First, WV has moved from Barely McCain back to Weak McCain. This one disappoints me. If you look at the relative voting history of the states (the second set of tables on this page at FiveThirtyEight.com) you'll see that WV is one of the bluest states in the country. In fact compared to the rest of the nation, they have only leaned relatively Republican in three elections since 1948 (1972, 2000, 2004). I believe that WV has a low number of evangelical Christians, which also should work in Obama's favor. But, for whatever reason, his message doesn't seem to be catching on here.
The other state to move today was SD, which moved from Strong McCain to Weak McCain. This is exciting, because unlike WV, this is an area where Obama (or any other Democrat) has no business winning if you go by the historical record. The Prairie and Big Sky regions that include MT and the Dakotas are by far the reddest areas of the nation, even making the deep south look blue in comparison. Currently one of those three is tied, one Barely supporting McCain and one Weakly supporting him. If Obama follows Nate's suggestion on Countdown yesterday and starts dumping advertising money into these states, it could make for a very significant historical shift. I'm not terribly familiar with the Dakotas, but I know that MT is more of a Libertarian state than a Republican one, so this shift could be just one more nail in the coffin of the mutant version of Republicanism that we've had over the last 30 years.
| If the election were held today and... | Obama | McCain |
| ...all McCain <5% went to Obama | 381 | 157 |
| ...all Obama <5% went to McCain | 286 | 252 |
| Shift since yesterday: | -5 | +0 |
| Shift this week: | -2 | +3 |
(See this post for an explanation of these numbers.)
For the raw poll data and more details, see this day's page on Electoral-Vote.com:
8 comments:
Oct 22, 2008 article
WASHINGTON (AP) — The presidential race tightened after the final debate, with John McCain gaining among whites and people earning less than $50,000, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that shows McCain and Barack Obama essentially running even among likely voters in the election homestretch.
The poll, which found Obama at 44 percent and McCain at 43 percent, supports what some Republicans and Democrats privately have said in recent days: that the race narrowed after the third debate as GOP-leaning voters drifted home to their party and McCain's "Joe the plumber" analogy struck a chord.
Diogenes,
Possibly not an objective reporter(--her Native American name is "Brings McCain Donuts"). Seems to be writing slanted pieces all year. Liz Sidoti? Haven't seen the poll, but she may be picking the lowest one out of a dozen.
As a transplanted expat midwesterner, I've issued myself a license to comment on SD and its neighbors:
SD is home to George McGovern & Tom Daschle.
Clinton picked up Montana in 1992.
Obama is very popular in neighboring Iowa.
ND is similar to MN in some ways -- Lutheran belt, etc. It's between MT and MN after all. I wasn't surprised to see it going for Obama.
Recall that SD's neighbor Nebraska is home to Chuck Hagel.
In these heartland states, non-interventionalist feelings run strong and domestic concerns come first. Foreign adventurism is not popular, and people like McCain who have done little real work other than bombing villages, wrecking planes, and marrying beer heiresses don't impress much. Prairie values, y' know.
Obama really reminds me of an earnest midwestern pastor or someone like that. Actually, I can't really think of Obama as "black" since he doesn't share the culture and history of most black Americans. I think he is clearly post-racial, well beyond that, as evidenced by African, Asian, and European members of his immediate family. When forced to choose, he has chosen to be identified as "Black". But my point is that he seems like a normal midwesterner in many ways. Plain vanilla, or chocolate or strawberry swirl. No nuts or rum thrown in like McCain. (He's got a rocky road.)
Corn Belt farmers seem very unlikely to go to the trouble of voting for the candidate who has pledged to cut ethanol subsidies and let the "market" (Saudi princes) set prices and determine America's energy self-sufficiency policy. They will stay home rather than vote for the guy who wants to slash their income. The turnout will veer toward Obama in this area, I would say.
Nate has thrown a lot of good variables into his demographic model but corn farmers and Lutherans were not among them, so his model can not see anything happening there.
Some other states have not been polled for a long time as seen at e-v.c . I'm wondering what might be cooking in AR (since 9-22) and NE (since 9-30). Note that in Kansas the polls narrowed from a 30 to a 13-point gap. The McCain lead in Nebraska may have gone from 19 to something more like 9 by now as well. McCain's lead in AR varied from 29 to 4 points; he may well be behind there now. Or are there any polls…? The campaigns must have their own?
You are right, Poll Junkie, that advertising money should be spread far and wide.
I don't get WV.
BTW, On second look this reporter seems to be objective enough most of the time.
Remember, those numbers are for LIKELY VOTERS. Each pollster calculates likely voters differently, but they virtually all factor in who voted in the previous presidential election as part of their algorithm. More new voters have registered in the last year then at any time in history. The AP is assuming that none of them will show up. That's certainly possible, but not entirely likely. Without them revealing their trade secret formula of how they calculate likely voters, the number is highly suspect.
Note also that in 538.com's breakdown of the national polls today, the polls range from Obama +12 to that Obama +1 poll. Why do you believe the +1 poll instead of the +12 one? The average among the 11 polls puts Obama's lead at right about +6.6 which is probably closer to reality than either of the outliers.
Blues: Great observation about Obama being post-racial. I've never really thought of hime being black either, and your way of putting it makes perfect sense. If only we could get the far right to see it that way.
I wouldn't worry about Liz Sodoti's article... It's the poll itself that is flawed. Without details about how any pollster decides who is a likely voter, those polls are always suspect.
Nate actually addressed the problem with Likely Voter polls today. You should read the entire article, but here's the key bit: "In the 'traditional' model, a voter can tell you that he's registered, tell you that he's certain to vote, tell you that he's very engaged by the election, tell you that he knows where his polling place is, etc., and still be excluded from the model if he hasn't voted in the past. The pollster, in other words, is making a determination as to how the voter will behave."
You should read, listen to, or watch this report on voting machine fraud and stolen elections on Democracy Now.
It sounds like the fix is going through. The ACORN propaganda line is to one way to point the finger at the victim and discredit an Obama win if their hacks are insufficient. The PA campaign is to cover why they win a state where they are 13% behind in the polls.
Blues- Looks like you got your wish for some new polling in AR. Unfortunately, Obama didn't do so hot there-- He's down by 13 points. That's OK, since he's ahead virtually everywhere else in todays polling, including MT by 4.2 points, OH by double digits in two polls, PA by double digits in five polls, and in FL and IN by 5+ point leads.
Post a Comment