Home > Blogs > Ohio politics > Archives > 2008 > October > 14 > Entry
Obama tops McCain in two new Ohio polls
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama leads Republican John McCain in two new Ohio polls.
In the Fox News/Rasmussen Reports poll released on Monday, Oct. 13, Obama leads 49-47 percent among likely voters. The results are within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points but it is the first poll from the groups in which Obama has been ahead since tracking of the race began in February, a press release said.
McCain had led by a single percentage point for the past three weeks.
The poll was conducted Sunday, Oct. 12, with 1,000 likely voters. Click here for details.
In a SurveyUSA election poll released on Tuesday, Oct. 14, Obama led 50-45 percent among likely and actual (voters who already voted), just outside the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.
The poll was conducted Sunday, Oct. 12, to Monday, Oct. 13, with 575 likely voters and voters who already had voted. For full results, click here.
Permalink | Comments (32) | Post your comment |
Comments
By alex
October 22, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this
GO McCain!By alex
October 22, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this
GO McCain!By John McSame
October 14, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this
www.plainmcsame.orgBy Jim W.
October 14, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this
I left Ohio 30 years ago, but have kept up on the news. It’s great to see that Ohio is becoming a progressive state. Obama will be a great president and will have concerns for your state and your people. You’ve been neglected by Bush and the Republicans for long enough! If you don’t make $5million a year, you aren’t worthy of their time.By adase3
October 14, 2008 4:45 PM | Link to this
The republicans have nothing to offer me. And, McCain has shown his inability to lead because of his fractured and disorganized campaign. Also, the hate filled rhetoric of Palin has proved once again that the republican party cannot be trusted at all. She also is an extremist evangelical. Most christians do not accept her radical beliefs. McCain’s closeness to Bush signifies that McCain will continue the failure management of Bush. He is using Rove in his campaign. That shows that he is in bed with the neocons. We Americans are faced with a crisis. We have a foreign policy disaster. And, an economy in the toilet. I do not need some old decrepit Bush clone and some religious bigoted nutcase being in charge. Our country need true leadership. Obama is the type of leader that can pull us together and repair the damage caused by Bush and the neocons. And you know, if you republicans didn’t hate so much, perhaps McCain would do better in the polls.By Ethel S.
October 14, 2008 4:35 PM | Link to this
I guess that I should not find it amazing that the avid Obama supporters would feel like Gov. Palin is stonewalling like other politicans, when Sen. Obama is one of the most opaque (Webster’s definition is “not letting light shine through”) candidate in our history. There are so many unanswered details to Sen. Obama’s background and associations along with his limited Senate record, and experience that a prudent person would not find Sen. Obama acceptable as President of the United States of America. Is Webster’s enough authority for you, SDMC?By Dan
October 14, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this
http://realestate.msn.com/Buying/Article_forbes.aspx?cp-documentid=9579218>1=45000 Dayton, Ohio check this article on msn.com. Not exactly the distinction we would want. Remember this article when casting your vote.By Fed Up
October 14, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this
It’s time for the “Bushy” Conservatives to pack up and head for the hills ! McCain’s half-witted attempts at winning over the majority of the voters ain’t gonna work this. time. The NERVE of the conservatives shouting “unfair voting practices”…after the “Bushy-Birds” literally stole the 2000 and 2004 elections. You people talk out of both sides of your mouths…and your days are just about over. America is sick of your crap !By Fed Up
October 14, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this
It’s time for the “Bushy” Conservatives to pack up and head for the hills ! McCain’s half-witted attempts at winning over the majority of the voters ain’t gonna work this. time. The NERVE of the conservatives shouting “unfair voting practices”…after the “Bushy-Birds” literally stole the 2000 and 2004 elections. You people talk out of both sides of your mouths…and your days are just about over. America is sick of your crap !By Fed Up
October 14, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this
It’s time for the “Bushy” Conservatives to pack up and head for the hills ! McCain’s half-witted attempts at winning over the majority of the voters ain’t gonna work this. time. The NERVE of the conservatives shouting “unfair voting practices”…after the “Bushy-Birds” literally stole the 2000 and 2004 elections. You people talk out of both sides of your mouths…and your days are just about over. America is sick of your crap !By lax20
October 14, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this
Leslie my friend give it up. Everyone is tired of a ‘Republican Pumper’ and it is getting old. The information you are pumping is available to all and is no secret. Please put a sock in it and let everyone choose who is best for them. By the way, I’m sure Obama probably leads by more , because some people have no need for a land line telephone and polls do not call wireless numbers. Let it go and vote the way you choose. Your dribble could be working the opposite way, because I know I’m fed up.By Leslie
October 14, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this
Obama’s claims that “I have not received some official endorsement from” and “not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis” are both wrong. True, Ayers has not publicly endorsed Obama during the current presidential campaign, but Ayers opened his home to Obama very early in his first campaign for the Illinois state Senate and threw a fundraiser for him. Undoubtedly, that counts as some type of official endorsement. The issue of not exchanging ideas regularly is clearly wrong, too. Ayers and Obama served on two boards together: the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995 to 2001 and the Woods Foundation from 1993 to 2002. For the first five years with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama served as chairman of the board and handled its fiscal matters. Ayers was the Chicago Annenberg Challenge’s founder and he served as the chairman of the foundation’s other body that set education policy. Since they served together with a foundation that gave out over $100 million to groups that they both generally agreed with, there had to be some regular exchange of and agreement on ideas. Agreement on views seemed particularly crucial, since Ayers hardly has what most Americans would consider “traditional” views on education. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge gave money to infuse students with a radical political commitment. Just in 2006, Ayers told Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez that, “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution.” Ayers apparently told an author, who was writing a book on 1960s radicals shortly before the foundation was set up in 1995, that “I’m a radical, Leftist, small ‘c’ communist.” None of the media fact checkers evaluated either of these two claims. Instead, for example, the Washington Post Fact Check focused on whether Ayers was a professor of English or education citing the New York Times story’s claim that the “two men do not appear to have been close.” Nor do any of these media critics mention Obama’s comparison to Coburn, which makes it appear that the relationship between Ayers and Obama was about as close as senators from different political parties at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. Yet, there is still another problem with Obama’s statement, one that Hillary Clinton pointed to. She called on Obama during the debate for not being completely forthcoming regarding the relationship and pointed out that Ayers and Obama had worked together. Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position. And if I’m not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn’t done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died… . And we’re really supposed to believe Obama did not know, by 1996, given all the major media coverage of the 1996 Democratic Convention going back to Chicago despite the 1968 riots — including local and national media interviews with Bill Ayers on the subject — that Obama did not know? … If Obama really did not know, we must question his fitness to be President. Finally, why would Obama ever think that William Ayers had been “rehabilitated”? Both Ayers and his wife have very publicly proclaimed many times on national television shows and other venues during the time Obama was working with Ayers that they were not sorry for the bombings “and that we would do it again” and “I didn’t do enough.” Yet, this is not the first time that Obama has gotten into trouble with his associates. Nor is it the first time that he has been accused of not being honest about what he knew about their controversial views. There appears to be a pattern here. For example, Obama claimed that despite his extremely close personal relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright he was unfamiliar with Wright’s racist and anti-American attacks in his sermons. Indeed, Obama only admitted to have heard what Wright was saying on these topics after Wright’s National Press Club appearance. Yet, nothing really new was said at the National Press Club that hadn’t been discussed nationally months earlier. Still it was only after the National Press Club appearance that Obama said that he was “outraged” and “angered” by Wright’s comments. But Obama’s two other self-professed spiritual leaders, Father Michael Pfleger and Rev. James Meeks, have also made similar controversial and racist statements. There is also Obama’s association with ACORN. Obama claims to have “no connection” with this political advocacy group which is facing criminal investigations for voter registration fraud all across the country, but at the same time his campaign gave a related organization $800,000, he was their head lawyer a decade ago, ACORN has endorsed Obama for president and he promised ACORN members in 2007 that he would be “calling all of you to help shape up the agenda” after the election. Is this bias conscious? How do reporters avoid claims about whether Ayers has endorsed Obama? Or how was Obama being honest when asked to explain his relationship with Ayers and he neglected to mention that he worked for Ayers?By SMDC
October 14, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
First, Ethel, Hollis French is a he, not a she. If you’re going to ape Palin’s press releases, at least get the basics right. Secondly, Palin’s legal team had this canned response prepared weeks ago. Now that the report is out and casts Palin in a bad light, we’re just supposed to buy Palin’s prepared excuses? NO ONE from Palin’s camp has successfully refuted ANY of the findings of the Independent Counsel’s Report. The best Palin can come up with is to say it’s ‘enemies’ she’s made in Alaska who are out to get her ‘cause she’s been such a maverick’. Who is she now, Richard Nixon? She’s got her own Enemies List? Palin’s noise is right out of the Republican playbook for the last 8 years-if you get caught red-handed with your hand in the cookie jar, lie over and over again. Just say, ‘everyone’s doing it’ or blame it on ‘partisan attacks’. And, above all, take no responsibility for your actions. Ethel, your letters reveal you to be a caring person but Palin has done nothing to earn the faith you’ve invested in her. I would respectfully encourage you to seek out and heed more unbiased sources of information.By You Need to Vote
October 14, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this
Continually posting poll numbers favoring NObama is the Dayton Dumocratic News way to suppress votes. If McCain voters continuously read that their candidate is losing, they won’t bother to vote. Thanks DDN for suppressing votes. Voters, disregard the DDN trash and get out and vote.By Joanie
October 14, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this
The Republicans and conservatives have had Obama under a microscope for over a year. If there was anything to these claims, they would have found it and we all know they would be shouting it from Fox Republican Network. Instead, they resort to innuendo, distortions, and lame internet rumors and smears.By Ethel S.
October 14, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
In the matter of the investigation of Gov. Palin, the head of the Committee was Hollis French, a Democrat who endorsed Sen. Obama. That is why Gov. Palin did not believe the investigation would be fair. Hollis French made an off the record comment prior to the release of the report that she had an “October surprise.” Hollis French should have qualified herself because of her obvious bias. Another significant part of the report said that she was within her authority to terminate her cabinet members. Sarah Palin is still an exceptionally good pick for Sen. McCain because she has been the most scrutinized candidate of the four and still comes out just fine. I just wished that Sen. Obama had the same level of scrutiny from the MSM.By SMDC
October 14, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this
Ethel S: Sarah Palin ran for office on a platform of transparency and innovation but, instead, abused her executive power and attempted to derail legitimate inquiries into her activities. The ONLY extraordinary quality Palin has evinced thus far is her ability to dissemble and stonewall just like George W. Bush. Sorry to burst your bubble Ethel; Sarah Palin is just another cheap lying small-town politician trying to duck accountability for her lack of scruples. I look forward to Palin going back to Alaska after the elections are over and facing the music for her unethical conduct.By Change looking forward to it
October 14, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this
I think it would be great for this Country to have a bi-racial president. This Country needs a new look and feel. What a message to send to the world that we are a forwarding thinking Country. I think Obama will bring Unity to those who seek it. I see Biden being a great asset to his administration. McCain does not have Country first and if elected He is old not forward thinking and hot tempered his gal Palin has been caught in an ethical violation and now they are looking into how she built her home the same time a million dollar sports complex was built at the same time. Hmmm just what we need more me first corruption. I have had enough of the last 8 years and as Americans we need to cut our own gluttony and help re-tool this Country while keeping and eye on Washington. I have faith in the American people of all races.By karon
October 14, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this
I go by STATE votes NOT national polls!Obama is leading in the KEY states!By DCJET
October 14, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this
I took John McCain at his word in early 2008 when he vowed to be a straight-shooting presidential candidate who prized honor above winning. He urged Americans to judge his candidacies “by the examples we set, by the way we conduct our campaigns, by the way we personally practice politics”. When Republicans attacked John Kerry during the 2004 “Swiftboat” episode, McCain responded immediately, calling those ads “dishonest and dishonorable.” This was John McCain at his best. I regret to say we are now seeing John McCain at his worst. This Republican of over 40 years is sorely disappointed that McCain has yet to forcefully and proactively condemn his campaign organizers’ insinuating to voters that Barack Obama is a terrorist. I understand that McCain has failed to connect with many discerning voters. I get it that he sees his chances for winning the White House slipping away, but for McCain to abandon his avowed principles and embrace Karl Rove’s brand of scorched-earth politics appears to be an outright betrayal of the code he purports to live by. These cynical, desperate attacks are reminiscent of McCarthyism at its lowest. For shame, John, for shame.By voter
October 14, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this
Philman-What is it you want the media to report on McCain? His plan to tax health care benefits? His performance at the last debate that showed he is getting dementia? His hate-mongering campaigning? Anyone who wants to know more about McCain can go to his web site as I did and see that his policies are just a continuation of Bush’s. And the media is not “reporting” on these suppposed ties and bogus membership in the Socialist party because they aware of libel and slander laws in this country that have severe consequences for disbursing lies. Give it up, you fool!By Ethel S.
October 14, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this
From my view, I see John McCain is the only qualified person to lead this country because of his long record of successful landmark bipartisan legislation, experience with national security, and judgment. John McCain does not make a lot of empty promises and has an impressive tax plan to help bring our country into greatest again. His choice of Gov. Palin, who is also a reformer has added a marvelous energy to the ticket. John McCain has been on the forefront of both parties, for example, when he advanced the surge principle in Iraq and the energy independence/security issues. When Sen. Obama gets some major legislative achievements, then maybe he will be qualified in the future and get a reasonable tax plan. And Sen. Obama needs to unload his baggage before he would get the job so the American people will not get a November surprise.By BrarHopper
October 14, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this
Jeff, at first I thought your comment was silly. The answer, of course, being that people decide who win elections, not the polls. Then I remembered, Al Gore won the 2000 election by nearly 500,000 votes over Dumbya, and then Bush won the 2004 election with an assist to from corrupt election rigger and Republican Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell. So maybe you make a good point after all! Maybe it really doesn’t matter how we the people vote since the last two national elections were rigged by the crooked and corrupt corporate bagboys Bush/Cheney and their pals at Diebold.By Philman
October 14, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this
Is it any wonder the polls show Obama leading , if the media including the DDN did there job and reported MCcain would be leading big time. the media looked at everything put Gov. Palins last pap smear. who knows that may come out yet. but ignore everything negitive about Obama. his ties to Rev. Wright the WACKO preacher just go to utube and see for yourselve’s. they ignore his ties to William Ayers the Terroist. the communist party usa member Frank marshall davis, and even Obama’s membership to the Democratic socialist party . lets get real hear. do your homework the media will notBy Philman
October 14, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this
Is it any wonder the polls show Obama leading , if the media including the DDN did there job and reported MCcain would be leading big time. the media looked at everything put Gov. Palins last pap smear. who knows that may come out yet. but ignore everything negitive about Obama. his ties to Rev. Wright the WACKO preacher just go to utube and see for yourselve’s. they ignore his ties to William Ayers the Terroist. the communist party usa member Frank marshall davis, and even Obama’s membership to the Democratic socialist party . lets get real hear. do your homework the media will notBy Philman
October 14, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this
Is it any wonder the polls show Obama leading , if the media including the DDN did there job and reported MCcain would be leading big time. the media looked at everything put Gov. Palins last pap smear. who knows that may come out yet. but ignore everything negitive about Obama. his ties to Rev. Wright the WACKO preacher just go to utube and see for yourselve’s. they ignore his ties to William Ayers the Terroist. the communist party usa member Frank marshall davis, and even Obama’s membership to the Democratic socialist party . lets get real hear. do your homework the media will notBy William
October 14, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this
The only poll that matters is on November 4.By Dave
October 14, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this
Regardless of what any polls say, I believe the election will hinge on turnout. McCain’s core followers tend to be older and they always vote. Obama’s followers tend to be younger and don’t always vote. If Obama can get the turnout, he wins.By jeff
October 14, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this
IT’S JUST A POLL. IF WE WOULD BELIEVE POLLS WHY VOTE?By HuberTucky
October 14, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this
A most excellent observation and comment SMDC…couldn’t agree with you more. Thanks for detailing that. It’s sad that a once fine senator has allowed himself to be taken off the very course of his greatest strength(s) by a bunch of scumbag political toads like Karl Rove. I believe it’s his (and the republicans in general) negative and fear-based campaigning strategies that will backfire on them this year. Worked for Bush (although he still had to steal two elections to get what he wanted). People are sick of this negativity and fear crap. And McCain’s choice of Palin to pander to the religious (?) far Reich nut jobs showed very poor judgement and illuminated how pathetic his handlers truly are. This is NOT the same John McCain of 2000…this is a desperate man. Yep, as a team they are McFailin’By voter
October 14, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this
McCain’s policies demonstrate he will continue Bush strategies and his lack of understanding of the economic situation, his pick of Palin demonstrates his lack of judgement, his personal attacks demonstrate his lack of integrity, and his showing at the last debate demonstrates he is too old to be President.By SMDC
October 14, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this
I supported John McCain for President in 2000 but find it lamentable to see his 2008 campaign led by disciples of the discredited Karl Rove. When McCain entered this year’s race, I felt a thrill of hope. Surely he would run the moneychangers out of the Temple; surely he’d call out George Bush and Dick Cheney for their flagrant abuses of executive power. This is, by definition, what a maverick is, what a true leader does. He speaks truth to power; he cleans up the mess in his own house before tackling others. Regrettably, John McCain has done none of this. Instead of the warrior patriot he purports to be in his ads, all I see in McCain is a lost soul utterly beholden to the dictates of the lobbyists running his campaign. One of his chief strategists is the same despicable cur who led a smear campaign against McCain in 2000, accusing him of fathering an illegitimate child with a black woman in South Carolina. The John McCain I know would have run off that mongrel, would have publicly renounced a campaign as dishonorable as the one his lieutenants have waged against Barack Obama. As President, McCain would have no peers to temper his rash judgments or check the worst excesses of his mercurial nature. What ardent McCain supporters see as steely resolve, others fear as intractability, rank impulsiveness and contempt for good counsel. This nation simply cannot afford another chief executive who refuses to work with or honor the roles of Congress and the courts. George Will got it right; temperament matters when it comes to the Presidency. On that basis, Barack Obama is better-suited for the job than John McCain.