That Reagan Question
Looks like it's not the answer Republicans would want to hear:
Just as interesting (and probably with some correlation, who knows) is the general election match ups:
But Denver's still a while away.
Are you better off now than you were four years ago?
This has become a fundamental question in presidential elections. And for the first time since 1992, a plurality of voters heading into November’s election answer that question with a resounding no, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
Forty-three percent say that they and their families are worse off, compared with 34 percent who say they’re better off; 21 percent respond that their status is the same. By contrast, strong pluralities or majorities answered that they were better off before entering the general elections in 1996, 2000 and 2004 — when, with the exception of the extremely close 2000 race, the incumbent party held onto the presidency.
Just as interesting (and probably with some correlation, who knows) is the general election match ups:
Although Clinton is ahead in this poll, Obama is viewed among Democrats — by 48 percent to 38 percent — as the candidate having a better chance of defeating Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party’s presumptive presidential nominee.
But the poll shows that Clinton and Obama would run equally close contests against the Arizona Republican. In a hypothetical matchup, Obama leads McCain by three points, 47-44 percent, which is within the survey’s margin of error. Clinton, meanwhile, leads McCain by a similar margin, 47-45 percent.
But Denver's still a while away.
Comments