Poll Vault

[Pookster]

Gallup daily tracking from Friday shows the race tied:



Three-day rolling average, with 2680 registered voters and error margin of +/- 2%.

It now shows Obama up by 4%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109279/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Holds-4Point-Advantage.aspx

Did McCain get ... over-inflated?

Seriously, though. Polls before the conventions are hard to go by. I don't think much has changed over the past month.

 

[gdnp]

It now shows Obama up by 4%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109279/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Holds-4Point-Advantage.aspx

Did McCain get ... over-inflated?

Seriously, though. Polls before the conventions are hard to go by. I don't think much has changed over the past month.

It's like trying to judge a sailboat race in light, fluky winds. Once the trade winds pick up after the conventions we'll have a better idea who has the better boat and crew.

I think the European tour will help Obama more than the current numbers show. One of the biggest knocks against him is that he is too inexperienced, so looking presidential really helps. And given the problems that Clinton, Gore, and Kerry had with the military, his favorable reception by the troops despite his call for timetables blunts the "not ready to be CIC" and "elitism" charges.

 

[Pookster]

It's like trying to judge a sailboat race in light, fluky winds. Once the trade winds pick up after the conventions we'll have a better idea who has the better boat and crew.

Excellent analogy.

I think the European tour will help Obama more than the current numbers show. One of the biggest knocks against him is that he is too inexperienced, so looking presidential really helps. And given the problems that Clinton, Gore, and Kerry had with the military, his favorable reception by the troops despite his call for timetables blunts the "not ready to be CIC" and "elitism" charges.

It's blunted one of McCain's talking points, that's for sure. McCain's campaign has put a lot of effort into hurting Obama's image lately. At some point, will the effect on the public grow tiresome? If I were McCain's campaign manager, I'd be concerned about that ... because the polling on specific issues hasn't reflected any real negative effect for Obama so far. Maybe McCain has other shots to fire to hurt Obama. We'll see.

 

[David Wong]

For all of us who get totally worked up over every 4-point "bump" one candidate or the other gets, constantly analyzing who's winning and what it means, realize that the polls have not moved substantially since January of freaking 2007.

Seriously. Go look. Trace back the RCP Obama vs. McCain polling averages over TWENTY MONTHS AGO and what do you get? Obama up by 3.

It just reinforces my point: nobody is really paying attention. Most are still supporting their guy based on the same thing that made them support him the first time they learned who he was: Age, race, party affiliation.

 

[Brainster]

Smotherly Love?

Pew reports that Obama fatigue may be setting in:

Close to half (48%) of Pew's interviewees went on to say that they have been hearing too much about Obama lately. And by a slight, but statistically significant margin - 22% to 16% - people say that recently they have a less rather than more favorable view of the putative Democratic nominee.

In contrast, if anything, Pew's respondents said they want to hear more, not less about the Republican candidate. Just 26% in the poll said they had heard too much about McCain, while a larger number (38%) reported that they had heard too little about the putative Republican candidate. However, as for Obama, a slight plurality reports that recently they have come to have a less favorable view of McCain rather than a more favorable view of him - (23% to 18%).

Democrats were almost as likely to say they were hearing too much about Obama (34%) as they were to say the same about McCain (35%). Now, you can joke that's because McCain's talking about Obama, and I might even agree with that assessment.

They also find that McCain's ads are considered more negative and Obama's more positive, and here again I'd tend to agree as well (recently). There is an odd note though:

When asked about specific commercials, those tested for each candidate registered about similar recall levels - 41% of Pew's respondents said they have seen McCain's commercial that compares Barack Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. Almost the same number - (43%) report seeing Barack Obama's commercial where he talks about his background growing up in Kansas.

Kansas? Obama's family (on his mother's side) were from Kansas, but Barack didn't grow up there, by any means. I assume that Pew has got this wrong.

 

[Pookster]

I've heard too much about Obama myself. It does get tiresome after awhile. But, Obama is a novelty in many ways. He has tended to make for more interesting stories/coverage. The conventions will help balance things though when the media spotlight is basically all on McCain for a whole week. It'll be interesting to see what a similar poll might show in October.

 

[gdnp]

CNN poll of polls has Obama by 5.

The race between Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama is extremely tight, according to the latest CNN "Poll of Polls." Just five points separate the two candidates -- Obama's 48 percent to McCain's 43 percent, with 9 percent undecided.

More Brownian motion.

Close to half (48%) of Pew's interviewees went on to say that they have been hearing too much about Obama lately. And by a slight, but statistically significant margin - 22% to 16% - people say that recently they have a less rather than more favorable view of the putative Democratic nominee.

This is an interesting development. It would tend to suggest that even an overwhelming lead in money and air time may lead to eventual diminishing or even negative returns as it ends up turning off as many voters as it ends up gaining.

 

[Pookster]

This is an interesting development. It would tend to suggest that even an overwhelming lead in money and air time may lead to eventual diminishing or even negative returns as it ends up turning off as many voters as it ends up gaining.

The question for me is how does "hearing to much about Obama" translate into "not voting/supporting Obama".

 

[chipmunk stew]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/06/obama.polls/index.htmlThis is an interesting development. It would tend to suggest that even an overwhelming lead in money and air time may lead to eventual diminishing or even negative returns as it ends up turning off as many voters as it ends up gaining.

Only if the numbers actually suggest causality.

McCain's been using a classic and effective underdog strategy. Since the frontrunner is getting more attention anyway, snipe at him from the sidelines and try to bring his negatives up.

That, more than mere overexposure, is what I'd wager on being the cause of the drop in Obama's favorability ratings.

 

[gdnp]

Just because people claim they don't like negative campaigning does not imply that it doesn't work.

 

[Brainster]

Rasmussen shows more movement towards McCain on the issues:

John McCain is now trusted more than Barack Obama on nine out of 14 electoral issues tracked by Rasmussen Reports. The latest national telephone surveys find that McCain has the biggest advantage on the war in Iraq, by a 51% to 39% margin.

Perhaps the most interesting finding of these polls is that McCain has expanded his leads on nearly every issue he had previously had the advantage on, while Obama’s leads have diminished over the past two weeks.

Could just be Brownian motion but I do get the sense that Obamomentum has stalled recently. 1000 likely voters, +/- 3%.

 

[Brainster]

Zogby stunner:

UTICA, New York – As Russian tanks rolled into the Republic of Georgia and the presidential candidates met over the weekend in the first joint issues forum of the fall campaign, the latest polling includes drama almost as compelling - Republican John McCain has taken a five-point lead over Democrat Barack Obama in the race for President, the latest Reuters/Zogby telephone survey shows.

McCain leads Obama by a 46% to 41% margin.

Zogby notes that Obama had led by seven points in his last poll. 1089 LV, error margin of +/- 3%, August 14-16.

Zogby has not exactly been the most accurate of pollsters. I can believe he's got the direction right, but the swing he reports (12 points towards McCain) seems way too high. Of course, the size of his lead for Obama in July was also an outlier.

He shows Obama getting support from only 42% of women, which would indicate an even bigger blowout for McCain.

Not much movement at InTrade; Obama's at 59 to 39 to McCain.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Didn't Zogby show that 84% of the population believe the US Government was behind the 9/11 attacks?

 

[Pookster]

Zogby stunner:



Zogby notes that Obama had led by seven points in his last poll. 1089 LV, error margin of +/- 3%, August 14-16.

Zogby has not exactly been the most accurate of pollsters. I can believe he's got the direction right, but the swing he reports (12 points towards McCain) seems way too high. Of course, the size of his lead for Obama in July was also an outlier.

He shows Obama getting support from only 42% of women, which would indicate an even bigger blowout for McCain.

Not much movement at InTrade; Obama's at 59 to 39 to McCain.

The wild swings showing up with Zogby don't show up with other popular polls. Rasmussen and Gallup have shown steady support for both candidates over the past several months. Both Obama and McCain's leads in the respective Zogby polls are outliers in comparison. As I recall, Zogby wasn't very accurate in the 2004 race.

 

[Brainster]

Didn't Zogby show that 84% of the population believe the US Government was behind the 9/11 attacks?

No. Zogby was commissioned by the Truthers to do a poll (PDF file) in early September 2007 which concluded that only 4.6% of the population was MIHOP (the government did the attacks). The 84% poll result is a NY Times-CBS News poll, and there the Troofers combined "Don't know" with "Government mostly telling the truth but lying about something" with "Government mostly lying".

Like I said, Zogby isn't all that reliable, and I don't buy the magnitude of the swing. There are some confirmations; the LA Times had Obama by 12 in June and now have him by 2. but again the 12 was an outlier. So it appears the direction of changes over the summer has been in McCain's favor, although I still think Obama remains a slight favorite.

Some conservatives are grumbling that Zogby's intent with this poll is to set the stage for a reported convention bounce; I don't think they're that devious.

ETA: And in the fever swamp left, the belief is that Hillary will use this poll to pull off a coup at the DNC.

 

[David Wong]

Three polls have come in since Zogby:

CBS/NY Times - Obama by 3
NBC/WSJ - Obama by 3
LA Times - Obama by 2

So everybody else has the race in the exact same spot it's been for about 19 months now. Obama up by 3.

Maybe McCain got a one-day bump from the faith forum thing. Don't know if anybody watched it though. I didn't.

A lot of speculation on how the VP pick will affect the polls. I'm going to go way out on a limb here and predict that Obama will get a small bump, and then a week later, in a shocker, will find himself up by 3.

 

[Foolmewunz]

RCP has the latest average (of 8 major polls) at 1.2 for Obama.


This is not looking good for the Democrats in a year that they should be sweeping the Senate, the House, and the White House.

 

[Pookster]

Three polls have come in since Zogby:

CBS/NY Times - Obama by 3
NBC/WSJ - Obama by 3
LA Times - Obama by 2

So everybody else has the race in the exact same spot it's been for about 19 months now. Obama up by 3.

Maybe McCain got a one-day bump from the faith forum thing. Don't know if anybody watched it though. I didn't.

A lot of speculation on how the VP pick will affect the polls. I'm going to go way out on a limb here and predict that Obama will get a small bump, and then a week later, in a shocker, will find himself up by 3.

Rasmussen and Gallup show that they've both been polling the same over the past two months, with the typical noise.

It's going to be a close race. I'm a little amazed that anyone has thought different. We're still dealing with an electorate and electoral college system that elected Bush ... twice.

 

[David Wong]

Rasmussen and Gallup show that they've both been polling the same over the past two months, with the typical noise.

It's going to be a close race. I'm a little amazed that anyone has thought different. We're still dealing with an electorate and electoral college system that elected Bush ... twice.

No, there's nothing shocking here for either side. We just don't elect many Democrat presidents.

The coalition of Chrisitian conservatives (including pro-lifers), defense hawks, and people who vote purely on taxes should always give the Republicans 35-40%, even if they ran a mannequin for office (not an insult to Republicans- the Dems have a similar base). This time, tack on people who just like McCain and the people who will never vote for a black candidate, and you've got yourself a race.

When they say that Bush has 28% approval, that doesn't mean that 72% of the country became Democrats. A lot of that criticism is from the right, complaining that he did an incompetent job of standing up for their cause. But they want a replacement Republican, not a Democrat.

Please also remember that the experts calling for an Obama "landslide" were never talking about him winning by 20 points (or at least, not if they know anything at all about the subject). They were talking about him winning several key battleground states by 4-5 points, giving him a huge electoral advantage but still single digits in the popular vote.

The lead will certainly change hands multiple times, even in that scenario. And McCain can certainly win, he only needs to convince a few percentage points beyond the Republican base to switch.

The reason I said, and still say, It's a 60 to 65% chance of an Obama victory is because the electoral map still looks worse for McCain now than it did for Bush in 2004, and everyone expects turnout to be much higher for the Democrats.

 

[Pookster]

The reason I said, and still say, It's a 60 to 65% chance of an Obama victory is because the electoral map still looks worse for McCain now than it did for Bush in 2004, and everyone expects turnout to be much higher for the Democrats.

As of now, the Democrats seem to be holding on to the States they had in 2004. There are about five blue States that Obama has a very legitimate chance to pick off (and is leading in a number of them at the moment). Depending on the combination he might win, it wouldn't take but a couple to win the election. All this will start to be more clear by the end of September.