama 40.5 – McCain 51
Clinton 37.5 – McCain 51.5

Hawaii:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 61 – McCain 31
Clinton 43 – McCain 39

Idaho:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 39 – McCain 52
Clinton 27 – McCain 63

Illinois:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 60 – McCain 31
Clinton 48 – McCain 37

Indiana:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 41 – McCain 50
Clinton 36 – McCain 53

Iowa:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 44 – McCain 41
Clinton 37 – McCain 47

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/...
Obama 53 – McCain 36
Clinton 40 – McCain 49

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  50 – McCain 41
Clinton 41 – McCain 46

Iowa average:
Obama 49  – McCain 39.3
Clinton  39.3 – McCain 47.3

Kansas:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 41 – McCain 50
Clinton 42 – McCain 51

Kentucky:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 33 – McCain 54
Clinton 41 – McCain 50

Louisiana:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 39 – McCain 54
Clinton 41 – McCain 51

Maine:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  53 – McCain 39
Clinton 48 – McCain 42

Maryland:

http://garesearch.com/...
Obama 51 – McCain 37
Clinton 47 – McCain 40

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  53 – McCain 40
Clinton  49 – McCain 40

Maryland average:
Obama  52 – McCain 38.5
Clinton  48 – McCain 40

Massachusetts:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 49 – McCain 42
Clinton 55 – McCain 37

Michigan:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 47 – McCain 39
Clinton 44 – McCain 44

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 46 – McCain 45
Clinton 44 – McCain 44

Michigan average:
Obama  46.5 – McCain 42
Clinton  44 – McCain 44

Minnesota:

http://rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 53 – McCain 38
Clinton 42 – McCain 47

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  49 – McCain 42
Clinton  47 – McCain 43

Minnesota average:
Obama 51 – McCain 40
Clinton  44.5 – McCain 45

Mississippi:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 41 – McCain 54
Clinton 42  – McCain 51

Missouri:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 40 – McCain 42
Clinton 42 – McCain 43

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 42 – McCain 48
Clinton 44  – McCain 48

Missouri average:
Obama  41 – McCain 45
Clinton  43 – McCain 45.5

Montana:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 39  – McCain 47
Clinton 33 – McCain 53

Nebraska:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 42 – McCain 45
Clinton  30 – McCain 57

Nevada:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 50 – McCain 38
Clinton 40 – McCain 49

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 46 – McCain 41
Clinton 41 – McCain 49

Nevada average:
Obama  48 – McCain 39.5
Clinton 40.5 – McCain 49

New Hampshire:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 49 – McCain 36
Clinton 43 – McCain 41

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  46 – McCain 44
Clinton 41 – McCain 49

New Hampshire average:
Obama 47.5  – McCain 40
Clinton  42 – McCain 45

New Jersey:

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/...
Obama 46 – McCain 39
Clinton 47 – McCain 41

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 43 – McCain 45
Clinton 50 – McCain 39

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 43 – McCain 43
Clinton 47 – McCain 42

New Jersey average:
Obama 44  – McCain 42.3
Clinton 48 – McCain 40.7

New Mexico:

http://rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 44 – McCain 44
Clinton 38 – McCain 50

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 50 – McCain 43
Clinton 47 – McCain 47

New Mexico average:
Obama  47 – McCain 43.5
Clinton 42.5 – McCain 48.5

New York:

http://www.siena.edu/...
Obama 47 – McCain 40
Clinton 49 – McCain 42

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 52 – McCain 38
Clinton 55 – McCain 33

New York average:
Obama  49.5 – McCain 39
Clinton  52 – McCain  37.5

North Carolina:

http://www.jwpcivitasinstitute.org/...
Obama  36 – McCain 46
Clinton  36 – McCain 48

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  45 – McCain 47
Clinton 41 – McCain 49

North Carolina average:
Obama 40.5 – McCain 46.5
Clinton  38.5 – McCain 48.5

North Dakota:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 46  – McCain 42
Clinton  35 – McCain 54

Ohio:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 41 – McCain 42
Clinton 43 – McCain 46

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/...
Obama 40 – McCain 42
Clinton 43 – McCain 44

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/...
Obama 48 – McCain 47
Clinton 47 – McCain 51

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 50 – McCain 40
Clinton 50 – McCain 40

Ohio average:
Obama 44.75 – McCain 42.75
Clinton 45.75 – McCain 45.25

Oklahoma:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 34  – McCain 57
Clinton 42 – McCain 50

Oregon:

http://blog.oregonlive.com/...
Obama  46 – McCain 38
Clinton 38  – McCain 46

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 49 – McCain 40
Clinton 42 – McCain 45

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  49 – McCain 41
Clinton  43 – McCain 48

Oregon average:
Obama 48  – McCain 39.7
Clinton  41 – McCain 46.3

Pennsylvania:

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/...
Obama 42 – McCain 40
Clinton 44 – McCain 42

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 49 – McCain 39
Clinton 42 – McCain 44

http://www.presidentelectionpolls.co...
(Morning Call/Muhlenberg College Poll)
Obama 39 – McCain 42
Clinton 42 – McCain 41

http://www.wgal.com/...
Obama 43 – McCain 44
Clinton 46 – McCain 46

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 42 – McCain 47
Clinton 47 – McCain 46

Pennsylvania average:
Obama  43 – McCain 42.4
Clinton  44.2 – McCain 43.8

Rhode Island:

http://www.insidepolitics.org/...
Obama 42 – McCain 30
Clinton 43 – McCain 32

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  53 – McCain 38
Clinton  54 – McCain 37

Rhode Island average:
Obama 47.5  – McCain 34
Clinton  48.5  – McCain 34.5

South Carolina:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 45  – McCain  48
Clinton  42 – McCain 48

South Dakota:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama  38 – McCain 48
Clinton 38 – McCain 50

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  43 – McCain 47
Clinton  40 – McCain 52

South Dakota average:
Obama 40.5 – McCain 47.5
Clinton  39 – McCain 51

Tennessee:

http://www.mtsusurveygroup.org/...
Obama 37 – McCain 53
Clinton 41 – McCain 45

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  38 – McCain 54
Clinton  46 – McCain 46

Tennesse average:
Obama 37.5 – McCain 53.5
Clinton 43.5 – McCain 45.5

Texas:

http://www.cnn.com/...
Obama 44 – McCain 52
Clinton 42 – McCain 55

http://www.beloblog.com/...
Obama 42 – McCain 49
Clinton 46 – McCain 50

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  46 – McCain 47
Clinton  42 – McCain 49

Texas average:
Obama 44 – McCain 49.3
Clinton 43.3 – McCain 51.3

Utah:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  39 – McCain 50
Clinton  27 – McCain 65

Vermont:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  63 – McCain 29
Clinton  49 – McCain 39

Virginia:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 44 – McCain 49
Clinton 41 – McCain 51

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  47 – McCain 47
Clinton 40 – McCain 50

Virginia average:
Obama 45.5  – McCain 48
Clinton  40.5 – McCain 50.5

Washington:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 44 – McCain 45
Clinton 40 – McCain 48

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 52  – McCain 38
Clinton  44 – McCain 46

Washington average:
Obama  48 – McCain 41.5
Clinton  42– McCain 47

West Virginia:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  35 – McCain 53
Clinton 47  – McCain 42

Wisconsin:

http://rasmussenreports.com/...
Obama 44 – McCain 43
Clinton  38 – McCain 50

http://www.presidentelectionpolls.co...
(Strategic Vision)
Obama  45 – McCain 44
Clinton 43 – McCain 48

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama 51  – McCain 40
Clinton  48 – McCain 44

Wisconsin average:
Obama  46.7 – McCain 42.3
Clinton 43  – McCain 47.3

Wyoming:

http://www.surveyusa.com/...
Obama  35 – McCain 54
Clinton  28 – McCain 61

•  yeah

  you've wasted so much time on nonsense.  If Hillary gets the nomination, I hope you intend to vote for her.

  I don't care what the March polls say.  Every democrat should vote for the democratic nominee.

  And Hillary is not losing Michigan, Oregon or Washington state to McCain.

  You are forgetting something:  If you think Hillary is treating Obama badly, she will totally trash John McCAin.

  We're in this to win.  That's it.  Clinton I gave us Ginsberg and Breyer.  It all comes down to SCOTUS.  Thats it, nothing else matters.

  by kennyc on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:37:10 AM PDT

  •  You cannot vote blindly

    Clinton has shown herself to be a Lieberman.  She is only out for herself and will not take care of you.

    by dan667 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:41:40 AM PDT

    •  No Lieberman left the...

      party after losing the primary to Lamont...Hillary has done no such thing

      by dvogel001 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:42:54 AM PDT

      •  In effect she has left the party

        by endorsing McCain over Obama in the Lifetime Achievement award she gave him (Obama has a speech comment).  

        It is so funny that they are touting Obama as VEEP.  That will never happen.  I think this type of politics is an insult to the American people because it is simply playing games, as if the people are toys.

        Yuck.

        by alliedoc on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:14:05 PM PDT

    •  Magic 101

      Just ignore her life-time achievements, ignore her voting records, grab some inane campaign rhetoric and PRESTO!, you have a Lieberman like talking point.

      by xy109e3 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:48:02 AM PDT

      •  You have not been paying attention to her actions

        If you listen to Clinton you think she is great, if you look at what she is "actually" doing she is a train wreck.  She is a blight on the Democratic Party.  She is quickly becoming Lieberman's Buddy (and McCains)

        by dan667 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 12:17:39 PM PDT

    •  Dumb and Obnoxious

      Let's get back to reality here. Lieberman still blindly supports the Iraq War to the hilt, as well as supporting a candidate in McCain who wants to continue GWB's economic agenda as well as his desire to privatize Social Security. Hillary opposes all those things.

      If you want to criticize Hillary for the "Obama has a speech remark," that's a fair and valid point. But to say that she is a Lieberman clone is downright ridiculous.  

      by Frank Cocozzelli on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:50:43 AM PDT

      •  Ok, how about the McCain is great comment?

        About as valid a criticism as they come.  I almost think she wants him to win the general.

        by dan667 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 12:18:34 PM PDT

  •  You are missing the point. It is not whether the

    diarist would vote for Clinton, it's that a whole lot of plain vanilla Americans (many of whom are neither Democrats or Republicans) would prefer Obama over Clinton. You can't force the general public to be doctrinaire, and if the party elders are ignoring information like this they are fools.

    by Wee Mama on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:51:56 AM PDT

  •  Except I always,

    always will be a person first and a Democrat second (or in all reality, third, fourth, fifth, 22nd, etc.), a person with a conscience. To say that "every democrat should vote for the democratic nominee" is simply myopic and injudicious. I have a civic obligation to vote for whomever I think will benefit the country the most, not the candidate who happens to share my (anecdotal--Washington resident) party affiliation.

    In all honesty, I would probably vote for Clinton in the GE if she somehow magically became the nominee, but it would be much more a vote for whomever will cause less harm. Fortunately, in the real world, I'll have the pleasure of voting for Obama.

    Oh yeah, and speaking again was a Washington State resident, Clinton might (might--voters here tend to be attracted to moderate Republicans, or at least Republicans who call themselves moderate) win our state, but her miniscule coattails aren't going to help at all in what's shaping up to be yet another extremely contested gubernatorial fight.

    by lieblingskartoffel on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:57:43 AM PDT

•  once again:

  It's the goddamn math!

  by joeyess on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:37:54 AM PDT

•  Well Obama can wrap this up...

  with a nice bow...just add Clinton then he would be more competitive in

  NJ, WV, KY, TN, MO, AR, OK, LA, MS, AL, FL

  Adding the states that he is weaker in would mean over 400 EV mandate...sounds great to me

  by dvogel001 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:42:10 AM PDT

  •  Wow, it really doesn't work that way.

    If anything, a united ticket would probably go more toward canceling out either candidate's advantage in his or her respective swing states.

    by lieblingskartoffel on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 07:01:45 AM PDT

    •  Why would that be???

      by dvogel001 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 07:22:17 AM PDT

      •  Each appeals to certain demographics that'd

        be turned off if the other candidate appeared on the ticket. For instance, I imagine that there are quite a few "Obamacans" that would never even conceive of voting for a Clinton.

        by lieblingskartoffel on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 07:35:35 AM PDT

        •  That is imagining not polling...

          in fact there are always some Democrats and Republicans in every election that vote for the other party for some reason...previous polling suggests that the vast majority of Democrats would vote for a combined ticket

          by dvogel001 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 12:14:47 PM PDT

  •  I honestly think she would hurt the ticket.

    Firstly, there is the fact she fires up the conservatives.  Then, there is the "in 2002 he gave a speech" comment.  Plus, I would bet it would hurt Obama with the independents.  So, well, I hope not ...

    by alliedoc on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:20:06 PM PDT

•  Why This Tells Us Nothing

  To cite these polls at the beginning of March is absurd. The general election is eight months away, which is an eternity in politics. Far too much can change for all the candidates.

  Let me give you an example.

  Coming out of the Democratic convention in 1988, Dukakis was crushing GHWB by double digits. Within six weeks, GHWB was comfortably ahead for good. And while I support Hillary, I also put no stock in polls that show her (or for that matter, any other candidate) winning the general election at this point in time.

  by Frank Cocozzelli on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:43:26 AM PDT

  •  There is a general pattern of Obama's polling

    going up in areas where he has campaigned. Clinton has universal name recognition; Obama is still becoming known, and when people get that chance they often like him and the direction he wants to take the country.

    The Florida results are at least partly name recognition since there was no campaigning there.

    by Wee Mama on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:54:19 AM PDT

    •  Really?

      Part of that "becoming known" process is far from complete. And it seems that we also learning that he might not be able to land a punch, let alone take one.

      As more Democrats learn that, they just might change their minds. If he can't refute Hillary, then how can we expect him to handle the GOP spinners, let alone stubborn GOP congressmen who are not exactly in the mood for change?

      Let me give you a prediction. When the Florida revote takes place, Hillary will clean Obama's clock. Why? Because of Hispanic, Jews and Italians for whom Hillary's nut and bolts approach is far more appealing than lofty rhetoric.

      by Frank Cocozzelli on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 10:33:45 AM PDT

  •  This is ignoring, of course,

    that Michael Dukakis somehow inexplicably forgot to campaign for a substantial chunk of time after the convention. True, polls are not suitable predictors of electoral outcomes, especially this early in the game. They do, however, provide trends, and all those trends favor Obama. Obama has consistently demonstated that he appeals to independents and moderate Republicans, demographics that'll be vital in the general election.

    by lieblingskartoffel on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 07:09:16 AM PDT

    •  Obama Is a Wash

      Obama's appeal to independents and moderate Republicans is a wash. That is because while gaining those folks he loses a chunk of blue-collar Democrats--a group that Hillary keeps in the fold. Besides, in areas such as Nassau and Suffolk Counties during her two NY Senate races Hillary more than proved her ability to draw moderate Republican support.

      More importantly, Dukakis lost his lead because the GOP was able to define him in the eyes of the voters. Remember Willie Horton and all the other nonsense? Well, the GOP spinners will do the very same to him. And that's something that super delegates will consider, especially as they watch an Obama who increasingly displays a propensity for not landing effective counter-punches.

      by Frank Cocozzelli on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 10:46:06 AM PDT

•  Data Based on Old News

  Your data is interesting but totally insignificant.  You chose the point in time for your polling data during which Obama was the strongest and Hillary was the weakest.

  If you instead chose data from, say, last December, the results would have been exactly the opposite.  And, because of the powerful new momentum that Hillary has and the serious questions the American people now have about Barack, if you were to choose polling data that will come out over the next month or two, there is no doubt that the data will be 180 degrees the opposite of what you have selected.

  Hillary's a winner for the Democrats.  Barack is a question mark.

  by tailor324 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 07:27:25 AM PDT

•  So, it would seem that Jim Webb is the man?

  by alliedoc on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:10:09 PM PDT

•  Question for silver spring

  Great diary, great maps, great analysis.  I'd love to do a YouTube video using them in the hopes that the word gets to a few SD's.

  A scratch copy is below.

  Can you take a look and let me know if that'd be okay with you?  If not, no problem.  (Sorry to post this here, not sure how else to contact you!)

  by Warningwill Robinson on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 08:50:49 AM PDT