home

The Polls - 10/18

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 09:55:08 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Tightening from double digit leads, Barack Obama still holds significant leads in most tracking polls. This could be a function of the volatility of these polls or a genuine (and predictable) tightening of the race.

DKos/R2000 has Obama by 7, 50-43. This is down significantly from Obama's consistent double digit leads in this poll. Rasmussen has Obama steady - with a 5 point 50-45 lead for the fourth consecutive day. Hotline actually trends towards Obama, up 2 for a 10 point 50-40 lead, UPDATE - Hotline today - narrows to 7. IBD/TIPP has Obama by 5, 46-41. Battleground has Obama by 4.

The question is the spread now. Obama will win. The last debate did nothing significant for McCain. Downticket should be our focus now.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< R.I.P. Levi Stubbs (Four Tops) | Obama Enthusiasm in Missouri >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Polls - 10/18 | 71 comments (71 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    The tracking polls are converging (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:03:18 AM EST
    The only thing that really concerns me is that Obama is backing off from 51%. Oh, and yesterday's SUSA poll of Florida, with McCain holding a small lead, is sticking in my craw, even though it's probably methodologically flawed.

    But yeah, nothing to see here.

    That poll shows McCain with 22% (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:58:00 AM EST
    of the African American vote.....That seems odd...

    Parent
    I did remark on the methodology, no? (5.00 / 0) (#16)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:59:46 AM EST
    my guess is that they're picking up on black Cubans or something. I think race/ethnicity is more complicated than "Press 1 for. . .," especially in a diverse place like Florida.

    Parent
    SurveyUSA (5.00 / 4) (#28)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:28:14 AM EST
    has never shown an Obama lead in Florida.....

    Most polls in other states show at least 85% support from African Americans for Obama....So, it is natural to question the methodology.  The questions are about SurveyUSA's Florida polling....Even good pollsters can miss....

    Parent

    BTD's take on the Fl poll would be interesting (none / 0) (#30)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:29:37 AM EST


    Parent
    He'll see you the extra AA support (none / 0) (#34)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:33:00 AM EST
    but likely also give McCain 56% of the white vote.

    Florida's tied right now IMO. And ties in Florida invariably go to the Republican. . .unless Obama's vaunted ground game can actually come through this time.

    Parent

    Demographics are most valuable ... (none / 0) (#74)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 12:38:52 AM EST
    if they can be seen as determinative.

    So, in Florida, being Cuban may be the determinative demographic factor here among Afro-Cubans.

    Parent

    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by connecticut yankee on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:14:41 PM EST
    It's amazing how with a legion of deranged fans, McCain is still losing.  Not a single polls shows him ahead.

    Parent
    Predictable or not (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by blogtopus on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:03:40 AM EST
    It is still frightening to see this closing. Reminds me of the "Winning by 5%" Kerry days in late October.

    RCP (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:09:21 AM EST
    never saw that.

    I paid too much attention to electoral-vote.com. The election was too close and there were too many bad individual polls for it to be very useful.

    Parent

    Thanks (none / 0) (#76)
    by blogtopus on Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 02:04:24 PM EST
    that helps tame the butterflies.

    But I still can't believe 44% or more people think McCain would be better. It boggles the mind.

    Parent

    Too late to help downticket much (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by Cream City on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:21:06 AM EST
    so I hope that everybody else here also already sent their checks some time ago to those candidates, so that they could plan for expenditures on events, posters, buttons, bumper stickers, and ad buys.  We did and are hoping to pick up another seat in the upper house of our state legislature -- while also helping a good newcomer replace our guy moving up from the lower house.  Our lives are ruled much more by what our state legislature does than by anything else.

    So we're also already saving toward helping a good candidate, if we get one, for U.S. Senate next time -- where we expect to have a retirement and an open seat.  For now, we're focused locally.

    mccain would still need a near (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by kenosharick on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:30:19 AM EST
    miracle. He would have to run the table on: Virginia,NC, Florida, Ohio,Colo.,Nev.,W.Virg.,and Indiana- all of which are a bit shaky for him right now.

    Virginia and Colorado (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:35:23 AM EST
    make it more-or-less impossible for him to win at this point.

    Parent
    hmmmmmmmmmmm: (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by cpinva on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:51:39 AM EST
    let's see now:

    • napolean should, by all standards, have defeated wellington at waterloo.

    • dewey should have defeated truman.

    • the packers should have routed the jets in the superbowl.

    • the redskins, cowboys and giants should have all won easily last weekend.

    and yet.................none of these "shoulds" happened. obama supporters would be wise to take the senator's insightful counsel, and assume nothing is in the bag.

    Pakcers/Jets in Superbowl (none / 0) (#18)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:01:28 AM EST
    I think you mean the Colts and the Jets--where Namath guaranteed victory beforehand.....Still biggest upset and one of the biggest games of all time...

    Parent
    Don't forget... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by caramel on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:53:35 AM EST
    that for the last presidential election, the polls placed W at 40% and Kerry at 51%, remember what happened??

    I just wonder why ... (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by Demi Moaned on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:01:10 AM EST
    the polls are tightening when everyone says the polls show Obama 'won' the last debate. Maybe the pundits were right.

    Tightening started before the debate happened (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:03:04 AM EST
    We're past October 15th, so it's pretty natural for this to happen IMO.

    Parent
    IDB Poll Concerning (none / 0) (#45)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:25:33 PM EST
    Supposedly IDB came closest to actual results in 2004; they have Obama ahead, but 13% undecided.  This is cause for great concern to me. Am I missing something?

    Parent
    More concern (none / 0) (#46)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:27:08 PM EST
    I do think we will see tightening of the polls....

    Parent
    If there's more than one poll to look at, (none / 0) (#47)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:28:35 PM EST
    never look at just one poll.

    Parent
    Most of the polls (none / 0) (#48)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:38:05 PM EST
    have significant undecideds?

    Parent
    Addressing your concern (none / 0) (#49)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:43:52 PM EST
    Rasmussen has very few undecideds.  Today Ras has a one point gain by Obama 50-45.  Ras has less volatility than the others and has shown Obama at 50% for a long time.....

    The standard rule of thumb has been that touting bad poll results hurts turnout.....But I think that a closer race will actually keep Obama people motivated.....So sentiments like yours voicing concern will probably help. So, yes, the polls are tightening and Obama people need to redouble their efforts...

    Parent

    But for those of us actually interested in knowing (none / 0) (#51)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:46:13 PM EST
    where the race is, IBD is less-than useful.

    Parent
    The Gallup for today is out (none / 0) (#52)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:49:25 PM EST
    Among registered voters, Obama gains one point,  50-42.  But among the likely expanded voter model, he loses two, 50-46, from 51-45 yesterday.  That measure is based on expressed voter interest.....So, Obama is absolutely right that complacency is the biggest worry.

     

    Parent

    For me likely voter models (none / 0) (#54)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:57:37 PM EST
    are fishy at best.

    But I guess as someone who's missed one election--ever (and it was really insignificant), I'll never understand why people choose not to vote.

    Parent

    Obama's cash advantage and (none / 0) (#56)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:02:28 PM EST
    the half hour Obama has for the week before the election seem likely to help.

    I think we may have exhausted all the McCain stunts, so I think McCain will tend to fade from view.  

    Next big event:  MTP tomorrow.  Will he or won't he?

    Parent

    I don't care about Powell (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:06:29 PM EST
    But I'll tell you this much: the Republican temper tantrum over ACORN is hilarious and annoying at the same time.

    Parent
    Why, aren't (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:37:46 PM EST
    you livid that Donald Duck has actually voted?  He went right up there quacking away getting everyone wet--and voted!....

    Tony Romo and the other Dallas Cowboys registered in Nevada are going to show up in uniform to vote there.

    The New Mexico Republican who got David Iglesias fired because he would not pursue bogus voter fraun claims, says he has evidence that 24 people actually voted fraudulently.......Somehow I think he overstates the case and it may be more like 2 or 4.....

    Parent

    Hell (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:41:04 PM EST
    Duran Duran might try to vote!


    Parent
    Not just Republicans (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Spamlet on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 03:02:56 PM EST
    throwing a tantrum. Check out the PUMAs. At this point, I want to defeat the PUMAs as much as I want to defeat McCain.

    Parent
    to what do you refer re pumas? (none / 0) (#70)
    by DFLer on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 03:41:53 PM EST
    are they "throwing a tantrum" over Acorn? didn't see that...where?


    Parent
    Check out The Confluence (none / 0) (#72)
    by Spamlet on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:54:21 PM EST
    Virtually every post eventually gives rise to a thread parroting the GOP talking points on ACORN and other matters.

    Parent
    It's actually dangerous (none / 0) (#75)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 12:31:20 PM EST
     because, as I heard on one of the Sunday talk shows earlier, the Repubs are planning to use the 'Acorn problem' to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election should Obama win.

    Parent
    None as many as IBD (none / 0) (#50)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:45:29 PM EST
    so for now, I'm essentially ignoring IBD.

    I do not believe that there are any longer so many undecideds.

    Parent

    The debates don't really matter ... (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:13:49 AM EST
    they're mainly watched by the politically engaged who've already made up their minds.

    The race is tightening because (a) races tighten.  It's a very common occurrence.  And (b) some of Obama's support was a bounce effect from the bad economic news and the Democratic brand on the economy.  Bounces fade.  

    Parent

    It's probably true... (4.75 / 4) (#44)
    by marian evans on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:15:55 PM EST
    that the debates don't swing opinions either way.

    Moreover, these debates were fairly below par - whatever the OTT praise given by pundits or supporters to either candidate. They were pretty average performances.

    Neither candidate displays the kind of "turn-on-a-dime" reasoning that shows a real facility with in-depth policy or with the rhetorical aspects of the debate format.

    Moreover, neither really connects with the listener.

    Sen McCain functions best when he frames himself as an American Cato - i.e. duty and service to the state, patriotic allegiance to the nation (as opposed to party), and reverence and loyalty to the military tradition. That is where he is most comfortable and sounds most sincere. Otherwise, his nuggety personality just gets listeners offside.

    Sen Obama projects a cool and distant tone which gives him gravitas, but he tends to talk "at" people, not "to" them. Also, his occasionally meandering answers, and worse, an apparent superciliousness undercuts his message. If McCain's twitchiness was off-putting in this last debate, then so too was Obama's smirking and laughing in the background at McCain - if this was a debate competition (yep, got debating progeny - have spent many fun hours listening to high school debates!) then Sen Obama would be penalized for inappropriate behaviour.

    But does any of this matter to the broader electorate? Probably not. It is what is thought ABOUT the debates, not the debates themselves, that might swing voters - and that stream is running Sen Obama's way.

    Parent

    Good analysis ... (none / 0) (#73)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 12:29:56 AM EST
    and I agree with most of it.  Especially this:

    Neither candidate displays the kind of "turn-on-a-dime" reasoning that shows a real facility with in-depth policy or with the rhetorical aspects of the debate format.

    The lack of this ability makes me skeptical of both candidates.  It may say more about me than the candidates, but the ability to offer unique, lucid and compelling answers to questions is one of the ways I judge intelligence.

    Not just in political debates but in life itself.

    Neither candidate can do this.  They just spout talking points.  Mostly excerpts from stump speeches I've heard a million times before.

    Parent

    Undecideds going for McCain (none / 0) (#20)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:06:03 AM EST
    Obama is at 49-50% in almost every poll and has been consistently there for awhile....McCain's support was  never going to stay at 40-42%.

    The polls showing a double digit Obama lead had McCain at around 40%.  So you had 51-40 type polls.  Now you have 50-45 polls....

    Parent

    The race is tightening ... (5.00 / 0) (#21)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:07:02 AM EST
    as I and everyone else predicted.  

    At this point, I'm not worried.  When I would worry is if the race tightened to an average of 5% and/or Obama's number slipped to 48%.

    This is because I believe the undecideds actually include a larger percentage of McCain supporters.  This is an opinion shared by many pollsters because of how many of these voters rank on the index portion of the polls.

    I understand why some people see a potential landslide.  But I'm not seeing that.  For a number of reasons.

    Right now I see the range of the win as between 286-306 electoral votes. YMMV.

    I want trackers for four states: (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:08:55 AM EST
    Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, and Florida.

    Everything else is essentially irrelevant at this point.

    Parent

    Have fun ... (none / 0) (#29)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:29:30 AM EST
    I think I'll use a Ouija Board.

    ;)

    Parent

    Can't get a special rate from Miss Cleo? (none / 0) (#32)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:31:07 AM EST


    Parent
    She uses Tarot ... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:41:12 AM EST
    it doesn't give you as decisive answers as the Ouija.

    ;)

    Parent

    Good that it's tightening. (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Faust on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:31:08 AM EST
    Gets people off their overconfident duffs and back in the game.

    Turnout...... (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Kefa on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:15:03 PM EST
    That's the key now.....if we have it we win.

    True - this is where negative ads (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Fabian on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:56:38 PM EST
    come in.

    Nasty negative ads can create a "Lousy politicians - who needs them?" attitude that keeps people away from the polls.

    The question is:
    Whose voters are more likely to stay home?

    If people are voting FOR McCain or FOR Obama, then they aren't likely to stay home.

    If people are voting AGAINST McCain or AGAINST Obama, then they might just stay home.

    And since the Obama vote seems to have a significant percentage of "bipartisan" voters, Obama stands to lose the most.  (The anecdotal evidence is that even two time Bush voters are upset enough to vote (D) this election.)

    *Bipartisan - voters who cross party lines.  

    Parent

    I think it remains (none / 0) (#55)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:58:16 PM EST
    that Obama has a more excited voter base.

    Parent
    No, no, no (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by cal1942 on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:05:48 PM EST
    Downticket should be our focus now.

    NO. Play every minute of the game until the gun goes off.  Don't let up for a minute.

    It's likely these polls were destined (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by brodie on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:37:43 PM EST
    to tighten up anyway.  Certainly the one major sounding which had him ahead by a ridiculous 14 pts, quoted widely and frequently in the MSM, was probably an outlier.

    I do suspect, however, that the Repubs have gotten some moderate traction with their bogus scandal-mongering about ACORN, where that org and the Dems, as usual, have been far too slow to respond and too defensive overall.  "Dem-caused voter fraud", Repubs screaming about Obama wanting to "raise people's taxes", and Ayres -- plus the utter failure of TeamObama to put McCain on the defensive for some of his own peculiar and closer associations with unsavory and violent types -- have likely combined to stall Obama's momentum and possibly slightly reverse it for the moment.

    But it's a solid Change year, and provided our side finishes strong and doesn't get too complacent in the final days (like idiot Rep James Moran did the other day on Hardball), and provided there is no massive Repub election theft in numerous states, we should win the WH by 4-6 pts in the PV.

    agree -- focus on downticket (2.00 / 0) (#12)
    by Yotin on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:52:31 AM EST
    I agree, we need to focus on downticket. That's all I have been actively helping and involving myself, Democrats for local and state positions since Hillary dropped out.

    I just couldn't warm up to Obama to give financially or throw my body his way. He's just too slick of a politician to me. Maybe, that's what one needs to win but is it what we need as President?

    McNerney California District 11 (none / 0) (#3)
    by Katherine Graham Cracker on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:07:54 AM EST
    Speaking of down ticket races once again Jerry McNerney (beat the horrible Pombo in 2006) is in a close race.  If you are in the Bay area this is a race that could use your help.  Yes McNerney isn't perfect but he is better then his opponent. more from the SF Chronicle

    Jerry has it locked up (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:10:37 AM EST
    I think if I were going to cut a check tomorrow, it would go to Jim Martin, Kay Hagan, or Jeff Merkley.

    Parent
    He doesn't need money (none / 0) (#7)
    by Katherine Graham Cracker on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:16:20 AM EST
    There is no national campaign in Cal and each local campaign has to run its own GOTV and the campaign could use help in that regard.

    The Hill had a story on other vulnerable congressional races.  I was happy to see Patrick McHenry on the list...the safest Republican seat in the county.

    Parent

    Pombo had the worst environmental (none / 0) (#31)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:30:44 AM EST
    record.....I guess he went back to being a realtor....wonder how that is working out....

    Parent
    NJ 5 and 7 (none / 0) (#5)
    by Lil on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:10:03 AM EST
    Schulman trying to unseat Garrett...oh what a wonderful miracle that would be.  And of course Linda Stender in the 7th.

    Saxby Chambliss' Senate seat just (none / 0) (#14)
    by MyLeftMind on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:57:55 AM EST
    came into play this week.  Democrat Jim Martin is within two points, and the Dem Senatorial Campaign Committee just added Georgia as a 12th battleground state.  Imagine a blue Georgia!  What a mandate that would send to Congress.  

    You can donate here. https://secure.democratsenators.org/o/4/p/5000/contribute?donate_page_KEY=4231&default=25

    Closing the gap in CA-03 (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:38:20 AM EST
    now this is news I like on a Saturday morning!

    If anyone in the CA can help him out, it'll be one more for us!

    Wow, our first Socialist President!! (none / 0) (#39)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 11:44:55 AM EST
    At least, that's what McCain says.. heh.
    That's  a sign of real desperation, IMO.

    That, of course, was FDR (none / 0) (#40)
    by Cream City on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:08:32 PM EST
    although some of his initiatives were from the turn-of-the-century Progressives (when that term was more meaningful than it is today).  But many were from the American Socialist agenda, too.

    So when his opponents used to blast FDR as a Socialist, they weren't exactly incorrect.  But he really was not a plagiarist, just a pragmatist. :-)

    Parent

    Dunno about FDR being our (none / 0) (#64)
    by brodie on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:13:39 PM EST
    first "socialist" prez, since he was an economic conservative at heart, didn't nationalize the banks and instead sought firm regulation in that sector and for Wall Street.  In fact his first few steps upon taking office were in a conservative direction (budget cutting, banking reform bill largely co-written by bankers and not radically different from what Hoover's people were advocating).  Roosevelt largely ended up acting boldly in a progressive direction, especially after his "second" New Deal of 1935.  

    And the tenor of the times virtually dictated such action.  The majority of Congress by early 1933, for instance, had been elected in the two post-Stock Market Crash elections.  If he hadn't done some revolutionary things in gov't, then there probably would have been revolution in the streets.  Though for sure none of this made his former ally Al Smith very happy.

    Obama, if the polls hold up and he wins (and Bush and the Repubs actually allow him to take office in an orderly fashion), will face not dissimilar circumstances probably.  No option for him to advocate small-bore solutions, either for the economy or for things like health care reform.  All the more true if he wins by a fair-sized 5 pts or more in a Dem landslide that gives us overwhelming control of Congress.

    Parent

    Sad but true (none / 0) (#41)
    by Manuel on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:12:02 PM EST
    This might get some traction.  Remember the flap over "French" fries? It's also cynical considering we just passed the rescue plan.  It's one economy and government must play a significant role in it for it to work for everyone.  What will Obama's reaction be?  Will he tiptoe around it (probably cautious and prudent)?  Or will he point out that economic investment by government can create wealth and help ease the volatility in the markets?   Does Obama even believe this?  Many Democrats don't.

    Parent
    I wish our country could be a (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:13:46 PM EST
    socialist "failure" like Sweden or Norway.

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#59)
    by connecticut yankee on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:16:32 PM EST
    I think "socialist" means, "one who pays his bills".  Conservatives think the military is a gift from Jesus.

    Parent
    Why I worry (none / 0) (#62)
    by liberalLibertarian on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 01:46:29 PM EST
    Given the ideal conditions for the democratic candidates, that this race is not shaping up to be a landslide worries me.

    How anybody could have watched the debates and thought McCain held his own is either blind, stupid, or both. I winced at his lies, and winced again when he got away with it.
    Our planet is in crises. The world's economic system is in crisis, and our country is in crisis in so many many ways... our infrastructure is crumbling, our spending is out of control yada yada yada.

    It is my sincere opinion that anybody who favors McSame has the critical thinking skills of a stone... or trusting the pundits which is almost the same thing.   Without a diligent free press, our democracy is vulnerable to mob rule.

    The latest polls (none / 0) (#65)
    by cal1942 on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:14:06 PM EST
    included in the realclearpolitics.com were conducted from 10/15 to 10/17.

    I believe the most meaningful polls to guage where we are today will be those conducted entirely AFTER last Wednesday evening's debate.

    There was a 2 point difference between Gallup traditional and Gallup expanded.

    What's the difference between the two polls?

    iirc (5.00 / 0) (#66)
    by connecticut yankee on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:24:32 PM EST
    Traditional LV has the 2004 voter id weights. Expanded LV accounts for increased dem registration this year.  They dont know which is more accurate.

    Gallup RV is up to 8 so the pool of Obama voters is still strong, its just a matter of getting them out to the polls.

    Parent

    Thanks to Both of you (5.00 / 0) (#71)
    by cal1942 on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 04:24:08 PM EST
    connecticutyankee and MKS - thank you

    GOTV will be critical.  If those new registrants have been tracked there ought to be a GOTV effort directed their way.

    Parent

    Past voting history (none / 0) (#67)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:30:34 PM EST
    is the difference, I think...Past voting history would exclude all those new Obama voters.

    Parent
    The Polls - 10/18 | 71 comments (71 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment