Thursday, July 31, 2008

Today's Polls (AM Edition), 7/31

Quinnipiac is out with polling this morning in the swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Barack Obama holds a lead in all three: he's ahead by 7 points in Pennsylvania, and 2 in each of Florida and Ohio. But also in all three states, his lead is diminished from last month, when Quinnipiac had shown him 4 points ahead in Florida, 6 in Ohio, and 12 in Pennsylvania.

The media is likely to focus on the near-term trendline -- one that shows movement toward John McCain within the last month. The last set of Quinnipiac polls were conducted near the peak of Obama's post-primary bounce, and there is no doubt that he has lost a little bit of ground since then.

We like looking at trendlines too. But focusing on only the last month risks failing to see the forest for the trees. Fundamentally, the news is that Obama is ahead in all three states -- two of which are states that Democrats have made a habit of losing. Moreover, if you compare his performance not just to the most recent number, but to all other instances of the Quinnipiac polls -- this is how our model looks at things -- the results are pretty decent for him:

Month      FL       OH       PA
Feb M+2 M+2 O+1
March M+9 O+1 O+4
April M+1 M+1 O+9
May M+4 M+4 O+6
June O+4 O+6 O+12
July O+2 O+2 O+7
This is a weaker performance for Obama than in June, but a better performance for him than in any month but June. Our model weights those two factors, and concludes that the status quo has more or less been preserved. As of last night, our model gave Barack Obama a 68.0 percent chance of winning the election in November. With these polls rolled in, he has a 67.7 percent chance.

There's nothing really dramatic here, in other words. And to the extent there's any news at all, it's that Florida and Ohio continue to move toward one another in the polling, which has a lot of implications for resource allocation going forward.

EDIT: Here's the other type of spin to watch out for. Quinnipiac's Peter Brown implies that the movement in the polls reflects a negative reaction to Barack Obama's overseas trip:
"The $64,000 question is whether Sen. John McCain's surge is a result of Sen. Obama's much-publicized Middle Eastern and European trip, or just a coincidence that it occurred while Sen. Obama was abroad," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"While Obama was on tour, trying to show voters he could handle world affairs, voters were home trying to fill their gas tanks," Brown added.
This might be a perfectly valid point of view -- if Quinnipiac had conducted polling 10-14 days ago, immediately before Barack Obama embarked on his trip to Europe and the Middle East. But it didn't; the last time the Quinnipiac polls were in the field was six weeks ago. In the period intervening mid-June and Obama's Iraq trip, a number of different things happened: Obama took a lot of criticism for flip-flopping, the McCain campaign began to champion offshore drilling as a wedge issue ... the campaigns really picked up their advertising spending. Our model sees some decline in Obama's numbers over this period. But it also thinks that the decline has halted -- and has possibly begun to reverse itself -- since that time.

289 comments

Hugues Fournier said...

Thank you Nate for this morning effort.

Just a suggestion (that some others have already made) : it would be really interesting if you could make available a csv file of the distribution.(and some other datas at your convenience, possibly).

joel said...

looks grim for McCain. I don`t see how he wins without Florida and Ohio. I think Pa. is out of reach, he ought to give up there and use resources elsewhere.
I still have my doubts Obama can take Florida but if he does it will be a 35 state landslide for him because if he wins Florida I would think he takes Missouri and possibly Va. and maybe Indiana.

Arnaud said...

The fact is than McCain can't win without OH or FL.

If he can't win OH or FL, it's the end for him.

Only PA is a must win for Obama and in every polls, he leads.

dwbh said...

Nate, I was wondering about the validity of taking all polls from this year into account instead of just last month and this month. Obviously, the big difference between the last two months and the months before is Clinton was still in the race. Does this skewer the results towards Obama unnecessarily?

W. Mayes said...

Nate, do you get any sleep at all? ;)

Thanks for the update!

It makes me quite nervous that McCain's state-by-state numbers are improving while the national lead is (in general) moving towards Obama.

This now takes your position that McCain stands a higher chance of losing the popular vote but winning the electoral vote and shoves it into the forefront of, hopefully, both of the campaign's minds. Maybe then will they allocate resources properly (McCain putting into Florida while Obama needs to win the air-war in OH and PA).

unertl said...

Regarding Florida: how can the polling average, regression, and snapshot all be at around M+1 but the projection to be M+2?

babagaia said...

Didn't small Obama leads in primary polls translate into landslides?

Alex S. said...

Good numbers for Obama.

Nice to see some kind of clarification on the state of the race in Ohio. It seems (just as we had guessed) that the truth there is somewhere between the -10 of Ras and the +8 of PPP. If you take the size of these two polls into account you get pretty close to the +2 of Quinn as the median.
The +2 in Florida looks very good. It´s just like Ras, that´s very assuring. I guess the model will soon turn Florida into a toss-up, once the May results drop out.
Pennsylvania looks slighty worse for Obama, ok, but still out of reach for McCain. And the differences between these and the previous Quinnipiac polls are the Flip-flop "story", Obama´s trip, and the regression of the unity-bounce to the mean. If Obama consistently wins every big battleground state (MI, OH, FL, VI, PA) by a few percent (1-5%), McCain has a lot to worry about. He will need a convincing national message, not state-focussed targetting.

babagaia said...

Plus, one must agree with nate for 1nce: a lead is a lead is a lead.

Andy said...

Obama can win this election without Ohio or Florida, because all he needs is Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado. But I still think he can win Ohio and Florida.

DU said...

The fact is than McCain can't win without OH or FL.

And as we just saw the other day, he's spent $0 in FL while Obama's been flooding the state.

So it's down to OH, but only for McCain. He has to win it, but Obama doesn't. That's not a great scenario for the GOP.

joshua said...

mccain has nothing to worry about in florida really,

for one there's lot's of older american's who favor mccain heavly

and also the cuba's however small of a lead the republican's have over there is still a lead. all in all florida will slide back to mccain.

ohio obama might have to worry about alittle more the last 2 out of 3 polls, has obama either really close to what he was or behind and now for them to be closer is pretty bad i'd figure for him.

PA, really no different mccain should push to hard here.

Arnaud said...

The pollsters has no idea what the Obama campaign will make between now and October for register voters and the turnout.

The grassroots will be historical and unprecedented.

read this story.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/31/obamas-phone-bank/

Bryan said...

for one there's lot's of older american's who favor mccain heavly

and also the cuba's however small of a lead the republican's have over there is still a lead. all in all florida will slide back to mccain.


McCain leads in 55+, 51-41, up eight points from last month-- but Obama leads among Hispanics, 56-36 (no trendlines). It doesn't break it down into Cubans and non-Cubans, but if it's any indication, both of the Diaz-Balarts are in danger of losing their seats.

(Friendly advice: Proper capitalization and punctuation is usually helpful if you want to get your argument across.)

The pollsters has no idea what the Obama campaign will make between now and October for register voters and the turnout.

Yeah, this sort of thing is probably going to confuse a lot of LV screens. But then again, it's hard to take it into account until after the fact.

micah7 said...

Obama runs better when he runs as an underdog. So in some respects, I think the Obama campaign is better off seeing the polls tighten. It's sort of a blessing in disguise to make their campaign more efficient in the long run and ward off against complacency.

Nick said...

Wally O'Dell and Ken Blackwell are no longer in charge of counting Ohio's votes, so maybe this is an invalid feeling, but I'd still be a lot more comfortable with predicting Ohio if I knew the vote tallying would be on the up-and-up.

RL said...

Love the statistical analysis, Nate - it's your strength and you're doing it better than anyone else.

If you will excuse my tinfoil-hattery: given the occasional disparities between a state's polling data / exit-polling data and its tabulated results (e.g. Ohio, 2004), I am worried that a statistical model is only good at predicting vote-casting and not vote-counting. I'm especially worried about states using paper-free electronic voting machines.

Is there a large enough sample space, over the first decade-or-so of electronic voting, to demonstrate any tendency of paper-free ballots to produce results that differ from exit polling?

Which states are using paper-free electronic ballots, anyway? And who controls vote certification in those states?

Thanks,
RL