Obama '08?

This must be it... NBC News/ Wall Street Journal poll, 12-14 through 12-17:

Obama 48%
Huckabee 36%

Obama 49%
Giuliani 40%

Clinton 46%
Giuliani 43%

Clinton 46%
Huckabee 44%

Found it here:

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

More about it here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22327166/

Summary of pertinent part:

Quote:

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

It still seems fairly clear to me that Obama has the potential to enthuse and invigorate the american electorate moreso than any other candidate.

Yep!

That's part of what I've been saying since I opened this thread back in... wheneveritwas. So far so good... but we'll see.

0 Replies

Wait, that's not all.

Continuing with Polling Report:

USA Today/Gallup Poll. Dec. 14-16, 2007

Obama 51%
Giuliani 45%

Obama 53%
Huckabee 42%

Obama 57%
Romney 39%

Clinton 49%
Giuliani 48%

Clinton 53%
Huckabee 44%

Clinton 52%
Romney 46%

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

0 Replies

57-39 over Romney, whew

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

OK, so a little analysis...

This seems well borne out, rather than "patently wrong":

Quote:

According to recent polls, Obama does much better against the republicans than Hillary does, so her electability point is out the window.

Obama said something more general.

Quote:

right now among all Democratic nominees or Democratic candidates I do better in a general election match ups than the other candidates.

Two of the three polls referred to don't include Edwards. The third, Zogby -- which was released the day of Obama's comments (note "right now") -- does included Edwards, and Obama does better than Edwards in it. There is also the aspect that Hillary is running in large part on the electability angle -- known quantity, already vetted, etc. So the fact that Obama does better than her is significant. Additionally, Edwards is in third place in most measures (with the exception of Iowa, where the big three are virtually tied), and is not the main person Obama is running against for the Democratic nomination.

So I think a third option needs to be added to nimh's choices between characterizing Obama's statement as "misinformed" or "deceitful" (not to mention "wrong.") Perhaps "accurate"?

0 Replies

Quote:

So I think a third option needs to be added to nimh's choices between characterizing Obama's statement as "misinformed" or "deceitful" (not to mention "wrong.") Perhaps "accurate"?

I want to protest this barrage of attacks on nimh's credibility and character.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Quote:
So I think a third option needs to be added to nimh's choices between characterizing Obama's statement as "misinformed" or "deceitful" (not to mention "wrong.") Perhaps "accurate"?

I want to protest this barrage of attacks on nimh's credibility and character.

Wow... you really have been following Hillary too closely...

0 Replies

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

blatham wrote:
Quote:
So I think a third option needs to be added to nimh's choices between characterizing Obama's statement as "misinformed" or "deceitful" (not to mention "wrong.") Perhaps "accurate"?

I want to protest this barrage of attacks on nimh's credibility and character.

Wow... you really have been following Hillary too closely...

I've always thought it an inexplicable waste of good time to follow someone other than a female.

If not clear, by the by, I was making a joke about the present moment's 'sensitivity' where criticism of candidate A by candidate B is commonly held up like the carcass of a murdered infant..."Look at his attack!"

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Quote:
So I think a third option needs to be added to nimh's choices between characterizing Obama's statement as "misinformed" or "deceitful" (not to mention "wrong.") Perhaps "accurate"?

I want to protest this barrage of attacks on nimh's credibility and character.

Not so much an attack on my credibility and character as ignoring all the basic lessons about how to interpret polls that Ive tirelessly tried to put forth here. Which is kind of disappointing.

Crossposted from the Polls thread:

sozobe wrote:

So I think a third option needs to be added to nimh's choices between characterizing Obama's statement as "misinformed" or "deceitful" (not to mention "wrong.") Perhaps "accurate"?

No.

Look it, individual polls show varying results. Thats why it's never good to go on one or the other poll.

You have come up here with this poll, that poll, such a poll that lines up with what Obama said. Of course I know about the Zogby poll, et cetera. I systematically track these things.

But look it: what I did was to aggregate ALL such polls that came out since 1 November; and then again, in case some more recent development plays a role, ALL such polls that appeared in December.

I gave the data on how many such polls have been done for all three frontrunning candidates in those time frames; and I gave what the AVERAGE of those polls are.

The TOTAL of recent polls show Obama's assertion to be flat out wrong, whether you look only at the last three weeks (when on average he did better than Hillary but worse than Edwards), or at the last month and a half (when he did no better than Hillary, and worse than Edwards).

OK, so what do you want to go on? A couple of individual polls that confirm your preference, or an aggregate average of ALL such polls, in two given recent timeframes? Which do you think is more reliable?

Surely the Obama campaign has someone who is able to track the polls and calculate the averages, so their candidate doesnt go out making some false claim on the basis of cherrypicked polls? And if it does, why did he do exactly that anyway?

0 Replies

I put the averages up on the other thread.

0 Replies

Another plonk:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101923_pf.html

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I put the averages up on the other thread.

Yeah, except all they show is that if you only take the very latest polls, Obama does indeed do better than Hillary - which I had already noted myself before you made any of your posts. But what Obama said was "among all Democratic nominees or Democratic candidates I do better .. than the other candidates".

You contend that Obama's statement was "accurate" nevertheless, on the basis of those averages of the last few polls showing him doing better than Hillary; and on the basis of ONE recent poll, by Zogby, showing him doing better than Edwards too.

Slight problem with that - apart from how it's irresponsible to just go on one poll, and the fact that Obama said he was doing better than all the others in the "polls". Zogby's was one of three polls done around the same time. In the same week that Zogby found Obama doing much better than Edwards in the match-ups, CNN found Edwards doing much better than Obama. While Rasmussen found them to do roughly equally well.

See this post on the other thread for the numbers.

Which means that, as I wrote there,

Obama is wrong if you look at the last three [concurrent] polls in which both he and Edwards appeared.
Obama is wrong if you look at the average of all polls this month.
Obama is wrong if you look at the average of all polls since 1 November.
Obama is right only if you cherrypick just the one poll on how he compared with Edwards.

And yes, cherrypicking one poll from three concurrent ones because it's the only one that 'proves' your point is misinformed at best and deceitful at worst.

Your defense that it was OK because we all know that when he said, "among all Democratic nominees or Democratic candidates I do better .. than the other candidates", he really just meant Hillary is, well...

0 Replies

When were the concurrent polls in which both he and Edwards appeared, before the Zogby one?

(Not a trap or leading question, just seemed when I looked like there must've been a while between the last poll in which both he and Edwards appeared and the Zogby poll. I can check if you'd prefer. About to go to bed now though and will likely be busy for the next few days.)

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

When were the concurrent polls in which both he and Edwards appeared, before the Zogby one?

(Not a trap or leading question, just seemed when I looked like there must've been a while between the last poll in which both he and Edwards appeared and the Zogby poll. I can check if you'd prefer. About to go to bed now though and will likely be busy for the next few days.)

Hi Soz, no problem.

The answer is in this post in the other thread (it's an update of the table that compares Edwards' and Obama's very last numbers in these match-ups).

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Wait, that's not all.

Continuing with Polling Report:

USA Today/Gallup Poll. Dec. 14-16, 2007

Obama 51%
Giuliani 45%

Obama 53%
Huckabee 42%

Obama 57%
Romney 39%

Clinton 49%
Giuliani 48%

Clinton 53%
Huckabee 44%

Clinton 52%
Romney 46%

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

Giuliani's numbers have slipped dramatically, since the scandals surrounding him and his associate Kerik, have come out! Guilaini passes himself off as the hero of 9-11, when nothing could be further from the truth! He's a fear-monger and a racist, to boot! Cool