Again, i raise the same question with Gallup, as i do with Rasmussen. Are they polling only in states which have not yet voted? If so, are they including Michigan and Florida? If they are polling all fifty states, how relevant is it to include the places where people have already made their choices, and are not nearly as focused on what they intend to do.

Both these polling organizations need to clarify just what they are doing.

When are they going to release the California survey? I think Obama may pull it out on February 5th.

That does it. It is all over. Stay tuned for Senator Obama's endorsement of Hillary!

"Today's Gallup national tracking poll shows another fluctuation"

So I guess we've answered my question from the other day. Eric really doesn't understand the first thing about sampling, and yet he continues to report it in a way that has to be characterized as stupid.

Polls fluctuate even when the actual preferences of the population do not. To report on these *expected* fluctuations (+/- 3%) as if they reflected actual changes in the underlying preferences is either woefully naive or willfully stupid.

Now, the underlying preferences of the population can and do change, yet we cannot tell over a narrow range whether the polling picks up the actual or the random fluctuation. We cannot tell if this is noise or signal.

Again I ask, is this website an attempt to improve on the usually low level of competency in the US press corps when it comes to actually understanding an issue before parroting what someone else says about it, or is it just a one more voice in cacophony of garbage?

I thought you were trying to be smarter. Apparently not.

The jump today is because of the numbers that fell out of the poll. The numbers that gave Obama a large lead a few days ago fell out of the tracking poll. Tomorrow the day that gave Hillary a big bump will fall out as well and there may be a reversal.

The real test will be Saturday. That will have the numbers from Wed, Thur and Fri which will be after the "borrowed speech" story *and* the Wisconsin/Hawaii contests.

--
Mike

And I think the rioting in Belegrade is a much bigger story than Clinton retaking the lead in a irrelevant national tracking poll.

Obama just needs to win Texas. If he does well in the debate tonight, keeps the momentum going, keeps holding huge rallies where he hands out early voting ballots, then he's going to win Texas. If huge numbers of people in Houston, Dallas, and Austin vote for him, then it's over. He wins. Game over. The only poll I want to see is a SurveyUSA poll of Texas, a few days after tonight's debate. Then I'll add on a +6 margin for Obama. And then that's what my lying eyes will be believing.

This thing ruins the Obama dominance meme. In spite of the string of Obama victories, He and Hillary are very close in popularity. It is nothing like the McCain/Huckabee contest. Yes, that one is still undecided also.

The other day when Hillary closed the gap by as many as five points, Obama won WI by 17 points. Not that this is good news to Obama, but it's no news to Nobody.

The Two Debates
The Early Voting (with 10% expected in TX)
Martch 4, 2008.

That's what matters at this point. If he wins any of the two big states- this is over. If he loses both- then get ready for the "he can't win big states" narrative.

I wonder what impact the McCain story will have on the OH and TX primaries on the democratic side?

Also, this has to be sort of painful for Clinton. Even though every single thing seems to be going Obama's way (I mean, he's beating her in NY now!), there's always one little shred of hope she can hold on to. First it was Maine. Ouch, that had to hurt. Then it was Wisconsin. Ouch, that had to hurt. And now that the polls shows a tight race in TX and a closing in OH, she can at least look to this poll as an affirmation of her candidacy. See? See? They really do like me! They really do!

And then she'll just keep going on and once again get humiliated.

I think Obama was slow to respond to some of the hits he was taking leading up to WI- Michelle's proud comments and his plagerism charges.
While I don't personally think they were valid criticisms, they were allowed to get take root in the media and there was no counter-press. Obama's camp was silent aside from a few press releases which isn't going to do much.

I also think that there is a little buyers remorse going on.

Fortunately, most of the states involved in these polls have already voted (I can't say for sure but my understanding is that these are total US polls) and the HUGE WI win should start to counteract that.

My opinion is that it usually takes a few days for things to sink into the psyche and show up in polls. So we are probably seeing the end of the bad news cycle impact and should start seeing the impact of the good.

What I am mostly curious about is OH & TX. PA looks like it is getting closer.

"This thing ruins the Obama dominance meme."

No, it doesn't. (And it's not a "meme." It's a fact. Obama is beating HRC across the board.) Mathematically, it will be near-impossible for HRC to stay in this race (does anyone here believe she's going to take 60%+ in every state remaining?), and who's leading nationally today or tomorrow has no bearing on the GE. Hillary can be leading *nationally* by as large a margin as you like, but in a race that's determined on a state-by-state basis, national numbers mean nothing. Look at the states remaining; as Mark Penn would no doubt tell you, the other states don't count. Obama could lose it, but he'd have to step on his own dick with a great deal of vigor and enthusiasm to do so. Of course, the debate tonight could change things significantly...perhaps he'll take a dump on the floor, in full view of the cameras? That would probably change some minds.

"In spite of the string of Obama victories, He and Hillary are very close in popularity."

Except for that 47% disapproval rating Hillary's carrying around like an anchor.

Why just daily polls? Why not hourly?

The odd thing is that even though they still seem to be tied in the national poll, the state by state polls consistently show Obama doing 6-10% better than her head-to-head against McCain. Florida is a notable exception.

The state-by-state polls are more important at this point in the game, but I think it's interesting that a chunk of voters seem to disappear when the other polling method is used.

Is Gallup basing their poll on registered Democrats? If so, then their poll (and Fox News' as well) actually agree with the Wisconsin results. Clinton and Obama did indeed split the Democratic vote almost 50-50. Swing voters, who show up in the state-by-state polls, broke heavily for Obama, and seem to be breaking for him still in a potential matchup against McCain.

HA HA OBAMANIACS ... WAH WAH WAH.

Thanks, KcM. Those were the numbers I was thinking of.

That's only a sampling of the states, of course, but put together like that makes it look brutal for Clinton, even without addressing the effect of "coat tails".

Doesn't look that great for McCain, either. A Republican leading in Kansas by 6%? Routed in Colorado and Nevada? Ow.

I dearly want to see more southern state polling. McCain versus Obama in Mississippi and Alabama. I think the "Southern Strategy" is a dog that's had its day, and I want to see some evidence of that.

Oh stop complaining because poor baby Obama has to take a few shots. Wouldn't want the truth about the guy to come out, would you? We will all find out just who Obama really is soon enough.
Hopefully it will be before we get stuck with him for the next four years. But, if somehow he's able to sneak into office, can you say-"One
term President"?

It's interesting that every time he wins a primary, he jumps in the national polls, then falls back to more or less a tie. It think what's happening is people get enthusiastic, then they think about him actually running in the general in Florida and Ohio, for example, and they come down a little. Then they think about him eking out a victory over McCain and trying to govern without the landslide he envisions and without the nation rallying to him as he promises they will do, and they come down a little more. And it sits there. 50/50 in the Democratic Party for the inspirational leader who is going to bring the country together under the banner of hope and change. A little depressing actually.

I agree Billy-Glad; he tends to go into a state and generate a lot of enthusiasm with the ground game, the rallies, etc. Also, the outreach his campaign is achieving is exceptional, with countless high-touch contacts of potential voters. This gets them to the polls.

But, then he leaves and the excitment subsides. People then exhibit a less emotional reaction.

Maybe there should be a cooling off period associated with Obama outreach, kinda like with some hard sell purchases.