Survey USA has had 8 state-level polls out so far this month measuring how the different Democratic candidates match up against the different Republicans in hypothetical match-ups. They covered Washington state, Oregon, Iowa, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia, Kentucky and Alabama.*
It's a good occasion to read today's tealeaves on the Democrats' chances in November; but also to take another look at who seems more electable at state-level: Hillary or Obama? And of course; how's the different Republicans' electability look at the moment?
Despite actual primaries now having been held and the media coverage of the race having escalated, the picture remains quite similar to last month, when I posted a more extensive overview of polls from different pollsters.
Obama does better than Hillary against the Republicans in blue states. But perhaps contrary to expectations, considering the spate of endorsements Obama's had from red state Democrats apparently shirking back from the prospect of dealing with the consequences downticket of having Hillary as nominee, Hillary actually does better in the red states.
Mind you, the four properly red states here are all in the South. Perhaps, as I speculated last month, race still plays a somewhat more pronounced role there. In as far as there's been polls for both Hillary and Obama for states in the West in the past couple of months, there was no similar relative advantage for Hillary.
The rather counterintuitive result of Obama doing better than Hillary in blue states and worse in red states is that Obama, the man of "no red states, no blue states, just the United States" fame, would seem to actually leave the US geographically more polarised than Hillary.
Let's look at the numbers by Republican opponent.
McCain has picked up significantly compared to December polls, in a swing of over 5 points on average. The result is that Hillary would lose a race against him across the board right now, while Obama would do roughly like Kerry in '04.
Obama matches up better than Hillary in the blue states, and especially well in Iowa (where the poll was held shortly after his win in the caucuses). But Hillary matches up noticeably better in the red states.
Against Romney, both Dems would win in a landslide right now. There's not a lot of pattern in the difference between how Romney does now and in December; he does better in some states, worse in others. It does seem like he's getting to do a little better in red states, and sliding back further in blue states.
Obama matches up (much) better than Hillary against Romney in the blue and purple states. But Hillary matches up better in the red states. And again, the redder the state, the worse Obama does in comparison to Hillary, culminating in the deep South (Alabama).
Both Dems would do well against Huckabee, if not quite getting the landslide they'd score against Romney. They'd both win the blue states plus Iowa and Virginia, and maybe Ohio. But both would lose in Missouri, Kentucky and Alabama.
Obama matches up better in the blue states and especially Iowa, which he'd take massively while Hillary would struggle. The background here is probably Huckabee's success in the Iowa caucuses, which was in turn trumped by Obama's. But Hillary matches up better in the Southern red states, where she would come close to taking Missouri, for example, where Obama would be clearly defeated.
Against Huckabee, the Dems do better than last month in the blue states, but worse in most red states. Makes you wonder, especially since the same was showing in Romney's numbers, whether people are sorting into their natural constituencies more now that the campaign is getting more media coverage?
Both Dems would run the table of swing states against Giuliani: Iowa, Ohio, Missouri and Virginia. But neither would win Kentucky, which makes Rudy rank between Huckabee and Romney. Again, the Dems do better than last month in blue states, but worse in most red states.
At the risk of becoming repetitive, Obama matches up better in the blue states and especially Iowa; but Hillary does better in the Southern states of Virginia, Kentucky and Alabama; the redder the state, the bigger the difference.
Comparing the Republicans
Of the Republicans, John McCain obviously matches up the best against both Hillary and Obama, while Romney obviously matches up the worst. Huckabee and Giuliani would both do worse than Bush in 04, but not suffer a landslide defeat. Comparing the strengths and weaknesses of those two candidates, Rudy does as well (or badly) as the Huckster in the blue states, but clearly worse in the purple and red states.
_______
*All polls by Survey USA:
Kentucky: 01/07
Ohio: 01/07
Iowa: 01/07
Washington: 01/14
Oregon: 01/14
Missouri: 01/14
Alabama: 01/18
Virginia: 01/18
