Our busiest polling day in several weeks:
Let's get the easy ones out of the way first. Kansas and New Jersey were two states that the campaigns talked early on about being competitive, but they have since retreated into their respective red and blue corners. Each of these polls have moved slightly toward Obama from their previous edition, but otherwise there's nothing to see here.
Wisconsin may have tightened some; McCain's 5-point deficit in the Strategic Vision poll is the closest he's been in any individual survey since April. Still, the race has consistently polled outside the margin of error, and Strategic Vision's polls are notoriously Republican-leaning -- their only prior poll of the state, taken at about the time of the Democratic primary in February, had Obama ahead by just one.
We're listing a different result from the Franklin & Marshall poll of Pennsylvania than some other outlets, using Obama's +8 among registered voters rather than his +5 among likely voters. A couple of weeks ago, in the brouhaha over the Gallup-USA Today poll that showed a huge likely/registered voter split, we established a policy of deferring to the registered voter version of a poll when given the choice, until the time of the first Presidential Debate on September 26, after which we will switch to the likely voter version. There is some evidence that likely voter models are more accurate near to the election -- but very little that they work this far out, and in fact there is some evidence to the contrary.
Of course, it is relatively unusual for a pollster to list both registered voter and likely voter numbers -- most just pick one or the other. But when in doubt, we're going to defer to allowing voters to speak for themselves -- which means using the registered voter version until there is a good empirical argument not to.
That notwithstanding, the difference between a +5 and a +8 hardly matters, considering that Pennsylvania has been polled extensively, and not really shown any daylight for John McCain in a couple of months now.
Nevada has been one of the most vexing states to us poll junkies, with only Rasmussen surveying the state on a regular basis. Their latest result has McCain up by 3 -- a reversal from last month, when Obama had pulled into a 2-point lead. As I said last month, I think these numbers may be lowballing Obama somewhat, considering that the Democrats have made significant gains in party registration, something which might be hard to detect in a poll (like Rasmussen's) that weights based on party ID.
Lastly, two polls out of Virginia show the race essentially tied: McCain leads by one point in the Rasmussen poll, the same margin he held last month, and by a fraction of a point in the first InsiderAdvantage survey of the state. The last six Virginia polls have all been in a tightly-banded range between McCain +1 and Obama +2, and it looks like the state may come down to turnout operations.
8.13.2008
Today's Polls, 8/13
by Nate Silver @ 8:03 PM...see also kansas, likely voters, nevada, new jersey, pennsylvania, today's polls, virginia, wisconsin
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

93 comments
Nate, any chance that we can have the graph of Win Percentage back? That's the key number on this site and it would be nice to see how it changed over time. Thanks!
Essentially these are status quo results. I expect WI to tighten up a little bit and McCain to have a slight advantage in NV given its proximity to AZ similar to the extra boost that Obama gets with IA.
It is going to come down to the Rust Belt states since if McCain is polling even or a little ahead in VA when down 4 or 5 points in the national polls, if the race tightens up, VA will slide out of play.
I kept ref reshing the page waiting for this lol. VA is the ONE state that I have no doubt will go down to the wire and will end up being GOTV vs GOTV. The other states can be leaned one way or the other (relatively speaking) but that state is totally unpredictable.
NJ Moderate,
As a PA resident, I was curious about your assertion that Obama is underperforming Kerry in the state. So, to check your assertion, I found an October '04 F&M for comparison. So here it is.
Region Obama / Kerry / UND. Diff
Phila. 82 / 73 / -1
NE 35 / 48 / -11
Alleg. 50 / 56 / -10
SW 50 / 49 / -11
NW 30 / 43 / -5
Cent. 40 / 38 / -10
SE 45 / 56 / -7
K/B 49/44
So yeah, right now, pre-convention, Obama is underperforming Kerry slightly. Not by 20%, though, in any region; and don't forget where the people are. Hint: it's that place where Obama is significantly outperforming Kerry '04.
Just note that the crosstabs on that InsiderAdvantage VA poll are pretty horrendous: Obama loses 18-29 yearolds by ten points, and only pulls in 57% of the black vote? Not that we expect InsiderAdvantage to be too accurate, but if Obama can pull the kind of numbers they're giving him among whites, he'll win Virginia in a walk.
Nathaniel,
I very much agree with you. I live and work in Northern Virginia (I moved from Michigan a year ago), at least once a week since early June I have been stopped to and from my commute to work to see if I am a registered voter ... by people wearing Obama swag.
The Obama hype here is amazing, I live down the street from the Virginia headquarters as well. I hope this translates into a high Obama turn out - I am sure they are targeting the black voters in the state just as much as they are targeting the affluent white votes in Northern Virginia.
The polling in Virginia is very much what it looked like in Webb/Allen. With Webb eventually winning, obviously. Hope that can translate into an Obama win.
MAJOR VIRGINIA NAILBITER
Assuming identical turnout of all voters and identical non-white vote pattern...
Obama needs 37.6% of the white vote to win.
Obama loses with 37.5% of the white vote
Source: My math
THIS IS WHY THE POLLS ARE SO CLOSE:
Insider Advantage has Obama at 40% of the white voter, Rasmussen at 37%
FYI - That "significant gains in party registration" link is missing.
This race is very static. Should be interesting to see what it looks like this time next month, after the dust from the conventions and VP selections has settled.
Awaiting the usual ballyhooing from conservatives who are going to whine that Nate is biased for using the registered-voter numbers out of Pennsylvania and saying that Obama might be underpolled in Wisconsin and Nevada.
yiannis we can't use that data because..........well............ the turnout will totally shatter last election, especially because people are actually paying attention to the state.
Great work. I stop by often and am always impressed.
Some very smart and insightful comments as well.
Thanks!
The primary "underperforming" that's going on in this election is John McCain. Where Bush consistently polled in the 45-47% range, on average, all year in 2004 in swing states, McCain polled all summer in the 40-42% range, on average. In an electoral system where +/- 3% in national polling gives rise to +/- 350+ EV landslides, that's a huge ground that needs to be made up. If you want to see the difference, go to electoral-vote.com and click on states like IA, PA, WI, MN, MI, OH, VA. McCain is generally polling 3-5% less than Bush across the board.
I'd like to see more NV polls, too. We're a hard state to poll, with a variety of differing demographics.
Clark County always goes Dem, but Obama did exceptionally well in mobilizing voters in the other counties during the caucuses, so if he can perform well enough there and pull more voters than Kerry did in the other counties he'll carry the state.
The comment about Rasmussen weighting by voter ID reminded me of a question I had regarding cell-phone only voters. As most "CPO's" will be Democratic and Obama voters, most analysts believe this will result in a small but real undercounting of the vote for Obama. Since Rasmussen weights by party, isn't he undercounting this support twice? Once when he fails to reach CPO's (and thereby underweights the percentage of democrats) and again when he fails to get their voting preferences? Anyone have any thoughts?
Maxon-Dixon is a good pollster from the West states.
I´d like to see more NV polls from this pollster.
PA, NJ and WI goes to blue.
KS is red. In the Rasmussen poll in VA Obama wins 44-43 without leaners and McCain wins 48-47 with leaners.
The real poll is without leaners, leaners are undecided.
More evidence:
State Bush04 McCain08
ND ~58 ~44
MT ~57 ~45
CO ~47 ~44
NM ~45 ~43
OR ~44 ~41
NC ~48 ~44
Rasmussen Markets data currently gives the GOP a 47.5% chance of carrying VA this year. The dem chance of carrying VA is 50%.
We should read all the article, not only the poll number. The poll is about only 700 people.
Markets and proyections are more important than the poll.
Interesting that Virginia is the closest state in this race at the moment because it's difficult to envisage John McCain winning the election without it, whereas the same is not true for Obama.
As I've said before, I find it difficult to believe that only 57% of black Virginia voters are supporting Obama. Surely more like 90%.
Nate is very dismissive of what appears to be a close result in PA, relying on the RV nos to make his point. I think the poll has oversampled Democrats at 50% while undersampling Inds at 10%, so who knows what is really going on.
Nate is equally dismissive of Strategic Vision's WI poll which shows a surprisingly tight race. If you look at the questions that precede the horserace query you so a portrait of a very left leaning, anti-Bush electorate, who nonetheless only narrowly gives the nod to Obama.
VA sure does look like it is going to be a nail biter, but looking how the leaners broke to McCain, I am fairly confident that there is latent support for him in the Old Dominion, waiting for an excuse to go public.
NV is a happy surprise for McCain, with the vectors moving in the right direction and indicating that Obama is by no means running away with the West. CO will be worth watching. Obama's strategy for victory w/o OH pretty much requires he wins NV and CO (NM and IA too), unless he can begin to pull some leads out there he will be forced to bet it all on OH.
In 2004 FL and OH were both considered battlegrounds and Bush won FL in a walk and OH with a comfortable margin.
I suspect that OH will be this years FL and McCain will win it handily, as Bush won FL in 2004.
FL is now apparently out of reach for Obama. He has spent millions on TV against ZERO for McCain and has nothing to show for it.
This tells me that Obama most likelyt has a low ceiling in some states and that no matter what he does he can't raise it. We saw this in the primaries where in OH, TX, PA, WV, and KY he outspent Clinton by three or four to one and wound up with nothing to show for it.
It's always better to be ahead, but as they say the only poll that counts is the one on Election Day.
Wow - this could tip a close election:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Ohio_voting_law_may_be_boon_0813.html
We've been bantering back and forth about the impact of the youth demographic - sure, they favor Obama, but they never actually drag their flaky tatooed butts to the polls when push comes to shove, right?
The linked article implies that Ohio will allow "instant voting" in the last month before the election - register and vote at the same time. Think what Obama's thousands of foot soldiers could do in every college town! Find an Obama-friendly youth and bank his or her vote the same day.
If O wins OH it's Over.
Uh...if that Ohio law gets passed, the election is over. Plain and simple. The college and youth votes would SKYROCKET. It'd basically be Kent State's long-overdue revenge.
PeteKent, no offense, buddy, but I'm going to take Nate's mathematically supported analysis over yours every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The fact is simply that Johnny Mac hasn't made significant inroads into those "battleground states" like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Colorado, and Michigan he's been trying to pick up. You can argue that he has, that those voters will suddenly break for him in the next couple months, but I could argue just as easily that a surge of Texan liberals will flip the Lone Star State to Obama just as easily. And that'd be the silliest argument this side of the Mississippi River.
Dear Pete,
Bush won Ohio in 2004 with a comfortable margin?
120.000 votes are not a comfortable margin.
Did you heard about the controverses about the election in Ohio in 2004?. Let´s see in google "Ohio Fraud" and tell me.
obsessed...
Sorry, but 'Pete' has already informed us above [again] that McCain is a sure thing in OH & FL - because Pete says he knows how it will go...
so why bother trying to fight such insightful logic ?
your point is well taken though now that the GOP does not have their finger on all the keys to suppress OH turnout & rig the vote as in '04 [when Pete claims Bush won comfortably...]
Of course the other side is that McCain can get Pete to vote early in case his overconfidence gets the better of him and he stays home on election day.
Sorry, i want to see did you hear.
Peter Kent I have a serious question. If Obama trounces McCain by wat, 70 80 electoral votes what will be your explanation?
Pete said: "FL is now apparently out of reach for Obama."
He leads, albeit by only 2%, in the latest from Rasmussen and Quinnipiac. I don't know if I'd call that out of reach given the amount of time left for his ground troops in a state where he didn't campaign in the primaries. I agree that FL is more likely to go to McCain but I certainly wouldn't call it "out of reach".
Obsessed,
Please don't post a comment with a link to actual information that might be relevant in the election. Such content-laden entries really detract from Pete Kent's rambling, utterly content-free posts about how every result is good for McCain and how it is clear that he will win in November.
Seriously, though, there seem to be so many of these intangible factors that might move in Obama's favor: massive GOTV and new voter registration efforts, very enthusiastic supporters and volunteers, a strong anti-Bush sentiment and desire for change, and better machinery support in key states (especially OH). McCain intangibles are: he's a well known national politician with a reputation for bipartisan work and he isn't black (if the Bradley effect is still an issue, though recent evidence suggests that it is not). If polls in OH, VA, NV, CO, and NH stay close, I would be very worried if I were working for the McCain campaign.
Mark,
As I read the article, the same-day registration & early voting isn't pending, it's law. Elections officials are working on implementation, but passage is not pending, it's over. The only question is whether GOP lawyers can successfully challenge it in court.
I think Obama needs to run a 3 am ad on McCain. Show how uncertain he is...he has changed so much, going from GOP maverick to evangelical ass-kisser, pledged an honest campaign has rolled into the gutter.
Obama is the one who is calm, cool, smart (Got into a prestigious school without family connections, didn't graduate last in his class) and has stayed on message for the last 18 months under intense scrutiny...Also, the question that really needs to be asked is, how is a 20 year Senate veteran with a decorated military history losing to a first term senator during a time of war? I think I answered my own question.
Assuming identical turnout of all voters and identical non-white vote pattern...
Obama needs 37.6% of the white vote to win
Obama loses with 37.5% of the white vote
Source: My math
THIS IS WHY THE POLLS ARE SO CLOSE:
Insider Advantage has Obama at 40% of the white voter, Rasmussen at 37%
FYI: Kerry got 32% of the white vote in VA
musicman
I would agree that Obama should attack McCain's alleged strengths. Question his temperment & show his knee-jerk anger management issues.
Just play clips of McCain singing "bomb, bomb Iran..." and his numerous other diplomatic gaffes...
Obama's female & anti-war shares will grow even more...
But wait until October to push the negatives... stay positive unless he actually loses the lead in projected EV [ignore the national polls]
Ohio is not a state that will warm to Obama. His cool professorial elitism does not resonate with voters there. McCain will inherit much of the rural downscale coalition that rejected Obama overwhelmingly in the primary and will perform well with the Republican base. He will win in a walk. OH is this year's FL, my friends, it is FL.
Look at MI, WI, PA and in each you see significant polling declines for Obama. WI is the most dramatic today -- the former double digit lead has now slipped to the low single digits.
I am not sure if Obama is Dewey or Stevenson or Dukakis. I suspect, in fact, he is Obama: another liberal elitist who will go down to defeat.
Seriously, what is up with the "Pew" headlines?
Is it out of line or just new data? Are their numbers worth a darn?
Pete,
again you try to compare apples [red] & blueberries...
exactly what polls show significant declines for Obama in the blue states ?
Nate had called it correctly as a regression toward the mean as also supported by historical electoral data.
Just because you call it significant does not amke it so...
"With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another."
~ Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742 - 1799)
Hmm...should be interesting to see if the MSM picks up on that Ohio voting law story. Unless the GOP can swat it down sometime in the next two and a half months, I'm thinking Ohio's a lock for Obama as long as his people are aggressive at U of Ohio, Ohio U., Kent State, and the bajillion other colleges in the Buckeye State. But then again, maybe not...
And McCain is a liberal republican.
PeteKent is a troll-parody of a Republican, right?
DCM:
Take a look at the WI polls on the right, eg.
Do you all really think that college kids are as monothlic and left leaning as you suggest? A bunch of lemmings that will march trance like to a voting office and vote for Obama, b/c some other kid or community organizer is leading them? You are very naive.
One thing history does supprt ios that old folks vote. And the polls suggest they will vote McCain. I think they will come out in force to protest the ageism that has infected the Obama strategy.
Pete Kent:
That elitism is a Karl Rove/Mark Penn caricature(Rove said that obama is that guy you would see at a country club, with all the girls). Once Obama shows people that the real elitist is McCain, I think he will be fine. See Rove is smart...he knows it's not true, but he knows it's the best way to beat Obama.
Why McCain is the elitist and not Obama:
1. Obama had to work for everything in his life...didn't have rich connections. Father didn't get him into Columbia or Harvard, didn't marry a rich gal to launch a senate career.
2. Obama doesn't have 8 lavish homes throughout the US.
3. Obama has a strong pro union voting record.
4. Obama could have gone into a lucrative law practice out of law school, and choose more of a public service roll.
5. Do elitists want to tax rich people? McCain is tied to some of the richest lobbyists in Ohio, and the whole US. Once the American people get a whiff of this, Obama should be fine.
I live in CHicago, and when the Democratic Machine tried to paint Obama like this in 2004, he crushed his whole competition, including the machine backed Dan Hynes. He also won many of the rural votes in southern and central IL with a populist message. I think Ohio will warm to this.
PETE,
try some FACTS in an argument...
first, it is inherently biased to try to compare polls produced by different outfits in comparing relative positions.
those who know, watch the TRENDS [including Nate] and compare internals.
You claim WI is performing bad for Obama. Try the trends on Rasmussen who has been polling there monthly.
5/5 McCain +2 @ 47%
6/5 Obama +2 @ 45%
7/8 Obama +10 @ 52%
8/5 Obama +7 @ 51%
now, please explain to us ignorant types - how does this real trend suggest bad news for Obama ???
he is polling OVER 50% and is well above the MOE.
looks just fine to me...
I love the "elitist" charge.
What the accuser is saying, essentially, is that this man thinks he's Better than us! How dare he! It's not like he's running to be the most powerful man in the world or anything!
Pete, You say:
One thing history does supprt ios that old folks vote. And the polls suggest they will vote McCain. I think they will come out in force to protest the ageism that has infected the Obama strategy.
Once Obama starts talking about Social Security, health insurance, which by then, McCain will have his lips around the asses of Pfizer and other drug compaines...I think Obama will be fine with the seniors.
PETE -
man you PROVED how little you know about real statistical analysis with that stoopid post above @ 8:50PM.
plus your commentary is insipid. You are not a troll - you are a parrot !
you showed you know not what you say but only spit about your pre-programed talking points.
try actual rational logic not your personal version of neo-reality...
We are all waiting for this Obama you talk about to appear.
Music man's five reasons why Obama is not an eltist prove nothing:
Why McCain is the elitist and not Obama:
1. Obama had to work for everything in his life...
What does this have to do with elitism? Elitist are made, not born
2. Obama doesn't have 8 lavish homes throughout the US.
No just a giant mansion in Chicago paid for by his corrupt crony Tony Rezko. And since when does having things make someone elitist?
3. Obama has a strong pro union voting record.
So? He is a cryto-socialist; I would expect nothing less of him!
4. Obama could have gone into a lucrative law practice out of law school, and choose more of a public service roll.
Yes, he had his wife work for a living! She has always had a Wall Street career. Obama is essentially lazy and could not have hacked the corporate life.
5. Do elitists want to tax rich people?
What does that have to do with it? Elitist live in universites and want to turn this country into Sweden!
Once the American people get a whiff of this, Obama should be fine.
When is the stench gonna rise?
Some good results for John McCain.
Pew has it as a draw as of today and that is far better than anyone in the GOP truly hoped for in mid-August.
Conventional Wisdom is that Virginia will be won and lost depending on the ground efforts of both campaigns if the state remains this close. If this comes to pass then Virginia will go to Obama.
The Obama campaign IS a ground operation. Its wgat they do. It's how he beet a tremendously strong Hillary Clinton that he had no business beating. Make no mistake, he will beat McCain if it comes down to a ground war in Virginia on election day.
Matt JH:
More overconfidence from y'all. GOTV is a 72 hour effort -- it is a sprint and not a marathon. The Republicans invented it. Obama and the Dems are Johnny come latelys. Mrs. Clinton ran a horrendous campaign; don't be so dumb as to think McCain will fall victim to the same thing.
Nevada will go for McCain this fall for the same reason that Wisconsin will go for Obama.
VA is a mirage, as it is a R+2% or R+3% based on the national polls (McCain is doing 2 or 3 points better in Virginia vs. the national race).
Incidentally, WI and IA are shaping up as D+3% and D+2% states so they are the converse of Virginia.
The three states that are tracking the national polls within 1% are CO, MI and NH. VA comes into play only if Obama is leading by 1-2% in the national polls. If he is up 3%+, he wins and if he is tied or behind, he loses.
Please do not feed the trolls.
Pete, I like how you cut off some of the points I made to fit your argument.
My dad worked on the south side of Chicago with Michelle Obama's dad in a water purification plant, she was far from a Wall Street gal.
The Rezko affair was sifted through by everyone already, they found no improprities, the house isn't worth nearly as much as the McCain estate...and if you want to go into shady business dealings, can I say, S and L?
BTW...did you hear the news about same day registration in OH and recent efforts to expand absentee voting? I know you and the GOP don't like this idea to expand democracy and the GOP crooks in OH (Blackwell, Nay, Taft, etc) are complaining about it.
Some harsh comments for a poster who dares to differ from Nate's opinion:
Such content-laden entries really detract from Pete Kent's rambling, utterly content-free posts about how every result is good for McCain and how it is clear that he will win in November.
PeteKent, no offense, buddy, but I'm going to take Nate's mathematically supported analysis over yours every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
How is Nate's Obama-centric spin on these polls any better than Pete Kent's?
Nate on Wisconsin: Strategic Vision's polls are notoriously Republican-leaning... (a weakly supported accusation doesn't change the fact that they are corroborated by the two most recent Wisconsin polls)
Nate on PA: We're listing a different result from the Franklin & Marshall poll of Pennsylvania than some other outlets... (Nate thinks he's right on LV models and these other outlets are wrong - but at least he acknowledges there's no objective way to know right now)
Nate on Nevada: I think these numbers may be lowballing Obama somewhat... (even though Rasmussen's weighting is based on self-identification, not registration, and updates each month)
Nate does very solid analysis in many posts, but this one is mostly opinion and conjecture. Yet no one would begrudge Nate his opinions and theories. The same respect should be extended to Pete Kent and everyone else here. So Nate finds the positive for Obama in every poll and Pete Kent finds the positive for McCain. Balance is a good thing. The Obama drum-beaters whacking Pete Kent should step back and take a breath. You make it look like you can't tolerate other opinions.
Wait, Obama wants to turn the US into Sweden?
http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/quality_of_life.pdf
Hell, sign me up!
Musicman:
Nothing wrong with same day voting and all that as long we kinow the people have the right to vote.
Michelle Obama worries how families can afford dance and piano lessons and works out with a professional trainer. She is far removed from her roots.
Nice try on the Rezko busn.
New book bashing Obama to debut at No. 1 on the NYTs Best Seller List. Same author who Swift Boated Kerry.
McCain will inherit much of the rural downscale coalition that rejected Obama overwhelmingly in the primary and will perform well with the Republican base.
About 25% of Ohio's population is rural. Also, simply because Democrats in a state may have favoured one candidate, it does not preclude them voting for another. If that were the case, no Democrat would ever win anywhere on any level of government because the people who favoured the losing candidate in the primary would not vote for the eventual nominee.
It is a continuous impertinence that we routinely see the prospects for a state engineered out of rural area polling data. Obama may not get 25% of Ohio's vote, so therefore he will lose - does that sound reasonable? I constantly hear analysts point to red rural districts in Minnesota that contain single digits of the state's electorate, and they never fail to derive evidence of state-wide GOP influence from that.
Not a single poll shows Obama behind in PA. No poll has shown McCain ahead in MI since May, and that was SUSA.
And the inane argument that Obama is not winning by "enough" means that McCain wins is so very tired. There has not been one poll in the last two months showing McCain ahead in Wisconsin. If a future poll comes out with McCain showing a lead in Wisconsin, you may have grounds to be smug; as it is, you are simply engaging in wishful thinking.
You are, of course, entitled to an opinion. The rest of us are entitled to reject your opinion as little more than smug assertion.
Darren:
These Obama supporters are a bunch of Stalinists: they tolerate no deviation from the party line!
Survey USA just released a poll showing Obama lost 9 points in WA the last month, with a current 7-point lead there.
Obama will take WA because of Seattle but the decline in that blue latte liberal state should concern Obamaphiles about what may be going on elsewhere.
The celebrity/messiah/antchrist subtext ads seem to be working according to the state polls and Rasmussen tracker and Pew, but not Gallup tracker for some reason.
Serious melt down in WA. A tremor that will be felt further east.
Pete:
Michelle is such a priss..I mean, wow, her rich, lavish lifestyle has afforded her everything... Cindy McCain is the real hard-working woman right? She had to really bust her ass for everything she earned in life.
Typical no response to my Rezko post..as far as expanding voting, you know you (and the rest of the GOP) don't want Cleveland voting in high numbers and you boast about a smear book by Corsi, who has called the pope senile, has had to apologize for his comments and has had his claims refuted by just about everyone, on the right and left. I hope he enlightens you.
Good night.
Darren,
No, what I don't like is posts without merit or reasoning. Pete Kent posts numerous comments every day on this site, and the majority are variations of the one that I mocked: Obama is a disaster, the American people will wake up to realize that he is a terrible candidate, and John McCain will win. I have no problem with your post -- though I don't agree with your reasoning -- because you actually have reasoning and evidence. For example, I disagree with your conclusion that the Strategic Vision poll was really in line with the two other recent polls in the link you provided, since the other two showed Obama up +6 and +7, which is a little different. Nate claimed that Strategic Vision leans Republican and their numbers here seem to be a little pro-McCain compared with Rasmussen (also a Republican pollster, but a highly rated one) and WPRI. But that, in essence, makes my point. You provided evidence, I went and checked on it and I have a slightly different interpretation of that evidence. Your post had content, reasoning, and a point. I can respect your comment and appreciate it, even if I don't agree. Pete Kent's comments, well...
4. Obama could have gone into a lucrative law practice out of law school, and choose more of a public service roll.
Yes, he had his wife work for a living! She has always had a Wall Street career. Obama is essentially lazy and could not have hacked the corporate life.
Everyone Else:
I know, I know, DNFTT! Sorry, I apologize in advance.
PeteKent:
I cannot let that one pass. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that your statement about Obama's work ethic is not some kind of veiled racist attack and just say that this statement is just silly. No one who gets through Columbia College, Harvard Law school, then joins a law practice, then becomes a state rep and then a U. S. Senator is "essentially lazy." You don't get get to become the Democratic nominee for POTUS by being lazy, especially when you're going up against an establishment candidate with the name recognition and resources of Hillary Clinton. Mr. Obama has worked very, very hard to get into the position of POSSIBLY (no, not DEFINITELY as some people on this site would have us believe) being the next POTUS. I know you favor Mr. McCain, but I think you have to Mr. Obama credit where credit is due. Mr. Obama has many flaws, but laziness is definitely NOT one of them.
Returning to lurk mode . . .
Pete,
Theres no over-confidence. Obama has maintained a 3-6 point lead in polling the entire summer even though he basicly went on vacation in early July. McCain has had his way with Obama for 6 weeks and they managed to pull 2 points closer in the polls.
-All the atmospherics are democratic
-No Party has been re-elected in a recession
-No party has ever been re-elected with the incumbent below 50%
-No party has ever been re-elected with a wrong track number below 45%
McCain cannot scrape above 45% in the polls while he's seen as more experienced, more American, safer. Meanwhile Obama is favored on nearly all issues related to by far the number one issue, the economy. Obama is Black. Obama is new. Obama is seen by many as un-American and he's still winning by 3-5 points.
The democratic party is split down the middle, theres only room to improve, McCain should be winning now. He has not yet defined Obama and time is running out. If Obama defines Obama, this thing is over. He will light it up during his speech, and defining him after millions of voters seeing his vision for the future will be impossible.
In the end, this election is not about left VS right, red vs. blue, or black vs white. Its about the past vs. the future. Which candidate looks like the future to you?
PeteKent is a troll-parody of a Republican, right?
not funny enough
I'm afraid Pete is a genuine, Limbaugh-listening example of the demographic that brought us 8 years of George Bush.
Could it be the regressives are desperate, in the last throes if you will.
Seems Nate is on top of his numbers, explains how and why. That is enough for me.
I may not understand all of the details but I do learn a little something.
Thanks
Re: Franklin & Marshall PA poll, Obama +5 among likely voters.
I live in PA, and I think that G. Terry Madonna, the Director of the F&M College Poll, is without a doubt the best pollster of PA.
That said, the sample in this poll is seriously skewed.
First, the Philadelphia sample size is 7%, yet Philadelphia makes up 12% of registered voters. In 2004, Philadelphia voters turned out at a rate slightly lower than the state average, but not enough to change their percentage significantly from 12% of the PA electorate.
Second, the southeast PA sample size is 15%, while the southeast region (if it is limited to the four counties surrounding Philadelphia) represents just over 20% of registered voters, and in 2004, turned out at slightly over the average for the state. If other southeastern PA counties are included in the poll's definition of "southeast" (such as York, Lancaster, Berks, Lehigh and Northampton), then the numbers are even more skewed against this region. I suspect that the other counties are included, but I will re-calculate on the assumption that they are not.
Re-weighting the poll to accurately reflect the impact of the southeast and Philadelphia regions gives Obama 47 McCain 35 (Obama +12) among RVs, and Obama 48 McCain 40 (Obama +8) among LVs. This is a trap poll for McCain if he thinks it shows any tightening in PA.
All re-calculations are based on the following sources: F&M poll, PA voter registration stats archive, PA election returns.
Also, in a prior thread, nj_moderate said "PA might be a difficult state as well for Obama. It is elderly and has a large number of Appalachian counties in the state. Kerry held serve here but Obama is underperforming in these counties by 15-20% from Kerry's total. Since Kerry got a legendary turnout in Philly in 2004, Obama is not going to improve much on these margins (81-19% in Philly, 97-2% in the AA vote)."
nj_moderate, your assumptions about the turnout in 2004 in Philadelphia are not supported. In 2004, 63.4% of registered voters turned out in Philadelphia, while the state average was 68.9%, meaning Philadelphia turnout was 92.1% of the state average. In 2000, PA was less engaged, with Philadelphia turnout at 54.7% and the state average at 63.1%, so Philadelphia turnout was 84.4% of the state average. However, when Philadelphia voters are engaged, their turnout can exceed the state average. In 2002, when Ed Rendell first ran for Governor, turnout in Philadelphia was 39.6% of registered voters, when statewide turnout was 25.5% of registered voters, so that Philadelphia's turnout was 155.6% of the statewide average.
This year, Philadelphia voters are likely to be highly engaged, just as the rest of the state Democrats were. The primary turnout in Philadelphia was 55.3% of registered Democrats, and the statewide average was 55.6%, a negligible difference. I would be very surprised if turnout in Philadelphia in November was less than 65% of registered voters.
You analysis also ignores that the four counties surrounding Philadelphia have seen major shifts in party ID towards the Democratic party, and were also very blue in 2004. Kerry carried those four counties by about 88,000 votes, when Republicans had a registration advantage in those counties of over 240,000. As of the PA primary, the Republican advantage in those four counties was down to less than 50,000. As of the most current statistics, it is down to about 33,000. Recapping, Kerry +88,000 with a 240,000 registration deficit. The registration deficit has shrunk by over 200,000 since 2004.
If anyone thinks that Obama will come out of the five county Philadelphia and southeast region with less than a 500,000 vote margin, they are dreaming.
Finally, PeteKent takes issue with the sampling of party ID in the F&M poll, syaing "I think the poll has oversampled Democrats at 50% while undersampling Inds at 10%, so who knows what is really going on."
Pete, do you ever tire of being wrong? The latest registration figures from PA, found in this spreadsheet, show registration as of 8/11/2008 at 50.9% D, 37.8% R, 11.3% I.
I'd like to see more polling out of Nevada. With the exception of that one Mason Dixon poll, there's just been the one monthly Rasmussen poll, consistently showing a result within the MoE. But given the polling we have, one would likely conclude that McCain has the edge there. But I still think Obama has a very solid chance.
Going by RCP's final average, Kerry overperformed his polling in Nevada (RCP final average: Bush +6.3; Actual result: Bush +2.6). Nevada has been trending Dem rather heavily; the Republicans there seem disinterested, and I think it will be an interesting state to watch on Election Day.
I think this will be a state where Obama will overperform his polling numbers by at least a couple points, but I could be wrong. Of course, a Romney VP selection changes this significantly.
Obama has a great GOTV setup, and McCain a terrible one. But the RNC has an awesome GOTV, and the DNC's is terrible. The DNC may as well not exist for all the support they give their candidates. At this point, Obama has pretty much swallowed up the national party efforts.
Actually, that would be pretty funny. Suppose Hillary somehow won the nomination. All of the Obama campaign HQs would close, and the DNC basically doesn't have any of its own left. The Democratic party would kinda cease to exist as a party- every candidate would be on their own, particularly with Ms. "twenty million in the hole" as the candidate. No wonder the Republicans pretend to love Hillary so much.
Sorry, got off track.
Anyhow, I think Barack's GOTV in traditionally competitive states like Florida, Virginia, and New Mexico won't be any better than the RNC's. Might be worse. But in states like Indiana and Montana Obama will have a huge advantage. It might even be enough to turn those states, even as a one time deal.
If the Democrats had been in charge of Ohio in 2004, Kerry would have won it. Of course, the Republicans operatives were so obviously criminal that some of them would go to jail, but I'm sure the Democrat-run election in November will just be pure as the driven snow.
Right?
Right?
Obama's going to win Ohio handily, mark my words. Even if the dead have to vote six or seven times to make it happen, they're dead. They can rest later.
The RNC GOTV is nowhere as good as Obama's. Just ask people on the ground. Obama's ground attack is his campaign. It's his plan to win, its how he beat Hillary. During the Texas Primaries, the RNC paid close attention to the Obama campaign ground attack looking to see if they could outmaneuver him in the general. There conclusion...
Not a chance in hell. Have to find another way.
Not to mention that the idea of DNC support for candidate GOTV being terrible is about four years out of date. The Obama team's community organizing skills are working in concert with 50-State-Strategy party infrastructure and an Internet-based voter file that is at least competitive with the RNC's vaunted direct-mail based system, and may lap it by Election Day. In addition, a large portion of Bush's impressive ground operation was the religious right, who are lukewarm at best about McCain.
Obama has swallowed up the national party efforts because he's the nominee, and the nominee becomes the head of the party. (By contrast, it's kinda weird how McCain seems to be sort of half-owned by the RNC instead of controlling it, actually.)
Anyway, I hope Nate's right about Virginia coming down to turnout operations. Based on the relative amount of effort being put into the state by the two campaigns on the ground, if it does, McCain is toast.
Nate,
I take it from your observations of some of the polls showing Obama doing badly that your are getting sweat beads on your upper lip. Generally I like what you post, but it seems to me your are reaching to explain bad polls for Obama.
He is crashing all over the country in state polls, and I think you are beginning to feel it in your bones. The Pew Poll should be sending shivers down the spine of all Obama supporters.
With McCain up by double digits on leadership and who will make the best decisions in a time of crisis, it looks like the race is over.
Americans elect Presidents to be the leader of the free world, and not for Change we can believe in.
The closer we get to the election Nate, the bigger the beads of sweat are going to be on your upper lip. You know it and I know it.
McCain need only shift Colorado to his side and he wins this election with a little over 270 EVs, and if all goes well he takes PN, MI and now it looks like Washington as well. Of course, if that happens it is a landslide for McCain
Nate - Can you (or someone) please explain what "weights based on party ID" means?
If this has already been explained or discussed, can someone please point me in the right direction for the info?
Thanks.
Wow! Did you read that article Nate linked to? I've been arguing on these boards for over a month that Rasmussen's likely voter screen is pure crap, and here the statistical proof in the article Nate cites:
http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/
content/full/68/4/588?ijkey=
053EosjdTO0oc&keytype=ref#T2
I'm amazed Rasmussen is as accurate as they have been considering they are introducing TWO distinct sources of error by using a voter ID screen (necessary) AND by using a likely-voter screen.
"To the extent that change scores are real, they are due to shifts in the type of respondents who score as "likely voters" or "unlikely voters" from one period to the next. One day, Bush voters score as more enthusiastic than usual about voting, and three days later the enthusiasm may be located among Gore voters, and so on.
This is not a change in the preferences of the electorate who will be voting in November; it is only a short-term change in enthusiasm as scored by the likely voter instrument.
Did you follow that? Using a likely voter screen the pollster determines whether to count the voter in the poll by asking questions about "how enthusiastic" he is about voting, etc. Well, surges in enthusiasm among partisans thus reflects not real changes in the electorate, but simply who gets screened out and who doesn't.
Sometime in October the likely voter model will be necessary because there's a significant difference between the preferences of likely and unlikely voters that Registered Voter polls don't capture.
But using a likely voter screen in August or September is just adding noise.
Nate does a good job with his super-tracker, but I just subtract a few points from the Obama lead among Registered voters and figure the real lead at this point is about 3%-4%, slightly above what Rasmussen is showing with the Likely Voter polls (Obama +2), but less than the rolling average of Gallup (around +6).
Worse, the likely voter polls are MORE volatile than the RV polls!
"For registered voters, the estimated reliability of reported change in percent Bush (from one three-day period to the next) is a miniscule .07, suggesting that virtually all change from poll to poll is error. But for likely voters, the estimated reliability of change scores reaches the relatively lofty level of .42, as if close to half the variance in observed change over three days is real change."
Why is this? Because the LV pool is smaller, which increases the margin of error. LV are also MORE volatile, as the article points out.
Why? Because Likely Voters are more engaged. When campaign events, news coverage or polling favors their candidate partisan enthusiasm surges most among likely voters, while Unlikely Voters interest actually declines.
Thus more partisans from one side or another get included among the likely voters. If there's a "cutoff" number of voters from a particular region or voting demographic (age group for instance or race) then less motivated voters get left out of the poll.
But, the harshest partisans only get one vote and the most wishy-washy who managed to fall out of bed, shrug their shoulders and amble to the poll get one vote.
Trackhead,
There is absolutely no indication that McCain is going to win Pennsylvania or Washington. And the Pew Poll is really nothing new. This race is static and Obama has consistently led slightly in polling since before he clinched the nomination. Save your grandiose predictions until after the VP picks and conventions. Until then, all we can do is wait, speculate, and cross our fingers.
Matthew H. I'm very impressed by how you make the corruption of Republican efforts in 2004 into an indictment of the Democrats of 2008.
Kerry may well have won a fair contest in Ohio. As a Democrat, all I'm asking for is a fair one (everywhere) in 2008.
Nate, any comment on the following from pollingthepollsters.com? Do you think $3.15 is a good bet?
"So on the one hand the net effect of these 7 polls, and whatever other stuff 538 feeds into its numbers (and I don’t mean that critically - 538 is the best info available imo), has caused 538 to increase Obama’s national lead in “popular vote” and “winning percentage”.
On the other hand, in 2 key States where there was new polling data specific to those States, 538 re-rated McCain to 62% favourite in Nevada and 54% in Virginia. Based on what I assume is general data, McCain slips to 41% underdog in Ohio and 35% in Colorado. Remember, if McCain were to win all 4 of these States, based on the current Rasmussen Electoral College State by State balance of power table, McCain would win the election
So it seems to me there is some discord here. Specific polling in 2 key states was a small fillip for McCain, yet the other indicators (polling and betting) have trended solidly in Obama’s direction".
Darren,
Discourse on this site is welcome. Partisanship is fine. Your post is fine - you are free to quibble with Nate's attempt to provide critical predictive analysis.
But your defense of Pete Kent is misguided. Pete is too often vulgar & seldom on point. Did you see that post about stalinists ? so we have learned that no one appreciates his fanciful flights of fantasy & insult trolling.
His 'commentary' is just posted to distract & cause dissension. It serves no practical EV statistical analysis.
PLEASE DNFFT !
The InsiderAdvantage poll was odd. The crosstabs were all over the place in ways that didn't completely make sense.
They did have an interesting question at the end. They asked parents of 18-29 year olds whether they thought their kids were actually going to vote this time. I suppose this is a more reliable way than asking the kids themselves. I'm not sure on the logic of that. Well, whatever the logic, the parents are reasonably sure their kids are actually going to vote this time.
I have all sorts of problems with this question. Doesn't everybody want to think the best about their kids? Still I do note that basically all of the people that were parents said their kids were planning to vote. A considerable portion of whom said "more likely than the past"
Trackhead1234 dreams of red meat in Washington State; what fun, he sees a trend toward a great awakening to McCain. If a poll shows McCain within 5 points of leading Washington it has simply gotten something insanely wrong. The few people out here whose livelihood is tied to Boeing, be they liberal or conservative, latte sipping pencil pushers or hard working white folk have a bread and butter grudge against McCain. The little towns of Seattle and suburbs, Tacoma, Everett, Spokane, Vancouver, and Bellingham are pretty convinced that Obama has got their back side; that is the shiftless city slackers who somehow manage to pay almost all the state’s taxes like his ideas about keeping a middle class economy rolling. All that the east side of the state asks in return for glowing red is a handout from the farm bill. The last vestiges of McCain the maverick disturb their ardor in that regard. Hispanics both east and west are starting to vote in greater numbers. The economies of the rural west side, the mountains, and the coast now live or die with the tourist vibe, not the timber, i.e. big ecology is taking over. Don’t forget we have all mail in voting, Obama has to have a big ground game so his supporters know they can drop off their ballot at their grocery store if they don’t have a stamp. It matters not; McCain has the vast effete yet rabidly conservative wine drinking bed and breakfast industry of the Walla Walla Valley sown up. Yes Trackhead1234, you can bet your baby’s booties McCain takes Washington as the final jewel of a 40 state landslide. Now wake up, its time for you to go back to work.
Todd Dugdale said:
"And the inane argument that Obama is not winning by `enough' means that McCain wins is so very tired."
Maybe what the McCain supporters are counting on is another stolen election, like 2000 and 2004. And whoever supports Obama should fear that and do what they can do to fight against that. Complacency is naive and foolish. Do NOT count on the Republicans allowing Obama to win fair and square.
Again, Nate, you simply MUST address systematic voter suppression and electronic vote-rigging by Republican operatives in your model. If this election is within 200,000 votes or so in favor of Obama in a state that habitually represses the votes of blacks or other mostly Democratic-voting minorities through purging of law-abiding black people whose names happen to be John Smith like some felon, putting up police roadblocks near polling places in black communities, mysteriously lacking sufficient ballots in Democratic-majority districts, etc., etc., like Florida or Missouri (Ohio in 2004), and suppose that would make the difference in the electoral college result, expect McCain to "win," even if he would have lost in a fair election.
The polls tell us what the polls tell us. Namely that Obama is sufficiently ahead in Kerry states that he should comfortably hold like WA, OR and WI and that he is in a statistical tie in certain states that McCain simply has to win (NV and VA). The true battleground states however are MI, PA, IA, NM, CO and OH and at present if you take the RCP average polls (and entirely discount Nate's statistical trickery) Obama is comfortably up in PA, IA and NM and has small leads in MI, CO and OH. Thus on any reckoning, Obama is well placed to win and McCain needs to move the numbers by 3 or 4 points to change the game.
Of course McCain could do that but you could just as easily argue that Obama could expand his lead on the basis that McCain has already maxed out the Rep base whereas Obama can still squeeze out another 10% of the Dem base who previously voted for Hillary. What we are all engaged in is supposition based to an extent on our political preferences. No harm in that. But what is immutable fact is that Obama is ahead of the game right now.
On the issue of VPs, I must have missed something. PeteKent put his head on the line and said that Obama would have to choose his VP last week because we had reached an inflection point in McCain's favour based on his (oh so successful) celebrity smear campaign. I've been searching various news sites but I can't seem to find out who Obama chose as his VP. Can anyone tell me?There must be some kind of mistake because I cannot conceive of the possibility that PeteKent could be hopelessly wrong or that he could have presented his private fantasies as fact.
Keep trying Pete eventually one of your predictions will come right. After all, even a blind dog finds a bone some time!
Hm. Yesterday some drive-by troll was saying sarcastically that GOP voter suppression in Indiana would be carried out by offering Obama voters food stamps and "free drugs" (meaning, I guess, illegal drugs, since what with healthcare costs many voters of all political stripes would probably welcome free prescriptions).
Today we have Pete Kent yelling over and over that Obama is an "elitist" and so is Michelle.
Which is it? Is Obama an elitist or does he mostly appeal to people on food stamps?
Poor Pete -
I see the Obots have jumped on you. Troll, neo-can nut, etc...Well the Obots have a serious problem on their hands as their dream candidate is slowly watching the electoral map become tighter over time. Remember all the giddy talk of blow-outs and Reagan-like landslides? Gone. Obots have offered up the most inexperienced candidate in modern election history. Now the talk is how he might limp to 270. After BO gets his final teleprompter poll bump from his Invesco Field coronation, his numbers will fade. Come late Oct this board is going to need major anti-depres drugs. Does it bother Obots that BO has been campaining for the Pres longer than he has been a US Sen? Before that? BO was a ward pol in state gov fixing parking tixs and trying to determine just how radical his stance on abortion should be. Can the dems name a more inexperienced candidate? Dan Quayle was ridiculed for his "wet behind the ears" VP nomination with Bush Sr. The Dems have trumped that with BO for President. Dems will need therapy in masse when they blow this chip shot of an election that favors Dems by 15% in generic matchups.
PSmith:
I'll hand it to ya: "On the issue of VPs, I must have missed something. PeteKent put his head on the line and said that Obama would have to choose his VP last week because we had reached an inflection point in McCain's favour based on his (oh so successful) celebrity smear campaign. I've been searching various news sites but I can't seem to find out who Obama chose as his VP. Can anyone tell me?There must be some kind of mistake because I cannot conceive of the possibility that PeteKent could be hopelessly wrong or that he could have presented his private fantasies as fact."
It appears that the Celebrity ad is not moving the polls as dramatically as I thought. I think its impact is taking root just the same and McCain has put out a thesis on who Obama is: a media created celebrity that Obama has yet to counter. The impact of this will be felt later and it will be more subtle.
Obama dodged a bullet as he was able to arrest the decline in the polls he was experiencing early last week. As a result he was not compelled to do anything.
I detect a certain souring of the coverage on Bayh. He is illiberal, too feckless on the war and thus unacceptable. To whom, I am not sure. George Soros, Michael Moore? Whoever controls Obama, I guess.
Obama is running out of choices. Biden is too much of a show horse and will not be easily leashed as a VP must be. Richardson is too ethnic. Other women are out. Schweitzer is an Oaf and is way too conservative.
This leaves only Mrs. Clinton. Obama knows that despite all his enormous advantages and his having entered the race on third base, there is already one out and the bottom of the order coming to the plate.
He needs a pinch hitter to bring him home. Mrs. Clinton could do the job, but she is stretching out her hammies and quads and thinking about being the pinch runner.
Good point, Overrated.
I noted to the group here how Obama's electoral vote simulations have move steadily leftward in Nate's graphic depictions, showing a tight race for EVs and erosion of landslide possibilities for Obama and the "true believers" jumped all over me shouting "optical illusion", "regression to the mean" and "statistical noise"!
They cannot see the forrest for the trees.
heck, iw ould still like to have the shoe on the other foot, they seem to have all the advantages, but seem hellbent on squandering them.
The Clintons are loathesome people, but at least they knew how to win.
Fair play Pete, you took it in the spirit it was intended and put your hand up to getting it wrong.
For what it's worth I just don't think the celebrity thing is an angle that resonates because it just isn't founded in fact. The elitist angle would work better as it hits on the cool/aloof/intelligentsia vibe that Obama can sometimes give off. But the celeb thing? People just don't buy that he is a vacuous Britney/Paris airhead. Sure Obama is popular, he enjoys hobnobbing with world leaders and appearing on satirical chat shows but then so does McCain, in spades. I just feel that McCain has picked the wrong argument here and it leaves him looking a little cheap and petty.
He should stick to fearmongering on national security. That is the only way to the White House for the Republicans in the current economic climate. Unfortunately for McCain it looks like the Russians are withdrawing from Georgia so he may have to wait for a Bin Laden tape (or his friends in the CIA could make one for him).
I still think you got one thing right. Bayh is the most likely option. Yes he voted for the war but he has also been man enough to admit he was wrong which bolsters Obama's judgment while at the same time giving valuable executive experience from a moderate perspective. Obama needs a heterosexual white moderate male as there is only so much 'change' the American people will swallow in one go. So that rules out Bill Richardson (Hispanic), Clinton/Sebelius (female), Biden (liberal)and Charlie Crist (gay). Tim Kaine doesn't have half the experience that Bayh does and he has also been something of a self promoter. Bayh is also a former Clinton backer and satisfies the test of being ready to lead should Obama get assassinated by a Republican funded lone gunman.
My guess is that Obama will announce his choice early next week to allow for a full week of media hype leading up to the Convention. McCain will not announce his choice before the Convention as any bounce he will get will be squashed by events in Denver. McCain will announce 24 hours after Obama's speech in order to limit Obama's bounce and media coverage. Just my hunch.
Pete,
You seem to think everyone drinks the Kool-Aid but you. You started off by saying:
"VA sure does look like it is going to be a nail biter, but looking how the leaners broke to McCain, I am fairly confident that there is latent support for him in the Old Dominion, waiting for an excuse to go public."
There is another way to say this, and that is that the support McCain needs to win Virginia is based on people who have no decided who to vote for, but if forced to decide now, will pick McCain. That's the same kind of support he had in the last NH poll, where those who had decided were substantially for Obama, but McCain won with those who had not decided, but were "leaning". While it would be nice for Obama to win both groups, I'm sure no candidate would trade a voter who is committed to him for one who is leaning his way.
You also said: "NV is a happy surprise for McCain, with the vectors moving in the right direction and indicating that Obama is by no means running away with the West. CO will be worth watching. Obama's strategy for victory w/o OH pretty much requires he wins NV and CO (NM and IA too), unless he can begin to pull some leads out there he will be forced to bet it all on OH."
Yet one more correction for you: If Obama loses Ohio, but wins Kerry + NM + IA + CO, he is our next President. If he loses NH, it will be 269-269, and he will again be our next President. And THAT assumes that McCain can hold VA, IN, FL, MO, ND, MT and AK, as well as NV. McCain really need to win another state to give him a decent chance, such as CO, MI, PA or WI.
And saying Obama should give up in FL is just rubbish. He probably will not win Florida, but he (1) has the money and organization to compete there; (2) his campaign did not gear up for a primary there, so there is opportunity for improvement; and (3) he is closer in Florida than McCain is in NM, CO, PA, MI, or WI. (http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Graphs/florida.html).
PSmith:
You are obviously a ticket balancer. I detect this from your statement: "Obama needs a heterosexual white moderate male"
It might help!
p smith said:
"Obama needs a heterosexual white moderate male as there is only so much 'change' the American people will swallow in one go. So that rules out Bill Richardson (Hispanic), Clinton/Sebelius (female), Biden (liberal)and Charlie Crist (gay)."
Are you sure about Charlie? I really think Obama should give him another look. I think little gay Charlie would do wonders as his VP pick.
also you said:
"should Obama get assassinated by a Republican funded lone gunman."
I bet the Clinton's are starting their own investigation on the assassination of the Arkansas Democratic Chairman and obvious Clinton Super Delegate yesterday. That would be something special if the Obama campaign was found to be killing off the trouble makers. Now that's an October Surprise!
Petey Boy (aka PeteKent):
What do you make of this:
A top strategist for Sen. John McCain's campaign said Thursday that the presidential contest in Virginia will "undoubtedly be close" this fall and acknowledged that the state should no longer be considered a Republican stronghold.
The comments by Mike DuHaime, McCain's political director, represent a significant shift in the GOP's thinking and are the latest signal that Virginia is emerging as a state that could make or break McCain's chances to defeat Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
The candidate's campaign is saying that Virginia is a toss-up is what I read. And you?
And remember that "the candidate does not speak for the campaign." VBG
By the way, the above quote is from the August 15, 2008 edition of the Washington Post.
Mike
徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 外遇沖開, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信
徵信, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵信,徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵, 徵信公司, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵, 徵
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,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,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解,av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av ,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,六合彩,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,婚友,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友,交友,交友,婚友社,婚友社,婚友社,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,越南新娘,外籍新娘,外籍新娘,台中坐月子中心,搬家公司,搬家公司,中和搬家,台北搬家,板橋搬家,新店搬家,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,交友,越南新娘,婚友社,外籍新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,交友,外籍新娘,視訊聊天,大陸新娘,婚友社,婚友,越南新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,視訊交友,外籍新娘,網路排名,網路排名軟體,網站排名優化大師,關鍵字排名大師,網站排名seo大師,關鍵字行銷專家,關鍵字,seo,關鍵字行銷,網頁排序,網頁排名,關鍵字大師,seo大,自然排名,網站排序,網路行銷創業,汽車借款,汽車借錢,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,拉皮,抽脂,近視雷射,隆乳,隆鼻,變性,雙眼皮,眼袋,牙齒,下巴,植牙,人工植牙,植髮,雷射美容,膠原蛋白,皮膚科,醫學美容,玻尿酸,肉毒桿菌,微晶瓷,電波拉皮,脈衝光,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,英語演講,托福,Toastmaster,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,借錢,借貸,當舖,借款,借貸,借錢,週轉,
Post a Comment