Has McCain actually already LOST?(Yes he has)

[General Zod]

They are national polls.
I think it is still concerning. If THIS is the result of only a few days of this dirt, I don't want to know how bad it will look after three weeks.

I'd say the fact that they fluctuate so much is precisely why they're not useful indicators. All it will take is a few more slipups by McSame and they'll swing back towards Obama again.

[McC]

Look at the "Super Tracker" graph in the right-hand column on 538. Then tell me you're still concerned.

[Pablo Sanchez]

They are national polls.

As pointed out, that means they are not useful in predicting who will win. They could (and likely do) represent the consolidation of pro-McCain sentiment in states that are already red.

I think it is still concerning. If THIS is the result of only a few days of this dirt, I don't want to know how bad it will look after three weeks.

Or, because the numbers have only changed by a few percentage points, within the margin of error, they represent nothing more sinister than random fluctuation.

[McC]

Ghetto edit:
Alternately, compare the 2008 electoral vote graph with the 2004 graph.

Anywhere you look where the actual likely voting outcome is examined (rather than nebulous "national polls"), Obama is winning in a resounding fashion. The only dip he's suffered since the nomination was clenched was the post-RNC swell that always happens after a party's convention. The announcement of the unorthodox Sarah Palin also contributed. Then people started listening to what Palin had to say, and coupled with McCain's own dreadful lack of redeeming qualities, you see the skyrocketing for Obama that every single trend now depicts.

[CmdrWilkens]

Lets take your polls one at a time:

If you insist...

Obama 45, McCain 44 (Hotline 10/05-07)

Without context one poll is useless. I haven't followed the hotline but is this a tracker, a single poll, a RV, a LV, which type? Is this the second or third poll in a series and if so what where the previous numbers? Polls are only useful if you have a point of comparison.

Obama 51, McCain 45 (Rasmussen 10/05-07) (down from +8)

+6 instead of +8 which could, again, EASILY be float within the MoE. If the poll CONTINUES to downtrend after 3 or 4 days THEN you start to worry. Moreover you don't really worry until Obama falls UNDER 50%.

Obama 49, McCain 45 (GWU 10/02, 10/05-07) (down from +7)

See above only without the note about Obama below 50%.

Obama 47, McCain 45 (Zogby 10/05-07)

See the first response.

I think I do have reason to be worried.

No you really don't. Go take a look at the Gallup (Obama +11 versus +9) and Research2000 (Obama +10 versus +11) trackign polls. Obama's lead in BOTH is more than twice the Margin of Error which means that it is a statistically significant lead. Moreover both of those trackers AND the Rasmussen tracker show Obama with more than 50% of the vote.


If you look at the state by state polling Obama is also posting double digit leads in MI (McCain's big pickup shot before yanking his campaign), NH (the one everyone was putting in McCain's column of the Kerry states for no obvious reason), PA (which McCain almost absolutely needs at this point). You can also look at the FL, VA, CO, NM, NC, IA, OH, and IN numbers. Every single one of those states went to Bush in '04 and every single one of them is leanign Obama at this point. If you take the pollster composite Obama reaches 270 electoral voters somewhere around VA which he curently leads by more than 6 points. In other words it would take a collpase on the order of 7 points NATIONALLY in order to screw over Obama's math.

Is anything a sure thing 4 weeks out? Nope but right now this is looking more 1980 (in reverse) than 2004.

[Big Phil]

And I have bad news:
McCain's tactic of getting dirty seems to work.
The new numbers aren't encouraging.

Dude, your vague doom and gloom posts with no supporting material is getting annoying, particularly when you ignore Americans who respond directly to you and tell you what they're seeing here on the ground.

Why don't you knock off the pissing and moaning and post something we can actually react to?

If you insist...

Obama 45, McCain 44 (Hotline 10/05-07)
Obama 51, McCain 45 (Rasmussen 10/05-07) (down from +8)
Obama 49, McCain 45 (GWU 10/02, 10/05-07) (down from +7)
Obama 47, McCain 45 (Zogby 10/05-07)

I think I do have reason to be worried.

[sarcasm] I appreciate you providing links so it's easy to see what you're referring to [/sarcasm]

Ignoring that national polls are irrelevant, let's look at the following:

Hotline Poll
10/4 Obama +7
10/5 Obama +7
10/6 Obama +6
10/7 Obama +2
10/8 Obama +1

Rasmussen Poll
9/23 Even
10/4 Obama +6
10/5 Obama +7
10/6 Obama +8
10/7 Obama +8
10/8 Obama +6

GWU Poll
9/24 McCain +1
10/5 Obama +7
10/6 Obama +7
10/7 Obama +4
10/8 Obama +6

I can't find historical data for the Zogby poll


In other words, three weeks ago (around 9/24), McCain was ahead of Obama, but since then he's been consistently ahead in all polls. So what trend are you freaking out about?

[Tribun]

I flipped when reading this, because where I live, national polls are seen as the ultimate truth of who will win. I have to adjust to the strange voting system of the US presidential election.

Concerning the tracking polls, of all these, Hotline is the really bad shocker, but this proably has to do with their manipulated weighting. I read that this was undone and hopefully we'll see more useful nubers from them soon.

[irishmick79]

I flipped when reading this, because where I live, national polls are seen as the ultimate truth of who will win. I have to adjust to the strange voting system of the US presidential election.

Concerning the tracking polls, of all these, Hotline is the really bad shocker, but this proably has to do with their manipulated weighting. I read that this was undone and hopefully we'll see more useful nubers from them soon.

The national polls tend to show where things are trending. Movement in the national polls takes about a few days or so to show up in the state polls. If you think of the national polls more of as trend indicators, they're more useful.

Zogby by the way has a shitty reputation as a pollster. Completely unreliable. Don't know about the Hotline poll, but I would think that to get a swing that big when nobody else is showing that much of a swing, the pollster would have to be tweaking their formula a bit.

[irishmick79]

Forgot to clarify the last part - if hotline just tweaked their formula, then that poll probably has a lot of statistical noise in it and shouldn't be relied upon.

[Thanas]

I flipped when reading this, because where I live, national polls are seen as the ultimate truth of who will win. I have to adjust to the strange voting system of the US presidential election.

Concerning the tracking polls, of all these, Hotline is the really bad shocker, but this proably has to do with their manipulated weighting. I read that this was undone and hopefully we'll see more useful nubers from them soon.

Well, Germany has a sane election procedure where winning the popular vote actually has an effect on the outcome, the US does not.

[McC]

Well, Germany has a sane election procedure where winning the popular vote actually has an effect on the outcome, the US does not.

In the last two elections, I cursed the electoral college. In this one, I'm praising it. Reason? The electorate is fucking dumb. The whole reason the EC existed in the first place was to prevent uninformed voters from leading the country in a bad direction. My thinking in the last two was, "We're in the information age now! We don't need that!" It's only in the last few years that I've realized how utterly uninformed people still are. Of course, dubious vote count reliability bullshit plagued the previous two elections, whereas that will hopefully not be the case this time.

Maybe Germany's electorate isn't as fucking dumb as ours. *shrug* Either way, the EC serves a purpose.

[Thanas]

Maybe Germany's electorate isn't as fucking dumb as ours. *shrug* Either way, the EC serves a purpose.

Well, for one, the media in Germany isn't a joke.

[Haruko]

I posted about Cindy McCain and her choice of how to get her voice heard over the current election in the previous page. After that article I posted, there was yet another article on comments by Cindy McCain titled "Cindy McCain Goes On The Attack", wherein it's mentioned that when she learned Obama voted against one of the troop funding bills, it sent a "cold shiver down my spine" and suggested that he "change shoes with me for just one day" and "watch our men and women deploying", repeating what CNN called "a regular line of attack from her husband’s campaign."

Now, Michelle Obama, responding to the question of whether she found the now infamous McCain comment, "That one", offensive, chose to get her voice heard over the current election this way:

(CNN) — The wife of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama told CNN's Larry King Wednesday that she is not offended by a much-publicized comment made towards her husband in Tuesday night's debate.

In the presidential match-up at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee, Sen. John McCain criticized Obama for supporting the 2007 Bush-Cheney energy bill.

"It was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate, loaded down with goodies, billions for oil companies, and it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. … You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one,” he said, gesturing towards Obama. “You know who voted against it? Me."

When asked if McCain’s reference to Obama as "that one" was offensive, Michelle Obama simply said "no," adding that this issue has nothing to do with what's affecting average Americans hurting from the economic downturn.

"I think there are two conversations that have been going on throughout this whole election. There's the conversation that's been happening with the pundits … and then there's the conversation that's been happening on the ground," she said.

She said that Americans "right now are scared" and "nervous about the economy."

"They don't care about the back and forth between the candidates … They want real answers about how we're going to fix this economy and get the health care benefits on track so, you know, this is part of politics," she added.

You can watch the full interview tonight on "Larry King Live" beginning at 9 p.m. ET.

Link

[Stormbringer]

People have already covered the electoral college front, in which recent news has favored Obama.

They are national polls.
I think it is still concerning. If THIS is the result of only a few days of this dirt, I don't want to know how bad it will look after three weeks.

One thing to keep in mind with all this is that sudden gains not driven by significant events can easily be reversed. If there really is much of a trend toward McCain, it's people that are easily swayed. There's every possibility that such people may well be swayed back to Obama by other events. It's silly to be sweating the numbers day to day since they will almost certainly change.

Another thing to consider is that McCain's initial salvo of dirt might have had an effect. But even if it did, there's no real reason to think subsequent volleys will significantly escalate that. He's not likely to convince people additional on the tenth repeat, let alone the hundredth. So even if McCain does go negative full time he's not likely to make continuous gains.

[CarsonPalmer]

MSNBC is doing a report right now on the possibility of McCain losing North Carolina. I hope it happens.

[RedImperator]

There's no way these polls should be reflecting the mudslinging. That just started on Saturday and only really picked up steam on Monday. It's more likely they're just Obama sliding down slightly from his peak when all hell was breaking loose last week. We'll see what happens over the next few days with the state polls. I don't think he's going to hold onto his lead in all the swing states, but I do thing he should hold on to a comfortable Electoral College majority.

[CmdrWilkens]

As an addendum to what Red just sid there will always be a ceiling for Obama. There is an old saw that 40% of folks will vote (D), 40% will vote (R) and the only question mark is what hppens to the other 20% of the electorate. +10 translated out to election day (55-45) means that Obama would have captured 3/4 voters that he can reach. Now yes those are really generic numbers that don't have a great deal of polling or any other direct support behind them aside from the long history of elections where even the loser usually garnered 40% of the split vote (R vs D minus 3rd parties). 538 has a really great point about this and I'll paraphrase for simplicty sake but when canvassers are coming across blatantly rascists unreformed rednecks who are willing to sit down and talk with Obama supproters and actually talk about maybe voting for him because of the economy then there aren't that many folks left to bring over to his team.

[Uraniun235]

Yeah, shit, the most anyone ever got was LBJ in 1964 with 61% of the popular vote. Since then the only elections to approach that were Nixon's re-election in 1972 and Reagan's re-election in 1984.

[RedImperator]

The national average for the tracking polls today is 5.6%. Pollster's trend estimate stands at exactly 6%. Both these numbers will translate into huge electoral college margins in any election, including this one: according to Electoral-Vote.com, if the election were held today, Obama would win by 349-174 (with North Carolina exactly tied).

Incidentally, if you're worried about a Bradley effect, you can have Pollster.com only display robo-polls, where people would presumably be less likely to hide racial preferences. The margin for Obama falls only to 4.5%, still plenty for a big win unless the distribution is bizarrely skewed towards the Kerry states. Unfortunately, there are only three automated tracking polls, so the number probably isn't as reliable as it could be.

[Surlethe]

The national average for the tracking polls today is 5.6%. Pollster's trend estimate stands at exactly 6%. Both these numbers will translate into huge electoral college margins in any election, including this one: according to Electoral-Vote.com, if the election were held today, Obama would win by 349-174 (with North Carolina exactly tied).

Incidentally, if you're worried about a Bradley effect, you can have Pollster.com only display robo-polls, where people would presumably be less likely to hide racial preferences. The margin for Obama falls only to 4.5%, still plenty for a big win unless the distribution is bizarrely skewed towards the Kerry states. Unfortunately, there are only three automated tracking polls, so the number probably isn't as reliable as it could be.

How much of the Bradley effect would robo-polls still mask? I could see someone unwilling to admit even to an automated poll that he was not going to vote for Obama because the candidate's black.

[RedImperator]

The national average for the tracking polls today is 5.6%. Pollster's trend estimate stands at exactly 6%. Both these numbers will translate into huge electoral college margins in any election, including this one: according to Electoral-Vote.com, if the election were held today, Obama would win by 349-174 (with North Carolina exactly tied).

Incidentally, if you're worried about a Bradley effect, you can have Pollster.com only display robo-polls, where people would presumably be less likely to hide racial preferences. The margin for Obama falls only to 4.5%, still plenty for a big win unless the distribution is bizarrely skewed towards the Kerry states. Unfortunately, there are only three automated tracking polls, so the number probably isn't as reliable as it could be.

How much of the Bradley effect would robo-polls still mask? I could see someone unwilling to admit even to an automated poll that he was not going to vote for Obama because the candidate's black.

That's impossible to say. I don't think there's ever been a study on it. I did read a study recently that argued, based on historical election data, that the Bradley effect has largely disappeared; the poll bias in favor of black candidates seems to dwindle to nothing in the mid-90s. So we'll see how it goes. Obama didn't significantly under-perform in the primaries (even in New Hampshire, the polls correctly predicted his numbers; it's just that nobody counted on the majority of the undecideds breaking for Clinton on the last day).

[Tribun]

Ha, read this, it seems McCain will get another problem very soon.
Troopergate continues

Oct. 9 (Bloomberg) -- The Alaska Supreme Court refused to halt an investigation into Governor Sarah Palin's firing of the state police chief, paving the way for tomorrow's planned release of the findings.

The Supreme Court dismissed the case brought by five state Republican lawmakers who sought to stop the probe, claiming it was unconstitutional and tainted by partisan politics. The investigation, known as Troopergate, took on national importance after Republican presidential nominee John McCain picked Palin as his running mate.

The Alaska Legislative Council, a bipartisan committee of 14 lawmakers that conducts business when the Legislature isn't in session, voted unanimously on July 31 to investigate Palin's July 11 firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The commissioner said he was dismissed for refusing to fire state trooper Mike Wooten, who was involved in a divorce and custody battle with Palin's sister.

The governor has said she didn't pressure Monegan and dismissed him because of budgetary disagreements.

The state Supreme Court said it will issue an opinion later explaining its dismissal of the Republican lawmakers' challenge to the investigation.

The Legislative Council's independent investigator is scheduled to deliver his findings tomorrow morning in Anchorage. The council includes 10 Republicans and four Democrats.

Todd Palin

Todd Palin, the governor's husband, gave a sworn written statement yesterday to the investigator. He claimed Wooten was a danger to the Palin family and public, saying the police officer threatened to kill the governor's father.

Todd Palin acknowledged in his statement that he spoke to numerous state officials, including Monegan, about wanting Wooten fired. He said he didn't pressure Monegan to fire the trooper.

In a phone interview today, Monegan said Todd Palin's statements confirm that he pressured him to terminate Wooten.

"Todd says that he's been campaigning on that for years,'' Monegan said. "I think he had a kind of obsession with it.''

Palin and the McCain campaign say the legislative probe is politically biased. She is cooperating with a separate investigation conducted by the state Personnel Board and has agreed to be questioned within two weeks as part of that inquiry. No deadline has been announced in that investigation.

To contact the reporter on this story: Tony Hopfinger in Anchorage at thopfinger@gci.net.

[Tribun]

That's revealing...

Earlier today, Obama remarked on recent outbursts of "Traitor!" "Terrorist!" and "Kill him!" at McCain campaign events. "It's easy to rile up a crowd," Obama said. "Nothing's easier than riling up a crowd by stoking anger and division. But that's not what we need right now in the United States."

In response, McCain senior adviser Nicolle Wallace released this statement, NBC's Kelly O'Donnell reports. "Barack Obama's assault on our supporters is insulting and unsurprising. These are the same people obama called 'bitter' and attacked for 'clinging to guns' and faith. He fails to understand that people are angry at corrupt practices in Washington and Wall Street and he fails to understand that America's working families are not 'clinging' to anything other than the sincere hope that Washington will be reformed from top to bottom."

"Attacking our supporters is a new low for the campaign that's run more millions of dollars of negative ads than any other in history."

*** UPDATE *** McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers adds in another statement: “Barack Obama’s attacks on Americans who support John McCain reveal far more about him than they do about John McCain. It is clear that Barack Obama just doesn’t understand regular people and the issues they care about. He dismisses hardworking middle class Americans as clinging to guns and religion, while at the same time attacking average Americans at McCain rallies who are angry at Washington, Wall Street and the status quo."

[CaptJodan]

That's revealing...

Earlier today, Obama remarked on recent outbursts of "Traitor!" "Terrorist!" and "Kill him!" at McCain campaign events. "It's easy to rile up a crowd," Obama said. "Nothing's easier than riling up a crowd by stoking anger and division. But that's not what we need right now in the United States."

In response, McCain senior adviser Nicolle Wallace released this statement, NBC's Kelly O'Donnell reports. "Barack Obama's assault on our supporters is insulting and unsurprising. These are the same people obama called 'bitter' and attacked for 'clinging to guns' and faith. He fails to understand that people are angry at corrupt practices in Washington and Wall Street and he fails to understand that America's working families are not 'clinging' to anything other than the sincere hope that Washington will be reformed from top to bottom."

"Attacking our supporters is a new low for the campaign that's run more millions of dollars of negative ads than any other in history."

*** UPDATE *** McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers adds in another statement: “Barack Obama’s attacks on Americans who support John McCain reveal far more about him than they do about John McCain. It is clear that Barack Obama just doesn’t understand regular people and the issues they care about. He dismisses hardworking middle class Americans as clinging to guns and religion, while at the same time attacking average Americans at McCain rallies who are angry at Washington, Wall Street and the status quo."

Source?

That's sick, really. Really, really sick. I wish Olberman was doing a special comment on this tonight. They are truly shameless now.

[General Zod]

Someone just hit a new low today. Some twat in New York printed out absentee ballots that say "Barack Osama" under the list of candidates.