Obama's Slipping Democratic Support

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:29:45 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I have criticized Senator Barack Obama for the politics he is practicing. Some Obama supporters, as supporters do, take great umbrage at any criticism aimed at their candidate. But Obama and his supporters need to wake up to an emerging trend, Obama is losing support. Look at the trends:

CBS News Poll. April 9-12, 2007.
Obama 24

3/26-27/07 28

American Research Group poll. April 9-12, 2007.

Barack Obama 24

3/2-5 31

Time Poll conducted by Schulman, Ronca & Bucuvalas (SRBI) Public Affairs. April 5-9, 2007.
4/5-9/07

Barack Obama 26

3/23-26 30

Gallup Poll. April 2-5, 2007.

Barack Obama 19
3/23-25 22

I think the reason for this slippage is clear - Obama does not project an image of someone fighting against President Bush and Republicans. It seems to me that is what he has wanted to project. I think that if he does not get himself straightened out on this, the trend will continue.

< Gonazales' Big Lie: "I Value Their Independence," Firings Not Political | Calif. Builds New Death Chamber, Secretly >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Obama's Slipping Democratic Support | 21 comments (21 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I'm getting old! (5.00 / 5) (#1)
by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:58:09 AM EST

In order to feel good an episode of Mr Roger's Neighborhood just isn't cutting it for me. I really need something good to happen in order to feel good.

: Heh (none / 0) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 11:11:44 AM EST

his slipping support (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by cpinva on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 02:32:45 PM EST

is a consequence of people beginning to realize that which i've stated all along about sen. obama: there's no there there. yet.

aside from being another pretty face, his substantive contribution to the body politic has been negligible, if nothing constitutes negligible.

he actually started to believe his own press releases; a bad thing for an actor, potentially fatal for a politician.

he'd do well to sit this one out, and spend the next few years actually doing the job he was elected to. build up a resume' first, run for president later.

: Circumstantiasl evidence: (none / 0) (#17)
by oculus on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 02:41:38 PM EST

why don't I announce my candidacy from the steps of the old capitaol in Springfiled? Lincoln good=Obama good.

With the possible exception (4.66 / 3) (#19)
by yetimonk on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 06:31:11 PM EST

of Gore (I think he will enter), what happened this election cycle? Two inexperienced politicians, Obama and Edwards, are the only ones willing to take on the almost equally inexperienced Hillary? Nobody will ever convince me that experience doesn't matter, especially now in the critically injured condition our country is in. We need an ER surgeon who brings on board a bunch of other specialists, not someone still in med school.

What happened to our Governors? Anyone with real governing experience? Hell, even a lengthy Senate career looks good at this point. Did everyone decide to sit this one out or did the MSM neuter everyone that was a real threat like they did to Kerry?

No offense, but I want more than the political equivalent of kids taking the helm Jan 1, 2009. This is going to be serious bare-knuckle work when we get back to the whitehouse and is going to look a lot more like a bar brawl in Modesto than a state dinner in DC. The amount of damage that needs to be undone alone would make FDR quake in his chair, let alone the amount that would need to be done to secure our future even if these machiavellian chimps had not hijacked the executive.

Indeedy (none / 0) (#3)
by Maggie Mae on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:14:01 PM EST

MOE was 4%. Weren't the polls consistent... (none / 0) (#4)
by cal11 voter on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:46:07 PM EST

with no movement, except for Edwards who I think has moved outside the MOE?

But Obama is not improving in the polls. Your comment is right if your point is that he is not improving in the polls IMHO.

You misunderstand MOE (none / 0) (#5)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:50:46 PM EST

The trend is consistent - he went down in EVERY poll.

This demonstrates he is losing support.

The issue MOE presents now is whether the polls are UNDERSTATING his drop.


Then, why don't you explain how the MOE works... (none / 0) (#6)
by cal11 voter on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:54:32 PM EST

so my understanding can be corrected?


MOE (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:59:40 PM EST

refers to margin of error. To wit the poll is best read as potentially spanniing within the range of MOE.

Tale a finding of support of 20. The range is 16-24, with a 95% confidence level, 19 out of 20. Assuming of course the poll is not dlawed which is a bad assumption generally and that the sample is truly representative, also a bad assumption.

But within that margin, the most likely outcome is the result, the off by 1, then off by 2 and so on.

When EVER poll agrees, and the ranges are between a 4 to 7 point drop, the MOE is no longer practically operative. IF anything it is more likely the error is for understating the dropn not overstating it.

How's that?


So the CBS News poll of late March... (none / 0) (#13)
by cal11 voter on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:05:26 PM EST

(28) is 24-32, and the April Poll (24) is 20-28, right? Can't it be said that his support is consistent if his support was actually mid-20's?


: You could say it (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:08:48 PM EST

if you wanted to ignore the consistent drop in ALL polls.
That is up to you.

P.S.: I speaking of the recent polls.... (none / 0) (#7)
by cal11 voter on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:57:13 PM EST

(late March, early April).


First, lease define MOE (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by oculus on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:59:33 PM EST

: From Wikipedia (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:01:43 PM EST

a good definition:

The margin of error is a statistic expressing the amount of random sampling error in a survey's results. The larger the margin of error, the less confidence one should have that the poll's reported results are close to the "true" figures; that is, the figures for the whole population.
The margin of error is usually defined as the radius of a confidence interval for a particular statistic from a survey. One example is the percent of people who prefer product A verses product B. When a single, global margin of error is reported for a survey, it refers to the maximum margin of error for all reported percentages using the full sample from the survey. If the statistic is a percentage, this maximum margin of error can be calculated as the radius of the confidence interval for a reported percentage of 50%.

I just did (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:59:59 PM EST

Archived under "too much info" (none / 0) (#12)
by oculus on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:04:59 PM EST

: You asked (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:05:52 PM EST

oh tell me who projects (none / 0) (#18)
by Miss Devore on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 04:50:21 PM EST

an image of fighting against the president among the dems?

dodd?-just a part of the assemblage which will deliver hillary.

both edwards and obama seem to offer more than "against bush", and I think that is important.

personally, I'd prefer an Elizabeth Holtzmann/Dick Gregory ticket (i.e. liberals who have never sold out) but as Marisacat has noted, this is the therapeutic position we are in:

https://www.officialtvwebsite.com/doggysteps/index.asp?did=738&refcode=doggy1

: Nobody (none / 0) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 07:10:11 PM EST

But Obama least of all right now.

The race issue is now sinking Obama (none / 0) (#21)
by theobserver on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 06:18:46 AM EST

In the latest polling period, the Imus issue brought race to the forefront again. In this polling period the only thing that Obama did was to become identified in pictures and speaches with with Jackson and Sharpton on the issue. The latter two are despised by many and the issues of being a black with power are being re examined by whites. Obama now has a negative he can not overcome.This theory will be confirmed if his numbers do not recover in the coming weeks.
Edwards never commented on the issue and his numbers moved up.