Time/CNN Poll: Obama Ahead in Red Battleground States

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 04:02:39 PM EST
Tags: John McCain, Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Time/CNN just released a new poll:

Senator Barack Obama has held or increased his lead in four key states won by President George W. Bush in 2004 — Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia—while losing ground to Senator John McCain in West Virginia.

Obama gained the most ground in North Carolina, where he now leads McCain among likely voters by 51% to 47%, up four percentage points from earlier this month when a similar poll showed the two tied at 49%. [More...]

In Nevada, Obama expanded his lead to 51% to 46%, up a percentage point from September. Similarly, in the crucial swing state of Ohio, Obama leads the Arizona senator by a 50% to 46% margin, an increase of one percentage point from his lead earlier this month. In Virginia, a state that increasingly looks to be solidly in Obama’s corner, the Illinois senator remains 10 percentage points ahead 54% to 44%.

Obama lost ground in West Virginia — a state his campaign has said they are just starting to contest — and now trails there by 41% to McCain’s 53%, more than doubling McCain’s September lead of 49% to Obama’s 44%.

Actual poll results are here.

More evidence McCain's character attacks aren't working:

You are familiar with William Ayers but it won't matter to your vote:

NC 52% Ohio 55% VA 62%

You are familiar with William Ayers and it may affect your vote:

NC 27% Ohio 27% VA 24%

< RNC/Palin Expenditures FollowUp | James Dobson Interviews Sarah Palin: Election in G-d's Hands >

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.

Time/CNN Poll: Obama Ahead in Red Battleground States | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Looking good (5.00 / 0) (#1)
by andgarden on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 04:12:48 PM EST

I especially like the Virginia numbers.

Any idea why AP poll has (none / 0) (#3)
by oculus on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 04:59:46 PM EST

the race tightening?

AP poll


Nope (none / 0) (#4)
by andgarden on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:02:19 PM EST

Just looks like an outlier to me.


Rush, of course, is (none / 0) (#5)
by oculus on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:05:49 PM EST

touting it.


I have never in my life tuned in to Rush (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:06:51 PM EST

and have absolutely no interest in what he says.


I listened due to extended (none / 0) (#7)
by oculus on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:25:41 PM EST

fundraising on NPR and the fact the first WS game doesn't start 'til 5 p.m. my time. Focus on first part of Biden's statement re Obama being tested, but, of course, not the last part. The problem is, the stuff he spouts later emerges from the mouths of some of my friends.


: I actually find Biden more... (none / 0) (#9)
by Salo on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:44:11 PM EST

...frightening than Palin. Although Obama is quite a bit less frightening than McCain.
She's at least a scripted candidate--whicjh means she's subject to a committee of advisors.

Because of their voter model (none / 0) (#13)
by zvs888 on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 06:40:23 PM EST

"The AP-GfK survey included interviews with a large sample of adults including 800 deemed likely to vote. Among all 1,101 adults interviewed, the survey showed Obama ahead 47 percent to 37 percent. He was up by five points among registered voters."

Honestly, I'm just looking at registered voters. I find it highly unlikely that in a massive turnout election that less of Obama's registered voter support turns out than McCain's...


: But that would mean (none / 0) (#16)
by Cream City on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 09:03:29 PM EST

that for every 800 registered voters, there needs to be more than 200 more of the likely voters?
I think I'm confused! (It has been a busy, tiring, and generally confusing day in other ways.) But I don't think there are enough states that still have voter registration available -- i.e., same-day registration by this point, I presume. (I'm in a same-day state, so I'm not as familiar with the deadlines of other sorts of states.)
Still, thanks for reading so much farther into the linked story. There is a lot in it, including more explanation than in most polls' press releases.

If Obama wins NC, he's got a mandate (5.00 / 0) (#2)
by Exeter on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 04:26:50 PM EST

A real mandate-- one we haven't really seen since 1964.

: Hopefully not the one we saw in 2004 (none / 0) (#8)
by Salo on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:42:36 PM EST

teehee.

Did anyone check out... (none / 0) (#10)
by barryluda on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 05:44:43 PM EST

the priceless Zogby poll?

Difference Between A Strategy and Tactic (none / 0) (#11)
by john horse on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 06:13:48 PM EST

In the debates, McCain claimed that Obama didn't know the difference between a strategy and a tactic. Believe me I think Obama knows the difference. Let me explain.

A tactic is like some of the political stunts that John McCain has pulled, like suspending his campaign or the use of robocalls.

A strategy is to put so many states in play (such as NC, Va, FL, Ohio, etc.) that your opponent cannot concentrate his resources in defending one without losing the others.

A strategy, my friend, (none / 0) (#15)
by mg7505 on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 07:15:01 PM EST

is to win before the election even happens, so your opponent can use all the tactics he wants, to no avail.


: Strategy Helps but So Does Outside Events (5.00 / 0) (#17)
by john horse on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 09:46:50 PM EST

mg7505,
The traditional Democratic strategy was for the Democrat to win the blue states and then pick off a battleground state like Florida or Ohio to get enough electoral votes to get elected. Obama believed that he could not just contest some of the battleground states but also some of the red states as well. Now the reason that Kerry or Gore didn't try to contest some of the red states when they ran was because they lacked the organization and the financial resources to do so. Obama can do this because he has a well organized campaign organization filled with many enthusiastic volunteers. He has the financial resources because he made the decision very early to tap into a large base of small donors.
If you have more resources than it is better to make your opponent fight over five or six critical states instead of only one or two states.
I don't think this meant the election was won before it started. Had the financial meltdown not occurred, this election would have been much closer. McCain might even be leading. However, I am arguing that you have to partially credit Obama's strategy with the reason why McCain's counter tactics have appeared so ineffective.

And Florida (none / 0) (#12)
by cal1942 on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 06:29:40 PM EST

continues to disgust.

Three straight post-debate polls with McCain leading. McCain shows himself on the verge of an Eleventh Hour and they eat it up.

They must be drinking water directly from the tap.

: More likely Kool-Aid, (none / 0) (#14)
by mg7505 on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 07:12:59 PM EST

served fresh daily on the Straight Talk Express.