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 Americas 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 Obamas 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 ...
The “common factor” is the shedding of any appearance of objectivity in the media. The media/pollsters are in the tank for this rotten piece of human garbage like no other candidate in history. The unusual thing happening this year is the attempt at force-feeding us a candidate who opposes life and opposes the things that make America great.
“...then again it might be that respondents backing Obama are the only ones willing to answer the pollsters questions.”
I work at a survey research center. The above statement is truer than anyone wants to admit, or is willing to factor into the final numbers.
OMG how I remember that day when Sean Hannity sounded so depressed around mid afternoon. I tuned into him and he was talking about how it looked like (from the exit polls) that Kerry won.
Man I almost got sick. And then look what happened. I don’t believe these polls for one minute. Not after the last election or two.
I remember that. That’s why I hardly ever listen to him anymore.................
Yes, and that's a good point since McCain and Palin are clearly expanding beyond those states, and in the process forcing Obama to defend territory (PA, WI, MN, NH) that he ought to have locked up. In fact, if the DNC believed all the polls showing His Most Perfect Excellency up by over 10%, then he would not still be campaigning in those places. And yet - he is. That's why I argue (see my post #39) that something odd may be occurring this year, and if so, it is a globalized phenomenon.
“PA is not necessary for McCain. But it is necessary for the Obamessiah. “
Disagree.
PA will be for McCain in 2008, what Ohio was to Bush in 2004 (and what Florida was in 2000).
Literally, “the keystone” this time around...
- John
And you base that on what? McCain doesn't need PA to win. Are you presuming McCain will lose OH and/or FL but win PA? Are you implying that VA, CO, IA and NM are already in Obama's column? (laughable)
Do they? We have a batch saying Obama leads by 8, 10 or even 15 points. That's laughable on its face, and completely unsupported by historical baselines and what we're witnessing in state-by-state campaigning. Then we have a group of polls showing a margin of error race. Which is what we have had for months and months, and what we're witnessing right now.
Just by way of explanation for my interest in the subject: aside from the existential fear of a radical socialist like Obama coming to power, I have a degree in Political Science from Colgate University and wrote my thesis on the efficacy of polling methodologies across diverse populations.
I'm not a poli sci major, but I've done some light graduate work on surveys and random sampling. (Plus a ton of reading on the topic in my later years.) You undoubtedly realize that every poll (or survey in general) starts with a set of assumptions. Almost every pollster I've read or heard readily admits they expect huge Democratic numbers this year. I think this assumption is skewing their results. Between false ACORN registrations and, to a lesser extent, Operation Chaos, and just overestimating the impact of unreliable young voters (nothing new), I think they're expecting an unprecedented (in recent Presidential elections) Dem advantage of +5 to +8. Some polls even higher than that!
They expected a strong Dem turnout in 2004, and they were right. John Kerry got the second most number of votes EVER for a Presidential candidate.
What they completely missed was the powerful amount of anger built up by conservatives, anger that resulted in an unprecedented turnout. (final turnout percentages acc to exit polls were 37% GOP, 37% Dems) They were angry at the media for completely ignoring Kerry's many flaws and anti-Americanism, while still pretty supportive of the President.
I'm seeing the same thing in play this year. Even more anger, perhaps, given the complete fawning over a lightweight Socialist with significant ties to terrorists and racists (including his wife). While the support for McCain is not as strong IMHO, I think the Palin selection meets or exceeds the Bush enthusiasm levels. (based on anecdotal evidence rather than real data) Only time will tell if I'm right.
I personally thought the polls were fairly accurate back in 2004. This year their differential numbers are unprecedented (judging by recent history), and therefore (to me) quite unrealistic. Not impossible. Obama could win big. I just really don't think so. I expect turnout percentage to be within a point (+1) either way. And if that's the case, McCain's gonna win rather comfortably in my view.
how my peckerwood brethren vote will determine this race
especially our womenfolk....
At this stage the key is the undecideds and how that shrinks and changes the results. The conventional wisdom is that a fairly significant percentage of voters lock-in within 72 hours of an election. I see the undecideds breaking 2/3 for McCain.
hey andy.
FR is in a shoot the messenger mood...which is historically not a good sign around here.
we are a fickle peoples, if the polls are down they all suck and are run by Move On.org
if they are up then they are good as gold.
you are right that some of them are crap and some are not
the final polls will tell the story but that can be overturned by high GOP turnout
what worries me more is how much more money Obama has to spend on TV in key states right now than we do.
wish some GOP billionaires would step up like Obama’s have....
by the way...Campaign Finance Reform was supported by many here....they won’t admit it now....they were so sure that if Bush signed it for publicity sake that SCOTUS would nuke it.
they were wrong and the GOP never gets shite credit for any reach across the aisle legislation...ever.
I haven't really tried to assign numbers, but I think your assessment is pretty realistic for two reasons. 1) There are a lot of white voters/Catholics in the undecided column. It's a decent bet that a good chunk of them pulled the lever for Bush. KESG has been playing with the numbers and can perhaps go into detail. 2) The Obamamedia has made this election a referendum on Obama. All Obama, all the time. Plus an unprecedented amount of advertising sparked by HUGE fundraising. So in essence he's become the "incumbent" in this open race. Unless the Dems have a really good surprise (a la the 2000 DUI news) up their sleeves, I don't see him getting a majority of undecideds.
I do not see this happening at all. If it were true, Obama would not been defending Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida at this point. Moreover, internal polling in OH and PA belie the big media polls.
Bottom line: we need to keep people encouraged and positive. Ignore the psychological operations (PSYOPS) nonsense being tossed out by Chuck Schumer, et al. and get our people out to vote.
I'm in the military and work with a number of males - black, Hispanic and white. I personally know one Hispanic backing the O. I know several hundred white and Hispanic males, and know of probably ten that may vote for the O.
You’re right - the “Undecided” vote is huge by historical standards for this late date, and the way that vote breaks will make all the difference. I have a theory that a lot of these “undecideds” really have decided for McCain, but are holding back when polled due to the influence of social pressure.
"Obamessiah media troops are goose-stepping towards a landslide victory. The McCain campaign is committing suicide in their think tanks."
Exactly! And it should be pointed out that even during that rather miserable GOP year of 2006, the differential was only a +3 for the Democrats. So that +3 should realistically be the high differential turnout mark for pollsters, but in most polls it doesn't even seem to reach the lowest threshold. Rasmussen (who, to his credit, is very open about his intentional weighting process) is polling over 6 points higher for Dems than Pubbies. What on Earth could his justification be, other than inflated registration numbers and media-generated excitement over the Obamessiah?
I think the differential was +4 for the Dems in 2000. KESG, do you have that Wash Post resource bookmarked, the one showing differential for each national election cycle? I'm curious as to when the last election was where we had a +6 Dem differential. 1996, maybe, with a Dem incumbent?
Here's a very interesting stat that I just stumbled upon:
[2004] Turnout in the red states was 5.7 percentage points higher than 2000, while in the blue states, it was only 1.3 percentage points higher.Source
Talk about showing the difference in voter enthusiasm/anger!
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.