President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 26, 2008 08:36 PM UTC

New Poll: Udall by 10, Obama by 5

  • 22 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Rocky Mountain News reports:

Barack Obama leads John McCain by five percentage points in Colorado, according to a new poll that tracks the presidential contest in four key battleground states.

The poll by the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Quinnipiac University found that 49 percent of Colorado’s likely voters would choose Obama, compared with 44 percent for McCain.

It also shows that independents in Colorado favor the Democrat 51 percent to 39 percent.

Obama also is the favorite in Michigan – 48 to 42 percent; Minnesota – 54 percent to 37 percent; and Wisconsin – 52 percent to 39 percent…

The poll of 1,351 likely Colorado voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.7 percent.

In Colorado’s U.S. Senate race, Democrat Mark Udall has a 48 percent to 38 percent lead over Republican Bob Schaffer, and has an even stronger lead among independents – 54 percent to 27 percent…

Link to the full results.

The Senate results are similar to a Rasmussen Reports poll from a week or two ago that showed Udall with a growing lead among Unaffiliated voters, which was 51-30 at the time. Udall has increased that lead to 54-27 among Unaffiliated voters.

Tweet
Share

Comments

22 thoughts on “New Poll: Udall by 10, Obama by 5”

  1. Looks like all of that IE money spent to make Sweatshop look moderate hasn’t taken hold. Just the opposite — independents are breaking for Udall and they aren’t coming back. Holy smokes, now it’s an issue translating this into yet another down ballot lift for Dems.  

    1. ….and announce that Bob is exactly where he should be at this stage in the race (how many times did we hear that said about Both Ways in ’06?), and that once the voters actually see Boulder Liberal Mark Udall, his numbers will collapse.  

        He will also work the phrase “Boulder liberal” into his press statement a total of 12 times in the text of his 35-word statement.

        The Udall-Schaffer numbers do not surprise me.  The real (and very pleasant) surprise is the five point lead Obama has over McCain in Colorado.  When was the last time the Dem candidate had a five percent lead over the GOP in Colorado at this point in the campaign?  1964?

    2.    Not only that.  On behalf of Bob, Dickie has gone out of his way to piss off the base with his fight with the Egg as Person Amendment supporters.

        They’re ending up with the worst of both worlds:  alienating the right wingers while not winning over the moderates.

      1. Messrs. Schaffer and Wadhams are in the same boat Beauprez got himself into two years ago.  He and now they are making everybody mad.  Again, in my opinion this is indicative of the deep ideological and philosophical rifts within the Republican Party that can’t be bridged.  This isn’t 1964 when Goldwater lost, or 1974 and 1976 when Republicans lost because of criminal activity by President Nixon.  2006 and now this year represent the deep and abiding split between the social conservatives and the traditional Republicans.    

        1. And can you please identify one?  

          This isn’t a specious request. It seems to me that ever since Reagan brought together the fiscal and social conservatives, that the Republican party has embraced both.  

          So, what is a traditional Republican? Who is one? Schwartzenegger? What Republican alive today would stand up and say “beware the military-industrial complex”?

          1. From the White House Biography page

            As President, Roosevelt held the ideal that the Government should be the great arbiter of the conflicting economic forces in the Nation, especially between capital and labor, guaranteeing justice to each and dispensing favors to none.

            Roosevelt emerged spectacularly as a “trust buster” by forcing the dissolution of a great railroad combination in the Northwest. Other antitrust suits under the Sherman Act followed.

            Roosevelt steered the United States more actively into world politics. He liked to quote a favorite proverb, “Speak softly and carry a big stick. . . . ”

            Aware of the strategic need for a shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific, Roosevelt ensured the construction of the Panama Canal. His corollary to the Monroe Doctrine prevented the establishment of foreign bases in the Caribbean and arrogated the sole right of intervention in Latin America to the United States.

            He won the Nobel Peace Prize for mediating the Russo-Japanese War, reached a Gentleman’s Agreement on immigration with Japan, and sent the Great White Fleet on a goodwill tour of the world.

            Some of Theodore Roosevelt’s most effective achievements were in conservation. He added enormously to the national forests in the West, reserved lands for public use, and fostered great irrigation projects.

            He crusaded endlessly on matters big and small, exciting audiences with his high-pitched voice, jutting jaw, and pounding fist. “The life of strenuous endeavor” was a must for those around him, as he romped with his five younger children and led ambassadors on hikes through Rock Creek Park in Washington, D.C.

            We haven’t seen a Republican like him in a long time.

            1. It is an oasis of calm right in the middle of the Potomac, with zero development and lots of wildlife.  In the middle of the summer I would go there sometimes for a  half hour after work in DC to decompress.  Very neat place, and one of the smaller footnotes of the many legacies of Teddy Roosevelt.

            3. They put him in the VP position to try and neuter him. McKinley getting shot is what put him in the presidency.

              And in the case of Eisenhower they were so desperate to win after 5 straight Dem terms that they would have taken Mickey Mouse. So again an anomoly.

              Outside of that you have the old-line Republicans (Nixon pre Watergate), the new-line Republicans (Reagan and his old-guard), and then the clowns (Bush, Cheney, DeLay, Paul, Huckabee, etc).

              My guess is you will see the party go back toward the party of the sane members of the Reagan revolution, but with bits of the various fringes still there.

      2. but with such a large sample, I’d be curious to see what’s going on in El Paso County. One of the anti-Bob IE’s went after the Bob’s base there on the Abramoff issue. If being a moral sellout is hurting him with on the hardcore GOP turf, Sweatshop Schaffer is done.


  3. But a week is a lifetime in politics. If Schaffer figures out how to campaign effectively, we would see it go back 5 points in the other direction very quickly.

    Same for McCain vs Obama.

    And with both Udall and Obama busy pissing off their base, it does leave turmoil on both sides.

      1. He’s trying to square the circle on it and he hasn’t voted yet. There’s already a MoveOn effort to lobby him.

        If he does vote for it, you’ll see the same thing about him that we’ve been pinging Udall for here.

        1. His take (experience and judgement) on the FISA vote is quite different from that of the netroots.

          From Keith

          John said his reading of the revised FISA statute suggested it was so poorly constructed (or maybe so sublimely constructed) that it clearly did not preclude future criminal prosecution of the telecoms – it only stopped civil suits.

          I have repeated his observation each night since. Maybe I didn’t sell my conviction of its conclusiveness. I think John Dean is worth 25 Glenn Greenwalds (maybe 26 Keith Olbermanns).

          Thus, as I phrased it on the air tonight, obviously Obama kicked the left in the teeth by supporting the bill. But anybody who got as hot about this as I did would prefer to see a President Obama prosecuting the telecoms criminally, instead of seeing a Senator Obama engender more “soft on terror” crap by casting a token vote in favor of civil litigation that isn’t going to pass since so many other Democrats caved anyway.

          This was really a two layer issue.

          1. Only civil lawsuits that would have been thrown out anyway under a zillion different common-law defenses that all apply because the situation is so f—ed up.

            Really. The circle jerk we have going on over the immunity provision is entertaining, but inconsequential. Without immunity, civil suits would have been aborted. With immunity, civil suits will never be commenced. The end result is the same. No civil suits.

            But President Obama and his Attorney General will be free to bring criminal charges if any are warranted.

          2. 1) That reps are voting for this planning on a court decision that might happen. Take the easy out and hope that a court will make things right.

            2) That our (Dem) reps think this is what the American people want. I want them to stand up for our rights, not roll over.

        2. seeing some complaining on the blogs but I think you’ll find most Obama supporters are too invested in an Obama win to jump ship now.  He’s what we haven’t had to lead us into battle since Clinton; a genuine alpha male.  

          Like Clinton, he will be forgiven a lot.  Dems are really tired of getting their asses kicked by a bunch of snotty Republican frat boys and will give some leeway to a candidate who demonstrates the ability to do some serious ass kicking of his own.  

          Not to put too fine a point on it, we want a victory and we smell blood.

          1. I don’t understand why people think we must either find a candidate perfect or switch to another candidate. What I think we need to learn to do is support a candidate while at the same time let them know when we are very unhappy with something they have done.

            Yes we’ll continue to support Obama and work for his election. But at the same time we can exert significant pressure on issues where we think he’s wrong and it matters a lot.

            It’s like raising kids, you love them but that doesn’t mean you don’t get mad at them at times and that you don’t punish them at times.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

81 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!