home

AP-Ipsos Poll: Tight Races In Dem Contest And GE

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:32:52 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

This is a perfectly meaningless poll imo and I offer it only to give you something to talk about. I have nothing to say about it.

An AP-Ipsos poll taken in late February had Obama leading McCain 51-41 percent. The current survey, conducted April 7-9, had them at 45 percent each. McCain leads Obama among men, whites, Southerners, married women and independents.

Clinton led McCain, 48-43 percent, in February. The latest survey showed [Clinton] with 48 percent support to McCain's 45 percent.

[T]he Democratic contest is unchanged from February with Obama at 46 percent and Clinton at 43 percent.

(Emphasis mine.) Ho hum as far as I am concerned.

< Open Thread | Brock and Dems Form Group to Critique McCain >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    AP-Ipsos Poll: Tight Races In Dem Contest And GE | 14 comments (14 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Could the Dems for a Day be departing Obama? (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by davnee on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:51:50 PM EST
    It looks like Clinton-Obama, and Clinton-McCain remained relatively static in their support, but could it be that McCain is peeling off those Dems for a day that Obama loves and a big swath of the indies?  

    Young indies may like the idea of Grandpa Maverick.  Reagan Dems may like the idea of putting their lives in the hands of a patriot.  Women and centrist latte sippers may be reacting to McCain's relative moderation.  Catholics can tell the difference between the tepidly pro-life candidate from the tepidly pro-choice candidate.

    Clinton and McCain appear to be holding their bases.  Obama is the only one losing a portion of his base.  And that may be in part because Obama's base was always in part a mirage?

    I'd want to know if the model was identical for the earlier poll.  Poll numbers don't necessarily mean anything absolute numbers wise, but I think when you compare apples to apples you can discern trends.

    I do agree w/ BTD the women for Clinton # is odd (none / 0) (#7)
    by davnee on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:57:12 PM EST
    I just wanted to add that in as a disclaimer to my post.  I'm not taking this poll as gospel.  I'd want to see the trends in the numbers from other polling outfits in their polls over the last few months.

    Parent
    You read my mind (none / 0) (#12)
    by Lou Grinzo on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 04:18:26 PM EST
    I had exactly the same reaction, re:Obama's support possibly eroding.

    I think some voters looked at the primary season as a chance to test drive the sleek, racy ObamaMobile, but now that it's time to sign on the dotted line for a vehicle they'll have to live with for years, some of them are opting for a better-known, if stodgier, commitment.

    Or maybe the poll is just messed up.

    Parent

    This is interesting (none / 0) (#1)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:36:41 PM EST
    Against McCain, Obama lost ground among women -- from 57 percent in February to 47 percent in April. Obama dropped 12 points among women under 45, 14 points among suburban women and 15 points among married women.

    He also lost nine points or more among voters under 35, high-income households, whites, Catholics, independents, Southerners, people living in the Northeast and those with a high school education or less.
    Problem is (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:44:20 PM EST
    same poll says HILLARY lost ground with women against Obama. And that Hillary gained ground amongst men.

    I think this polling is garbage.

    Parent

    More importantly (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:44:43 PM EST
    it is meaningless even if true.

    Parent
    It's called the Wright effect (none / 0) (#8)
    by Prabhata on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:11:46 PM EST
    I don't believe BO has put that little problem behind him.  The voters he seem to have lost would be the ones to be most influenced by Wright's speeches.

    Parent
    not too meaningless (none / 0) (#14)
    by mscristine on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 12:37:43 AM EST
    I don't see this as meaningless at all, I fear it will be the trend in the general. Obama is too ripe too pick and when you bite into it, you realize it shouldn't have ripened.

    Parent
    A ten point lead evaporating in the same poll... (none / 0) (#5)
    by ineedalife on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:51:50 PM EST
    is probably not meaningless. Pre-Wright +10, post-Wright +0. Of course alot of other things have happened in the last 2 months. If Hillary had lost ten points to McCain in this poll it would be the lead item on tonight's news.

    I do agree, as far as predicting electability in November, polls now are meaningless.

    Well (none / 0) (#6)
    by Lena on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:54:53 PM EST
    These 2 polls, spanning the time period before and after the Wright scandal and the Goolsbee flap, seem to show a ceiling of popular support for Obama. Throughout the whole thing, he's had largely positive press coverage (and amazingly positive press coverage as compared with HRC), and yet his numbers don't seem to have improved or even held firm.

    So...if he's our nominee, and the press starts to give him less than flattering coverage in the fall, where do his numbers have to go?

    Interestingly Enough (none / 0) (#10)
    by nell on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:46:44 PM EST
    It was Mark Penn who talked about his theory of Obama having a "ceiling" of support that would not rise, no matter what, and so far that makes some sense...despite insane amounts of favorable media, money, and even after 10 straight wins, he couldn't close the deal...perhaps those in Clinton's camp who believe in Penn hold that as one of the reasons they are certain Obama is unelectable...I am not sure if Obama has that ceiling, but I am quite certain Clinton does not. She won New Yorkers over who swore they would never vote for her, so she has proven she can break through.

    Parent
    WNBC/Marist poll (none / 0) (#9)
    by waldenpond on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:32:12 PM EST
    This New York poll is odd, but RCP put it up so I am passing it along....

    04/03-04/04
    Clinton/McCain 48/46

    McCain/Obama 48/46

    link

    McCain/Rice beats Clinton/Obama in New York.

    Hmmm (none / 0) (#11)
    by nell on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:47:59 PM EST
    I don't really believe that poll...it makes no sense...Clinton will NOT lose New York, or even come that close. You can over sample or under sample any population to make a poll correct. I guess in a way though they controlled for race and gender bias by using the match-ups they did.

    Parent
    Who's ahead in PA? (none / 0) (#13)
    by yourkidding on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 04:44:41 PM EST
    Anyone who saw Matthews sucking up to Russert on Hardball would be very very hard pressed to say there is no double standard when it comes to portraying the current polls for PA.
    Matthews cited a poll showing McCain tied with Obama, but completely failed to mention that Hilary, in the same poll, is AHEAD of McCain!
       These guys could make you believe that anit women bias is metastasizing.
    AP-Ipsos Poll: Tight Races In Dem Contest And GE | 14 comments (14 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment