home

CNN Poll: Obama 53, McCain 46

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 10:35:42 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The final CNN poll appears to push leaners, leaving only 1% undecided and having Obama at 53 and McCain at 46. This is significant because it puts the poll to the test - it leaves no room for "undecideds breaking to McCain." It has McCain at a realistic number - McCain is not going to pull 42% on Tuesday.

While there is divergence on the margin of victory, there is not a single poll that has McCain winning the election.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< More On Mason Dixon "Tightening" | Sunday Open Thread >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    CNN Poll: Obama 53, McCain 46 | 42 comments (42 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    BTD -- OF, but did you see that Olbermann (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Exeter on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:12:32 AM EST
    sketch on SNL last night?!?  It was absolutely spot-on and devastating.

    You can see it ... (none / 0) (#15)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:22:28 PM EST
    here.

    Parent
    "Is he bad news?" (none / 0) (#26)
    by Fabian on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 01:50:50 PM EST
    My son wants to know if KO is "bad news".

    I think we can probably respond in the affirmative to at least a few interpretation.

    Since he watches PBS news programs, I think he might know what "good news" looks like.

    Parent

    pumapac.org (1.00 / 0) (#28)
    by jaru2 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 01:58:10 PM EST
    Go to this site; great ideas exchanged by democrats

    heh (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:03:58 PM EST


    Parent
    Isn't blog-wh@ring for the PUMAs (5.00 / 0) (#32)
    by rdandrea on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:09:58 PM EST
    against site rules?  It was at one time, I think.

    Parent
    About PUMAs (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by zvs888 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 03:31:25 PM EST
    PUMAs aren't Democrats.  They're wingnuts without a party.

    Parent
    If this is for real, Obama likely wins (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 10:38:34 AM EST
    every tossup state save perhaps Indiana.

    I was just at a little event here (none / 0) (#18)
    by Salo on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:39:26 PM EST
    in St Louis.  just started my professorship....grins....and Ryan Phillipe and Olivia Wilde ware doing a little rally. About 50 people.  They got some of the kids to sign up as vols working the phones and walking the pavements. Couple of local TV cameras. Wilde has been working for Obama since before Iowa I think.

    They will be at Kayak's Cafe near WashU this afternoon.

    Parent

    If he wins 2008 good (none / 0) (#2)
    by Salo on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 10:58:46 AM EST
    if he is pipped at teh post--not so good but we can recover it and win in 2012.

    I only wish it was Bush, that Obama was running against instead of McCain. I'd have liked to see George squirm instead of having the murdering bastard go undefeated.

    I'm not so sure you'd really like to see that (5.00 / 0) (#3)
    by rdandrea on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:03:03 AM EST
    If Obama was running against Bush, Rove would be running Bush's campaign.  He ran a lot tighter ship than McCain's boys.

    And if you think THIS campaign was nasty...

    Parent

    nah (none / 0) (#8)
    by Salo on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:20:13 AM EST
    The press just don't like McCain anymore so they are focusing in on his warts and ignoring Obama's warts.

    Bush would be shark chum, like John Major in the mid 1990s when Blair rolled him.

    Parent

    That's more or less what happens (none / 0) (#10)
    by zvs888 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:32:29 AM EST
    To losing campaigns.  Everything becomes magnified.

    Look at those two weeks in September when Obama was losing.

    Everyone in the media was all "omg how can a Democrat lose in this climate" and they started the whole mistake theme on the VP choice and all that.

    All of those questions went away when Palin showed a total lack of knowledge of national issues with Couric...

    Parent

    I think those questions went away when (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by tigercourse on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:49:17 PM EST
    the economy tanked. If not for that, Tuesday might look pretty different.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#24)
    by zvs888 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 01:15:00 PM EST
    I meant to include that too.  Both of those events consolidated the Democratic base and so now all people can do is question McCain's strategy and tactics even though there's nothing he can do about this result.

    Parent
    Not really (none / 0) (#27)
    by Gabriel on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 01:52:09 PM EST
    Mccain ahead was a always a temporary bounce.

    Parent
    I don't think it was so much the economy tanking (none / 0) (#29)
    by rdandrea on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:01:20 PM EST
    As it was McCain's reaction to the economy tanking.  I think that during the week following the Lehman Brothers failure, people learned a lot about what both McCain and Obama would be like as leaders.  And McCain came up short.

    Obama came across as cool, analytical, and unflappable in a crisis.  McCain went off like Roger Rabbit.

    That's when McCain's post-Palin bounce began to evaporate, and it never came back.

    Parent

    Which is why I don't trust MD (none / 0) (#4)
    by bluegal on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:03:13 AM EST
    They may have the margin of victory right but 9% undecided is truly unrealistic at this point.

    I'm skeptical of polls that don't push leaners.

    Also notice (none / 0) (#5)
    by bluegal on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:04:40 AM EST
    That when they pushed undecideds they broke for Obama as they had it 51-46 last week.

    I hope Bush does some last minute (none / 0) (#6)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:07:51 AM EST
    campaigning for McCain in PA and AZ.

    Nailbiter (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:28:26 AM EST
    in Virginia

    If you insist (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:36:22 AM EST
    the demo breakdown indicates otherwise.

    88-10 A-A? Try again. A-A turnout 18%? 2004 21%.

    Obama gets 40% of white vote in VA. Kerry got 32%. Seems realistic to me.

    Virginia looks solid for Obama.  

    Parent

    heh (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 11:39:30 AM EST
    Actually, it looks like SUSA's last primary poll in NC. They said 50/45. Apparently, they have no idea how to poll minorities. And even if they're underballing black turnout, the mental adjustment to Obama getting 95% of it puts him over 50%. So no worries, just a trend.

    And sorry, worrying is in my nature!

    Parent

    I've Got to Agree (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by zvs888 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:01:07 PM EST
    The only way Obama loses Virginia is if 10-15% of his likely voters don't show up.

    That's the only way he loses Virginia.

    Parent

    And Dems control the election machinery (none / 0) (#14)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:06:17 PM EST
    in Virginia. In fact, they do in all important states except for Indiana, Florida, and Colorado.

    Parent
    What "election machinery"? (none / 0) (#17)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:38:13 PM EST
    And how do the "Dems control it in VA"?

    In what other "important states" do they control this "election machinery"?

    Are you talking about actual voting equipment or something else?

    Parent

    He (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by zvs888 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:45:27 PM EST
    Means secretary of states and other directly important election officials in the various states as well as governors and attorney generals.

    Some of them have the power to challenge ballots, extend election times, as well as to challenge the actual result.

    Parent

    Thanks for the clarification. (none / 0) (#39)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 05:51:56 PM EST


    Parent
    A perfect storm for Democrats... (none / 0) (#16)
    by oldpro on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:24:45 PM EST
    ...mostly...at the national level but there's a local downside I'm watching in my Dem-leaning state.  The "change" message has been picked up in spades by Republican challengers to Democratic officeholders and it's beyond nasty.

    Case in point:  Democratic Governor Gregoire's redo with Rossi is close and can't be predicted.  She's not a good campaigner but she's been a fabulous governor.  Until this week, her campaign ads on television haven't even addressed her strengths.  Another dreadful campaign when it should be a blowout.

    Same song, second verse for some local very important county commissioner races.

    In both cases, the BIAW and the property-rights folks have focused all their attention and their money on these races.  Vicious lies, mostly unanswered, calling for change, change, change...

    All the polls have Obama leading... (none / 0) (#19)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:42:09 PM EST
    Are there any ready-made theories out there to explain the prospect of an Obama loss?

    Aside from the spurious, so-called Bradley Effect.

    My bet (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by Lou Grinzo on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:57:13 PM EST
    While I think there's almost zero chance Obama will lose, assume for the sake of discussion it happens.

    I'm sure we'll hear endlessly from the usual circles (e.g. Faux News and Limbaugh) that he lost because "the kids and minorities didn't show up on election day", even if the facts don't support that conclusion.

    Right now, the Republicans should be praying for two feet of snow in some places on Tuesday, but I'm not sure even that would be enough to save their sorry backsides.

    Back here in the real world, I think we're looking at something like 54-46 in the popular vote, with Obama collecting about 340 electoral votes.

    And then I'm going to sleep for about 72 hours.


    Parent

    The MCM is entirely predictable... (none / 0) (#38)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 05:48:13 PM EST
    If Obama were to lose, the MCM will claim the Bradley Effect, which is impossible to disprove.

    And you're right the MCM will claim "the kids and minorities didn't show up on election day", even if they did. However, the truth, or untruth, of that claim should be readily visible and self-evident.

    We know the MCM has pre-fab talking points that have nothing to do with reality.

    I'm more curious as to what the progressive blogs/netroots might say in the event of an Obama loss.

    Parent

    I think... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Thanin on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:58:51 PM EST
    the Bradley effect is the only "legitimate" explanation Ive heard regarding the predictions.

    As far as conspiracy theories, Ive yet to be convinced that electronic voting machines arent all fixed.

    Parent

    To clarify: are you saying that (none / 0) (#37)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 05:31:57 PM EST
    all electronic voting machines "aren't fixed"?

    Parent
    Ive yet to be convinced... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Thanin on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 06:38:52 PM EST
    that they arent all fixed, so no Im saying no one has adequately assured me the machines are honest.  Or simply I think theyve been preprogrammed with the votes.

    Parent
    I probably misunderstood (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 09:40:58 PM EST
    the way you were using the word "fixed". You meant "fixed" as in rigged (rather than "fixed" as in repaired).

    If that's the case, I agree. Freakin' OPRAH had a problem with electronic voting this week:

    "When I voted yesterday electronically, the first vote that you vote for on the ballot is the presidential candidate. It was my first time doing electronic, so I didn't mark the X strong enough, or I held down too long. Because then when I went back to check it, it had not recorded my presidential vote," she said.


    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#25)
    by zvs888 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 01:17:25 PM EST
    At this point it would have to be one of two possibilities: 1) the "Bradley Effect" in pure terms of voters saying they're voting for Obama switching to McCain or 2) Obama's voters not showing for him.

    Look at the polls.  In states adding up to roughly 280-320 EVs, Obama is over 50%.  Thus, he can only lose if some of those voters desert him.

    Or he loses if 10-15% of the voters that say they're voting for him in those states fail to materialize.

    At this point looking at early voting numbers, there's no way those voters don't show up.

    So the Bradley Effect is probably the only way he loses.

    Parent

    Is it frakking Wednesday yet? (none / 0) (#31)
    by Fabian on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:09:11 PM EST
    Robocall heaven/hell here in Columbus Ohio.  We've stopped keeping track of who, why and who is paying for them.

    Strong suggestion for campaigns.  Coordinate your GOTV and outreach efforts so as not to over saturate the voters.  If a campaign called me for a donation now, I'd tell them they owe ME for all the stupid times I picked up the phone only to hear yet another insulting pitch.  The Republicans are the worst by far and I have the mailers to prove it - but the Democrats are busy pandering and pushing buttons.

    Can someone please point me to the non-emo marketing?  The best experience I had was talking to a judge yesterday morning while we had our drink and snacks after donating blood.  He asked me for my vote and I asked him about his job.  It was fun and interesting and I have no idea if he is an (R) or a (D).

    Coordination is often illegal (none / 0) (#33)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:15:48 PM EST
    Thanks BCRA!

    Parent
    I wish I had the patience (none / 0) (#34)
    by Fabian on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:45:16 PM EST
    to find out where all these calls are coming from.

    It's been something like two calls minimum per day this past week, but this weekend we must have at least eight calls a day.  Good thing they aren't live calls because they'd get an earful.

    Parent

    awesome sarah Palin video! (none / 0) (#35)
    by obama13 on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 02:48:34 PM EST
    Check this out, you'll have a lot of laughs!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1exiyBYnJ00

    Obama Still Fighting Media Every Step of the Way (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ladyjustice on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 06:24:24 PM EST
    Every time I switch over from football, all I see are McCain Ads and McCain rally spots.  McCain makes outrageous comments and the media can't wait to play it on the air over and over and over.

    CNN Poll: Obama 53, McCain 46 | 42 comments (42 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment