Posted on 10/22/2008 5:17:23 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
As has been the case in just about every presidential election cycle in recent memory, the polls are showing the Democratic candidate pulling away in October.
In just three elections of the last ten has this trend held up.
Why this is true is hard to say.
What is true is there are no credible reports of the major voting blocks: White women, White men, Catholics or Evangelical Christians moving to support Barack Obama in numbers he will need.
Of these groups the most immovable for Obama will be White males who will be 43% of the electorate.
For a variety of reasons no Democrat has won White males since 1964. The percentage of White males backing Democrats for president fell to 36% in 2004. As things stand, Obama does not appear headed to get even that much backing.
How low can this column sink for Obama ?
A just completed poll of America’s Military might provide a clue as to what the White male numbers could be this year.
The Military Times asked 4300 of its readers whom they supported. John McCain leads 68/23.
Admittedly this survey was of a conservative universe. Yet given the White male make up of the military ( 65%) and its exact match with the population in general, the gap from 36% to 23% suggests White males might be finding Obama especially hard to support.
Our military is 62/38 male. John McCain is leading among military females with 53%.
A September AP-Yahoo poll of only White Democrats suggests Obama’s White male support is not growing. AP-Yahoo said one third of White Democrats and 40% of all White Americans hold negative opinions of Blacks. Or was it of Obama himself? Can anyone say for sure that these folks will change their mind by November 4th?
(Excerpt) Read more at Collinsreport.net ...
My sister, a socialist atheist public school teacher, is voting for McCain. She is a typical rich liberal, but Obama is too much even for her. There is hope for our side!
If McCain can win PA, it will be a miracle because of the fraud in Phila.
yeah there is THAT, isn’t there? every time i jin up some hope for PA and the election, my husband points back to the fraud. sigh.
Too many white men have seen the results of affirmative action impact them directly. They will not vote in large numbers for an affirmative action president.
PA is becoming a necessary rather than a “nice-to-have” state for McCain. Virginia is going to be very close, and I am afraid that Colorado is now unwinnable. I would not have believed that four years ago, but apparently something dramatic has happened to the voter base out there (California influx?).
bump
Nope, gotta strongly disagree with you. The GOP is sending in hundreds of volunteers and staff to CO. Palin just did three events in CO, and McCain is doing two more events there on Friday. It's quite winnable. It's just gonna require a fistfight. I think VA is in as good or better shape than CO. PA is not necessary for McCain. But it is necessary for the Obamessiah.
C'mon guys, shrink!!! Do it for your country!!!
I think Mac wins Florida and Ohio, regardless. That's why PA is so vital - it would be a game-changer allowing for a loss of VA and CO and still providing a potential avenue to victory.
In 2004 polls showed Colorado very close. Here's one in Oct 04 with a 49-49 tie.
So could Obama win CO? Sure, but it's by no means a lock. I'll be surprised if he actually comes within four points of McCain there.
1. Men (of all colors, not just white) tend to have an attitude that they should take care of themselves (part of it is pride, as men are raised with the idea that a “real man” provides for himself and his family.) The Dem line has long been “we’ll take care of you.” That has a strong appeal to women (hence more women vote Dem), but it is a turn off to men. A better message for men would be “We’ll help you take care of yourself.”
2. White men have been demonized by the Dems for long enough that when Obama says he wants to “spread the wealth around” the knee-jerk reaction from white males is “yea, he wants to spead my wealth around.”
If 27% of conservatives say they are voting for Acmed, then people are lying to the pollsters to bump the numbers.
Pray for W, McCuda and Our Troops
Why would you care what the published polls say? McCain has his internals and this is what matters.
I live in northern VA. I've heard that argument for every election that I can remember. Despite the supposed liberal onslaught Bush actually increased his VA margin ever so slightly from '00 to '04.
The biggest problem that I think we're going to face is that McCain needs to "run the table", while Obama just needs to pick off a few formerly red states. It's doable, but I would far rather have the lead at this point
McCain is in better shape electorally than Obama. Or he's leading, if you prefer.
Let's be realistic, Andy. If you were McCain, and you saw REAL danger in losing VA, NC, OH, MO and FL, wouldn't you be spending ALL your time & money there since it's a proven strategy (see 2000 and 2004) for electoral victory?? Most of us would. So where are McCain/Palin doing much of their campaigning and spending their limited funding? Certainly in some key red states, including FL, OH, and CO, with some visits to MO, VA and NC. But where else? NH, PA, WI, MN.
We can argue that your state of NH is necessary to offset the potential loss of IA or NM. But WI? PA? MN? McCain doesn't need those to win. If he were truly on defense, he wouldn't be there. Add to that upcoming visits this week to purple states (blue in 2000, red in 2004) IA and NM (states many here insist are a lock for Obama, which I find utterly ridiculous).
I’d like to believe the article but the folks who join the American military are an entirely different demographic than the population as a whole. Guys like Joe Biden, Evan Bayh and Mark Warner won’t join...ever. In my opinion, that’s one of the advantages of joining the military.
Perhaps you’re right, but perhaps the campaign is just very poorly run. People I have respect for are comparing it to the Dole campaign...and that’s not meant to be a complement.
In my view the only people making that absurd comparison are the ones who have little to no knowledge of what's transpiring. I was in a discussion with a fellow earlier, who was criticizing the campaign's every move, yet he didn't even know where McCain or Palin were appearing. People in uncontested states may get the feeling McCain/Palin (or Obama/Biden, for that matter) aren't doing much. Folks in the battleground states generally don't have that impression.
- "Likely voter" methodology - use of "expansive" model vs. standard model (that accounts for past voting behavior)
- Overweight Democrat samples based on a common assumption about expected '08 turnout that is at odds with recent electoral history.
- Known higher propensity for Democrats to answer polls.
- "Bradley Effect" - anomalous answers due to perceived social pressure.
My point is that if we accept the idea that McCain has a chance to win, then we must also believe that something very unusual is happening this year, such that the validity of all current polling methodology needs to be called into question. On the face of it, that would seem to be a stretch. But this year, it might just be true.
You need to find new people to respect.
In ‘96 Clinton was an incumbent. There was a viable third party, and Race was not an issue.
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.