Get yer polls, bets, numbers & pretty graphs! Elections 2008

sozobe wrote:

I came back downstairs and saw about 10 minutes and was just laughing in disbelief at some of what was happening. (This was the SNL "pillow" and "I always have to answer questions first" section.)

Oh, me too...I had to leave when she started talking about always getting the first question. I couldn't stop myself from heckling and jeering at the screen and I got the feeling Mr C wanted me to leave, heh... Laughing

I haven't managed to watch a debate as it's airing yet-- gotta hear the analysis first so I know if anything awful happened or else the tension is just too much for me to bear!

0 Replies

Yes, exactly!

OK so my Columbus bulletin now...

First, ginormous disclaimer. I moved here almost 4 years ago but am still getting a feel for the place. I am starting to get a fairly good handle on Columbus, but I still probably know far more about Minnesota or Wisconsin than about Ohio.

Columbus has a popular black mayor (Michael Coleman) and from my preliminary feelers is pretty pro-Obama in general. Some startling exceptions, especially in terms of local media -- I've mentioned that here.

I had an interesting discussion with the interpreter today and I'd imagine she's pretty typical. Leaned Hillary for a long time, didn't quite trust the whole Obama thing as a concept, and just started really researching things in this last week before the primary. The more she researches, the more she likes Obama. She's also been disappointed with both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the last month or so. We talked about how we'd both placed our first presidential vote ever for Bill, and how we thought he was a good president overall.

Not to extrapolate too much from her but that's an impression I've gotten from a lot of quarters. People liked Bill's presidency and like Hillary by extension and also the idea that Bill will be back in the White House. That's been their default mode. There's also some pushback against the Obama phenomenon -- it's just not Midwestern. Too gushy, too Hollywood. But the combination of researching who Obama actually is (as opposed to the media-fuelled "phenomenon" angle) and Hillary mis-steps seems to be shifting things. I don't think it will shift all the way to an Obama win -- maybe. More likely it will merely be a closer race than it seemed like it would be a couple of weeks ago.

0 Replies

On bringing the kids to political rallies.
I remember my older son saying, when he was quite small: "Daddy, are we going to "Fist" this weekend?"
Laughing

0 Replies

Interesting local stuff, Soz!

-------------

Meanwhile - unnervingly little movement in the Gallup and Rasmussen daily tracking polls. Nothing since the Obama bounce directly after the Potomac Primary ebbed a bit again, really. They're stuck. No similar bounce after the Wisconsin and Hawaii wins.

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/9374/galluprasmusdemslead6qe8.png

0 Replies

Another slight disturbance in the force: Obama's upswing in the (national) match-up polls against McCain has also abated somewhat.

In the match-up polls, Obama had a rally throughout the first half of February. When the month began, he and McCain were, on average, tied. The average climbed steadily to a 5+% lead for Obama as the following polls came in:

Obama leads over McCain (only 1 in 4 days of daily Rasmussen tracking poll included)

Code:



     pollster          end date poll



+ 3  ABC/WaPo             02/01	

+ 2  Cook                 02/02	

+ 8  CNN                  02/03	

+ 7  Time                 02/04	



Super Tuesday



+ 5  Rasmussen (tracking) 02/07	



LA, NE, WA



+ 6  AP/Ipsos             02/10	

+ 4  USAToday/Galllup     02/10	

+ 4  Rasmussen (tracking) 02/11	



Potomac Primary



+ 3  Rasmussen (tracking) 02/15	

+ 7  Zogby                02/16	

+ 8  Diageo/Hotline       02/17

So far so good. But there's been a bit of a downturn in the last week or two. Too early to tell what it means, but a bit unnerving, in combination with the stagnating daily tracking polls:

Code:



     pollster          end date poll



+ 3 Rasmussen (tracking)  02/19	



WI, HI



+ 4 Fox                   02/20

- 3 Rasmussen (tracking)  02/23

- 1 Gallup                02/24	

+12 CBS/NYT               02/24	

- 2 LAT/Bloomb            02/25	

- 3 Rasmussen (tracking)  02/27

0 Replies

Quote:

So far so good. But there's been a bit of a downturn in the last week or two. Too early to tell what it means, but a bit unnerving, in combination with the stagnating daily tracking polls:

I can tell you what it means. Nothing. These polls are meaningless until the real head-to-head campaign begins, that is between McCain and Obama. Right now, the campign Obama is involved in is the one for the nomination and his opponent is Hillary Clinton not John "Bullshit Express" McCain.

0 Replies

Fair enough. I see it more as a "mood thermometer" of sorts.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Another slight disturbance in the force: Obama's upswing in the (national) match-up polls against McCain has also abated somewhat.

This is the graph that goes with that, by the way:

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/1272/demsvsmccain4fa0.png

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Bill will be back in the White House. That's been their default mode. There's also some pushback against the Obama phenomenon -- it's just not Midwestern. Too gushy, too Hollywood.

Hey, Gail Collins agrees. From today's Op-Ed:

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/opinion/28collins.html

0 Replies

I'm being finicky now, but it turns out I had missed two recent Obama vs McCain match-up polls, both on the bright side end of the spectrum for Obama: a recent AP/Ipsos poll (conducted 2/22-24) had him 10 points up and a Research 2000 poll (2/18-21) had him 6 points up.

They were relatively good for Hillary too (up 5 and tied with McCain, respectively).

That still didnt change the look of the overall graph all that much, at least not for Obama. But yesterday a new (national) Pew poll with match-ups was released as well. It was also actually conducted a few days ago already (2/20-24), and it's got Obama up 7 over McCain and Clinton up 5. And with that one included the look of the graph does look a little different now, especially for Hillary but also a bit for Obama.

So here's a new version:

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/6918/demsvsmccain4updlb0.png

0 Replies

Interesting, nimh, but I am left wondering this: Where are the Dem primary polls from TX, OH, VT and RI? I have not seen any of those for days.

0 Replies

Check out Pollster.com

http://www.pollster.com/08OHPresDems600.png[img]

[img]http://www.pollster.com/08TXPresDems600.png[img]

(hey, that line moved since I saw it last)

[img]http://www.pollster.com/08RIPresDems600.png

http://www.pollster.com/08VTPresDems600.png

0 Replies

Here ya go.

http://www.pollster.com/08TXPresDems600.png

http://www.pollster.com/08OHPresDems600.png

Now, there's not been much polling for Vermont, so there's no line; only a couple of points. Same with RI.

http://www.pollster.com/08RIPresDems600.png

Cheers

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Great minds...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Good observation from Marc Ambinder:

Quote:

Hillary Clinton As An Efficiently Priced Security

[..] Clinton is like an efficiently priced security: the market -- i.e., the voting public -- already possessed an enormous amount of information about her. [V]irtually everything that you could say or think about her has essentially been priced in. (Experience, Bill Clinton, strength, toughness, etc.)

Events push her numbers up or down but, at it's root, the overall national market puts her around 40%.

She has probably the least volatile polling track record in recent American history. (Try to find any other presidential candidate in the last three decades with as flat a national tracking number in the 12 months prior to the nomination being decided, or six months, or even three months.)

Second: It's also probably the first time in history of presidential primaries (of either party) that someone with the apparently unflinching support of 40% of voters from the outset couldn't move more than 1 in 6 of the remaining 60% to go on and win.

And these are Democrats!

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Great minds...

...remember to put the "/" before the concluding "img" tag!

I see Marc Ambinders point (I've read enough Andrew Sullivan by now that I have to work not to call him "Ambers") but I think that hilzoy made a great point too (oh God now I'm speaking pure Bloggish) about how all of this pretty much ends in 2000 when it comes dirt being thrown and Clintons being "vetted." What has Bill been doing since then, for example? What accounts for the huge jump in wealth in the last three years?

http://thememlingindex.com/hillary_clinton_net_worth-wealth.html

I don't necessarily think there IS dirt -- I just don't totally buy the "whatever there is has already been used" line. There may well be more.

0 Replies

Thank you Sozobe and Cyclops. I reckon I figured that Clinton is done for in TX. Ohio? She may still "win" (the popular vote), but does it really matter? She may win in OH by a few % (although I question that) but in TX and OH she doesn't gain on Obama in delegates.

0 Replies

Here's the hilzoy blog I meant, "No Surprises":

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/02/no-surprises.html

0 Replies

OK, so I just saw on CNN that the caucus half of Texas delegates won't be decided until June?! So we will only have the results of the primary half of the Texas vote at the end of March 4th.

Eek.

0 Replies

Floridian Democrats are apparently much more nuanced in their opinion about the whole primaries and convention seating clusterf*ck than either the Hillary campaign or the media would have you believe.

Quote:

Floridian Democrats also weighed in on whether and/or how their delegation should be seated at the national convention -- 28% said the state party should hold another Democratic primary or caucus; 24% believe the delegation should be seated, according to the Jan. 29th primary; 15% say "the Florida Democratic Party knowingly violated the national party rules, so it should accept the penalty"; 13% favor a delegation that is split evenly between Clinton and Obama; and 20% say they aren't sure.

Source (MSNBC)

That's just 24% agreeing with the Hillary line that anything short of seating Florida delegates on the basis of the primary results is some kind of disenfranchisement, and a total of 56% agreeing that the Jan. 29 primary results can not be used as basis for delegate seating.

0 Replies

Get yer polls, bets, numbers & pretty graphs! Elections 2008

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know