"A National Poll We Can Believe In" Or Just Good Business? (Why The Election Appears Tied Alert)

CollinsReport.net ^ | 9/17/2008 | Kevin Collins

[goldstategop]

These are trying times for our national pollsters. They have to juggle state polls showing a steady collapse for Barack Obama, yet produce national polls that make the race look close. Why would they do this?

It’s good for business.

Consider these numbers: Obama’s up just 5 in New York, 3 in New Jersey and 2 in Washington. Does ‘thisclose’ in deep blue states add up to “A national poll we can believe in!”?

Obama’s losing ground everywhere, not by a little, but by a lot.

His numbers are crumbling among White men, White women, Catholics, Evangelicals, Independents and his base.

So where are pollsters finding Obama supporters to talk to and report a tied race?

Obama is -12 with White women, a group he desperately has to win by at least double digits. Among White males, even the 36% Al Gore and John Kerry got now looks way out of reach.

Catholics, who will be 26% of voters, are running away from him. He is down 59/36 fully 10 points below what Kerry got.

Evangelicals gave George Bush 71% in 2004, showing what they will do when they support a candidate. This year they have a chance to vote for an Evangelical Christian they are wild about. A 75% support is not out of reach.

With Independents Obama is losing 52/37.

The most telling number for Obama is his disappearing Democratic base support which runs from 86% down to 81%. A new poll from Ohio puts it at just 82%

Where these pollsters are finding a few Obama supporters to interview is a mystery. What is not a mystery is that if they released polls showing Obama is finished, it would be bad for business. Reporting the Yankees are in 4th place doesn’t sell papers, but “Close” races do.

[goldstategop]

If Obama is in fact losing, why do the pollsters show the election to be close? There's really no mystery about it. If the truth was reported about Obama, all the interest in the election would disappear. Stories about a loser don't sell papers or airtime ratings but a "close" race does. And the MSM also has a vested interest in keeping its favored candidate looking good for as long as it can possibly get away with it.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Tublecane]

I briefly watched a news show for kids a few years back, and it called the 2000 election “basically a tie.” At first, it sounded reasonable. Then I remembered that they actually counted the votes up, and they actually weren’t tied, and then I wondered why people bothered to say it was.

[b9]

Also, we certainly don’t want McCain supporters getting apathetic, thinking it’s in the bag.
We need to WIN BIG to counter voter fraud.

[Wilder Effect]

I agree.. Right now it seems like our only ways to give our message about Bill Ayers etc.. is thru Talk Radio and blogs.

Once October comes along the MSM will start to tackle Obama a little harder as AD Rates go up and Right Wing Commercials start to get played. The 527’s will kick in and then FOX News will finally come out of hiding and hit the left.

[scory]

People on these threads who are a lot smarter than me have been saying for some time that the individual state polls are more important than the national polls in determining who is actually ahead in the overall race. There are some really sharp people on FR.

[Red_Devil 232]

Yep. It is all about money. Once the pollsters report a candidate way behind then the pollsters are no longer hired to produce daily numbers. $$$$

[PGalt]

Good analysis on MSM/polls.

The Democrat National Committee's print/audio/video reporters manufacturers have numbers to manufacture their numbers. They also have a candidate to manufacture.

[MrB]

So, just WHO are the 25% of evangelicals that support 0bama?

That makes no sense.

[Humvee]

We need to WIN BIG to at least recapture the House as well.

[Mamzelle]

Rush warned before the convention that the polls would be skewed to favor Obama.

[MrB]

We have to “win big” in order to counter voter fraud and litigatory campaigning.

The refs won’t have any effect on the outcome if you win big enough, gentlemen...

[PreciousLiberty]

“So, just WHO are the 25% of evangelicals that support 0bama?

That makes no sense.”

Black ones? I hate to be cynical, but...

McCain/Palin ‘08!

[Wilder Effect]

Today was the last day I looked at INTRADE.

They have McCain/ Obama tied which is fine.

On their homepage they give Obama 300 electorals, but if you look at their indivdual State Markets, he only gets 273.

McCain is ahead at Intrade in Ohio, Mo, etc...

What a joke

http://www.intrade.com

[goldstategop]

I believe Rush also said if Obama is not up 15-20 in national polls by October, he has no prayer of winning in November. He should be by up that much and it will soon begin to dawn on Democrats they picked someone who can't win, period. For now, they will continue to pin their hope on his being able to effect a miraculous turnaround in his political fortunes.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[puroresu]

I think those polls showing Obama in trouble in NY and NJ are probably outliers. But, there does seem to be some discrepancy between the internals on a lot of polls and the numbers on top. Obama keeps slipping among key groups in the internals, but somehow remains tied. I don’t see how a Dem can be down by 16 points among Catholics, by 12 points among white women, by double digits among independents, and so forth, and still be in a statistical dead heat with the Republican.

Something’s wrong somewhere.

[Wilder Effect]

Right. It is a way to suppress GOP turnout, because the DEMS know that if their is good Conservative turnout they will lose.

AT 5pm election day 2004, the liberals released their bogus exit polls hoping to suppress GOP turnout. I Voted 15 minutes after those polls came out as did many others.

[HamiltonJay]

So, just WHO are the 25% of evangelicals that support 0bama?

Unitarians, Persbyterian Church USA, et al.

[Salvation]

**Obama’s losing ground everywhere, not by a little, but by a lot. His numbers are crumbling among White men, White women, Catholics, Evangelicals, Independents and his base.**

I would certainly hope Obama's numbers with Catholics are disappearing. Have you seen the releases from all the Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals? Granted it is aimed at Pelosi, Biden and other CINO politicians, but it applies to ALL Catholics. We cannot vote for a supporter of abortion. And the dimocrats have abortion increases in the platform.

Updated: American Bishops who have spoken against Pelosi

Here is the complete list of American bishops who have responded to Nancy Pelosi's comments so far:

1. Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver was the first American bishop to respond
2. ... Bishop James Conley, his auxiliary, joined him
3. Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington DC responded twice, first in a press release and second in a statement to The Hill. He has also appeared on Fox News, I am told.
4. Cardinal Justin Regali of Philadelphia, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities, issued this statement through the USCCB website...
5. ... Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, chairman of the Committee on Doctrine, joined him
6. Cardinal Edward Egan of New York publised a strongly worded statement of his own
7. Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo issued a letter correcting Pelosi's claims
8. Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh and...
9. ... Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs have chimed-in
10. Archbishop Jose Gomez of San Antonio, CNA reports has added his voice ...
11. ... Bishop Oscar Cantu, his auxiliary bishop, has joined him
12. Bishop William Murphy of Rockville has published an extensive letter
13. Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa has a detailed response
14. Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas has joined the USCCB's efforts
15. Bishop Gregory Aymond of Austin is on-board
16. Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston mentions the USCCB on his blog
17. Bishop Thomas Wenski of Orlando has written at length
18. Archbishop John Nienstedt of Saint Paul/Minneapolis challenges Pelosi's statement
19. Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, President of the US Bishops, has weighed-in
20. Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, OR publishes in the Catholic Sentinel
21. Bishop Jerome Listecki of La Crosse, WI responds in a word document
22. Bishop Richard Lennon of Cleveland, OH will comment in his September 5th column (PDF)
23. Bishop Ralph Nickless of Sioux City, IA has one of the very best responses I've read
24. Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco has invited Pelosi to a "conversation"
25. Bishop Glen Provost, LA: "Catholic Church clear on when human life begins"
26. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn: "Judging the Candidates"

{Last updated on September 10th.}

Notes:

• Previous #23 has been removed. Bishop Joseph Gossman of Raleigh, NC is actually the bishop emeritus, and the new bishop, Michael Burbidge has not, to my knowledge, made a personal statement.
• Previous #16 has also been removed, it was an erroneous duplication of current #13.
• #26 was added September 10th, although he published his column September 6th

[ctdonath2]

Once the pollsters report a candidate way behind then the pollsters are no longer hired to produce daily numbers.

Also: once the pollsters report a candidate is way behind then the donors no longer hand over large piles of money.

Hillary was not all that far behind Barack, but once she got far enough behind all the donor money dried up.

[Glacier Honey]

Yes - It seems Fox is trying so hard to be “fair and balanced” they are not exposing or reporting on Obama like they should.