Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: Times/Bloomberg National


Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg
(Times story, results; Bloomberg story)

National
Obama 49, McCain 37
Obama 48, McCain 33, Nader 4, Barr 3

 

Comments
josephj:

It's in my professional opinion that I say...

Yowza!

____________________

1magine:

I must concur.

____________________

kingsbridge77:

Obama: I'd like to thank God, my mother, and the media.

____________________

carl29:

This is the second one. I think that McSame problem is that republicans are shrinking.

According to Rasmussen, a republican pollster:

Partisan Trends
Where Have All the Republicans Gone?

June 1, 2008
Republican Democrat Other R - D Quarterly

May R-31.6% D-41.7% I-26.6% -10.1%
Apr R-31.4% D-41.4% I-27.2% -10.0%
Mar R-32.1% D-41.1% I-26.8% -9.1%
Feb R-31.8% D-41.5% I-26.7% -9.7%
Jan R-33.1% D-38.7% I-28.2% -5.6%


____________________

onelightonvoice:

Where's nickberry with his usual, "I dunno, this spells doom for Obama" forecast. LOL.
Spin THAT, nickberry. I thought his "bounce" was over. I hear there is a new poll from Indiana showing Obama up there too.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=d62471d9-b9f8-4274-8312-16c1006a5764

I can already hear it now, "See, what had happened was....."

What many of you naysayers refuse to realize is that regular folks don't pay attention to this stuff. Only in politico land do people even know who Father Pfleger is. Sorry Uri, good try on parroting that lie. Maybe less than 0.1% of Pennsylvanians even know who Pfleger is. Get real, they have families and jobs to worry about.

The bounce is still happening. Give it two months, and then start with the "bounce is over" crap. Until both Clintons have campaigned for Obama, and the effects of that are seen, it is rather premature to declare the bounce has run its course.

The reason why the polls vary so much has to do with partisan identification - just check the crosstabs. Not many Repubs will be voting this year - call it the Bush effect.

____________________

carl29 is on to something. McCain is winning among independents 36% to 33%. The Republican brandname is so toxic that Obama may be able to win the election without even winning self-identified independents. That would be quite a change from recent elections.

What also seems interesting is how Obama's supporters line up solidly behind him, with only 5% defecting to another candidate, while 13% of McCain's supporters defecting in the multi-candidate horserace. If McCain is going to close this up, he needs to start by solidifying his base, which is perhaps why he shifted his position in the past week towards traditional Republican issues, such as drilling in ANWAR, etc. Perhaps even Charlie Black's comment was not a slip of the tongue since it reminded Republicans about national security.

That Nader supporters should also prefer McCain suggests to me that they tend to be older Democrats who still can't stomach voting for Obama. I'd love to see the demographics on the multi-candidate horserace by age and region (they're not in the on-line report). If Obama can smooth their fears, perhaps through his vice-presidential choice, he may be able to run away with the election. If not, a vote for Nader may actually be a vote for Obama this election since it gives these voters an option other than McCain.

I had to laugh when I heard the commentary about this poll on MSNBC this evening. They spun this poll as a problem for Obama because he had not broken 50%. I think all things equal, I'd take Obama's problems over McCain's. If there is a danger for Obama, it may be signaled in today's Gallup commentary, showing that Democratic enthusiasm has waned since the primaries. While still higher than Republicans, if Democrats become too complacent with a big early lead, Obama may regret not opting into public financing. He needs to keep his base energized.

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

@Michael: I was wondering how the media was going to spin this one away. It's getting ridiculous. If you go to Cook Political Report, Charlie Cook still has Virginia as "Lean Republican" and Missouri as "Likely Republican". The media so desperately wants a close race it's becoming transparently obvious. If they keep this up through poll after poll of double digit leads they're going to start seeming extremely disingenuous, and eventually we'll all see through it...

Also, don't worry about the slight decrease in enthusiasm. It's June. People have pool parties, BBQs, and vacations to worry about. Summer is always a dead time. In fact, I'm surprised that enthusiasm is still that high. late June, early July is the "news dead zone" when people pay the least attention to the news. Wait until August and the VP announcements and Convention. Things will get fired up again!

____________________

eternaltriangle:

This poll doesn't line up well with the vast number of state-level polls that show competitive races in swing states. If Obama really is 12 points ahead of McCain, he should be running (on average) 15 points better than Kerry in the state-level polls. That hasn't been happening.

Moreover the favourability numbers for McCain and Obama are out of whack with most of what I have seen from other polls. Usually Obama does better by a few points.

Finally, I find it hard to believe that the week's news - which has largely focused on offshore drilling (which 66% support), McCain's visit to Canada (nobody cares) and Obama's flip flop on public financing have not been favourable to Obama.

Of course, there are those that take this poll and the Newsweek one and decide there is a trend - I'll stick to Rasmussen, SUSA, and polls of that ilk, thank you, which do not have regular 12 point swerves.

____________________

skibum1981:

eternaltriangle -- IMO, I think you're not quite right about the state polls conflicting with this one. Firstly, Obama is running about just as well or better as Kerry did in 04 the traditional blue states. Secondly, Obama is running WAY ahead of Kerry's 04 results in some notoriously red states (VA, NC, MI, GA, CO, NV, etc.). Finally, not all states have been polled recently.

I'd agree with you that it's been a bad news week for Obama, but do you think the public really cares about campaign financing? It's too cerebral of an issue.

____________________

Mark Lindeman:

This poll does show McCain ahead among independents. That's odd, since Gallup two weeks ago, based on its tracking poll, said that Obama had a 7-point edge among independents -- and Gallup has had this race quite close the whole time. It could be that Democrats are "coming home" and independents are moving away (or it could be a fluke). But it also could be that some Obama supporters identify as Democrats or independents depending on how the question is worded, or where in the survey it is asked. Not that that could explain all the differences between the surveys.

____________________

mago:

skilburn:

Obama is not runnins that far ahead of Kerry in MI and NV (which are not red states). eternaltriangle is right in observing that the state polls have not reflected a 12-point lead for Obama.

Of course 538.com does a nice job of supplying an aggregate popular vote based mainly on state polling, and for the period of this poll it had Obama up about 5 nationally, not 12. OTOH, a 5-point lead was enough to give him about a 335-200 electoral vote lead. I'd take that.

____________________

onelightonvoice:

I find it funny that people are concentrating on states other than the ones on the east coast. This election will be over early. Despite what the polls say now, the voter registration drives in the atlantic states will be what creates the victory for obama. So that is what I am predicting, that it will be called very early, and everyone can go to sleep on time.

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

@eternal, re your quote: "I find it hard to believe that the week's news - which has largely focused on offshore drilling (which 66% support), McCain's visit to Canada (nobody cares) and Obama's flip flop on public financing have not been favourable to Obama."

...what you fail to realize is that a) most people are not following this election as closely as we and other internet political geeks are, and therefore care very little about the news this week. Public opinion is not as fluid as you might think, and usually doesn't swerve all that much in either direction with "bad news", but b) the pubic just doesn't really care about public financing. Never has, and won't this time.

____________________

1magine:

McCain flipped on public financing. Obamna decided not to take tax dollars. I WILL NOT buy NEOCON spin. 95% of Obama's donations are under $500. 2 million individual donors. McCain's donors are maxing out individually 20+%, and he is taking corporate donations 50+%. If the country was focused on this issue - and come the debates, they briefly will, it will be clear that Obama is a publicly financed campaign and stuck to his word. He is not taking lobbyist money or PAC dollars. Eventually someone will push this issue and the response will be clear - Why can't McCain get more than 300,000 donors? If the country believes in his policies why are they not backing him? Why is McCain getting so much of his money from special interests?

Obama promised that his campaign would belong to 'The People'. With 2M individual donors (PS FEC considers $200 or more donated to a campaign to be a "Big Money" donor) averaging just $90 per - - I believe he has kept his promise.

____________________

Tzal:

A few of you have commented on the independent numbers and how they are more or less even. I suspect that the disappearing republicans are identifying themselves as independents now. Some of them still support McCain, and will vote republican though.

____________________

boskop:

YOWZA!! it's four months to go and counting. the longer we have to get our ears boxed by the constantly chastising obama, the longer the electorate has to yawn at his empty basket of energy alternatives and 'gimick' put downs.

every time someone has an idea he wishes he'd thought of first he bully talks them with "silly, gimmick". well, four months is a very long time for americans to deal with oil prices, heating homes, debt foreclosures, joblessness.

inflation is not a good friend of the likes of obama. at least mccain is coming up with some ideas, a list in fact. all the great chastiser manages to come up with is,"no!"

12 point polling differentials is a gut to close in on. i hope obama comes up with another dippy presidential seal, another transparently greedy campaign finance scheme, another negagive spin on every energy idea out there. GO OBAMA!!!

____________________

Undecided:

Yes, at least McCain has some ideas to try and address current rising energy costs .. and unfortunately Obama keeps negating those ideas. Several political pundits have noted that McCain has taken the lead on this which is advantageous to him, whereas Obama is left behind in a responding position. Yet, even in this situation Obama does not respond with any helpful proposals to address America's pain at the pump, pain at the grocery store, pain because of dramatically increased prices.

Instead, Obama "mocks" McCain for stating that the move to give states the option to open up offshore drilling is not an immediate oil supply benefit but it does offer a "psychological" factor. Yet, several analysts had already confirmed that the idea of the U.S. focusing on its own oil supplies would indeed help lower the market prices (futures)...i.e. a "psychological' effect.

Notably... the polls indicate that by wide margins, voters like McCain's off shore drilling idea. Also significant it that it is a state's right issue as well as the states would gain oil royalties.

____________________

Undecided:

FYI--1magine

Corporations are NOT allowed to donate to candidate campaigns. I know Obama often states this, but it not factual.

____________________

sherman:

Just because 66% percent of people surveyed agree with McCain that we should open up more of the coast to offshore drilling does not mean they will vote for McCain. There are a lot of other issues that are more important in voter's minds and, I may be going out on a limb here, I think most of those 66% probably know that opening up the coasts to drilling won't make a dent on oil prices in the short term anyway.

The truth is, the idea of eliminating the federal gas tax was a gimmick. Giving offshore drilling leases to oil companies that aren't drilling with the leases they do have is a gimmick. There are no easy answers to high oil prices and I think Obama deserves credit for not coming up with BS solutions to long-term oil problems.

____________________

Tzal:

Undecided does not strike me as undecided.

At any rate, sherman is right. This election is not going to be decided on the question of whether or not to expand offshore oil leases. And McCain already agreed that increasing available oil leases won't impact gas prices for several years.

____________________

boskop:

one thousand voters for a polling sample is laughable. personally, i hope they keep priming the pandering pump of obama to give him a truly false sense of security so we can see the real
smugness and lack of intellect he genuinely sports.

as a former teacher, i have found that the ones who bully and laugh down others are the ones who come to class least prepared, least intelligent and full of swagger just to maintain the perception of superiority.

at some point, when exactly no one can say, the obama swagger will derail the momentum train of empty cargo. he will swagger himself to finally revealing the true political hack he is. he thinks americans really aren't clever enough to catch on to anything and that he can out dance them with charm and what not.

"Just you wait, barack obama" to be sung to the tune of "Just you wait 'enry 'iggins" The little guys actually have IQ's too. Be wary of those who sat on the fance and came to you late in the game, because they'll be the first to dump you at the ballot box.

this is an age where rank arrogance does not align with the insecurity and mawkishness of the american taxpayer in the face of global energy deprivations and inflation. we want someone who like us, is not "SURE" but is willing to put out ideas, try anything but is genuinely human - not a sometime visitor from Delphi spouting oracle.

so i am greatly encouraged by these polls, by the media's continual pass on his his bumptious bloviating and monomania dementia. imagine, i thought his blue seal of "yes we can" in latin mind you, was a joke floated over the weekend by the ONION!!!

late night writers couldnt have paid their princeton staff to come up with better. GO OBAMA!!!

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

@boskop:

unfortunately your statement: "inflation is not a good friend of the likes of obama" is factually incorrect (not to mention grammatically confusing).

From this very poll: "nearly half (49%)
think Obama is the candidate [best able to handle the economy], compared to 28% for McCain."

the more the economy worsens, the better Obama's chances. It's been like that since the Dems became the party of the working class (hit hardest by economic downturn) since the 30s. Finally we have an "economic election" instead of a "national security" one.


____________________

Mike_in_CA:

Again, I shouldn't feed the trolls, but, boskop, when you make statements like "we want someone who like us, is not "SURE" but is willing to put out ideas, try anything but is genuinely human - not a sometime visitor from Delphi spouting oracle." you should make clear that that is your opinion, and that the use of "we want" is factually incorrect. You have no idea what the voters want. You should say "I want" because, perhaps, that's correct.

But again, I apologize for feeding the trolls. This is a polling site, let's stick to that. Clearly the American people want Obama when it comes to the economy, as evidenced by the numbers, and not the opposite, as you suggest (without any supporting facts/information).

Go back to redstate.

____________________

jsh1120:

I realize I'm not the first to request it, but would those whose sole contributions to this site consist of promoting one or the other candidate go somewhere else, please! There are innumerable sites where you can cheerlead or flame. There are very few sites where informed commentary about polling isn't buried in the muck of typical candidate bashing.

And while you're at it, please take those who believe that "one thousand voters for a polling sample is laughable" with you. There are both internet resources and textbooks that demonstrate how sampling works. Luddites who aren't sufficiently informed to comment will find many sites where ignorance is valued.

____________________

boskop:

fyi: this site is an obama sing along. please do not bully some of us off it because we have found deficits in obama.

and for those who dismiss difference of opinion as an indicator of troll status, you are sadly mistaken and remarkably myopic.

if you want a discussion then stop agreeing with each other without any challenges to your pre frontal lobe.

for those who challenge me on grammar and also the use of the term 'we', while i am certainly not a pope, i am representing those voters who care to dissent from the lemming mentality characteristic of the above put downs not only by obama but his supporters. independent voters actually listen to what people say and dont just go along with cheerleaders, front men and shake pompoms in people's faces.

____________________

Undecided:

I realize that we all have our biases, but "boskop" has a point. It appears that those who support Obama feel free to make statements not associated with the polls, yet reprimand those who do likewise.

____________________

onelightonvoice:

boskop,

Your arguments are a joke. The "ideas" McSame has come up with have been trashed universally by economists. Namely the "gas tax holiday" and that ridiculous offshore drilling BS. LOOK IT UP. Maybe you should research the crap you put forth so you wouldn't look like such a fool when your "arguments" are destroyed, time and time again.

It looks like the repubs are resorting to the same ole fear and scare tactic card. They are so utterly incompetent to govern that they just make stuff up about their opponent to take the focus off their PATHETIC record. Pretty sad when that's all the neocons have left........what a sad joke.

____________________

onelightonvoice:

Yes, I reprimand BSers. Make a real, factual point or say something that actually isn't nonsensical, and perhaps then people won't attack you. Otherwise, take it to foxnews.com. Thanks!

____________________

Undecided:

I realize that 1000 is typically considered a decent random sample, but it is only one poll. Please do not berate others about lack of knowledge of statistics, when you yourself are hanging your hat on a singular poll.

In statistics, larger samples "generally" produce more accurate estimates of the population mean.

But by random chance one may get an extreme sample that is unrepresentative of the targeted population as a whole (Type I error).

To be sure that a Type I error did not occur, at least one other poll need to be done (using the same methodology) that replicates the effect from the first poll. This is why most pollsters conduct multiple polls.


____________________

Mike_in_CA:

@boskop,

my issue with you (and others too I imagine) is not that you aren't an Obama "cheerleader" but that you add nothing to the discourse about POLLS. Go to another blogging outfit to gripe and moan about your opinions of the candidate.

This site is not a site to push one's candidates policies over anothers, or even to discuss which one is better. This site is to discuss polls -- and how each candidate is faring in those polls, and how he may improve, where numbers look suspicious, interesting information in the polls, etc. This is not a site to argue about politics, but to argue/discuss POLLS.

That's all we ask.

____________________

Mark Lindeman:

For what it's worth, I find the pro-Obama and the anti-Obama polemic equally boring and useless. I don't mind an aside about someone's rooting interests, although I could even do without that.

____________________

brambster:

@Mark, et al.

I think what might be preceived as Obama supporter domination comes from the fact that most of the activity on this site for the past 4 months has been focused on the Democratic contest. Now with that resolved, Obama surged in the polls immediately after and has yet to look back, leaving the polling data and analysis squarely in favor of Obama over McCain.

I would assume that we are just about done with the Obama post-Hillary bounce, and those that are partisans for McCain can start pointing out well-founded erosion of the lead, but for now, there is almost nothing that the polls are doing for McCain right now.

I recall when Hillary was polling better and subsequently won Ohio and part of Texas after Obama's long string of victories. Despite the fact that the race was statistically over at that point, the postings on this site turned pro-Clinton. Supporters will follow the momentum in other words, and if it's pro Obama right now, it will surely become at least less so in the future.

And regarding this poll. I would agree that it shows lower Obama independent support because many of them are identifying as Democrats. I have considered even changing my own registration as a sign of support (but likely won't because I don't like the 2-party system). Other pollsters are still sometimes showing big differences due to their correction of raw data for party identification built on pre-contested primary data. SurveyUSA in Oregon is one great example where they show just a 1 point edge for D over R, and Rasmussen likewise has many more states that they are seemingly using older data for. Both are likely underestimating the Obama lead. On the flip-side, the NBC/Newsweek poll and this poll only correct for fixed demographic data, and they both include more than just likely voters. So they are skewed to the top side for Obama in this case since those that don't pay much attention to politics or don't bother to vote, probably have heard more about Obama than McCain. I'm also pretty sure that the pollsters are having issues with measuring Hispanic voters in some areas due to language and socio-economic issues.

I think that pollsters might need to change their methods a bit in order to more accurately measure this election since it is so fundamentally different from the last two, and even different from the 2006 mid-term.

____________________

eternaltriangle:

I'm happy to actually debate energy policy - although I prefer talking polls.

The main criticism you guys have offered of offshore drilling is that its effects won't be immediate, and oil companies already have a bunch of land to drill on but aren't drilling. First, why would oil companies want offshore drilling if they had no plans to drill? Secondly, why does the fact that the beneficial effects (cheaper gas coming from not-Saudi Arabia) mean it is a bad idea? Oversold? Sure. But not negative (the argument against it is environmental - but then I'd say shipping oil across the oceans from an unstable part of the world strikes me as more risky).

Moreover, it is not only part of McCain's energy plan. McCain is pro-nuclear - which is sensible. Nuclear power doesn't emit CO2, is the cheapest per kilowatt hour (though it has high start-up costs) and the risk of meltdowns and radioactive waste is overstated by alarmists. Chernobyl was a problem with a particular type of reactor. As for waste, the vast majority of waste does not take 10,000 years to degrade, but rather 100. The US nuclear waste storage capacity is 33% empty, and can be expanded cheaply. Moreover, the red herring of dirty bombs have been shown to be quite ineffective in military simulations.

Finally, and probably most critically, McCain favours lowering tariffs on Brazilian sugar-based ethanol (sugar is 8 times more energy-intensive than corn). The status quo is essentially a big subsidy to big corn. Now I suppose technically relying on Brazil doesn't lead to energy independence, but Brazil is a longstanding ally of the United States, a democracy, and a comparatively stable country.

By contrast, Obama's offerings are far more dubious and uncertain. They involve subsidies for alternative energy products, and creating "green collar jobs" instead of using the resources and technologies we already have.

____________________



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