Pollster.com

The Gallup numbers are a bit surprising given that it is a registered voter universe and Rasmussen is a likely voter universe. I expected the trend to be the other way around, with McCain leading Rasmussen and Obama leading Gallup.

McCain has had nearly a week of uninterrupted positive media coverage, which just like Obama, moved his numbers during the convention. In the past, the Obama campaign has proved effective in quickly changing the direction of the campaign, which is why I am surprised his campaign did not do something surprising on Friday like McCain did with the Palin pick the previous week, such as annoucing a Colin Powell endorsement (I'm just trying to give an example: I have no firm knowledge this will happen). These polling numbers, particularly if they are confirmed in other polls, are going to prod Obama to step up attacks on McCain.

After comparing the real record of Mccain with the empty rhetoric of Obama, people are beginning to move towards Mccain. I don't know how long will this last, but running even at this stage at least gives Mccain a chance to win--who would have guessed that in this environment?

One poll does not an election make. In the past 74 polls McCain has led 6 times. He needs more than just a Gallup poll to show movement. If he can sustain this lead with all the polls it will show movement. We'll have to wait and see.

It's states that matter, of course. Discussions of overalls are pointless. Even *doing* overalls is pointless, except as a tool to indicate that likely the prior states data is invalid.

If this overall data is valid, in which states has the movement occurred?

Adam,

Wow, you read that talking-point card pretty well. Have you ever thought of running for President? You'd probably do better than GWB. What exactly is John McCain's record, and how would the public know about it? It's not in his stump speech, or in his TV commercials. Rhetoric or not, at least Obama talks about something other than McCain in his commercials. McCain always just talks about Obama, and Factcheck.org seems to think that most of what McCain's ads say is BS.

Hmmm, still waiting for the BIG bounce for McCain. Guess it may come this week? I know it took a few days for Obama's. We shall see.

As for his record or what he stands for, well McCain had a decent maverick record prior to 2000. He embrace of GWB's and the other Repubs for the past 8 years is the troubling part. He "says" he will change back, but if you look at his inner circle, it's a who's who of K street. I'm not a trusting person of any Republican at this point, minus my Congressman Young. I'll vote for him cause he still brings home the pork! :)

As Nate at 538 has shown, the Gallup result today was doomed to be bad for Obama because his Wednesday result of +7 was going to cycle out.

Convention bounces are temporary, and this should be the height of McCain's. If it only has him at +3 and tied, it bodes poorly.

Palin's the political equivalent of the sports fan whose favorite team is the one who just claimed the title. She is incapable of understanding the plight of a Cubs fan because she's too busy buying Red Sox merchandise. Nobody will take Sarah seriously until she reaches into her closet and pulls out that Cubs jersey...

where are those "no bounce for McCain" posters?

Though I disagree with Palin's social issues, at least she has some experience,as compared to the neophyte Barack

McCain for Prez, and a democratic house and senate are the best thing for America.

florida voter.. i'm still waiting for the BIG obama bounce..
LOL, don't be such a sourpuss!

@JWilly48519
I happen to be one in agreement, if these poll numbers shifted because of "base rallying" in kentucky or Texas... who cares...The polls of the lucky 7 (states) can't come soon enough

Long way to go still. We'll have to wait to see if this "bounce" will last a long time or will dissipate like most bounces do. I agree with the previous posters about the importance of seeing some state data. States matter, and some states matter more than others. Give it about a week and I think we'll know just how things are really shaping up.

odd, i don't remember the "states being important" during the obama bounce...

;)

Tybo - That's because it's more or less impossible to lose the EC with an 8 point popular vote lead, but pretty easy to do it with a tie (as Rasmussen shows).

I just don't get the "experienced" Palin argument. Certainly she has no, and I mean no, foreign policy expertise. But what is much worse is that she has no experience of "the lower 48," as Alaskans call the rest of us. As a governor of a state without a major metropolitan center, she has never had to deal with urban problems, problems of underfunded education, inner city poverty, crime and health care. She doesn't even know how it feels to live in or near a big city . How could someone who has spent her entire life so distant from the problem centers of American presume to govern the nation?

And as for experience as a governor...why doesn't anyone say that Alaska, the whole state, has a population of 677,000. There are 20 American cities with larger populations. LA has a population of 3.8 million. New York City has 8 million. Could she run a municipality larger than San Jose? It is certainly a question to be raised. I doubt that if the mayor of Columbus or Indianapolis were nominated for VP the voters would be asked to swallow this "executive experience" argument.

McCain's choice was great for mobilizing his Christian base, but it had no other virtues. It was a completely cynical political choice that speaks neither to his vaunted bipartisanship nor to his maverick myth (Palin being the ideological clone of our present hard-praying, evangelical President).

I just hope that when her handlers let Larry King and the Sunday hosts loose on Palin, they ask her what she knows about the America where most of us live. And I hope that they ask McCain why the "uniter" made such a divisive, culture-war selection for VP.

I'm a Lib and I'm worried.

This is terrible news. I thought McCain would lead by 1 or 2, but not 3. This is what happened in 2004. Kerry got a convention bounce, and then Bush got a convention bounce that subsided, but his lead never really went away. This could be the beginning of the end for Obama. The only light at the end of the tunnel is that McCain has not hit 50. If he does, we can probably call this race over, ultimately.

I don't understand either what it is about Palin that's appealing, but clearly she is winning people over. Like Marty says, her state has 200,000 fewer people than the county I live in.

But mark my words, if this election becomes a culture war like the last two, the democrats will never win. There is no way Obama can win a culture election, and that is how they're trying to frame it. This is republicans at their best, folks, and I suspect the D's will lose once again.

I think this is probably the extent of McCain's bounce- or tomorrow. This is probably because this will be the last poll to cover the day of/ the day after McCain's speech. In other words, I don't think it will keep a bounce up two or more days after the speech. (I don't think people would have a sudden epiphany to vote for him after hearing the speech two days ago.) This will flatten back out to an Obama +2, with maybe an Obama +3-5 once the debates kick in - after all, as the McCain camp has said, they're running their campaign on personality, not issues, and the debates are entirely about issues.

marty, the reason Palin is winning people over is she actually fought corruption in her own party.

Compare that to Biden or Obama, who have embraced corruption.

(go read about Obama support of the Chicago machine).

In addition, at least Palin has made governing decisions, Obama never has.

I forgot to add, Palin is running for VP,,, if you charge her with Not Experience, you've just labled the Your Own Candidate as NOT Experienced.

regardless of your politics, can't you see that?

I predict this will be an unbelievably close election, with both Colorado and New Mexico going to Obama, and a vast number of voting irregularities deciding the election.

Ergo, McCain will win, but, the country will never be certain whether the election was properly conducted.

Unless Obama can clearly win in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and Michigan (perhaps in all of the above), the election is already won by McCain.

god save the US.

Guys, what about the elephant in the room=race. I mean think about it the democratic brand runs 8 pts better then the republican brand. 80% of the country thinks we are headed in the wrong direction. You have ads running in which Mcsame says himself " i have supported president Bush even more then any of my republican colleagues." He voted with him 90% of the time- fact!

so how else can you explain this?

@ Tybo

No, your statement is illogical and probably (?) incomplete. And speaking of so called "fighting corruption," she has passed initiatives that increase oil company profits, threatened numerous people with unemployment if they were to stand in her way, and sponsored the "bridge to nowhere" which she later acted as if it was a proposition that she had always opposed. Those are governing decisions alright- ones that are harmful to the Alaskan and American people. Did I mention how much money she spent on this? Maybe the term should be tax and spend conservatives. A bridge to nowhere is something I neither need nor want.

Omg Palin is a evangelical extremists and she sounds so stupid. every day she lies about the bridge to no where says she didn't support it but she actually hired a lobbying firm to secure earmarks totaling 27 million, but of course retard republicans will buy it. she would deny abortion rights to even victims of RAPE AND INCEST!(naral) AMERICANS ARE SO STUPID!

slinky - I continue not to see the Michigan paranoia. There are no polls since May showing a McCain lead there. Pennsylvania is even less in play - McCain hasn't led there since April.

I am also mostly uninterested in the Rasmussen polls dropping tomorrow - state polling during a convention bounce is of limited use.

If Obama wins Colorado, he wins the election.

to SNOWSPINNER

how do you know there are state polls dropping by rassmussen tommorow?

by the way: the paranoia for michigan comes from the possibility of a bradly effect

Showspinner,

Obama must win Colorado, New Mexico, and at least
one other contested state to reach the magic number. The Detroit imprisonment is going to be an issue, and the attack dogs against Biden's relationship with Scranton are going to be vile. Pennsylvania is in play even if you don't see it, as is Ohio.

The election is very close: But, my point is that a close election that is run unfairly will keep the incumbents in power. They know that, and that's what they're doing: The Democrats have no defense against the dark arts.

"And speaking of so called "fighting corruption," she has passed initiatives that increase oil company profits, threatened numerous people with unemployment if they were to stand in her way, and sponsored the "bridge to nowhere" which she later acted as if it was a proposition that she had always opposed."

she increased the taxes on the oil companies, hence the 1200$ check each and every Alaskan is receiving ,she did NOT sponser the bridge to nowhere, she supported it until the cost ballooned ,.. she threatened numerous people with unemployment??? ... I have no idea what you are referring to there....

still

can't you see regardless of your political opinioins, that calling Palin Inexperienced means you are calling Obama the Same thing?
and he's running for the top of the ticket.

I would also like to point out that the demographic models used in election '08 polls are based on previous elections and do not account for new voters (for example, Obama has demonstrated he can bring young voters to the polls during the primaries) or the greater enthusiasm of Obama voters vs the Kerry voters for their candidate. McCain may even reach +5pnts by tomorrow or Tuesday, but I doubt he will stay in the lead once voters look beyond the personalities of the candidates and focus on the issues they care about.

The McCain campaign is wrong in their assessment that this is not an election about issues. Economic issues in particular will dominate. Unless McCain changes his policy positions on taxes (big tax cut for corporations, repeal of the sunset clause of the Bush tax cuts) I don't see how he can argue that he brings anything new or different from standard Republican policy.

We won't even go into the fact that he doesn't provide any extra money for wind and solar (it's all nuclear and oil and neither are long term solutions---again pretty standard Republican fare); nor shall we discuss the fact that his health care plan (tax the health insurance benefits from employers as income, while giving a $5000 credit to employees) won't put much of a dent in the number of people who are uninsured. He has no viable policy to run on, and so he runs on his 'character' and it's not going to work. With the nature of his campaign becoming more and more apparent (OBAMA IS UNPATRIOTIC! OBAMA IS UNPATRIOTIC!), I've lost a lot of respect for him.

Oh, and how does his foreign policy differ from Bush? Oh yeah, now that Bush has officials talking with Iran and now that the Bush administration is negotiating a withdrawal timetable with Maliki, quite a bit! Incredibly enough, McCain's foreign policy may turn out to be much worse than GWB's.

They call it a "bounce" for reason - it tracks like a bell curve. And that goes for both sides. Otherwise it would be called a "step."

There are two series of events coming next, and those are the only things that matter now: The debates, and the republican attack machine. On this latter point, I shutter to think what's going to be McCain's Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. It's gonna be a lie, and it's gonna be ugly. Any theories an this last point?

It amazes me how a few people are still saying McCain's bounce has been minimal. A few days ago the RCP average yielded about a 6 point lead for Obama. As of a few minutes ago, it was down to 0.8%. I call that a 5-point bounce, about the same as what Obama had received, or slightly larger.

I guess when the bounce is added to a deficit, people don't notice it.

It wouldn't surprise me to see another point added to the bounce tomorrow or Tuesday before it maxes out.

there is not doubt Mccain's is worse then bush, bush is a little more mainstream. Mccsame is a hot head, that will go to war with iran for sure, and he said he doesn't know much about the economy. God these evangelical extremists are trying to elect him so he can fight their next crusades! its shameful when you live in a country where a hateful kkk rally (republican convention) provides a bounce in the polls!!!

The whole Bradley effect thing is pretty stupid - people are not going say they vote for Obama just because they don't want to appear racist. If they are in fact racist but don't want to admit it, they can just say they aren't voting for Obama for some other reason. It's just wishful thinking in terms of the conservatives.

There's even a reverse Bradley effect apparent in this election:

"On average, Obama received three percentage points more support in the actual primaries and caucuses than he did during polling"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect#Barack_Obama_2008_Presidential_run

hateful, shameful, kkk; frankly, it doesn't matter: It is what it is.

Kerry lost the last election, and Gore the previous one, largely because of 'dirty tricks' including voting machine problems. There is no question that these have not been solved and figure in to this next election.

Obama is a stronger candidate in many ways than Kerry or Gore because he has undeniable charisma that his predecessors lacked, and because there has been a huge voter registration effort, largely on his behalf.

That said, the fundamentals of the American electorate have not shifted, and its fundamentally a racist, paranoid country, very insecure and in the middle of a war. That said, Obama could win if his message of change had not been commandeered, usurped and perverted by the 'change' forseen by McCain and Palin.

Given all of this, the ability of Obama to make a dent in the established order depends on a mass mobilization, which should have started happening immediately after the Denver convention, but which has not occurred.

Unless something changes very quickly the trajectory is decidedly against an Obama win.

One major change would be the announcement by the Democrats that all voting irregularities will be hotly contested, and that efforts will be made to conduct the most fair election the free world has ever seen.

I doubt the other side will greet this joyfully; but sometimes the only way to cure a patient is through cauterization of wounds.

Homework for you all: Read Bush v. Gore.

@Tybo

To me this whole experience issue was never the key. However, since you're asking, Obama has a long legislative record (12 years) where he sponsored or co-sponsored a number of important laws---child health insurance in IL, videotaping of confessions in IL, ethics legislation in IL and the US senate, racial profiling in IL, weapons of mass destruction in US senate with senator Lugar and many others lower profile ones.

He has also spent time looking and thinking about a huge number of bills that have gone across his desk. He has developed a governing philosophy as can be seen in his book "The Audacity of Hope". It is true that he does not have experience as a governor or a mayor (neither does McCain), but if Romney can point to his running the Olympics as an executive, Obama can point to his impressive campaign. McCain can't even do that.

If you are being honest, you have to admit that Obama has been vetted by the 20 months of campaigning not to mention the 20 debates he's gone through. Palin simply hasn't. So from everything I've seen of Obama, he is not only ready to be President, but more so than either Palin or McCain.

i dont thing the election will be rigged, you have to think longer. If that were to happen the country would become destabilized, and the dems are in control of congress, the republicans know that. Also these are tough times something like that will blow up the whole country! not gonna happen

Getting more taxes from oil companies doesn't mean you're not in bed with them, particularly when they see a new boom on the Alaskan horizon. The whole R energy policy emphasizes oil and fossil fuels and pays lip service to altenatives. Palin's on record as not thinking climate change is human-caused at all. "Drill, baby, drill" is the new R mantra.
Denial is not a mountain in Alaska. (That would be Denali)
Speaking of which, Colbert played the clip of Cindy McCain saying that Alaska's proximity to Russia may count as Palin foreign policy experience, then pointed out that McKinley/(Denali), as the tallest mountain in the US, makes Alaska the closest state to space as well.

change - there's been no evidence of a Bradley effect this election cycle. This has been widely refuted.

Slinky - Polls show New Mexico and Iowa as solid for Obama, which is what makes Colorado a winner. I'll worry about Michigan and Pennsylvania when there are numbers showing a risk there. Otherwise, it's just not something there's any reason to worry about beyond speculative ones.

dave101 - The best and most paranoid theory I've heard on this is that the recent US incursions into Pakistan have been to try to capture bin Laden in an October surprise to end all October surprises. I'm very, very skeptical of this, if for no other reason than, if it were that easy, they'd have done it in 2006 or 2004. I'm mostly not worried on this front - the swift boat ads launched in August, and the 527 was announced in May. The only comparable group this cycle is the one that ran the Ayers ad, which seemed to have no effect.

As for experience, I am hard-pressed to believe anyone is ready to be President. I can't imagine preparation for that job.

I will say that Obama consistently seems to me to have intelligent, nuanced, careful thoughts and opinions on issues, and that his plans and positions show a respect for subtlety and complexity - a trait that has been disastrously absent in the current administration.

McCain has not showed that this election cycle, and Palin has no record of that that I'm aware of.

I think that is a far, far more important trait than the nebulous "readiness."

@slinky..whines a lot

many of us began as dyed in the wool dems, changed horses midstream from say biden to obama then to hillary and as we did, realized that a facelss smileless white woman who was a community organizer, a senator for 12 months and made one single speech against a war that everyone else thought was caca..

would never cut the mustard.

i will vote for anyone, who walks crawls or swims that runs against this resume. it is the one getting the top billing for the dems and it is risible

AND FOR ALL those astute media junkies WHen oBama was on oreilly he was pressed on the surge.

do you recall his answer? post me back what you think he said. caio!

Pion,the illinios congress is a part time position- 5 months a year.
the bills you credit to obama "child health insurance in IL, videotaping of confessions in IL, ethics legislation in IL and the US senate, racial profiling in IL, "
were written by other democrats and Obama was given credit.

do you know who said "I going to make me a senator?"

His legislation with Lugar?

That was Lugar's second bill applied to a different area of the world. It was already written by the time Obama signed on (good for him for signing on) and its passage was never in doubt.

It's obvious you buy what Obama says he did, without looking further.

why didnt' he call the committee he headed to order (to meet)..
why did he vote for the cheney energy bill, bankruptcy reform,the Patriot act 2, telecom immunity (after saying no)
How did his wife get a 250K raise after he got the hospital a 1 million dollar grant?

@snowspinner

i'd start worrying!

new mexico craters when the debates point up mccain's advocacy of them for the mccain kennedy, DID I SAY KENNEDY??? immigration reform.

michigan caves by weds. you'll see them draw even...but since i cant make predictions like the other savants on this site, i'd caution you snowbird...

loud talk doesnt make fact.

BTW: do you recall precisely what obama's answer was to oreilly about the surge. ]

please enlighten, many thanks ahead of time...

later all..

i'm out for a little golf ..

boskop - I didn't watch O'Reilly, so it's not so much a matter of not recalling as not knowing.

I don't see McCain pulling off enough Latino support from Obama (who is also friendly on immigration issues, and, let's note, Latino != single issue voter) to overcome the average 7 point lead Obama is holding there.

Michigan... we'll see. I see no particular reason to think that McCain's bounce is going to erase the average of five points Obama has in Michigan.

McCain has bounced to his highest % in the tracker polls. A bounce is a bounce. How much higher, before it drops to the floor again?

There are going to be lots of state polls out tomorrow in addition to the Fox News ones. Fox say they will have 5 Ras polls tomorrow of battleground states, its all about producing closeness and Big Mo for McCain judging from the timing. I am admitted conspiracy guys, who wouldn't be after Florida!

McCain's support according to Rasmussen is still much less solid than Obama. About 12 days ago a Ras tracking poll had 46-45 to McCain following the Bden pick.

The trackers are a lot of fun. But that's what they are a lot of fun - as they give a kneejerk snapshot on whose at home responding to an automated phone call Ras and Gallup doesn't seem to have it right at the week ends.

Gosh every time Obama loses ground there is joy and sadness, every time McCain loses ground there is joy and sadness.

A long way to go

@snowspinner
@slinky

"we're going to provide them with additional military support targeted at terrorists, and we're going to help build their democracy and provide the kinds of funding, ..."

I am soo sick of talk like this. I never did like Bush or think he had any business browbeating people into democracy as the excuse for invading countries.

but i want a leader who is faster and more flexible on all alt energies to reduce inflation.

boskop - No, indeed, he didn't. We never should have invaded Iraq. But since we've made that mistake, which was a catastrophic one, we've got a new problem - if we don't build a lasting government in Iraq it will fall to the terrorist insurgency and become the terrorist state Bush pretended it was in 2003.

@snowspinner...
OBAMA SAID THAT!

I knew that.

"SEN. OBAMA: No, no, no, no. What we say is, look, we're going to provide them with additional military support targeted at terrorists, and we're going to help build their democracy and provide the kinds of funding --

MR. O'REILLY: The things that we're doing now."

of course you did since i set that BIG hint up for you.

but since you do know it, tell me how that differs from the bush doctrine?

boskop - Yes. I am agreeing with Obama. We shouldn't invade countries to set up democratic regimes. But once we've collapsed the government there, we can't just walk away either.

I think Obama put it best in the ABC debate - once you've backed the bus into the ditch, your number of options decreases.

sounds like his plan for pakistan. why if he says the same thing as bush does it sound holy and legit. to me it sounds like four more years of non stop war.

as i said, i fear obama's reckless hand more than mccain's and now you know why.

so open your eyes and at least be honest with what you see and read.

This is going to be an unbelieveably close election on the popular vote. We'll be up late into the night I'm sure. In the US, elections are won or lost in Electoral votes, not the popular vote. In that context Obama is in a much better position than McCain. He has more ways to put together the 18 votes needed to get to 270. If you look at the electoral map as it now stands, state by state, Obama has led in the last 2 polls in Ohio. He is leading substantially in New Mexico, and in Iowa, both states in which Bush won. All he needs is Ohio,Virginia or Colorado, where they have registered 600,000 new Democrats. Getting the vote out is the primary goal. If the Dems can get the over 2 million new voters out to vote,it will be tough for McCain,who essentially has to run the table.

@harsch

he can get out all the votes he wants and win the popular vote but if the older states like PA OHIO and FLORIDA dont dig him, it doesnt matter that he might take new york and CA by 99%.

i would have agreed tuesday that it would be another late night election wrap . i dont anymore.

palin is a game changer and this time, based on trends and bounce and chatter good and bad for her, mccain is invigorated to perform at his will and bash the republicans at will because he gave them someone to live with and he doesnt have to be that square peg in a round hole anymore..

Can people explain what type of a bounce they expect from McCain? People look at the poll and say no bounce? He was down 8 according to some polls last week and now he is up 3! Remember before the both conventions McCain was DOWN in the polls, then only to get farther down after the Dem convention. Now he is ahead. There you go, his bounce.

@north dakota irish...

listen. mccain has not had a bounce HE IS bouncing. the question is how long he does and whether he breaks through the 50% ceiling.

obama people were theorizing three days ago that once you hit 50 it's sayonara for the other guy. these kinds of proclamations make them look foolish. no one knows, do they?

but mccain has now hit 50% and should reach 53 by wedsnesday, if he does, that is a game changer in this election since no one, not obama, not hillary not mccain has ever penetrated that iron ceiling.

boskop - I have not opposed Bush's Iraq policy in the last two years. I am not as fond of withdrawal as most Democrats.

As for the bounce, I assume Nate's overall graph is correct - which has basically held. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/what-convention-bounce-looks-like.html has the data. It suggests an 8 point swing from Obama to McCain that will slowly level out.

This is what we are seeing.

This is one of the few places that I've seen that is actually talking about the polls. It's obvious that when Obama was leading in the polls, the liberal media was mentioning it repeatedly and now that McCain leads (Gallup, Zogby, Rasmussen), I haven't seen/heard one headline, much less a mention in even one article/story. Doesn't this significant change in the polls qualify as big news??

Also, not to to be picky, but 48

Palin is not a game changer. She's a push the conservative vote changer. Although right wingers are enthralled with her, voters who are moderate Dems, and independents vote on issues not personality.And her positions on creationism, abortion and foreign policy are fairly extreme. Historically no one votes for the VP. This is McCain vs Obama. No one can predict who will win at this point. Hitting 50% or not doesn't predict anything. We have 3 presidential debates ahead. Those will be critical. I remember in 1980 when Reagan and Carter met in their first debate Reagan was behind in the Gallup polls. Once he showed people he was capable of leading by asking "are you better off than you were 4 yrs ago?" That was it. After that he shot up in the polls, and took the election. Anyone who is trying to predict at this point is just flipping a coin.

Guys we should also take into account the electoral college which has obama leading 260-194, after all the election is decided by the electoral college not national vote total. A recent poll showed that 51% of americans are concerned that mcsame would be a continuation of bush's policies= good luck trying to get to 270 with that kind of statistic! i think virginia will seal Mccain's fate, because their are a lot of military families. and mccain voted against the G.I bill! and military families are tired of sending their kids to wars over lies.

One other very important statistic, and that's Intrade. It's one thing to give your opinion in a poll,it's quite another to put your money into buying political stock. At Intrade(and there are others as well)investors put up money on who will win the Presidential race. At this moment Obama is selling at 56.3, and McCain 43.4. This means that no matter who they feel will win personally,Dems or Reps,their money says Obama. Intrade has never been wrong.

@ Michael McDonald,

McCain has had nearly a week of uninterrupted positive media coverage, which just like Obama, moved his numbers during the convention.

lol!

Did you somehow miss the non-stop aggressive coverage of Governor Palin that painted her as an object lesson in McCain's lack of judgment? That was still going on through Friday, and in some quarters it hasn't stopped.

Unless you were out of the country, lost in a the desert, or in a coma there is no way you missed it.

In the future, a little less spin and a lot more analysis, please. Actually, make that a lot less spin and a little more analysis.

harschwarz - Intrade has been wrong plenty of times. It had Clinton ahead in the primaries several times, for instance.

To: harschwarz

ya intrade is very interesting, get this: days before saddam hossien was captured i heard the odds of him being captured went up greatly on intrade! can you give me an idea of of what factors they take into account other then polls?

SNOWSPINNER,

how do u know rassmussen is releasing state polls tommorow?

Regarding the utility of national vs. swing state polls, I think it is fair to say this:

Swing state polls matter in that they inform projections based purely on EV counts. National polls don't help very much with that.

National polls matter in that they inform the media, whose audience is nationwide. The media, sycophantic by nature, takes cues from national polls in trying to assess where their audience is. I expect that with McCain up in the national polls, he will get more favorable coverage (such as stories about what McCain is doing right, like the favorable NY Times profile of Steve Schmidt today). If McCain were down five points, the coverage would be more critical (such as stories about Governor Palin not pulling very many Democratic female voters). That would be 'pulling' in the American, not British, sense of the word. :o

There is also a phenomenon of people feeling more positively towards a candidate if they think the candidate is likely to win. People tend to adjust their assessment of a candidate to fit the likely (or actual) outcome of an election. Thus hearing about a candidate's good standing in national polls is in and of itself a mild form of persuasion messaging. It also has an impact on the enthusiasm level of the candidate's base voters.

change - It's been widely reported at this point, I believe.

speaking of enthusiasm, this is nuts but since the palin rant from hell- obama has raised more than 10 million dollars, and rasmussen has been indicating for three days in a row now that 77% of his base is enthusiastically voting for him- that is trouble for mccain. also 17% are voting against mccain.

the numbers are 65% for mccain's base being enthused

SNOWSPINNER:

where has it been widely reported? because that makes no sense to do state polling at this time, there is too many factors that have not yet taken effect-palin's radical views and biography

It hasn't been widely reported yet. It's in about 10-15 media outlets. Check google news.

Change

Polls are backward looking. Markets, however, are forward looking. Markets have all the information (polls, news etc) and opinions (traders opinions) priced. That's why there was no bounce (except very short term, very low volume, 2-3% spikes) in the markets.

You can take today as an example. Polls show people's opinion for the last two days. On the other hand, market price is based on all the past data plus future expectations (Palin's media exposure, debates, economy going worse etc.).

hey swing vote what state are u from, and whats your prediction on the election?

Change,

I am from Maryland. MD is solid Obama.

I think Obama will win unless there is a game changer (like Iran operation, capturing or killing Bin Laden). Palin was not a game changer. She was like Obama's European trip, which ended up with a short-lived bounce. Media is making too much of little things. Because that's how they make their living.

Obama has a big EV advantage. He probably will win all Kerry states, Iowa and NM. If he gets one more state he'll win. So, McCain is actually on the defense and it is tough for him.

Given where the country is, it just shocks me that a convention so vitriolic can get a bounce like that. It reshapes my view of the political culture, and contests my assumption that the country has had enough republican frauds.

Change,

It is all about perception, not the reality. Republicans are responsible for skyrocketing gas prices but they changed the perception by proposing "drilling". Now Democrats are on the defense. Obama team should have been smarter and more responsive. For example, they could come with a plan which would include drilling but some other propositions which would benefit people, cutting oil companies' profit (such as, oil from drilling will be sold in the US only, half of profit will be used in building refineries etc.). Probably Republicans would oppose it and Democrats would be on offense. Republicans are far better in perception and expectation game.

I am either Democrat or Republican. This will be my first time voting (I'm 35). I really think this country needs a change. Not only change in Washington. Change in everybody's life. We cannot afford borrowing and spending, wasting energy, losing jobs and technological advantage. Most of the PhD students in science and engineering are foreigners. That's not good. If, instead of drilling, we talk about making our cars 15% more efficient, we would be much better off.

dude the country is so fuked its beyond belief! i mean think about an old warmongerer is up 3 points in todays gallup over an inspirational leader that made all the right decisions such not going into iraq! lol this country is going down the ****ter

Change,

The next president will face big challenges. If Obama wins, he at least have an excuse (Bush). If McCain wins, he has no excuse. McCain presidency may hurt Republicans and conservatives very badly. That's why democracy is good. You have to live with the consequences of your decisions, good or bad.

I agree with you. In any modern democratic country, the governing party would lose under this circumstances. However, race is still a factor although nobody can mention it because it is politically incorrect. I have democrat friends who will vote McCain. Only one of them honsetly told me he wouldn't vote for a black man. (BTW I am white). He also told me he knows many others who will be voting McCain because of the same reason. If 20% Democrats are not voting for Obama (despite a far right wing VP on McCain side), I don't have any answer to why? Lack of experience is BS, everybody knows it. If you can beat Clintons in primaries, you are more experienced than enough. Moreover, what counts for experience for presidency? 26 years at senate and 5 years as a POW?

I wonder if all these months of Obama building "get out the vote" infrastructure, will translate on election day.

It seems like a summer of Rebublican malaise might be hard to make up for in eight weeks.

Plus the talk is that Obama has spent a lot of his money on payroll rather than TV media.

Any opinions on this?

Posted on September 7, 2008 9:34 PM

Change,

Race thing has other side too. There are AAs voting for Obama just because he is black. However, AAs vote Democrat anyway. Moreover, they are only 14% of the population. If You have 15% of each voting based on race, then race issue hurts Obama badly. That's why Hillary got better results after she made the race an issue behind the scenes (i.e. very very hard working white working class comment). Obama knows it. A Republican senator called Obama "uptick" which is a racist comment. However Obama camp had to close the subject saying "he did not intend racism", because they know it will hurt them. On the other hand, any fair critique against Palin is called sexist on the other side.

Ciccina-
As has been repeated ad nauseum there are around ten or twelve battlegound states. The question that we are not getting an answer to is is the McCain bounce evenly distributed across the country or greater in, say for example, the West or the South or Midwest. If the bounce was greater in one area than another it could indicate areas of strength or weakness for either of the candidates. It would be more informative to see polls focusing on these states since calling people in CA or TX will not really help anyone figure out who is going to win.

zotz - To be fair, at the current level, it is all but certain that McCain would win the election if it were held today. A four point victory doesn't get erased in the electoral college.

But there is *no evidence* that this is not a normal convention bounce that will fade over the next week as new political news comes up. Likely candidates to re-shift the landscape include Palin's ABC interview, the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which plays towards economic issues, which McCain is weak on), and a return to ad production, which basically froze for two weeks. Does McCain have a new angle of attack to hit Obama with? Is Obama going to go back to hitting on the houses theme? All of this is going to shape the race so that the Republican convention stops being the latest news.

Nobody should have gotten too excited over Obama's big bounce, and nobody should get too excited about this bounce either.

SwingVote appears to me to be correctly assigning some lack of strength to Obama consequential to his race. I am for Obama. However, I understand the realities of politics in this country and race is still a major factor. I am also white (like SwingVote).

change,

The biggest bank failure ever (EVER!) occurred today. Obama mirrored McCain in his remarks about it. Here's the point: No one wants to offend the Wall Streeters and Fed Chairman and Treasury Secretaries who caused it, but, there is a right way and wrong way to handle a financial disaster. So far, Obama (and McCain) have both chosen the wrong way.

So much for rationality.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-07-poll_N.htm

McCain by 10 among likely voters in new Gallup Poll.

Wow.

Re bank failure, the whole problem could have been avoided with some realistic mortgage lending regulations. This should be a Democratic issue, given that blind deregulation is a clear Republican issue and a clear failure.

On another subject, two words: President Palin. What a concept.

boomshak - That smacks of a bad voter screen to me. We'll see. What we need is more data over time to show the effects of the bounce going out, not a higher concentration of data now.

POLLINGREPORT.COM
gallup/usatoday McCain 55 Obama 45

TR in VA

that polls makes me think why the hell couldn't obama just swallow his pride and put her on the ticket, how is he gonna overcome this bounce with 57 days to go!

Man this country is headed down the ****ter: a new war with iran, the economy with more tax cuts for the wealthy, and god knows what else

change - Ummm... straightforwardly? Bounces overcome themselves, generally.

Sorry, previous comment was to TR in VA, not change.

to snowspinner

One statistic that is comforting in this poll is 63 percent are concerned mcsame would continue the policies of bush!

but SS this is bad news, really bad news, 52 percent means mcsame is leading in swing states! imagine 54!

obama should have put hillary on the ticket, and just swallowed his pride now look

slinky: the realities of this country are that the Bush economic policies have failed (not to mention the foreign policy). Race will end up playing a small role in this election.

@boomshak: Hey, nice work for McCain---but it's not going to last. People may not have paid enough attention to the issues in 2004, but this is 2008; with the mortgage crisis and banking failures, the growing jobless rate, the growing economy that benefits only those in the top income bracket, the rising costs of health care, and creeping inflation and the huge debt, there will be enough people noticing that the ship is sinking not to look carefully at their candidate's plan---this should benefit Obama since McCain's economic policies are Republican boilerplate that have led us to our current situation.

@change: stop panicking. Democrats panic too easily which is why Republicans often find them wimpy.

pion are u smoking something, this is a huge 10 point lead 54-44- that is cause for panic!

@change: I don't smoke. It's a single poll that comes on the heels of a convention where the nominees distorted Obama's record. I don't believe it's going to last. Also, I think the polls generally underestimate Obama's strength because their weighting model is based on previous election cycles. Finally, in my opinion, over the next two months, the economy will trump other issues and the Republicans won't be able to escape the blame. McCain has *nothing* to offer on the economy.

and also you should see how much the intrade market odds just moved, im telling you hillary would have been better, she would have won. the republicans are gonna have a field day with this guy! he cant even answer a question without say eh eh eh like three times and taking an hour to answer! and for the love of god y didnt he put hillary on the ticket at least!!!

@change: "also you should see how much the intrade market odds just moved" Good. time for me to make some money.

Man, screw Intrade. Intrade is a bunch of non-experts panicking at small scale fluctuations. It routinely responds poorly and overly quickly to data, and has no real skill at prediction.

pion - I suspect a lot of it is that it's basically been a week since Obama has had any press, while McCain has had quite a lot of press. Voters need to remember why they liked Obama, or why they didn't like McCain.

57 days is plenty of time to accomplish that.

@Snowspinner: "57 days is plenty of time to accomplish that" I couldn't agree more.

well it looks like once again americans will fall for the same old nonsense they fell for in 2004. to be blunt im not surprised. for a nation that is supposed to be tough we are the most afraid. a man who is tough doesnt have to advertise it and doesnt run around punching people to prove he is. its the man who is afraid and paranoid who is always on the attack running around taking out a perceived enemy then looking for a new one when that one is gone. this year it was iran.nows it russia.next election it will be china. the republicans knwo we are afraid.and they use it well. because they know we are smart enough to look beyond the fear and see the reality.they know that we wont question that iran by no means has the current capability to build a nuke. they know that russia is not on a new campaign to reclaim it former soiviet nations. they know that terrorism is not as great a threat as hitler or the former soviet(or current if you hear the repubs)union. but if it will get them elected they dont care.so i m saying that it is more likely that mccain will win.because we are a afraid not strong. no thinking on what the issues are but on what scares us is how we have been voting. it was the repub convention mantra all week until the so called change lie of mccain.now you can insult me all you want but thats what i believe and it not unamerican to think your country has problem that they dont want to see.

The bottom line to all Americans; ask ourselves how could we rate this congress the WORST EVER, then turn around and nominate our presidential candidates from that CONFIRMED POOL of LOSERS? Its beyond logic - its irresponsible, its negligent, its insanity.

We are Truly Screwed '08

because we have uneducated working class as they are called.

I continue to wonder how some folks arrive at their conclusions. Want to know how Palin energized the party when she lives in a state with less people than many metropolitan areas? Simple, she appeals to folks that don't live in major metropolitan areas. The world (and the U.S) does not revolve around NY, LA, or DFW. There are lots of folks scattered across the country in small towns that have a voice, are more likely to vote and are very disgruntled with both parties at the moment.

Obama has run an incredible race for a junior senator, and I think he could have won until he picked Biden. Biden is not a "Change" kind of guy. HE also alienated a large amount of Hillary supporters with his pick.

By contrast, McCain couldn't get much support from his own party until he added Palin, a brilliant political move on his part. Palin appeals to the small town folks and the conservative base. These two things (Biden/Palin) have contributed to the bounce. If you don't beleive the Palin pick was smart, look at some of the Rep. websites that are selling shirts and stickers that promote "Palin/McCain". They prefer the VP candidate to the Pres. candidate.

If Dems want to rally they better lay low on the "experience" argument. If you compare actual elected office experience when comparing Obama and Palin the nod has to go to Palin. But the main issue there is it looks like Dems are trying to convince the American public that their #1 guy is better than the Rep #2.....Biden has more experince than Palen, compare VP to VP, then get back on the "Hope/Change" message comparing #1 to #1.

As it stands now, I think Palin/McCain will win in Nov. Unless Obama has some major magic to perform before then. Powell endorsement wouldn't be enough, he needs some serious juju to get back up.

Can't wait to see where this race goes next.

Today's Rasmussen has McCain to a one point lead. That tells us basically nothing, since by all appearances the night that was dropped - Thursday - was an Obama leads night, so even a tightening of the race from Saturday to Sunday was still going to favor McCain in the topline.

So really all it tells us is that McCain's bounce has peaked.

Snowspinner:

What it tells us is that McCainhas had a 3 point bounce on Ras from 45 to 48. That Obama had a 5 point bounce from 46 to 51.

Currently and these are good numbers for Obama considering 8 days of press dominating by Palin and convention McCain is at high waterpoint of 48 and Obama (51) is just about on his average polling number of 47 of the last 6 weeks!

There are a lot of panicking Obama supporters on this site!

With Gallup

On yesterday's number Obama bounced from 44% with McCain on 46% on August 26th to 50 high waterpoint which is a 6 point bounce.

Mc Cain has bounced to a high watermark of 48% having been as low as 41% in the last 2 weeks.