It's very early, but both of the national tracking polls are showing results that are consistent with the notion of a "unity bounce" for Barack Obama.
Rasmussen:The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows what may be the beginning of a bounce for Barack Obama. Obama now attracts 45% of the vote while John McCain earns 40%. That five-point lead for Obama is up from a two-point advantage over the past couple of days. Before that, for much of last week, McCain had enjoyed a slight edge.
Gallup:The latest results include two nights of interviewing since Obama declared victory over Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night in the Democratic delegate contest. Although Wednesday night's interviewing showed no immediate bounce in national support for Obama versus McCain, Thursday night's results were quite favorable to Obama. It will be important to see if Obama can maintain this support over the coming days.
We don't know that this is triggered by Clinton-supporting Democrats coming back into the fold. It could just have easily be independent voters who are caught up in the excitement of the past couple days, or were turned off by John McCain's awful speech. Both of those phenomena are likely to be more transient than a true unity bounce. Naturally, it could also just be statistical noise.
But as someone who has been pitching the notion of a unity bounce for a long time, my expectation is that some of this is going to stick in the near-to-medium terms.
There's also a chance -- I wouldn't call it probable, but it's distinctly possible -- that Obama is going to gain several points over the next couple of weeks and essentially never give them back. When I saw Mitt Romney on Morning Joe the other day and he was really lowballing expectations for McCain (e.g. "it's amazing that we're tied"), I got the impression that this is something the Republicans stay up late worrying about.
6.06.2008
Some signs of a unity bounce
@ 3:50 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments
I'm curious how many Clinton supporters will come through on their threats to withhold support from their own nominee.
You're reading noise.
I agree with the conclusions, but not with the evidence.
p.s. I miss the logo with the Donkey and the Elephant and the question mark. Aside from that, the mainpage has to be the densest display of useful information this side of the library of congress.
If the rest of you find this site as useful as I do, you might consider making a contribution with the button on the lower left.
I think that there will be a unity bounce, but I don't think this is it. First of all, it will take a little more time to show up, no matter what, due to the fact that Hillary's supporters are still coming to terms with her loss. The whole "she must be VP" thing strikes me as pretty classic "bargaining" phase of grief, so we are still waiting for "acceptance".
I really don't think we will start to see any bounce effect until after the joint appearance and endorsement on Saturday.
I've give it two weeks. We'll known then.
Two Weeks! I want to know now!
:)
The democratic nominee ALWAYS starts off far ahead, usually by double digits. This is beacuse this is what the media wants. Some suggest that the media influenecs a 15 point advantage for the democratic nominee.
Carter-Reagan, Bush-Dukakis, Bush-Gore, Bush-Kerry, the democratic candidate always started off far ahead. And this one is a dead heat.
Another reason to be agnostic about the size or durability of any Unity Bounce at this time is that there could be a bounce-back if Clinton supporters are expecting the reward of a VP slot for her.
This is why I suggested a few days ago that Obama may need to settle on his VP choice quickly (by end of June) so that he can remove all doubt; and then, with the finality of the campaign at last settling in, perhaps there may be a slow recovery from grief by Clinton supporters.
"I got the impression that this is something the Republicans stay up late worrying about."
Yeah, it should be! Because it's something I stay up late laughing gleefully about! Oh, they are SO, SO VERY TOAST!!
Thanks for the statistical confirmation. Oh, and I agree with your prediction-- Obama picks up a few points in the coming two weeks and never gives them back.
Nate - did your time at the University of Chicago intersect with Obama's? Did you by any chance have the opportunity to take a course where he was the lecturer?
"
Thanks for the statistical confirmation. Oh, and I agree with your prediction-- Obama picks up a few points in the coming two weeks and never gives them back."
That´s in fact not his prediction.
He says he doesn´t know if the effect is temporary or permanent.
Nate,
Could you please provide us with a history post, abot the kind of suggestion raised by the McCain supporter?
You democrats aren't going to be able to stand the heat of McCains bottled hot water and dehydrated babies!! They're comin to get ya!!!!
Anon@13:47
I do remember that being sort of true, but both of them ran terrible campaigns, particularly Kerry, who probably had the worst idea for a convention ever ("Bush may be the worst president ever, but let's not mention his name!")
Let's also not forget that Gore actually won the 2000 election.
Question: Could someone explain the vertical aspect of the Electoral Vote Distribution chart at the right?
What is the x-axis?
Thanks from a fascinated non-statistician!
The real unity bounce will come when Clinton starts traveling around the country giving speeches and campaigning for Obama (which I sure hope is what she's planning).
OK, dumb question:
How are you defining a "must-win" state, as opposed to a "swing" state? I assume it's a close state that has more EVs than the margin of victory, but if I'm correct, how exactly would that be defined?
Just curious; love the new design!
anon@13:59
I assume you mean the y-axis (the x-axis is the # of electoral votes).
I'm not Nate, but if I understand it correctly, that's the number of computer simulations (out of 10k) that resulted in that number of electoral votes.
the number of computer simulations (out of 10k) that resulted in that number of electoral votes.
Ah! I get it now - thanks!
Answer to anonymous's question:
That chart maps the number of electoral votes Obama scores in the 10,000 simulations. The x-axis (horizontal) is the sum of electoral votes Obama wins in an simulation, and the y-axis (vertical) is the number of simulations in which Obama scored that many votes.
As we can see, the most commonly occuring scenario (the mode) is somewhere around 275 EVs, which makes sense, as the Kerry states + CO + IA + NM (which seems to be the most likely scenario as far as the pundits and the polls are concerned) is 273 EVs, and there are a multitude of similar scenarios (swap WI and MI for OH and VA, steal a few of NE electors but lose NH, etc.).
How do you calculate "identical map to 2000"? What win percentage do you assign in the Supreme Court? Do you just set that to R+11, as you used to with DC?
Thanks Robby!
God I love this site!
Sorry to belabor a weak joke, but I actually wonder what your 538 regression would say the percentage would be with the demographics of the Supreme Court. Years of education - Obama. Age - McCain. AA - about average.
I want more tracking polls with Barr/Root and Nader included. I really think the final mix number changes significantly when Bob Barr, who is a household name in republican circles, is included in the polling.
If this were the case, Obama would probably crest at 45% but McCain would have trouble getting over 38%, with Barr and Nader likely pulling in a similar amount.
Since both are running and both will be on the ballot, why aren't both in these polls? Everytime they run the poll with them, Obama's lead grows 3-5%
A nice item to add to the Scenario Analysis would be the "most likely scenario" -the particular combination of states won by each candidate that comes up more often in the simulations. Is it really Kerry + IA + NM + CO as Robby says? How does it change with time? How big is its percentage share compared to other scenarios -is it the most likely scenario by far or just, say, a 2% chance with many other scenarios getting 1.9% chances?
I'm definitely digging the 5% lead in the Rasmussen poll. Here's hoping that sticks - or even expands with Clinton's endorsement.
CNN just disclosed a new poll: Obama is up 49-46. I imagine this should get better over the next few days, as news of Obama's "clinch" and Clinton's endorsement start sinking in.
The posting and these comments are leaving out an element that I think is critical to the analysis. On Saturday, Clinton is going to hold an event in which she formally concedes and endorses Obama.
Here is the letter I received from her to that effect:
"On Saturday, I will extend my congratulations to Senator Obama and my support for his candidacy. This has been a long and hard-fought campaign, but as I have always said, my differences with Senator Obama are small compared to the differences we have with Senator McCain and the Republicans.
"I have said throughout the campaign that I would strongly support Senator Obama if he were the Democratic Party's nominee, and I intend to deliver on that promise.
"When I decided to run for president, I knew exactly why I was getting into this race: to work hard every day for the millions of Americans who need a voice in the White House.
"I made you -- and everyone who supported me -- a promise: to stand up for our shared values and to never back down. I'm going to keep that promise today, tomorrow, and for the rest of my life.
"I will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise.
"I know as I continue my lifelong work for a stronger America and a better world, I will turn to you for the support, the strength, and the commitment that you have shown me in the past 16 months. And I will always keep faith with the issues and causes that are important to you.
"In the past few days, you have shown that support once again with hundreds of thousands of messages to the campaign, and again, I am touched by your thoughtfulness and kindness."
All of us will be watching carefully for two things. First, whether she suspends her campaign or whether she gives her delegates to him. Second, for her level of passion and commitment on behalf of Obama. Even if she suspends, she could still speak convincingly on behalf of Obama.
I've given up trying to predict what Hillary Clinton will do. Some of her detractors went after her for the wording of that letter, which seemed to leave open the possibility for further conflict or hedging. The media will certainly be running over everything with a fine-toothed comb, because conflict is a story.
Still, I choose to be cautiously optimistic. I think Clinton will fully endorse him, even if it's within the context of a "suspension" of her campaign. She has plenty of practical reasons to get behind him in a major way, and I think she's going to do it.
Which brings me to my other point. People who are watching this as closely as we are have a way of overestimating the degree to which the general public is watching as closely as we are.
There is still enough time for her to get with the program. I think the "unity bounce" is still yet to come, and I think it's going to put Obama firmly in the lead. By the time this is done, I think 95% of those who'd have voted for her are going to vote for Obama, and I think she'll draw some Republicans who wouldn't have voted for Obama.
The reason it'll do that is because the Democratic Party is going to look like it has its shit together, and she's going to instrumental in cementing that image. Along those lines, bear in mind that the economy is starting to come apart at the seams, so whatever the Democrats can do to project stability, calm, order will attract votes from places that few would expect.
All kinds of things can go wrong, but I'd sure as hell rather be Barack Obama than be John McBush right now. That man is staring at the mother of all freight trains bearing down on him, and I think he and the Republican Party are very, very aware of it.
So, take heart folks. I think the best days are yet to come.
Your thoughts on the Allan Lichtman "13 Keys To The Presidency:
1. The incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives after the midterm election than after the preceding midterm election.
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination.
3.The incumbent party candidate is the current president.
4. There is no significant third-party or independent candidacy.
5. The economy is not in recession during the campaign.
6. Real (constant-dollar) per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth for the preceding two terms.
7. The administration has effected major policy changes during the term.
8. There has been no major social unrest during the term.
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
10. There has been no major military or foreign policy failure during the term.
11. There has been a major military or foreign policy success during the term.
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or is a national hero.
13. The challenger is not charismatic and is not a national hero.
If six or more of these statements are false, the incumbent party loses.
Also, Alan Abramowitz has a formula called the Election Barometer that is calculated by taking the Net Approval Rating + (5*Gross Domestic Product) - 25. Explanation of the formula can be found at http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/print.php?article=AIA2008052901.
Based on the above, November looks extremely positive for Obama.
There's a simpler formula. If unemployment rises in the second quarter of an election year, the incumbent party loses. If it falls, the incumbent party wins. If it stays the same, it's a close election. This has worked for the last 50 years.
I double checked, comparing the unemployment rate for June of an election year to that of March to determine whether it went up or down in Q2. Then I looked at that year's election results.
1948: UE Rate Down, Incumbent Won
1952: Up, Opposition
1956: Up, Incumbent
1960: Same, Opposition
1964: Down, Incumbent
1968: Same, Opposition
1972: Down, Incumbent
1976: Same, Opposition
1980: Up, Opposition
1984: Down, Incumbent
1988: Down, Incumbent
1992: Up, Opposition
1996: Down, Incumbent
2000: Same, Opposition
2004: Down, Incumbent
2008: Up (likely)
Notes:
The only exception to the rule saying that the incumbent party's fortunes depend on the direction of unemployment in 2Q of an election year was 1956, when Eisenhower won in spite of a rise in unemployment in Q2 of that year.
In the years where there was no change, the elections were very close. In fact, in two years (1960 and 2000) the close results were fraudulent, with JFK/LBJ stealing TX and IL in '60 and GWB stealing FL in '00.
Big changes in Q2 unemployment tended to produce big margins in that year's elections (1980, 1984 being good examples). 1964 was one of the biggest landslides ever, and the dimensions of the victory weren't foreshadowed by the 2Q unemployment rate.
This year, unless there's a snapback in June (which I very much doubt there will be), this indicator will point to a good year for the Democratic ticket. It'll be Obama's election to lose, and to judge by the quality of his primary campaign I don't think he's going to lose.
Seems all your Big Sky states are given to McCain. I have been plaring some with an Obama-Schweitzer ticket and assuming this could deliver numeroug Western states, not merely because of any help Schweitzer might give but because the campaign might consciously adopt a Western Strategy -- a less abrasive populism than Edwards' and more emphasis in what Schweitzer calls a restoration economy. How porous are your conclusions abot Big Sky and other Western states wou award to McCain?
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表
水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment