Rasmussen Reports Alabama Polls
Rasmussen Reports has new poll results on the state’s U.S. Senate race (not close between Sessions and Figures) and new poll results on the presidential race in Alabama (not-so-close between McCain and Obama, but half the gap it was).
Related Articles:
Who did Rasmussen Poll, Doc’s Political Parlor?
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 1, 2008 @ 10:40 am
The fact is that polls such as this underrepresent minorities and young people who will turn out in droves for Obama. Maybe in a liberal state like New Hampshire, there is a Bradley effect that compensates for that somewhat, but here in Alabama, most folks that don’t want to vote for Obama aren’t afraid to admit it.
In the end, I think historic black and youth turnout + low evangelical turnout will make things somewhat competitive in Alabama. Probably not that close in the end (my guess right now would be maybe 53-47), but enought to make the Republicans spend a few dollars here.
Comment by SamfordDem — July 1, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
Go Figure!
Comment by Zorro — July 1, 2008 @ 3:01 pm
Samford dem the democrats talk about “historic youth turnout” every presidential election and it never happens. Also Bush carried every county in the fifth CD in ‘04 thanks mainly to these rural white democrats in the Shoals. It will be interesting to see if McCain and Sessions can do that in November. If they do, I think that will probably translate into Wayne Parker getting elected to Congress.
Comment by dan t — July 1, 2008 @ 3:20 pm
Samford Dem,
Your assuming that it doesn’t rain and there isn’t a Facebook concert on Election Day that doesn’t drive down minority and youth vote.
Comment by Truthsleuth — July 1, 2008 @ 3:31 pm
A Facebook concert? Excuse me while I shake my head at the ignorance of my generation. Man that was great.
Comment by Terry — July 1, 2008 @ 4:34 pm
Most will vote for American Idol and little more.
Comment by Zorro — July 1, 2008 @ 5:25 pm
Would be leary of any Halo/WoW tourneys scheduled election day.
Comment by walt moffett — July 1, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
Rasmussen must have polled the Archie Bunkers. Fortunately there are more rational, sane, intelligent and tolerant voters in Alabama than Archie Bunkers.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 1, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
I am your generation. Unfortunately, most of my generation is more into social networking (online or in person), entertainment, and having a good time than they are about doing their civic responsibility. Certainly not true for all, but true for many.
That is what has made me somewhat hesitant about Obama. The way young supporters flock to him, he has become more of a fad than a politician. The Dems better hope the fad does not fade before Election Day.
Comment by Truthsleuth — July 1, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
Why do you believe he is a fad because young people “flock” to him? Is it Obama the person they are flocking to, or it it Obama’s message? I believe it’s the message. I also don’t believe he is a “fad”, I believe he is the real deal and a real straight talker. Young people are tired of seeing their friends and familys wounded/killed in an immoral occupation. Young people realize they need access to affordable health care. Young people want college cost to be affordable. Young people care about the planet. Young people care about the high price of gas. There may be some young people who are more into social networking, entertainment and having a good time than they do about their civic responsibility, but not the majority. The majority care about what is happening in their cities, their states, their country and the world.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 1, 2008 @ 7:02 pm
if he had a message, other than “i will be everything to everyone”, then you may have a point - but there is nothing behind the words man…get off the liberal blogs and catch a glimpse of any major news network - a trend is forming, this cat has no clue how to implement his message, or even stay on message for that matter. all over the place - i’m sure you and the far left just love his new revelation of expanding faith based programs initiated by pres bush, even after the great hope wanted to do away with most of them…lick thumb, stick in wind, give speech.
Comment by Anonymous — July 1, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
Those democrats in the shoals will vote for Parker Griffith.
Comment by Anonymous — July 1, 2008 @ 10:14 pm
probably the dumbest of all the us senators
Comment by jeff sessions is a turd — July 1, 2008 @ 10:35 pm
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising he most money from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world’s greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage.
Alexander Tyler, 1778
Comment by Anonymous — July 1, 2008 @ 10:49 pm
Note for Anon #15 - the Tyler quote is “likely fictitious.”
Bhmhomeboy - Just what would the great Barack Obama do to reduce the price of gas?
Also, how would he make college (or health care) more affordable? Here’s a dirty little secret about why college costs are rising (that also applies to health care). When the government “helps” more people by offering grants and low interest student loans they instantly increase the demand for college education by government fiat. However, the supply of education must grow gradually, which results in a shortage and consequent price increases. Any politician who tells you that he is going to increase access to a product whose supply is inelastic in the near term, like college or health care, while also making it cheaper is telling you a flat out lie. It sounds good - like world peace! - and may win votes from those too ignorant to understand how things really work, but in the end it will only make currently perceived problems worse.
Comment by Brian — July 2, 2008 @ 5:39 am
Like suggesting that the price of gasoline will be aided by commencing offshore drilling?
Comment by Roy — July 2, 2008 @ 10:46 am
What “curently percieved problems” are you referring to Brain?
You say Barack Obama is telling us a “flat out lie” , do you mean like the “flat out lie” Bush told to take us to war in Iraq? Or do you mean the “flat out lie” Bush told when he said his tax cut for the rich was going to create millions of new jobs?
I don’t know what Obama will do exactly to “reduce the price of gas”, but I do now that every since Bush took office and Dick held his secret meetings to formulate the energy policy the price of gas is steadily rising. Gas was $1.46 per gallon when Bush took office in 2000. I’m not sure what Barack Obama’s exact plans are, but I am sure he has one. I’m also sure that we can trust what ever plan he has.
I’m going to refer you to the official Barak Obama for President 08 website for specific answers to the questions raised in your post.
Comment by bhmhomeboy@aol.com — July 2, 2008 @ 10:53 am
why can we trust “what ever plan he has”? what has he done to prove that we can “trust” any plan he has? you have just laid out the exact argument - “not sure what he wants to do, but i/we/the sheep trust him” - a lot of people give good speeches, doesn’t mean you can trust them.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
Hey, if you trusted Bush and Dick you ought to be agle to trust anybody. Give Barack Obama the same benefit of the doubt. I mean what can he do..take us to war based on dead wrong intelligence, wreck the economy, spy on Americans, out an under cover CIA agent, politicize the U.S. Justice Department, sit reading “My Pet Goat” to school children while the country was under attack?
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 2, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
Hey, if you trusted Bush and Dick you ought to be able to trust anybody. Give Barack Obama the same benefit of the doubt. I mean what can he do..take us to war based on dead wrong intelligence, wreck the economy, spy on Americans, out an under cover CIA agent, politicize the U.S. Justice Department, sit reading “My Pet Goat” to school children while the country was under attack?
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 2, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
Speaking of giving “good speeches”
I recall Bush giving some “good speeches” they were called called State of the Union Addresses. In one SOTU he said “Iraq had Nukes from Niger”, remember?
Candidates and politicians give speeches. That is why they hire “speech writers” it’s call “communicating”,Ronald Regan was called “The Great Communicator”, remember?. Don’t hate on Obama because he is an effective communicator.
I trust Obama not to lie us into a war. I trust Obama to do the right thing for all of the people not some of the people.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 2, 2008 @ 2:11 pm
you have zero common sense if you believe we can trust what the man says - the bush cheney rhetoric is old and has no relevance. it is relevant that we are in the here and now with this idea machine that everyone blindly trusts and if you are going to broadly say that “we” can trust, then you better back it up. since you can’t back it up, you should limit your comments to “maybe i’m the only idiot who believes what ever plan he has even though there is no substance behind the words” just don’t lump the rest of us in with you
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
23, don’t think he will do the right thing for ALL of the people - day one in office, obama will roll back bush tax cuts, and raising taxes is not “doing the right thing” - unless you’re a democrat.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
On his first day in office President Obama will roll back the Bush tax cuts on the RICH. This action will NOT “raise taxes” on the poor and the middle class.
Bush’s tax cut was not really a tax cut, it was a tax shift from the rich (who could afford to pay) to the middle class.
Bush paid for his tax cut for the rich by raiding the surplus.
Bush is borrowing and spending money to pay for all war all the time.
Rolling back the tax cut for Cheney, Kerry, Bush, Kennedy, Clinton, Gates, Oprah, and all the other rich and famous will be doing the right thing for all Americans, not just Democrats.
Under Bush’s tax cut the rich got richer and the rest got the shaft, regardless of party.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 2, 2008 @ 2:35 pm
guess you don’t think any of the people you mentioned are american. real classy.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
Anonymous#23,
The Bush/Cheney “rhetoric” is revelant, because it’s what got us to “here and now”. There is plenty of substance behinds Obama’s words.
Speaking of great speeches and substance:
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.
Try judging Barack Obama by the content of his character, not by the color of his skin.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 2, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
you are the only one who spoke of race - but would expect nothing less.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
This election IS different. Kerry substantially increased both turnout and the margin of victory for Democrats among young people in 2004. Obviously, it was not enough for Kerry to overcome the huge increase in evangelical turnout that came with it. Obama will yet again increase both turnout and the Democratic margin of victory among that age group, the question will be how much. I simply cannot see evangelical turnout for McCain even coming close to that for Bush right now.
Obama has broken through into the world of facebook and myspace and everything else that young people are interested in. He’s been able to connect with them in a way no candidate has the past twenty years. They will turn out higher numbers for Obama than any election in modern history; the same will be true for African-Americans.
If you want to argue that won’t be enough for him to win the general, there’s an argument to be made. But to discount the fact that he defeated the strongest non-incumbent primary candidate in modern American history (in terms of endorsements, money, organization, and polling) largely because of increased turnout among blacks and young people, you are crazy. Those same people will vote for him in the general and they will bring plenty of friends, none of whom has a landline. Polls are going to be more inaccurate than usual this election cycle.
Comment by SamfordDem — July 2, 2008 @ 3:21 pm
I prefer not to judge candidates by the color of their skin nor the content of their character (though if I did Obama might be hurt in the later significantly)I prefer to judge them based on the content of their policy. At this point in the campaign process all I know about Obama’s policy is that he will promise anything to anyone. His campaign is roughly based around the same campaign principles as a middle school student running for Student Government. Promise no more homework, longer recess, and through in a few witty cracks and some cheap rhetoric tricks and you have the thing in the bag.
Until Obama provides some meat and potatoes for these lavish policies he is proposing, I will put him in the same category as LaLa from your hometown bhamhomeboy, and his proposals in the same category as Birmingham’s bis for the Olympics.
I will once again post an exert from an earlier post- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury” Alexander Tyler 1778
Surely the fad that is this campaign at the moment will fade and people will want more information about this two faced candidate and his promises
Bhmhomeboy, Judging both by your name and frequency of posting, I come to the conclusion that you, like samfordem, are not in the working world and thus might not understand the rules under which it operates. In the real world empty rhetoric is not worth the air it takes to speak it.
Comment by still need a consistent name on here — July 2, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
through to throw
bis to bid
sorry,
Comment by still need a consistent name on here — July 2, 2008 @ 3:28 pm
Comment by still need a consistent name on here,
you shouldn’t judge a post by it’s frequency or it’s forum name. I try not to pass judgement on my fellow human beings, nor jump to conclusions about their individual circumstances, I certainly don’t try and demean anyone because I disagree with their OPINION.
In the real world in which I operate, tolerant people can agree to disagree without being disagreeable. Good luck coming up with that consistant name on here and no need to apologize to for typing errors. We all make mistakes.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 2, 2008 @ 4:20 pm
[…] Doc’s Political Parlor: Rasmussen Reports Alabama Polls […]
Pingback by links for 2008-07-02 | Daily Dixie — July 2, 2008 @ 5:30 pm
Wow. Quite a stir up on this post. The fact is that if you like Obama, it’s exactly because his message is change and hope. This, however, leaves critics to point that he offers no substance. Now, these people only do so because they have already chosen McCain. If they were honest with themselves, they would look at the multiple 180s and 360s Sen. McCain has made in trying to gain the nomination and turn on the evangelical turnout machine, which may be his only hope for election.
Here are the facts. Independents and crossover votes will be the determinants in this election. Youth turnout will be larger, but probably not significant enough to turn the vote. Same goes for black turnout, which, though large, will unlikely overcome the majority white and typically conservative votes in the Southern states necessary to be effective in the Electoral College. All that said, the news pundits and Republican operatives have been very open about the fact that they don’t have the resources of Obama, don’t understand which voters he may appeal to, and don’t have the campaign infrastructure he has built. This doesn’t spell victory in the real world of elections.
Most telling, a tried and true, small government big-L, self-confessed Libertarian has told me that he is seriously considering Obama. My prediction, for what it’s worth, Obama wins the popular vote by 10%. This flies in the face of all the political insiders I know telling me that race will likely prohibit an Obama victory. If James Fields can win in Cullman, why couldn’t Obama win in the US? (And don’t throw the “experience” talking point at this statement. We’ve had multiple Republican Presidents, most of whom I voted for based on their “experience,” only to see them fail us miserably.)
Comment by Trvld — July 3, 2008 @ 7:29 am
I do note a consistent theme amongst the comments here: The Repubs feel a lot more comfortable attacking and attempting to ridicule Sen. Obama than they do defending their choice of Sen. McCain. The truth is that Sen. McCain has no more or less “substance” to his positions than does Sen. Obama. That is the nature of our political process as both candidates attempt to appeal to the middle. Those attacking Obama for lacking substance would never have considered voting for him in the first place. Personally, all I really need to know about Sen. McCain’s “substance” is that he intends for our brave soldiers to stay in Iraq indefinitely with no exit strategy and no real plan for “winning” the war, and that his only plans for the economic holes created by eight years of failed Bush policies is to keep digging.
Comment by Roy — July 3, 2008 @ 9:39 am
Trvld, I think you’re correct. I do however think Obama can win Virginia and North Carolina and put Georgia and Mississippi in play. Florida will be in play too, but that’s not really part of the South as I understand it. As I said earlier, increased black and youth turnout + low evangelical turnout will make things much closer in Alabama than most expect, BUT I think the biggest hurdle for Obama will be Jim Folsom Dems in the Appalachian region of the state, especially AL 4. If Obama can find a way to get some traction with the voters of that district (if he could pull 35% of the vote in that district, he’d be doing pretty well), he could potentially win the state.
Comment by SamfordDem — July 3, 2008 @ 6:07 pm