Did they put Nader in this poll? He will take more away from Obama probably than Barr will with the conservatives.

I am hopeful that the conservaitves will not do the same thing they did in 2006 and have all 3 branches of the government under the control of the Socialists inthe Democrat Party

Pollster John Zogby: “Obama is in the driver’s seat right now, especially where it really counts – in the electoral votes. Bob Barr could really hurt McCain’s chances. McCain can’t afford the level of slippage to Barr we found among conservatives in this polling. While there has been plenty of talk about Obama’s recent emphasis on his centrist positions, he can get away with it during these dog days of the campaign as McCain finds himself still trying to shore up the conservative base. McCain will have to move to the center because right now Obama is clobbering him among independents. But there is the rub for McCain: Bob Barr has some juice among conservatives and is hurting him in several states. ”

Bob Barr receives the support of 7% of voters who identify themselves as conservative or very conservative voters. Barr gets 43% of libertarians and 11% of independents. McCain’s support among conservatives is 74%. On the left, Ralph Nader gets less than 2% nationally.

Obama has the support of 83% of Democrats, while McCain gets 75% of Republicans.

Independents break 39% for Obama, compared with 31% who support McCain.

For white voters, race doesn’t appear to be playing a significant factor. McCain leads Obama, 43%-39%, with Barr at 6%. Among black voters, Obama wins the vast majority of support.

http://www.the-peoples-forum.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=2101

Like I said above, “important numbers” aren’t just for Obama.

Well, I like chatting with you guys too.

Dunno how I’ll be much more of a poll fan after the convention, Doug. My impression of polls is that they are the tail wagging the dog, ya know. If people didn’t believe something before they read a poll result, they are likely to trend that way. Also, most polls are nothing more than a regurgitation that the past week or two of MSM headlines. I guess I fail to see how that will change post conventions.

But hey… you two like ‘em. I think I’ll bask in the moment of political harmony and convergence here….

As we saw in 2006 there were quite a few conservatives (or at least they claimed to be and I’m all that sure they were) who said they were disgusted with the GOP and that we needed to be taught a lesson. So, they didn’t vote.

Do you think THEY LEARNED their lesson or will they repeat that mistake again?

I don’t know.

We only have two choices and not voting is not a third choice, it is a default vote for Obama.

I am not fond of McCain. However, those GOP voters who don’t like him have two alternatives. They can sit the election out and hand the country to Obama, Pelosi and Reid. Or they can hold their noses and vote for McCain.

My money is on the second alternative.

But that was more for show than anything else. The really useful polling information comes from a candidates private polling, which is done on a daily basis to give some overall sense of the up and downs reflecting current events and campaign tactics.

At this stage, all this poll watching of media polls doesn’t mean a heck of a lot except to create some type of baseline for further analysis later.

Still, I have always wondered whether the former Hillary voters who won’t vote for Obama will be outnumbered by the GOP voters who can’t stand McCain?

P.S. I enjoy my chats with MataH too !

A Seattle art dealer? What Spiro Agnew accurately referred to as effete intellectual snobs! You are so far removed from the reality of daily living in America that you can barely see the planet.

“Doug, you may (or not) remember I have a particular disdain for polls. My thought is, ask 1000 uninformed Americans leading questions, and you’ll get 1000 uninformed answers, led right down the path the pollsters wanted. Now that I made that disclosure….”

Polls out right now simply give a ‘pulse’ on where the nation is leaning, that’s about it … it’s merely an academic spat outside of that.

However, ignoring them puts a candidate in peril. Therefore, they are a necessity in politics. Personally, I don’t have much faith in them –when they are close– until after the conventions; then they are an essential “food” group.

Therefore, your disdain for polls would be unwise if you kept it after the conventions.

MH said:

“To go back to Mike’s point about BHO’s progress in DNC unity… another CNN poll released yesterday confirms what Mike was saying…. BHO’s support appears to be eroding in his own party.”

His support does appear to be down a bit among Hillary supporters. Mike’s post makes a good point here. This poll may explain why Obama has yet to establish more than a 5%-6% lead over McCain.

But then Mike wanders out on limb:

“These numbers should have gone up by now, you would think. But it appears that Hillary backers are now even more resigned to defecting or staying home. The important number here is the number of McCain Democrats. If he only gets 5-10% of them Obama will lose in a landslide. Granted, we are still months away from November but this just can’t be good for Obama.”

There simply are too many variables to make that statement I highlighted; it needs to be flushed out and given breath to make it live, yet Mike won’t look at McCain’s downsides, just Obama’s.

There are a lot of “important numbers” for McCain, too: McCain evangelicals, McCain Hispanics, McCain fiscal conservatives, McCain donor groups. We don’t have recent tracking poll numbers here yet, but they will come in the fall; as they do, then we’ll see if that is an “important number” contrasted with other numbers.

Now granted Mike does state we’re “still months away”. But let’s be honest here, the political concrete simply doesn’t take meaningful form until after the conventions; before then, if we are going to talk about “important numbers”, why won’t FA discuss _all_ the important numbers” –instead of only obama’s missing Hillary supporters.

Are not the evangelical voters, that put Bush in the white house, “important numbers”; are not the Hispanics, that helped put Bush in the WH, “important numbers”; and how about ‘new’ “important numbers” like Ron Paul and Bob Barr or Republican fiscal conservatives, are they not “important numbers” for McCain???

Therefore, don’t snipe at us about a present sore Obama has with Hillary supporters, how it could doom us all by losing in a potential “landslide”, when all the “important numbers” aren’t even in the calculus– the argument is less than honest.

PS– I enjoy our chats ; )

How *past* was one of the great stalwarts of the GOP Jess Helms?

Speaking of Helms…, I thought this was an interesting post.

At this point in 2000 and 2004, the polls had Gore and Kerry in front of Bush, ranging from 3-5 points. Not an insurmountable lead, but solid and steady. Poll after poll from late winter into late summer, Bush consistently trailing. But, of course, we know the outcome of those two elections.

Colorado, the state I know the best since I live here. Though polls say “Coloradans have a high regard for Obama,” he has unable to translate this into an early, solid lead over McCain. Indeed Obama scored decisively over Hillary in the February caucuses and McCain lost to Romney by a 3-1 margin. Intuitively, Obama should have a solid lead. He doesn’t. It’s in the toss-up category, with a slight lead (within the margin of error) to McCain (+1).

For those that haven’t caught on yet, Colorado has reliably voted Republican since 1964 despite having Democratic governors for 20 years (Lamm and Romer). Also, legislature control is not a factor. The 1992 election was an aberration in which Perot siphoned off enough Republican/independent votes to allow Clinton to carry the state (Clinton – 40%, Bush 41 – 37%, Perot – 13%). Because of the ‘92 result, the media and polling units have portrayed Colorado as a swing state without looking at voting patterns.

So, how does all of this figure into this election cycle. Very little. In 2004, Kerry was running nearly even with Bush at this time. The State Legislature was split, Democrats in the majority in the Senate, Republicans in the House. Speculation was Kerry could flip Colorado.

Side note: On Jul 2, Obama came to predominantly Republican Colorado Springs. The theme of his daylong appearance was “National Service,” recycling an old Gary Hart theme from 1984. In the two appearances he made, both were by invitation only. (The second appearance was a private fundraiser.) In his first appearance, he said the 4th of July is more than fireworks. This particular quote was also slight backhanded slapped at Army personnel at Ft Carson where efforts to celebrate the holiday was in full swing. Definitely not a way to win votes in a strong military community. While Obama visited the Cheyenne Mountain complex, USAFA, and Peterson AFB in his capacity as US Senator, he deliberately stayed away from Ft Carson. Anyway, Ft Carson is in the midst of readying a brigade combat team for deployment to Iraq in September.

Mike’sA’s post was about warning signs for Obama… that the party unity ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. You responded with poll comments of McCain trailing Obama. Huh? Rather off topic, and if it’s supposed to mean anything than pollsters stayed gainfully employed for yet another week, I’ll be darned as to what it is.

While McCain is no Reagan, it might be noted that Reagan was consistently trailing in polls by double digit before his 44 state sweep/win. But while JSM isn’t Reagan, the DNC has a Carter-esque candidate who’s managed to raise as much strong opposition as he has support. There are few that are neutral about BHO. So I suggest you don’t celebrate prematurely, based on polls.

To go back to Mike’s point about BHO’s progress in DNC unity… another CNN poll released yesterday confirms what Mike was saying…. BHO’s support appears to be eroding in his own party.

If you believe in polls, of course. You quote them often, so I’ll suspect you do.

I”ve linked directly to the poll results, since I prefer that original source material. If you prefer the media spin, here’s the corresponding CNN article, Clinton Supporters still not embracing Obama.

There was a total of 1062 responders, 431 registered Dems (starting on pg 6) is what they based the BHO v HRC results upon.

June 4-5 had BHO as the preferred nominee over Clinton 59 to 35%.

By June 26-29, BHO was still the preferred, by only by 54%. He lost 5 points.

At the same time, those that preferred HRC went up from 35 to 43%.. a gain of 8 points to BHO’s 5% loss. Statistically, I give this one to Hillary.

HRC’s always had a more loyal base. 43% were always supporters, compared to BHO’s 39%. 15% said they did a switch from HRC to BHO. Likely because she suspended her campaign and BHO prematurely claimed victory, before the Supers’ votes in August. Technically, he still doesn’t have enuf votes to claim the nomination without them, and that 15% aren’t die hard loyalists. Those chickens haven’t hatched yet.

Asked about voting in the Nov election, but not for whom, 90% are very and somewhat likely to participate… down 2% from just weeks before. How many of those HRC supporters will not be voting for BHO, yet still participating? This is still the unknown.

The accompanying article puts it this way:

In a CNN/ORC survey conducted in early June, entirely before the New York senator officially ended her White House bid, 22 percent of Clinton supporters said they would not vote at all if Obama was the party’s nominee. Now close to a third say they will stay home. In all, only 54 percent of Clinton backers say they plan on voting for Obama.

If BHO can’t capture but near half of HRC’s base, he most certainly could find himself in a pickle come Nov…. which is, again, Mike’s point.