Obama Leads Clinton in Rasmussen Poll

[liberalpragmatist]

This may just be an outlier. Whatever it is, it's certainly interesting, though it is within the margin of error.

2008 Democratic Presidential Primary

National Poll: Obama 32% Clinton 30%
April 30, 2007

For the first time in the Election 2008 season, somebody other than New York Senator Hillary Clinton is on top in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows Illinois Senator Barack Obama with a statistically insignificant two point advantage over the former First Lady. It’s Obama 32% Clinton 30%. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards remains in third with support holding steady at 17%. No other candidate tops 3%. The survey was conducted April 23-26, 2007 meaning that the overwhelming majority of the interviews were completed before last Thursday’s debate in South Carolina. The impact of the debate will be measured in polling conducted this week.

Following a surprisingly strong fundraising report released at the end of March, Obama steadily gained ground during April. The last Rasmussen Reports poll released in March found Clinton enjoying a dozen-point lead. Since then, Clinton’s support has fallen seven percentage points while Obama’s total has increased the same amount. Obama now leads among voters under 40. Clinton is strongest among those 65 and older. Clinton has a two-point edge among Democrats. Obama has a nineteen-point lead among independents likely to vote in a Democratic primary.

Last week, the two top candidates were tied at 32%. Two weeks ago, Clinton had a two-point lead. Three weeks ago, it was Clinton by five. The week before that, the former First Lady was up by seven.

[jobycom]

1. So now I guess the smears will turn on him.

He can't win the general, he's too conservative, he's too liberal, he's only popular because of (fill in lame excuse), he'll say anything to get elected, his voice is annoying, why isn't he using his middle name, people don't trust him, people just don't like him...

Just getting people warmed up. The trends have been moving his way for some time now, so he has to be taken seriously now. Maybe the Hillary supporters can catch a breather and the Obama supporters will have to fight off trolls.

[Captain_Nemo]

8. I am surprised that his poll numbers are so high given his religiosity

From todays New York Times

"A Candidate, His Minister and the Search for Faith"

"His embrace of faith was a sharp change for a man whose family offered him something of a crash course in comparative religion but no belief to call his own. “He comes from a very secular, skeptical family,” said Jim Wallis, a Christian antipoverty activist and longtime friend of Mr. Obama. “His faith is really a personal and an adult choice. His is a conversion story.”

[Perky]

9. I am delighted by it. n/t

[Captain_Nemo]

12. Why? n/t

[Perky]

18. because it suggest that Obama has the ability

to take some small part of the white evangelical vote in the South. If he does that and creates enthusiasm among southern blacks.

He stand a substantial chance at winning the South Carolina primary and that would bode well for March 5.

Beyond that it may well mean that he does well enough in the south in November to force the GOP to defend its base.


Beyond that I like his religiosity because it rings true to his faith and it is not shrill or demeaning or threatening should he milk it for all it worth? Of course not. But religiosity should not be the sole provence of the right. And silence on the issue of how faith and politics might intersect has never served Dems well.

[Captain_Nemo]

20. I see your point but ultimately male dominated religion doesn't serve women and girls too well.

[Clark2008]

50. You really think he'll take any of the white evangelical vote?

No matter where they are (they're not all in the South - in fact, most are in the mid-West)?

:rofl:

Of course, I don't think ANY of our so-called front runners will take any part of this vote. Call me jaded.

[Perky]

51. Please to meet you jaded.

I absolutely do. particularly if we are still in Iraq and Guiliani is the nominee. White evangelicals are first of all not all conservative and the support for the GOP is not monolithid. As importantly, their voting is not merely a reflection of their religion tre are many more impacting factors.

Pershpas most importantly the fundy coalition is in tatters at many levels and are pissed off that they do not hav a single candidate they can get behind in the top tier.

[jobycom]

15. Nah, some of our favorite liberals are deeply religious. Carter, Gore, MLK, Jackson.

Kucinich was a lot more religious when he first started running, too.

I don't mind religiosity, as long as it is not used as a political ploy, or as a dividing tactic to claim superiority for one group or another.

[BuyingThyme]

17. Obama uses his religion to justify his oppression of gay people.

[jobycom]

21. Somehow I've missed that. Fill me in?

That could alter my opinions of him significantly.

[BuyingThyme]

29. Religion is the only reason I've ever seen him give

for denying homosexuals the right to marry.

I can't stand people like Obama. Cowards to the core.

[peacebaby3]

45. Marriage is a religious institution and should have no part of a government

that practices separation of church and state. Neither heterosexual or homosexual couples should be "married" in the eyes of the government. All couples should have a civil union in the eyes of the government and if they want to be "married", they do so in a church.

You can go ahead and add me to your "coward and can't stand list" because I fully support separation of church and state and in doing so I also have to allow the church to decide who it will and will not marry. There are churches such as the UCC who fully support gay rights as well. It's one of the reasons I became a member.

[BuyingThyme]

59. And this has something to do with Barack Obama?

[peacebaby3]

23. He's a member of the United Church of Christ. You should check out

their position on gay rights before you make statements that are completely wrong.

<http://www.ucc.org/>

Oh goodness...they even have all kinds of info about him on their homepage.

[BuyingThyme]

26. I'm talking about Obama. Your attempt to change the subject

has not only failed, but exposed your unwillingness to discuss the facts.

[Perky]

31. I agree the referenc to the UCC was not about Obama

SO back to you point??/What the evidence?

[BuyingThyme]

33. Evidence of what?

[Perky]

36. That Obama uses his religion to oppress Gays

[BuyingThyme]

38. Again, the only reason I've ever seen him give for denying

homosexuals the right to marry is in that it does fit his religious views.

And, by the way, Obama does not agree with "his" church:

...


In July 2005, the UCC General Synod overwhelmingly passed a resolution of marriage equality. But in August 2005, Obama's pastor and inspiration for the title of his recent memoir The Audacity of Hope, the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, spoke against the synod's position.

"While our denomination grappled with how to address the human problem, the denomination also at that synod voted to ordain a homosexual. Guess which item made the newspapers? Maybe I missed something!"

And in his closing tirades on same gender–loving issues, Wright stated: "Are 44 million Americans with no health care insurance less important than 'gay marriage'? Why aren't black Christians in an uproar about that? Maybe I am missing something!"

When the article came out in light of the United Church of Christ's stance on ordaining and marrying same-gender loving people, it was disheartening for many of us to know that Pastor Wright broke rank with his liberal denomination to stand in solidarity with a more conservative black church position.

So it is also not surprising that in March, when Obama appeared on CNN's Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, Obama stood where his pastor does on the issue.

...

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid44651.asp

[Perky]

43. SO you have taken the words of one blogger and formed your opinion

The writer sort of lost me when she said that The Audacity of Hope was a memoir.... No it was notm and she obviously had not read it.

Before you start saying thing like Obama uses religion to oppress Gays. I would ask you to read his positions.

[BuyingThyme]

46. Look, I've stated a fact and supported it.

I have never seen Obama defend his stance on denying marriage without citing his "religion."

Now if you can find some evidence to show that his hatred for gay people is derivative of something other than religion, post it here.

[Perky]

48. It is an outlansish statement from a third party

who clearly has not done much reading. Give me more information. yiu mad the accusation ....it is your urde to defend it.

Read his book. Read his website.

[BuyingThyme]

60. Are you saying that his book and his website say that

his decision to oppress gay people was influenced by something other than religion? If so, why don't you take a moment to tell us what you're talking about instead of speaking in generalities.

And if you need more information, why don't' you read the entire article I linked and follow up on the quotes and the references? It seems that you have a problem with the truth about Obama.

...

BLITZER: Should there be gay marriage? If you were president, would you push to allow gay marriage in the United States?

OBAMA: Well, I think that "marriage" has a religious connotation in this society, in our culture, that makes it very difficult to disentangle from the civil aspects of marriage. And as a consequence it's almost -- it would be extraordinarily difficult and distracting to try to build a consensus around marriage for gays and lesbians.

What we can do is form civil unions that provide all the civil rights that marriage entails to same sex couples. And that is something that I have consistently been in favor of. And I think that the vast majority of Americans don't want to see gay and lesbian couples discriminated against, when it comes to hospital visitations and so on.

...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/28/sitroom.02.html

[peacebaby3]

49. We are wasting out time, Perky. We have offered enough to debunk

the blatant attack and anyone who reads the thread will know who is offering facts and who is just spewing rhetoric. If the poster wants to disagree with the fact that he doesn't support gay marriage so be it, but to say that Obama uses his religion to oppress gay people was as bad as any right wing organization so I'm done.

Peace.

[BuyingThyme]

58. You offered fact? Where was that?

It seems that you're doing the exact opposite.

[peacebaby3]

64. This proves you don't bother to read anything provided.

Here is the link again from post #37:

<http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=3931>

It is an interview with Obama from February of 2004 about his work for gay rights and his sponsorship of a bill in the IL Senate for equal rights for gay and lesbian couples.

I would suggest that anyone who reads this thread check out his record regarding gay rights compared to the other candidates and our last two Democratic presidential candidates as well.

[peacebaby3]

41. The reference to the UCC is about Obama. If he is a member of a church

that has as part of their doctrine a complete acceptance of gay rights and this poster says that he is using his religion to oppress gay people, then it is absolutely relevant. It would be hard to use your own chosen church's doctrine to oppose gay rights when that church fully supports them.

[BuyingThyme]

Well if he was using his church's doctrine, he wouldn't be opposing gay rights.

In other words, you've proven yourself incorrect.

[BuyingThyme]

61. dupe

[peacebaby3]

37. So am I. He is a member of the UCC which openly supports gay rights.

He has been a member since 1988 so you are completely wrong in saying that he uses his religion to justify his oppression of gay people.

This article from back in February of 2004 really shows how much he believes in the oppression of gay rights when he proposed SB101 in the IL Senate in support of gay rights:

<http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=3931>

You should apologize for misleading people on this issue.

[BuyingThyme]

42. Read #38.

You should apologize for misleading people on the issue.

[cooolandrew]

68. Exactly highlighted in his 2004 "auacity of hope speech", video link...

link...

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1807013296

[Odin2005]

53. That is a bald-faced LIE! n/t

[BuyingThyme]

62. No, it's the truth. That's why you couldn't add to the conversation.

[Captain_Nemo]

19. As a feminist I really believe that the male dominated religions of the world have to come to a

close in order for true equality between the sexes. The use of words like "He" and "Him" for the portrayal of the almighty being only reinforces the inequality bwtween the sexes. It feeds the lack of self-esteem for women. It feeds into the violence against women in so many countries (including our own).

Oh, for a president that can really revolutionize the world and lead us to true equality. !

[Perky]

22. I think Hillary would disagree with you on that

That using "He" or "Him" reenforces such in equality.

[Captain_Nemo]

25. as a feminist I think she would agree with me - as a politician she is going to play the game

Which is disappointing for me. I think its going to take a major shift in our conciousness to stop violence against women and girls /boys. And, I do believe it needs to happen in the male dominated religion (among other places).
I don't believe it serves us.
So, as politicians continue to "pander" (for lack of a better word) it only continues the strengthen male dominated religiosity.
It is going to take a real independent thinker to initiate this change in conciousness.

[Perky]

28. Well perhaps

but you have to admit that electing a non-christian woman is not going to happen anytime soon.


I would also quibble with the notion that male dominated religion is an underlying cause of violence against woman.

[Captain_Nemo]

32. An non-christian woman can be elected if we think it can happen. Then we work towards it

If you think it can't happen than you create more roadblocks to it.

I think violence against women is not a "natural" result of being in the human species.
It is cultural.

Part of the sexist notions in our society come from embedded religious thought that portray women as weak, subservient.

A really great book on this is a "Beyond God the Father" written by Mary Daly in early 1970's.
Aslo, Andrea Dworkin's "Woman Hating"

[Perky]

39. "weak and subservient" does not necesarily translate

as violence against women... And as a practical matter only a very small portion (albeit very loud) of the religious community does not believe that women should not have equal right.

[Captain_Nemo]

44. I think language is indcredibly powerful. Look at the Civil Rights movement and the

women's liberation movement. Being called a "man" was incredibly important. And, then in the women's movement being called a "woman" and not a girl became important. This shift in language changed our view of ourselves in just 35-40 years.

That is why what we call ourselves as a group continues to shift and change. Because we are learning who the language reinforces how we think of ourselves and others.

I often imagine what it would be like if we used the word "She" as a word for the almighty being. It's a nice (and unusual) feeling.

How would women and girls see themselves? I think we would see ourselves as stronger.

I think it is a realiity for us in the future to have the imagine of an almighty being to be not male or female but just a force or conciousness. And, for that to happen we have to stop using He and God as names of spiritual power.

[jobycom]

24. As a feminist, I disagree, mostly.

Religion is what people make of it. Sexist people will use it to justify their sexism, decent people will use it to justify their decency. Take away religion (not that you could) and people will invent scientific explanations to justify it (ask Freud). Change society's preconceptions, and religion will follow. Religious folk act like religion guides them, but it's the other way around.

Not that I'd cry to see religion disappear. I just don't believe it really does anything to anyone. It's just a tool religious people use to win arguments, in their minds.

[Captain_Nemo]

30. Well , if you look at the research done in sexist language you see how it affects girls

people form images in their minds when they hear words. If all girls hear is "God is man" they see "God as a male." They has to carry over into their private lives (their sense of self.) Is it any wonder that self esteem and violence against women has been a problem in our society?

This is a great article about this topic. It is called :

'The Goldfish Might Be A She: Sexist Sexist language reinforces gender discrimination in insidious ways and limits the development of both boys and girls" By Carolyn Kernberger 1998

" Research shows that children form mental images of males when they hear or read he or man--even when they know intellectually that such words are meant to refer to both genders.

"This is sexist language. It socializes and reinforces gender discrimination in insidious ways and limits the development of potential among both boys and girls. The economic bottom line is that, according to the US Census Bureau's 1989 statistics, women earn only 68 cents to each $1.00 earned by men."

[jobycom]

56. I've looked at it.

I agree, and I'm careful about the gender specificity in what I say or write. I've lectured my daughters on it, too. But even there, language is reflecting culture, even as it reinforces stereotypes.

Getting rid of religion wouldn't get rid of patriarchy, but getting rid of patriarchy, I believe, would get rid of the dominance of males in religion. There are linguistic elements in Genesis, for instance, (I've been told, anyway--I don't read ancient Hebrew), that describe the God of Genesis in feminine terms. The devotion to Mary in the later Middle Ages often placed her in a position of power over Jesus, to the point where she was the one saint believed to be able to change his mind. There are precedents, in other words, for a divinity of both genders, as well as a divinity that is neither gender. What makes religion take the particular form it does is the culture around it.

I agree that Christianity as it is often taught today instills a sense of subordination in young girls. But so do love songs, movies, literature, art, politics, and every other male-dominated aspect of life. Religion is another symptom of the larger problem, IMHO.

[terisan]

47. The male image of God has always bothered me. It has no basis. It is artistic license.

The use of the male face and figure is fanciful. It was done by artists in certain cultures.

[cooolandrew]

67. Love it or hate it. His selling point is, his faith but at least a genuine faith by its true values.

[RufusTFirefly]

2. Statistically significant?

Sorry, but nothing is statistically significant at this point.

[Gold Metal Flake]

3. Another Hillary bashing thread!

"You post like a freeper. I thought Hillary bashing threads were no longer allowed." etc...

:sarcasm:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. LOL. The usual suspects will be here soon.

Allegedly "tough" Hillary seems to need a lot of protection.

[TahitiNut]

10. Chivalry isn't dead yet, it seems.

:evilgrin:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. One of the bold knights brandished the "Freeper" lance at me yesterday.

And, hoisted the "you hate powerful women" shield to ward off the evil detractors of the Queen.

[TahitiNut]

40. As I said many months ago ...

... the Hillary supporters will attack the others as sexist and the Obama supporters will attack the others as racist. The former will far, far outnumber the latter because it's easier to play the "sexist" card on DU.

[Bluebear]

6. :)

[jobycom]

16. So you bash Hillary supporters in a thread about Obama. Classy.

[TahitiNut]

35. You don't seem to be able tor read. It's NOT "a thread about Obama."

It's a thread about "Obama leads Clinton." See? Two names. Got it?

(Sheesh!) The vigilante attacks get tiresome.

[jobycom]

57. "The vigilante attacks get tiresome." THAT was my point. nt

[Gold Metal Flake]

52. Ah, well done!

An excellent impersonation of the type!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. I think this reflects more on the anti-Hillary sentiment than Obama's popularity.

Which is fine by me.

[Dawgs]

7. I think this reflects more on Obama's popularity than anti-Hillary sentiment.

Which is fine by me.

[Perky]

11. I agree

Hillary's problem is not that she is "Hillary", it is that she does not have the fire in her belly to excite anyone beyond her own base.

SHe is probaly the third, fourth or fifth choice of anyone who is not alreasy supporting her.


My perception is that Obama popularity makes him the second or third choice of those atrracted to otghers as their first choice.

[David Dunham]

14. Obama cannot win the general election. Guilaini would cream him.

[Perky]

27. I will book mark your post

and we can talk about it after the nominations.

I do not think Rudy will win the nod but even assuming he does not self implode. Rudy has no foreign policy background has a ton of personal baggage, and has less federal experience than Obama. and I am convinced that Obama could take away enough evangelical votes in the south to make the GOP to support its base at the expense of Missouri, Ohio and Virginia.

[Odin2005]

54. If we face Guiliani we'll lose no matter who we nominate.

:-(

[terisan]

55. Giuliani has many skeletons in closet, yet to make appearance. nt

[illinoisprogressive]

34. In response to two posts, one saying Obama cannot win in the general and

one on his religious and spiritual side.
1. obama does very well in general match ups. he is placing much higher than Hillary and has supporters who have come over from the indie and republican side.

2. I have known alot of African Americans and religion is very important to all of them. the fact that religion plays a large part in their lives doesn't translate the same as evangelicals in the white community. It actually plays a large role in the compassion and open to new ideas and acceptance of people in their lives. For a large part of the African American community, religion is very important but, is not an interfering or narrow minded or ridge theme much like say, the Bushies and the evangelical movement.
Religion actually played a very big role in the civil rights movement.

[AtomicKitten]

63. a snapshot in time in one particular poll

this will change about 1,000,000 times before the election

[cooolandrew]

65. Barack has dramatically risen in the last 2 weeks even with zogby who has been accurate for over...

... decade. Now we all have our favourites but by the looks of it Barack has a fighting chance a nice clean record and can beat establishment Clinton. His freshness is his winning trait, because those there long enough get tainted by the corruption system.

Barack statistically is a very viable candidate.

[cooolandrew]

66. Barack is appealing to left and right. Even to the most unlikely voters too.