« Top Obama Labor Supporter Warns Race Remains Volatile, Says Voters Lack Clear Sense Of Obama | Home | New Obama Ad Hits McCain As "Big Spender" »

Obama Holds Sizable Lead In Today's Tracking Polls

Here's a wrap-up of the four major national tracking polls for today. Barack Obama continues to hold a substantial lead over John McCain:

Gallup: Obama 48%, McCain 44%, with a ±2% margin of error, compared to a 49%-43% Obama lead yesterday.

Rasmussen: Obama 51%, McCain 45%, with a ±2% margin of error, unchanged from yesterday.

Hotline/Diageo: Obama 47%, McCain 42%, with a ±3.2% margin of error, compared to a 47%-41% Obama lead from yesterday.

Research 2000: Obama 51%, McCain 41%, with a ±3% margin of error, unchanged from yesterday.

Adding these polls together and weighting them by sample sizes, Obama is ahead 49.4%-43.7%, down just slightly from yesterday's 49.8%-43.3% lead, but still well ahead.


61 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

The world is upside down again - Greg is posting cold water posts and Eric is topping him with good news.


O my brain!

Yeah really! What's with that "way ahead" quip? What happened to clawing desperately?

user-pic

Looks like some number of voters have changed their minds.

We just need to be careful and take nothing for granted. I hope the Obama campaign has some tactical Nukes on standby just in case the dishonorable Repukes do what they are known to do.

I know they are scheming to do something... We need to watch our backs and be ready ...and take nothing for granted.

Biden has to be very careful tomorrow. My biggest fear is that the Clueless Evangelista from Way-Silly will regurgitate whatever they have drilled into her and somehow manage to come across as someone with a quarter of a brain (that's a big deal for Republicans who are useed to people with only one eigth of a brain).

THIS IS GREAT NEWS FOR JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III!

user-pic

How can the situation still be "fluid" when the polls are consistently rising for McLame?

I don't care what that AFL-CIO says - it's bullshit.

user-pic

Consistently rising for Obama?


I tried to kill that comment when I realized my error, but I didn't get it in time.

user-pic

Don't worry, a simple Freudian slip.

Reeling.

user-pic

Not reeling yet, but starting to wish McCain would listen to Dick Morris and Newt when it comes to the direction his campaign should take...

That's funny. Me, too. And while he's at it, maybe he can borrow Rove's "math"..ya know, the one Rove used to predict Republican victories in 2006.

If things look the same way in two weeks, you will be at full reel.

user-pic

I'll definately be half past the concerned head shake...

I like the direction of the polls but I'd rather see at least 10% + difference because of the Bradley effect. But keep in mind the cell phone voice won't be known until election night. Let's hope it's not good news for JSMIII. Good job TPM

user-pic

Ok - this has been explained, debunked thoroughly and correctly - there is no Bradley Effect.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ Nate Silver has explained on his site - it's in the archives there.

Look at the primaries - there is no Bradley Effect in this election if indeed the so-called Bradley Effect is anything other than an anomaly in a race that occurred 20 years ago. This whole idea is based on one mayoral race 20 years ago.


user-pic

I really liked this article from the Princeton Election Consortium:

The disappearing Bradley effect

Let us all agree that any further mention of the Bradley effect (after this one) constitutes a troll comment. Every day I come on here reading through the comments on one thread or another about the election, and some clown comes on here talking about the goddamned Bradley effect. WE GET IT!! It's not contributing anything anymore. You can stop pasting it in every thread. PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, STOP ALREADY!!

Gwen Ifill HAS to remove herself from moderating the debate. I mean writing a book on "Age of Obama" politics and moderating the debate doesn't pass the smell test.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/10/pbs_ifill_writi.html

user-pic

Don't waste the energy, Jonze - she won't.

Just wait and see what kind of job she does - you said Katie Couric would serve softballs to Palin, too.

Even if she moderates down the middle as all moderators should, she gives the wingnuts a built in excuse. And this becoming public might force her to overcompensate and go harder on Biden and let Palin off easier.

Couric did lob softballs, just that Palin whiffed on them. I mean how is "What magazines and newspapers did you read regularly before being named VP?" a toughie?

The Obama camp should get rid of Brokaw if Ifill is removed though.

"I worry, therefore I am"

user-pic

It might. But you know, Jonze, seriously - I'm not good with numbers, but I'm pretty damn good with concepts. From what I understand, this universe is nothing more than limitless possibility until something happens.

Straight up.

So what, Jonze? If they don't have Ifill as an excuse, they'll come up with something else. Truth is, that's all this is - a cheap attempt to play the refs. They had every opportunity to veto her as the moderator.

Let the whining begin.

user-pic

... she [Ifill] gives the wingnuts a built in excuse.

I wouldn't worry about the wingnuts.  They already have plenty of excuses; it doesn't matter that most of them are non-factual.  Replacing one of those with this one won't make a hill o' beans of difference.

And you know where whining about the refs will get ya...

Also, the people whose opinions are swayed by watching this debate aren't likely to even hear about subsequent wingnut whining.  They're not the kind of people who go for inside baseball.

I worry, therefore I am.

Do you ever worry that, in fact, you might not be?

I hear you -- it looks bad, but on the other hand she has not hidden the fact of the book. It was addressed in a story Howard Kurtz did for the WaPo on Sept 4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/03/AR2008090303319.html

There is no way the McCain folks did not know about the book.

The fact that the knowledge of the book was out there two weeks prior to McCain's camp agreeing to her as moderator makes this a non-issue. Two minutes on the web would have brought up the AP report on this. They vetted her like they vetted Palin.

Jonze, I can't tell if your comment is snark or not, and if it is then I apologize. But Ifill shouldn't remove herself from the debate, isn't her book more about black politicians than Obama? Besides, Tom Brokaw is so far up John McCain's ass that he uses the old guy's prostate as a pillow - If Ifill has to remove herself, so does Brokaw.

user-pic

No - I like Ifill for Palin - a woman is necessary.


Brokaw can go mmmm fuck himself. I can't stand him.

T'isn't snark. Now maybe it's all gamesmanship in that the McCain Camp knew about the book but wanted to use it to their advantage right before the debate to put certain pressure on Ifill or to have a built in excuse for Palin should she fail to exceed in expectations even when the bar has bottomed out.

A woman is key to moderating Palin's debate, but she's also African American, and now she's writing a book at least in part on Barack Obama...

I wonder if Ifill will make public the fact of her book when she introduces herself.

user-pic

I get your point.

But since Obama isn't one of the debaters, I'm still not all that worried about the fact that Gwen is African American.

I don't really think we need race in the debates as an issue - I really don't think it is one.

I think it is part of developing a built in excuse to give the right wing idiots for when she doesn't do so well.

I usually cut you some slack because Tena X has made you her personal whipping boy, but I'm going to have to say: chill the fuck out.

It's a book on black political power. She's interviewed several black politicans, including Barack Obama. And certainly the title seems provocative, but um, if going forward Obama isn't the most powerful black politician (not to mention politician period), then pray tell who is? Other than the title of the book, can you point to a single article that demonstrates that Ifill is in the tank for Obama?

And I won't mention that the McCain campaign AGREED to her moderating this debate. Wait, I just did. Seriously, this is just a distraction.

user-pic

I'm sorry it looks that way to you - I just find logical arguments come right to the front of my brain when I read Jonze. IN a lot of ways, I really appreciate Jonze.

man I'm getting flak this morning - and I don't think the incoming is really warranted. If someone is posting here, I assume they intend to be part of the conversation and want people to reply.

Maybe the 7 years I've spent on boards I've been doing it all wrong.

Y'all are going to have to show me how to do it right, I guess.

I'll make small comments here and there until I get it.

Tena, you aren't doing a damn thing wrong - Democrats can use some of that fire you have.

I certainly don't see it that way either Tena, we're just different personalities hoping for the same outcome. I'm a Murphy's Law worrier and a Devils Advocate by nature so I can appreciate why folks see me the way they do.

user-pic

To me, this:

I worry, therefore I am

Says it all. In a funny, self-deprecating way, too.

*I hope this doesn't come across as too "Kumbaya-ish"* But the same way that I appreciate Tena's fearlessness, I appreciate Jonze's occasional pessimism because its comes from the right place and it always helps to stop any complacency that may set in.

Agreed. I think those of us who come here often enough understand where everyone's coming from. There's a little bit of Tena and Jonze in most of us. :)

user-pic

Please.

I mean it.

Stop with the "making small comments until you get it stuff", ok? Your comments are fine. Some people take particular exception to them but who gives a rat's ass?

user-pic

Not me...

user-pic

thank you, sargeant. you're a non-com and a gentleman.

And it's getting late awful early out here. Not much time left for McCain. We might be entering live boy, dead woman territory.


Pufferfish


user-pic

With every day that passes, it gets harder for McLame to win this.

For every cloud....

I have to say that I am absolutely loving listening to talk (i.e. Republican) radio on the way home these days. These clowns have NO talking points: they hate Bush and his impotent ineptitude with a passion since he betrayed them on the bailout and demonstrated how bankrupt neocon social and fiscal policies are. They can't stand McCain because he has no credibility nor realistic alternatives to offer (plus he's not a "true Republican"). All they can do now is stretch their tiny minds to find ways to blame this fiscal shitstorm on "failed liberal policies" of the last 8 years....which they can't find in their hearts to correctly attribute to the Republicans. Talk about cognative dissonance -- they are foaming at the mouth and are totally incoherent! A more dispirited and desperate bunch I have never heard the likes of before. Truly a delight to hear and brings me to full-on hysterical laughter several times a night for the past two weeks.

user-pic

Rachel Maddow was awesome last night on the continued unravelling of the Republican Party.

Basically, no one is in charge. It's total disarray out there for the Republicans.

I'm tellin ya, Newt is angling to take the reins. Yuk, it's disgusting. They're all disgusting obv.

user-pic

Yeah, I imagine so but what kind of political clout does Newt Gingrich have any more? I can't see it - unless it's a situation of anyone at all who steps into the vacuum.

user-pic

I think we are etting closer to the non-event numbers right about now. Last week was a week of hysteria.

Obama has a healthy lead and is closing the gap in swing states. He has a non-event lead in the Kerry states plus New Mexico, Iowa and Colorado -leads he kept through the height of the Palin/RNC bounce (poll of polls).

If I recally correctly from the primaries, the only state the poll of polls got wrong was new Hampshire - and that showed Clinton leading forever and then a huge Obama bounce in the last week.

user-pic

McLame is definitely running out of time.

user-pic

I'd be sacred of Ifill is I were the candidates - she flat own pwned Edwards and Cheney on the HIV-southern black woman question in 04. Of course, no one really gave a darned that neither guy could answer the question but she did a great job of exposing both of them. I think the moderators should reserve one question for "this is the crap that keeps me up at night and
I could care less what anybody else thinks about the validity of this question"

user-pic

I agree - I don't see Ifill holding back on anyone. I'm perfectly happy with Gwen moderating this one.

Brokaw is a different story - he's all about Brokaw and Brokaw's millions. I really can't stand him and don't expect to like his moderation.

Brokaw's debate is the town hall variety - How does it usually work for moderators in such a set-up?

The questions are pre-screened and selected by Brokaw still? Can Brokaw ask follow-up questions if he personally isn't satisfied with the answer given?


Obama is the presumed victor, the P-victor

user-pic

I think Ifill will be unbiased and fair, and not just because this book thing came up. While I'm sure she's a Dem, she's always struck me as pretty fair. People will judge her based on her performance. She doesn't need to overcompensate by taking it easy on Palin and going tough on Biden, she just needs to be fair.

I LOVE the stability over the last 6 days in 3 of the 4 tracking polls. The best is that Obama has held a 5-6pt lead in the Rasmussen daily over the last 6 days and during that time, he has been at or above 50 in the Ras poll. Gallup, as usual, is the one that shows goofy day-to-day swings. I guess that's due to the fact that they don't weight by party ID.

Hey folks, this is off topic but I think it interesting enough to bring up here.

The Weird Universe web site (www.weirduniverse.net) has an article discussing McCain's use of "Tongue-Jutting." The article quites retired FBI agent Joe Navarro as saying:

Tongue-jutting behavior is a gesture used by people who think they have gotten away with something or are “caught” doing something... This behavior has several meanings – depending on specific situations – but is usually associated with one of these: I got caught (taking candy from a drawer), gleeful excitement (look at what I just did, Mom), I got away with something (and I didn’t get caught), I did something foolish, or I am naughty.

This behavior is common in predatory animals also, which leads to the finishing quote:

So the question is, was McCain's tongue jutting more reptilian or primate? i.e. was it more predatory in nature, or sociosexual? I'll leave that to you readers to decide.


The article can be found at http://www.weirduniverse.net/blog/permalink/tongue_jutting/. The site they are referencing is http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/tongue-jut.html.

You know, someday I will write a post without all the usual errors. Quite vs Quote, for example.

user-pic

Don't forget the tongue-jutting of Palin. (picture on the front page right now)

Same thing applies.

user-pic

Interesting, until you watch the video and see when the tounge "juts." Does it show he's lying or is he wetting his lips to keep from mumbling? Most of the stuff that comes before and after the "jut" is innocuous. I think it's more of an irritating habit that, now that you've pointed it out, will be all I see whenever he speaks...thanks for that.

user-pic

What's with the people being polled by Gallup, I wonder?

user-pic

They don't weight for party ID so if they get two or three days of heavy GOP responses, you'll see a shift away from Obama. He almost always hits his Gallup weekly low point on Wednesday or Thursday. His high numbers usually come in the results released Saturday-Monday. This has been a pretty consistent pattern in Gallup's tracking. Not sure why. One theory is that the the results released on Wednesday and Thursday - or even Friday - include results from mostly weekday polling. The under 60-65 crowd is usually at work for most of the day during weekdays, soon those days the polling responders may include more of the older crowd than polls taken Friday-Sunday. These folks who are likely more Republican and more likely to support McCain.

Rasmussen, likely because he does weight for party ID (and his Dem-GOP split is pretty conservative), doesn't show this type of pattern - his numbers are often very consistent and usually only swing in one direction or the othern as the result of some big event - eg, Obama's overseas trip, the conventions, the Palin pick, the economic crisis, the debate, etc. As I noted above, Obama has been at +5 or +6 in Rasmussen's daily for the last 6 days. You have to love that type of consistency, especially with a 5+ Obama advantage.

Hey, I like Gwen but must admit, she's as MSM as the rest. She knows how to toe the line and she's used to where the line is (think of WashWeek sponsors such as Boeing, etc. hanging over her head) I think bringing the issue of her book up at the last minute is an attempt to get her rattled. She will have this in the back of her mind before every pitch and thus will lob softer balls. Grounds for Wingnut excuses are secondary as a purpose and only a side benefit. Psych Ifill and Palin goes home a free hockey mom. I think i would pull Gwen out of the game and get a reliever.

Obama Clings to Landslide Results.

But, hey, they're not too worried over at Freerepublic. They're pretty much convinced that the polls are biased because conservatives actually have jobs and are too busy to respond to polling questions, and that, combined with the Bradley effect means McCain is actually still in the lead. Besides they're pretty sure that Obama supporters will all be so busy smoking weed and drinking Thunderbird paid for with the proceeds of our welfare and unemployment checks, that we'll forget to vote on Nov. 4th.

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address