We are starting to see polling taken after the week-end (and thus after the Powell endorsement and McCain’s socialism charge), and there is little sign that McCain is closing the gap. He does gain a bit in two of the tracking polls, but he loses ground in four others, as Zogby, Research 2000 and Washington Post/ABC now all show Obama leading by double-digits. In all 10 of the national polls released today (including the AP survey, about which I will talk in a minute), McCain is stuck in the low 40s, between 40% and 45%.
One possible worry for Obama is that the size of his national lead is due to his gains in states that will not influence the electoral college: We have been seeing Obama open dramatic leads in safe blue states like California and Washington and cut margins significantly in places like Texas and Kentucky. The trends in places like Ohio and Florida are at a much smaller scale (surely because the volume of campaigning and advertisement makes these states less susceptible to follow national trends). So could the size of Obama’s lead in non-battleground states be obscuring a tighter race in the electoral college?
There isn’t much evidence of that in polls from battleground states, where Obama continues to get strong numbers - though he hasn’t put it away the way the way he appears to have secured a popular vote lead. But he dominates in Virginia, where CNN/Time finds him leading by double-digits yet again. Mason-Dixon does find the Old Dominion within the margin of error, but its previous survey had been the only one with McCain ahead since September. Furthermore, Obama leads outside of the margin of error in three out of the five CNN/Time polls (VA, Nevada and Ohio) and is leading within the MoE in two polls of North Carolina.
The good news for McCain comes from Florida: his lead in Mason Dixon is well within the margin of error, but it is the fourth survey in a row to find McCain gaining in the Sunshine State, a significant break from Obama’s fifteen consecutive - many of which were outside of the margin of error.
The second good news for McCain comes from the much-discussed AP poll that has a 1% lead. But three remarks apply here. First, McCain is stuck in the same range as every other poll (the low 40s), and Obama is much lower than his national average. As long as McCain cannot break 45% (or 46% in his best Rasmussen days), he doesn’t have much hope of besting Obama nationally. Second, Marc Ambinder remarks that evangelicals make up about twice as much of the sample as they usually do. Third, this gets us to the important slip between registered voters and likely voters.
Obama leads by 5% among registered voters in AP’s poll, a differential that also exists in Gallup’s tracking (+9% among registered voters, +5% or +8% among likely voters). And it is most dramatic in CNN/Time’s state polls. In all five, Obama performs better among RVs than among LVs (especially in Nevada, where he is ahead by 13% among RVs). What this means is very simple: Obama will benefit from higher turnout, and the size of his lead is partly dependent on how tight a likely voter screen pollsters apply.
There are clear indications that turnout will be larger than usual, particularly among Democrats, meaning that Obama’s lead could range somewhere between the LV screen and the RV results. Early voting numbers are going through the roof among Democrats and African-Americans in North Carolina, Georgia and Nevada; furthermore, Gallup’s tracking poll acknowledges that the traditional LV model might not apply - which is why they have an expanded model which closely mirrors the RV results.
That said, it is impossible to predict how large turnout will be and whether Obama’s organization will fully function. And that’s why we have elections. On to the full roundup of the day’s polls:
- Obama remains in command of the tracking polls, though they are not moving as uniformly in his direction yesterday. Obama gains 2% in Zogby (up 52% to 42%), 2% in Research 2000 (up 51% to 41%), 2% in Rasmussen (up 51% to 45%) and 2% in Washington Post/ABC (54% to 43%). Hotline finds a stable margin (47% to 42%). McCain gains 2% in Gallup’s expanded likely voter model (52% to 44%, with a 9% lead for Obama among RVs and a 5% lead in the traditional LV model), 2% in IBD/TIPP (46% to 42%). To recap, Obama’s leads are: 4%, 5%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 10%, 11%.
- Obama leads 49% to 40% in a national Fox News poll conducted Monday and Tuesday. He led by 7% two weeks ago. Who knew a few months ago that Obama would achieve the support of 88% of Democrats (versus 83% of Republicans for McCain)? Interestingly, 66% of Democrats and 47% of independents think that spreading the wealth is a good idea.
- Obama leads 44% to 43% in a national AP/GfQ poll conducted Thursday through Monday. He led by 7% three weeks ago. Obama leads by 10% among all adults and by 5% among registered voters, however.
- Obama leads 50% to 42% in a national poll conducted by Ipsos/McClatchy conducted Thursday through Monday.
- Obama leads 54% to 44% in a CNN/Time poll of Virginia. Among registered voters, Obama leads 54% to 42%. When other candidates are included, he leads 51% to 44%.
- Obama leads 47% to 45% in a Mason Dixon poll of Virginia. McCain led by 3% two weeks ago.
- Obama leads 51% to 47% in a CNN/Time poll of Ohio, just within the margin of error. Among registered voters, Obama leads 51% to 45%. When other candidates are included, he leads 49% to 44%, with 2% for Barr (50% to 43% among registered voters).
- Obama leads 48% to 46% in a WSOC-TV poll of North Carolina.
- Obama leads 50% to 46% in a CNN/Time poll of North Carolina, just outside of the margin of error. Among registered voters, Obama leads 51% to 46%. When other candidates are included, he leads 51% to 46%, with 2% for Barr.
- Obama leads 51% to 46% in a CNN/Time poll of Nevada. Among registered voters, Obama leads 54% to 41%. When other candidates are included, he leads 49% to 43%, with 3% for Nader and 2% for Barr.
- McCain leads 46% to 45% in a Mason Dixon poll of Florida. Obama led by 2% two weeks ago.
- Obama leads 52% to 41% in the Morning Call tracking poll of Pennsylvania. He led by 10% yesterday.
- Obama leads 52% to 41% in a Research 2000 poll of Wisconsin, conducted Monday and Tuesday.
- Obama leads 51% to 38% in a Wisconsin Public Radio poll of Wisconsin. However, the poll was was conducted form the 9th to the 17th, so it is not at all an indicator of what is going on currently on the ground.
- Obama leads 51% to 39% in a Pan Atlantic SMS poll of Maine.
- Obama leads 55% to 36% in an Elway poll of Washington.
- McCain leads 53% to 42% in an Ivan Moore poll of Alaska. McCain led by 17% two weeks ago.
- McCain leads 53% to 44% in a CNN/Time poll of West Virginia, just outside of the margin of error. Among registered voters, Obama leads 51% to 44%.
- McCain leads 42% to 41% in a one-week old poll of West Virginia conducted by Democratic-firm Rainmaker.
- McCain leads 52% to 44% in a Rasmussen poll of Kentucky.
- McCain leads 54% to 42% in a Rasmussen poll of Tennessee. He led by 19% last month.
Meanwhile, in down-the-ballot polls:
- Mark Begich is ahead 47% to 46% in an Ivan Moore poll of the Alaska Senate race. Begich led by 4% two weeks ago.
- Kay Hagan leads 44% to 43% in a WSOC-TV poll of North Carolina’s Senate race.
- McConnell leads 50% to 43% in a Rasmussen poll of Kentucky’s Senate race. He led by 9% three weeks ago.
- Mary Landrieu leads 54% to 34% in an internal poll of the Louisiana Senate race.
- Chris Gregoire leads 51% to 39% in an Elway poll of Washington’s gubernatorial race.
- Perdue and McCrory are tied at 44% in a WSOC-TV poll of North Carolina’s gubernatorial race.
- In AK-AL, Ethan Berkowitz leads 51% to 43% against Don Young in an Ivan Moore poll. He led by 9% two weeks ago.
- In FL-18, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen leads 48% to 41% in an internal poll for Democratic candidate Annette Taddeo.
No big surprises in this batch of congressional polls. If anything, the news is good for the GOP as Sens. Stevens and Dole stay within the margin of error in their respective cases (as we await the verdict of the Stevens trial) and as Mitch McConnell remains ahead outside of the margin of error in Rasmussen’s survey. But the Louisiana numbers are naturally excellent news for Democrats; while Landrieu’s own survey might be overstating her lead, it does confirm the conventional wisdom that the incumbent is ahead.
Finally McCain is making the case that Obama’s policies = tax increases and it’s hurting Obama in the polls. Older voters are going back to McCain now that they’re seeing the economic risk they’re facing. That’s why McCain’s winning Florida again.
Finally McCain is making the case that Obama’s policies = tax increases and it’s hurting Obama in the polls. Older voters are going back to McCain now that they’re seeing the economic risk they’re facing. That’s why McCain’s winning Florida again.
Finally McCain is making the case that Obama’s policies = tax increases and it’s hurting Obama in the polls. Older voters are going back to McCain now that they’re seeing the economic risk they’re facing. That’s why McCain’s winning Florida again.
Someone explain to me how tax cuts for billionaires is going to help repay a $3 trillion dollar national debt. This is not 1980. Reaganism is dead. I make far less that $250,000, and I want some extra money!
Finally McCain is making the case that Obama’s policies = tax increases…Older voters are going back to McCain now that they’re seeing the economic risk they’re facing.
Yes–on the top few percent of wage earners, a category which does not include most fixed-income seniors.
Hard to argue that Obama’s tax proposals are so radical when the wealthy would be paying no more than they did under Clinton and everyone else would be paying less–not only less than they did under Clinton, but less than they’re paying now.
As for McCain winning Florida “again,” don’t confuse polling swings of a few points with actual advantages for either candidate. Florida has been within a few points for a while, and those few points are within the polling margins of error, so it’s essentially been a statistical tie with no one really “ahead.”
Academic proof of media bias http://journalism.org/node/13307
Academic proof of media bias
Proof of bias? Hardly, except for those predisposed to believe it in the first place. Here’s the discussion section of the report:
“One question likely to be posed is whether these findings provide evidence that the news media are pro-Obama. Is there some element in these numbers that reflects a rooting by journalists for Obama and against McCain, unconscious or otherwise? The data do not provide conclusive answers. They do offer a strong suggestion that winning in politics begat winning coverage, thanks in part to the relentless tendency of the press to frame its coverage of national elections as running narratives about the relative position of the candidates in the polls and internal tactical maneuvering to alter those positions. Obama’s coverage was negative in tone when he was dropping in the polls, and became positive when he began to rise, and it was just so for McCain as well. Nor are these numbers different than what we have seen before. Obama’s numbers are similar to what we saw for John Kerry four years ago as he began rising in the polls, and McCain’s numbers are almost identical to what we saw eight years ago for Democrat Al Gore.”
Instead of jumping to the conclusion of bias, it it possible that coverage for McCain has been more negative because, well, there’s been a lot more negative activity and/or results on the part of his campaign? If one campaign is making more mistakes than the other, wouldn’t it be media bias to report both campaigns as doing equally well?
At some point, one has to stop blaming the media for the results of a campaign and perhaps place responsibility on the campaign’s own message or messenger, or just accept the possibility that more people just believe or want something different than what the campaign is offering. Believe me, I’ve been there.
This meme that the race ‘always’ tightens toward the end of the campaign (as evidenced by the supposedly objective AP-GFK poll that has both O. and M. tied) is a myth. Races seem to become harder and harder to track in the final days. Remember 2004 when the exit polls on election day seemed to portend a victory for Kerry? Taniel makes very good points for discounting the AP-GFK poll which runs counter to all the others. While other polls show Obama near or slightly over 50 percent, McCain never goes beyond 45 percent. He is stuck there. I’m also surprised by the large number of undecideds in the AP-GFK poll. I find it hard to believe that a full 13 percent of likely voters have not yet made up their minds.
One last comment about these Undecideds. I like what Cafferty has to say:
“After the longest and most expensive presidential campaign in history, 7% of likely voters are still not sure who they’re going to vote for. And the election is now less than two weeks away. These are the findings in the latest CNN Poll of Polls. So what’s the problem? Maybe if you haven’t figured it out by now you should not be allowed to vote.”
Agreed. If you are still unsure which candidate you support at this late date, please do us all a favor and just stay home!
I have to wonder what the trickle down effect will be if Obama is elected. Seeing lots of businesses closing and more jobless, there is surely less income tax coming in. I think if taxes were done in a fair way like 10% for all, people could get ahead. People who make tons of money probably deserve it for all the time and hard work they invested.
Keep the chin up, we are always the best when things are the worst.
I think if taxes were done in a fair way like 10% for all, people could get ahead. People who make tons of money probably deserve it for all the time and hard work they invested.
10% for all wouldn’t come close to paying our national bills, even with massive cuts in spending. Marginal rates start at 10% and go up to 35%. And that doesn’t include federal wage taxes which is around 6% up to about the first $100,000 of income.
Taxes aren’t some black hole created by the government; they’re the way we decide we’re going to pay for programs we say we want. And we’re not paying our national bills as it is, so it’s hard for me to see how tax cuts for everyone will improve the situation.
Some people who made tons of money may have worked hard to get it (though some of us inherited it), but once you have it you can make lots and lots through investments which require no work except paying someone to manage your money. And that income now often gets taxed at a lower rate than people who actually work for it (Warren Buffett’s effective tax rate is lower than his secretary’s).