California poll shows Obama beating McCain - Hillary and McCain within the MoE

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Obama, the Illinois senator who has inched close to his party's nomination, would defeat McCain by seven points if the election were held today. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, whose fortunes have faltered since her Feb. 5 drubbing of Obama in California, would eke out only a three-point victory, the poll found.

...

The margin of error is 3 percentage points.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-me...0,6353526.story

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ding Dong.

[no name 1]

The poll interviewed 705 registered voters.

California's population: est. 37,700,000

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

It's called sampling. Look it up.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's called sampling. Look it up.

In Hillaryland, where dev and metta are home, only those polls that have Hillary in the lead are valid. All other polls are quite obviously erroneous. In Hillaryland, they don't understand that there's a real world out there where Hillary is not the favorite. Neither with the Democrat crowd nor with the population as a whole. They don't venture into this cruel, real world much.

[Peikko 1,575]

How refreshing it is to see people tolerate the idea that someone might like a candidate more than the candidate they prefer, can accept that they have good reasons for their preference and don't resort to name calling and finger pointing because their preferences are different.

Edited May 25, 2008 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

How refreshing it is to see people tolerate the idea that someone might like a candidate more than the candidate they prefer, can accept that they have good reasons for their preference and don't resort to name calling and finger pointing because there preferences are different.

You may have missed it but it's just silly when someone was busy posting poll after poll that showed her candidate leading or gaining but then dismissing poll after poll that showed the opposite on nothing but the basis that the poll was using a population sample to come up with trends; which so happens to be how polls including the ones that someone posted are established. There's a difference between having a preference for a candidate and being in deep denial of where that candidate stands in the real world.

[Peikko 1,575]

I did miss that it is true.

I am not sure why Ms Clinton is carrying on but if it is within the rules of the game I don't see why she shouldn't either. I don't see her as this evil monster that the media has made her out to be either - dogged certainly but not evil.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I did miss that it is true.

I am not sure why Ms Clinton is carrying on but if it is within the rules of the game I don't see why she shouldn't either. I don't see her as this evil monster that the media has made her out to be either - dogged certainly but not evil.

That's not the point that was addressed. The point this thread raises is that McCain has caught up to her in CA while Obama appears to be leading McCain quite comfortably there. Now remember that one of the main arguments that Sen. Clinton has put forth for her staying put is that she won the big states in the primary contest and that she'd be more likely to be able to beat McCain in November carrying those states - CA being one of them. This poll shows that her argument isn't particularly sound. Dismissing the poll on the basis that it was established using a sampling in lieu of having a valid point to make in the debate is just silly. And it's worth pointing out just how silly that is.

[sj5 4]

we'll see whose winning. we have lots illegal immigrants here too..