No Bounce for Obama!

It’s the while males dems that supported Hillary that aren’t ready to support Obama. McCain has 20 plus points over O. in this category.

It’s unfair to speculate this early if they will move to O. or not; it’s been less than two weeks where O. has not had a primary opponent. One has to remember all the chatter from Rush, Anne, Hannity and all the others when McCain got his prize; over time the chatter died the seas calmed his points went up.

The same patience in time should be given to O. Without this “decompression” period you’re missing an event variable in the trend.

Of course McCain is going to win, Obama is far too smart for the average American and McCain just dumb enough.

Of course McCain is going to win, Obama is far too smart for the average American and McCain just dumb enough.

The man who hasn’t got a clue of how his spiritual mentors and friends of 20 years preach and believe is smart?

The man that wants to leave Iraq but will return if Al Qaeda shows up there, but they are already there, is smart?

The man who doesn’t even take the time to research if we have captured all the ‘93 WTC bombers before running his mouth is smart?

I don’t think salvage is on the right side of the bell curve for American intelligence. And no salvage being on the left there is not a good thing.

I also love how Obama is admitting that black people will vote for him simply because he’s black.

It’s fun to cherry pick polls!

How about them apples?

There’s so many to pick from it’s easier to consolidate.

I like pie.

here is another view of McCain v Obama from an average of polls http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Interesting. Gallup says Obama is trending up?

From the Gallup site:

“Obama has averaged a four percent advantage over McCain……though in the immediate days after Clinton conceded the nomination Obama led by as much as seven points.”

Their lastest polling had Obama up by 5, used registered voters, +-2 margin of error.

Rasmussen said,

“Both results reflect a single point gain for McCain and a continued fade for Obama’s bounce.”

They used likely voters, had Obama up by three with a +- 2 margin of error.

Zogby/Reuters said,

“but his recent win of his party’s nomination has not produced a big bounce.”

They used likely voters, polled on a weekend, had Obama up by 5 with a +-3 margin of error.

ABC said,

“The presumptive nominee emerged from his primary season battle……with improved personal ratings overall, but with no appreciable gain in the head-to-head competition with McCain.”

Also week end polling, random sample of adults, had Obama up by four with a margin of error of +- 3.

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

Just wondering where all those 18 million Hillary voters are.

Mike,

This is spinning:

If anything, his lead over McCain shrank in most polls.

or just flat out lying. All I did was post some links to other polls. I offered no “creative” interpretation of their meaning.

Okay,

I’m guessing you didn’t check the links or you’re just in denial. Either way I’ll just sit down now…

I like pie.

So does Michelle Obama:

“The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”

Here’s an interesting take on the polls:

How Much Trouble Does Obama Have in Ohio?

However, two polls account for Obama’s lead in the two sites’ Ohio averages, and may actually be an early warning sign for the potential trouble Barack Obama could have in that key battleground state.

While both of the polls show Obama with large leads over McCain — one shows Obama with an 11-point lead over John McCain, and the other shows Obama with a nine-point lead over his Repub rival — the political breakdowns for the polls’ respondents are eye-popping.

Public Policy Polling, which has Obama with an 11-point lead in the state, breaks down the poll’s respondents thusly: Dem 55%, Repub 30% — a 25-point margin for the Dems. (A March PPP poll showing McCain with an eight-point lead over Obama broke down: Dem 48%, Repub 32% — a 16-point Dem margin.)

A SurveyUSA poll, which shows Obama with a nine-point lead in Ohio, breaks down the poll’s respondents like this: Dem 52%, Repub 28% — a 24-point margin favoring the Dems. (A March SurveyUSA poll showing McCain with a seven-point lead over Obama broke down: Dem 44%, Repub 34% — for a 10-point Dem margin.)

The wide swings in the four polls aside, having only 11- and 9- point leads while holding large margins in political identification like 24 and 25 points would be troubling for any candidate, even if they were accurate descriptions of the electorate, but when those margins don’t hold up to historical data — well, there’s even more trouble.

***

The last time the Dems won a presidential race in Ohio was 1976, when Jimmy Carter beat Gerald Ford by just over 11,000 votes, or 0.28%.

The last time margins for the Dems in Ohio looked liked those found in these polls was 1964, just one year after JFK’s assassination, when LBJ beat Goldwater in Ohio by almost 26% — in a year when LBJ won nationally in a landslide, by 22.5%.

***

It’s as if historical results no longer matter. These polls spell trouble for Sen. Obama in Ohio.

The media use these polls as news and try to convince the electorate that more people support their guy. That’s why the imbalance of dems and republicans. Another commie trick. They don’t realize the blogs will find out what the demographics are and report them. Evidently the media is full of these type of people i.e. liars. But then we already knew that.

I didn’t realize you guys censored same the way all the liberal blogs do… get a spine Mike.

There was no bile in the last comment you censored, anyone who got the chance to read it knows.

My comments (more or less):

Let me help you:

While I may have been mistaken about the Obama advisers, the conventional wisdom was ten points. The bottom line, and something that Fit Fit fails to grasp, is that every candidate typically gets a bounce when he secures the nomination.

Obama has not.

I probably overstated myself on the decline of Obama’s lead overall, however there is an obvious trend in the Gallup poll.

Fit Fit can throw all the temper tantrums he wants but he can’t change reality.

Hardly offensive or beyond the pall.

I conventiently didn’t have to include that because it’s still posted… I don’t feel I’m whining, just trying to plead my case.

Fortunately we can actually evaluate the individual claims made in the post if we want to keep score!

1) No Bounce for Obama! (headline)

True in one chosen poll. Aggregates of polls (generally considered more reliable than an individual poll) linked by others seem to show a bounce (see also pollster.com). And in fact most of the news and opinion articles on this acknowledge the existence of a bump - they just comment on it being smaller than Kerry’s or smaller than expected.

2) Obama’s advisers expected that [...] Obama would get a 10 point bounce

The link you have here is to an article that you also wrote, as far as I can tell. It’s not unreasonable to suppose that they hoped this, since Kerry *did* get a ten point bounce, but as far as actual substantiation there is no evidence that you didn’t just make this up. Google turns up nothing.

3) If anything, his lead over McCain shrank in most polls.

Pollster.com and every other aggregator I’ve checked show otherwise. This looks like pure wishful thinking on your part.

The rest of the post is color and speculation about Hillary supporters which may be right but can’t really be shown to be true or false (trivially true for *some* supporters, trivially false for all).

Of three claims you made, two are false and one is unverifiable. Getting huffy with Fit fit and proclaiming things like ‘If you are going to play games, be prepared to lose. You lost. doesn’t change that. Nota bene, people who offer convincing arguments don’t have to proclaim that their adversaries lost, because it’s already obvious.

Now that’s a bounce!!

I guess Hillary leaving the race did help.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/142465?from=rss