I've often been told that Missouri is a microcosm of the country. Reportedly Missouri has voted with the rest of the country in every presidential election except one. With that in mind, let's review a report in today's St. Louis Post Dispatch that says if the election were held today, any of the Democratic candidates would beat any of the Repubican candidates for President in Missouri.
Conducted last week, the survey of 800 likely Missouri voters showed them favoring the top Democrat, U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., over the top Republican, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Clinton also came out ahead in matchups with each of the three other highest-polling Republican contenders: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson and Arizona Sen. John McCain.
The two other leading Democrats — Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards — also outpolled all four top Republicans, but generally by smaller margins than Clinton.
Now first I want to ask you to take my word for it that these are not the kind of poll numbers that Missouri usually sees. In fact, even when Democrats win they are rarely ahead by much in polls. So this lead is remarkable. However, I think some of the underlying numbers are even more interesting.
Hillary Clinton (36%) leads Obama (21%) and Edwards (20%) in the Primary match-up (Missouri votes on February 5th). This lead, however, may not hold up. Some 48% of Missourians said that they disapprove of Hillary--a number matched only by Republican candidates.
Clinton's success in head-to-head matchups with Republicans came even though 48 percent of the poll participants said they had an unfavorable opinion of her. That was far greater than the disapproval ratings for Obama (31 percent) and Edwards (35 percent).
Only 47 percent of the poll participants gave Clinton a "favorable" rating.
"Just looking at her disapproval number, I'd say this candidate was someone who couldn't even get elected dogcatcher,'' said pollster Del Ali, head of Research 2000.
But Clinton gets a boost, Ali added, because "the Republicans are even more unpopular."
The disapproval ratings for the top four Republicans: 45 percent for McCain, 48 percent for Giuliani, 50 percent for Thompson and 52 percent for Romney. emphasis mine
Hillary absolutely kicks butt among women voters. In the Primary match-up, 45% of women voters selected her. That's her good news. Her bad news is that the poll shows only 25% of African-American voters supporting Obama. While blacks may comprise only 10% of the vote in the General Election, that percentage doubles in the Primary vote and I'll bet my house that by February 5th that if Obama hasn't screwed up he'll get 70-75% of the African-American vote.
But enough about the Democrats. Let's indulge in some schadenfreude, shall we? George Bush's (un)favorability rating is 37-61%. That compares to 42-55% one year ago and 55-39% in January 2004. The pollster asked "All in all, do you think going to war against Iraq was worth it, or not?"
A full 60% of Missouri voters say NO while only 35% still believe the war was 'worth it'. In January 2004, 57% of Missourians answered Yes, the war was worth it while only 34% said NO.
The really bad news for the Republicans can be found in the Right Direction/Wrong Direction question. One year out, I consider this to be the most important question. And Missourians are not happy with the status quo...by a margin of 67 to 29%, they believe our nation is headed in the Wrong Direction.
The tables with this data and more can be found right here.
If we do our work properly, we will elect a Democrat to the White House next year. Looking at the Right Direction/Wrong Direction question, we here in Missouri can seriously entertain the notion of beating our Republican governor Matt Blunt, maybe regaining control of the State Legislature and sending Kay Barnes to Congress instead of Graves. With enough work and enough resources, these are very real possibilities.