California poll results are in for the presidential race

Hillary Clinton may have scored a solid win over Barack Obama in California's presidential primary on Feb. 5 (as she frequently likes to remind folks these days), but a new L.A. Times/KTLA poll finds he would fare better than she in the battle with John McCain for the state in November (a result the Clinton camp won't be touting).

Obama led McCain in the poll, 47-40%; in a Clinton matchup with the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, she got 43%, he held steady at 40%.

One reason for pause for Democrats -- the margins for both of their candidates fall within the survey's error margin of plus-or-minus 4 percentage points (though in Obama's case, just barely).

Times reporter Cathleen Decker, in a detailed analysis of the poll, notes that McCain benefits from stronger support from Latinos in California than George W. Bush got in the 2000 and 2004 presidential campaigns.

But, as Decker also writes, McCain may be disappointed if he's looking for a boost to his prospects in California from Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The new poll, conducted Tuesday and Wednesday, found the GOP governor's approval rating among registered voters in the state has taken a big hit over just a few months. It stood at 60% in January; now it's at 43%.

Some background:

The last Republican to win the state in a White House race was George H.W. Bush in 1988; he defeated Michael Dukakis, 51%-48%.

Bill Clinton won it in 1992 with 46%; Bush got 33% and Ross Perot 21%. Clinton triumphed handily again in 1996, with 51% of the vote to Bob Dole's 38%.

In 2000, Al Gore beat George W. Bush, 53%-42%. And four years ago, John Kerry kept the state securely in the Democratic column, getting 54% of the vote to Bush's 44%.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[JoshA]

Remarkable. So apparently the comments from some Clinton supporters that they won't support Obama are not shared by the broader electorate.

Again, I hope McCain makes a try for California, both because I think he won't get it and because it would be nice to have the Presidential candidates pay some attention to our state rather than it always being Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. No offense to those 3, but enough already.

[Julie in Burbank]

Good deal - Obama's got my vote.

It's great to truly vote FOR a great leader and not just vote for the lesser of political evils for once.

He's very experienced -- though lies persist -- and no guy of color, white-and-black, mixed, AA, whatever, could get this far without being twice as smart and good as the next at Harvard, in the State Senate and US Senate. He's under too much scrutiny, will continue to be and doesn't mind being accountable.

No put John Edwards in that Attorney General seat and let's get my nation back on track!

[Benjamin]

Another reason for McCain to worry - He isn't Arnold. My high opinion of Arnold's job as governnor remains, but that isn't going to translate into a vote for McCain no matter what. With his whining about age and contriving comments most would not consider to be about age, to be about age, then turning around and taking a shot at Obama's age, well... Let's just say, I think McCain and Clinton have a lot more in common than either would care to publicaly admit.

We need a leader, not a victim. We need someone who can win on the merits of their case, not because we feel sorry for them because they see discrimination in every corner, while they turn a blind eye to their own.

Hey, since so many Hillary supporters are saying they will vote for McCain anyway, maybe he should tap her for his VP. Then they can call it the Victim Express and run on the Poor Little Victims platform.

[S. A.]

Not so fast now. I don't think Obama will win Ca in november. By then even more voters will know him better and see his many flaws and lack of good judgment. There are huge problems with and surrounding Obama's ability to lead this country and keep us safe. I'm praying that he dosen't win because he scares me.

[Vince]

S.A., people like you scare me.

To the writers, how is Obama's 7 point lead within the margin of error of 4 points?

[barackoblogger]

superdelegates, do your job and put a stop to Hillary's campaign.

I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A RED STATE!!!

[Dennis Berry]

As with most trends, California leads the nation.

Sometimes that's not so good, as in an alarming propensity to elect actors to high government office - though I must admit that the guvernator has done a better job than many thought he would.

But this time it's good.

If Barack Obama enjoys this kind of lead in California now - even before he's actually secured the nomination - John McCain's chances in November don't look good at all.

Actually, John McCain's chances in November look pretty bad everywhere.

That's bad news for McCain, but good news for our country.

It will be so refreshing to have a president with an actual working brain and functioning conscience - someone who actually cares about ALL Americans, not just those who warrant no one's concern: lobbyists for oil cartel nations, oil producers, and the military industrial complex Dwight Eisenhower warned us about more than fifty years ago.

Yes. We do need change. I, for one, welcome it. It's about time, folks. It's about us. ALL of us.

[Pilar]

Really? All my friends have said that they will simply not vote if Obama is the candidate. As for me, I will vote for Hillary anyway.

And yes, my friends and I are all Latinos.

[clemycali]

Vince you are right. And what the poll does not tell is what percentage of the voters said that are undeceded or decline to say how they'll vote. And its important becose some of those are agains Obama and the'll vote against him but don't want to tell that to the pollsters not wanting to be perceived as racists. California is still in play for McCain.

[Bob]

I don't know -- 7 points sure doesn't sound like a lot to me, especially with Hillary at 3. Gas at $4.10, Iraq, heavily Democratic state, everyone tired of Bush, foreclosures galore -- and this guy is *still* only 7 points ahead? Polls taken right now are relatively meaningless, but it sure seems CA will be competitive.

[jeffs]

Claiming that Obama is more electable in a general election than Hillary based on a California only poll, is ridiculous. This state is far more liberal than the average, even with the rural areas factored in. Hillary's ahead of Obama most everywhere else, from Penn to NY to Michigan to Florida (whose Cubans like her and aren't pro-illegal like in Calif.) and McCain would clean Obama's clock in all these states. Obama might have made gains in Calif pandering to the Hispanic vote, like promising licenses to illegals and no penalty for legalization, but these are hugely UNpopular votes everywhere else.

[blackbox]

A Democrat winning the Peoples Republic of California.
Gee, what a shock!
Yep, Obama, the empty-suit Democrat Presidential hopeful will win CA no problem..................

[John Galt]

What a ludicrous blog. As if the fact that California has enough liberals to vote for ANYONE against McCain is news to anyone except the readers of the LeftAngeles Times. It is downright hilarious that the Times thinks this worthy of printing in the top part of their homepage as if this “blog” contained solid news value. Conservatives are smart if they just give up the state and spend every dollar where it can do some good in defeating the left throughout the rest of the country.

[Diane McSwan]

I'm curious as to the people polled. Most articles about polls list how many people were polled, when they were polled, how they were polled, and other demographical info. This article gives none of that data. As we have seen recently, most media outlets are blatantly biased to the point where most Americans believe the media is just making stuff up anymore. This poll reeks.

[Hollywood Mark]

HA! This poll is brought to you by the same newspaper that endorsed Obama and more importantly said that he was within 5 points of Clinton in Penn. The poll was used by the LA Times to drive their news sory about Obama. And guess what? They are doing it again! Was the Penn primary poll accurate? Read the far more professional Real Clear Politics poll. It is more accurate and used by far more people in this business than the shakey LA Times poll.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/california.html.
It has Clinton winning California by almost 15 points over McCain. Obama just 13 points.

[mel]

Pilar, If you want more Latinos to die in an illegal and immoral war, vote McCain. If you want the economy to continue to plummet and more Latinos to lose homes in the corrupt mortgage crisis, vote McCain. If you want education to continue to suffer and for more and more Americans to be without health care because all American dollars are going to support a one trillion dollar illegal and immoral war, vote McCain. If you want the hate mongering to continue and Rovian politics of divisiveness which have landed thousands of immigrants in jail: vote McCain. If you loved NAFTA, you'll love McCain.

[Joe]

LA Times is wrong about everything, as usual.

[Page]

Hillary Rodham Clinton should be, and hopefully will be, the First Woman President.

Colin Powel should have been our First Black President.

When Obama called that reporter "sweetie," the reporter should have responded, "OK, ...boy."

Obama, his wife and his pastor can go straight to hell.

[David Marine]

The Times does not know how to interpret the data in its polls, sadly. The Times asserts that "a new L.A. Times/KTLA poll finds he would fare better than she in the battle with John McCain for the state in November". Actually, when the margin of error is factored in, Obama has no edge over Clinton. At any rate, California is not one of the states that Clinton is referencing when she talks about electoral math. The Times really should be more responsible about the claims that it makes regarding the results of its polling.

[Ron]

It's impossible to get an accurate poll for the general when one party has selected a nominee and the other is still going through the primary process.

Pollsters (not just the times) all need to exercise a bit of patients on this one,

[Sam]

I don't get why the people in America only think of themselves alone. Afterall, we are all human beings, and we should be in agreement that the Democrats have to win so that the great number of deaths - Iraqi or American- should be stopped. I say good luck to both of the Democratic nominees.