Pollster John Zogby is out with new data that suggests John McCain's two-month honeymoon period is over, and he's shedding support to both his right and his left.
The new poll, which includes third-party candidates Bob Barr (who is seeking the Libertarian Party's nomination at their convention this weekend) and Ralph Nader, shows McCain at 37 percent support nationally, 10 points behind Barack Obama. Nader earns 4 percent support and Barr wins 3 percent.
Among self-described "very conservative" voters, Barr wins 10 percent, and wins 22 percent of those who say they are philosophical libertarians.
"As McCain continues to angle for moderate support on the campaign trail, Barr could create havoc for him among McCain’s political base," Zogby writes in his analysis.
In a match-up between McCain and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, she barely tops him, 41 percent to 40 percent, while Barr and Nader are static at 3 percent and 4 percent respectively.
But only a month ago McCain trailed Obama by just 3 percentage points in Zogby's poll, and beat Clinton by 10 points. That suggests that in the last month, as Obama appears to have sewn up the Democratic nomination, voters have turned their attention to the general election, and McCain is suffering for it.
— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times
Comments (3)
If the Nader Barrs split evenly, then they counter each other effect. Lets not forget in the beginning Clinton was the unequivocal candidate.
Posted by Larry Stone | May 21, 2008 12:12 PM
Clinton would not have won in 1992 if not for third-party candidate Perot taking away votes from George Bush senior, and same for George Bush junior in 2000 due to Ralph Nader in Florida. Thus far I would agree with Mr. Stone about Barr and Nader canceling each other out nationally, but perhaps not in individual states. When Hillary Clinton says that Bill Clinton "won" West Virginia in 1992, she is- as usual- distorting the truth. Clinton won in the electoral college but did not win a majority of the popular vote there due to Perot. Clinton actually won a majority of the popular vote in only about 10 states in 1992; the others he won with a plurality. If Obama regroups and Barr does well in West Virginia, Obama could conceivably win West Virginia in the electoral college even without a majority of the popular vote- just like Bill Clinton did in 1992. That's the effect that these third parties can have. This is really even more of an impact than Ralph Nader in 2000, because Gore actually won a majority of the popular vote nationwide and only lost out overall due to one state. For the 2008 contest, a strong showing by Barr in the South could tip the South to Obama even if he doesn't win a majority in any single state.
Posted by George Robertson | May 21, 2008 6:27 PM
Honestly, if there EVER was a modern US pres election that was suited to put a third party into real contention, this is IT. ONLY sucky bad candidates for dems and Repubs, all are like a fetus tied to the global business and the Israel lobby- this is the one time we need to martial all resources to break the De-publow-crat-icans.
You dont have to love Bob Barr in every way, shape, or form, personally, but this may be the one real chance to forever crush the freedom robbing two party monopoly.
Posted by James Madison | May 25, 2008 11:45 PM