Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

NatJournal: CO, FL, NC, OH, VA (10/23-27)

Topics: PHome

AllState / National Journal
10/23-27/08
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews
(source)

Colorado 409 RV, 4.9%
Obama 48, McCain 44

Florida 408 RV, 4.9%
Obama 45, McCain 44

North Carolina 402 RV, 4.9%
Obama 47, McCain 43

Ohio 404 RV, 4.9%
Obama 48, McCain 41

Virginia 404 RV, 4.9%
Obama 48, McCain 44

 

Comments
Obama008:

4.9% error jesus who the hell does these polls.

____________________

boolean_radley:

Obama is on McCain like a fat kid on cake.

____________________

Pro-America_Anti-America:

Higher in Ohio than in Virginia? Samples obviously too small.

____________________

pbcrunch:

FL is going to be close and will come down to GOTV. NC looks a bit too good for Obama and the CO/VA numbers look a bit low from what we've seen from other pollsters...

____________________

hou04:

FLORIDA should read 48/44 !!

____________________

DecaturMark:

Sample is small but these are 5 states that McCain MUST win and yet, he is behind in each one. Not a good day for the GOP.

____________________

C.S.Strowbridge:

"Higher in Ohio than in Virginia? Samples obviously too small."

That was exactly my thought.

Also, Obama just needs one of those states to win it all, and he's leading in all five, so this is clearly good news.

____________________

ricbrig:

wow this is 'Spreading the variance'! Very large errors

____________________

PortlandRocks:

Gallop Obama up 1 or more in all models!

____________________

jamesia:

Terrible polls from the National Journal... teeny sample size and 4.9% error???? But hey, if a partisan pollster gives leads like this for Obama, the GOP is in deep doo doo.

____________________

Obama008:

This poll is good for Obama, but its just not a good poll overall.

Who does a poll with almost 5% error. Whats the point of the poll, with 5% error.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Gallup traditional goes from +3 to +5 Obama. Expanded stays the same.

lol, SURGE!!!!

____________________

ricbrig:

Good numbers from Gallup, what happened in LVs on sunday?

____________________

Trosen:

Gallup.. O+1 M-1 in the trolls' precious "traditional" LV model..

tick...tick...tick...

____________________

zotz:

We don't need more polls. We need higher accuracy. They should have just done two states and doubled the sample.

____________________

deeznutsrepubs:

yeah, wtf 5%? might as well through darts....

don't get complacent dems - make the calls, walk the routes. we have to finish strong.


____________________

mysticlaker:

fox news national

O47-44M

must be using tipp to do their polls...

www.foxnews.com

____________________

Dave Barnes:

Higher in Ohio than in Colorado? Samples obviously too small.

As someone who lives in Colorado, I can assure you that Barack Hussein Obama will take this big square state by a lot.

Our US Senate race is going to be a blow-out for "Marxist, Boulder LIberal" Mark Udall.

____________________

NextAmericanChapter:

DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE....

In the last few days I've been guilty, like many others on this site, of calling for an Obama landslide. I volunteer for the Obama campaign and unfortunately I think that we may be at risk of being victims of our own success.

Rather than sitting back and savoring a victory that is not yet set in stone, please put your energy towards reaching out to potential Obama voters. Make sure that you can get five people to vote Obama, and make sure those five can get a further five…and so on. There are still some genuine undecideds out there and you could help tilt them Obama’s way by advocating for the Obama/Biden policy proposals. The Dems have better ideas on the economy, taxes, healthcare and energy. When in doubt, remind undecideds that Palin is a joke….that always seems to sober them up.

While it’s fun to joust with doucebags like Boomshak and SouthernAngler, you’ll never change their deranged minds. However, some re-directed energy could help get some marginal voters for Obama. You don’t need to volunteer officially; you could do your own canvassing with family, friends and co-workers. Obama is fighting hard, and he is fighting against some really entrenched negative attitudes out there. He, and our favorite senator from Delaware , will need ALL the help that they can get during these last few days.

I hate to pour cold water on the upbeat mood that predominates this site, but folks, this battle is far from won. John Kerry was ahead in the electoral college projection on November 1, 2004. The fat lady has not yet sung!!!
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/29/164349/89/799/646031


____________________

decided:

Gallup:

O +5 (traditional LV) (was +3)
exp. LV: +7 not changed
RV +8 (was +9)

seems like the traditional model realizes that some "unlikely" voters have actually voted already...

____________________

pbcrunch:

Gallup:

RV: 50-42 (O -1)
LVE: 51-44 (nc)
LVT: 50-45 (O +1, M -1)

Clearly, a McCain Surge(tm).

____________________

Chester:

it looks like Virginia may have tightened slightly; 2 polls reading an O +4%, the good news is that Gallup and Ras confirm what I have been hoping for a couple of days:
that the Mac "bounce" is was statistical noise...

(do you think Joe's advisors are telling him to distance himself from McCain just like Palin??)

____________________

Zeidan:

Not sure what to think of this one. The margin of error is way too high for such a small sample size, so I'm not sure how trustworthy these are.

____________________

PortlandRocks:

Kerry was ahead on WHO's electoral projection NextAmericanChapter?

____________________

chaircat:

@ hou04:

Where do you see FLA 48/44? I see 45/44 in the linked release.

____________________

AdamSC:

I predicted it yesterday, and I'm right. Woot. Bump in the Nationals for Obama.

____________________

RussTC3:

Just like the NBC/Mason-Dixon polls, NationalJournal is not pushing the leaners hard enough.

There is no way that 10% of the voters in these states are still undecided.

____________________

mysticlaker:

LV breakdown in foxnews

41-d/39-r/16i

Liars....

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/103008_poll.pdf

____________________

ricbrig:

"some" will argue that the LV2 sample was made up of 1800 calls instead of the traditional 2000+. Clear sign of a Communist plot to hide the McCain Surge!

____________________

masselo:

let me go put in my ballots now

____________________

drdr:

Small samples, but Obama is ahead in every state poll listed here.

Also, McCain "surge" continues in today's Gallup poll. Obama +8 among RV. No candidate has ever overcome an 8-point RV deficit in the Gallup poll in the last week of the campaign (Oct 1980 poll was taken prior to presidential debate).

http://www.gallup.com/poll/111658/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Lead-Among-Likely-Voters-Points.aspx

____________________

Pro-America_Anti-America:

@mysticlaker

What could you possible expect from them? It only makes the one poll they had with O+9 a while ago even more amazing with their party weighting nonsense.

____________________

PortlandRocks:

Fox Dem advantage +2 with 900 sample and he's still up by 3%, an electoral lock. Ok:)

____________________

truebljb1:

If Obama is not averaging 50% in the states or nationally on election day it is going to be a barn burner. I think as McCain closes the gap (overall) people will feel it is OK to vote for him. Clearly if they have not decided to vote for Obama by now, I don't, and a lot of profesionals don't believe he will get those votes on election day.

____________________

ctj:

The fox poll only has a 2% spread between dems and repubs among likely voters, in addition Obama still leads by 8 on the economy and by 6 on taxes. I will take that as great news for Obama, but of course boomshack will now tout this as the new surge- LOL!

____________________

LOL, these polls today are killing me. Someone desperately wants this to be a horse race!

____________________

PortlandRocks:

From Nate @ 538 for truebljb1. (Still waiting on the state polls to show movement to McCain.) hehee

With no fewer than 45 polls released since our last update, covering essentially all of the major swing states, we have a pretty good idea of where this race stands -- a far better idea than you'll get by trying to discern the meaning of John Zogby's divining rod or paying any attention to what you see on the front page of Drudge Report. What we can say, when we put all this information together, is that there are two things that John McCain is NOT doing.

Number one, John McCain is NOT closing Obama's margin as quickly as he needs to (if indeed he is closing it at all). This appears to be a 6- or 7- point race right now ... that's where we have it, that's where RCP has it, that where Pollster.com has it. In order to beat Barack Obama, John McCain will need to gain at least one point per day between now and the election. Our model does think that McCain has pared about a point off Obama's margin -- but it has taken him a week to do so. Now, McCain needs to gain six more points in six more days. And he needs to do so with no real ground game, no real advertsing budget, and no one particularly strong message. Not easy.

Number two, John McCain is NOT gaining ground in the states that matter the most. The top tier of states in this election are Virginia, Colorado and Pennsylvania. There is lots of lots of polling in these states, particularly in Virgnia and Pennsylvania, and it's all coming up in roughly the same range, showing Obama leads in the high single digits (in VA and CO) or the low double digits (in PA). The second tier of states is probably Ohio, Florida and Nevada. McCain seems to be getting a bit stronger in Florida; Obama seems to be getting a bit stronger in Ohio and Nevada. McCain does seem to have halted Obama's progress in some of the third-tier states, particularly Missouri and North Carolina. On the other hand, some other third-tier states, like New Mexico and particularly New Hampshire (where Obama is getting some insane numbers lately), now appear to be off the table.

My feeling is that John McCain still needs some sort of external contingency to win the presidency. Even if some of the more conservative turnout models are correct AND even if he were to win large majorities of the undecided vote, he is probably a little bit too far behind to catch up. Rather, McCain will need to find some way to eat into some fraction of Obama's decided vote, and because most of Obama's support is quite hard (e.g. enthusiastic), that will not be easy to do.

____________________

Thatcher:

@truebljb1:

I'm of the opposite camp - they've been looking for a reason to vote McCain and he hasn't been giving it to them. Also, history shows that most undecideds break for the challenger/challenging party - not the incumbent/incumbent party.

____________________

paradski:

These polls even better than the may appear.

listed with previous poll numbers...

VA O-48(41) M-44(48) +11
OH O-48(41) M-41(42) +8
CO O-48(45) M-44(44) +3

____________________

Trosen:

mysticlaker:
"LV breakdown in foxnews

41-d/39-r/16i"

haha.. fat freakin' chance Fox.. The registered D atvantage is about 8%. Let's even knock that down to actual turnout only being about 4 or 5%. you do the math.

____________________

AB:

You can trust a poll, or you can trust what voters are actually doing, NC sboe is very accurately tracking which voters are going to the polls in NC. Early voting as of 10:00 pm last night:
1,847,564 voters have already gone to the polls. That is 29.68% of registered voters. SBOE website is lagging a bit; early voting continues through Saturday and by the time the sboe finishes crunching their numbers it is possible that 50% of NC voters will have voted early. Turnout will be very high, but not 100%, it is quite likely that more than half the votes cast will be in early voting.
With that in mind:
984,085 Dems (53.26%) (Dems are 45.69% of registered voters)
538,825 Repubs (29.16%) (Rs are 32.00% of registered voters)
That's a difference already of 445,260 voters.
McCain has a big uphill battle in NC.
Obama appears to believe he can win NC, and they are spending a lot of time here, as is McCain.

____________________

mysticlaker:

from fox liars:

43d-37r last week
41d-34r oct 9th

____________________

Chester:

The RCP national average is fascinating... McCain CAN'T BREAK 44%! Everytime he comes close to it Obama shakes him off... the only time he broke it was with his big convention bounce.. except for that, he hasn't broken it since May...
when was the last time a candidate won with 44% of the vote, no matter what happens to Obama.. even if he breaks through and shoots up to 46%, I still don't see any chance.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

____________________

sunnymi:

@Trosen & @mysticlaker:

What is even more funnier about the Fox poll is that the Republicans are more enthusiastic than the Dems about the election....I have not seen this even in the most hardcore Republican poll.

____________________

lhtk:

Does anyone know: Do pollsters release presidential polls right into Election Day morning or do they stop before then?

____________________

Trosen:

mysticlaker:
"from fox liars:

43d-37r last week
41d-34r oct 9th"

Yup.. clearly someone in the McCain camp "talked" to Fox.. funny stuff.

____________________

Shannon,Dallas,Texas:

Sweep!!!!

____________________

PortlandRocks:

Who cares. It will be a news story for Fox. Yay!

____________________

BridgeportJoe:

Last week's Fox breakdown was 43D-37R. A demo change +4 in the Republicans' favor might go a long way in explaining a topline change +6 in the same direction.

I also note that Obama's support actually inches up slightly among independents -- it's just that McCain's jumps up even more. This is consistent with the theory that any tightening (and I still think we've seen a point or two in McCain's favor) comes from Republican-leaning independents finally deciding what they were going to all along.

____________________

PortlandRocks:

This Fox news story will last about 4 hours. Around 3PM we will have the new CBS/NYT poll showing O + 11. Nice of fox to play with the weighting. God this is hilarious. Did everyone notice all of the +3 leads for O have a small Dem weighting? Consider this 3% popular vote is an electoral LOCK in history. No president has won 3% of the pop vote and NOT won the election. Sorry!:)

____________________

NextAmericanChapter:

@ PortlandRocks:
"Kerry was ahead on WHO's electoral projection NextAmericanChapter?"

Kerry was ahead on electoral-vote
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/Pres/Maps/Nov01.html

All I'm saying is that all this energy we're spending arguing with McCain trolls could be better used to grab marginal votes for Obama.

____________________

boomshak:

Can someone explain to me the point of even doing a poll with a 5% MOE?

____________________

Angus Mc:

Actually if you crank the Fox poll down to decimals, the breakdown is:
41.0 D
39.4 R

So it's only a +1.6 R poll.

____________________

sunnymi:


Greenberg Quinlan Rosner - South Dakota

McCain - 45
Obama - 40
Nader - 4
Other - 1

Dem - 43; Rep - 48; Ind - 9

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/JohnsonOct29TrackPoll.doc

____________________

RussTC3:

Let's not forget what Fox News/Opinion Dynamics pegged the race at back in 2004:

10/30-31
Kerry 48
Bush 46

They were one of two polls showing Kerry ahead in the last week. ARG was the other (Kerry +1).

That pretty much tells you all you need to know about Fox News polls. LOL

____________________

Pro-America_Anti-America:

You gotta hand it to Fox. Rasmussen wont do their dirty work for them so they go ahead and put up their credibility (yet again) just to make Reps look better.

____________________

DTM:

@truebljb1

Some of our hosts here, Mark Blumenthal and Charles Franklin, have been looking closely at the undecided population and carefully trying to project their likely vote based on every relevant factor they can identify. It turns out they are projecting close to a 50-50 split.

____________________

Pro-America_Anti-America:

Just saw on Fox. They are talking about the new Gallup and Ras numbers and are saying they tightened? I guess yesterday didn't exist then.

____________________

thoughtful:

RussTC3

There is clearly quite a lot of churn out there.

A lot of enthusiasm for Obama BUT not a lot for McCain amongst Repubs, and Independents still not 100% buying Obama's ticket.

Selzer's Indiana poll, for example, said 1 in 5 could still change their mind including the 6% undecided.

Still got some ways to go to close the deal

____________________

Trosen:

Here's some accurate party ID #s..


http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx

____________________

ctj:

New Ras poll on NC Senate race

Hagan up by 6!!!

Where is the boom surge? C'mon after all we know that Hagan is "godless".

____________________

Hope Reborn:

Sample size low, dates long and old... better polling out there than the Allstate polls

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

I have a serious question for any/all the polling experts here.

Has a pollster runs two (or more)independent polls in the same state in parallel during the current elections? Instead of a single 400 person poll, run a design experiment with, say, 1000 respondents in two or three simultaneous polls. Theoretically, the results of such polls should all fall within the MOE, but do they?

I think this would be of particular value in the polls that do not pre-weigh their D/R/I ratios and let them fall where they may.

The results from various pollsters run the gamut, esp. in states like VA and PA of late. It would be interesting for me to see that sort of a blind study by the same pollster to confirm their theoretical MOE in the field that way.


____________________

DTM:

@boomshak

For those of us who believe in scientifically aggregating polls (as opposed to cherry-picking), even polls with small sample sizes just represent more data for the hopper.

____________________

katocat:

400 sampling size?

Please.

____________________

carl29:

Did you see Fox little dirty secret?

POLITICAL IDENTIFICATION: When you think about politics, do you think of
yourself as a Democrat or a Republican?
Democrat Republican (Independent) (Other) (Refused/Don’t know)

THIS POLL: 2+ Dem. gap

28-29 Oct 08 LV Dem 41% Rep 39% Ind 16%
28-29 Oct 08 RV Dem 40% Rep 39% Ind 17%

PREVIOUS POLL: 6+ Dem. gap

20-21 Oct 08 LV Dem. 43% Rep. 37% Ind. 16%
20-21 Oct 08 RV Dem. 43% Rep. 36% Ind. 16%

See? If "uncle" Ras' disappoints, Fox own poll comes out to the rescue :-)

____________________

McPalinocchioIsAJoke:

The fox poll showing a 4 points shift of party affiliation is done on purpose to give a talking point to Sean Insanity
4 more days of polling before facing the real poll that counts
Get out to vote guys don't get overconfident

____________________

adocarbog:

The FOX Party ID Problem

Last FOX poll had Dem advantage at 6.2% and that was reasonable and in agreement with Rasmussen.
The new for poll has party ID advantage by dems at only 1.7% clearly impossible.

The party ID support is largely unchanged, barack doing a little better with Dems than last time and McCain doing a little better with Reps. Both increasing slightly with Independents as they go down from 14% undecided to only 8% undecided.

If you take today's candidate performance among parties and apply to last poll party ID you get:

Obama 50.2%
McCain 43.1%

thus both picking up some undecided voters with the slightest advantage to McCain.

Obama lead would be higher if we used current and final Rasmussen party ID figures of 7.2% advantage Obama.

____________________

purplevoter:

I actually agree with Boom!!!!
Useless poll. MOE to wide this late in the game.
Sample size is too small and the model is outdated.

____________________

DTM:

@MNLatteLiberal

You could simulate that just by randomly dividing the respondents to the same poll into smaller subsets and seeing if over many such trials they were falling out along the expected distribution. But I don't really see the point: if you are truly selecting these subsets randomly, then they should fall out along the expected distribution. In other words, that is less a theory than an axiom, because if they didn't fall out along the expected distribution you must not have been selecting them randomly.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR