US election minus 40 days

Gallup‘s three-day tracking poll shows the situation in the US presidential race throughout September as follows:

Barack Obama held a slight lead as the month began, which seems to be the long-term status quo. Then came the Republican convention and Sarah Palin bounce, which briefly put McCain well ahead. This moderated into a slight lead when the dust settled, before being wiped out with the onset of the banking crisis. However, Obama’s six-point lead at the start of this week has narrowed, despite polls giving him a clear lead on economic issues – surely a great boon in the current environment. Much is being said of an ABC-Washington Post poll which has Obama nine points in front, but this appears to be out on a limb. In any case, Gallup’s historical analysis reminds us that a lot can happen in the next six weeks, one way or the other.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,141 comments on “US election minus 40 days”

Comments Page 20 of 23
1 … 19 20 21 … 23

  1. Yes, Kerry led in the exit polls in 2004. And famously so.

    All that reveals is that exit polls are trash. (Or at least these ones were.)

    By contrast, the phone polling in 2004 was pretty well spot on.

  3. If Clinton was the candidate the question wouldn’t arise, she’d by 10% ahead.

    The only reason I am pointing out that Obama can still lose is to counter the rampant hubris and over-confidence of the Obama supporters here. I might point out that in a system with voluntary voting, over-confidence is VERY dangerous, because it can affect turnout among your core supporters. If the Obama camp in the US is as cocky as Obama supporters here are becoming, that just adds to the chances he will lose.

  4. I have always been wary of exit polls – their MOE is so high and they end up being wrong quite often.

    The 2004 US Presidential Election was an example – one exit poll predicted Kerry to win OH by 2.5 points, in the end he lost by 2.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm

    For an Australian example, think about last year. The Sky News exit poll had Eden-Monaro going 58/42 to Labor – instead it went 53/47. It also had the NSW Libs picking up 5 seats from Labor last year – they only won 2 (Tweed and Port Stephens).

    And, of course, there is the real killer of bad exit polls – the 2000 US election in Florida. Exit polls were responsible for the state being awarded to Gore 70 minutes before the polls closed in the Florida panhandle.

    So the fact that the UK exit polls got it wrong in 1992 doesn’t surprise me – I’m often more surprised when the exit polls get it right…

  6. One of at least 5 obvious Pallin attack points against Biden seeing Palin wants out of Iraq ASAP But Bidens policy ‘stay th course in Iraq to ‘win’ ..that could be 20 years fighting..identical to Bush policy

    This is opposite to Obama’s withdrawal policy which his supporters wrongly think is 100% withdral but is not 9bases will remain under Us , “non combat” troops will remain , who will man those US bases , and he reserves right to ‘re-enter iraq with tropps should Al Quaeda return significantly)

    notwithstanding Obama’s 80% withdrawal , it is 100% opposite to Bidens…Biden’s being identical to bush’s

    2 fronts for Palin..Firstly , biden a war monger as VP could be 20 years in Iraq fighting vs MCain current policy out by 2013 and Secondly attack Obama on lack of convictions , how can he argue to withdraw from Iraq BUT apppoint a war monger 20 years fighting VP in Biden

    ps its apoint I’ve raised here before to ususally stunning silence from Obama suporters

  9. Ron,

    If Palin did that, she would be the laughing-stock of the country.

    Imagine: McCain-Palin saying that the Obama-Biden ticket were warmongers.

    It would contradict everything that the GOP have been saying about Obama for a year and it would be portrayed as ridiculous by the media. It would have no cut-through and it would just go to damage the already-tarnished credibility of Palin in regards to national security…

  12. Ron, it’s true that Biden was much more hawkish on Iraq than Obama, but when you become someone’s VP pick, you have to give up your policy positions to those of the presidential candidate. Biden will repeat Obama’s policy word for word if he has any sense. Palin will have an easier job here, because as you note Obama’s position is quite complex, whereas McCain’s is very simple: win the war.

  15. [Palin will have an easier job here, because as you note Obama’s position is quite complex, whereas McCain’s is very simple: win the war.]

    What does “win the war” actually mean? Is it sort of like “mission accomplished”?

  18. Evan, we’ve been over this several times. What counts is the ECV, and Obama’s lead there is very slender. When I see Obama leading in FL, NC, OH, MO etc, I will be the first to agree he is heading for victory.

  20. Imagine how boring this thread would be with only you lot all agreeing with each other about how wonderful Obama is. As Dame Nellie Melba said: “What a dull party this would have been if I hadn’t come.”

  21. [I said it’s an easy policy to enunciate, not to effect.]

    Maybe for McCain, but not for Palin. If it was easy to enunciate, then she would’ve been able to do it during the ABC interview, and she would’ve avoided endorsing Obama’s policy of incursions into Pakistan.

    The problem is Palin muddies the water and dilutes the message, because she doesn’t actually know what McCain’s foreign policies are.

  22. [LOL! 😀 The Republicans are promoting the fact Obama chose a foreign policy hawk for V.P.!]

    I thought that was the whole reason why Obama chose Biden as his VP…

  24. William

    Do you have a reference to the first time the term “reverse Bradley” was used on PB? According to Wiki, it was first used after Super Tuesday. I’m sure we were using it long before then. We should have taken out a Trademark on it if we were first. or at least correct Wiki.

  25. [I thought that was the whole reason why Obama chose Biden as his VP…]

    Biden probably has the best plan for Iraq out of all the candidates. He thinks it should be split into different states for the Kurds, Sunni’s and Shia. Then they should have both state and a federal parliament.

    That way the different groups all get their own land to administer, but the entire country would be led by a unifying federal government that would ensure representation by the different groups.

    I think that sounds like a better plan than the political parties that are really just different religious sects pretending to participate in a representative democracy.

  26. http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080814/military_donations.html

    [U.S. soldiers have donated more presidential campaign money to Democrat Barack Obama than to Republican John McCain, a reversal of previous campaigns in which military donations tended to favor GOP White House hopefuls, a nonpartisan group reported Thursday.

    Troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama’s presidential campaign as they have to McCain’s, the Center for Responsive Politics said.]

  27. Diogenes @ 974,

    Surely at least one commentator here used it in the aftermath of the South Carolina primary in January.

    If there was ever a case of a “reverse Bradley”, it has to be the SC primary…

  32. [“Theorem: The amount of time conservatives spend talking about the Bradley Effect is inversely proportional to the fortunes of their candidate.” — Nate Silver]

    hahaha

  33. [Troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama’s presidential campaign as they have to McCain’s, the Center for Responsive Politics said]

    SIX times!? I don’t believe it.

  34. Well PB records will show i objected to bidens VP selection on th day Obama appointed him because hwas hawish on Iraq and because it showed Obama’s lack on convictions this time on Iraq ..now if GOP ar running adds then onl now highlighting both these contradictions it shows they ar slow tactically

    Fact IS Biden is hawkish on iraq , …now Debates ar about perception and concise attack blows that may change votes Nothing wrong with Palin giving a concise contrat McCain out by 2013 and biden out by what 20 years …followed by who do we believe Biden’s words then , bidens words now tp pretend he agreees with Obama , who do we believe , and why Mr biden did Mr obama pick such a hawkish pro iraq VP , and which quotes Mer Biden do you wish

  37. William

    Bummer. Looking back at those threads I can see why you ditched us. Bloody hell! Did we carry on like that. It’s like Krapps Last Tape.

  38. Ron,

    You do realise there is nothing necessarily wrong with a Presidential candidate’s views contrasting with those of their VP’s.

    For example, I would think that McCain’s views on pork-barrelling and congressional earmarks would contrast rather strongly with those of the Queen of Pork (Palin)…

  40. [For example, I would think that McCain’s views on pork-barrelling and congressional earmarks would contrast rather strongly with those of the Queen of Pork (Palin)…]

    Yeah, and McCain believes in the Theory of Evolution, which means he doesn’t think humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. 😀

  41. Interesting – Rasmussen polls in PA, FL, Co, OH and VA coming out later tonight.

    Is it really lame to say that I can’t wait for them to come out? 🙂

  44. [Interesting – Rasmussen polls in PA, FL, Co, OH and VA coming out later tonight.

    Is it really lame to say that I can’t wait for them to come out? :-)]

    I was thinking the same thing…

    I think 6 PM U.S. Eastern is 8 AM Sydney time.

  45. Swing Lowe

    “You do realise there is nothing necessarily wrong with a Presidential candidate’s views contrasting with those of their VP’s.”

    thats true however depends on issue ,Iraq is th MOST fiundamental FA policy of US election , rates no 2 on polls re importance after economy

    Now “nuance” wise voters think Obama is out of Iraq man ..whereas in fact Biden is very hawkish On such fundamental issue tactically it was a poor choice , polcy wise think its a poor choice and convictions wise its a reel poor look Believe he should hav chosen ANOTHER ‘out of Iraq’ Democrat , hell that would be most Democrats

    Am waiting for someone to say Obama st.ffed something up This is an examaple…he st.ffed up big time on 3 grounds…surely withdral from Iraq ASAP IS th core of th hart of all ‘left’ posters here , but never had support here on it

  46. [Am waiting for someone to say Obama st.ffed something up This is an examaple…he st.ffed up big time on 3 grounds…surely withdral from Iraq ASAP IS th core of th hart of all ‘left’ posters here , but never had support here on it]

    You’re seeing everything too simplistically as usual.

    McCain is the “Win the war” guy, but does that mean the U.S. is going to stay there indefinitely? Of course not, they will get out EVENTUALLY. But McCain is pretending that he wants to stay there for 100 years if necessary.

    On the other hand, Obama is the “we need to end this war ASAP” guy. But the U.S. still has 160,000 troops there. Even if they started getting them out immediately, it would take 12 – 18 months. So Obama is appealing to the people that think Iraq is a dumb idea. But his real position – like McCain’s – is actually more complicated.

    This is called POLITICS Ron, you play up the differences with your opponent, while downplaying the similarities. That’s how you win an election. BOTH candidates are doing this.

    You are taking their statements at face value, and ignoring that they are actually closer to each other than what they SAY.

  47. Ron,

    Most VP picks are designed in order to address a “perceived” weakness on the Presidential nominee’s part.

    Cheney was to provide national security/foreign affairs experience for the inexperienced Bush, Liebermann was to provide a moral compass to a Clinton-tainted Gore, Edwards was to provide populist street-cred to the WASP-ish Kerry and Palin was to provide social conservatism to the maverick McCain.

    This strategy has gone as far back as Kennedy picking Johnson to provide experience and Reagan picking Bush I to provide economic credentials.

    So Obama picking Biden to address a foreign policy weakness, particularly over Iraq, is not particularly shocking nor is it a poor choice tactically. All of the above issues that VP picks have addressed have been major campaign issues. What Obama did was absolutely nothing out of the ordinary (and hence the reason why he got no bounce out of the Biden VP pick)…

    P.S. As for sticking to his convictions – that’s only what losers in politics do. Sticking to one’s convictions is how McGovern lost in 1972, how Mondale lost in 1984, how Dukakis lost in 1988 and how Michael Foot lost in 1983 (in the UK). There’s no point being in politics if you’re not trying to win – otherwise, how else are you supposed to shape the agenda of a nation???

  48. Swing Lowe

    I’ve read your 4 paragrapghs and do agree with first 3 , and actualy first line of 4th para Yes Obama picked Biden because of Obama’s FA weakness & to counter MCains FA strong point

    I’m suggesting he picked th wrong man…not th wrong type of VP having FA experience I’m suggesting an out of Iraq man to maintain credibility & convictions needed to pick an FA experienced VP who was FOR Iraq withdrawal ASAP ..not a FA experienced VP who is essentially a clone of Bush to stay th course to win

    That I believe is poor policy , poor convictions and tactically capable of being easily exploited (subject to GOP nous) Obama had a field of out of Iraq Democrats to choose from

  50. ShowsOn

    I am not th first poster here you hav misrepresented nor th first you’ve taken a posters comments out of context to assist your arguments

    Swing Lowe and I were debating th merits of th hawkish Biden’s appointment as VP by Obama vs Obama’s stance in our consecutive posts #984 , #988 , #995 , #997 , #998

    We were NOT debating th merits of Obama’s Iraq policy itself at all and its intricacies vs McCain’s policys itself at all and its intricacies BUT you jumped in in with #996 in between pur posts pretending we were so debating when we were not , so you could push your Agenda of Obama vs McCain’s Iraq policys ….or as red herring to divert discussion of th hawkish Biden appointment that me & Swing Lowe were having

    Now whilst there were numerous errors in your post on Obama & MCain’s Iraq policys and there nuances politcaly & policy wise I can post them at later date

    This post firstly , is simply to highlight your red herring And secondly to alert posters that there ar reel issues in hawkish Biden’s VP appointment & reasons that Swing Lowe & I were discussing & may wish to read 984 , #988 , #995 , #997 , #998 to get full coverage of our differing viewpoints

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 20 of 23
1 … 19 20 21 … 23