Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: InsiderAdvantage Georgia


InsiderAdvantage / PollPosition

Georgia
McCain 44, Obama 43, Barr 6

 

Comments
onelightonvoice:

Thank you Bob Barr! Time to go donate to his campaign again.....

____________________

Nickberry:

Notably, Bob Barr is a former Republican Congressman from Georgia and one would expect to see an even higher number for him.

____________________

pluck:

Barr has only begun his campaign. Already, we've seen the undecided/other numbers go up. Given what's been going on within the Republican Party, I'm not going to be too terribly surprised to see McCain in the 30s when this is all over with.

____________________

Nickberry:

Note: As a Libertarian, Barr will be competing for Independent voters, which is also the "battleground" for McCain and Obama. Barr really shined in his work for the ACLU in defending the 4th amendment (privacy rights)... aka against eavesdropping by the Bush Administration.

____________________

carl29:

After checking the crosstab, I was left with the feeling that Barr is hurting McCain.

Let me explain myself:

1) 100% of Barr's support comes from WHITES, a group McCain is winning 60% to 25%

2) By a margin more than 2 to 1, Barr supporters are MALES; therefore, since Barr has no support from Blacks, we can assume this men are white

3) The age group that shows more support for Barr is people over 65, a demographic McCain is winning 59% to 24%

4) Barr supporters are primarily republicans, 0% support from independents indeed.

In 2004 Bush won 76% of whites in Georgia and Kerry 23%. As to now, Obama has reached whites beyond Kerry's support in 2004, Obama 25% vs. Kerry 23%. However, McCain has a level of support of 60% among whites, a 16% from Bush's in 2004.

In conclusion, Barr support comes totally from whites, and in bigger proportion from older, white males. For some reason I don't think this is the perfil of an Obama supporter in the deep south, but you never know.

____________________

brambster:

@carl29

Nice job of pulling out the data. Not a surprise in Georgia at all. Barr will probably play best there, but if a nationwide blowout isn't expected on election day, I doubt that he would even break 5%. I think the biggest effect of Barr will be to provide a traditionally conservative voice to the anti-Iraq war sentiment, and in favor of privacy. This could help push some traditional conservatives to at least consider Obama, vote for Barr in protest, or stay home in protest. I have yet to see a Libertarian that didn't have some really wacky ideas though. Browne was a literal nut-case.

@Whinerberry

You said:

"As a Libertarian, Barr will be competing for Independent voters, which is also the "battleground" for McCain and Obama. Barr really shined in his work for the ACLU in defending the 4th amendment (privacy rights)... aka against eavesdropping by the Bush Administration."

Are you really trying to suggest that Barr will primarily or even equally pulling support from Obama??? I'm sure some self-identified Dems will vote for him, but these will typically be the ones that cross-over in presidential elections anyway.

Don't kid yourself (nor should you try to mislead anyone with your consistently partisan banter), Barr hurts McCain the most, and he hurts him the worst in states like Georgia and North Carolina because he could erase the margin and help educate voters on ideas alternative to McCain's on the war and civil liberties.

You might have taken some statistics courses, but you clearly flunked Clear Thinking 101, or rather you may have received a doctorate in Rove-ian Exploitive Propaganda.

____________________

Nickberry:

What do you not understand about the term "Independents?"

____________________

Nickberry:

19.2% Independents are UNDECIDED!!!!

____________________

carl29:

@Nickberry: Even if we give McSame the totally of those undecided independents, he is not getting the support Bush got from them in 2004 against Kerry.

Let's see the numbers in 2004:
Among independents Bush 60%, Kerry 39%
Bush had a 21% advantage over Kerry.

Now, let's see McCain support among independents if we give him each and everyone of those undecided.

McCain *54%, Obama 46%

McCain starts with a deficit of 6% among independents compared to Bush in 2004 and Obama starts with a 6% advantage compared to Kerry.

On the one hand, Obama is doing better than Kerry among whites and better than Kerry among independents. On the other hand, McCain is doing worse among whites and independents than Bush did in 2004. This deficit of support for McCain among whites has something to do with Barr? Well, those white voters are coming from someone's base of support, and it doesn't look like Obama is missing anything compared to Kerry in 2004.

Another point, compared to Bush in 2004, McCain is not getting the same support from Republicans. How many republicans are undecided in this poll? LESS than 1%. What % of republicans are supporting McSame? 85% vs. 97% who supported Bush in 2004, again a deficit for McCain, 12%. What % of republicans are supporting Obama? 7% vs. 3% who supported Kerry in 2004, again Obama doing better than Kerry. What % of democrats are supporting McSame? 11% vs. 13% who supported Bush in 2004, again a deficit for McSame.

To me Bob Barr is good news as far as it takes away white votes from McSame. Republicans are the party of white people in the deep South, that's why Kerry just won 23% of it. You know, this was the whole point of Nixon's "southern statrategy," let blacks vote and then they will become democrats and because of this, white southerners will leave the democratic party like if it were infested.

Obama doesn't need to struggle to get more white support than Kerry did. All Obama needs in huge AA turnout and depressed white turnout. Remember that the GOP is not excited at all about McSame. So, I don't expect a record turnout in the GOP like in 2004. In the deep South, every vote cast for Barr will be a white vote missed for McSame.

According to George Will, yes that George Will, in Georgia there are around 600,000 AA who are elegible to vote who are not registered yet. Of course the Obama campaign is taking care of those people. Registering these AA to vote and bringing to the polls those who are register but don't usually vote is the Obama strategy. Remember that if there is a group galvanized in this election it will be AAs. For the first time in US history they will have the chance to cast their vote for one of their peer to elect him President of the United States of America. WOW!!!

P.S: What was the difference of the popular vote between Bush and Kerry in Georgia in 2004? 548,105!!! How many AA are not registered to vote yet? around 600,000

See why the WASHINGTON TIMES- yes, the very conservative Washington Times, had this article?

Barr chiseling into McCain voter base: Bob Barr's Libertarian presidential campaign is poised to play a serious role in this year's elections, with early polls showing him taking away enough votes from Sen. John McCain to give Democrats a chance to win states that should be safely Republican.

McCain - Barr = Obama: Barr does throw a monkeywrench in Republican plans in states people otherwise take for granted as Republican states," said Matt Towery, a former political adviser to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and CEO of InsiderAdvantage, an Atlanta-based polling and political analysis firm that conducted the Georgia poll.

As you can see conservaties are very aware of the Barr effect.

____________________

Nickberry:

Do you understand what a Libertarian is? (Did you not realize that Obama flip-flopped and supported the latest FISA bill?) This is where Bob Barr spent the last few years working for ACLU... against undue intrusion into American lives. Some people care about the 4th amendment as strongly as the 2nd amendment.

Again do you understand what an Independent is? In the context of MY statements regarding this poll...there are NO African-American voters, white voters, or other racial demographics. I specifically targeted Bob Barr and INDEPENDENT voters... (which is also NOT Democratic voters or Republican voters... not liberals or conservatives.) Independent voters are a diverse group, and they are categorized as "Independent" and nothing else.

Independent voters are the "battleground" for Barr....as well as for McCain and Obama. Very simple statement, very clearly stated. I do not know why a couple of you deem to go off on tangents and attribute things to me that I did not state nor imply.

____________________

brambster:

@Whinerberry

You said:

19.2% Independents are UNDECIDED!!!!

Yeah-but...0.0% of independents were supporting Barr from the 80.8% of them that had a preference, and you claimed that Barr would hurt Obama.

The independent support is definitely lower than what the reality is, but I think a low number there reflects a more common disinterest in the process among independents who mostly haven't even figured out yet that Barr is running or who he is.

At least Carl29 posts relevant numbers and backs them up with the opinions of others.

I don't think that Georgia will go Obama without Obama getting near 400 electoral votes, which equates to about a . I think the Bush states going Obama would be in the following order of succession:

--- Likely Obama ---
1) Iowa
2) Colorado

--- Lean Obama ---
3) New Mexico
4) Virginia
5) Ohio

--- Toss-up ---
6) Nevada
7) Missouri
8) Indiana
9) Florida

--- Lean McCain ---
10) Montana
11) North Dakota
12) North Carolina
13) Alaska

--- Likely McCain ---
14) Georgia
15) West Virginia
16) South Dakota
17) Arkansas
18) South Carolina
19) Louisiana
20) Kansas
21) Nebraska
22) Mississippi

--- Solid McCain ---
23) Tennessee
24) Arizona
25) Kentucky
26) Texas
27) Idaho
28) Wyoming
29) Oklahoma
30) Alabama
31) Utah

I don't think people will even be thinking about Georgia specifically if there is such a huge landslide that would get it this far. Winning 400 EV's would mean a popular vote margin of 7% to 12% according to fivethirtyeight:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/popular-vote-v-electoral-vote.html

I am not nearly so bold as to predict such a thing at this point in the election. The election is Obama's to lose, but McCain would need to fall on his face to end with such a deficit.

____________________

carl29:

Obama doesn't have to win and will NOT win WHITES in the deep South, independents or not. Up to now Obama support among whites is just right. Remember that the key for him are not whites, independent or not, but depressed WHITE vote combined with huge AA turnout. Obama is happy if Barr steals those WHITES from McCain. As far as Barr supporters in the deep south are WHITE, God Bless Barr's heart.

The deep south strategy for Obama is simple: More WHITES staying home or voting for someone other than McSame combined with more African Americans going to the polls.

Independents are going to be key in battleground states, where race is not the big of an issue it is for whites in the deep south. The reason Obama has a chance in some states in the deep south is because of the big AA population combined with lack of enthusiasm in the Republican base for McSame.

If polls stay close approaching the elections, McSame will have to campaign in Georgia, and in so doing, spend time and money he could use in other critical states. Some way McSame has got to make up that 16% deficit among whites that he has compared to Bush. With the huge African American turnout that we will witness in this election, McSame cannot afford a single white voter to stay home or vote Barr in Georgia.

The goal is to make McSame spend money and time in a state like Georgia out of fear that the African American turnout in addition to Barr's white voters help Obama carry Georgia. I think it will be hard for Obama to carry Georgia because the white population is not as educated as that one in Virginia.

The reason Obama has a decent shot at virginia is that a good % of whites in Virginia are more sophisticated than those in other states in the south. For example, in Georgia Kerry won 23% of the white vote; however, in Virginia he gathered 32% of the white vote. For white southerners being democrat is being pro-black, pro-feminist, pro-abortion, pro-gay, so they refused to vote democrat. In Virginia at least 1/3 of white voters don't think that way. Saddly in states like Georgia and North Carolina around 3 1/4 of whites think like that.

This is just a factual statement: In the south what determines how people vote is race. Whites are conservative/republican, minorities are democrats. If Obama keeps the same support Kerry got from whites in the south he is in fine. All he needs is as many whites as possible going for Barr, so McCain's deficit among whites keep up. If Barr is getting whites, that's good news for Obama.

LET'S KEEP McSAME DEFICIT AMONG WHITES. Remember, McCain 60% of white, Bush 76% of whites, 16% deficit.

LESS WHITES, MORE AA's= McSame running around Georgia.

____________________

brambster:

@carl29

I think that with the so-called swing states, and with so much attention paid to them in the last two election cycles, the voter turnout is so high already that things aren't going to change by huge margins from the last election.

However, in states such as Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, they have seen hardly any attention from Democrats at the presidential level for decades, and with general acceptance of Republican domination in the past, the Democratic vote was suppressed by a lack of enthusiasm. It follows that in this election, you will see the biggest gains for Obama not in states like California and New York, but in states like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia among others (plus the rest of the Mountain West and South).

For example, in 2004, Virginia's voter turnout was 68.5%, but in 1992 (Clinton vs. Bush), it was 84.5%. Record turnout would be more indicative of enthusiasm for change rather than a McCain vote. Clinton lost 1992 by less than 5%, and with the demographic changes alone, he would have won in 2008.

This is why I think that Virginia is slightly more likely to flip than Ohio, and definitely more likely than Florida. There are more suppressed votes in Virginia than there are in Ohio or Florida. Colorado and Nevada are other good examples.

Virginia will further benefit from a very well liked Warner running for Senate in what looks to be hardly a contest, plus a large AA population. Colorado and Nevada will further benefit from large Hispanic voting populations which are still under polling and will strongly favor Obama. I think that North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia will be pretty close due to the added effects of Barr as well as large AA populations, but I don't expect to see anything but North Carolina squeak by except in a landslide (because that will suppress McCain vote). North Carolina in the triangle area is becoming a bastion of liberalism and it is growing more rapidly than any other area on the East Coast.

____________________

carl29:

The problem that I see with Virginia is the big military population, militar retiree. You know, McCain is a fellow militar; therefore, I think those militars are going to show up to help McCain. I think that family of active military personnel may be inclined to vote for Obama due to the never-ending tours of duty to Irak. Nonetheless, how about those old military men? I think they are going to come out for McCain.

I wouldn't use Clinton-Bush as an example because there is not doubt that Bill Clinton benefited a lot from Ross Perot's presence in the race.

"On November 3, Bill Clinton won election as the 42nd President of the United States by a wide margin in the U.S. Electoral College, receiving 43 percent of the popular vote in the three man race against Bush's 37 percent. It was the first time since 1968 that a candidate won the White House with under 50 percent of the popular vote. The state of Arkansas was the only state in the entire country that gave the majority of its vote to a single candidate; the rest were won by pluralities of the vote."

I don't think that Barr is going to be a Ross Perot to split the vote in such dramatic way, but he will certainly make McSame uncomfortable in states like Georgia and North Carolina.

____________________

brambster:

@carl29

Regarding veteran populations, this is commonly overstated. In 2000, Virginia had a 15.1% veteran population, which is high, but still lower than several other states such as Washington, and we never speak about the veteran population in Washington. Virginia does have the highest Gulf War vet population, but that is just 1/5 of their overall vet population. (http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-22.pdf)

Virginia in 2006 however has a 19.9% AA population, a 4.8% Asian population, and a 6.3% Latino population. That's a much bigger factor because all of these groups are between 65% and 90% Obama voters this cycle.

Assuming equal turnout according to race (inaccurate, but somewhat useful), my numbers say that Obama only needs 31.9% of the non-AA/Asian/Hispanic vote in order to reach 49% (a win if 2% go other). I assume 90% AA, 65% Asian and Hispanic voting for Obama in this mix. Here is the census data:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/51000.html

In 2004, Kerry won 32% of the white vote in Virginia, the AA population actually over represented their population slightly, and Asians and Hispanics under-represented. Overall Kerry got 30 points from non-white vote, or 78% of the non-white vote. So if anything, I am underestimating Obama's support from this group.

Also, White Women were 54% compared to 46% White Men in Virginia in 2004.

SurveyUSA's last poll showed 41% Democrat, 33% Republican, and 22% Independent, with far less undecideds in the Republican column (as is commonly the case in this election). Obama lead in that poll by 7%. He wins Moderates by 2:1, and Liberals by 3:1, Women by 11 points, and the poll under-represents Women.

Other notable factors are that George Bush had 33% approval in Virginia in April, but back in September 2004 it was 55%.

This state would flip if the election was held today, but in the end it depends on what the surprises will be and how strongly it is contested. I think that this is a state that McCain will strongly contest, along with Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, and he will have to win at least 2 of the 4 to have any shot at winning the presidency, and more likely 3 of these 4. I think it makes sense for McCain to fight in one area like this because you can use one message and travel more easily. I wonder however if the McCain camp even realizes this however. Their battleground states map is so surreal that people think it's fake (no Virginia for instance, but lists Arkansas and Louisiana as leaners), and not even a good fake at that, while Obama hit every state but one with his first ad buy that I think he has a good shot in, and he ignored those states that he is comfortably ahead in. It's common belief that Hillary lost due to a lack of post-Super Tuesday planning, which is a huge mistake and shows they underestimated Obama, and maybe McCain's camp is doing the same thing right now.

____________________

carl29:

I DO really agree with you that out of all southern states Virginia is the best for Barack. Virginia has a good presence of educated whites, a good % of AA, and a decent presence of hispanics. As we already saw in the primaries, in Virginia Barack rocked. He won the white and hispanic vote there. Why he won the white vote? Well, thanks to educated whites who are the white base of the democratic party in the state. Why he won the hispanic vote there? Well, the majority of hispanics in Virginia are NOT Mexican, they are Salvadorian. Salvadorians of course will be deligthed with Barack. Salvadorians tend to be center-left leaning.

For the potomac primaries, Virginia was the only state where Hillary thought they could keep it close. She thought that educated women and hispanics will help her. Totally wrong! These women turnout to be Obama girls, and Hillary learned that Mexicans and Salvatorians are not the same and do not vote the same.

I really think that Barack's best shot to pick up one of those traditional red states in the south rests in Virginia. However, those military men make me kind of uncomfortable to be honest. I hope they don't turnout in good numbers, although I don't see why wouldn't they if a fellow military man is on the ticket.

____________________

brambster:

Interesting point about education. I checked and in 2004 Bush won just 4 of 20 states + DC where over 25% of the population had a bachelors degree or higher. Those states were Colorado: 32.7%, Virginia: 29.5%, Utah: 26.1% and Kansas: 25.8%.

In 2004 Kerry only won 4 of his 20 states + DC with less than 25% college graduates: Maine 22.9%, Pennsylvania: 22.4%, Wisconsin: 22.4% and Michigan: 21.8%.

The college graduate percentage is probably the strongest demographic tied to a state's presidential preference that there is. This should be especially true of Obama since his primary success was also largely predicted by the same measure as he only lost 5 of 20 states + DC where there was 25% or more.

FYI, the national average is 24.4%, and other states discusses are as follows: Georgia: 24.3%, North Carolina: 22.5%, South Carolina: 20.4%.

____________________



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