Poll Vault

[Undesired Walrus]

What were the polls like around about this time in '04?

 

[gdnp]

Don't count McCain out in the debates. Obama certainly didn't blow them away at the religious forum, despite clearly being a more religious person than McCain. I don't recall him dominating the democratic debates either. He can come off as both aloof and less than articulate at times. And he is also prone to blurting out things that can hurt him: I suspect, for example, he would like to have back his "the surge has succeeded beyond our wildest dreams" comment during the O'Reilley interview. I'm sure we'll be seeing that one in McCain commercials.

I am not so sure that Palin won't hold her own as well. These debates are not really about knowledge. They are about anticipating the questions, having set answers, or changing the subject to something you do know.

BAC could give her lessons. When cornered, he rarely concedes a point--he just changes the subject. Most of the candidates are quite good at this.

 

[dudalb]

With all the "Obama has it in the bag" threads and posts since he went up two points,
this picture should be a lesson for the Dems about what overconfidence will do to you:

 

[David Wong]

What were the polls like around about this time in '04?

Bush up by 3:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html

It didn't change up to election day, except for the occasional outlier.

 

[dudalb]

It's stupid even to discuss the polls as showing that one is ahead of the other at this point since all the leads are well within the + or - percentage of error.

 

[David Wong]

Don't count McCain out in the debates.

I completely agree. Especially the Palin debate, where any harsh attacks by Biden will be seen as more persecution of the strong, conservative woman. The only way she can screw it up is if she completely fumbles it and reveals she doesn't know where Europe is or whatever. I don't see that happening, she's not stupid.

And McCain is a likable guy, that's always been his asset. He's probably better at off-the-cuff remarks than Obama and I think he could do well.

He just can't lose his temper and can't let himself get cornered on the recent economic stuff.

Remember, these debates tend to lean to the left, you'll get lots of questions about increasing funding for green energy and schools, but not many on decreasing the deficit.

Obama's goal is not to create deadly "you're no Jack Kennedy" moments. He just has to answer the questions and be competent and hold his lead.

 

[David Wong]

It's stupid even to discuss the polls as showing that one is ahead of the other at this point since all the leads are well within the + or - percentage of error.

Actually, Gallup is now outside their margin of error (lead is 4, margin is 2) as is Hotline (lead is 4, margin is 3) CBS/NY Times (lead is 5) and Quinnipiac (lead is 4, margin is 3.1).

Plus, even if the lead is within the margin, the movement of the polls is significant. The six-point move to go from down 3 to up 3 is significant even if the margin of error is 3.

 

[chipmunk stew]

Actually, Gallup is now outside their margin of error (lead is 4, margin is 2) as is Hotline (lead is 4, margin is 3) CBS/NY Times (lead is 5) and Quinnipiac (lead is 4, margin is 3.1).

Plus, even if the lead is within the margin, the movement of the polls is significant. The six-point move to go from down 3 to up 3 is significant even if the margin of error is 3.

Also, the aggregate polls (like Real Clear Politics) have a smaller margin of error, and they show definite trends. McCain was clearly ahead last week. Obama is clearly moving into the lead.

 

[NotJesus]

FiveThirtyEight sure does lag; they show McCain still with a lead...methinks that they will show Obama back on top by this weekend.

Or even today.

 

[MattusMaximus]

It's stupid even to discuss the polls as showing that one is ahead of the other at this point since all the leads are well within the + or - percentage of error.

That's why I'm not discussing polls. I'm following the prediction markets, which have usually been much, much better predictors than polls (especially the Iowa Electronic Market). And guess what? All the prediction markets are showing that McCain is in trouble.

For example, if you compare the IEM markets from the 2004 election with the current election, you'll see what I mean. McCain and the GOP are in big trouble, though of course they and their supporters refuse to admit it publicly this close to the election.

Case in point, in the 2004 election at this point (mid-to-late Sept) the IEM-WTA was

Bush ~60
Kerry ~40

And in the current election the IEM-WTA is, as of now

Obama 60.8
McCain 40.6

which is almost a complete reversal from 2004. Check the histories and the trends. I maintain that unless something major happens, even with a few gaffes, this is Obama's election to win.

 

[MattusMaximus]

With all the "Obama has it in the bag" threads and posts since he went up two points,
this picture should be a lesson for the Dems about what overconfidence will do to you:[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_188404862c8a777faf.jpg[/qimg]

Which is why we're not making the mistake of being overconfident. From here until Election Day, we're going to beat McCain and his GOP handlers like a drum.

Count on it.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Don't count McCain out in the debates. Obama certainly didn't blow them away at the religious forum, despite clearly being a more religious person than McCain. I don't recall him dominating the democratic debates either. He can come off as both aloof and less than articulate at times. And he is also prone to blurting out things that can hurt him: I suspect, for example, he would like to have back his "the surge has succeeded beyond our wildest dreams" comment during the O'Reilley interview. I'm sure we'll be seeing that one in McCain commercials.

Yes, but McCain can also display some pretty stupid gaffes. Just look at what happened this week with all of his mis-steps.

Besides, the way I see it, Obama can probably afford some small goofs in the debates - McCain cannot. If McCain doesn't really outshine Obama, he's in deep trouble.

Bottom line: the debates will be make or break for McCain; they are must-wins for him. Obama doesn't have that handicap, especially given the current economic climate and the fact that more people are paying attention to issues.

I am not so sure that Palin won't hold her own as well. These debates are not really about knowledge. They are about anticipating the questions, having set answers, or changing the subject to something you do know.

Well, given her ham-fisted performance last week in her only interview to date, you'll have to pardon me if I don't agree. I know plenty of undecided voters who are looking at the debates to be specifically about knowledge. If that is a general trend, Palin's predicted knowledge-less display in the VP debate will act to hurt McCain, at least with undecideds.

BAC could give her lessons. When cornered, he rarely concedes a point--he just changes the subject. Most of the candidates are quite good at this.

I agree that she'll weasel, squirm, and try to change the subject while sticking to her pre-set script. But I also think that it probably won't work out too well for McCain/Palin if (when) she does that, because the undecideds have likely heard it all again and again. They're going to be looking for something new and substantive, and Palin won't be able to give it to them.

 

[MattusMaximus]

FiveThirtyEight sure does lag; they show McCain still with a lead...methinks that they will show Obama back on top by this weekend.

Check it now. There's been a big change in the last 24 hours since you posted.

FiveThirtyEight has a great article on this...

State of the Race: Is McCain In Trouble?

Some key points in the article:

Is this shift really a result of the economic crisis? I believe that's part of it, but I believe there are at least two other factors at work as well.

The first is that McCain's performance in the polls in the 7-10 days following the Republican convention did likely reflect a bounce of some kind, rather than a permanent shift in the state of the race.

The Wall Street crisis was the first major event of the post-convention news cycle -- the first thing that really tested the robustness of the Republican bounce. And what happened? The bounce proved to be about a mile wide but an inch deep.

McCain's other problem is that Sarah Palin may no longer be an asset to the ticket; in fact, she may be a liability. Averaging the candidates' favorability scores across four recent polls -- as one should always try and do when looking at favorability numbers since they can vary greatly depending on question wording -- Palin now has the worst net scores among the four principals in the race.

The McCain campaign may be in some trouble. We should learn over the next several days, as further polling results roll in, whether they are in a little trouble or a lot of trouble. I would certainly not rule out the latter possibility.

I'm going to go with a lot of trouble.

 

[Wangler]

Obama's goal is not to create deadly "you're no Jack Kennedy" moments. He just has to answer the questions and be competent and hold his lead.

True, but let's not forget the old adage:

"The best defense is a good offense"

 

[MattusMaximus]

True, but let's not forget the old adage:

"The best defense is a good offense"

This is a valid point. But also bear in mind that Obama/Biden seem to have found their voices, and I think everyone will have to agree that they've been playing offense pretty hardcore all week. If they can continue this into next week, it'll give them a huge amount of momentum going into the debates.

As I said, I think the only way for McCain to recover is for both he and Palin to really outshine their opponents in the debates. All of them.

 

[Wangler]

Bottom line: the debates will be make or break for McCain; they are must-wins for him. Obama doesn't have that handicap, especially given the current economic climate and the fact that more people are paying attention to issues.

I think that both candidates need good debates this time round.

Well, given her ham-fisted performance last week in her only interview to date, you'll have to pardon me if I don't agree.

Well, she did have a two part interview with Fox News (does that even count), lobbed a whole bunch of slowballs at her........

I think that she has another ABC interview next week.

She is beginning to get out there a bit more.

 

[MattusMaximus]

I think that both candidates need good debates this time round.

McCain needs a good debate way more than Obama at this point. If McCain stumbles in the debates, he's finished for sure; if not, he might have some kind of fighting chance.

Well, she did have a two part interview with Fox News (does that even count), lobbed a whole bunch of slowballs at her........

Surprised? I'm not. It's no surprise either that barely anyone beyond Fox News robots paid any attention to it. Most people who aren't hardcore Bush Republicans don't give Fox news much validity anymore.

I think that she has another ABC interview next week.

I know she's to be interviewed by CBS's Katie Couric and might show up on 60 Minutes as well.

She is beginning to get out there a bit more.

She really has no choice. It's starting to look bad for the GOP that McCain's campaign is doing everything they can to hide her from the press (think "Cheney's in a secret bunker"). Not to mention, she needs to do some kind of damage control to mitigate the damage she wrought upon McCain last week with that terrible interview, and sound bites won't cut it.

Imo, beyond the base (who will love her no matter what), she has become a liability for McCain's campaign.

 

[gdnp]

I'm just hoping that the Bush administration doesn't pull an October surprise: a US or Israeli air strike on Iran, for example.

 

[Wangler]

Not to mention, she needs to do some kind of damage control to mitigate the damage she wrought upon McCain last week with that terrible interview, and sound bites won't cut it.

I didn't think she was all that bad...I haven't seen too much analysis beyond the single "Bush doctrine" question.

Certainly her answer there was no worse than Biden's patriotic tax answer.

 

[Wangler]

I'm just hoping that the Bush administration doesn't pull an October surprise: a US or Israeli air strike on Iran, for example.

I hope not...has any administration done something like that in the past?