Poll: McCain Pulls Even With Obama In Ohio, But...
A number of you have already chewed over the new poll from Public Policy Polling that finds McCain has pulled even with Obama in Ohio.
The survey finds the two in an absolute dead heat, with 45% apiece, with 10% undecided. McCain had trailed in the state in two previous Public Policy polls.
The pollsters say that McCain's gains are fueled by the fact that he's actually doing better among Republicans (89%-7%) than Obama is among Dems (75%-17%). That's largely because middle-aged white females are neglecting to choose Obama, "an indication that it could be former supporters of Hillary Clinton who are holding out.
One caveat, however: The poll finds that Obama is winning only 80% of black voters, a finding that's out of line with some other surveys.
test
anyone experiencing delays today or over weekend?
August 18, 2008 9:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ohio is the mother of swing states, always supposed to be close. But the AA numbers and the fact that is a tie, even with the big advantage Obama have with independents, left me uneasy with this poll.
Still, not an excuse to avoid concern. There's still work to do. Time to redouble the efforts.
The game is not over until it's over.
August 18, 2008 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
The AA diminished participation is probably more realistic when you consider voter disenfranchishment. However, in terms of the turnout it will be well over 90%, for AA.
Ohio will turn on jobs.
Also if Obama wants the female vote he needs to start running ads on family planning where the GOP is advocating under the Bush policies that birth control is a form of abortion.
Obama needs to go directly after mcCain for the female vote by talking about the erosion of family planning rights. The most significant innovation in the last century in terms of societal impact is by far birth control. Birth control enabled women to have control of their own lives, to plan how many children they would have and to lead far more independent and happy lives.
A woman's life without birth control is nothing but a man's world, she is at the behest of men.
Obama needs ads that talk about this:
"The Health and Human Services Department is reviewing a draft regulation that would deny federal funding to medical centers that don't allow employees to opt out of participating in care that runs counter to their personal convictions, including providing birth control pills, IUDs and the Plan B emergency contraceptive.
Conservative groups, abortion opponents and some members of Congress are welcoming the initiative as necessary to safeguard doctors, nurses and other health workers who, they say, are increasingly facing discrimination because of their beliefs or are being coerced into delivering services they find repugnant.
But the draft proposal has sparked intense criticism by family planning advocates, women's health activists and members of Congress who say the regulation would create overwhelming obstacles for women seeking abortions and birth control
....the rule could have far-reaching, but less obvious, implications. Because of its wide scope and because it would — apparently for the first time — define abortion in a federal regulation as anything that affects a fertilized egg, the regulation could raise questions about a broad spectrum of scientific research and care, critics say.
The expanded definition of abortion would include most forms of hormonal birth control and the IUD."
This information is not widely known and it needs to be blasted over the airwaves.
http://www.courant.com/news/health/hc-birthcontrol0731.artjul31,0,6786166.story
If Ohio thinks the lack of jobs is bad, just wait until their wives and girlfriends can't get birth control. More mouths to feed with fewer jobs is a disaster taking us back to the stone ages waiting to happen.
A population explosion is a poverty explosion in America today withOUt jobs.
August 18, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry to say but that "but" or the caveat about the black vote just sounds like a way to dismiss every poll that doesn't suit us. And frankly doesn't make analysis of polls that do suit us very credible either in that case. Everyone can always find one internal whose results are strange, and in this particular case I am not shocked:
Blacks represent 13% of the sample, (1) so that's a HUGE margin of error for that subsample, and really not worth mentioning. For Obama to get 80% of the black vote if that vote is 13% of the sample is completely in line with every other poll that is being released, not to mention that other polls are showing the same.
(2) If Obama were at 90% of the black vote, it would get him about 1% more - certainly not very significant. There are enough things in the poll to explain the 8% swing (75% of the Dem vote...) to not have to use the black vote explanation.
August 18, 2008 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
fair points, but I still think the finding suggests something may be amiss with this one
August 18, 2008 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, I dont think that even if the obama had 100% of the black vote that the polls would go up that much. Obama is always going to have a hard time in Ohio, culturally they seem behind. Thats why other states like virginia and colorado will be important to Obama winning the election
Faith Forum: Sincerity Versus Stump Speech
August 18, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wait a second.
Every state has its rubes.
I'll wager that Virginia has as many, if not more, than Ohio.
Ohio has a portion of appalachia, but so does Virginia.
we also have urban areas that have swung Ohio to the Dems a hell of a lot more often than No. VA has done, which hasn't ...yet.
Ohio wasn't the only state that went for Bush; a lot of states wear that shame.
We're going to win Ohio.
Book it!
August 18, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
OH GOD!!! THE POLLING IN AUGUST IS SO CLOSE!!! AAAAAHHHHH!!! PANICATTACKPANICATTACK
August 18, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ohio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (shaking fist at sky)
http://strategy08.wordpress.com
August 18, 2008 9:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stuff like this is why polls state their margins of error and confidence intervals.
Unfortunately, most people have absolutely no idea what "margin of error" and "confidence interval" really mean.
Poll results do mean something, but they don't mean what 90% of the people who read them think they mean (plus or minus 5% with a 90% confidence interval, of course).
August 18, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing about this poll is surprising.
This election is going to be close, and it will likely come down to Ohio.
Obama's being doing the right things in this state, playing up McCain's ties to DHL and so forth.
Obama must stay on message--the economy--until the election.
The PUMA folks aren't helping us out any either. Cruella De Ville, er I mean, Lady Rothschild, or whatever the hell her name is isn't helping matters any with front page spreads of her loathing for Obama.
And folks like Ted Strickland shouldn't be sniping in the press about Obama's campaign style. Particularly if he really wants us to win this cycle.
August 18, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
This election shouldn't be close.
Median family income is down well over 5% from 2001, food prices are up, education is up, gas is $4 a gallon and oil is $100 a barrel (up 5%) over 2001, we are more reliant than ever on oil despite it funding most of our would be enemies, Americans are loosing their homes as record rates, two American cities had to be abandoned in the last eight years, one American city has effectively been lost, we are hated and have more enemies than we did eight years ago, the military is over stretched, Russia which was on life support only 11 years ago invades an American ally with impunity, our constitution has be shredded, our treasury ransacked for the sake of making billionaires more comfortable.
This election shouldn't even be close.
If it is close its because Obama will have clusterf*cked it and/or Americans are completely stupid and deserve to live in the squalor and suffering a McCain presidency will permanently saddle the nation in while he sends our children and what remains of our treasure off to endless wars. My god the American people don't deserve anything good but the suffering their going to get.
August 18, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
The election should be close. No white Democratic Presidential nominee has won an electoral majority since the 1964 Civil Rights Acts. Racism is more important to white folks than poverty.
White folks would rather be entitled and impoverished than to be unentitled and prosperous.
If that was not true Democrats would still rule the South.
Racism transcends the economy!!!! and their own pocketbooks.
Rednecks like that they are not NiGGA's!! more than they like money!
Dumbasses.
Don't you recall Howard Dean getting in trouble over this very same issue?
August 18, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's simple: middle-aged females guess that Obama will deal as fairly with them as he dealt with Hillary.
In any other election she would be the odds on favorite for the veep but everybody knows that Obama is not that big a man.
August 18, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Those HRC supporters need to get over themselves. HRC lost. Obama did not deal unfairly with her--she lost. Obama did not create her effed up campaign strategy, her fiscal irresponsibility with her campaign money, or her failure to plan for primaries after Super Tuesday.
If that PUMA fantasyland delusion leaves us with a McCain presidency, there will be a huge anti-HRC backlash and her career, even in NY, will be over. Nice going, PUMAs!
August 18, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent post Jenesq!!
Not only has Obama been fair to her, but the last time a LOSER had their name put in roll call for the nomination was 16 years ago. The presidential nominee was PISSED when he allowed it and that was none other than WJC!!
The Clintons are the worse type of slime and sleaze they just look to keep shyt going they KNOW is WRONG!
August 18, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thou hast forgotten her extremely high, bolted on, negatives.
August 18, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
if hold out hillary clinton supporters don't vote dem. in this eleciton after listening to mcbabble talk about being a PRO-LIFE president, then they get what they deserve.
August 18, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Along with a health care system that is even worse than what we have now.
August 18, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Every thing will be worse. Much worse.
We'll be going from a President with a mind eaten away by a lifetime of abuse of drugs and alcohol, to one with a mind eaten away by torture and dimensia.
The decline is going to be geometric.
And this time the decline is going to be irreversible because the nations seed corn will have been gutted too.
This country is teetering on the verge of major cratering.
August 18, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
My guess is that when push comes to shove, many of these holdout Dems will vote for Obama, especially as McCain wanders further and further into crazy wingnut/neo-con territory. But if they don't come home, I don't want to hear any of these middle-aged bitter white women bitch about McCain's 2 or 3 45-year old wingnut SCOTUS nominees or the wars in which their children and grandchildren may have to fight if they hand him the election because of their petty, childish grudges. These people don't need to be coddled and handled with care, they need a slap of reality in the face. Get over it already. We have one nominee. You may not like him, you may think he's sexist, you may think he played the race card. But folks, look at the freaking alternative!
August 18, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the point of the caveat is not that an additional 10% of the African-American vote will change the result--it's that any poll showing Obama getting only 80% of the African-American vote is suspect in its methodology generally.
That said, if Obama is having trouble because of genuine PUMAs (and not just "operation chaos" Dem primary voters who have returned to the GOP), those women deserve what they get--which will be John McCain, the most anti-female president in recent memory. Unfortunately, the rest of us won't deserve that.
I loathe stupid people.
August 18, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am concerned that some of them just don't give a damn about things like health care or the economy or the issues or Roe v. Wade anymore. We'd better be prepared to work around them.
It stopped being about Hillary for them back around the time of the New Hampshire primary. They came to believe--and, indeed, were encouraged to believe--that the country owed them, personally and individually, a Hillary presidency to somehow psychically compensate them for every slight, every insult, every grope, leer or assault, every paycheck that was lower than they thought it should be, every cheating husband, every promotion or job they think should have gone to them instead of a man, they ever suffered. They are displacing the accumulated pent-up rage of a lifetime onto Obama and, as a result, preparing to cast a vote for a guy whose consistent pattern of conduct over thirty years that reveals a thoroughgoing sexism that borders on misogyny.
I really don't think they're going to be suddenly turn reasonable any time soon.
August 18, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's it. NCSteve has officially been banished from the Obama campaign HRC supporter outreach committee.
August 18, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Got me laughing out loud and you brought back the old photo! You saved Monday.
August 18, 2008 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your post was dead on NCSteve.
It is called white female entitlement.
August 18, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
The pollaverages on the RCP homepage now list McCain ahead in OH, FL, CO, VA, and MO. McCain's ads portraying Obama's disciples as empty-headed celebrity worshippers and Obama as having a messiah complex are working.
Will Barack strike back or stay a wimp like when he had no response to Jesse Jackson's stated desire to remove his genitals?
August 18, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah right.
Obama needs to act like the angry black man so the Repubs can say " see, he's a N*****, just like Jesse Jackson!"
That will accomplish a lot!
August 18, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
In another eight years we'll all be n*****.
August 18, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
America knew what it was like to be n*ggr* on 9-11!!
The worst part was they elected a first class jerk to lead the country and he proceed to tumble America down the outhouse shute.
August 18, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even with all of that RCP still has Obama at 275 electoral votes.
It is also worth noting that in the RCP averages of Ohio the only poll that shows McCain leading Obama is a Rasmussen poll that has McCain leading Obama by 10 points, which is clearly an outlier. The other 3 polls have Obama tied or leading.
August 18, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like paperless voting machine time!
August 18, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I thought we didn't need Ohio this election. 50 state strategy and all? How about Indiana? We need Indiana? Michigan? Can we win without Michigan? Romney is popular here.
August 18, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not sure Greg got that memo, Mr. Glad.
August 18, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
When people don't support your candidate, you're supposed to think of ways to get them to support your candidate, not try to out do each other in the variety of ways you insult them.
In 1960, JFK chose his bitter primary rival, Lyndon Johnson, precisely because he wanted to build a winning coalition. Those who denounce the analogous step today are the ones standing in the way of a clear path to victory. And it is no use saying Hillary Clinton's career will be over if Senator Obama loses. His victory will be his own or his defeat will be his own. That is the way it works in the grown up world.
August 18, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Did Johnson have Hillary's negatives? I dont thing so.
August 18, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the gain is greater than the loss. Most anti-Clinton people are either Republicans, who will vote for McCain anyway, or pro-Obama, who will vote for Obama no matter what.
August 18, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
You mean like Hillary's defeat was entirely her own?
Mmmhmm, thought so.
As long as PUMAs continue to blame Obama for HRC's defeat (which, as I said in an earlier post, was entirely her own fault for having poor campaign strategy, profligate spending, and no plan after Feb. 5), they are living in a dream world where no "outreach" can touch them.
I mean, if PUMAs are willing to play the outraged feminist card and then turn around and vote for one of the biggest misogynists who has ever sought the office of President--"John McC-word"--there is no reason to reach out to them, because they're delusional.
August 18, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't put words in my mouth. Mmmmmhmmmm.
Hillary's defeat is her own defeat.
The older women in Ohio who are not as yet supporting Obama in the poll are not PUMAs. PUMAs are a very small group of activists who have formed a militant group agitating for their preferred candidate. The women of Ohio we are talking about are run of the mill voters whose votes people supporting Obama should want to recruit. All this moral posturing of the "there is no reason to reach out to them" variety is childish nonsense.
It is normal, right, and proper in politics to build coalitions. That means compromising in order to recruit support. If Hillary Clinton supporters hold the margin of victory, and this is the most important election of our lifetime, then the ones standing in the way of her being chosen as VP are the real impediments here.
August 18, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a vague recollection of a poll from a couple of months ago that showed a large percentage of McCain supporters were pro-choice, and they thought he was too. If that was credible, then it would suggest that substantial numbers of these voters will be less inclined to vote for him once they find out about his "pro-life presidency."
McCain's emphasis on his pro-life credentials -- which makes him sound tough and unwaivering in front of a friendly audience -- is the type of thing that might seep out and damage him quietly but significantly among middle-aged female voters
August 18, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the larger issue here is that McCain has crept up in the polls and the race is a dead heat. I believe that come November, there will a percentage of the people who've said they're going to vote for Obama, who will get into the polling booth and vote McCain.
This may be August, but I find the trend and the stats very disturbing.
August 18, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
And there will be a percentage that does the opposite, plus a percentage of new voters registered by the Obama campaign. But don't worry--DO something, like phonebanking.
August 18, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is so fluid.
I'm actually glad the polls are tight.
It will keep people from sitting on their asses, thinking this will be a landslide.
August 18, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agree wholeheartedly--assuming people actually DO something to help the campaign when they get worried, and don't just sit around hand-wringing on Teh Internetz.
August 18, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is so typical of the Lying Left.
You harp that 98% of blacks voting Obama did not demonstrate a racist preference but in trying to explain Hussein's continuously sinking numbers in Ohio you claim under polling of blacks.
The only way that makes sense is if you assume those under polled blacks were largely going ObamaNation, a racist assumption if there ever was one.
So which is it, lying then or lying now?
Oh I know, your mouth is moving...
August 18, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Shut the fuck up you racist asshole.
August 18, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice try, troll. Our skepticism has more to do with the fact that the PPP poll is wildly inconsistent with all of the other data on African-American voters. Also, in states with large African American populations, Obama won primaries by large margins and attracted record turnout.
August 18, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
What matters most in looking at polls are not the absolute numbers (unless landslide margins are involved) but rather the trends over time both among all pollsters and within a particular polling outfit.
Clearly McCain has gained ground over the last 3 weeks so that the convention period begins with the race neck-and-neck.
The only reason Obama is still ahead on RCP is that RCP still has Obama ahead in Indiana based on ancient polls. A new poll in IN will certainly give the state to McCain for now.
August 18, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
In your dreams Dr Zalus, just read the cross tabs, and your candidate McBushSame is nowhere to be seen,
The latest cross tabs give 20% of the black votes in Florida and Ohio...
This does not stand. Even Clinton never manage to get more than 10% after South Carolina...So McBush will not get 20% of the black vote in any state.
I also doubt that McBush will get 20% of the dems votes...Not a chance...
August 18, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know perhaps I shouldn't be, but I am very very worried.
My bias for Obama aside and policies and facts aside (b/c since when do policies and facts MATTER in politics?!?!), McCain has been cleaning Obama's clock ever since the Brittany/Paris ad.
Obama campaign responses have been pathetic and ineffective.
Obama got DESTROYED in the CNN thing. If he continues to talk and act like a Senator, he will LOSE and we will be subjected to a minimum of 4 more years of NEOCONSERVATIVE rule.
Everything from Obama lately has been very reminiscent of the Kerry campaign. And it is really starting to piss me off. I work too f'ing hard for progressive issues to see a bunch of f-ing losers in the Obama campaign screw up this election.
McCain is a f-ing NEOCONSERVATIVE. If we can't beat him, I am de-registering from the Democratic Party.
Had to get that off my chest.
August 18, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chill, dude. Obama did just fine at the Saddleback thing. It was incredibly hostile territory, and the fact that he didn't get booed off the stage was a victory.
Republicans generally don't have the balls to go into unfriendly venues like that, so to call Obama weak and wimpy completely ignores reality.
Moreover, it seems like too many Dems are equating childish tit-for-tat namecalling commercials with "strength." Obama is addressing smears vigorously, but he doesn't need to fight back with the same lowbrow garbage the GOP is using.
Finally, I live in a swing state, so I see all the commercials all the time (ugh). Obama is running some pretty darn good ones--including a commercial with shot after shot of McCain hugging Bush. That's both completely honest and very powerful....brilliant.
Your problem is that you are paying attention more than 99% of voters, so you are panicking about things that most people never even know about (see: Saddleback).
August 18, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
You cannot underestimate party unity, an overused but very real fact. McCain's success with coalescing his party (despite the resistance of evangelicals etc...) is contrasted with Obama's continued need to assuage the feelings of Hillary's voters. for whatever reason (maybe looking at 2012 if you are cynical), this group is still griping.
I saw elsewhere, they are called the WC as in Whining Clintonites, and the allusion to flushing etc... Democrats hopes down the drain fits perfectly!!
August 18, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink