It was another fairly bad polling day for Barack Obama, and we are getting to the point where it would be hard to describe the election as anything other than "too close to call". But most of that has been driven by the rapidly tightening national numbers. This set of state polling isn't quite as bad as it looks for Obama:
The most disappointing for result for Obama is probably in Indiana, where SurveyUSA has John McCain pulling into a 6-point lead after having trailed by a single point last month. Why so disappointing? Because Obama has been investing heavily in Indiana while McCain has not. A couple of caveats, though. Firstly, investments in the ground game may not show up in the polls in the first place. And secondly, the partisan leaning of the sample has shifted a fair bit more Republican than the last edition of this poll. It's possible that, as McCain enthusiasm grows (and Bush fatigue wanes), more Republican-leaning independents are now willing to identify themselves as Republican. It's also possible that we're just looking at some static.
It is officially time for Obama to be worried in Minnesota, where SurveyUSA marks the third consecutive poll to show him with a lead of only 2-4 points? Our model says ... maybe not qute yet. There has certainly been a pretty big shift in the raw numbers in the Gopher State, but there aren't really any demographic explanations for it -- Obama hasn't lost much ground in demographically similar states like Wisconsin and Iowa. So our model is going to need a little more coaxing before it considers Minnesota a toss-up. It might be close enough, however, that there is an electoral rationale for McCain to pick Tim Pawlenty.
Certain of these other results actually aren't that bad for Obama. In Pennsylvania, for instance, his 6-point margin over McCain in the new Susquehanna poll is meaningful precisely because he's not polling so fantastically elsewhere. What do I mean by that? I mean that even when the national race is about tied, as it is now, Obama still has a lead of 5-6 points in Pennsylvania. So Pennsylvania is unlikely to be a tipping point state; it's going to be pretty hard for McCain to make up 5-6 points in Pennsylvania without gaining that ground everywhere, especially given that Penna has been absolutely saturated in the Presidential campaign since late March.
Conversely, in Florida, Obama may be within tipping point range in a close election. McCain's 2-point edge is a reversal of the 2-point advantage that Obama held in the prior Rasmussen poll -- but on the other hand, versions of the Rasmussen poll in the spring had shown a couple leads in the double digits for McCain. Which way Florida goes next may depend on Obama's VP selection; it is one of those states where Joe Biden might help him, as undoubtedly could Hillary Clinton.
8.19.2008
Today's Polls, 8/19
@ 11:02 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
205 comments
Nate Susquehanna poll numbers are 46-41 for Obama and not 44-38...
What do you think of CQ Politics' map? They list Arkansas and West Virginia as only leans McCain.
Looks like we have a real horse race. It is going to be an exciting two and a half months.
The Obama campaign really need to worry about Senator McCain strengthening in the midwest. If John McCain takes two of the upper midwest states (Minnesota, Michigan-the biggest prize, Iowa, and Indiana), the Senator Obama path to victory gets narrowed significantly.
The model is wise to ignore even multiple close polls in Minnesota because I'm not sensing the closeness here.
I'm still of the belief that campaigning and money matter relatively little in this election and the outcome will simply boil down to turnout, particularly among 18-34 year olds.
Why does the projection move in Obama's direction by 0.1% when he leads the popular vote? According to the FAQ there should be a reversion to the mean and an equal allocation of undecideds. What gives?
I saw this on another blog recently, and it's true - the High Road Fairy isn't going to show up on November 4th and leave votes under Obama's pillow.
The Obama Camp -- in an obsession to be "nice guys" about everything -- are going to piss away what should be the most winnable election Democrats have had since... well, maybe ever.
Do you know how much of a wimp you look like when your opponent calls you a traitor and you respond by saying that your opponent is a man of honor and an American hero?
Obama is getting bitch-slapped left and right by McCain, and he keeps thinking in a Shrum-like way that he'll somehow be rewarded if he doesn't fight back.
He's basically taking the worst parts of the Gore and Kerry campaigns and running with them.
He'd better start blasting the hell out of McCain now. Keating Five. Cheating on his first wife. His senior moments. His idiot moments. His outright lies. And on and on. The Obama campaign's new motto had better be "Nothing is off limits." Otherwise, they are going to lose this election.
Con from Rome, it's 44-38 with Nader and Barr included.
The Pennsylvania poll internals are interesting because for the black vote, Barack Obama gets 98% while John McCain gets 0% of that demographic. That's right, 0%.
That's odd, because I have been told countless times by Obama supporters that if you vote for McCain than you are a a racist. But it appears the REAL racists seems to be the African American voting bloc.
I wouldn't trust SUSA on Indiana. They had Clinton up 12 during the primaries. In fact, every pollster consistently underestimated Obama's support in the midwest (see MO, IA, WI, MN, even MI-uncommited).
VP announcement to break summer doldrums soon enough.
Indiana is totally out of range for Obama...the state is too conservative...too republican...in 2004 party ID was +14 GOP and Bush won by 20...
""But it appears the REAL racists seems to be the African American voting bloc""
Why is that?
In every election before this one, white presidential candidates got about 100% of the white vote in November.
jackson: Don't even bring that straw man, full of holes argument in here.
In every election before this one, there have only been white candidates to vote for.
Also, babo is just on time for the daily "discredit any poll that shows a McCain lead/bad news for Obama" post. When will people just accept a poll for what it is?
SUSA used to be fairly good in the early primary season, but ever since they started dabbling in polls including VP pairings, they seem to have lost something.
"But it appears the REAL racists seems to be the African American voting bloc."
AAs consistently vote 86-90% for Democrats in every election, even with white candidates. Maybe you should ask why Republicans have enacted policies that push AAs so far away from them?
I cannot believe another democrat fell for the "voters don't want a negative campaign" trap.
you don't need to trust survey usa poll...you have to trust the logic...McCain cannot lose Indiana. Only chance for a dem in that state is in the case of landslide victory ( you can see for example presidential election in 1964 )...
In every election before this one, there have only been white candidates to vote for.
Doesn't matter, unless you're suggesting that since there is also a white candidate, some percentage of blacks are obliged to vote for him instead.
So what percentage of blacks have to vote for McCain to make the remaining blacks who vote for Obama not be racist for doing so?
Tyrone- Calm down. Are the mormons who vote 100% for Mitt Romney religious bigots? What about the 85% of white mississippians who voted for bush in 2004?
Black people have been voting for white presidents (usually in blocs) for the last 100 years. We have NOTHING to prove.
don't think it's a coincidence that things are too close to call, being that it's the week before the conventions start. Everyone's starting to tune in and uncertainty is being (re)injected into the polls from all-around. I'm kind of glad it seems like someone hit the reset button on this whole thing.
We've seen Obama's tendency to poll high, so we could assume that he has room to grow and pull those people back in. McCain hasn't polled high though, so it's gonna be really interesting to see where the polls stand in a little over two weeks. I don't even think he's gonna get that big of a convention bounce or that he really has much room to grow his support - I predict he's gonna hit a ceiling against anti-incumbency and change momentum.
Having lived in Minnesota for 10+ years and NJ 20+ yrs, let me say both states are masters at polling head fakes. There is absoloutely ZERO chance Obama will lose MN. The Scandinavian socialist/democratic streak is plenty strong. Pawlenty simply does not have any competition who is young and 'energetic' like he is - in other words, an Obama. That's the reason he's governor. Obama will take MN by a minimum of 8.
Tyrone
Your problem isn't that African-Americans are racist. Its that they are DEMOCRATS, primarily.
Work on that and maybe you won't be a minority, mostly southern political party in the next 20 or 30 years.
tyrone i think there are some AA pro McCain in PA...simply they are not recognized in the poll sample...
re: the Susquehanna poll -- our policy is to use the version of the poll with third-party candidates included when the pollster provides both. That shows a 6 point lead for Obama rather than 5.
"when the national race is about tied, as it is now"
Nate, weren't you the one that posted on how being within the margin of error wasn't the same thing as a tie? Maybe it wasn't you, but don't think that the national polls show that the race is about tied: they all show a slim Obama lead. Not that it really matters, of course, since these polls right before the convention don't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things.
ainsley you are so right...in fact GW Bush lost MN by 2 in 2000 and by 3 in 2004...polls now are very closed in the state...but i have to trust you for sure!
Burt,
That's pretty much like I see it. He better find that gun he promised us in the fight once Hillary finally hit the ground after falling off the cliff for 2 months. Because the way I see it, he's become more passive, more deferential to McCain than he ever was to Hillary. He should have gone hard and aggressive after McCain on everything, especially once McCain started treating him as a petulant, vacuous child, insulting his character, his motives, and his abilities.
Anyway, the path looks pretty clear. Either toughen up and bloody up McCain--and there's plenty to work with there--or be hopelessly caricatured as a sniveling milquetoast. Bush already proved his war-hero schtick is vapor.
Nate it's all ok i didn't know this rule...i respect very much your work...
David Bossie and the GOP Varsity are still warming up on the sidelines and Big John McCain appears to have grabbed the lead.
Bossie will be VERY upset that he isn't responsible for this turnaround. He'll make short work of the Obama presidential hopes. Look for some hard hitting Bill Ayers-Obama ads throughout Labor Day.
Nate,
so then with 3rd party votes, yesterday did you use that factor for the Rasmussen GA poll with the Barr votes re-adjusted from 3% [which was lowered by Scott R. from 5% when originally posted] rather than at the 1 % following the push on them to 'lean' as LV resulting in more for McCain ?
I think Tyrone has a valid pt. Let's not patronize the AA minority vote with "white guilt" sympathy. A legitimate question would be - Is the AA minority in PA capable of diverse political opinions? What rational is producing 0%. It is a fair question.
I am just making a point that SurveyUSA and all pollsters underestimated Obamas appeal in the MW during the primary. According to RCP, he outpaced IA +6.2, MI +9 (uncommitted), MO +6.8, WI +13.1, IN +3.6. I don't have the polling avgs. for MN but he trounced Clinton by +30. I tend to think there is a hometown advantage that is being overlooked. Nate pointed to this with the fact that there hasn't been a strong MW pres candidate in a while.
It has nothing to do with me having a pro-Obama bias. For example, I think some polls are overestimating his strength in other parts of the country particularly OH and FL.
overrated i am sure this is an issue of the Susquehanna poll...of course there are some AA pro McCain in PA...
Blind Trust of The Republican Campaigner
The Republican campaigner is like a free agent ballplayer. He's looking for a contract, so he's on his best behavior. George Bush sounded pretty good in 2000 and 2004. He didn't deliver a thing. How come when Obama is up by 8 points nationally.... we can't trust August polls? When he's 'dead even' all of a sudden its a media wave of "What's wrong with Obama" stories. If he gets that 8 point lead back, there better be stories about, "what's wrong with McCain???" Somehow I have a feeling there will be a new excuse to not trust any polls that show Obama dominating. The media really makes me sick. They trust McCain and put Obama under a magnifying glass. It's the Republican who needs to be questioned. His campaign rhetoric sounds wonderful, but he CAN NOT BE TRUSTED. A Republican campaign is like a free agency year for a player. They do their best to secure a contract, then do whatever they want once unaccountable.
TJB - yes, this could get very nasty. I see that NR was hot about being denied IL records on past Obama/Ayers connections. You just kicked a hornet's nest on this thread.
according to CNN 2004 exit poll GW Bush won 16% AAs votes in PA...
In Ohio he won again 16 AAs, in Florida 13%
As much as I'd hate to say it, I'm willing to give the AA community a pass for voting Obama based on race only, which, without a doubt some are. Let's not kid ourselves here. I wouldn't call it racist, as much as I would ethnocentric. That being said, I seriously doubt that 0% are voting for McCain.
Either way you look at it, PA is going to go for the Dems...so it's a moot point.
How many times do I have to say that I am a black person myself?
I am tired of other black people calling me a traitor and a disrespect to African Americans everywhere because I support McCain.
I just find it ridiculous how many fellow blacks are voting for Obama because he is black. I ask my fellow AAs why they like Obama, and they can't come up with any other reason but "He is black".
As a black person myself, I find this ridiculous and proof that our race has a long ways to go. I just wish more black people thought for themselves rather than thinking "I'm black, so I have to vote democrat", even though I personally believe democrats screw over blacks on purpose for their votes. In order to be able to pimp out platforms like welfare, section 8 housing and the like, they need to keep black people down in order to need things like that.
overrated- Of course the polls are always 100% accurate. dont worry mccain is gettin 19% of the IN vote. That will be probably be a record for a republican.
Amen, Tyrone. Could not have said it better.
What is going on with the latest point on the Super Tracker showing roughly Obama +8?... I didn't notice any polls that were substantial improvements over previous values.
Also, a minor typo note: I think "It is officially time...?" should be "Is it officially time...?".
"Bossie will be VERY upset that he isn't responsible for this turnaround. He'll make short work of the Obama presidential hopes. Look for some hard hitting Bill Ayers-Obama ads throughout Labor Day."
"TJB - yes, this could get very nasty."
And TJB seems positively giddy at the prospect, despite the fact that trying to suggest some close relationship is total BS. That type of attitude is what is wrong with America. I would be ashamed to tacitly support that type of smear campaign, even psuedonymously. Repulsive.
Good for you Tyrone on figuring out what the Dems do.. IMO you are dead on. I am not black, but my wife is. She was born and raised in NYC. She saw what you spoke of on a daily basis. She just told me for the first time yesterday that she'll be voting for McCain this fall. I was psyched. She was taken aback at how McCain went through all that time held captive in Vietnam and didn't see anything comparable in Obama's character that would lead her to believe that he'd be able to survive what McCain did.
Sedi,
Obama's people have described the relationship between Ayers and Obama as "friendly". Nobody needs to smear Obama with Ayers...he does it on his own...
Tyrone- I agree with most of your comments. But why are you singling out black people? Do you think all those white folks in MS, LA, TN who vote Mccain do it out of their interests? or are they racists? or are they really conservatives?
Its funny. Its like the infamous "bitter" comments. White republicans have been saying the same thing about black folks- that they vote against their own interests and cling to welfare and other govt. programs- but the media never calls them out on it.
However, Obama makes a very similar statement w/o referring to a particular race and he gets blasted.
Wahoo! Sedi is back. Did you see my commentary on OH in previous thread. What do you think?
My opinion is everyone votes on the race issue ( black or white or hispanic or asian ) is wrong...but i want to say in Mississippi 85% whites already voted against the "white" John Kerry...so if now they are against the "black" Obama they are not racists...
bado,
There is a big fundamental difference between voting for someone who will protect your second amendment rights and shares your religous beliefs than voting for someone because they will give you sh*t for free (welfare).
A note that may or may not have been noticed in the Indiana poll: in the cross-tabs, African Americans only make up 6% of the poll even though they are 9% of the population. If SUSA weighted, then it would show African Americans making up at least 8% of the voting population (and adding more than a point for Obama). Secondly, does anyone think McCain is getting 19% of the African American vote in Indiana? Neither did I. More realistic weights show the race as 3-4 points.
"Obama's people have described the relationship between Ayers and Obama as "friendly"."
And Bush had a friendly relationship with Putin, but that doesn't mean they are linked. And Ayers had a criminal past decades ago, before I was born. Aren't some of you supposed to Christians...you know, forgiveness, redemption? This is the stupidest non-issue. I don't expect it will work, however.
I stand by my previous statement. Repulsive. And wrong.
dtm33bb,
Good job cherry-picking your favorite crosstab!
Keep altering the focus to get your favorite view.
Sedi -
I agree with you concerning random smear campaigns by both Dem and GOP. But please...there is soooo much with Obama regarding past relationships with his church and with others. The Dems could have had a traditional GOP war with Clinton, but you tossed the GOP fresh raw meat with Obama. He is such a high-risk candidate.
Sedi,
So 20 years from now we should be friendly with Bin Laden because its "in the past"??? How about Manson?? Or how about if Timothy McVeigh was still around...
WTF?? It doesn't raise a huge red flag that Obama and a guy like Ayers are even mentioned in the same sentence? Good grief!
i bet McCain will win in Indiana with a double digits lead...no way for Obama to win in that place...
i agree but who is saying that black people vote because they want "shit for free"? is there empirical proof?
actually i think your statement is a bit more egregious.
Overrated,
Oh yeah, there is a long reply on the other thread. Short version: you might be right, but McCain isn't Clinton, Obama has ramped up the aggressive part of his campaign yet, and new and non-traditional voters could give him a boost. And he could pick Clinton and ask her to campaign there.
Your view is certainly not without merit, and could prove to be an accurate prediction. Thanks for the analysis and the link to the 2004 map. I didn't realize that eastern OH was so moderate.
If all you guys have going for you in the smear machine is William Ayers then y'all are gonna crash and burn. Just like the Michelle Obama "Whitey" video (that didn't exist) such smears sound better as innuendo and threats, but when they're actually put out into the light of day they crumble away.
You go with William Ayers, we'll go with Keating Five and let's see who gets more traction.
Sedi- good one. The political Christian only uses the faith when it helps them. Notice how many Pro-Lifers are Pro-War.
Oh..Sedi.. that was below the belt. Assumed in your critique is that Obama is clean here. Obama is a good person. He is not the devil. I think he is a worthy American and I would love to dialogue with him in heaven, but he is not qualified to be the President of the United States and he is a huge, unknown mystery. He can be vetted like all the other candidates before him. McCain has multiple yrs of exposure. Have at him. Obama has very little record, so let the vetting begin. It could be a good thing for Obama. He could emerge stronger as a candidate.
bado,
The fact that people keep on thinking it's "egregious" to think what I just stated is half of what keeps it perpetuated! Nobody is willing to be honest that it is a problem. It is not limited to black people....it is across the board for lower income people. Which are disproportionately African American. Go on, keep thinking it's "egregious"...I'll keep knowing it's based on fact. It's human nature to vote to get sh&t for free. That is why we need welfare reform. Problem: it would undermine a good part of the Democrat constituency.
"Anyway, the path looks pretty clear. Either toughen up and bloody up McCain--and there's plenty to work with there--or be hopelessly caricatured as a sniveling milquetoast." -- Mark in VA
The problem is I don't think Obama will be able to pull this off without undermining his own campaign. Why? Because in many respects Obama is the "Jackie Robinson" candidate -- a pioneering, trailblazing candidate who must overcome lingering doubts about his race, his relative inexperience and his relative youth. To overcome such doubts, Obama (like Robinson) may have to withstand unfair attacks and "turn the other cheek". Fair or not, vicious attacks against McCain may make him unpalatable to the 50th percentile voter.
Talking about "smears". Calling someone "Pro-war" or "warmonger" is a smear....
Nobody is pro-war...it's an idiotic and intellectually dishonest thing to say. Exactly the kind of stuff you guys are complaining about.
Response to Ainsley who used to live in Minnesota. Well I do now and have done so for 30 years. Yes, Obama's lead, as reported in the last three polls (all by different organizations) over the last 6 weeks have seen a 12 pt collapse by Obama. Minnesota is now in play. Why? The answer is John McCain himself. He is a perfect Minnesota candidate in that he is a moderate conservative and not a right wing Republican. His appeal with independents is huge, Minnesota is one of the few places in the country where McCain beats Obama with independents by over 10 pts. Minnesota has less than 4% African Americans and few other minority groups. And yes, if he selects Pawlenty is it virtually certain he will win the state. Obama's inexperience is killing him here. Most people did not know Obama had such a thin resume - the more people find out the lower his support. That is what's happening here and I suspect elsewhere as well
dtm33bb @ 10:56 PM said...
"A note that may or may not have been noticed in the Indiana poll: in the cross-tabs, African Americans only make up 6% of the poll even though they are 9% of the population. If SUSA weighted, then it would show African Americans making up at least 8% of the voting population (and adding more than a point for Obama). Secondly, does anyone think McCain is getting 19% of the African American vote in Indiana? Neither did I. More realistic weights show the race as 3-4 points."
---------------------------------
Lots of interesting tidbits in that RR IN poll today if you read beneath the toplines [as most of the trolls on this site do not].
For me, I can't help but wonder why SUSA IN sample went from 38%D, 36%R, 19%I in July to 36%D, 42%R, 15%I in the new one.
What is the justification for such a move in one month ?
That re-weighting alone would create at least a 5% swing to McCain so take the poll for what it is worth. A mid-summer poll showing that another RED state is still in play. Both sides can spin it however they want, but Obama is doing better than Gore or Kerry in IN...
"She was taken aback at how McCain went through all that time held captive in Vietnam and didn't see anything comparable in Obama's character that would lead her to believe that he'd be able to survive what McCain did."
Yes because growing up with black skin raised by a white family in the 60's was a cake walk!
Curis -
Ok...here we go. Pro-life and war are a poor comparison. How many pro-lifers are Pro-war? Do you think support for the Iraq war is pro-war? Please. Are Iraqs pro-war? Is the military pro-war? I know of no one that is pro-war. Do you have some friends that are pro-war? Can anyone seriously name anyone that is pro-war?
stop_the_stutter,
Am I wrong? No, the point is that SUSA doesn't weight and it causes some questionable fluctuations. More realistically, Obama will win 90%+ of the African American vote (on higher turnout) unless you are to tell me he will win fewer votes than Kerry. It is effectively a point .9 increase for every 1% of African Americans in the sample. The wild card is how whites will vote in the state. It may be more strongly for McCain, but it is a harder read. Considering whites are 92% of the sample, it is actually useful against the margin of error. It isn't cherry picking to point that out.
overrated- wright is a legitimate issue. even obama said that. he chose to associate with the rev. for a long time and it is up to the GOP to decide how much they want to exploit that. it can backfire, however. Recall during the special election they tried to run that ad against T. Childers in MS and it exploded in their face.
Ayres is a non-issue. Sad as it sounds, nobody thinks an old white professor named William is a scary terrorist. Nobody is scared of that. They just aren't. Now if he was middle-eastern and a cab driver that would be different.
dominoid73
compared to five years of broken bones...probably.
dtm33bb,
Maybe you're right.....
I just happen to feel that Survey USA is one of the top pollsters and they probably know a bit more about it than you or I do.
stutter, we might have a difference of opinion. do warren buffett, steve jobs, all those hedge fund managers want sh*t for free? let me ask you- why do jewish people vote over 75% for democrats?
black people don't like high taxes. nobody does. there are plenty of reasons to vote against republicans or for democrats.
you do sound a little patronizing and dare i say- elitist.
MICHAEL,
where do you live in MN man ? you really think a state that recently elected Amy Klobuchar and Wellstone & other progressives is fertile ground for a the 2008 neo-con version of McCain ?
John might have played OK in progressive MN back in 2000, but I grew up in MN & unless you live under a rock, your radar is faulty [IMO].
I justed returned from visiting my family in MN. TPaw is a JOKE, just a goof who never got even 50%, and the Star-Trib poll this week showed that if he was john's VP that McCain would LOS the IND vote in MN - making it advantage Obama.
Now, MN will not be a blow-out for Obama - but with a progressive DFL tradition there, Barack has at least as much of an advantage in MN as McCain has in IN.
McCain can not break 50% in MN this year [IMO], and if IA & WI stay BLUE as polling suggests, then MN will as well as always.
But dream on, and GO TPAW !
Overrated,
I have no problem with going after Obama's record. If you think he's inexperience, go after him for it. (Though history isn't going to back you up much, as there is virtually correlation with experience and successful presidencies.) If you think he cast bad votes, make them an issue. If he did something underhanded and abused his power, let's bring it to light. I can understand the investigations into his land deal, since that involved potential abuse of power. This Ayers thing is a total joke and completely without substance: it's an attempt to have guilt by association. I would not go after McCain for the Keating 5 issue (though it is clearly much more damning than anything we know of that Obama has been involved with), though, since it really doesn't matter much. I'd go after him for supporting the tax cuts (recently), voting in favor of what is essentially torture (recently), consistently opposing renewable energy programs, opposing regulations that help protect the public, etc., etc.
Stutter,
"Warmonger" is namecalling (probably a smear, too), but "pro-war" is not, it's a policy position on one or more wars. It's not comparable to "pro-life," for example.
CYRTIS,
I can answer your question.
John McCain is pro-war & damm proud of it !!!
did you see him at the VFW convention in Orlando yesterday - the very definition of a real life warmonger.
and then you have his 'bomb, bomb iran' ditty too. he thinks that is funny !
My prediction in the state by state presidential outcome.
AK- McCain 52-47
AL- McCain 58-41
AR- McCain 54-45
AZ- McCain 55-44
CA- Obama 58-41
CO- Obama 51-48
CT- Obama 57-42
DC- Obama 90-9
DE- Obama 55-44
FL- McCain 50-49
GA- McCain 54-45
HI- Obama 60-39
IA- Obama 53-46
ID- McCain 57-42
IL- Obama 57-42
IN- McCain 52-47
KS- McCain 56-43
KY- McCain 58-41
LA- McCain 57-42
MA- Obama 62-37
MD- Obama 58-41
ME- Obama 57-42
MI- Obama 52-47
MN- Obama 53-46
MO- McCain 52-47
MS- McCain 56-43
MT- McCain 50-49
NC- McCain 51-48
ND- McCain 52-47
NE- McCain 57-42
NH- Obama 52-47
NJ- Obama 55-44
NM- Obama 52-47
NV- Obama 50-49
NY- Obama 59-40
OH- Obama 50-49
OK- McCain 61-38
OR- Obama 54-45
PA- Obama 54-45
RI- Obama 61-38
SC- McCain 54-45
SD- McCain 53-46
TN- McCain 57-42
TX- McCain 53-46
UT- McCain 62-37
VA- McCain 50-49
VT- Obama 61-38
WA- Obama 56-43
WI- Obama 54-45
WV- McCain 52-47
WY- McCain 57-42
CO,OH,and NV
Why does the projection move in Obama's direction by 0.1% when he leads the popular vote? According to the FAQ there should be a reversion to the mean and an equal allocation of undecideds. What gives?
Nate, I noticed this when you first published the Projection methodology. Your equation for the projection doesn't work well for margins smaller than about +/- 1.6.
P = .909*M - .0475*D*M + .0604*D*sqrt(M)
P is projection, M is current margin, D is sqrt(days remaining).
The problem is that for small values of M, sqrt(M) is actually greater than M. Thus, very small leads will actually be projected to grow! I would suggest just using P = .909*M whenever .0604*sqrt(M) > .0475*M, i.e. M < 1.617. This will provide a smooth mapping from the SuperTracker to the Projection.
bado,
I must be a low-income elitist then..
I've never made 100k in any year during my life. But I do look at what is around me and it's tough to argue against a lifetime in the Bronx. Why can't you admit that it is a huge factor that Dems offer welfare so low income people aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them? Is that really so farfetched?
BTW, low-income people don't pay taxes....you can't hate doing something if you don't actually do it.
michael- if Minnesotans love big resumes why did they vote "the body" for governor? why is a comedian giving the senior senator so much trouble?
I think we are just seeing reversion to the mean in MN and a few other states.
babo -
I agree with you. Let it happen and let the chips fall. if the GOP goes too far they will suffer. Why does everyone distrust the electorate to decide these things? The GOP has been rejected before - remember Gingrich and 1994 and the GOP congress landslide? Clinton overcame that in 2006. The Dems have been rejected before - Jimmy Carter, John Kerry, Ted Daschle. Let the people decide. Could it be that the "swift boat" issue did not sink Kerry? Maybe he was simply too liberal? Imagine that.
stop the stutter -
"It's a tough war we're in. It's not going to be over right away. There's going to be other wars." - John McCain
"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran." - John McCain
John McCain on the idea of staying in Iraq for another fifty years - "Maybe a hundred."
So yes, some people are pro-war. John McCain is one of them. It's a fact of life, so just deal with it and stop whining about people attacking your McMessiah.
Sedi,
Thanks for being reasonable. Even if I partially disagree with you, at least I can have respect for your position.
John McCain is running as a war hero. The guy couldn't articulate a policy position without a team of experts behind him. George Bush's problem was being ideological and un-nuanced. McCain is the same way. McCain is a soldier, great courage, would fight and die for his country. But soldiers like McCain go to the front lines, they fight the wars and don't plan the wars.
As we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, courage and will only get you so far, and can get you in a whole lot of trouble. I know a lot of people love the ra-ra America act. But that ain't gonna solve any problems. McCain often calls 2-3 people for advice on matters and always goes with the last person he's talked too.
I really like McCain, but he's very old, very out of touch with todays world, and not smart enough to be president. This election is like two high-schoolers fighting over a girl. McCain being the macho tough guy, Obama the smart geek. The teenage girl always picks the tough guy, and doesn't realize the error of her ways until she's got 2 kids, broke and divorced 15 years later. Then remarries a smart guy and lives happily ever after.
Well this election we're going to find out if Americans have fully matured yet or if we're still chasing the tough guy. The situation is pretty bad, and our tendency is to seek comfort with the Macho dude, but we know what road that leads down. Its fixing our life (Obama) or continuing the misery (McCain). Stay tuned.
Opps Clinton overcame that in 1996
Sedi is my favorite liberal
Nate, your excuses for Indiana and Minnesota contradict each other. You say Obama's ground game is not being counted in Indiana, while Minnesota is still safe for Obama because of the demographics.
Well, Indiana is +10 McCain according to your regression. So if Minnesota (+6 Obama) is still out of reach for McCain, Indiana is doubly so for Obama. In Indiana, the polls seem to be reverting to the demographic mean which leads to the usual Republican blowout.
Indiana, North Carolina, and Missouri have all been moving out of reach and now require a national 5-7 point shift to be competitive. With Minnesota and Michigan tightening Obama is unexpectedly on defense. Wasn't Minnesota the only battleground that Obama didn't send organizers to?
tito,
"My grandmother was a typical white person"
"I've been to 57 states so far"
"I wouldn't have nominated Clarence Thomas because he didn't have exxp..a strong enough judicial record".
See what you can do with random quotes?
Could the recent good results for McCain in Minnesota be a bounce in anticipation of the Republican Convention coming to St. Paul?
If so, that leads to two questions:
1) Is this likely to go away after the Convention or could some or all of it persist?
2) Why the heck isn't Obama getting a similar bounce in Colorado?
stop-the-stuuter...your wife voting for McCain because he was a POW is pathetic. It's the same stupid arguement of who would you rather have a beer with? Being a POW doesn't qualify you to be president. Your wife is voting for 4 more years of a mental midget compared to an intellect because of that? Shows why this country is in the sh_thole it's in to begin with. If she shouldn't vote BO for the color of his skin she shouldn't vote JM for being a POW.
nkpolitics,
Care to share how you arrived at those numbers? It's a nice, pretty list -- and it looks good for the person I'm rooting for -- but I'm not quite sure what to make of it without some analysis or interpretation.
"For me, I can't help but wonder why SUSA IN sample went from 38%D, 36%R, 19%I in July to 36%D, 42%R, 15%I in the new one.
What is the justification for such a move in one month ?
That re-weighting alone would create at least a 5% swing to McCain so take the poll for what it is worth."
I agree that this is likely a false inconsistency between the two polls. But, given how Republican Indiana is, the latter one - the one w/ more Reps - seems more reasonable to me. In which case, the story is that Obama was never 1 point ahead in Indiana at all and this month's McCain +6 in Indiana is probably not much of a change from where the race stood in June.
Voice of Reason,
Your post typifies why your party can NEVER achieve a majority vote in this nation. It is indignant, disrespectful, and just plain idiotic.
WARMONGER is not a perjorative term. It is a decriptive noun that simply means :
"one who urges or attempts to stir up war"
since McCain was one of the top promoters of EVERY war that the USA has engaged in during his political career, especialy this IRAQ invasion/occupation/war PLUS he wants war with [or at least nuke] Iran, and now he is pushing WAR with Russia over Georgia, plus he really wants to 'settle' affairs with those commies in N. Korea - he fits the definition of a warmonger & he proudly talks as one ! Even in a Church, fer christsakes.
in fact in 2004 party ID in indiana was +14 GOP ( see cnn exit polls )
one more thing VOICE OR TREASON,
Why
are
Obama's
School Records
SEALED??
Why would an intelligent man do that?
stop the stutter -
I wouldn't expect anything less from an elitist country-club Republican to try to make someone sound dumb by pulling out random quotes that don't have any contextual flow. Obviously since you changed the subject, though, and can't dispute how pro-war McCain is then I'll take the point for this round. Thanks.
stop_the_stutter,
I understand the way that SUSA does their polling and they are of excellent quality. I just prefer proper weighting to the massive error introduced by interviewing ~40 African Americans and 8 or 9 say they are for McCain, I take less stock in the poll than past results. Realistically, I would be shocked if McCain did not win Indiana. But my points still stand.
lilnev - thanks for clarifying the projection quirk.
Where do I find all of these formulas?
I'm Bi-racial like Obama I am voting for him because of his message about change not because he's black. So I just want to say not every black person votes for someone blacks of skin color. You don't speak me or nor AA's Tyrone you speaking for yourself my friend.
tito,
I'm glad that in your world rainbows and puppy dogs solve all of your problems. But in the real world, please tell me how you would handle a bully?
dtm33bb,
I didn't look at the poll in depth, but from what I understand...is that in heavily GOP Indiana, the voter sample included more Dems than GOPs...could the demographic of the state shifted that much so quickly?
Unfortunatly Obama's thinking that the Olympic games would be a good time to take a Hawaiian vacation was also considered a good time by Saakashvili to move militarily against South Ossetia. Russian intervention in Georgia has played well for McCain, it allowed him to do what the Republicans are so good at, beating the war drums, or in this case shaking the war tambourine, since I don't think anyone in their right mind really thinks the US is going to start a war with Russia over Georgia.
Hey stutter
What kind of character does it take to base your entire political career on the fact you were a POW and make up stories about it to pander for political gain. (see Cross in Dirt!)
I'll take head of the Harvard law review and Constitutional professor over "I graduated 894 out of 899 and road my daddy's coat tails to become a fighter pilot who crashed 5 planes". The lack of character McCain has displayed both personally and politically is a joke.
McCain simply doesn't think at the same level as Obama - period.
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." - H.L. MENCKEN, AMERICAN JOURNALIST
overrated- the swift boat stuff didn't finish kerry. it came out in august when he was having his best month. It is a good talking point to hammer the GOP with though.
Looking back at 2004, the republicans really had the dems on their backfoot with the whole war on terror stuff. the 9-11 convention in NY just sealed it. Kerry and the rest of the dems were afraid to go after Bush. They actually were pre-examining convention speeches less they be too "tough" on the pres!!!
Kerry actually did pretty well in Oct and Nov (mostly due to the debates and a better than avg ground gram). Without that he would have been blown out.
This year is different. The country can't even get enough of bush-bashing. I expect to see just as much in MN as we will see next week in Denver.
Point is taken on the IN - red & MN - blue posts.
Note that Nate's projections also agree, and the historical trends for these states make the likelihood of either flipping on the longshot side at best [despite any VP homers Bayh or Pawlenty]
538's projection # for Obama in IN is only 20% to win, and McCain in MN is at 18% to win.
both of those are reasonable on the face of it for mid-August based on polling & historical trends. Time will tell, but neither is really a true battleground state. If either flips, then that winner already had the vote in the bag with well over 300 EVs. They would be gravy.
But red CO, NV, OH, VA & FL [assuming IA & NM are flipping] are probably much more in play today. Blue ? maybe NH, but MI & PA not looking likely.
so McCain has more states to play defense in & cannot afford to lose any of them, but at least he is in the game !
Hey Stutter...
Why are
McCains
POW records
sealed if he's
such a hero.
He's fought pretty hard for that and against other POW families wishes.
Voice of Reason,
Wow. Obama hasn't done a damn thing to be considered smart outside of some stupid degree and all people can do is fawn all over how articulate, how thoughtful, how intellectual the man is.
It's a joke. Perhaps I should include Uhhh....Ehhmm...and other long pauses and people will be in awe of my intellect because it appears that I am soooo deep in thought. Choosing my words so eloquently.
You keep thinking he's the world's smartest man. I'll keep thinking that he's a populist demagogue using tired old made-for-TV campaign lines to get elected.
McCain is not a war monger. War mongers crave war always. McCain doesn't crave war, but he sees the world in black and white, right and wrong. Highly principled. Which is why he's a guy you want to go into war with, but not the guy deciding whether or not we should fight the war in the first place.
If I was going to war, I'd want McCain, If I was planning a war, I'd want Obama. Big difference. America has to get over the idea a president needs to be "Like me" or want to "Have a beer with." we need a president to maneuver through geo-politics on the global stage, improve our standing in the world and execute effective government.
There is good and evil in the world however dealing with it is complicated. Throwing Russia out of the G8 is the principled "Right thing to do morally, but it's a political disaster likely to create huge problems down the road. A president needs to see all sides of a problem and manipulate the playing board to his advantage. Its chess on a global stage with lives in the balance. Who looks like the better chess player to you?
stop the stutter -
Define the bully. Iran, and their suspended nuclear program? Russia, who attacked a country in which we have no vital national interests (unless you check McCain's lobbyists, ahem, advisors pockets), or Iraq and their massive and monumental WMD program that's just gonna kill us all in the form of a mushroom cloud!!!
You deal with other countries through dialog, shared interests, and finding common ground. Nixon opened a door to China that is helping them flourish today. Ronald Reagan took down the Soviet Union without a war. What problems have Bush and McCain solved with their neocon warmongering ways? Nothing except create exponentially more enemies for our nation while tarnish and staining the great international goodwill that we once had.
I'm not giddy about Bossie et al going after Obama-Ayers. I EXPECT that from the GOP.
This is presidential politics and a lot is at stake. Obama is in an indefensible position and everyone knows it.
Obama is a political rarity. He is an outstanding orator and a lousy debater. He can read a speech off of a teleprompter but he cannot answer a simple question posed to him.
McCain, on the other hand, is the old war veteran who can communicate in a closed forum with the best of them.
This election could fast become a route unless Obama gets his act together.
Why does the projection move in Obama's direction by 0.1% when he leads the popular vote? According to the FAQ there should be a reversion to the mean and an equal allocation of undecideds. What gives?
Correcting this small distortion and flipping about 0.2% to McCain would have an outsized effect on the closest states - CO, OH, and VA. I would estimate the probability of McCain winning improves 2-3% in each, narrowing the EV to about 278-260.
It was 42/36 in favor of the Republicans. I have not looked up the breakdown of the state, so no comment on that. Do yourself the favor and just concede that my point is valid and that I still think McCain will win the state.
Darren,
The equation for the Projection is described here.
On the issue of SUSA's (non-)weighting of their polls: that's why we really need some other poll out of IN. Rasmussen might sometimes skew a bit towards the GOP, but it's a small lean and it's predictable. They still get some wacky results, probably because their samples aren't huge, but I'd love a Rasmussen poll just to know whether IN might be in play or not. I know, as Conservative in Rome has pointed out, that GOP has done well there and has had an ID edge, but the border-state effect and an active GOTV effort could make it much closer. Probably not enough for an Obama win, but maybe...which is why we need another IN poll.
Sometimes I think these polls are like crack, which I guess puts me into Matt JH's smart geek category. Or at least geek. At least I know I'm not a math geek anymore, because lilnev's suggested tweak went totally over my head.
Minnesota is a perpetually weird state. Not just Jesse Ventura. Consider that fact that Michele Bachmann and Keith Ellison have adjoining congressional districts. Literally people across the street from each other are represented by two Reps who are as far apart as any in US history.
That being said, Minnesota and Iowa, with some spillover toward the Dakotas and Wisconsin, are where "nice" plays best. My 80-something grandparents in law lived in a town that was, pretty much exactly, Lake Wobegon. They never declared a party preference, because their town was just too small to risk losing friends in. They voted Ventura. Why, you might ask? Because "the other guys weren't very nice to him in the debates".
I'd argue "Minnesota nice", and the lack of it, is why Hillary Clinton fell so flat in Iowa. Obama, in having spent so much time in rural Illinois, then so much time in Iowa, may lean toward that, where people, particularly in the South might expect more nastiness.
tito,
your post is heavily filled with spin.
Ronald Reagan took down the Soviets by building or threatening to build a military that the USSR couldn't keep up with..
It can be argued that China is a huge friggin problem today.
Russia is doing a pretty good job of bullying Georgia around, don't ya think? Ukraine, Poland, Estonia, Lithuania are not exactly disbanding their defenses right now.
I'm not saying war is the answer, but you have to have that threat there for a bully to listen.
Clinton did his fair share of bombing during his day. Let's be fair now.
lilnev ,
that is an excellent link you providede above, and very timely too.
Reading how Nate more or less predicted back in June that the 6% lead would regress to a tight race shows just how well his modeling is working.
And he backs it up with facts & data. how refreshing !
tjb: people don't care about ayres. americans do not equate white, "bill", and college professor with terrorist. it looks like what it is- a reach.
Wright could have had more traction (it already has hurt obama a lot) but it came out too soon. It can backfire like it did during the special elections if it looks like race-baiting.
"lousy debater..cant answer a question without stuttering" that routine carried bush to the white house. Be careful- you are actually doing obama a favor by lowering expectations- the oldest trick in the book. it worked for mccain last week.
McCain sounds like a bumbling idiot without having the answeres provided to him. We all know he was coached up in th debate. he knew the questions in advance.
I've seen the guy in town halls. He's useless. Now, Obama isn't Mr. inspiration speaking extemporaneously either, mainly because he would never answer in 30s what he could drag out for 5 min. Thats the constitutional layer in him.
In a debate McCain won't have the questions before hand and can't get away with saying things like "I'll chase BinLaden to the gates of hell!" when he wouldn't chase him to Afghanistan. Obama doesn't need to win the debate, just a draw as he did most against Hillary, who is a much better debater than McCain.
This election will come down to Obama's ability to take the gloves off and go after McCain. Thus far McCain has gotten a free ride and still can't take a lead. If Obama turns up the heat effectively, he will will win rather easily.
TJB,
Your previous post came across (to me, at least) as cheering on the impeding smear campaign. If that is not your position, then I will reserve my scorn for those who do support and encourage such attacks. I cannot fathom what you mean, however, when you say, "Obama is in an indefensible position and everyone knows it."
I think Obama is a very good debater. Your critique seems to be that he resists oversimplifying complex issues. Indeed, this is why people like me think he's intelligent (to answer Stutter's question), because he understands the depth and complexity of most issues and can see multiple perspectives. It depends on what one values in a debater, I guess.
I would have to agree with bado on Ayers.
IMO it should matter...but it likely won't if it hasn't by now...which it probably hasn't.
Wright has the potential to scare the bloc of white voters who have any latent racial tensions...
To me, Wright just shows poor judgement on the part of Obama...possibly an insight to a possible sinister racial position of Obama, but that is just speculation. Obama has never to my knowledge uttered the words "Black Power!" So innocent until proven guilty.
stop the stutter -
I never said anything about not having a well established military or the threat of force on the table. You implied that the only way to deal with a bully is through war, hence your defense of the pro-war candidate in this debate.
I'm tired of this and tired of you. You can keep changing the goal posts all you want to but you haven't refuted my point that John McCain is pro-war. And knowing his hot-headed temper, he has no problem jeopardizing our forces and national security because he thinks war is the only answer. Just like the current occupant of the White House.
You can be intellegent and look at a question in many different ways...but leaders need to be decisive..
The position Obama is running for is a leader position. That would be his paygrade.
Mr. Obama didn't do much thinking when he got involved with Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. So let's stop with the more intelligent than Stephen Hawkings routine here.
Six minutes that show why Obama is a superior thinker!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx_YlddXuOY&eurl=http://www.jedreport.com/
tito,
be tired of me....
That's perfectly fine. I disagree with you on a multitude of levels. I look at war as a threat that is sometimes necessary. You would rather talk to these sometimes unreasonable leaders and compromise our nation's best interests. That's fine....I get that. But to call someone pro-war is disingenous and you know that to be true. I can sense the snarkiness in which you say it. It's your opinion...and to me, it's a very flawed one.
StS-
Don't forget self-inflicted wounds in the collapse of the USSR. It wasn't all Reagan's spending.
Brezhnevian Stagnation. Glasnost and Peristroka.
The former led to the latter.
Matt- I think Obama is trying to set expectations low for the real debates. That is why they didn't pushback on the story that Mccain was so awesome and well prepared.
Obama does need to come up with some more one liners (a la Biden or Huckabee). People tend to forget that a big reason he is the nominee was the SC debate. He just came off of loss in NH and NV . Bill and Hill were getting cocky and building momentum towards Feb 5. All she needed to do was not get pulverized. Obama went right after her and Bill- "I don't know who I'm running against sometimes" haha and the classic "while you were sitting on the board of wal-mart".
Of course Clinton was in her element and shot right back but it brought out her worst stereotypes. Black folks and the young crowd flooded the polls for Obama. Edwards picked up the rest and the clinton camp never really recovered.
Hey Stutter...I have a feeling this may describe you:
CHICKENHAWK: a person, politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person actively avoided military service when of draft age.
"The position Obama is running for is a leader position. That would be his paygrade."
You're never going to get it are you? Let's reduce it to the LCD. The question was a form of, "When does life begin?"
The answer was, "I can't tell you. It's between you and God."
Six minutes that show why Obama is a superior thinker!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp0hU1THjuc
Mason,
Maybe he should write that in law.
"Abortion: it's above our paygrade"
To me that would mean that you err on the side safe side of the unknown.
StS:
Sounds good to me.
You know that that would allow people to decide for themselves, right?
Voice of Reason,
Good one!
Glad you got that off your chest.
Yeah - that one was fun!
Mason,
Yes I do.
I don't feel like the government should have it's hands all over this issue like it does....NOR do I think the government should fund any abortions...fair enough?
It's cheaper than food stamps.
But that's pretty much the way current law is anyway, so what's your point?
Never let the enemy pick the battle site!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svBWnryRIQI&eurl=http://www.jedreport.com/
Mason,
I am not thrilled about the way the government polices its food stamp program either. Far too much abuse.
My problem with abortion lies with the a-holes that use it as a form of birth control. To me that's just an evil disregard for what should be a beautiful thing.
You're right about that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni-bJ-SrGTM
"Burt / Mark in VA"
Interesting article in the NY times that discusses Obama's movement toward more agressive attacks on McCain locally, while staying positive nationally. Wonder, now that this has been launched if we will see any movement in the numbers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/us/politics/20ads.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Stutter, you're actually ignorant enough to think women use abortion as a means of birth control. How insulting to any woman who has ever struggled to make that decision.
Mason,
My point was that he couldn't just give a clear succinct (sp) answer about how he feels. He had to do the tulip dance which IMO, he didn't have to do if he felt ok about his position. But, hey, listen. It's been great chatting with you guys here...even those who evidently hate me....LOL. I've got work in the morning. Respect to you all.
Goodnight.
Voice of Reason.
WTF??? I've seen it first hand buddy. Some are ultra-cavalier about it. I can swear to God about that. You need to get out more evidently.
Stop the stutter,
I'm glad to see you posting tonight. Pete Kent and I were posting earlier today and the left wing nuts were out in force.
I noticed Dumb ass in Florida was posting also, DCM are you eating regular potato chips or chips that have ridges.
I'm sure that Indiana Poll made your asshole tighten. All polls now show McCain winning this election.
Stop the stutter the left wing nuts would rather a baby be sucked out of a womb by a vacuum cleaner than admit it is evil. The more the voters pay attention the more they move toward McCain.
Also, Nate it looks like you are cooking the books with your new policy of only counting polls with all candidates. Let's not be a HOMER, NATE SILVER!!
You know Nate, somehow after November 4, 2008, I am going to see you on Keith Odumblermann's show crying about how your system failed to pick up this and that. Frankly Nate, I think you should turn your attention to the upcoming college football year. THIS ELECTION IS OVER!!!!
I am not thrilled about the way the government polices its food stamp program either. Far too much abuse.
Not the point. It's cheaper to get an abortion than to raise a child. Pitch in with the kid once it's born, or keep your nose out of it.
My problem with abortion lies with the a-holes that use it as a form of birth control. To me that's just an evil disregard for what should be a beautiful thing.
That's the beauty of the answer, "It's between you and your God." They can do whatever they want, and you can think yourself better than them for it.
Mason,
You know what? You're right.
I would keep the government totally out of it though...
jack black,
thanks man...
I wouldn't be so quick to call the election over. We've just now broken to about even. Slightly ahead with the electoral college and slightly behind in the national polls. I think this is about as good a position as McCain will be in, however. At least for the next few weeks. The window of opportunity is rapidly closing with the DNC coming up.
I'm turning in for the night...time for you to keep these guys from being unchecked...lol
VoR-
http://www.policyalmanac.org/culture/archive/abortion_statistics.shtml
CDC data from 2000 says that just 53% of women have abortions done were in for the first time.
StS
I'll connect the dots for you one last time.
It's not a tulip dance, or whatever you want to call it. The audience was a bunch of Evangelicals. The question was, "When does life begin?" His answer was, "I don't know. I'm not God." That is a vaild answer to a loaded question. Read the bloody subtext, please. He's pro-choice. Every pro-choice person out there says that it should be between a woman, her doctor, and maybe her God if she has one. It's really quite simple. He explained his position unflinchingly in ecumenical terms.
StS-
"Totally"?
Did you vote for Ron Paul?
Huh... and from the same report 18% were in for their second or more.
Must have been a bunch of "Decline to States".
This is what happens when a Democratic candidate decides that he's afraid to be a Democrat. Obama, the more you try to be a Republican, the lower your numbers will go. You'll never be as Republican as McCain.
If the public wants a Republican, they'll vote for him. If the public has two Republicans in the race, they'll vote for the real Republican. Obama, the only way you can win the election is to run as a Democrat.
stop_the_stutter,
Wow you're in way over your head tonight buddy. I'll be watching from WAAAAY over here.
It's funny how in the same blog you can have people claiming that Obama is an extreme leftist and others claiming that he is practically a Republican. Remind me never to run for president...
Sedi---McCain is not going to bring up Bill Ayers until after the convention.
It will make the Swiftboaters look like kids.
"McCain is not going to bring up Bill Ayers until after the convention.
It will make the Swiftboaters look like kids."
This is probably true (early October would be my guess), but it is to be mourned, not celebrated. If it works, then I lose all faith in this country. I don't think it will, however, in part because it is baseless, hollow, fear-mongering and guilt-by-association. And because Obama is ready for it and will defend himself and then hit back with substance. Chicago politics ain't beanbag either. Obama is ramping up his negative attacks now, mostly going after McCain on economics. There's a lot to say about McCain on the economy, and from the perspective of mainstream America, almost none of it is good.
pluckon,
maybe it would help you to review the last few decades of electoral history.
The following Democrats ran as centrists
In the edited volume Estimating the Policy Position of Political Actors, page 54, they code the Republican and Democrat presidential platform. And develop a left-right index.
The largest gaps (>20 points) between the candidate's platforms (when the Democrats were furthest to the left) were in:
1952, 1964, 1980, 1984 and 1988.
The smallest gaps were in 1956, 1960, 1968, 1992 and 1996.
Moderate gaps (about 20 points) were present in 1948, 1972 and 1976
When the Dems ran close to the Republicans, they won 3/4 times, and lost in 1968 by a very small margin (despite the Vietnam war, and rising public disorder).
When the Dems ran with a large gap, they lost every single time except in 1964 (where the gap was large because Barry Goldwater swerved to the right).
With moderate gaps, the Dems won 2/3. However, 1972 was a big loss, and 1976 was a much narrower win than it should have been, given Watergate. 1948 was also a very close election - California was won by .44%, Illinois by .8% and Ohio by .24%. If those states had gone the other way, Truman would have lost.
The lesson?
1. Democrats have clearly done best when they run as close as possible to the Republican party.
2. This is increasingly true as the center has shifted over time.
I had to comment on here because I found the level of discourse to be a bit ridiculous for this topic.
Tyrone:
There is nothing wrong with you being an African-American guy and supporting McCain. If someone belittled you, I'm sorry you had to go through that experience. However, I think you are generalizing African-Americans a lot. You cite Section 8 and welfare as reasons the Democrats get the votes from African-Americans. Considering the fact that the majority of African-Americans are middle-class and don't need or care about Section 8, I find it extremely insulting that you equate the African-American vote to an endorsement of social programs.
Believe it or not, but Obama has talked extensively about improving access to higher education, implementing a real health care system, strengthening our national infrastructure (which no ONE talks about besides Obama and Mike Huckabee), and changing the way in which workers are trained for new jobs. These are all issues that are extremely important to everyone, but especially for African-Americans, who have a higher unemployment rate than most racial groups.
John McCain has been in the US Senate since 1987, but has a thin record on health care and the economy. He claims to be so experienced, but on the issues Americans care so much about, he hasn't been a leader. The closest thing McCain has been to economic issues was his banking and loan scandal involvement related to Keating Five. That is nothing to be proud of, and I hope more voters know that his rhetoric does not match up to his record. Gallavanting around and talking about Georgia is also a joke, considering he endorses the same foreign policy as Bush. He would not have been tough on Putin at all. He just saw an opening to look presidential and came with the tough talk, as any professional Monday morning quarterback knows how to do. I made these points to...African-Americans who gave a litany of reasons of why they supported Obama and opposed McCain. Guess what? Most of them were more concerned about health care, student loans, and retaining solid careers in the future, while a couple said race was a large factor. There is a diversity of opinion within the African-American community. What bugs me the most, however, is the large number of people who oppose Obama SOLELY because of his race, and they are never called out on.
How in the world are you going to say that African-Americans are only voting for Obama because of his race based SOLELY on people you have talked to? Do you know how presumptuous and ridiculous that is?
Are the 80%+ of white evangelicals also racist because of their voting patterns for white, Republican candidates? Are Mormons religious bigots for voting over 85% for Mitt Romney during the Republican presidential primaries? Were Catholics also being religiously bigoted for voting en masse for JFK in 1960? Why are African-Americans always supposed to feel bad for their votes because they don't prefer Republicans? Maybe if African-Americans weren't being talked down to by certain Republican operatives and "pundits", the party would have a chance.
Like I said before, I respect your vote for McCain, but don't tear down other people based on some perceived notions of how you think everyone feels. I think you have more of an issue with the fact that African-Americans just aren't supporting your guy. You are basically saying that middle-class African-Americans don't have a brain when it comes to voting, and I have a problem with that.
Maybe you should ask African-American Democrats what the Republicans can do to earn their votes. Mike Huckabee probably would have peeled off more African-Americans had he been the nominee, and he even won 48% of the African-American vote when he ran for re-election as governor in Arkansas back in 2002.
This whole "Democrats try to keep blacks down" junk is just as bad as when Democrats say that poor Southerners vote against their own interests when they support Republicans. People aren't going to support you if you start off belittling then.
The lack of analysis if these polls is amazing. It's a simple reason why IN went from Obama +1 to McCain +6. If you look at the crosstabs you will see they shifted party ID towards Repub by +8 from the last poll. Amazing shif tsince McCain has no field offices and is not campaigning there. The poll is suspect at best.
MN another poll with "interesting" changes in crosstabs in 1mth. Suddenly there are 7% more white people , blacks are reduced by 1/2, Hispanics are reduced by 3/4 and the party ID shifted towards by Rep +3 and Independents changed by 6.
Nate,
I don't understand why you are so surprised. I am yet to see how any major ground game (i.e., Indiana) can result in a dramatic change wih Bush won Indiana by 21 points in 2004. I don't think I understand Obama's approach of not securing states he should win (e.g., Minnesota, Michigan) in the midwest before moving to longshots. I have read nothing to indicate that there has been the necessary demographic shift in Indiana that makes it worth Obama's efforts (unlike say VA, CO and NM). I also don't see his proximity to Indiana as an Illinois senator having any real impact. Could you explain the basis for that argument (I have seen you make it before.) I would also like you to point me to some source that suggests a strong field operation can persuade an extremely favorable republican demographic to vote democrate in this election.
>> I don't think I understand Obama's approach of not securing states he should win (e.g., Minnesota, Michigan) in the midwest before moving to longshots.
Because Obama has been trying to headfake McCain with a psy-ops games to create money pits. McCain hasn't taken the bait and Obama's gambling isn't paying off.
There is simply no credible reason to believe IN is competitive when the national numbers are within 2 or 3 points and the state went Republican by 20 last time.
Partisan Democrat hopes aside, IN was always going to be out of play unless the national numbers were so lopsided that it wouldn't matter anyway.
Nate no reason to panic the right wing is just coming home. McBush has thrown them the red meat and their hatred is sending them in their corner. The Dems will get together after the convention and the battle for the Independents will begin. This always happens this time of year it's where you go from now that is important.
James,
Only a lib who has that part of their brain blocked from rational thought would think I am in way over my head...
Yes, I did vote for Ron Paul.
Our government's money should not be spend blindly on those who cant get out of their own way. Period.
Mason,
It IS a tulip dance.
Proper answer: I feel that abortion is a personal choice. I feel that if a woman should be able to have an abortion if she so chooses.
See how that works? If you are worried about how that plays...then you don't feel good about your position.
God, even when I try to give you guys credit, you go and screw it up.
Hasn't the playbook for crushing John McCain already been written? I.e. Bush's 2000 Republican primary campaign?
How did old Dubya go to work on our delightfully senile flyboy?
New Battleground National Poll:
McCain 47
Obama 46
http://www.tarrance.com/082008/Battleground-35-charts.pdf
In the RCP election projection, McCain has taken his first lead in the EV since Obama sealed the Democratic Nomination.
Remember, most of the Midwestern states voted before the Jeremiah Wright fiasco, the serial flip-flops and the generally uninspiring campaign. SD was the only state in the region that voted post Feb. 29th and that state went easily to Clinton and the portion of the state that bordered MN when especially strong to her. Obama will run very weakly in MN compared to the rest of the Midwestern states (IA, IL, WI) since it is the only state that is not contiguous with IL.
IN is out or reach and I can't see Obama winning FL with Crist as the governor. If Obama wins that state, he will have won all of the other battleground states as well.
The simple truth is that Obama's lies have started to catch up to him. He was an out spoken supporter in IL of the murder of babies who survive abortion and the only senator to stand on the IL senate floor opposed to the law to save those lives. He now says that he never did that. He also never knew Wright was a racist, never knew his Ayers was am unrepentant terrorist, his buddy that sold him his house and lot next door was a crook, and on and on the lies go.
Americans can only be fooled by glamour and glitz for so long... eventually the truth detectors go off and they realize who the liar is.
The simple truth is that Obama's lies have started to catch up to him. He was an out spoken supporter in IL of the murder of babies who survive abortion and the only senator to stand on the IL senate floor opposed to the law to save those lives. He now says that he never did that. He also never knew Wright was a racist, never knew his Ayers was am unrepentant terrorist, his buddy that sold him his house and lot next door was a crook, and on and on the lies go.
Americans can only be fooled by glamour and glitz for so long... eventually the truth detectors go off and they realize who the liar is.
The simple truth is that Obama's lies have started to catch up to him. He was an out spoken supporter in IL of the murder of babies who survive abortion and the only senator to stand on the IL senate floor opposed to the law to save those lives. He now says that he never did that. He also never knew Wright was a racist, never knew his Ayers was am unrepentant terrorist, his buddy that sold him his house and lot next door was a crook, and on and on the lies go.
Americans can only be fooled by glamour and glitz for so long... eventually the truth detectors go off and they realize who the liar is.
The simple truth is that Obama's lies have started to catch up to him. He was an out spoken supporter in IL of the murder of babies who survive abortion and the only senator to stand on the IL senate floor opposed to the law to save those lives. He now says that he never did that. He also never knew Wright was a racist, never knew his Ayers was am unrepentant terrorist, his buddy that sold him his house and lot next door was a crook, and on and on the lies go.
Americans can only be fooled by glamour and glitz for so long... eventually the truth detectors go off and they realize who the liar is.
bjb1968, do you think you could post that a fifth time? Obviously, you need to convince yourself of something.
The best way for Obama to campaign in Indiana is for him to campaign in Ohio and allow the campaign to spill over the border.
Interesting that Obama gets 98% of the black vote in PA, because in the last VA poll he was only getting about 70%.
Tyrone, if you really want to know why 90% of black people vote Democrat (and I can't believe you don't know this) it's because some of them remember that just 40 years ago, the Republican party was the party that wanted to deny them the right to vote and keep them seated at the back of the bus. Basically, at the moment of truth, the GOP chose the path of racism with their southern strategy and they have reaped the benefit of 100 electoral votes in the south ever since. Some blacks have not forgotten that. In the period since then there have been timely reminders to the black community that the GOP continues to harbour a racist element within it. That is not to say that Bush or McCain is racist (they are not) but it's not easy to forget history or ignore the fact that many in the GOP think that slavery is nothing to be ashamed about. The great irony of course is that once upon a time, the Democrats were unquestionably the racist party but at the moment of truth circa 1964, the Democrats chose the right path and the GOP opposed the principles of democracy and equality of man at every turn.
In addition, for those blacks who are poor or middle class, the Democratic party best represents their interests economically and socially. For wealthy AAs, well, they tend to be intelligent enough to know that the GOP has screwed up the economy, has waged an illegal war in Iraq while giving a free pass to the people who actually attacked us on 9/11 and has waged a disgraceful and dishonourable campaign to date. Rather than being angry at your fellow AAs, why not expend a little of that energy on the GOP for failing utterly to show any interest in fighting for the interests not just of the black community but the working and middle classes.
I just do not understand why a majority of Americans support McCain's policy in the Russian/Georgian conflict. McCain is championing a country who shelled at apartment buildings of innocent civilians, killing over 2000 in an act of genocide.
McCain has been a big proponent of Georgia, egging them on against Russia. So, this aggression was met with the bear. Only an idiot would provoke the bear. And our dear Maverick, if he was commander in chief, would be going to war with Russia right now.
Obama needs to get off his rear and start hammering McCain or it will be all over before it starts. I support Obama but am really getting ticked at his campaign, it's like they have already anointed him as the winner in November. I think this rally at Bronco Stadium is going to back fire on Obama big time, just like the trip to Germany did. It just oozes arrogance and that doesn't play to the blue collar voters.
Can't read the whole thread but doesn't it matter that Obama has been on vacation? He had to expect a dip now, then the VP bump, then the convention bump to bring him back to his lead.
Its all up for grabs, and the debates in the end may make the difference.
psmith, you've got to be kidding with that bit about pubbies wanting to deny blacks the vote...please check your history...which party controlled the Old South...which party started the KKK...which party ran two candidates in 1860, one of whom, Breckinridge, was committed to the expansion of slavery...which party, led by Al Gore's dad, attempted to derail LBJ's civil rights agenda in the mid 1960's...which party, in 1948, broke off a separatist wing labelled the Dixiecrats with Strom Thurmond in command...will wait for your reply...
Perhaps you should reread psmith's comment, irishbrigade. He/she made clear that the Democrats had at one point been on the wrong side of Civil Rights. But he/she also made clear that more recently the Democratic party has been the party that worked (in general) for Civil Rights (hence the reference to 1964.) And guess which party the ticked off anti-integration/anti-Civil Rights politicians flocked to? Of course you *had* to know that Strom Thurmond switched to the Republican Party during the Civil Rights era...
Nice try but no go; Democrats began making headway with African Americans in the 30s with the New Deal programs and they solidified that support in the 60s by championing racial equality. If the Republicans haven't found a way to earn some support of their own, then perhaps they should re-evaluate their strategy. They could start by cutting back on the condescending tone some choose to take with African Americans.
Tyrone is tired of being deemed a traitor (though, I've yet to see anyone here make that suggestion). I'm tired of being treated as if I'm not intelligent enough to know which party works in my best interest and which party's vision best represents my own for this country. I'm also tired of people acting as if being black or having black friends, etc. gives them the right to judge, demean and/or patronize African Americans.
And perhaps you, irishbrigade, should check your recent history; the standard "But Republicans were on the right side 150 years ago," argument means jack squat for today.
Drudge has got an Italian story up on Obama's half brother living in squalor in Kenya. Is it just me of does this paint an odd picture of Obama. He wants us to care for the world's poor (a noble position) yet he does nothing for his 26 year old half brother? What's up with that?
TimR states, "I think this rally at Bronco Stadium is going to back fire on Obama big time, just like the trip to Germany did. It just oozes arrogance and that doesn't play to the blue collar voters."
Stories yesterday on the all the lobbyist and fundraisers getting seats. Prior to that was a stream of criticisms on the requirement to volunteer to get tickets (rumors have scores of young GOPPERS getting tickets to get multiple ops for covert disruptions). How many of these volunteers got vetted is anyones guess. The whole notion of having to "volunteer" to get something of value in return "a ticket" is lame and is playing poorly. Many radio and print pieces about working moms trying to get tickets but not having the time to give.
I think in the end, the Democrats made the classic mistake of overplaying their hand. Both parties are guilty of this so I'm not picking on the Ds. They saw the GOP weakness as an opportunity to dump Hillary's DLC centrists and try for a homerun with a Leftist. By luck the GOP, in a moment of pragmatic clarity, nominated a moderate convervative (about as far from the USA voter center to the right as Hillary is to the left).
Obama comes off with a gross narcissistism. The more people get of Obama the less likeable he becomes. The Mile High Show is brilliant on paper but its no sure bet how it plays in the end.
Battleground poll is fascinating. Get the details at RCP. the internals are TERRIBLE for Obama.
Just looked at the Zogby poll -- a huge reversal, something like 12 points in one month. The wheels are coming off the bus.
MO at ras was interessting in that it had McCain at 50%. He is starting to reach unassiable numbers in certain states that were formerly considered battlegrounds.
WELCOME TO GLENN in CO. Nice to see some balance here. totally agree that the Rally in Denver may backfire. I must say I am hoping it will.
Glenn in Colorado (Springs, no doubt) wrote:
Obama comes off with a gross narcissistism (sic). The more people get of Obama the less likeable he becomes.
Let me interrupt Glenn with some facts, which as we all know, are deeply disturbing to Republicans. Obama's "likeability" numbers are far ahead of McCain's and improved between June and July.
Here is the link. So, Glenn, do you have any more Christian lies for us, or are you in the Cone of Silence?
Pluckon -- read the Battleground Poll his nuimbers are declining across all dimensions, Obama's that is.
Pluckon states,
"Let me interrupt Glenn with some facts, which as we all know, are deeply disturbing to Republicans. Obama's "likeability" numbers are far ahead of McCain's and improved between June and July.
Here is the link. So, Glenn, do you have any more Christian lies for us, or are you in the Cone of Silence?"
Respectfully, Pluckon, let's chill out on the hate speech and personal attacks.
I read that Drudge piece on Obama's brother. How sad to live in squalor and poverty when you have a multi-millionaire half brother. Contrast this with the McCain’s who plucked an orphan out of the arms of Mother Teresa to raise her as their own daughter.
Talk the talk? Yes, but walk the walk!
Mrs. Obama could not be reached for comment -- she was working out with her trainer. Her children were busy with their piano and dance lessons and seemed unaware they had an Uncle in Africa who makes it through life using his fists and guile while subsisting on one dollar a month.
Who are these people?
Agree PeteKent,
The more I think about this Obama's half brother story the more it strikes me as odd. Even if you were heartless and a pure Machiavellian, wouldn't you, in preparation for running for President of the USA, send some people over to help him out and at least create a feel good story from it?
Look, I'm not blind to McCain's issues. He's made some poor decisions at best during the Keating affair, the circumstances of his divorce is questionable, he's known to be rash and a bully, he has a temper, he was a poor student at the Academy, and many Senators he served with don't much care for him. But all that said I feel like I have a pretty good idea of what makes the guy tick. (I did have lunch with him in Denver at a table of eight, he came off very well. Although this was the day of the "bomb bomb bomb Iran" incident, which he used at this lunch. I wish I would have said something to him that day before he launched it that night in public. At the time, I thought it was odd and an inappropriate comment).
For me, Obama is an enigma. I'm still very much in the dark as to this guy. This half brother story is just that much more difficult to resolve, at least for me.
petekent, I agree that Obama's numbers are declining. I'm not happy about it, and I think they're weak because Obama followed Kerry's lead and essentially went on vacation while the Republicans attacked him. It was bad enough when Kerry did it, but it's inexcusable for Obama to do it.
Glenn, no, I won't cut out the "hate speech." Christian evangelicals are some of the worst liars this country has to offer. If it's not this phony "pastor" Rick Warren, then it's Pat Robertson or the late and not so great Jerry Falwell, who no doubt is roasting in hell as we speak. Your buddy Dobson will join him there soon enough.
"The circumstances of his (McCain's) divorce are questionable."
No they're not. McCain's wife was in a car accident while he was in prison making propaganda flicks for the communists. He got back, saw that he didn't have a hot wife anymore, and started messing around on the side with a rich, hot filly.
And he's never stopped messing around since. The Republicans know all about it, and those who know him best -- his colleagues in the Senate -- are avoiding his convention like the plague.
Obama's campaign is too stupid to take advantage of any of this, and the news media being the Republican asset they are, will never say anything because all they can do is repeat the P.O.W. mantra.
All of the foregoing is to be expected, but you'd have thought that Obama's people would've been better prepared. But no, they're not. The result: A much closer election than it should be, and maybe even a McCain victory.
It's still anybody's election though. A long way to go to November. I have heard from different talking heads that McCain stole the prisoner-of-war story about the cross in the snow from a Soviet prisoner stuck in a Gulag in Russia. Why doesn't Obama follow up on that? What about McCain lying about flying coach last summer when his campaign was out of money when he was really using his wife's corporate jet? Hillery's lies about Bosnia did her it and it would be the end of McCain also. Plenty of things for Obama to use................
can't wait for the con trolls after today's zogby poll, showing McCain up 5...the same reviled Zogby who is barely left on Nate's model. Same day a larger Quinnipiac poll, consistent with all the other national polls, shows Obama at 47, the same as he has been for the past 2 months, and McCain at 42 - in the alice through the looking glass world that is the MSM, Zogby now counts more than Quinnipiac. It's fun to cherry-pick polls, and we can all play that game.
If you look at RCP's tracker, Obama has been up since mid-April, period, and his poll numbers now are about the same as they have been all along, except for a bump in mid July. If the cons want to live by Zogby, they will, I am sure,be ready to die by Zogby (the same polling firm that said Obama was going to win California by 10 over HRC. How'd that one work out?)
I do not deny that the race has tightened a little (from plus 5 nationally to plus 2-3) and that Obama needs to man up. He is getting smacked around, as someone else said, bitch-slapped, reminding me of a good-natured labrador retriever getting mauled by a pit bull with distemper. "I love America, you love America and John McCain loves America" Damn...that is WEAK!!! Wake the f88k up, Barack. McCain is trying to DESTROY you. He cannot give anyone positive reasons to vote for him, so he can only make sure they are scared of you! They have not been subtle about their playbook, and I think the attacks have moved the polls a couple of points. I don't necessarily think the MSM are in the tank for their boy, McCain, at this point, as a lot of them have been turned off by his tactics. However, they are not going to fight your fight for you. You better name a fighter like Biden, Clark or Clinton, since you just don't have the stomach for it. You need a Bob Dole-style attack dog as VP...I have no doubt it helped Ford close a 30 point gap to 2...
Still, look at the long distance lens, and Obama has led in every RCP average for 4 months, so that might be something to pay attention to.
Thanks for encouraging me to read the internals of the Battleground Poll. It shows both Obama's favorable (46 to 57) and unfavorable scores (18 to 36) going up from January to August. The changes come from respondents who had no opinion or didn't know him. However, McCain's numbers are all downward over this period with favorables declining from 65 to 57 and unfavorables rising from 18 to 36.
It seems the republican may be undermining his own image with his attacks. The BP also shows that respondents are more comfortable with a 46 year-old AA candidate than they are with an old divorced candidate.
This suggests to me that future negative campaign themes by McCain may not work as well when is own negatives become too high. Clinton had this problem with likability during the primaries and this could undercut the play-book the GOP is running with in the general election.
Funny to see Glenn from Colorado (Springs, no doubt) yammering about Obama's extended family, as if he's supposed to run a worldwide welfare operation for every shirt-tail relation.
Oddly enough, there's nary a peep from Glenn about McCain's rich wife's half-sister. Turns out that his hot trophy wife is NOT the "only child" she claims to be, but has a half sister who got stiffed on the Budweiser inheritance.
And oh by the way, why in hell doesn't Obama have any surrogates out there in, say, Missouri, talking about how McCain is connected to the Budwesier fortune that just got sold to the Europeans?
Time was when the Democratic Party knew where the jugular was and was never too far from a sharp knife. What the hell ever happened? I'm not all that p.o.'d at the Republicans for their street fighting ways; I'm much more upset with my Democratic Party for having forgotten how politics is played in this country, and how it's always been played.
Post a Comment