« The (Lost?) Vision of the Founding Fathers
The McCain-Ayers Connection »



Obama McCain Political Debate Context: Polls Still Show Volatile Race

October 7th, 2008
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief

Print Print

When presidential hopefuls Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and GOP Sen. John McCain debate tonight, the growing conventional wisdom in some circles is that Obama is firmly on a path to victory — but. in reality, polls still show a still-highly-volatile race.

A race where a debate — a gaffe, a well-delivered charge that strongly connects with people, a memorable prepared or spontaneous zinger — can make a difference by causing a shift that could mean another nail-biter election night or even votes breaking one candidate’s way.

A look at the polls this morning confirms the fact that, at this point, neither Obama nor McCain have totally closed the sale. But today’s poll trending, if various polls are viewed as a group, isn’t good for McCain.

And viewed within this context, the McCain campaign’s big negative personal assault on Obama (in effect suggesting that he is a fellow traveler of dangerous terrorists who hate America and an outright liar in an admitted effort to turn the campaign and media focus from the economy to Obama) can be viewed as yet another “hail Mary” pass.

*Zobgy has Obama with a three point lead, within the margin of error with Obama 48 percent, McCain 45 percent. It says the race is “too close to call” and the polls shows a McCain recovery.

*The Real Clear Politics poll chart shows Obama leading by three points in some polls (Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Tracking, CBS News, Democracy Corps (D)), by six points in some others (NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl, Hotline/FD Tracking), seven points in one (GW/Battleground Tracking), and by eight in three (CNN, Gallup Tracking, Rasmussen Tracking). When the polls are averaged, Obama leads by 5.8 percent.

*Daily Kos’ poll has Obama ahead by 11 percent.

Various state polls increasingly show good news for Obama. Two obvious points have to be factored-in: (1) the increasingly bad news from the economic front and (2) the rather large shifts in some of these polls which suggest either people making their minds up or an electorate that continues to be volatile and could shift the other way if the McCain campaign does convince voters that Obama is a dangerous choice who can make a bad situation worse.

Here are a few of those polls (which can change later in the day):

–A CNN/Time poll finds Obama leading in some key red states but if you look at the details the lead is not huge in some of them. But there is a definite trend.

On the eve of the penultimate presidential debate, a new TIME/CNN poll shows John McCain still struggling in states won by George W. Bush in 2004, a sign that last week’s vice presidential debate had little effect on voter opinion.

In North Carolina, which Bush won by more than 12 percentage points in both 2000 and 2004, McCain and Obama are locked in a dead heat, with each candidate garnering the support of 49% of likely voters. In Indiana, which Bush won by 21 points in 2004 and 16 points in 2000, McCain maintains a slight 5 point lead over Obama, with 51% of likely voters, compared to Obama’s 46%.

In the crucial swing state of Ohio, which Bush won by slight margins in both 2000 and 2004, McCain trails Obama by 3 points, with the support of 47% of voters, compared to Obama’s 50%. Obama also holds a statistically significant 8 point lead over McCain in New Hampshire and a 5 point lead in Wisconsin, two states that Democrat John Kerry was able to win in 2004.

As a result of the new survey, CNN now considers New Hampshire and Wisconsin to be Obama-leaning states, after previously being considered tossups. North Carolina is now considered a tossup, after previously being categorized as a McCain-leaning state.

*Fox/Rasmussen finds Obama gaining in swing states.

*Obama ahead by 10 in Pennsylvania.

*Obama ahead by six in Ohio.

*Obama ahead by six in North Carolina.

*A new poll shows Obama ahead by 12 points in Virginia.

*The AP reports that McCain has given back gains in polling in New Jersey:

After closing within six points of Democrat Barack Obama following the Republican National Convention, Republican John McCain has again fallen well behind in the presidential race in New Jersey, according to a new poll.

A Fairleigh Dickinson University-Public Mind Poll out Tuesday has Obama with 50 percent to McCain’s 37 percent among likely voters. An FDU poll a month ago had Obama with 47 percent to 41 percent for McCain.

“To be competitive in New Jersey, McCain needed to make a strong play for voters dissatisfied with the results of the Democratic primary,” said Dan Cassino, a survey analyst for the poll. “That simply has not happened.”

A McCain problem is that, as he goes negative, his negatives go way up as he tries to make Obama unelectable. The other big problem remains George Bush. MSNBC’s First read:

‘As we mentioned above, Bush’s approval rating in the NBC/WSJ poll is 29%. But it becomes just 10% when you exclude Republicans. That is just stunning. Remember, that 10% job approval is among Dems and indies. Sure, Democrats are anti-Bush, but indies are a 50-50 split between Obama and McCain, and they are pretty anti-Bush too.



This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 7th, 2008 at 12:50 pm and is filed under John McCain, Debates, Approval Ratings, Newsweek Blogitics, Barack Obama, Republicans, 2008 Elections, Polls, Democrats, Politics. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Viewing 5 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    538 and Electoral Vote give a better picture for why the conventional wisdom has Obama in the Oval Office next year. Barring some sort of major gaffe or scandal, it looks like he'll win decisively in the Electoral College, even if it's a close race by popular vote.
    • ^
    • v
    "within the margin of error."

    guys, i don't know how many times i have to point this out, but statistics ain't algebra.

    you don't subtract and/or add one candidate's percentage to the margin of error to see if the other candidate's percentage falls within the resulting sum (algebra).

    you know that out of a 100 election trials, there's a 97% chance that obama will win 48% of the time, and a 97% chance that mcmuffin will win 45% of the time (statistics).

    pls. review my post here.
    • ^
    • v
    In order to close the race McCain needs to not mention just Ayers but also Obama's ties to Frank Marshal Davis, Rashid Khalidi, John L. McKnight, Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, and Franklin Raines, No one of these relationships is really that damning of itself (possible exception of Rezko), but when taken together they present a more convincing arguement on Obama's ability to judge character. Noone is really accusing Obama of supporting terrorism, except for pundits on the left and right, the argument is about judgement..

    The three questions are will McCain choose to get the entire message out?

    Are the American people capable of the attention span to follow it all?

    Will they care about this as an issue if they do?, ie. How important is judgement of people as a quality for a US President.

    When Obama met Ayers his campaign says he didn't know who Ayers was, but we do know that he knew later yet still continued to associate with hiim.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/07/obama-spo...
    • ^
    • v
    It's closer than some believe (the media suppresses the size and nature of the crowds that have attended the GOP appearances, in addition to the creepy way they are described here on this site), but Obama seems strong and McCain weak at this point and if anything, Obama seems to be increasing his lead. I did not hear or see the second Presidential debate (I've been enjoying a return this week to the Bay Area, where I grew up, and all my spare time is spent enjoying the sights along, and enjoying dinner on, the S.F. Peninsula) but McCain needed to do very well and he done so, the media would likely have conceded it (due to amazement if nothing else). McCain didn't do that, did he?

    Obama will likely win. Hopefully he'll do okay with the economy. The IMF is smart to worry aloud and the central banks were smart to do an emergency rate reduction after the US federal government has already expressed interest in trying to assist the ailing banks (and prop up economic activity). This is classic deflation-fighting, a more vigorous and less complacent effort than many believed would happen.
    • ^
    • v
    As predicted -- California only has led a string of states looking for a bailout.

    http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« The (Lost?) Vision of the Founding Fathers
The McCain-Ayers Connection »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.