Final USA Today/Gallup Poll: Obama By 11

The final USA Today/Gallup Poll is out. Obama is ahead of McCain by 11 points -- 53% to 42%. This is interesting:

Obama's favorable rating is 62% -- the highest that any presidential candidate has registered in Gallup's final pre-election polls going back to 1992.

USA Today's Washington bureau chief, Susan Page writes: [More...]

McCain's choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate doesn't appear to be wearing well with most Americans. In the poll, 45% of registered voters rated the choice as "poor" and another 18% said it was "only fair," while 19% called it "pretty good" and 16% excellent.

Those are much more negative ratings than in a USA TODAY survey taken just after the Republican National Convention in St. Paul. Then, 60% called the pick of Palin excellent or good; 38% said it was "only fair" or poor.

In contrast, assessments of Barack Obama's choice of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden remain positive. Now, 60% call Obama's choice excellent or "pretty good," while 38% say it was "only fair" or poor. In early September, the divide was 63%-33%.

Just more evidence of McCain's poor judgment.

< McCain: What If? | It's Not about Palin >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    whoo hooo (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by kmaxrnv on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 02:59:37 AM EST
    Go Obama.  I am so Proud of my early vote for Obama in Reno two weeks ago.

    RIP Studs Terkel (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by john horse on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 06:01:33 AM EST
    I just found out that Studs Terkel has died.
    Studs was a great author and activist.  

    Just one week before his death, in an interview in the Huffington Post, he expressed his tremendous excitement at the possibility of Obama being elected president.

    "It's a long haul. It's step by step," Studs wrote in the introduction to Hope Dies Last, published when he was 91 years old. "As Mahalia Jackson sang out, 'We're on our way' - not to Cannon Land, perhaps, but to the world as a better place than it has been before."

    I just hope... (none / 0) (#1)
    by laila on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 01:26:17 AM EST
    That it goes down this way in the voters booths.  I am confident that Obama will win but I am a little nervous right now.  

    Same here (none / 0) (#2)
    by BrassTacks on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 02:19:58 AM EST
    It's such a long, strange, campaign.  I don't feel confident that we can count on anything.  Call me a worry wort.  

    Here's something to balm the worry (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 02:27:06 AM EST
    PPP takes a huge sample and Finds Obama +1 in MONTANA.

    Add the good and the excellent (none / 0) (#4)
    by cal1942 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 02:44:18 AM EST
    and Palin gets higher ratings than Bush.

    So much for all the handwringing... (none / 0) (#5)
    by citizen53 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 02:59:15 AM EST
    of how the media would destroy Obama after he won the nomination.  However, this honeymoon will not last if there is not real change, as the status quo, which I think is what Obama mostly represents, means moving backwards.

    By the way, I voted Obama... (none / 0) (#7)
    by citizen53 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 03:03:23 AM EST
    but my eyes are open as to his candidacy from the start.

    In that regard, here is what I believe has importance:

    What Happens to Public Financing, When Obama Thrived Without It?


    The huge (none / 0) (#9)
    by cal1942 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 03:22:12 AM EST
    advantage that Obama held over McCain may drive some Republicans toward reform.

    Their hypocritical "principled" stand against public financing may magically vanish if they feel they're on the short end.  Par for the course for Republicans.

    So now we have to hope that Democrats are willing to give up a newfound advantage to do what's right.  It should be pressed home to them that the current advantage probably won't last forever.  I believe that Clinton outraised Dole but only because the money gravitates towards an obvious winner.  In a closer contest the money goes to the Republican.

    The remaining problem may well be that it's often difficult for politicians of any stripe to act beyond expediency.


    They should all be embarrassed. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by nycstray on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 03:33:12 AM EST
    Over 1 billion dollars. What a mess.

    If Obama doesn't work for the people, he may have some 'splain' ta do! Or maybe he'll get a break and they'll publish the big vs small donors soon  ;)


    But where are the principled... (none / 0) (#12)
    by citizen53 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 03:43:30 AM EST
    among the Democrats?  It's not fair to just point at them.

    hm (none / 0) (#16)
    by connecticut yankee on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 08:38:50 AM EST
    Well, iirc, it was Bush who first stepped outside the system in the primary.  Since then it's become more common if a candidate feels there is money to be had.

    The system needs to be revised as many people have written about.  The matching funds are too low for a start.


    I didn't point (none / 0) (#18)
    by cal1942 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 10:01:27 AM EST
    to Democrats as the culprits.
    The remaining problem may well be that it's often difficult for politicians of any stripe to act beyond expediency.

    I should have said self-interest.  It takes a bit of magnanimity to act against one's own perceived advantage and that goes for our whole species not any one sub-species.

    I wasn't unfair to anyone.


    Are they announcing the results as (none / 0) (#8)
    by nycstray on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 03:12:41 AM EST
    polls close? I thought they were holding all info until after the west coast closed? But this article makes it sound like that isn't so.

    I hadn't (none / 0) (#11)
    by cal1942 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 03:36:10 AM EST
    heard that no returns would be out until after 8 PM PST.  That's after 11 PM here.

    I hope they're released as soon as returns are available everywhere.  The anxiety is a killer.

    I got a 'chuckle' out of this line concerning the Senate races:

    the muscle to defeat Republican procedural hurdles.

    "procedural hurdles." The media will do anything to avoid using the word filibuster when it's Republicans doing the filibustering.


    I had thought they were holding them (none / 0) (#13)
    by nycstray on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 04:00:51 AM EST
    Why would the west vote if the race is called after a couple of eastern states? It's been a long time since I voted on the west coast, but I do remember always having a "why bother" attitude*  ;) I hope they still go out and vote no matter what. I'm pulling for a guy out there in CD3, he'll need heavy Dem turnout to pull it off.

    * I still voted and I may be remembering primaries.


    The networks will call the states as soon as they (none / 0) (#14)
    by steviez314 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 05:31:16 AM EST
    can after the individual states close.

    They won't call the Presidency until someone gets to 270 based on states that have closed.

    So, for example, even though we know who will win CA, they won't add those 55 EVs to Obama until CA closes.  


    Calling eastern states (none / 0) (#17)
    by cal1942 on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 09:48:35 AM EST
    won't matter because the electoral votes in the far west are needed to secure victory for a Democratic candidate.

    Are YOU ready for the USSA? (none / 0) (#19)
    by RocknRod on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 08:29:33 PM EST
    The REAL change under an Obama administration will be the small change left in your wallet after he taxes your paycheck to "redistribute" the wealth in the new "United Socialist States of America" i.e. USSA