Since our previous episode we’ve had individual polls from red states Georgia and Montana showing Barack Obama narrowly in front, so they’re now included in the polling aggregates. However, John McCain leads in both due to the overall polling picture from the past few weeks. The other remarkable development has been an Obama blowout in Ohio, underscoring a picture of Democratic strength in the rust belt states.
| Obama | McCain | Sample | D-EV | R-EV | |
| Michigan | 54.7 | 39.4 | 3005 | 17 | |
| Washington | 54.9 | 40.1 | 3379 | 11 | |
| Maine | 54.5 | 40.0 | 2185 | 4 | |
| Minnesota | 53.3 | 41.8 | 3677 | 10 | |
| Iowa | 52.6 | 41.7 | 3530 | 7 | |
| Pennsylvania | 52.2 | 41.7 | 5505 | 21 | |
| Wisconsin | 51.5 | 42.1 | 3490 | 10 | |
| New Hampshire | 51.5 | 42.3 | 3305 | 4 | |
| New Mexico | 50.5 | 43.3 | 2927 | 5 | |
| Colorado | 50.8 | 44.3 | 3450 | 9 | |
| Virginia | 50.9 | 44.7 | 3777 | 13 | |
| Ohio | 48.7 | 43.0 | 4337 | 20 | |
| Nevada | 50.0 | 45.4 | 3418 | 5 | |
| Florida | 48.2 | 45.3 | 5021 | 27 | |
| North Dakota | 45.5 | 44.7 | 1206 | 3 | |
| Missouri | 47.4 | 46.5 | 4050 | 11 | |
| Indiana | 47.4 | 47.0 | 3828 | 11 | |
| North Carolina | 47.2 | 48.9 | 4564 | 15 | |
| Montana | 44.8 | 48.7 | 2628 | 3 | |
| Georgia | 45.6 | 50.0 | 3530 | 15 | |
| West Virginia | 42.7 | 51.0 | 3622 | 5 | |
| Others | - | - | - | 175 | 137 |
| RCP/Total | 49.9 | 43.9 | - | 363 | 175 |
So who’s going to win then? The polls of course leave little room for doubt. However, there are a couple of items of conventional wisdom floating around which suggest they might not be telling the full story, one way or another.
• The Bradley effect. A compelling paper by Dan Hopkins of Harvard University examines the popular notion that polls overrate the performance of black candidates in biracial contests due to white voters’ reluctance to appear illiberal when interrogated by pollsters. Hopkins finds the effect was a serious factor into the 1980s, most famously when black Democratic candidate Tom Bradley failed to win the Californian gubernatorial election in 1982, but has ceased to be so. Pew Research charts a corresponding decline in the number of respondents willing to admit they would not vote for a black candidate, from 16 per cent in 1984 to 6 per cent. Hopkins notes a very sudden decline in the Bradley effect (he prefers the “Wilder effect”, after Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder) “at about the time that welfare reform silenced one critical, racialized issue”.
• The reverse Bradley effect. Strictly speaking, a “reverse Bradley effect” would involve voters telling pollsters they were voting for McCain or were undecided when they were in fact set on Obama, which is plainly not on the cards. Far more likely is that turnout of black voters is being underestimated in pollsters’ determinations of “likely voters”, which in many cases go on whether they voted last time rather than what they say they will do this time. Whatever methods are being used to account for the certainty of higher black turnout, I’m pretty confident they are overly conservative. When a pollster is required to explain inaccuracy after the event, “I was going on past experience” makes for a more professional sounding excuse than “I made a wrong guess”. I haven’t studied this systematically, but the one example I have looked at has proved to be an eyebrow-raiser: the most recent SurveyUSA poll of Pennsylvania has 10 per cent of black voters among its overall sample, whereas this paper from the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies tells us it was 13 per cent in 2004. Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight provides support for this and related impressions in taking to task pollsters who have gaps of 4 to 6 per cent between results for “registered” and “likely” voters.
• The late Republican surge. I recently heard it said that Republican candidates tend to come home strong in the last week or two of campaigning. Remembering how much of Bill Clinton’s lead vanished shortly before the 1992 election, I thought this sounded plausible and went burrowing through the archives for evidence. The following chart plots the last 15 days of polling at presidential elections from 1992 onwards, day 15 being the election result. I have used composites of polling obtained from Real Clear Politics for 2000 and 2004; Gallup tracking polls for 1996; and a list of various pollsters’ results I found in the New York Times for 1992.
The case of 1996 stands out, but this might well point to a general inaccuracy in the Gallup series I was using rather than a late surge to Bob Dole (unfortunately I could only locate one poll from the final week). Beyond that, the chart provides pretty thin gruel if you’re in the market for a McCain comeback in the last 10 days. The 1992 Bush recovery was less dramatic than I remembered it once I removed Gallup from the equation, which exasperatingly shifted from “registered” to “likely” voters in the final week, eliminating much of Bill Clinton’s lead at a stroke. If anything the trends from 2000 and 2004 point the other way.
• Front-runner decline. The aforementioned paper on the Wilder/Bradley effect by Dan Hopkins informs us that polls “typically overstate support for front-runners”, which is demonstrated in the scatter plots under “Figure 3” (see right at the back). These suggest a candidate like McCain who is on about 42 per cent is probably being underestimated by as much as 2 per cent, while a candidate like Obama on 50 per cent is probably being represented accurately – unless he’s black, in which case he will suffer a Bradley effect of a bit over 1 per cent.
• Advertising. The Washington Post informs us that the cashed-up Obama campaign is fielding “as many as seven commercials for every one aired by Republican Sen. John McCain”.
My guess is that point one will be comfortably countered by point two; point three is worth little if anything; point four might help McCain close the gap by 2 per cent, but some of this gloss should be taken off after accounting for point five. In sum, there seems little reason not to take the polls more-or-less at face value. That being so, my final prediction is that Obama will win every state where my polling aggregates currently have him ahead except North Dakota, where the result is derived from two small sample polls, one from an agency of little repute. The margin in Florida is narrow enough that front-runner decline might be expected to account for it, but I find it hard to believe Obama would fail to carry so marginal a state when he’s up by eight points nationally. That makes it 375 electoral votes for Obama and 163 for McCain.
1,057 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 22 » Show All
You know you suck at political commentary when you think liberalism and Marxism are the same thing.
You know you’re desperate when you think putting up a picture of Karl Marx will win you an election.
Responding to Generic Person’s saying:No 727
Yes, but Julian, Howard won comfortably in 2001 and 2004, so the theory that the GST was so unwanted goes straight out the window.
You have distorted my comment 180%. I was pointing out how all that matters is to win the majority of seats (or states), which after 1998 earned Howard the opportunity (with Democrats support in the Senate, of course) to make a major change in our tax system. I made no comment at all regarding whether the GST was unwanted or not.
As Juliem likes to say, you are entitled to your opinion, but I’d appreciate it if you would not make up any more opinions for me.
Palin is the communist, or is it socialist, or is it Marxist?
She’s quite clearly a liberal-democratic socialist-progressive pinko with a Marxist view of history.
Oz
That prediction of yours is looking grin. Todays polls just get worse for McCain. He’s down in PA by 12% in two polls and 13% in the other. Ohio 7% and 9%. NV 12%. CO 9%. VA 7%. It’s an absolute drubbing. He’s not winning one swing state on todays polls.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html
COOL! The demoralisation factor is going to kick in, which will help Obama win Missouri and Indiana.
Not that he needs them.
Ah but Diogenes, as a Pennsylvanian on Lateline just pointed out “He’s a Muslim, he’s a terrorist, he’s a socialist”.
Oh, and the AP has a liberal bias.
Pollster.com changes SOUTH Dakota to a lean McCain state. There isn’t much data there: http://www.pollster.com/polls/sd/08-sd-pres-ge-mvo.php
It’s now my smokey if Obama gets a 370+ landslide.
Republicans best hope now is to wait for a late Nader swing.
Arizona is my dark horse. When the Repugs start melting down in a few days and blaming McCain I think his homestate Repugs will give him a well-deserved kick. He’s never been very popular in Arizona. The home-town support might well be very fickle.
What about Georgia!?
Early prediction: Obama will win Arizona in 2012.
In all these post someone may have posted this link. Even the conservative pundits are concluding that the race is over. Personally I do not underestimate the stupidity and racism of the American electorate. And there is also the fact the the repugs are much better at voter fraud than the Democrats at this stage in history. The sooner that the US hires the AEC to run their elections the better.
http://www.electionprojection.com/archives100108.shtml#daily102708
“Eight days from Election Day, here is this blogger’s conclusion: Barack Obama will win this election in a landslide. He will capture at least 350 electoral votes and win the popular vote by 7% or more. McCain may benefit from some measure of the Bradley Effect, but that advantage will be overwhelmed by African-American turnout, Palin-induced defections by moderates, and under-funded, unenthusiastic GOP get-out-the-vote efforts. This week’s update shows Obama with a 375-163 electoral vote edge. The actual result may be a tad closer, but I’d be less surprised if his victory surpassed even that landslide tally.”
state data from AP/GfK (a republican polling firm/media body)
Florida: Obama 45
McCain 43
Undecideds 12
North Carolina: Obama 48
McCain 46
Undecideds 6
even tho national polls are tightening, state by state the Big O is way in front.
Ohio: Obama 48
McCain 41
Undecideds 10
Virginia: Obama 49
McCain 42
Undecideds 11
Pennsylvania: Obama 52
McCain 40
Undecideds 9
Nevada: Same as Pennsylvania
Colorado: Obama 51
McCain 41
Undecideds 9
New Hampshire: Obama 55
McCain 37
Undecideds 9
Quinnipac
FLORIDA: Obama 47 – McCain 45;
OHIO: Obama 51 – McCain 42;
PENNSYLVANIA: Obama 53 – McCain 41
national polls sofar
zogby -O 49 M 44
Daily Kos – O 50 M 44
So where exactly is McCain tightening when all the battleground states are blowing out. California? Good luck.
According to the Daily Kos homepage, essentially the only change is that some Republicans have finally settled on McCain. Support for Obama is still around 50%, I’d be REALLY shocked if that isn’t enough for a win.
The redneck racist dumb white men are lining up for McCain, particularly in Southern states.
We all know that less than 50% is good for a win.
Just watching CNN vidoe clips- it seems the Republicans in 2000 and 2004 were considered to have an aditional 2-3% advantage due to ground organisation for turnout.
This election has seen the Rep. ground organisation disintergrate and the Obama ground org build to a size that is considerably larger than the Rep. 2000 or 2004 and also targets at whole blocks of voters “notoriously famous for staying at home”
Obama shouldn’t sweat until national polling has him averaging below 48.5 (enough for most past presidents) and that may not happen anyway.
evan14,
I can’t find the article now but I read one yesterday that said there was a growing block of families where the men fit this demographic but the wives were voting for Obama. The writer of the article was relating her phone calls to various households where she would get the wife on the phone and the wife was very cautious on the phone with her answers. Turns out that the husband was voting for McCain, she was too fearful to let him know that she was voting for Obama. They continued the conversation in “code”. While that doesn’t say much for the state of the relationship of the couple, at least we know Obama is getting votes in some unexpected quarters …..
Michelle Obama’s interview a few days ago on Jay Leno’s Tonight Show
http://www.nbc.com/The_Tonight_Show_with_Jay_Leno/video/clips/michelle-obama-on-the-show-1027/791942/
As I mentioned a couple days ago, the RCP daily average is trending downward for Obama as older, higher polls for Obama drop off. What matters is that the RCP Electoral Vote estimate remained the same during this week at 311 for Obama, 152 for McCain and 85 Tossups. Without tossups it is 375 for Obama, 163 for McCain.
A CNN report on television this morning gave some salient polling stats that Obama is doing a Rudd in getting solid swings in the mortgage belt suburbs of battleground states. McCain’s attacks on Obama’s tax plan and guilt by association have had little or no impact because, for the suburbanites, the #1 issue………….it’s the economy, stupid.
I pay greatest attention to the EV state polling aggregates of Princton Election Consortium’s Prof. Wang (Obama @ 367 EV) and Nate Silver’s (Obama @ 348 EV). Here’s Nate’s words of wisdom today at how polls have gone since his update yesterday:
“BONUS EDIT: Here’s a fun little reality check for those of you who are sweating the trackers. Since our last update yesterday evening, I have added 34 polls to my database, including both state and national numbers. Barack Obama is ahead in 32 of those 34 polls. The two exceptions are in Arizona and Alaska, the home states of John McCain and his VP nominee, respectively.”
Link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
At this rate I think the real losers from this election will be any McCain grandchildren. They’re going to have to get into college on their own merits now, and they’ll be stuck spending a lot more time with gramps after this mess blows over.
A lot of similarities with our election this time last year!
The polls narrowed in the last 2 weeks before November 24!
Undecided Republicans, particularly in the South, are drifting back to McCain.
Sarah Palin announces she wouldn’t mind running in 2012 if McCain loses:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/29/183959/72/687/646143
In support of point in my comment #775, here’s Obama’s version of Rudd’s successful “Working Families” theme given in an interview with US ABC television journalist Charlie Gibson (Yes, he’s the one chosen by McCain campaign for the first major interview with Palin and asked her about the Bush Doctrine, and she replied “In what respect, Charlie?”):
“What I can tell you, my number one priority as president will be is to make sure that the current economic crisis is handled in a way that ensures that this coming recession is not long and deep. And that means getting a program in place to stop foreclosures and to really shore up the housing market. It means getting a stimulus package that actually creates jobs and puts money into the pockets of middle-class families.”
ABC is the only commercial network not broadcasting Obama’s 30 minute talk today, but the whole Gibson interview is one of Obama’s best IMHO. I’ll probably end up preferring it to Obama’s infomercial.
Link: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=6137652&page=3
Evan14
Glad to see you are also thinking of parallels between K’07’s victory. I’d be delighted if Obama’s margin of victory over McCain’s is similar to Rudd’s over Howard @ 5.4%+.
And it would be very tasty icing on the proverbial if McCain does a Howard and loses his home state EV’s!
Evan
She certainly already has a large enough wardrobe ready for 2012. No darn it! Those dresses will all be out of fashion then. Oh well, another shopping spree. It makes the campaigning all worthwhile.
I wonder if she will have given an unscripted interview by 2012?
Just saw a story on CNN @ the election vis a vis Florida. Broward County public schools ( county just north of Miami, major city is Ft. Lauderdale) has registered every 18 year old senior at all of their schools and are using school busses to transport them to the early voting booths. Estimate is about 3600 first time voters county wide are being helped by this. They are doing it on school time too
…….
I get a bit creeped out when I hear Obama mentioning “working families”.
Anyone know of any Melbourne viewing ops next Wednesday?
Also one of my questions from the other day remains unanswered: Are there any good websites giving coverage of ballot measures nationwide?
Martin, there aren’t any ballot measures nationwide …. only national office is President/VP. Ballot measures are all at the state level for instance – (1) in CA, pro or con against gay marraige & (2) Michigan – pro or con against medicinal use of marijuana …….
Why is it that these initiatives are always loony right wing ones?
Associated Press predicts an Obama win:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20081029/road-to-270/
When will Fox news call it? Sometime around the 13th of December perhaps?
Michelle Obama’s is as creepy as Julia Gillard….
Laura Bush is as scary as Sarah Palin.
Oh Glen!
And Sarah Palin is damn scary, I prefer the Tiny Fey version LOL
ltep, I wouldn’t call those two specific initiatives “right wing” ones
….. they are about as left as they come and they aren’t loony either 
…… nothing wrong with either of them. I voted yes on the Michigan one when I sent in my absentee ballot about 2 weeks ago …..
I was actually really pleasantly surprised with Michelle Obama. She’s a far better public speaker than Obama.
Tina Fey for VP.
I mean is there any website that covers all of the ballot measures in each state, across the country. I can only find sites that cover ballot measures for individual states, but obviously I am interested in how eg all of the anti-abortion measures are going, so checking dozens of separate sites is a bit inconvenient.
juliem, if proposition 8 is successful in California ‘A new section would be added to the Constitution stating “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Doesn’t sound awfully left wing to me!
McCain is running anti-Obama robocalls in ARIZONA!
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/mccain_now_running_robocalls_i.php
Sure, but there are 11 measures up for voting. Only the anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion and two law-and-order ones are right-wing. The other seven are left-wing or neutral.
The point is they aren’t all right-wing.
Some are also really weird.
In California there’s two that look half decent on the surface – Renewable energy target and changing car engines to more environmentally sensible options. But they’re opposed by The Sierra Club, The Green Party, the Democrats, the Conservation Association and a lot of others. They’re designed to look good but they’re essentially a way to put billions of dollars of public money directly into the hands of a couple of corporations.
That’s 11 in California of course.
Which ones are ‘neutral’?
At 11pm eastern, 3pm for us on the Aussie east coast; C-SPAN are broadcasting live feed of the rally with Obama and Bill Clinton in Florida. C-SPAN are the congressional broadcast cable channel in the USA and when Congress are not in session, they have various news programs and so forth. They are not showing the infomercial which is on right now
but they generally have good coverage of the political events. They are non partisan as I understand it. They broadcast live apparently all the time so if you want to check in on what they are showing at the moment, go for it ….
http://www.cspan.org/
well if the california ballot has phrased the question like that, yes that is right wing …. I hadn’t examined the language of the ballot proposal so I didn’t know ….
Pages: « 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 22 » Show All