Now that there are fully eight distinct national tracking polls, I thought I'd take the time to give you my Cliff's Notes assessment of each one. The polls are arranged in the order in which they typically appear throughout the day -- as you may have discovered, you can get your tracking poll fix quite literally morning, noon and night.
Zogby/C-SPAN/Reuters
When Publishes: About 12:45 AM Eastern Time.
Key Specifications: ~1200 likely voters, 3-day rolling sample.
Track Record: Zogby's telephone polls are not quite as bad a reputed, ranking just slightly below average (his internet-based Zogby Interactive polls are another matter altogether). However, they seem to be getting worse rather than better. Zogby was one of the few pollsters to call the popular vote for Gore in 2000, but he missed high on Kerry's numbers in many state-level polls in 2004, and then had an erratic primary season this year.
House Effect/Lean: For the reasons specified below, so far has leaned Republican by a point or two.
Features/Strengths: Zogby's write-ups are generally entertaining, and he reveals more than most about the progress of the candidates in individual days' results. One of two pollsters to publish results with a decimal place intact, which we like.
Zogby is the first pollster to go to press each day, publishing in the wee hours of the morning, although the way that he accomplishes this is to split his sample periods over two days. That is, a "day's" worth of polling consists of interviews from that afternoon plus the previous night.
Quirks/Concerns: There is one very, very significant concern with Zogby, which is that he has a longstanding rule to set his party weightings based on the exit polls from the most recent election. In this case, that means 2004, when a roughly equal number of Democrats and Republicans turned out. However, according to essentially every available poll, Democrats now have somewhere between a 5-point and a 10-point advantage in party ID.
This particular procedure has bitten Zogby in the ass before. Between 2000 and 2004, there was a shift in party ID toward the Republicans; as a result, Zogby's numbers were 2-3 points high for Kerry across battleground states.
To the extent that Obama is leading in a Zogby poll, that means essentially that he'd have won the election given 2004 turnout dynamics. 2008 turnout dynamics are liable to be sigificantly more favorable to him. With that said, the relationship between Zogby's odd party ID weightings and his toplines is probably not quite 1:1, since he is weighting based not just on party ID but also a number of other factors. My guess is, for instance, that one reason that Obama always seems to do strongly in Zogby among independents is that Zogby is essentially squeezing Obama-friendly demographic groups out of his Democratic pile and erroneously classifying them as indies.
Research 2000 / Daily Kos
When Publishes: Early AM, usually about 7:30 Eastern time.
Key Specifications: ~1100 likely voters, 3-day rolling sample.
Track Record: Research 2000 has an above-average track record, although this is the first time they've run a national tracking poll.
House Effect/Lean: Aggregating all of Research 2000 polls in this general election cycle -- including their tracking results plus their state polling for both Daily Kos and the myriad newspapers that they contract with -- they have had a slight Democratic lean of 1-2 points. However, the lean has appeared to be stronger in their national tracker, and less strong (in fact, almost nonexistent) in their state polling.
Features/Strengths: Full set of cross-tabular results published each day. Poll tends to be fairly stable, in part because they use a fixed party ID weighting (Democrat +9). Research 2000 is the only pollster to publish each individual day's results in addition to the rolling average.
Quirks/Concerns: Racial demographics are aggressive -- probably too aggressive -- showing blacks making up 14 percent of the electorate and Hispanics another 13 percent. Turnout will be up among minorities this year, but probably not by quite that much. The +9 party ID split is arguably also aggressive, although within the broad range of what other polls have found this year.
Rasmussen Reports
When Publishes: Promptly at 9:30 AM Eastern. Results are sometimes available slightly earlier for subscribers to their Premium service.
Key Specifications: 3000 likely voters, 3-day rolling sample.
Track Record: Rasmussen rates as a strong pollster overall and did particularly well in 2004, though less well in this year's primaries.
House Effect/Lean: Frequently reputed to have a Republican lean, Rasmussen's overall house effect between its state and national polls has in fact been very minor -- less than one full point. However, it has been somewhat more pronounced in their national tracker than in their state-level results.
Features/Strengths: Largest sample size of any of the tracking polls. Between that and the fact that they weight by party ID, they have tended to have the most stable results. To the extent that any pollster should weight by party ID, I think Rasmussen is going about it the right way, setting targets based on a six-week rolling average of all interviews conducted.
Quirks/Concerns: The poll sometimes crosses the line from being stable into lower-case-c conservative, as the strict party ID weighting scheme means that it often won't react as strongly as others to changes in the mood of the electorate. For the traditionalists out there, Rasmussen is the only one of the eight trackers to use the IVR/"robocall" method.
The Diageo Hotline Poll
When Publishes: Midmorning, usually around 10:30 AM Eastern time. Results are often teased on the Hotline Blog before they appear in full.
Key Specifications: ~800 likely voters, 3-day rolling sample.
Track Record: Not much information to go on. This poll was published in 2000 and called the race as Bush +3, but did not appear to be active in 2004.
House Effect/Lean: No pronounced house effects so far.
Features/Strengths: Only pollster to probe on enthusiasm each day in addition to the topline numbers. The National Journal folks take their politics very seriously and this poll is likely a reflection of that.
Quirks/Concerns: Has the smallest sample size of any of the trackers, and does not use a fixed party ID weighting. As such, their numbers have tended to bounce around a lot. That plus the limited track record make this a middle-of-the-road tracker.
Battleground / Tarrance / George Washington U.
When Publishes: Weekdays only -- midmornings around 10:30 AM Eastern time.
Key Specifications: Either 800 or 1,000 likely voters, spanning either 4 or 5 days respectively.
Track Record: Battleground is usually in hibernation, emerging only once every four years to produce national trial heat numbers. They've been around the block, however, and had great years in 1992 and 1996, followed by OK years in 2000 and 2004.
House Effect/Lean: Prior to a methodological change that they made a couple of weeks ago, had a very prounced (3-4 point) Republican lean. Since then, they've been fairly neutral.
Features/Strengths: Co-operated by a Republican (Ed Goaes) and Democratic (Celinda Lake) pollster, so to the extent they have a house effect, it isn't the result of partisan bias. Battleground publishes more cross-tabular detail than any other tracking poll, although the formatting is a bit cumbersome.
Quirks/Concerns: They don't conduct interviews on Fridays or Saturdays, which is a defensible decision, but means that the poll may be slower to react to new information early in the work week, especially when coupled with the relatively large (4-5 day) sample window.
As alluded to above, Battleground previously had significant problems with their sample, substantially undercounting young voters, which was likely causing the strong Republican lean. They have since revisited their turnout assumptions and altered their model, and have had more "normal" looking results since.
Gallup
When Publishes: At 1 PM Eastern time, or a few minutes thereafter.
Key Specifications: Generally about ~2750 registered voters and ~2200 likely voters over a rolling three-day window.
Track Record: Gallup's results lag a bit behind its reputation, as it ranks in the lower half of our accuracy ratings. Their likely voter models have been the subject of much discussion and occasional critique.
House Effect/Lean: Very neutral overall so far this year.
Features/Strengths: Large sample size. Includes a supplement of cellphone numbers. Write-ups are informative and concise. Strong professional ethics and sense of transparency. Significant cross-tabular information is available, although it's published on a weekly rather than daily basis.
Quirks/Concerns: The poll has been a bit "jumpy", reacting more strongly than others (i.e. perhaps overreacting) to events in the news cycle. Still, the main point of concern is with the three different versions that they publish each day (registered voters, and then two separate likely voter models) -- it's hard to know which version they are really throwing their weight behind. Also, the differences between the registered voter numbers and the more conservative version of their likely voter numbers are sometimes implausibly large. We advocate paying the most attention to the less conservative, so-called "Likely Voters II" turnout model, which is the number we list in our daily write-ups.
Investors Business' Daily / TIPP
When Publishes: Mid-afternoon, usually about 3 PM Eastern time.
Key Specifications: About ~1050 likely voters over a 5-day window.
Track Record: IBD/TIPP touts itself as the most accurate pollster based on its strong result in 2004, when they nailed the Bush-Kerry numbers within a couple of tenths of a point. One good result does not a pollster make, however, and in 2000, their performance was only average, missing the Bush-Gore margin by 2.5 points. Results were slightly erratic and counterintuitive earlier this year, when for instance they showed an 11-point Obama lead in mid-May when most other pollsters showed him struggling at that time.
House Effect/Lean: Not yet enough data to reach any firm conclusion.
Features/Strengths: Pretty good internals available at the IBD website. Publishes with the decimal place included.
Quirks/Concerns: A 5-day tracking window is relatively long, and means that IBD/TIPP may be slower to react to new trends. Their D-R party ID gap has been narrower so far than that of most other pollsters (perhaps too narrow), though it does not appear as though they weight based on party ID as Rasmussen or Research 2000 does. Overall, the poll is probably fine given these caveats, but we have relatively little basis on which to evaluate it.
ABC News / Washington Post
When Publishes: Embargoed until 5 PM Eastern.
Key Specifications: Just debuted yesterday, so it is hard to say with certainty, but they appear to be using a 4-day rolling sample of about 1300 likely voters.
Track Record: Strong relative to that of other major news organizations, which generally do not do terrific polling, although just average compared to the field at large. ABC/Post had a fairly strong go of things when they conducted polling during this year's primaries.
House Effect/Lean: Significant Democratic lean of 3 or so points so far this election.
Features/Strengths: The only tracking poll apart from Gallup to include a cellphone sample. Relatively large sample size. Results are documented and reported professionally.
Quirks/Concerns: I don't have any specific critiques about their methodology, although any poll with a house effect this large needs to be evaluated with that in mind.
*-*
In summation, none of these tracking polls are perfect, although Rasmussen -- with its large sample size and high pollster rating -- would probably be the one I'd want with me on a desert island. Conversely, the only one of the trackers that I consider obviously dubious is Zogby.
10.21.2008
Tracking Poll Primer
by Nate Silver @ 9:33 AM...see also methodology, national polls, pollsters, rasmussen, tracking polls, zogby
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

1103 comments
up late nate?
or early...
wow, great info. Some of it was self-explanatory, and some just confirmed my suspicions, but this will be useful reading Nov. 3 before I fall asleep. Thanks.
We get his kind of analysis a couple days after Nate apologizes for not returning our emails?!? Nate, buddy, you are working way too hard. I hope you have a vacation planned for the second week in November because you and your peeps deserve it.
Great work. And don't worry about not returning emails. No one would ever say that you're slacking off.
Battleground
O 48
M 47
I wonder what they are seeing that no one else is. Obama was not up 14last week, nor is he up 1 today.
McCain Surge?
Nate's slacking off. Answer your e-mail, Nate!
;)
Just kidding, of course.
Drudge has his new headline. Out with Zogby, in with Battleground.
Nate is right about the Battleground poll being slow to pick up trends. Right now, the GW Poll is using a 5 day sample with data from Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of last week, with Tuesday and Wednesday being strong McCain polling days. No other tracker has such old data in their sample. They are also showing Obama up by 1 point because of that. When those days roll off of the average later this week, GW will show "momentum" towards Obama when the real issue is the sample.
If the ABC poll has a 3-point house lean, it includes cell-phone only users and you estimate the cellphone effect to be 2-3 %, do you include that as an adjustment to your house-effect? Measuring the house effect of cell-phone polls and then subtracting/adding that to the overall lean? Or is that just a raw number?
The GW tracker also has very small (200 person) daily samples, so it will be more likely to produce erratic results. This is not a one-point race right now.
Hey guys, I've been mulling over a question and I would love some of your insightful analysis:
Now that McCain's camp has all but declared CO "unwinnable," what effect will that have on the voters in that state? Will Republicans just stay home? Will undecideds automatically break for Obama, reasoning that McCain doesn't even want them? If a candidate says he's pulling out of a state, is it all but a sure thing he will then lose the state?
Thanks.
Is there any difference between a tracking poll and a 'standard' poll other than the fact that the tracking poll is rolling?
Do they survey the same voters?
Battleground are fucking INSANE!!!
I looked on the Battleground site, could not find the +1 at all
It's +7 for 10/20 though. That's all I found on their poorly organized site.
wher is the battleground poll ?
All I see is 49 - 45 fro yesterday
Keep in mind that having a house effect does not mean its inaccurate. In fact, I'd say pollsters have been underestimating Obama's support so far, as in the primaries, where there was the cellphone effect and the enthusiasm gap between Obama voters and Clinton voters, as well as the much better organization Obama had. Hillary's organization and her supporters' enthusiasm far outmatched McCain's, so the gap should be even larger in the general election.
Great analysis, Nate. I deduced some of these biases and concerns, but I'm glad to see them affirmed and explained by an expert. But serioulsy, dude, what good is a poll on a deserted island?
it's here
http://www.tarrance.com/files/2-way-ballot-trender-10-20.pdf
Only pollster to probe on enthusiasm each day in addition to the topline numbers.
I'm not sure what qualifies as "enthusiasm" numbers, but Rasmussen does probe "favorability" each day (with "very" and "somewhat" as shadings).
Yeah, that Battleground poll is wildly erratic. Can't figure that one out. I think if we stick with Rass and Gallup as our baseline, we'll be about right.
What about the Nickelodeon tracker? Kids count!
I'm liberal defender of freedom and I approve this message.
Did you know all the polls are liberals fudging numbers to trick the moral majority not to vote?
http://hillbuzz.wordpress.com/2008/10/09/another-reason-the-polls-are-off-just-listen-to-how-some-polls-are-conducted/
I found this a while ago. These people actually believe there's some conspiracy against them. They can't accept losing.
anyone know what other polls to expect today outside the tracking?
I know of
- IN and FL from PPP...
Maybe the nytimes/cbs weekly?
+13 a week ago, to +1 today. Even if I was a hardcore McCain supporter, I'd still call that biggest outlier of this election, quite possibly all-time. The fact I didn't get pissed shows how utterly ridiculous it is.
Awesome explanation Nate! Thanks for clearing a lot of that up for us!
Also, I call shenanigans on that Battleground poll. With very old data and no weekend polling, that poll is pretty much garbage.
Has RCP decided to exclude the CBS/NYT poll? Not included in their average, from what I can tell.
The IN PPP poll may not be as reliable as the Selzer expected from the Indy StarNews this weekend. But then again, it may be the only thing we get between now and election day. Lemme explain.
I grew up in Indy. The Indy StarNews was owned by Dan Quayle's family (the Pulliams) and two of the Pulliams are still on the editorial board at the paper. They are among the most conservative editors in the country.
They will sit on a poll they have commissioned and paid for if it is not complimentary to the Republican. What may be the X factor is the fact the Pulliams also owned the Arizona Republic - a paper that has had a 15 year feud with John McCain.
Count on PPP to be Obama's ceiling in IN and Selzer to be the baseline.
THANK YOU!!
This summary is just what I wanted!
;-)
I wonder if the declining health of Obama's grandmother and his journey to be with her will generate any sympathy in the polls. Furthermore, I wonder if at the same time a continuation of a strong attack campaign by the GOP will be undermined and look unsympathetic.
Today's Battleground is weird. The undecideds haven't changed from 6 or 7% yet Obama's lead has dropped from 13 pts to 1 pt? That many Obama voters are switching over to McCain?
The national median is 7.3% no mattter what Battleground snapshots.
The issues just are not within one point for McCain.
Did you notice that Gallup's "expanded" likely voter sample yesterday was actually smaller than its "traditional" sample?
Numbers:
2774 registered,
2271 likely "expanded"
2340 likely "traditional."
I had assumed that to get into the traditional sample, a respondent had to survive an extra test, based on past voting behavior, presumably. But evidently that's not the case. On the contrary some in the "traditional" sample are failing a test, and that failure keeps them out of the "expanded" sample. I'm guessing that this failed test is based on enthusiasm about the current election and stated voting intention.
Draw what conclusions you will.
What Naur said, above. House effect is not the same as bias -- it is measured relative to a weighted average of poll results, not relative to "truth" (i.e. an actual population preference). It is entirely possible for the poll with the largest house effect to be the most accurate, if their outlier sampling methodology happens to best reflect the electorate.
Increasingly Nate, you sound like you believe that O is losing: I mean given this over-long analysis.
I do think, brav, that you really believe that O is inexorably losing. I can smell the scent of victory being snatched!
If my math is correct...if GW/Battleground had Obama +7 yesterday, and +1 today, and if it's a 5-day tracking poll, it seems to me that yesterday's sample must have been around 35 points better for McCain than the sample that dropped off. In other words, if the sample that dropped off had McCain and Obama even, yesterday's sample must have been something like M 67% O 32%. That almost borders on mathematical impossibility, and is enough reason to make me really suspicious about that poll.
Yesterday, chuck Todd sais that MSNBC was almost ready to move AZ to a "lean" state, but needed more polling.
what are your thoughts on that?
@porridgegun:
+13 a week ago, to +1 today.
I wonder if there's been a recent change in methodology to go from one extreme to the other like that.
At any rate, looking at the other trackers, the truth is probably right in between.
hey nate,
great work. Quick question: if you had to guess -- what will the Win Percentage numbers look like after the Nov 4 update??
I'm guessing ~87-13 fwiw.
GWU/ Battleground:
Obama 48, McCain 47
Now, I do not care, if you believe this poll, or not.
After work, you go to your local Obama's election headquarter and start calling. I know, I will.
NPR had a story a while back about how ABC polling put their questions in an order that led people to skew their answers. I can't remember which show it was on now (of course) but I thought it was pretty interesting - of course it was an interview with someone from Gallup and another pollster, so maybe it wasn't quite accurate. If it was, though, this could potentially explain some of the skew ABC/Post is getting since the people in the interview claimed ABC/Post led people to answers for the big who will you vote for question.
Battleground is simple= 600 of the 1000 people interviewed were interviewed on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of LAST week, when McCain appears to have tied or maybe even won in those samples. Once those strong days roll out, Battleground will return to the mean. Other polls (particularly Gallup) showed McCain strength those days as well, and Battleground's small sample size means it could have had a few bad samples.
ABC has started to ask its horse race questions first.
That's what I get for posting after staying up all night fixing a computer...obviously, the difference between +7 and +1 in a five-day tracker is a daily swing of thirty points, not thirty-five. But it doesn't change my overall point.
You are all so paranoid about losing when you're pretty much guaranteed to win, which is a good thing for us all.
Nate's % projects out to election day. 270towin.com estimates based on today... gives obama a 100% victory in 1000 simulations most days.
I think nate is being pessimistic in his projections.
How can you possibly have enough data to call a lean on ABC, which debuted yesterday, when you "don't have enough data" to call a lean for Investor's Business Daily? I just don't see how that works.
Conversely, the only one of the trackers that I consider obviously dubious is Zogby.
No wonder Zogby claims he does not know this site ...
ABC does plenty of polling through the year.
antmatic - your explanation on GW/B might work if you don't assume, as someone pointed out earlier, that the same poll (including the same Tuesday - Thursday samples had Obama up 7 yesterday. No matter how bad last week might have been, the fact remains that, to get such a swing, yesterday's sample must have been (IMHO, an impossibly) 30 points better for McCain than the previous Monday's sample that dropped off.
PPP Indiana
O: 48
M: 46
So FL will be closer than that, even or a slight McCain lead.
We are heading for the greatest economic calamity in our nation's 232 year history.
The election of Barack Obama will only exacerbate the problems we face.
Our position as leader of the free world is threatened as we speak. By 2020, we will be an economic equal to Mexico.
Barack Obama will be the worst president in our nation's history. He is a fool when it comes to economics. His economic policies are a disaster waiting to happen.
Remember this: the Soviet Union didn't come crumbling down because someone devastated them by military force or other authoritarian measures.
They were brought down from within. They were brought down by an economic collapse. That is what is waiting for us, and that is the direction Barack Obama is leading us. God help us all!
Maybe they do some weird thing where they reweigh their numbers every day and last night's polling had a wacky number of people in a certain age group or something which caused them to complete change which samples were valid...
So doomsday, do you have any, um, "facts" to back up this sentiment?
@regnad-kcin
Obama was +4 yesterday. in BG not +7.
Battleground serves a purpose, now the freepers can boot zogby and hang onto battleground. As long as rasmussen stays within 4 he won`t be in the tank for Obama.
Until a poll shows McCain ahead i would still consider this a 5 point race.
I just cannot see a way for McCain to reach 270 ev, game over.
Two questions:
#1 Enthusiasm in a mid-term election seems like it would translate to big gains for that party. In 1994 and I think 1998 the Republicans made huge gains on the Dems with no Presidential race to bring both sides in full force to the polls. In 2006 the Dems made huge gains for the same reason. However in the following elections, 1996, 2000 the Dems did much better. 2008 follows a mid-term like that. I know the Dems have outpaced the Pubs in registration just this year, but I wonder how much of a Voter ID advantage they'll actually have for this election. I bet it's less than Gallup suggests, Rasmussen is probably about right, and more than Zogby's 2004 #.
The BATTLEGROUND Poll has kinks to the extent that I would have thought Nate would lambast it. The poll had Obama up 13 points a week ago and 1 point today. Really...really... Come on, we all know that makes no sense. Small sample size. Volatile as hell. One thing he mentioned that I didn't catch is I see no internals. It seems impossible to find any details, except for a few numbers thrown up on a shiny powerpoint slide. Maybe, I'm missing something.
Rasmussen -- with its large sample size and high pollster rating -- would probably be the one I'd want with me on a desert island.
-- Nate Silver
What's the bet that quote pops up on Rasmussen's site.
They have lots of internals, but it's hard to find them and they are hard to comprehend.
@ Doomsday
Yes, what you said about USSR is true, but the main reason USSR's economy collapsed was military overspending (remind you something?).
Your other claims are not supported by facts, so I will ignore them.
Matt, re: PPP in Indiana (O 48 M 46)
There is your ceiling for Obama. If the Selzer poll is M 49 O 47, Katy bar the door. If the spread is more for McCain in Selzer, then McCain will get the endorsement of the Indianapolis Star.
Indiana will have a long night...they got hooked with the primary.
Forcefield,
This is not a sentiment. The facts are all around us that we are facing the greatest economic collapse in our nation's 232-year history. Do you not watch the news? Or read?
Do you not understand or know history? Do you not know what happened to the U.S.S.R.? Are you living in a cave somewhere? The "facts" you request aren't even tucked away in some obscure textbook or literary account - they are right in front of your face.
The stock market, housing market, credit market, etc. have all come crashing down like never before, and we are now increasingly addicted to a resource that comes from the ground that has a finite life span and that we don't produce enough of for ourselves.
We are doomed.
VERY useful info, thank you!
so obama is up 1 in this poll where yesterday he was up four. what happened to cause the shift? joe the not real plumber?
and how much percentage of obama supporters would have to jump ship to cause the swing overnight?
i just find this poll to hard to swallow
Echoing Matt's post-
From today's PPP:
Obama’s lead in the state is being fueled largely by voter concern about the economy. 60% of respondents list it as their biggest issue when deciding who to vote for this fall, and the Democrat has a 59-34 lead with that segment of the electorate.
Obama is also benefiting from strong support with independent voters, among whom he leads 49-39. His 89-11 lead with black voters is just enough to offset the 51-42
advantage John McCain has with whites.
Bartosz,
This IS going to be the greatest economic collapse in our nation's history - far worse than the Great Depression. The evidence is all around you.
Obama only getting 89% of the AA vote in Indiana according to PPP? Hard to swallow. I'd guess he'll end up with around 93-95% of the AA vote.
Barack Obama IS a failure at understanding the economy. His economic policies ARE flawed.
He WILL lead us to further pain and misery.
This is a 5-day poll that does not do weekends. What happened here is that the night that that put Obama up to +13 (10/13) finally rolled off this morning - I'm gueesing that night was some sort of insane number for Obama. I think McCain did very well late last week and may have been up on 10/15 and 10/16 by a few points, since it went down to +4 by Friday.
So no I don't think McCain "won" last night, but probably won last Weds. and Thursday (probably big). This Poll has data that goes back a full week.
Last week on BG:
Mon: O+8
Tues: O+13
Weds: O+8
Thurs: O+6
Fri: O+4
Mon: O+4
Tue: O+1
http://www.tarrance.com/files/2-way-ballot-trender-10-20.pdf
This one is usually a few days late at catching trends becuase of the small sample and the fact it's has week old data.
Right now this poll is catching up to late last week when there was tightening but is extra volatile since they use a small nightly sample (200).
Does anyone know what happened to the state-by-state polling that used to come up when I go to the home page?
I enjoy the idea that you would need to pick a pollster to have on a desert island.
am i missing something? o up 2 in IN is bad? considering that previously an overwelming # of polls had mccain up think this is good... am i dumb?
Doomsday, are you wearing a tin foil hat? Seriously dude, go outside and take a breath of fresh air. The world is nice.
Here's an OT interesting story but an important one none the less.
The Ohio Secretary of State is getting threats and the state website is having hackers attack it.
Anyways, get this story out and lets make sure this lady doesn't get overrun by the pressure of these relentless animals and has the support of the community.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6539#more-6539
BATTLEGROUNd and HOTLINE are silly polls. If you need to see a big swing to find momentum follow Gallup. Battleground and Hotline have small sample sizes. They have been all over the place over the last few months. They consistently have outlier days that seem to mean nothing. I'd ignore them almost completely. I'm someone who looks at every poll that comes out every day and inspects the internals. I don't say it lightly. Those polls are worthless to me. They haven't indicated trends in anyway consistently. There have been multiple times where one of them will shift 5+ points in one direction on a day and the other polls will move the other way. Here's the one caveat. The 2-3 days before the election, if they have a huge move one way or the other, try to figure out whether it's a menaingless outlier or not by comparing to other data.
Eric,
here are their internals for a previous tracker. I think they overcook data. Some things look strange (allready voted by race/gender/sex/id) but overall it seems overcomplicated.
http://www.tarrance.com/files/GWU-BG-Public-tables-10.16.pdf
Did you notice that Gallup's "expanded" likely voter sample yesterday was actually smaller than its "traditional" sample?
Numbers:
2774 registered,
2271 likely "expanded"
2340 likely "traditional."
Interesting catch. I think Gallup scores respondents based on answers to questions about intention to vote and past voting. Presumably, they score the answers to questions differently for the two methods or have a different cutoff number for who is or is not included in the sample. So, some of their likely traditional voters are being excluded from their likely expanded model and vice versa.
@livemild
The problem is PPP teased their results yesterday by saying O was polling better in IN than in FL.
Doomsday is just snarking. He realizes that this country is at the brink of economic collapse because of the last 28 years of financial deregulation and the enormous deficit run up by Republicans. And so he's just sort of taking it to the most ridiculous right-wing talking point and insinuating that the problems in our financial system are all the result of Obama. Sort of funny, I guess, but the military guy on here who always misspells Semper Fi as SIMPER FI! is way better.
@livemild:
Considering this is the first poll since the Selzer poll to give Obama the lead, this is very good. Unfortunately, PPP does not have a previous IN poll to trend this one with. My guess is that IN continues to be in tossup land, perhaps with a slight 1% McCain bent. Turnout will be very key there.
Prove with "facts" that Obama's economic policies will help or even make a dent in the looming crisis? Where is the proof? Where?
There is none. You know why? Because you can't. No such evidence exists.
You can't just regurgitate the excrement of Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, or Al Franken and call it true.
Where is the empirical evidence?
I'll answer for you - there is none.
@ Doomsday
Dude, so you are blaming Obama for the collapse that already happened?
thanks PA John, but are you saying after the debate that every poll showed obama won, mccain went way up on the next day polling? that just seems not right. at best maybe a tie.
Very interesting. Thanks for this.
thanks kid and andwre.
hadn't heard that story of obama polling better in IN than FL
Oh my GOODNESS! I just realized Doomsday is correct!! We cannot predict the future based on empirical evidence. What will we do?!?
where are the state-poll spreadsheets ?
Doomsday
You're being added to the "do not feed the trolls" list on this site. Have fun being ignored for here on out.
dwbh said...
I wonder if there's been a recent change in methodology to go from one extreme to the other like that.
Yeah, it's called the wingnut extreme. Battleground are back to retard levels. At the height of the McCain, I mean economic meltdown, they had McCain +2.
For Battleground's sake, they better show Obama at least +5 tommorow.
Re: PPP Indiana
The 89% AA number seems a bit low to me as well (ref. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Indiana_1021398.pdf)
Yesterday's PPP of NC showed a (92-6 split for AA in my state.
Doomsday
OK, then show us empirical evidence that McSame's plan will save us all.
Get back to us when you dig some up. Here's a shovel.
RAS still stable today at 50-46.
Mathis said...
Sort of funny, I guess, but the military guy on here who always misspells Semper Fi as SIMPER FI! is way better.
That should be "military guy."
Doomsday is wrong.
Clinton's deficit reduction saved us from the Bush I created problems.
Now THIS is really awesome:
Breaking SHOCK poll
McConnell tied with Lunsford in KY!!!
48-48
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=b7cb88d3-c9ec-4134-8dc7-f6b2ded0be6e
Its not hard to believe that Indiana is a 50/50 tie. Here in Chicago Obama has been on the airwaves big time touting economic and healthcare plans that should play well to working class folks trying to get by.
Anecdotally, I know a number of Black families that have moved from Chicago to NW Indiana over the last few years. If thats indicative of a larger trend, pollsters might be undercounting his support there (consider how Obama closed the gap with Hillary in Indiana based on big turnout in Lake County and in the college towns). A good ground game easily puts Indiana in play.
If my math is correct...if GW/Battleground had Obama +7 yesterday, and +1 today, and if it's a 5-day tracking poll,
Battleground was Obama +4 yesterday, not +7. So, this suggests a difference between the day that rolled off (10/13) and the day that rolled on (yesterday) of 13-17 points.
Also, the day that rolled off must have been a monster Obama day because the tracker moved from Obama +8 to Obama +13 the day that it rolled on. To move the average from Obama +8 to Obama +13, that day could have easily been as high as Obama +20. So, it's entirely plausible that yesterday's Battleground was Obama +5 or so.
Yes, Nate, where did the state poll spreadsheets go? I want to see all the McCain states that are within the same McCain-lead range as Pennsylvania is for Obama, since Pennsylvania, a state in which McCain has never had the lead, is now their new "must-win" state.
Doomsday,
What economic policies is McCain setting forth that will be any different than Bush's current policies that got us into this mess.
The GLBA, of which McCain was a total proponent and supporter opened the door. Here is a link to it since it's apparent you have no idea how the meltdown occurred.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act
Mathis,
Way to just laugh it off without offering any intellectual discourse to address the problem. That's because you can't because there are no "facts" to support your case. You just throw out, "The last 28 years have sucked" and have nothing else to offer. What a brainless twit.
I offer you this. Let's look at two parameters. War and the economy. I'd say the issue of peace and of economic well-being are the two biggest gauges of prosperity.
1932-1980: Who controlled politics and how did we fare on war and economics?
1980-2008: Same question.
that 270towin.com site is pretty interesting in that according to it's simulations even if Pennsylvania magically switched to McCain today - he'd still have just a 1% chance of winning the election.
How can you possibly have enough data to call a lean on ABC, which debuted yesterday, when you "don't have enough data" to call a lean for Investor's Business Daily? I just don't see how that works.
ABC/WAPO tracker may have debuted yesterday but presumably, they've published regular polls this and previous cycles.
I never implied McCain had any good ideas either. I only said that the failed economic ideas of Barack Obama will make the looming disaster that much worse.
Quit changing the subject.
We're not discussing McCain. He is a wretched old man. We're discussing Obama.
You know what is really funny is that the right-wingers think there is a "culture war" going on. Like the world is "liberals from Manhattan" and then everyone else is hockey moms, when it's nothing like that.
We really have a generational war.
Most Republicans I know in their late teens to twenties support gay marriage, are pro-choice, and fiscally conservative.
The same goes for most Democrats.
I know two Republicans that both voted for Kerry and are voting for Obama.
This election is young vs. old, and I don't mean our candidatea ages. But the "moral majority" is no longer a majority or even close to it.
Obama needs to reach out to young people across the country. Everywhere, including deep Red States.
It's not just about electoral votes. It is about closing the gap in Red States. Imagine if Texas goes to McCain by 5 points.
Josh,
Hell - give McCain PA, FL, MO, and OH. Obama STILL wins.
Anyone have a link to the PPP Indiana poll? I can't find it anywhere. Also, anyone know when this Selzer poll is coming out? I'd guess Obama will be up 3-5 in her poll.
Last thing, I have compassion for Barack with his situation with Toots. It also seems there's a possibility that she could pass away soon, which would be very sad and cause complications with campaign schedule. She was the most important in his life growing up and raised him. More important than either his mother or father in that respect. She sacrificed a lot so that he could be the best he can be. If you read his books, you'll figure her to be what I have, which is a symbol of the past and future rolled into one. She really was porbably about as prejudice as the average White American from that generation, but had a half black grandchild at 38, that she ended up raising from 10-18. I think she fast-tracked her views of what America is and should be, more quickly than the rest of us for obvious reasons. Gotta pray, somehow she makes it to see November 4th or even January 20th if he wins.
All that being said, let me talk coldly about the meaning of this vacating the trail thing. Assuming it's only for two days, he's hitting Indianapolis on Thursday instead of Wisconsin and Iowa. Michelle picking up the slack for him in Ohio. It's obviously playing more offense than defense, but strategically if you were playing a game to win, I think it might make more sense to send him to Indianapolis than Madison and Des Moines anyway. Maybe not, Iowa went Bush and Wisconsin was dead-even in 2004, just seems like Indiana is likely harder to call han Iowa or Wisconsin.
Do you want to return to the "Good old days" of the 50s, with 70% tax rates?
I don't get how Obama is evil for making the tax rate 39.1% for 1% of people... Many of the people that were paying 39.1% under clinton will not be because they were making somewhere like $125-$200k.
The biggest socialist ever was Richard Nixon.
I have dreadfull visions of Nate & Rasmussen marooned together on a desert island.
No rescue till 2012.
I'm surprised by the tepid response to the breaking shock poll.
Nate: a methodology request
While you're explaining can you do a post to go into the methodology behind the "Return On Investment Index" and the "Tipping Point States" maps. then link the images to that post. Right now I can sort of guess, but I (and probably many people) am very curious.
Thanks, love the site!
Doomsday, you're still not doing it right. You still have that essence of reality - more surreality would suit you well.
1932-1980: Who controlled politics and how did we fare on war and economics?
1980-2008: Same question.
1932-1980: Largely controlled by Democrats, we found our way through WWII, Korean War, and Vietnam, and laid the groundwork for peace and prosperity in the 80s and 90s.
1980-now: Taken a balanced budget and income equality and destroyed it, and once again we are facing the prospect of 1930 - when Republicans are in power for too long, their policies of laisse-faire capitalism leads to economic collapse.
See, if you really want to be ridiculous like "Military Guy" who shouts SIMPIR FI!!, you've got to throw some truly absurd notions into your comments, like "Tax cuts will solve our problems!" or "This mess is all simply the fault of poor black people!"
Only then can you appropriately mock the lunatic fringe of the wingnut right.
I am shocked! I really am.
If Indiana is +2 for Obama, McCain is going to have a very long night ahead of him.
I also think Obama takes Florida. It'll be close, but not that close +2-3%.
Doomsday said...
"I never implied McCain had any good ideas either. I only said that the failed economic ideas of Barack Obama will make the looming disaster that much worse.
Quit changing the subject.
We're not discussing McCain. He is a wretched old man. We're discussing Obama."
We are discussing you and you are a moron of the highest caliber.
So does this mean that PPP will have McCain up in FL?
Weird - the state-by-state polling spreadsheet appears in Firefox but disappears in IE.
Actually, that IN number is really going to change IN's color on the 538 map. The weighting of the past polling results is no higher than 0.86, and PPP should get somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.4. It'll be nice to see IN white again.
@forcefield I don't want Obama to just win - I want him to crush McCain. :D
We need to show Washington which way the political winds are going, or else yellow dog democrats and filibustering Republicans will block Obama from enacting his plan.
God Save the Republic!
The great sadness of this campaign is what has happened to the media and the lack of balance in discourse.
CNN and MSNBC try and demonize this plumber fellow while FOX News makes him out to be an icon.
The truth is somewhere in the middle as to his personal qualities -- as they are for all of us, but no one in the media should be in the business of discrediting a voter who asked a question.
John McCain has been left largely alone to fight his battles, while Obama can use the networks, the print media and two-thirds of cable news to amplify his message. That McCain can be heard above the din at all is to his credit and shows the potency of his appeal.
If charges are leveled against McCain or Palin then they are explored and dissected tirelessly by the likes of Campbell Brown, Tom Brokaw and Katie Kouric, but if McCain makes a claim or contention about Obama, then if he is lucky he gets a snippet of broadcast time, but no comment or amplification by the media as to the veracity or import of what he is saying. The public is left unassisted.
As but one example we have been treated to an extensive slam job on Cindy McCain on the front page of The New York Times, but its piece on Ayers was actually an apologia and it has otherwise done virtually no investigation as to who Barack and Michelle Obama really are. Including, let’s face it, some admitted extensive drug use by Obama and some curious questions about his associations and personal tastes. By contrast the Times published a flawed gossip laden piece about McCain that suggested he had had an affair with a lobbyist, while ignoring all the rumors of homosexual dalliance that have dogged Obama for years. Google: Michael Signator, Donald Young and Larry Sinclair.
In short, there has been no real critical analysis of Obama and his policies by the media.
Even on the day after Biden commits a major gaffe and admits that the world will provoke and test Obama, the media either does not report it (in the case of CNN) or simply puts it out there unfiltered without context (ABC News GMA).
Imagine is Governor Palin had said such a thing. Indeed her rather unsurprising statement that she supports a Constitutional Amendment to ban Gay Marriage is getting tons of airplay and much jawing over by the chattering class of commentators, while Biden gets another free pass.
I am already alarmed by the prospect of an Obama Presidency; the notion of a complicit media that will cover up its defects and blow its accomplishments out of all proportion has me wondering what will become of us?
Obama will turn us into a new socialist society and the media will lull us to sleep over it. The final nail will be the imposition of the "fairness doctrine" which will insure that only the kind of debate you hear will be like that at a New York Times editorial board meeting. In other words, none.
God save the Republic!
Vote McCain!!!
1932-1980: Who controlled politics and how did we fare on war and economics? (Doomsday)
Yeah, that era sucked. We saved capitalism and democracy while creating the Middle Class.
Meanwhile, in those golden years you referred to as 1980-2008, we have destroyed the Middle Class and have the highest poverty rate since 1968.
I can safely say that the current economic downturn is directly attributed to supply side, Freidman-think. It didn't work under Hoover, it didn't work under Reagan, and it didn't work under Bush 43.
To recover this economy, we need to pay down the budget deficit first, pay down the debt second, cut unnecessary spending (indluding the military), change the tax code to incent growth (not sloth by the wealth class), targeted tax cuts to grow small business, and an end to corporate tax credits to companies like Exxon who pay $0 in taxes (2/3 of all corporations pay $0 in taxes - a fact McCain overlooks when he bashes a 35% tax rate).
We are at the darkest point before the dawn. America's best days ahead of us if we put supply side economics behind us.
I agree. A mandate is most desirable.
I just voted for Obama an hour ago in NC. It's pretty damn sweet to be excited to vote for someone. If the line out the door on the 6th day of early voting at 8am is any indication, the GOP are in for a HUGE middle finger from NC this year.
Ok...Doomsday,
I believe Obama has 3 clear visions that will help us out of the Bush created disaster:
1. Shore up health care costs. I don't have a lot of faith in this magically transforming our f'd up system but at least Obama is on the right track. McCain's plan is a 100% disaster and would push us into a full National Healthcare System within 5 years because it will collapse the market.
2. Investing into green technology which is the next boom industry. It's coming one way or the other and America can either be a leader in it or a consumer of S. Korea, EU's ideas and labor.
3. Focus on stabilizing the middle class. Supply side economics don't work. It has been proven without a doubt over the last 8 years. When the credit runs dry we are f'd under supply side and this country has switched to a middle class consumer purchasing GDP. Kill the middle class consumer and we grind to a halt.
None of these plans are going to be fast, easy or cheap to implement. Building something is harder than tearing something down. But if we follow the plan we will see steady growth and stability something we have been lacking for a while now.
Or we can choose the McCain plan which will be running around, flailing impotently at all the problems while fixing nothing and creating more problems. Under McCain's tax plan he will create another $2.5 trillion in debt over what Obama is proposing. This doesn't include a protracted stay in Iraq or a 'surge' in Afghanistan.
You might not like Obama but it is abundantly clear that he is light years ahead of McCain's policies.
BTW Name me one person who has a 2 year solution to fixing the current mess we are in.
FLORIDA PPP POLL
McCain 51%
Hussein 47%
The terrorist is going down in flames.
THis is great news...FOR AMERICAN!!!
"admitted extensive drug use by Obama"
At least he didn't steal pain pills from a charity like a certain candidate's wife did.
ARG national poll:
O: 49
M: 45
Basically unchanged over the past three weeks.
"Approximately 72% of Obama's national ballot share of 49% comes from states where Obama leads. Approximately 39% of McCain's national ballot share of 45% comes from states where McCain leads."
petekent,
Joe the Plumber is a financial retard who doesn't even have the basic understanding or financial means to even consider buying a plumbing business.
It is correct to laugh at and ridicule this moron because maybe the next time a Joe the Douche-nozzle gets paraded out for a sound bite may have to think about his actions.
Stupidest analysis I've ever read, from one of the dumbest trolls!
1932-1980: Who controlled politics and how did we fare on war and economics?
1980-2008: Same question.
1930s and 1940s Dems ruled, Great progress as America pulled out of it's darkest days as we went from being a power to a superpower with standard of living for the whole country skyrocketing. The Greatest Generation inspires us still and leaves the Baby Boomer Generation behind. Worked us out of the Great Depression, beat the greatest enemy the world has ever had to face. Fantastic two decades!
1950s Republicans rule. America stalls in place for about 10 years.
1960s Democrats Rule Great social progress, cultural progress, economic progress. We prove in many ways to be the superior of the two superpowers that the world should follow
1970s Split Power. Stagnation. Many problems caused by both sides.
1980s Republican Power. Economic balloon for the wealthy, dug a huge crater of debt on the backs of future generations. Greatly influenced the end of the Cold War. Very good. Triggered much of the resent in the future from those that hate us still. Created a culture of greed and debt that haunts us still and never really helped the middle class. Mixed, more bad than good.
1990s Democratic rule. Peace and Prosperity. Balanced Budget. Good times.
2000s Republican Rule. Trashed everything. No peace. No prosperity. Huge Debt. Economic turmoil. Middle class falls way back. Lowest world opinion of us and lowest standingas a power in at least 60 years.
You tell me which party has been more successful. I didn't even include the 20s that created the Great Depression with 33% unemployment and a stock market falling 90% dominated by the Republicans.
RWD makes my point.
PeteKent clearly is in a latent homosexual panic.
You've gone crazy, son. In your Foxian effort to look fair and balanced, you bash everyone in the room when your side clearly has no footing on the issue. You choose to pollute the pool and exclude people from the process in order to keep power.
The sadness of Joe the Plumber is that he is going to support the guy who is going to increase his taxes (McCain) when McCain will actually cut his taxes. I know Joe the Plumber, I grew up with guys like Joe the Plumber. They aren't voting for Obama, either. Why? Because Obama is a minority.
I am very sure that is the same reason PeteKent is not voting for Obama, either.
So, when all else fails, start lying. Right Pete?
"RWD makes my point"
the point is, that it's ok for you to slander michelle obama, but not ok for me to mention a documented crime committed by cindy mccain?
It is important to the Stalinists to silence the people:
"It is correct to laugh at and ridicule this moron because maybe the next time a Joe the Douche-nozzle gets paraded out for a sound bite may have to think about his actions."
We only have to await the arrival of the "fairness doctrine"!
Awesome poll for the KY Senate race!
also, won't the PPP poll turn IN white on the map?
Eric:
Sweeeet analysis!
Where are these PPP polls? I have not seen any of them. Also, did they say Florida is redder than Indiana at O+2? When's Selzer's Indy poll to be released? Any info would be nice.
I think the polls work the reverse of bradley effect something like, people like obama verymuch, but because of their hard core republican ideas for the last century they just dont want to loose face with their friends and they say they are going to vote to mccain, but infact they vote for obama. After the election, we can call it Mccain Effect - new page in wikipedia. (all this if mccain goes ahead in the polls by election day, but i dont see that happening)
I'll admit that I pay virtually no attention to the national trackers/polls. I can't see how they can possibly be representative unless aggregated, baked, boiled and stirred over a long period of time.
A Mississippi R is as different from a Mass R as a NY Dem is from a KS Dem. Weighting by party just doesn't measure that difference and can cause the kinds of fluctuations we've seen.
The state polls are my crack and it's there that the makings of a mandate lie.
The reason not to vote for Obama is that his socialist agenda stifles the aspiration sof the people.
He want to keep you in thrall of the government so you can never get out of dependency.
I am old enough to remember the motivation behind the welfare state and I thought we had long ago put a nail in its coffin.
I recognize the bias of Fox News and the Wash Times, but they anre a small, if potent minority voice.
You will stifle all criticism under President Obama and may be stuck for generations with the wreckage that his Presdiency leaves behind.
Doomasday
Who lead the country in the 69 years leading up to THE Greatest financial disaster of our nations history
Oh right Republicans - they were in office for all but 16 of those years (Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson being the exceptions)
Who has been leading this country for all but 12 of the past 40 years - Republicans again. And according to you it would seem that low and behold they have once again lead us to the precipice of a financial meltdown.
Hell - go back to the last time the stock market stalled (1968-1982) - Republicans were president for 10 of those 14 years.
Amazingly when Republicans allow the markets to run hog wild those market in fact grow at amazing rates, but then they come crashing down.
heres a stat - of the top 20 % losses on the Dow Republicans were president for 16 of them. Damn - so 80% of the worst days on the Dow were under the great Republicans.
jesse
"Do you want to return to the "Good old days" of the 50s, with 70% tax rates?"
It may yet come to that.
It is clear that America MUST invest heavily in general infrastructure, jobs and energy self-suficiency. This from a starting point of $10,000,000,000,000 debt, and just about every nation on earth screaming for credit.
If it is as bad as I suspect America has only unpleasant choices.
1) Keep borrowing and drop into hyper inflation & 3rd world status.
2) Cut goverment spending. Drop into full depresion mode. A depresion that America will NEVER come out of as it won't be able to compete for oil, and won't have the alternative energy to run industry.
3) Go into war mode. Total comitment to restructuring America. High taxes. Masive national projects. Total control of the Economy.
PeteKent.
Obama does not support the "Fairness Doctrine". Quit trotting out your Neal Boortz talking points and do some fucking research.
Eric - link to the PPP polls:
Indiana
Tom Jensen mentioned yesterday that the Indiana numbers would be more positive for Obama than the Florida numbers. So I'd expect either a one point Obama lead, an even race or a slight McCain lead when they release their FL poll later today.
peteKent,
You can't refute my argument so you say I am stifling free speech.
FFS, Say what you want but be prepared to back it up or get laughed at and scorned.
The irony of the 1st Amendment and it's beauty
"We only have to await the arrival of the "fairness doctrine"!"
Ah, the newest right wing media canard...
BTW, there was an admission last night that this tact was given to the GOP by none other than the free market patron saint of fairness, Rupert Murdoch, last night.
Yes, the free market has REALLY stoked fairness. Only about five companies own all of the media and they are all huge contributors to the GOP. Reporters fear the follow-up question and the dopes on the right think it is OK that Sarah Palin doesn't have to answer a question in order to qualify herself as a potential President of the United States.
To quote Churchill and paraphrase George Will: "Not all conservatives are stupid, but all stupid people tend to be conservative".
The reason not to vote for McGrampa is that his communist and fascist agenda stifles the aspirations of the people.
McGrampa wants to keep you in thrall of the government so you can never get out of dependency.
I am old enough to remember the motivation behind the communist and fascist state implementing by Ronny Reagan and Nixon and I thought we had long ago put a nail in its coffin.
Every sane and normal American realizes the bias of Fox News and the Wash Times, sadly, the reich-wing GOPigs are not sane, normal, or American.
GOPigs, reich-wingers, and the Faux scum will stifle all criticism of adolf herr dubayh boosh and we are stuck for generations with the wreckage that his Presdiency leaves behind.
So far in the tracking polls
Ras: O+4, No Change
Zogby: O+8, up 2
Battleground: O+1, down 3
Hotline: O+6, up 1
There doesn't seem to be any real pattern... I'm surprised that Colin Powell's endorsement didn't result in a bounce, however (except in Zogby, LOL).
Waiting on:
IBD/TIPP
Gallup
ABC/WaPo
Nate writes regarding the Kos poll that "Racial demographics are aggressive -- probably too aggressive -- showing blacks making up 14 percent of the electorate and Hispanics another 13 percent. Turnout will be up among minorities this year, but probably not by quite that much."
The racial demographics in Kos do seem high for blacks and Hispanics, but they are low for Asians and Others. These should basically offset one another.
Kos shows following demographics:
Whites 72%
Blacks 14%
Hispanics 13%
Others 1%
CNN 2004 Exit Polls showed:
Whites 77%
Blacks 11%
Hispanics 8%
Asians 2%
Others 2%
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
Asians and Others overwhelmingly supported Kerry over Bush (56-44 for Asians and 54-40 for Others); slightly more so than Hispanics, who were 53-44 for Kerry.
Everyone assumes the white share of the vote will drop this year due to changing demographics of registered voters. White share dropped from 81% in 2000 to 77% in 2004. Assuming a corresponding drop, white voter share should be around 73%. If the rate of decrease is even faster this year because of excitement among minority voters, it could easily go the the 72% projected by Kos. Thus, while Kos is likely overestimating Black + Hispanic vote share, he is not likely overstimating non-white vote share. And as Asians and Others are likely to vote Obama at the same rate as Hispanics (but less than Blacks), the overall poll numbers should be about right.
Matt said...
Eric - link to the PPP polls:
Indiana
Tom Jensen mentioned yesterday that the Indiana numbers would be more positive for Obama than the Florida numbers. So I'd expect either a one point Obama lead, an even race or a slight McCain lead when they release their FL poll later today.
Two potential reasons Florida would redden more than some states:
Tim "Skank" Mahoney and him cratering his District and Dem reputation
Jesse "Go away" Jackson regarding Jews and Israel
LMAO: The logic that ANYONE says "Gosh, if I do X, I'll be rich!!! But hey, I'd better not because I'll have to pay more taxes"
As one who made it from middle class to the moderate classification of "rich", taxes were never a concern. The fact is, when you make that much money, you just end up stashing it away because you run out of things worth buying or the time to buy/enjoy them. Stashing it stalls the economy (as we see).
Not to mention, the tax breaks I got when I was in the upper tiers were positively sinful. The percentage I paid was far, far less than when I was "middle class".
That's why the "Roaches for Raid" groups are the only ones squawking about it--those who are there know it's a crock and that yet another change in the tax code wouldn't affect their lives in the least.
Well wa-da-ya-know, Bernanke endorses Obama:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455027730552509.html
People always forget Obama outperformed expectations in all states bordering Illinois - this includes Missouri and Indiana. Don't be surprised to see Missouri, Indiana, VA, and NC turn blue on election day while OH and FL remain red.
Petekent:
You use socialism too cavalierly. The common good is what we should aim for in order to sustain a peaceful civilization in the long term. Sure, Repub economic policies are good for say a few years, but they inevitably lead to an erosion of the middle class, because rich people are better at hording money than poorer people. Look at every country where there is a negligible middle class, like India, Mexico, most of Africa, and much of southeast Asia and South America: widespread poverty is the rule, with only a relatively few living a comfortable (by our standards) existence. Social unrest is exhibited in drug trade, guerrilla militias, and warlord rule. That's where we are headed if the upper class wins.
eric,
PPP IN poll is at http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/
yesterday, PPP said "Obama is doing better in our Indiana poll than our Florida one." They have not published Florida poll yet.
Three things needed to kill the economic slump:
1) A targeted goal on eliminating all debt and strengthening the dollar.
2) Targeted tax cuts for growth oriented investment instead of rewarding the wealth class to sit on their money.
3) A coordinated public works project that feeds into a new economies of America: tech and green.
The Dirty Industrial Age is over. The Green Industrial Age needs a dynamic leader in the world - we need the challenge to be that leader. Only Obama has the plan to grow our economy for the new age.
McCain is still entrenched in Supply Side thinking.
We are in the midst of a generational shift. For those who do not want to take on big challenges and sacrifice, then we step aside. The next war is the war to recover American stability economically. Lead, follow, or get out of the way: America has to become a nation of challenges and discipline again.
Funny how those times only occur under guys like Roosevelt, Kennedy...Democrats. Republicans are too busy bribing us with our own money and making enemies within.
Time for the adults to lead and take care of the irresponsibility of the GOP.
2much2lose said...
Well wa-da-ya-know, Bernanke endorses Obama:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455027730552509.html
DAMN.
Where are the state-by-state polling data? They're gone! We need to see individual states, e.g., to decide for ourselves if North Dakota should be safe or strong McCain.
Doomsday,
Here are some numbers for you:
Growth Real Gross Domestic Product
1940-1952 FDR/Truman D 6.22%
1953-1960 IKE R 2.94
1961-1968 JFK/LBJ D 4.85
1969-1976 Nixon/Ford R 2.80
1977-1980 Carter D 3.38
1981-1992 RR/GH Bush R 2.99
1993-2000 Clinton D 3.98
2001-2008 GW Bush R 2.41
Av. GDP Recessions
Democratic 4.99% 5
Republican 2.84 6
If the past is prelude, the economy in an Obama administration should perform well. In fact, the British magazine The Economist polled US economics professors and they favored Obama's economic proposals over McCains's by a wide margin.
Is this enough data or do you want figures on unemployment, wage growth, income inequality, market performance, etc.?
Hint: all the available evidence favors democratic administrations!
Doomsday = Mule Rider, in spirit if not in reality. Both candidates suck, blah blah blah blah nonsense nonsense blah blah blah. That's all either one of them really offer.
As for PK, if the whine about media bias has any merit, why don't social conservatives support the Fairness Doctrine? You'd think they would if they were constantly on the short end of the media stick. Next argument, please.
No one offers more pathetic reasoning and outright lies than a social conservative. No one.
What a strange map it would be if Obama was able to win VA, NC, MO, & IN. It's seems inconceivable that if this were to happen that he could somehow lose Ohio. For the life of me, I do not understand that state.
Oh, they're back. Never mind...
Smugness
You are all so smug now.
I can't say I blame you. Much good news in the polls if you like Obama, let's face it.
I heard mentioned that the Exit Polls in 2004 were off by 6%. That was enough to turn what appeared to be a Kerry Victory into an easy Bush Win.
I think a lot of the support for McCain and Palin has been driven underground. There is a hidden vote for them that may surprise.
What will not surprise is that McCain has his "Obama risks socialism" message which plays well into people's fears about him and Democrats in general, the new Biden gaffe about the world itching to "test" Obama that should re-ignite grave concern about Obama, along with a White (and possibly Hispanic) backlash against Obama's peculiar brand of racist politics and we have hope.
Now all we need is something akin to the Drunk Driving charge that was leveled against W back in 2000 that nearly cost him the election and we might win this my friends. Perhaps Michael Signator can supply that little nugget.
Oh how sweet it will be to see Obama go down like the flamer he is!
If he wins, well it was expected and our side will have an excellent target to go after while he flounders with a collapsing economy and an aggressive Putin.
Will Palin ride in her white snow machine and save us four years hence?
Or will she be presiding over the Senate in four months?
@2much2lose --
HA! WSJ didn't like Bernanke's statement at all!
This is simply a stunningly useful post, Nate. I am bookmarking it as a reference to use later as the polls come out.
Thank you again for your groundbreaking site. You deserve every bit of acclaim you are getting in the media.
So far in the tracking polls
Ras: O+4, No Change
Zogby: O+8, up 2
Battleground: O+1, down 3
Hotline: O+6, up 1
You left out dKos poll: 3-day average is O+8 (no change) and yesterday's number is O+9 (up 1 from Sunday, 10/19).
Looks like race is stable right now.
newsfromOH,
I slightly disagree with your analysis. There is no such thing as "stashinhg away". Extra capital (savings) should generate investment through banks, insurance, stock, houses, etc. This is important because it is THE ESSENCE OF CAPITALISM. When these investments are no longer safe, as is happening now due to the absence of rules, then you have liquidity trap and credit crunch; recession.
PeterKent,
At this rate you'll blow through the Talking Points for today by 1000 am PST
At least try to mount a rebuttal
With regard to this Socialism total BULLSHIT, I call BS. I'll never understand how this country gets duped by this garbage.
Bottomline is Bush Jr. implemented a completely retarded (I mean that literally) tax code with the help of a shitty Congress in 2001. The tax code was so bad, McCain opposed it! Many of those Congressmen and women have been replaced, but the new Congress can't change the tax code because this idot President would veto it. Obama's tax code is a tax break for 95% of us and he'd revert the wealthiest of us to a tax bracket very similar to that under clinton and LOWER than under Reagan. In what way is it punitive or socialist to have a graduting tax scale where the welathiest of us pay the higher %, but still pay less then they've paid historically, for all times but the most recent 8 years where a moron has been at the helm and helped us double the national debt to unsustainable levels and destroy our economy through policy and our reputation through dumb, expensive wars. Socialist countries pay 80-90% taxes at the highest levels. I thin Obama's tax code is 38% for $600,000+. 5% higher than today. God forbid!
Dear PeteKent:
Barack Obama is is about as much a socialist as John McCain is a fascist.
I just happen to have analyzed both plans and have discerned that Barack Obama has the best plan for properly regulated, free market economics that will save our economy of the two candidates.
Sincerely,
Warren Buffett
So Nate, if you give high ratings to Rasmussen and SurveyUSA, and if (according to pollster.com)they both say McCain is +1 or +2 points ahead in FL....well...isn't that scary?
:-(
franglais said...
So Nate, if you give high ratings to Rasmussen and SurveyUSA, and if (according to pollster.com)they both say McCain is +1 or +2 points ahead in FL....well...isn't that scary?
:-(
PANIC PANIC PANIC ?
@franglais:
VA +10 in Rasmussen
Now that's Scary News!!! For the GOP!!!
The WSJ editorial is just being snarky about Bernanke favoring the Obama stimulus plan. He didn't actually endorse Bernanke, however.
The article also gets the name of the Democratic Party wrong, so you can't take it too seriously. People who don't know our party's name have no business talking about it at all.
"So Nate, if you give high ratings to Rasmussen and SurveyUSA, and if (according to pollster.com)they both say McCain is +1 or +2 points ahead in FL....well...isn't that scary?"
Not really, because Ras also has Obama +10 in Virginia....+5 In Missouri and +5 in Colorado. Election over, congratulations to President Obama.
RE: the SurveyUSA poll showing McConnell and Lunsford tied at 48%.
The numbers look even more favorable for the Democrats when you look at the cross-section of party identification:
First, of self-identified Democrats, only 2% are undecided. Both self-identified Republican and Independents are at 6%. With an incumbent, generally speaking undecideds of his own party and independents tend to break for the challenger. Moreover, since June, McConnell has gone from 87% among Republicans to 77%. In addition, he has gone from +10% with Independents to -6%. Generally speaking, once supporters of an incumbent abandon that person to support a challenger, they very seldom return to the fold absent some external shock.
Assuming his internal corroborate these data, McConnell has to be shaking in his boots facing these results. With two weeks to go he has to find a way to energize his remaining supporters so that they turnout and find a way to win back the remaining undecideds. But it will be an uphill battle.
It will be interesting to see if a similar trend emerges in GA. If the Democratic challengers can pull even in those two states (or even within the M/E), I feel very good about our chances to capture a 60 seat majority in the Senate--possibly without the turncoat.
don't worry Obama supporters
Obama will win FL
So on to more pressing issues than arguing with the Talking Points trolls:
McCain has to take Pennsylvania or else he loses even if Obama loses all the battleground states of NV, FLA,MO,CO,IN,OH and NC.
PA is the key, however, if God forbid it flips red, Obama could still only needs 14 EVs from the remaining battleground states to win (NV+CO or VA on it's own).
Pete Kent and any other interested parties might look at the extensive investigative piece that the New York Times did on Obama's past drug use in February. (Feb 9th, in fact.)
At the time, NYT's editorial line was generally pro-Hillary and the story does, in a curious way, challenge Obama's credibility on the issue. It almost challenged the Obama campaign to produce confirmation that their man did use drugs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/us/politics/09obama.html
don't worry Obama supporters
Obama will win FL
What makes you so sure, Joe?
Are your sources within the McCain campaign telling you that?
:-)
I guess Republicans are going to be hyping the Battleground poll today. Every other day they hype the poll that has the narrowest Obama margin, and it changes often. To conservatives just about every daily tracking poll has been the most accurate pollster at one point other than Reasearch 2000 and ABC which is new.
Voyage of the Damned
For good or ill, much of what our economy depends upon is the prosperity of the wealthy.
The construction contractor will not sell a new kitchen to a maid.
If you want socialism so that we can all be poor, then fine, say it. But if the upper classes stop consuming, stop travelling and buying cars, paying gardeners and dry cleaners, there will be nothing left for the rabble to live off.
I guess you can all eat cake!
You have no idea what is coming in terms of a recession. The destruction in wealth that was visited upon us by a Democrat-inspired agenda to enforce lending to non-credit worthy borrowers that lead to the subprime mess will result in perhaps the most severe recession since the Carter years. When the Democrats want to have bad times, they know how to have them: 10% unemployment, double digit inflation and 20% interest rates.
You have seen nothing yet.
Perhaps Obama is some sort of Houdini but I suspect he will fail miserably. He will disappoint all of you on his social agenda that has already been spent on Wall Street (with his complicity) and he will never raise taxes on anyone b/c to do so would only prolong the economic ruin we face.
He will not bug out of Iraq b/c to do so would mean the US would pay a terrible price. And Afghanistan has turned into a quagmire under his very nose as Chmn of the Comm in charge.
He will be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
cora,
Point taken. I guess it's because I consider my investments, once invested, to be "done" with in a manner of speaking. I know my investment statements are purely fictional; that is, I don't really "own" anything unless I'm cashing out that instant. And I believe much of that investment, as you listed, really was in nothing!!
And, I fear, that a large portion of investments go to the absurd salaries at most of these companies. For the record, very few of those muckety-mucks actually believe they deserve anything close to the salaries they're making. It's just part of the salary "game" that goes on but is completely detached from any actual value of services. There's an excellent "farewell" letter on Andrew Sullivan's site that I could have written myself, as could any number of people across various industries.
I guess the ultimate point is the obvious, that "trickle down" just doesn't work because little of my spare cash led to an increase in jobs or income for anyone but the rich . . .
Perhaps Obama is some sort of Houdini
Not even Houdini could have beat the well-oiled Clinton machine. Do not underestimate Obama.
American dwmocratic socialists don't think Obama is a socialist.
http://www.dsausa.org/dsapac/Election%20closer%20than%20polls%20indicate.htm
Thia ia not communist party but a member of the international social democratic union. Jus as British Labour or German SDP
Are tim Mahoney and Jesse Jackson that big of a weight on Obama in Florida? Seems weird to me. There's pletny of evidence to suggest that Florida has shifted about 5 points to McCan in the last week or so. That's not the case anywhere else. Every other battleground appears about flat. Certianly none have had a sizable shift toward McCain. Perhaps Wisconsin and Minnesota have shifted from Obama +10-12 to +5-8, but Florida seems to be the outlier. I can't figure why.
"Yesterday, chuck Todd sais that MSNBC was almost ready to move AZ to a "lean" state, but needed more polling."
Arizona is been trying to find a reason to vote against John McCain for about eight years now.
I can assure you that Maricopa County is not outside of the margin of error in favor of McCain. This economy has been hell on the Valley.
Has anyone else noticed that the tracking polls as a group are closing more than quickly enough for McCain to be ahead on Nov. 4?
It is all well and good to pretend that poll results follow a random walk (despite Nate's unintended evidence to the contrary in his months-long tracker in the upper right). It looks like this election is going to be a nail-biter at best.
Blogger ChrisG said...
I guess Republicans are going to be hyping the Battleground poll today. Every other day they hype the poll that has the narrowest Obama margin, and it changes often. To conservatives just about every daily tracking poll has been the most accurate pollster at one point other than Reasearch 2000 and ABC which is new.
Short story: I was manning a voter reg table in NJ in early Sep., and this big middle-aged guido walks by and yells, "Yo, only +3 in NJ, you suckers are going down!" I laughed to myself as I flipped through the 40 new voter registrations I had received in the previous hour.
andrew said...
don't worry Obama supporters
Obama will win FL
What makes you so sure, Joe?
Are your sources within the McCain campaign telling you that?
:-)
on election night you will find out
Obama wins FL
Tyson,
Your math is off. If Obama loses Pennsylvania, he will have to get Virginia and another battleground state not including CO.
Pennsylvania's 21 electoral votes are worth the same as CO, NM and Iowa combined. So if Obama loses PA but wins those three states, he is at the same level as Kerry 252. He would then need to swing VA and MO or NC or OH or FL or IN.
Troll food:
"We are doomed."
I know, life is a terminal condition.
If you want proof that Obama's economic policies will work you will have to be a lot more specific in your request. Anecdotal evidence looking at other G8 countries suggests in general that he's probably on the right track. Of course it does depend on how one measures sauces.
On the flip side, there is strong evidence that tax cutting without corresponding spending cuts simply won't work. There is further evidence that capital gains and wealth based tax cuts also don't work - see last eight years & Regan years. I would suggest that in fact they act as catalysts on the erosion of disposable income for the majority of the population and transitively the dampening of growth.
"Has anyone else noticed that the tracking polls as a group are closing more than quickly enough for McCain to be ahead on Nov. 4?"
This is called gambler's fallacy.
You can not pick a few arbitrary endpoints and project the slope indefinitely. Statistical analysis does not work this way.
In fact, regression to the mean means the opposite is true.
All well and good if the model matches the process. Over the last 8 months however, changes in polling numbers are clearly positively correlated. Assuming the universe has not changed in the last week it is reasonable to assume positive correlation going forward.
That is how statistical analysis works.
So, I assuming that the race does tighten to a final +4 margin. Is there any way for McCain to win the electoral college while losing by 6 to 8 million votes? It seems improbable.
robin - Uh, no, the trackers have been basically stable at Obama +5ish for the last month now. Some bumps and dips, but voter preference (as always) is pretty locked in by October.
Regarding FL...it's telling that BHO is deploying so many resources there. Bottomline: he believes he has enough support to win the state; the only remaining challenge is getting the vote out.
IMO he wins FL, but unless McCain has major turnout problems, OH is probably too stubborn to turn blue.
"It is all well and good to pretend that poll results follow a random walk "
So instead, let's pretend that they follow a simple, linear pattern. Brilliant analysis.
PK see here's part of your problem:
"God save the Republic" may well be a nice sentiment. But never trust in a divine power to pull your chestnuts out of the fire.
Additionally, your hysterics are unwarranted. McCain use to have a great relationship with the press, (remember the 'the press is my base' quote?) hell, he was one of the most frequent visitors to the Sunday morning wank fests, a real media darling. A little over a month ago McCain started flinging a large amount of poo around blaming all his problems on an unsympathetic press and how they where soooo mean to his clearly unready VP nominee. If you bash people enough they are not going to be very sympathetic to you. To what extent the media has abandoned McCain (and it isn't quite as absolute as you hyperventilate about), it was largely McCain constructed. Just another indication of just how inept a campaign he is part of.
" changes in polling numbers are clearly positively correlated"
Positively correlated with what?
"So instead, let's pretend that they follow a simple, linear pattern"
If only we had a statistical expert to create some sort of "Super Tracker" that could apply proper statistical analysis to the polls. Maybe he could make a blog about it...
Theocratic troll infestation is down today! good work people! enjoying todays posts!
:)
each other? Speaking of poll results as a time series (surely you think that is reasonable!), the first differences in results appear serially correlated. I admit I haven't done the calculation to see if this is actually true.
Post a Comment