Posted on 09/24/2008 6:33:17 AM PDT by CatOwner
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Barack Obama attracting 49% of the vote while John McCain earns 47%. It’s the first time in more than two weeks that Obama has enjoyed a lead larger than a single percentage point (see trends). Both men are now viewed favorably by 55% and Rasmussen Markets data currently gives Obama a 52.0% chance of victory (see market results for key states) ...
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
But you still fail to address that all your posts are on low polls for McCain and you never are positive. It seems you enjoy touching the greatest fears of others. Expressing fears or doubts is good unless it it all you do. The other sides opinions can teach us a lot and I like to read some of their thoughts on other sites. There are a few people who only chime in with negatives and we know Democrats have read FR for years...just makes me question.
That's true, but I'm certain that those polls did not weight so heavily in Kerry's favor as the pollsters are in Obama's favor this year.
I did some quick checking on the exit polling from the 2006 election, a terrible year for Republicans. The turnout difference between the parties favored Democrats by 3%, 38% to 35%. Three points. Going back over the past five Presidential elections, the greatest spread in party ID was 4%.
I think it's possible that McCain is behind or that he has a slight lead, but that's impossible to determine from current polling. Any poll that gives the Democrats more than a 4% advantage in party ID is questionable, even Rasmussen, even Gallup, and especially the ABC/WaPo junk that came out last night.
>> Likewise, Obama must be leading nationally by about 3-4 points (actually slightly more) to have a real shot at Colorado
Why? In CO, Obama is running ahead of his national numbers. At least 1% ahead, it seems. He is favored to win CO (and thus the EC majority) if we have a replay of 2000, and the national vote numbers are close.
NM is 5 and IA is 7. We lose them both that means 12 gone from what we had in 2004. If we hold everything else we had in 2004 we’re still in. But CO, VA, OH, and maybe FL are critical holds. That is the only way McCain can do it, and right now I am very worried about them, especially with this Wall Street crap. As much as I’d like to think we can get PA or MI, I just don’t think it’s going to happen in the end. It may be close, but no cigar. When it’s crunch time, the ‘Rats will come home in those states, unfortunately.
But in Gallup's case, that may simply be the random result of a particular sample. A few weeks ago, when McCain was leading in Gallup, there were lots more Republicans in the samples.
Gallup intentionally makes no effort to weight their registered voter poll by party identification. This makes them different from most other polling firms (this is a big subject of debate among professional pollsters).
Gallup will further tell you that the national registered voter pool is approximately 4-5 points more Democratic than the national likely voter pool. My understanding is that Gallup uses a proprietary methodology (developed over a period of decades) for determining who likely voters are. Using this method, it has pretty much nailed the last two Presidential elections. In 2004, its final poll had Kerry leading by two points among registered votors, but Bush leading by two among likely voters. Bush won by 2.4% in 2004.
we are losing Iowa... which is normal...
so we are effed for 4 to 8 years right?
Here is why I think McCain is in slightly better shape in CO than current polls might suggest:
In 2004, Bush defeated Kerry by 4.67% in Colorado, compared to 2.4% nationally. In addition, Colorado is the type of state where a Western state Republican like McCain is going to do better than a Republican like Bush. In addition, Colorado is notorious for voting more Republican than it polls. So, that’s why I say Oama needs to be leading nationally by 3 points or more to have a real shot at Colorado.
It could happen we lose CO but pick up NH. Then we're tied at 269 and we lose in the House. Unless we get NH and one of Maine's proportioned (or whatever it is) EVs. Then we get to 270. But lacking that, I see no realistic way of winning without holding what we had in 2004 less IA and NM.
Some are really Dems who support him outright, others want him to win believing in the myth that it will usher in a rise of Conservatives, and others want to punish GWB (for the war or spending, or have BDS), or want to punish McCain for his RINO positions.
Any number of agendas. It's easy because of course we are all anonymous.
Just remember the polls are what they are, and there is nothing we can do about them, no matter who lectures on “facing up to them”, whatever that means, lol.
Republicans/Conservatives are and always will be the underdogs who fight and scrap for every vote.
Unlike the UnAmerican Democrat Party, we have a much higher mountain to climb because we do not buy votes with government cks, and most importantly we are treated unfairly by the MSM/Hollywood/Academia.
That Dem war room is an enormous propaganda machine, that is impossible to overcome.
Until we decide to stop whining over polls, and mistakes our candidates may make, and concentrate on being PRODUCTIVE, buy TAKING OVER THE MSM, HOLLYWOOD, AND ACADEMIA, then we will always be losers.
Don’t forget Wisconsin, which by percentage was the most closely contested state in 2004. Winning Wisconsin will pretty much neutralize the effect of losing Iowa and New Mexico (although I think McCain will actually win New Mexico).
botton line, who do you think will win?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.