WaPo poll sample: 52% Democrats
posted at 9:05 am on July 16, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The good news from the Washington Post poll for Barack Obama is that eight-point lead among registered voters. The bad news comes from the sampling, which as usual skews to the Democrats. When asked to identify their party affiliation, the sample showed 37% Democrats to only 24% Republicans. When calculated for “net leaned”, the Democrats get 52% of the sample, compared to 38% for Republicans.
That doesn’t explain the big gap on the economy, though, which McCain needs to close:
Overall, the Democrat has a lead of 50 percent to 42 percent over Republican Sen. John McCain among registered voters nationwide, lifted by a big edge among women, and he has also regained an edge among political independents. But it is Obama’s 19-point lead on the economy that has become a particularly steep challenge for McCain.
Economic concerns continue to eclipse other issues, with half the country saying the economy will be “extremely important” to their vote. Gasoline and energy prices, which voters rarely mentioned at the start of the year, come in just behind. The Iraq war, which was again the subject of direct engagement between Obama and McCain yesterday, ranks third. A cluster of domestic issues, including education, health care and Social Security, ranked behind the war, as did the issue of terrorism.
McCain gets the nod in experience in leadership, but this remains a critical problem. In a weakening economy, people will tend to focus on pocketbook matters first, and Obama and the Democrats thus far have the edge. McCain has a big opening here, though; the main driver of economic concern at the moment is fuel prices. McCain has to hammer Obama on his obstructionism on increasing domestic supplies of energy through drilling, and emphasizing that more drilling means more jobs and less American money going out of the country.
Even if the eight-point lead was believable, it doesn’t mean much in July. Obama should be blowing McCain out of the water at this point, and yet he’s struggling to maintain any significant lead even among the friendliest sampling. All McCain needs to do now is stay close — and he could do better than that by hammering Obama on energy. If McCain wants to attack Obama’s strength, that’s the chink in the armor he should target.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Polls: The junk food of journalists and pundits alike.
TheBigOldDog on July 16, 2008 at 9:08 AM
Georgie S spoke of this poll last night. +8 of RVs but only +3 of LVs.
Limerick on July 16, 2008 at 9:10 AM
Polls mean squat.
bbz123 on July 16, 2008 at 9:15 AM
My dad always mentions the race in which Reagan was trailing by +10 just a month before the 1980 election.
This pretty much sums it up.
jimmy the notable on July 16, 2008 at 9:16 AM
…. because …. ?
wise_man on July 16, 2008 at 9:18 AM
McCain needs to hammer home the ideas that 1) economic problems are caused by high fuel prices and 2) that increasing supply is the only way to bring those prices down. He can then attack the Democrats’ plans for a windfall profits tax by asking how many more barrels of oil will that produce. He can also use this argument against Obama’s Iraq surrender plan because Iraq needs security in order to produce more oil. McCain needs to take Obama to the woodshed every week like this until the election.
Kafir on July 16, 2008 at 9:26 AM
they are manipulating the numbers, to try and make people think its okay to vote for obama
jp on July 16, 2008 at 9:32 AM
Polls are useless until the day after the election. Just show me which poll was correct the last few elections, you can see the trend. It’s all push polling.
Does the poll take into account the “Wilder effect”.
tarpon on July 16, 2008 at 9:32 AM
Polling data suggests 100% of polling data should be ignored.
The ultimate poll takes place on election day.
fogw on July 16, 2008 at 9:33 AM
I keep telling you and you all know, the POLLS ARE ALL RIGGED.
Hussein’s gonna lose big, because his background, naivte, inexperience, racism, anti-Americanism make him UNELECTABLE. McNumbnuts will win and the GOP will regain the congress.
The real issue boys and girls is HOME HEATING OIL PRICES and the snug comfortable democrats playing their violins while America freezes.
dogsoldier on July 16, 2008 at 9:34 AM
We’ll wait for the big poll in November.
Maxx on July 16, 2008 at 9:35 AM
1. Hire Mitt to handle economic agenda.
2. Hammer a “border fence” initiative.
3. Win Election
marklmail on July 16, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Senator McCain can’t “hammer” anyone on energy, because he is stuck in the tar pit of ‘climate change’. Essentially he has bought into the crazy notion best expressed by Harry Reid: “Fossil fuels are making us sick!”
Someone has to grab the Senator by the. . . ears, and pull him out of the tar pit, as I said here.
MrLynn on July 16, 2008 at 9:42 AM
I think the polls are extra useless this season because I believe both these candidates are replete with warts. Much of the voting this year will be against the other instead of for the one voted for.
I am sick of these lameo choces, and wish voters could have a vehicle to demonstrate the disgust for of these meatheads.
About all I can come up with is a bogus 3rd party candidate people could contribute to in order to run protest ads to humiliate the two parties for their derliction of duty.
Of course you don’t raise taxes in a downturn, of course you don’t cut and run in Iraq, of course we need to increase the supply of oil in the near term, and of course we need to migrate to non-fossil fuels, of course we need to stop illegal immigration, of course the rule of law trumps the selfish wants of illegal immigrants. Any thinking person knows this and it doesn’t make McCain a genious.
What is should do is illuminate what shameless panderers these two candidates truly are, and how sorry the political partiess are in fielding quality Americans to lead the country.
saiga on July 16, 2008 at 9:52 AM
4. Run against the Don’t Drill Democrats in Congress. It worked for Harry Truman and it will work for McCain, if he has the sack to run against his buddies in the Senate.
rockmom on July 16, 2008 at 9:52 AM
Because Obama is the more appealing candidate with youth, charisma, the offering of something different than a white guy. In contrast, McCain is old, cranky, distrusted by his base and just not appealing. Until the VPs are picked and the debates get going with issues in sharper focus. Appealing liberals trump bitter old Republicans.
highhopes on July 16, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Reagan told us that if you subsidise something, you get more4 of it : and if you tax something, you get less of it.
Lets review:
1986 amnesty bill (Reagan was lied to by Congress)
Lesson? Congress is a bunch of liars.
$65 BILLION to Katrina victims in New Orleans
Lesson? The government wants more helpless souls dependent on the government for life itself.
Democrats want to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory in Iraq.
Lesson? Thes politicians care more about their own political power than they do the best interests of the country.
We keep subsidising illegal immigrants, welfare leaches, and other bad actors, and tax the good actors. So what do the political parties do? Sameo lameo.
saiga on July 16, 2008 at 10:02 AM
1) Surrendering in Iraq 2) Domestic drilling – NO 3)Amnesty without secure borders 5) Higher taxes 6) Liberal appointees to the Supreme Court. What is confusing about these choices?
volsense on July 16, 2008 at 10:10 AM
+1 What The Funk?
kirkill on July 16, 2008 at 10:16 AM
1. White guilt.
2. Unrestrained adoration of The Messiah by the MSM.
3. Unquestioning belief from The Messiah’s followers.
4. Continuous nit-picky whingeing about some of McCain’s positions from “conservatives” (Limbaugh, Malkin, etc.).
5. The “hope” represented by Democrat socialist giveaways to the victim classes.
With all those elements considered, Osama Obama should be leading by 15+ points right now.
Maybe those elements will change as the race heats up.
MrScribbler on July 16, 2008 at 10:17 AM
Obama is going to help the economy by taking away everybody’s money?
Maybe there should be an IQ test at polling places.
EJDolbow on July 16, 2008 at 10:20 AM
McCain really needs to hammer the issue of how horrible liberalism is for the economy.
And where did the environment rank on the list of issues? Not on the radar? Wow, I guess every single commercial I have seen for the past two years is falling on deaf ears.
Environmental issues are for out of touch world leaders. McCain, jump on energy prices or you have no chance for the oval office.
Grafted on July 16, 2008 at 10:20 AM
52% Democrats in the sampling?!?
That’s it! Don’t trust the Liberal media!
If they ever wanted honest people on polls, they could call me.
newton on July 16, 2008 at 10:28 AM
These polls might change after Obama gets taken to the woodshed by General Petraeus in Iraq–especially since an informal ABC poll of soldiers showed 90% of them (54 out of 60) supporting McCain.
McCain can win on the economy by wholeheartedly endorsing drilling on the Continental Shelf and opening up shale oil development, as well as his call for more nuclear plants, and not mentioning anything about global warming. On Fox and Friends this morning, the hosts mentioned a poll showing 70% support for more drilling (I didn’t get the reference). A candidate who gets on the right side of 70% of the people wins the election–guaranteed.
Not only that, if every Republican Congressman and challenger to a Dem-held seat came out in favor of drilling, the Republicans can take back the House. How about it, guys?
Steve Z on July 16, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Add Sarah Palin as the Interior Secretary and bring General Petraeus home to become the Secretary of Defense and it’s a done deal.
Rovin on July 16, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Ed,
How do you know that? How do you know the sample was “skewed,” and not an accurate reflection of the country’s political leanings?
paul006 on July 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM
I believe Rush Limbaugh at one point (2004 or 2006 I believe) said that in polls people who cite “the economy” are often Democrat leaners or Democrat voters. “The economy” is often a code word for “domestic stuff I want the government to pay for.”
Sekhmet on July 16, 2008 at 10:58 AM
I think the real interesting part is by how far McCain leads on issues other than “the economy.” What this poll seems to actually be driving at are voters’ attitudes without outright asking them who they intend to vote for.
Even with the Democrat skew, it’s Obama who should be worried. This is where that guy who really has questions about Obama’s qualifications can express himself without having to go so far as to tell the pollster he’s not so enthused about Obama.
Sekhmet on July 16, 2008 at 11:02 AM
The Republican is ALWAYS “behind” in these early polls. Even Reagan, peace be upon him, was behind early on and we know what happened there.
For the last 30 years we’ve gotten it right for president (remember Clinton only got 43% so we technically got that one right too). We want an adult, not American idol for president.
Mojave Mark on July 16, 2008 at 11:48 AM
The Washington Post’s credibility is so bad that the only MSM newspaper any worse is the New York Times. Even New Yorkers who have been brainwashed for decades are unable to swallow the garbage served daily by the Sulzburger family.
volsense on July 16, 2008 at 11:55 AM
There are more Democrats in the US than Republicans, but not as wide of a gap as some of the recent polling samples have shown. This poll shows roughly the same gap as the June Newsweak poll, which showed O’bama ahead by 15. When Newsweak lowered the polling sample gap to something more realistic, his lead shriveled to 3.
Remember, this is a partisan newspaper doing the “polling”. Polling should be left to polling companies like Gallup.
Del Dolemonte on July 16, 2008 at 12:03 PM
You have to understand polls will always reflect the desires of those who have long term sponsorships for them. Overweighting Dems, that’s one method and can be argued away. Didn’t a bunch of Republicans reregister as Democrats in Pennsylvania and Indiana? We know the answer why, but it is cover for the polling organizations.
The only time they approach accuracyis in the last twi days before the election, when the pollsters have to face reality. Always the Republicans make last minute dramatic gains.
Corky Boyd on July 16, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Alas, even that poll is not a perfect predictor of who will be President. In 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 (and some say 1960) the guy who got the most votes did not become President.
Just another useless factoid.
factoid on July 16, 2008 at 12:36 PM
Well said.
fogw on July 16, 2008 at 12:54 PM
According to Rasmussen:
So Democrats outnumber Republicans nationally by about 10 percentage points and Republicans out number “not affiliated” by only 4 points. If the Post polled in mostly urban areas, that would explain the difference. Democrats tend to cluster in urban areas.
crosspatch on July 16, 2008 at 12:57 PM
A different example of the demented mind of the media (from the front page of the LA Times). Apparently, we, the great unwashed mass of proles, are demanding an end to the e-e-e-evil capitalist system:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-losingfaith16-2008jul16,0,1516735.story
Americans may be losing faith in free markets
By Peter G. Gosselin, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 16, 2008
WASHINGTON — For a generation, most people accepted the idea that the core of what makes America tick was an economy governed by free markets. And whatever combination of goods, services and jobs the market cooked up was presumed to be fine for the nation and for its citizens — certainly better than government meddling.
No longer.
Spurred by the continued housing crisis, turmoil in financial markets, spiking oil prices, disappearing jobs and shrinking retirement savings, the nation and its political leaders have begun to sour on the notion that the current market system is the key to a fair, stable and efficient society.
“We’re at a hinge point,” said William A. Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington who helped craft President Clinton’s market-friendly agenda during the 1990s. “The strong presumption in favor of markets, which has dominated public policy since the late 1970s, has been thrown very much into question.”
Django on July 16, 2008 at 2:06 PM
Here’s a suggestion Senator McCain, announce that you’ll support rampant capitalism, and reduce instead of increase, Federal regulations and laws that prohibit people from doing things on their own property. Announce that you’ll support a constitutional amendment redefining when the Government can and should take private property, only for true public works, like roads, schools, things like that.
Announce that you believe that the Constitution should LIMIT Government and not the individual. Tell the people that despite your work of all these years, you can’t find one single Government office, including your own, which is run efficiently. So you’re going to consider shutting them all down, or hiring a businessman to come in an make them more efficient.
No, never mind, it’s never going to happen. Just keep promising that Government will make it better, that way we’ll keep moving left, just not as fast as with the Democrats.
Snake307 on July 16, 2008 at 2:12 PM
That’s where the welfare checks and section 8 housing is so that makes sense actually.
44Magnum on July 16, 2008 at 2:56 PM
44Magnum:
Actually, the last time I looked, the majority of citizens on welfare were rural white people. Seriously. And I think that per-capita, the highest welfare rates were in Minnesota or Wisconsin.
crosspatch on July 16, 2008 at 3:40 PM
“Actually, the last time I looked”
It seems it has been a while since I last looked. Overall, welfare rolls have dropped considerably since they peaked in 1994. As people have come off the rolls, they have indeed been dominated by black and hispanic recipients and have indeed been concentrating in urban areas. Where at one time only something like 30% of Pennsylvania’s welfare recipients were in Philadelphia, that number is something like 60% now.
Milwaukee accounts for nearly all of Wisconsin’s welfare recipients now.
But overall, welfare recipients are down something like 85% from the numbers at the peak. Welfare reform was one thing I am glad Clinton signed.
crosspatch on July 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM
I just heard a refugee from New Jersey on the Howie Carr Show (WRKO, Boston). He said that Democrats, fueled by Hispanic votes (probably illegals) have taken over every county in NJ; every town now has its bario.
The reason, he says, is that they vote. The politicians want to stay in their cushy jobs, so they pander to those who vote. Only a third of eligible Americans vote, so a block of ethnic voters can swing elections easily.
If we want to turn this country around, there is only one way to do it: vote for conservatives in greater numbers than the dependent classes vote for liberals, and once we elect conservatives, hold their feet to the fire with challengers every election.
Easier said than done, I know. But there is no other way.
MrLynn on July 16, 2008 at 4:06 PM
I always wonder about Democrats being ahead when it comes to the economy. Most of the small business people I know are worried about Obama winning. They are worried about regulations and higher taxes for starters. And I think it will sink in over time that Obama does not support more oil exploration. McCain does. The vast majority of Americans do.
52% Democrats is a joke. And the guy can not even get them to all commit. I dunno, seems a little fishy to me.
Terrye on July 16, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Mr. Lynn has a point. Refusing to vote may not send the message you want.
Terrye on July 16, 2008 at 5:48 PM
Comment pages: