American Research Group
Obama 47, Clinton 47... McCain 61, Huckabee 26, Paul 9
Clinton 51, Obama 44... McCain 59, Huckabee 26, Paul 12
Quick question for you pollsters...
How do you account for the cell phone only population (young voters)
Posted on March 1, 2008 9:16 PM
Arg is such poor pollsters, Look at their poll for wisconsin they just fliped the numbers on the last day, that was the sadest thing i have ever seen. ARg is a Joke
Posted on March 1, 2008 9:38 PM
Arg has Obama up 7 yesterday and it's tied today? Come on already. Do those guys want to be taken seriously by anyone?
Posted on March 1, 2008 9:47 PM
It appears, across several polls, as if support is trending toward Clinton, although both Ohio and Texas remain too close to call. If so, is this a function of the increased scrutiny on the media coverage, the television advertising, her debate performance, or something else?
Posted on March 1, 2008 9:49 PM
Granted I'm only in my mid 40's but I've been watching pollsters and political races since the 80's. No pollsters are biased, they all try to get it right, we keep knocking this poll or that poll if it doesn't favor our candidate. From my experience Fox Opinion Dynamics and Zogby are the two best out there...are they wrong from time to time, Yes!
In theory, any poll with a spread of + or - 8 is within the margin of error...and that's only assuming the sample was truly representative of the population. I'm a republican who voted for McCain already, but I do prefer Obama over Hillary. The races in TX and OH are close and that's what we should take from the polls. Again, Hillary is in big trouble if she cannot pickup a significant # of delegates over Obama on Tuesday evening.
Posted on March 1, 2008 9:53 PM
Another propaganda poll done by the Clinton's rogue polling agency.
Why is this crap even posted? We all know Obama will be 15/15 by Wednesday morning. Why pretend otherwise? We are the ones we've been waiting for, and I will admit to being drunk with victory for the first real liberal to ever win the Democratic nomination. We will probably have the White House in hand by July when McCain is down 20 points or more. McCain is a joke, rivaled only by Billary.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:01 PM
Sometimes, I wonder if ARG gets their poll data out of a random number generator, especially this year. They had Obama leading South Carolina by three just before that primary, and actually had Clinton leading in Wisconsin the weekend before she lost that state by 17 points.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:06 PM
what is the matter Obama Bots, are you feeling "Buyers Remorse".
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:08 PM
Bill Ohio - Mark had an extended post on this ealier, based on two separate studies by Pew and Gallup. Bottom line is that it doesn't seem as if cell phone users differ significantly from landline users in terms of political views.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:12 PM
Another worthless poll that fails to show what we know is coming.
Write this stuff down fools:
VT: Obama +38
RI: Obama +7
OH: Obama +6
TX: Obama +11
It's OVER. Stop making it seem like its not. Hillary Rotten Clinton = Huckabee with a worse sense of fashion and a bigger a$$
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:20 PM
The Magic 8 ball is pulling more numbers out of it's butt. ARG should just shutdown as an polling operation. This is polling amateur hour at its best.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:27 PM
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:31 PM
Hillary isn't qualified to be president. On what grounds is she qualified to be president. I have no idea!
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:32 PM
Looking at the Texas polls that surveyed more than once in the last 5 days, I find the following:
ARG Clinton +3 Obama -1
Insider Advantage Clinton +1 Obama -4
Public Strategies Clinton +1 Obama -1
I realize these all fall within the MOE. But does this suggest a trend, or not? I'm willing to buy that one of these polls is biased toward one of the candidates - but all three?
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:40 PM
see i told you says Hillary to her supports scare tactic works,.............
Bill said in 2004 to choose hope over fear, he said it was Clintons law of politics.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:42 PM
I imagine Obama is probably taking a hit from the Clinton/McCain/Media onslaught, though I think he's doing a great job holding his own against the tripartite assault. It looks like Clinton's delusional whining is finally working, as they're trashing Obama while softballing her and avoiding any critical examination of her ludicrous claim to "experience." On a conference call this morning, Wolfson and Penn sat in silence for twenty seconds when a reporter asked what international crisis Clinton had taken part in managing. They eventually came up with some BS spin (she gave a speech in China!), but that silence says everything. The media, of course, wants to draw this race out for ratings, though Clinton has no realistic path to victory.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:46 PM
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:48 PM
Me also thinks that we should stop dogging the pollsters, being a statistician myself, I understand variance. All in all these polls point to a hold by clinton in Ohio and an edge by Obama in texas (probably in delegates due to the caucus, there may really be statistical insignificance in the primary numbers). At the end of the "delegate" day margin matters and thats where the pollsters are failing to assure us. Does HRC catch up in delegates or does OBAMA continue to hold a pledged delegate lead. I think the latter will be true. Bottom line is no nominee after tuesday. For disclosure purposes, I am a republican, voting for Obama (fulling intending on voting for him in the GE...or I will stay at home for a Hillary/McCain matchup
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:55 PM
Thanks to this poll, I just gave another $200 to Obama!
Keep posting polls that show that worthless woman close, and I will spend every penny I have to make sure she's DOA on Tuesday night.
Posted on March 1, 2008 10:57 PM
Hm... Yes, it seems odd to me to suggest pollster bias -- even if a pollster supported a given candidate, does it really help that candidate to be ahead in the polls if it doesn't reflect reality? Besides, doesn't a "down" performance sometimes help get the vote out?
That being said... I'm interested in why there is this little clutch of polls that seem to show Sen. Clinton recovering some of her edge in Ohio. Those of you who really understand the numbers/methodology -- do you think this is just normal variation that happens to have lined up that way on a couple of similarly-timed polls, or is this a real trend? I don't know enough about how to filter out insignificant noise in the results. What do you think?
Posted on March 1, 2008 11:09 PM
The trend will/will not play itself out come tuesday and no-one will "really" know until then. The deeply convicted will vote their convictions, however some people vote whichever way the wind blows that day and I mean the media-wind. The tagteam that Clinton and McCain have going on is bound to shift the numbers a bit and I think that is what we are seeing. After Obama's 20pt catch up, Texas has been a tie so it comes down to turnout and that no-one can predict. So what I take from this is the ground game on Tuesday matters.
However, finally a poll that shows a 80-10 AA vote split that has been the trend in other states. Others had a 70% Obama split which seems to be conservative. ARG may reedeem itself on this one
Posted on March 1, 2008 11:25 PM
The AA vote will be 92-8 or better. The brothers won't let that cracker from up north steal the lone star state. We've been waiting for this moment for a long time. They kept us down for 200 years. Now we're taken one of them honkys down!
Posted on March 1, 2008 11:37 PM
Looks like at least the media tide is turning. For about 72 hours now, the mainstream media has almost stopped publishing stories saying how Obama is gaining and Hillary is losing. At least the blitz against the media worked. Obama supporters, better not trust media.
Posted on March 2, 2008 12:58 AM
Hey guys don't give up hope so easily. We were down 20 points just 10 days ago and now we are within margin of error. I have full confidence in our electorate.. Even if for some unforeseen reason something bad happens I will not give up hope and keep on fighting.. BO is not going anywhere.. the passion he has generated will not go in vain no matter what happens.. everyone take a deep breath and enjoy your wonderful life
Posted on March 2, 2008 1:53 AM
I like to take a look at trends in the polls for predictions...so the 14 in a row trend..keeps me from believing this poll. Obama should use this poll to his advantage to downplay his performance on March 4th. I think he takes Texas by a 6-9% Margin, He loses Rhode Island by a 8-12% Margin, Takes Vermont by a 20% Margin, and wins Ohio by a 3-4% margin....
I think this poll would normally be something to look at...except...the last 14 suggest a tie or a Obama Lead. This trend continued after the Debate, and the start of the Clinton Attack Ads. It is also important to note that the Caucus-Primary design was only recently discovered by the Clinton Campaign, while Obama has figured it out and installed grassroots offices in TX a long time ago.
The polls showing a 9% lead for Clinton seem a bit hasty. I think she has a stronger lead in RH, and even Obama's late campaigning will not break Hillary's "Catholic Demographic".
Normally this would be too close to call. One variable will alter this race...The Weather!! It is supposed to be Icy and Snowy, and the one demographic that Clinton needs to turnout is 60+ women. This is going to dent the Clinton turnout...much like the Severe Weather Outbreak in Alabama on Feb 5th. I also think that the AA vote will be in the single digits for Clinton, despite the solid endorsment from Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D, Cleveland). The Debate should have been a boost to Obama. The ONLY debate I might add, that gave more difficult questions to Hillary than Barack. The strength of Tim Russert holding her economic playbook up to the camera, and asking why she couldn't deliver the jobs she promised to Tim Russert's homestate...should have really hit home to those who reside in Ohio. The question about Obama's anti-semitic supporter was a spot where he could have bombed, but Clinton bombed and he looked sharp. The definitions of "Denounce" and "Reject" were given 2 minutes of national airtime. Where Obama pointed out which canidate has better knowledge in gramatical skills and "true meanings". Ohio is Obama's...prior to some Clinton leading polls...i would have said...too close to call...not anymore.
Who are we kidding...Obama.
Posted on March 2, 2008 2:33 AM
>> BO is not going anywhere
As long as you open your mouth or lift your arms, I would tend to agree
Posted on March 2, 2008 3:01 AM
I�ll also throw in my numbers-
Texas: Obama 50%, Clinton 48%-
I think the Latino turnout will be high, maybe 30%- the AA turnout will also increase, but I don�t think it will be more than 23%.
I also think that Clinton will take the whites with a solid margin- lets say, 57-41, and the latinos also, for sure, maybe 64-35.
The AA will vote Obama �n bloc, not 90-10, but I think 85-12 should be realistic.
Calculate that with Excel and you get out
I think the turnout whites/AA will be about 77/18 here, but Obama won�t get much of the White vote.
When I calculated with 41-57 in TX, I think 38-60 is more realistic in OH, and when the AA voters vote for him 5-1, maybe 82-15, we get out
I cannot say anything to Rhode Island and Vermont, but it�s illusional to think Obama could win RI.
He will lose it, maybe with a 15-percent-margin, but win Vermont, maybe with 25%, so both states would equalize each other- the same with TX and OH, Clinton won�t gain more than 10 delegates on to Obama, and it�s the same with Obama.
Posted on March 2, 2008 4:33 AM
The results in Ohio will emulate the ones in Mizzou. I like Obama 50% 49% in Ohio.
Posted on March 2, 2008 9:12 AM
Thanks for the links on Cell Phone only impact and the follow up comments.
The results in Wisconson forces me to ask the question if the current thinking about cell phone only impact underestimates the new electorate with increasing young voters. They are not a static number that you can apply a static multipler to your data (I think). The few % points they impact don't seem to be any less important than other variables, do they?
Posted on March 2, 2008 10:12 AM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
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.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
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