Obama Edges Ahead In The National Polls
Barack Obama has now edged into a narrow lead in most of the national polls released today, suggesting John McCain's bounce may be subsiding after he had been leading over the last week and a half.
First, here's our daily roundup of the four major national tracking polls:
• Gallup: Obama 47%, McCain 45%, with a ±2% margin of error. McCain had a one-point lead yesterday, and this is the first time in a week and a half that Obama has been ahead.
• Rasmussen: McCain 48%, Obama 47%, with a ±2% margin of error, unchanged from yesterday.
• Hotline/Diageo: Obama 45%, McCain 42%, with a ±3.2% margin of error, not significantly changed from yesterday's 46%-42% margin for Obama.
• Research 2000: Obama 48%, McCain 44%, with a ±3% margin of error, unchanged from yesterday.
Adding these polls together and weighting them by sample sizes, Obama has a narrow lead of 46.9% to McCain's 45.6%. The two were essentially tied yesterday, and two days ago McCain had a roughly one-point lead.
On top of that, Obama has grabbed a 47%-45% lead in the new Zogby poll of likely voters, with a ±3.1% margin of error. In Zogby's last poll from a month ago -- which was something of an outlier at the time, mind you -- McCain had a 46%-41% lead.
September 17, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
In Virginia, he has a +2 lead.
Yeah, the bounce is over.
September 17, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can we dub it a "dead moose bounce"?
September 17, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deflating is more like it, just like a spent whoopie cushion, so goes McCain's campaign.
September 17, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Substitute "is" for "may be," and I'll be happy. Oh, and I prefer "evaporating."
September 17, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Most apt term: Disintegrating.
September 17, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Average of 45.6% says the bounce is waning but not over. For all we know he may be in for a dive. I bet a lot of those voters drifting back to Obama are women who have had the chance to digest the Palin effect. I suspect the infatuation is subsiding.
September 17, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
NC Steve says "If you'd published this before all of the daily polls showing Obama's pulled ahead again were posted, it would have made you look like an ordinary fool. However, by posting it after all of those polls came out, you've shown, once and for all, that you are an extraordinary fool."
Gallup says " The Sept. 13-15 Gallup Poll Daily tracking update shows John McCain (47%) and Barack Obama (46%) locked in a close contest when registered voters are asked for whom they would vote if the election were held today."
September 17, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama reaches to a lead, clings to it!
September 17, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It'll be more than edging and clinging soon. Just like the Obama bounce ended, so is the McCain one.
September 17, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's bizarre to me is how much opinion can swing in a few days. These swings easily could decide who the next president is, just depending which swing is taking place when the election actually arrives.
Not to validate these polls too much, but I hope we have some swing proof numbers soon.
September 17, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are a lot of idiots in this country. They will swing whichever way the wind blew last. I expect a full-blown ad blitz implicating Obama in a trumped-up scandal, or rehashing Rev. Wright and Rezko, in the final two weeks before the election.
Obama needs to get around 48%-51% by mid-October, then count on Rendell, Strickland, the Clintons and, most importantly, the ground game to get him to a clear majority on election day. There's always going to be a slice of the electorate that forms their opinion of a candidate based on whatever was on the news the night before.
You can't help but wonder how bad the Republicans have to fuck this country up before a clear majority of Americans repudiate them and their policies. It's very frustrating.
September 17, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems that Obama keeps a solid 47% no matter what. McCain bounced up above that, now is falling below.
Seems we have a little chunk of people who really haven't made up their minds. They thought McCain and Palin were reformers, maybe, and she's just like a real person! But then they see evidence that that may not be the case. Or that Palin just isn't ready.
Keep pushin' people. Realize that there is a solid, huge percentage behind Obama. We just have to win the fence sitters.
September 17, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Beginning of the end for McSame.
Expect a desperate refrain of "POW" to begin now in earnest. Also, look for hints reminding us that, "pssst, Obama is a black guy."
September 17, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Power to the people 'cause the people want peace.
--Public Enemy and Moby
(At least 47% of them do, pretty reliably.)
I say 48% and change wins this election. This is turning into a dead cat bounce.
gObama!
September 17, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just realized this is a real Zogby poll, not one of the fake ones.
Any one knows what that reputation is?
September 17, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reputation of Zogby Not Online vs. Zogby Online? Not as much waving of the arms and incantation of magic words, but more eye of newt and blood of a virgin in the bubbling cauldron.
September 17, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
NC Steve says "If you'd published this before all of the daily polls showing Obama's pulled ahead again were posted, it would have made you look like an ordinary fool. However, by posting it after all of those polls came out, you've shown, once and for all, that you are an extraordinary fool."
Gallup says " The Sept. 13-15 Gallup Poll Daily tracking update shows John McCain (47%) and Barack Obama (46%) locked in a close contest when registered voters are asked for whom they would vote if the election were held today."
September 17, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank goodness. I can stop drinking. At least until the next round of polls...
His patience depite polls in and of itself shows why Obama has the judgment to be President.
September 17, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. The Palin bounce disappeared really quickly, no? I thought that they would get at least a month out of her 'new car smell'.
Then again, having surrogates who say that you're not a good leader and advisers who claim you invented an electronic instrument that you likely don't know how to use does not help much.
http://thepajamapundit.com/
September 17, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually think was surprised by the size of the bounce and how long it lasted.
It's a testimony to the media-love-fest that is yet to fully die. I overestimated the intelligence of the nation, I still cannot believe why Americans are not in a state of shock and why shivers don't tremble their spines when they think of the idea of Palin becoming a president within the first year or two after the election.
It scares the shit out of me.
September 17, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude...a solid 47% are ready to vote for a less qualified guy as the President...why wonder about the Palin deal?
September 17, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not really a matter of qualifications. Putin, for instance, has obvious and undeniable skills at managing a government of millions of citizens with complicated bureaucracies and nuclear weapons. That does not mean that I want him in charge of my government.
It is not that I am afraid that Palin will not know how to run the government. Rather, I am afraid that she will know how to do so, and I am scared witless at the prospects of what she (or her running mate) would do with it. This country cannot survive another four years of Republican rule.
September 17, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney, as another example, has, and had, undeniable experience in governing, and look how that has turned out.
September 17, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
At least you make a valid argument that it's their policies you are against (much like I'm against Obama's, it's not because I'm a racist as the Governor of Kansas thinks). I never understood how someone could vote for Obama for President and say Palin doesn't have the "qualifications" to be VP (unless your idea of qualifications is an adhearence to left-wing ideology).
September 17, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
SFC:
McCain's qualifications include his die-hard support to remove government regulations from the banking industry, just as he did for Lincoln Savings and Loan. That worked out well, didn't it, the biggest banking collapse in history that he helped engineer. Now we've got Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, AIG, IndyMac and others down the tubes. McCain voted to remove even more regulations this time. What's he qualified for, Master of Disaster?
September 17, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two brief responses:
1)
Don't worry; I never thought you were.
2)
Just between you and me, I think that this is a fair point. If "experience" were an important pre-requisite to me, I would not have been such an early and enthusiastic Obama supporter. As it happens, I do not think that experience is really all that critical, but I certainly agree that it rings hollow in my ears as well when folks on my side of this debate go after her inexperience. I think that she is manifestly unqualified for the job, but her lack of high-government experience is really no part of that conclusion on my part.
September 17, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Experience" = "Qualifications?" Are you in one of those unions you guys all seem to hate so much? I've known plenty of dumbasses who managed to hold a a job for 25 years without becoming even minimally qualified to do what their bosses did. And I've known plenty of people who step into a managerial or leadership position after just a couple of years on the job and have done great.
Notwithstanding Palin's "experience" as a sportscaster, mayor of a one-stoplight town and governor of a state with fewer people than Meckenberg County, North Carolina, she isn't remotely as qualified as Obama. It's like saying someone who has no interest whatsoever in football is every bit as "qualified" to be head coach of the Patriots as someone who's followed the sport obsessively for years.
September 17, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
First off, I'm not worried about her qualifications to be VP...I'm worried about her qualifications to be President.
Second, what you consider "qualifications" (time spent in office) are not what I consider "qualifications". Is that really all your concerned about is time spent in office? At least that's what you keep implying. Obama graduated from law school, was president of the Harvard Law Review, has spent years developing and detailing his views on a whole host of issues, has participated in 22+ debates covering just about every issue facing Americans today....I'm not willing to say that that's equal to a woman who has a journalism degree, spent 4 years on the city council and 6 years as a mayor of a town of 6,300 people, spent 1 years as chair of a gas and oil commission, and then spent 18 months as governor of a state that is flush with cash from pork and oil revenues. She has never, ever uttered a word about foreign policy, other than to say that she heard about the surge on the news. Do you truly think she's got the background necessary to understand the intricacies of FISA? Based on the shallow answers she gave to Charlie Gibson, I'd be willing to bet money that she hasn't even a clue what habeas corpus is....yet you expect her to be able to walk right in and be capable of defending our Constitution. For chrissakes, it was apparent she doesn't even know the difference between entitlements and discretionary funding. You can defend it all you want, but Bill Maher was right: we may be "elitists" but you all are the worst kind of cynics...because you all know better, but you know that stupid people won't.
September 17, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL - can't get enough of this "qualifications" talk. So what exactly are McCain's "qualifications" again? Oh yeah, that's right, he was a POW.
September 17, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I'll not insult Obama my comparing his resume with Palin. It's a fact and I'll say it unashamedly, Palin is unfit to run for the New York City Hall, forget VP.
But more importantly, from the Gibson interview and how McCain is sheilding her from scrutiny, it's clear she's a dumb fuck. And little surprise, she abused power for settling family scores, the whole issue is fitting to her petty credentials.
She doesn't know shit and take the word of a few republican columnists. She's clueless.
September 17, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and Obama's written 2 books...about himself...(she's held elected office longer than him).
September 17, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
..but she oddly doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is. Reeling.
September 17, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
She also has no idea what a Vice President does nor does she even have an opinion on Iraq (other than viewing it as "God's Work")
September 17, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
No point going down this rabbit hole again. The Palin bounce is over. America has vetted Obama and knows he has the judgment and temperment to be POTUS. Who gives a crap about Palin? Not me. Two months and she will be a footnote in the history books.
September 17, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is both more experienced and more qualified to be President than either McCain or Palin. Aside from his educational background, which is vastly superior(unless you really want to argue that 6 year journalism degree is better), he's got more experience on the state level as a state senator of a district with over 200,000 people for at least five or six years, then as a U.S. Senator dealing with foreign affairs and domestic issues at the federal level.
I would also say that Obama's combination of education and experience on the state and federal level is superior to McCain's as well.
Why would any of you cave to a moronic troll like Wally on this issue? I don't know why any Democrat wouldn't forcefully challenge this BS about Palin being more experienced--unless you mean more experienced at lying and abusing power. In that case, I'll admit she's more experienced.
September 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you not read the response? It's not about LENGTH OF TIME, it's about QUALITY OF PREPARATION.
I've never understood how the so called "party of values" could not actually have any ...you know...values.
September 17, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
You make it sound as though NYC were a suburb of Wasilla. As a New Yorker (in absentia, damn it all!), I must protest: anyone who can govern NYC well has it hand over fist over Klondike Barbie.
September 17, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm from NYC too, and I'm sorry to have insulted the great City Hall.
September 17, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
But she did a great job in Wasilla ... oh wait, never mind. How's that $22 million debt working out for those 7,000 people? At least they can go to the library and read some books, the ones Sarah Palin approved.
September 17, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
So are you guys back to "experience" again now that the Palin bubble has burst? Good luck with that one now, given that your boy's "experience" consists of 26 years of vociferous, if not particularly knowledgable, support for the exact economic policies that got us into the mess we're in today.
September 17, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was surprised as well. Considering that Palin came equipped with her own Pandora's Box of controversies, bad news and investigations, I was surprised that the Palin Bounce was so sustained. But as others have said, the high of 49 for McCain will most likely be the high water mark of his campaign before his campaign subsides into loserdom.
September 17, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the blatant lying did McCain and Palin in.
September 17, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I'm no strategist- I'm certain of a certain mantra.
It's the economy, stupid!
As long as Obama can control and lead on the economy, make McLame look clueless,it's our election for the taking.
With more bad economic news to follow far few Independents will care if Obama is black or Palin is the Goddess Venus or McCain was a POW.
September 17, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I would like to see is a current poll in Indiana. I think he has a better chance with the Hoosiers than he does with Ohio. Last poll in Indiana had him only down by 2 (august 29-30).
September 17, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know about IN there has been a lot of polls showing McCain pretty high in IN but there has been a couple showing it tight or Obama up by 1. But yeah there hasn't been a lot of polling on IN. Good thing for Obama is though they are both not must win states, they are must win states for McCain but Obama has a lots of states he could pick up that decided the election. IMO this is the order of the must wins states for McCain that Obama could pick up from order of best chance. CO/VA/OH/FL/NC. Mainly CO and VA looks like its over for McCain.
September 17, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
CO/VA/OH/FL/IN/NC
September 17, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
At this point, I'd have to say he's got a better chance of winning in Florida than Ohio. He may have a better chance in NC than Ohio.
September 17, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're going to win Ohio.
Trust me on this, I've lived in this state for 54 years.
September 17, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
From your lips to God's own ears...
September 17, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep the faith baby!
September 17, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've got relatives in OH who aren't so optimistic. Around the cities (Cleveland, Akron, Columbus), they think Obama will carry the day, but deep in that rural heartland and especially southeastern OH that runs up against WV, they feel decidedly gloomy about his chances.
September 17, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt, the racism runs deep in southern Ohio, but Obama has over 50 offices open statewide, including 14 in southern Ohio and has been concentrating on the ground game in the rural areas too.
They aren't deluding themselves into thinking they'll win rural Ohio, but they are working to keep the margins down.
With the big urban vote and more favorable rural vote, Ohio is definitely a state Obama can and will win.
No gay marriage issue on the ballot this time, plus, we have a Dem Secretary of State in Jennifer Brunner.
September 17, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Buckeye:
Ohio scares me, I still think of the poor uneducated man on 60 Minutes who said he agreed with Obama's policies because "I heard he's a Muslim." When Steve Kroft told the guy it wasn't true, the guy looked like he was going to cry, but still didn't want to hear the truth. Living in California, we have plenty of crazies here, mostly in Orange County, home of the Birch Society. But still....
September 17, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are kooks everywhere, and Ohio has representatives of just about every demographic out there.
But in the past 4 years, the state has been trending blue. The Dems took most of the state offices in 2006, aided by a GOP scandal, including the Secretary of State's office ...no more Ken Blackwell/Diebold BS.
The Dems are energized in Ohio , and it helps that we have Ted Strickland as governor, who is from southern Ohio.
He was more instrumental than anyone else for Hillary winning the Ohio primary. I believe if Strickland had been neutral or behind Obama, then Obama would have won the Ohio primary.
September 17, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad to hear it, because I'm losing my religion a little bit when it comes to the Old North State.
September 17, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hanng in there Steve, it ain't over until it's over.
September 17, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not unless we get a lot tougher. Trust me, I have lived in this state for more than 56 years.
September 17, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I found interesting last week is how McCain's campaign people, Tucker Bounds and a plethora of other surrogates, kept exhibiting the Larry Bird "look at the scoreboard" confidence in every interview. I kept thinking to myself, "Your lead isn't insurmountable you asshat, why the inbred victory lap?" Jesus, I'm glad that's over - for now.
September 17, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go over to the Obama site. They've really got it together when it comes to the ground game. I'm impressed. The next two weeks are critical.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/actioncenter
September 17, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, Eric.
Not a single negative comment about your poll knowledge, understanding, or commentary.
Dude: bookmark this post.
September 17, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did one of Palin's Yahoo e-mail accounts get hacked?
http://www.metafilter.com/74960/palins-yahoo-mail-hacked-oh-anonymous-what-will-you-do-next
September 17, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
So it seems... I wonder how this is going to play out.
September 17, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm just hoping that...
The wheels on the double-talk express are falling off, falling off, falling off. The wheels on the double-talk express are falling off all through the land.
September 17, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Er, so I see that Palin's favorability numbers have dropped from +17 a week ago to +1 yesterday. So, a question to everyone who said that we were focusing too much attention on her - do you still think that? Given McCain's drop in the polls is tracking almost exactly with her own drop in the favorable/unfavorable ratings, is it not plausible to conclude that he was being buoyed on her good image and that, by extension, taking her down a notch was exactly what was necessary to bring him back down as well?
September 17, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd be interested in a response to this as well. I think there are lots of ways to attack Palin on substantive grounds, and what was interesting about the last week is that the media actually committed acts of journalism in the investigation of Palin.
But I also think that the Tina Fey sketch may have had something to do with Palin's numbers, too.
September 17, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think, too, that of all things, McCain's appearance on The View must have hurt him. They called him out on his lies and his only response was to just lie some more.
September 17, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I can see Russia from my house!" - that line alone had to cost her about 5 points.
September 17, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
OT, but noticing your avatar, check this article posted on Sullivan's blog if you haven't seen it:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/denied-communio.html
...from a native Missourian and recovering Catholic ;-)
September 17, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
er, that would be me. Sorry...
September 17, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, no, no...I refuse to believe that the concern trolls were WRONG! Attacking Palin was going to explode in our faces...it was supposed to lead to the mother of all backlashes...all of us were causing McCain's numbers to go right through the roof...Obama was going to lose and it was all of our faults (but especially Josh's)!!!!!!! They PROMISED!!!
September 17, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Schrodinger, remember that attacks against Palin didn't come from the Obama campaign, they primarily came from "liberal" pundits, and to a lesser degree, some Democratic officials. The Obama campaign seemingly got it right: ignore Palin and focus on McCain. Given enough rope, she's proving quite adept at 'hanging' herself. This has become a hackneyed thing to say, but it is no less true: people do not vote for vice-presidential candidates. While a presidential candidate's choice of running mate is far from insignificant, it is not a decisive factor in whether he or she will win an election. I believe Obama is making gains at least partially because he resisted focusing his attacks on Palin.
Admittedly, I may be a bit of a 'concern troll' myself, but surely we've seen no shortage of 'Pollyanna trolls' on this site either. Let me stress, however, that I do think Obama can win, and that I'll be doing all I can to aid Democratic GOTV efforts come Nov. No defeatism here.
Believe me, if Obama wins, you can dig up every negative, 'concerned' post I've ever made here in re his chances of being elected, and rub it all in, mock me unmercifully. And I will love every second of it. ;-)
Robert
September 17, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Robert,
My comment was specifically aimed only at those people who were on this board saying that our discussions of Palin and criticisms of her record were the cause of McCain's surge in the polls. I held out that, in fact, it was the normal convention bounce he was experiencing. In addition, those same people were saying that our discussions were going to "explode" in our faces and cause a massive backlash against Obama. There were a few who went so far as to say that if Obama lost in November, then it would be our faults. I take no issue with those who are/were genuinely concerned with the state of the campaign. I do, however, take issue with those who were accusing us of causing Obama's drop in the polls without any evidence whatsoever.
September 17, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hear you. Thanks for setting me straight. ;-)
Robert
September 17, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I submit that McCain's numbers would have deflated far more quickly and his bounce would have been a dull thud if Palin were ignored and McCain were appropriately and mercilessly attacked. Two weeks of assault on his (dis)honor would have brought him to the breaking point far sooner and more gaffes on the economy could have been evoked. These could have been the fodder for the last two weeks' media narrative instead of how Palin was a possible game changer.
Sometimes it's better to ignore the flies and focus on cleaning up the poop.
September 17, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nate Silver estimates that convention bounces typically dissipate in three to four weeks. Before the conventions, he expected that McCain's bounce would probably last until pretty close to the first debate (next week). As it stands, it looks like McCain's bounce ended quicker than expected. Can you give any specific reason why you think that McCain's bounce should've ended even faster?
September 17, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain's bounce persisted because no one was paying any attention to him and his policies. Palin's celebrity was all the rage (particularly as the center of the othewise lackluster GOP convention) and his numbers were a direct beneficiary of 1) his savvy mavarickiness in picking the Next New Thing; 2) his positions and policies getting absolutely no scrutiny while the Palin phenomenon was front stage. It was no accident that McCain & Co did their damnedest to keep her in the news cycles.
Palin had a natural lifespan of about a week. Putting her in the spotlight with the attendant GOP hype extended that by about another. Had she been ignored, the corporate press would have had nothing else to write about but reality. By feeding into the Palinmania, both Obama, his campaign, and his surrogates did themselves no favors. Had they targeted McCain and his mendacity instead of comparing experience balance sheets with the ex-mayor of Wasilla, they would have seemed less defensive and more on message for the last two weeks and in a better position to capitalize on this week's economic catastrophe.
September 17, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again, I'll say that historically, convention bounces last 3 to 4 weeks. McCain's seems to have lasted 2 weeks which you insinuate was longer than it would have been because of all of the attacks on Palin....so, how long do you think his bounce would've been without the attacks on Palin? and what evidence do you have to think that his bounce would've been less than one would expect based on previous convention bounces?
September 17, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt that you'll see this, but what the heck:
Obama's bounce lasted about 24 hours. The McCain bounce was due entirely to Palin -- I have never seen a duller convention. Both bounces and their relative longevity were due entirely to the Palin media phenomenon. Absent all of the attention, Obama's bounce would have been longer and McCain's shorter due to the respective dynamism of each's respective convention.
Asking for evidence to support conjecture is akin asking for proof of God: there is no evidence for what might have happened. I'm making my own judgment based on induction, not on historical references which may or may not have an accurate comparison to current events. Clearly both campaigns are phenomena which have no exact analogues in American political history: there have been no previous African American candidates with a realistic chance of winning, nor have there been women candidates who are entirely unqualified to be president yet have enormous politcal appeal to a major portion of the electorate. Predicting campaign bounces about these two campaings based on historical antecedents is about as accurate as rolling dice.
September 18, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Its nice to see Big O ahead again. Keep the pressure on - see if McCain will snap.
(Thread hijack sorry - Manchester United just took the field for a Champions League match sporting their AIG logo uniforms. So let me get this straight - the US government is now sponsoring Man U. Hey, McCain - THAT calls for an investigative commission!)
September 17, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was thinking that as well. I guess the American public is now paying for Ronaldo's hair gel.
September 17, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Moe, good to see ya again.
N'yuk, n'yuk, n'yuk.
September 17, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hopefully Obama will get more than a minor bounce out of the major financial disaster we are undergoing.
If you're going to be unemployed, You sure as hell don't want a Republican in power!
September 17, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hah.
"McCain says he's gonna take on the old boys network. In the McCain campaign that is called a staff meeting."
His speech is live on cnn.com by the way right now.
September 17, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once again, McCain is forced to try and campaign against his own record. No wonder he needs ambien to sleep--all those competing voices in his head must make it hard to get a decent night's sleep.
September 17, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's also interesting to see that Obama is now within one point in West Virginia, the state that we've been told over and over again would never vote for a black man.
Hmmmm... perhaps people really are waking up and paying attention.
PEACE
September 17, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kash:
Hatred and resentment are powerful emotions. People are worse off than they were 8 years ago. Their homes are worth less, they have fewer savings and less income, probably less coverage or no health insurance, the government can provide for AIG or Haliburton instantly but if you lose electricity or are flooded out of your home, wait in line. And some of them know things are bad, they know things will get worse, and they will still vote for McCain. They are the permanently stupid. We just need a few more indies and undecideds and we can get our country back.
Joe
September 17, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
When are we going to see the Keating 5?!?
The current economic is a direct comparison to the Savings & Loan scandal. McCain intervened to pull regulators off the banks. And many think that was steered us into the recession of the early 90's.
Where is this point? Does the Obama camp think the Keating 5 is too big of a weapon?
Haha, Obama just said the Good Ole Boys network in the McCain camp is called a staff meeting.
September 17, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I were Obama, I'd use Keating 5 as a bargaining chip to keep Reverend Wright from magically reappearing come the last week of October.
September 17, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good Point.
But at the same time, the 527s are going to bring out Wright regardless. Might as well lay down the Keating 5 when it's most relevant. Maybe tarnish McCains image and get a little cushion in the polls.
September 17, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
K5 is there: he obliquely referenced it yesterday. I think its one of his aces...
September 17, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ayup. He dunna want to make his move too soon.
September 17, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
These polls lift my spirits, but I'm not going to run around in joy just yet. Let's see how these numbers translate into state polling. It's possible these gains could be composed of increased support from states where Obama is firmly in the lead. I have no idea if this is the case (and my hunch is that it's not), so I'm going to wait just a little while until I celebrate.
September 17, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm going to run around with joy!
My wife just called and said our power is finally back on for the 1st time since Sunday!
September 17, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would not keep Keating in the backgroudn for too long. The relevance to the current situation, the number of lobbyists running McCains campaign, and the key advisor, Gramm, all have their hands dirty in the current mess, and that should be brought up, but by surrogates.
And Obama needs to keep hitting dishonorable, keep running that ad or others like it.
September 17, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's it like in the Cincy area? I know it's always touted as being pretty religious-right, but any news?
September 17, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
News from Cincy. Yeah. The Reds still suck.
September 17, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
And so do the Bengals.
That's what they get for being right-wing Repub kooks.
September 17, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are we looking at the swing back toward Obama after Palin opened her mouth?
http://www.governmentalityblog.com/my_weblog/2008/09/why-the-polls-are-starting-to-normalize.html
September 17, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama just delivered the line of the campaign in Elko Nevada.
"John McCain wants to take on the Old Boys network. The Old Boys Network!? In the McCain campaign, that's called 'a staff meeting'"
LMAO! This line is priceless.
September 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL Righteous!
September 17, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesomeness.
September 17, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It will be interesting to see how the polls react after they we get a chance to digest McCain's 'strong economy' flops, and the campaign's full court press against the troopergate investigation.
September 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN's new polls have Obama moving into a tie with McCain in Florida and taking the lead by 2 in Ohio.
September 17, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, great news coming from OH and FL!
Someone needs to check old man McCain's "fundamentals"...
Senility is taking over: http://tinyurl.com/5zr47h
September 17, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
To:
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Just to answer your question from a late post yesterday - Of course I'm wholeheartedly supporting Obama. My blues band is playing a Dem fundraiser for him at an anti-war rally next Thursday. My complaint was never against Obama - just against the lies that were thrown at my candidate by so-called "progressives" on this board, and who are now angrily shouting "Liar!" at the McCain campaign. Oh dearie me! How negative you all are!
I'm sorry, but I find it somewhat perversely, pleasurably ironic to witness the frustrated sputtering from some of the biggest Clinton-bashing liars on here (not you, Steve).
It sorta hurts to watch your candidate have to respond to vicious innuendos and outright lies from the Republicans. How much more did it hurt to see the trashing from people who should be more aware than that? It's over now, I support Obama as the winner of the nomination and as an excellent candidate, and I hope we've picked a winner this time.
September 17, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is it possible that I didn't know you played in a blues band until now?
September 17, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
New Time/CNN Battleground Polls
Florida: Obama 48, McCain 48
Indiana: McCain 51, Obama 45
North Carolina: McCain 48, Obama 47
Ohio: Obama 49, McCain 47
Wisconsin: Obama 50, McCain 47
N.B When the third parties of Barr and Nader are added to the poll for Florida the numbers go as follows:
Obama 48 McCain 44
September 17, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not over yet, remember, we're still away from election day, Barack needs to keep up the offense with hard and tough ads against McShame, he needs to hammer the economic topic over and over and over and over again while sticking to the issues and to the fact that McShame is completely disconnected and out of touch about our problems.
The debates are coming, Barack's gonna finish him, once and for all !
September 17, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just love SFC Wallace. Every time he posts an angel gets its wings. He shows us so plainly how wrong our candidate is for the country. And he doesn't let facts get in the way of his trolling. God bless you, SFC Wallace. You really need it. If McCain is elected or appointed president this country deserves what it gets. But I won't worry because SFC Wallace will still be here to tell us how bad the apocalypse would have been had Obama been elected. It just makes me feel warm and radioactive all over.
September 17, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Fla. numbers in the CNN poll are of special interest, in light of the campaign calling for money to spend there.
September 17, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe it's the economy, maybe it's the war and maybe its voter exhaustion with Republicans.
But what this election is really about is cell phones.
Pollsters can only call land lines. What we often forget is that roughly 25 percent of people today rely exclusively on cell phones and do not have a land line. Most of these cell-exclusive users are under 35 years of age, a demographic that has favored Obama, especially on the lower reaches of that age group.
If we project that 60 percent of that 25% of voters favors Obama and are not being polled, that is a gain of up to 5% for Obama beyond what the polls show.
If you recall 1948, the year Dewey defeated Truman in all the national polls, it was the same polling methodology that did in the pollsters. They were calling land lines but many people at the lower end of the socioeconomic ladder did not have phones. These people tended to favor Truman so the polls were hoplessly skewed.
This is the first presidential election that so many people rely exclusively on cell phones so it could be another watershed year for polling error.
September 17, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great new 2 minute Obama ad - One of his best ever:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGg42R
September 17, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi,
I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:
"Impeach Senator Barack Obama"
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamaimpeachment?e ....
I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes less than a minute of your time.
Thanks!.............
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamaimpeachment?e
September 17, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You totally came to the right place for that!!!
September 18, 2008 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain lost his lead in several tracking and non-tracking polls because of Hurricane Ike. Hurricane Ike started in a big Red State Texas where 4 million people lost power and telephone connections. After leaving Texas/LA, Ike traveled through several Red states (OK,MO,OH) and caused similar problems. Therefore the poll results skewed in favor of Obama. The state polls on the other hand were not taken during this period which shows a McCain lead. The national poll leads MAY disappear next week and state polls may still show a McCain lead.
September 17, 2008 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink