*** FEB 4: McCain 47%, Clinton 39% ... McCain 44%, Obama 44%***

[FlyingSquirrel]

Rasmussen has begun daily tracking of general election match-ups featuring McCain vs. both Clinton and Obama.

"In general election match-ups, McCain leads Clinton 47% to 39% while Clinton leads Romney 50% to 37%. Obama and McCain are tied at 44% while the Illinois Senator leads Romney 44% to 41%. These numbers are likely to remain quite fluid as the nomination battles continue to unfold."

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll.

"Individual polls can sometimes overstate volatility in a race, especially during the ups and downs of a Primary Election season. This is especially true when the results carry a four percentage point margin of sampling error. One way of addressing this is to look at a rolling-average of three consecutive polls. Using this approach, McCain now has a narrow advantage over Obama 45% to 43%. Prior to this latest poll, they had been tied at 44%. Both men have now been within four points (the margin of error) of the 45% mark for seven consecutive individual polls. Using a three-poll rolling average, McCain leads Clinton by five percentage points, 47% to 42%.

In the new survey McCain enjoys an 22-point advantage among male voters with Clinton as his opponent. He lags by only three points among female voters. There isn't much gender discrepancy in the McCain-Obama match-up. Here McCain leads by eight points among men, five points among women.

McCain does better than either Democrat with unaffiliated voters in the new survey, but especially when Clinton is his opponent. Against the former First Lady, he leads 52% to 31% with unaffiliateds.

John McCain is viewed favorably by 52% and unfavorably by just 43%. His favorables have been in the 50%+ range since late November.

Hillary Clinton is currently viewed favorably by 47%, unfavorably by 51%. Barack Obama is viewed favorably by 51%, unfavorably by 45%."

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/john_mccain_match_ups/election_2008_mccain_vs_clinton_and_obama

-----

If you believe, as I do, that McCain will beat out Romney for the nomination, then this must be a consideration. I'd suggest keeping up with the results of this tracking poll. I believe Hillary Clinton would be an excellent president and in many ways better than Obama. But until I see these numbers move her direction, and in particular see her improve her "unfavorable" ratings and her "unaffiliated" numbers, I just can't support her nomination.

[MadBadger]

1. Every single poll shows Obama doing better than Hillary against McCain.

[Summerza]

2. If Obama is tied with McCain BEFORE the media turns against Bam, he's in trouble

God help us.

[southern_dem]

3. So you think the MSM

will be good to Clinton and her numbers will rise?

[Summerza]

8. No. Clinton is toast. Just that I thought Obama had a chance vs. McCain

Not anymore.

[FlyingSquirrel]

9. I agree. God help us.

On the other hand, would you rather go with someone who is already getting beaten and will be further damaged when they bring out the big guns, or someone who is at least tied to begin with?

I have a sinking feeling that both would lose and that the media has effectively killed our best hope, Edwards, for the sport of it. (Higher entertainment value of the first female or black president). If not for the actual reason of being owned by corporations that see him as a threat.

But since I don't have a choice, I'm gonna back the one who DOESN'T start off with a majority of Americans having their minds set against him, and hope he can beat the RW slime machine.

[Midwestern Democrat]

12. I've been saying for a year now that the media was WAY overhyping

the theme that 2008 was a "sure thing" for the Democrats - but the vast majority of Democrats throughout 2007 just listened to the media hype like it was gospel. For me, the telltale sign that the media hype was overblown was the early general election matchups between specific candidates. The matchups between specific candidates were always too close to warrant calling 2008 a "sure thing" for us.

I think the "We can't lose 2008" media mantra hurt our primary process this year - it caused us to be much less deliberative this season than we should have been. I think we can still win in November, but right now it's looking like it's going to be about as hard as the 2004 election was - and that was an uphill fight all the way.

[bluestateguy]

4. Daily tacking polls for the general election in February?

I think I'm going to need to stock up on Tums and Rolaids.

[Thrill]

5. No surprise. Independents aren't attracted to Hillary

thats why she can't win

[asthmaticeog]

6. This is pathetic.

7 years of Bush destroying EVERYTHING and getting record low approvals, but the best we can do is pray we squeak out a slight win with one cowardly, opportunistic centrist or another?

We fucking blow. :grr:

[FlyingSquirrel]

11. Amen, brother. n/t

[Colobo]

7. Obama will win in November by a landslide.

[Neshanic]

10. Of course he will move up, Nobody knows anything about him.

MacCain and crew will solve those numbers fast.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

13. WTF is wrong with the American people??!?

How is that creepy old cretin doing so well??

:banghead:

[HughMoran]

14. I'm glad these matchups are meaningless

Until the two nominees go head-to-head, there is no meaning to these supposed matchups IMO.