Gallup: McCain bounce coming from independents and Democrats
posted at 1:50 pm on September 9, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Conventional wisdom, if you’ll pardon the pun, held that John McCain’s bounce this week came from a party that suddenly discovered enthusiasm from its base. Gallup’s internals from its daily tracking poll tell a completely different story. His bounce comes from a significant shift among independents and even some Democrats:
John McCain’s 6 percentage-point bounce in voter support spanning the Republican National Convention is largely explained by political independents shifting to him in fairly big numbers, from 40% pre-convention to 52% post-convention in Gallup Poll Daily tracking.
By contrast, Democrats’ support for McCain rose 5 percentage points over the GOP convention period, from 9% to 14%, while Republicans’ already-high support stayed about the same.
The surge in political independents who favor McCain for president marks the first time since Gallup began tracking voters’ general-election preferences in March that a majority of independents have sided with either of the two major-party candidates. Prior to now, McCain had received no better than 48% of the independent vote and Obama no better than 46%, making the race for the political middle highly competitive.
In fact, Republicans didn’t shift much at all, trans-convention. Most of the bounce came from “pure” independents, whose support almost doubled from 20% to 39% in a week. McCain has opened a 15-point gap among independents overall, by far the widest gap in the race to this point. In contrast, the Democratic convention only provoked a small bump in this demographic for Obama, one that quickly evaporated.
McCain also scored among Democrats. Overall, he increased his draw by more than half, from 9% to 14%. Most of that came from conservative, “Blue Dog” Democrats, where McCain gained 10 points from 15% to 25%. Even his support among self-described “moderate” Democrats increased by five points, from 11% to 16%. Gallup even showed a two-point gain among liberal Democrats, but going from 2% to 4% probably is more polling noise than a real move.
What does this mean for the election? It’s both danger and opportunity. These gains are likely shallow in depth, at risk if Obama can start succeeding in running to the center. On the other hand, it shows how unsuccessful he has been so far in doing so. The more people see of Obama, the more voters see him as a doctrinaire, hard-Left liberal and/or unqualified to run the nation as his first executive position ever. Either of those will become poisonous to Obama’s chances to gain the center in November.
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
(I’m repeating this comment here because I think it’s a TP that should be repeated as it resonates with my collegaues here at work…)
My son used to work for an armored car company. They taught him how to spot counterfeit bills NOT by showing him fakes, but by becoming an expert at what the genuine article looks and feels like.
While some folks are more easily fooled, we generally all have an innate sense of authenticity…Gov Palin IS the real thing, and by comparing her to Obama, all of his phoniness comes clearly into focus.
JustTruth101 on September 9, 2008 at 1:53 PM
McCain’s been crowding the center for years now. Obama’s appeal to the center just comes across as phony. You’d hope voters will realize that.
Obama’s camp has been acting a little hysterical for the past week or so. I bet their internals are showing worse signs than these more generic polls do.
lorien1973 on September 9, 2008 at 1:53 PM
Are they Reagan Democrats, McCain Democrats, Palin Democrats, or Anybody but Obama Democrats?
Akzed on September 9, 2008 at 1:54 PM
correct Lorien the very thing that gives him grief from us on the right is what has earned him the trust of the middle and middle/left….
Bambi’s gymnastics trying to leverage the middle are just that gymnastics.
Nobody trusts him on taxes in the middle or middle/right going right.
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 1:55 PM
I wonder how Olbermann is going to spin this one? He’ll probably say it’s out of “fear.”
DanStark on September 9, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Or that all the people who don’t support Obama only do so because they are racists. I hear this more often, as a way to attempt to explain his falling support.
wise_man on September 9, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Yes, apparently racism is contagious.
Geronimo on September 9, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Puma votes? McCain is getting Puma votes? I question the timing. ~B
Brian on September 9, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Maybe the intelligent (read: not cultish) Democrats realize the danger:
The phone in the White House rings at 3 AM.
It’s CENTCOM. After two years of Barack appeasement of terrorists, rogue nations and a newly strident Soviet Russia, the Russian’s have attacked a close ally of the US. US citizens in the area have been killed or captured.
The General on the line wants permission from President Barack Hussein Obama to enact a pre-determined response plan. An act of WAR has occurred. American’s have died.
Barack: “Uh uh, umm, uh, uh, umm, okay, look, listen, uhh, umm. Well, you see, what we need uhh, is uhh, change. Umm, we must act uhh, with audacity, umm, to hope, uhh, look, this isn’t the administration of uhh, George Umm Bush, I uhh, umm…
General: *click*
Montana on September 9, 2008 at 2:01 PM
I know several Conservatives who were skipping the presidential vote or voting third party who are now strongly for McCain/PALIN. There is a large bounce from the Conservatives also. I always said this choice was not to get women as much as get the Conservatives on board. He could win without liberal women, but not without Conservative men/women.
I am glad they are also getting the independents though, It might make the victory margin larger.
Corsair on September 9, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Think of where the dummocrats have gone in the last 30 years. Cartah, Dukaka, BJ, Al Grunt, Kerry-Heinz, Hussein. They call this a party? Why not run Michael Moore and be done with it?
saved on September 9, 2008 at 2:02 PM
HAHAHAHA take that you silly dem’s but really I still don’t trust polls because there is still 50+ days yet, that being said bring on the debates I have the popcorn ready to pop and the beer on ice.
tee866 on September 9, 2008 at 2:03 PM
Obama successfully running to the center?
awake on September 9, 2008 at 2:03 PM
I’m sure the convention has increased GOP turnout as well, which wouldn’t be reflected in a poll.
lodge on September 9, 2008 at 2:03 PM
Reagan Democrats = Palin Democrats
jp on September 9, 2008 at 2:04 PM
Could be the PUMAs.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:05 PM
Polls do show that enthusiasm amongst Republicans has increased since the Palin announcement, and continued to increase during the convention.
The polls that I’ve seen also ask how likely you are to vote.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:08 PM
The danger is McCain will govern to please his base of independents and Democrats while screwing conservatives at every turn.
Valiant on September 9, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Oh that would be such a great commercial. Please pay attention RNC!
NTWR on September 9, 2008 at 2:09 PM
The danger is McCain will govern to please his base of independents and Democrats while screwing conservatives at every turn.
Valiant on September 9, 2008 at 2:09 PM
I’ll settle for center/right….
over left/center
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:11 PM
Democrats and Independents should take a second look and remain wary of any Republican from Alaska.
There must be something in the water up there…?
First Stevens, then Murkowski and now Palin…?
Perhaps most of these shenanigans and skullduggery is just now being investigated and coming into clear view…?
J_Gocht on September 9, 2008 at 2:12 PM
I’m guessing the base didn’t provide a bump because many of us planned on voting “for” McCain since Obama would have been far far worse on many other issues (including judges). With Palin, at least, we may not need to bring the motion sickness bags into the voting booth (and I don’t think that is a poll question). I have to agree with lodge’s assessment.
batter on September 9, 2008 at 2:12 PM
That surprises me actually. I was one of those hold-your-nose-and-maybe conservatives who really, really disliked McCain. The convention really spun me around on my heel.
I wonder how many people like me said they were going to vote McCain, but might not have turned out on election day?
S. Weasel on September 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM
1. I’d be wary of attempting to discern who “true” indpendents are in the Gallup sample;
2. Obama started trying to lunge to the center in late June — and the gap between Obama and McCain has been shrinking ever since (per the RCP avg chart). Moving to the center is Nixonian and damages Obama’s brand, just like picking Biden and giving a boilerplate convention speech.
Karl on September 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM
While I’m pleased to hear the news, I’ll keep my optimism restrained for now.
I will, however, enjoy the spectacle as the somewhat more poll-driven opposition camp continues to besmirch their trews. (Yes, that’s one of those phrases you save up for just the right opportunity.)
Personally I’m still counting this as post-convention bounce. If the polls are still in McCain’s favor next week I’ll pay more attention. And even then it will be to see if the D’oh!bama camp continues to come unglued.
Fun thing about a cult of personality – cracks that aren’t patched up very quickly can take the whole thing down in a big screaming mess.
Hey, a question for the more well-connected: what would / could the D’s do if the Obama campaign totally implodes?
KCSteve on September 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM
DITTO.
Its amazing and done in an arguably masterful stroke.
I hope the house and senate can ride the coattails to send Pelosi/Reed back to where they belong. In the minority.
Marine_Bio on September 9, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Maybe.
But, if we’re screwed either way, I’d still rather have McCain/Palin doing it.
Figuratively, I mean.
BacaDog on September 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Obama has too many capable handlers to remain off balance for too long, so we should all expect him to formulate a much more effective strategy between now and election day. (Though I do like it that he has so many fund-raising appearances. Too bad his European appearance is in London instead of Berlin or Zurich.)
Surely the Democrats won’t be such complete idiots as to keep Sarah Palin at the center of the campaign story too much longer. Though Charles Gibson should guarantee us at least another (delicious) week.
Maybe Palin could arrange to go on Meet the Press in, say, early October, just to keep it revved up?
JudetheFossil on September 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM
You mean your crazy rantings haven’t worked yet?
Obama can’t go towards the center any more because he’s thrown all his principles off the plane. I believe the tax cut flip flop was the last Barry in the chamber.
Chuck Schick on September 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM
It is not the people in “the ideological center” per se, it is the politically disengaged, now engaged. The people who are SICK of politicians etc… They saw the commotion created by the announcement of Palin, media frenzy and curiosity had them tuned into see her at the convention (ratings bounce), and they were convinced that McCain/Palin are the real deal. If they can keep those people convinced and keep the base, they’ll seal the deal.
rightallthetime on September 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
I don’t know what race or strain Olbermann is, but I dont like it.
saiga on September 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM
I think we had one of the greatest contrasts in acceptance speeches in modern political history – and that accounts for most of this shift.
Obama’s speech was red meat for the left, attacking McCain angrily (something he doesn’t do particularly well or often). It did almost nothing to reach towards the middle, the undecideds and independents.
McCain’s speech was “high road”, much more genuine (even if he delivers it poorly compared to the other 3 candidates’ oration skills), and reached out to independents (by bashing his own party for “losing their way”). McCain left the “undercard” (Palin, Guiliani, etc) to provide the red meat to Republicans at the convention.
avwh on September 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM
There’s a better chance that McCain would veto any attempts to pass the bill to eliminate secret ballots in unionization drives and any attempts to bring back the fairness doctrine.
Obama has stated that he will appoint judges and SC justices who agree with his postion that a judges view of “fairness” trumps what the constitution actually says.
McCain has stated that he will appoint judges who take a constructionist view of the constitution.
On these three issues alone, voting for McCain is a no brainer.
There may be a lot of issues where the difference between them isn’t a lot, but if the Democrats get these three, there’s a good chance that they can lock themselves into power for generations to come.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:23 PM
the only thing I’m well connected to is this chair but I’ll put in my two cents. The Dems will split if they lose.
One big concern I’m starting to have is safety. This Austin domestic wannbe SDS group has made some serious threats. Right now it looks like they fire bombed the gov’s mansion last month and have threatened more. The more the Dems implode the more radical their fringe will get.
Limerick on September 9, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Basic difference between Dems and Repubs: Republicans think that the American people are smart enough to choose wisely.
The Dems believe that Americans are dumb enough to vote for Obama.
Doug on September 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Seem to be a lot of closet racists out there, or were they closet sexists who felt guilty? I better call Baracky HQ and get the latest explanation.
Bishop on September 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Don’t be concerned….Texas is a castle state.
The temper tantrum will present the opportunity for some aggressive retirement counseling and poison $ociali$m for a generation.
sven<—–prefers glazer safety slugs
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:25 PM
Sorry, I should have said ‘candidate’ safety.
Limerick on September 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM
I remember reading about an experiment from many years back.
They took one of those shoot em up type video games where two people competed against each other.
One of the inputs they connected to a single joystick.
The second input they connected to an array of joysticks that they had averaged together. That is, the electronics averaged the position of all the joysticks, and that signal was fed to the input. If more than half of the buttons were pressed, then the computer was signaled that the button was pressed.
What they found was that as the number of players on the second input increased, the quality of play went down. It didn’t matter how expert the individual members of the “team” side were, quality of play went down as the numbeer of players went up.
If I remember right, they found that a novice player, playing solo, could usually beat 10 guru class players, playing as a team.
I have a suspicion that Obama’s weakness is the number of advisors advising him. Odds are he is getting conflicting advice, and from what I have read of Obama’s personality, decisive decision making is not his strong suit.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:28 PM
sven<—–prefers glazer safety slugs
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:25 PM
Bishop prefers Black Talons™, and is willing to pay a premium to his ammo pimp for this wonderful luxury round.
Bishop on September 9, 2008 at 2:29 PM
McCain needs to lock these people in. I have three things, among many, I’d love to see McCain-Palin start tagging to Obama.
First, Obama’s “middle-class tax cut” comprises six or seven refundable tax credits that are nothing more than glorified welfare. Removing so many people from the income tax rolls altogether and making them to some extent welfare queens is troubling. If it’s too impolitic to point that out, fine. But I’ll also point out that Obama’s middle-class tax cut will likely complicate the federal income tax returns of middle-class taxpayers to an extraordinary degree.
Second, flying under the radar screen is a program Obama describes as a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded as the military. In effect, Obama thinks we need an army of community organizers at a cost estimated at $500 billion.
Third, also flying under the radar screen is Obama’s Global Poverty Act–$845 billion over 10 years above and beyond our current foreign aid commitments. Oh, from what I understand, it will be funneled through that model of efficiency, the UN.
OT: Democrats often bemoan the reduction in working class wages during Bush’s two terms as evidence of “the failed Bush policies.” Last night, I saw a Republican talking head (I forget) throw the point back at the Democratic talking head (I forget) by saying that this Democratic talking point is misleading because their figure factors in 11 million illegal immigrants, whose numbers and lower wages skew the figure cited by Democrats. The Democratic talking head quickly switched the subject, so I am wondering about the point.
Anyone?
BuckeyeSam on September 9, 2008 at 2:29 PM
The best news in this poll is that Obama is below 40%. It really does seem possible that McCain/Palin could put together a landslide of Reaganesque proportions, approaching 60%. WOW!
Be still my heart! Much more work to do. No overconfidence!
Loxodonta on September 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM
The main reason against voting for any third party is that your vote will be wasted. The more the Democrats lose, the more that argument becomes non-operational. If you are going to lose anyway, why not vote for the person you really like, rather than the one you like somewhat.
The Libertarians have a shot at pulling away some of the socially liberal, but economically conservative Democrats. (there are a few of those left)
The Green has a shot at many of the hard left Democrats. (Many of them are already grumbling because of how far Obama has drifted towards the center.)
As I’ve mentioned before, there is vote level that a party has to stay above in order to get automatic inclusion on ballots, matching funds, etc. I’m not sure where that level is, but I think it’s 25%.
My personal fantasy is for the Democrats to disintigrate and for the Libertarians to take their place.
We can duke it out on social policy, while both sides agree on shrinking the size of govt.
(A guy has to have something to hope for.)
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM
ah don’t worry USSS details would drink their milkshake these neo-wannabes suck.
BTs are not bad, but they are hard to find here.
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
… and the more the left-leaning media bash her, the higher she will go in the polls, out of Americans’ historic love for an underdog.
The Dems and their media surrogates are looking more and more like those creepy bureaucrats in the movie “Enemy of the State.”
VastRightWingConspirator on September 9, 2008 at 2:36 PM
That income number is also skewed because it only examines monetary wages.
The cost of health insurance and other benefits has been sky rocketing in recent years. Total compensation has been going up, it’s just that most of it is not in the form of take home pay.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM
I suppose it’s really for a post-election thread, but I’ve thought about this too. At some point, the more reasonable Democrats have to decide that they need to get away from the party’s fringe elements. I guess that would leave 10% to 20% of the country divided among myriad of nutty causes and two parties dividing the rest.
BuckeyeSam on September 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM
BTs are not bad, but they are hard to find here.
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Hard to find anywhere considering that they became LOE (under a new and less scary name) back in 2002 or 2003; you just need to know the ‘right’ people and be willing to pay the premium. Needless to say I rarely use them for target practice.
Bishop on September 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Well barack the bombthrower is losing the argument over the WOT. That is turning off some independants and democrats
William Amos on September 9, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Careful what you wish for, Jude…!
J_Gocht on September 9, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Yes, indeed, good advice.
But do remember that it was the Obama-ites who have been clamoring for Sarah Palin to subject herself to up close & in person media scrutiny. So, this is not what I wished for. It is what they wished for.
JudetheFossil on September 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Attack Obama with those Ads attaching him to the House Democrats.
At the end of September announce the intention to put Liebermann in as Sec. of State. Have Gov. Palin go on Lou Dobbs to talk about energy policy.
Sackett on September 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Loxo_, it could possibably be; truly Reaganesque in its proportions…!
J_Gocht on September 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM
When the GOP is the first party to elect a black man/woman to POTUS we’ll be able to put that canard to rest.
DerKrieger on September 9, 2008 at 2:51 PM
IF Barry Hussein runs to the center, he will LOSE his only base, the looney toon fringe left….they will sit on their welfare butts come election day if he even breathes centrist…..
SDarchitect on September 9, 2008 at 2:51 PM
The Palin pick and speech probably accounted for much of the bounce among Independents. McCain had probably rallied the base pre-convention with his Saddleback remarks, while Obama turned off any Evangelicals he might have had.
By choosing Palin as his running mate, McCain chose an “outsider” who did have an admittedly short record of reform, who was relatively unknown to Democrats and the media. The Obama campaign’s efforts to label her as inexperienced have backfired on Obama, and the media attacks on her left people curious to actually hear her, which probably drove up the audience for her speech, who found her likeable, smart, and competent, and good at poking holes in Obama’s claims (she didn’t go after Biden).
Palin’s pro-life record has solidified the GOP base, but she HAS gone after corruption in Alaska, even in her own party, which appeals to independent voters, who had turned away from the GOP in 2006.
If Obama tries to “tack to the middle” now, some of his moonbats might not bother voting, and McCain should jump all over his flip-flops between the primary and general election (they are legion!). Palin can be a very strong advocate on the energy issue, where 60-70% of the voters favor offshore drilling, while reassuring independents that McCain won’t be owned by the oil companies. The one possible weakness that remains is Palin’s lack of foreign-policy experience relative to Biden, but even if she loses that debate, McCain can dominate Obama on that issue.
If Obama persists in trying to bash Palin, he will look weak by comparison–Obama vs. Palin is probably a wash, but McCain will look statesmanlike by comparison. If Obama tries to return to an issues-oriented campaign, McCain/Palin will have to explain the wisdom of a corporate tax-cut, and the folly of Obama socialism, and hopefully Palin will have boned up on Economics 101.
Steve Z on September 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM
They are Democrats that can put together rational thoughts, and can analyze the crap spewed forth in the news and make educated decisions. Unlike libtards that want either anarchy or socialism. And think that wars should never be waged, even if the greatest society in the history of the world goes down in flames.
kirkill on September 9, 2008 at 3:00 PM
I’m thinking of Mr. Drywall of course.
kirkill on September 9, 2008 at 3:01 PM
McCain will govern to suit his own principles. He’s pretty much made that clear. Most of his principles are also mine. Almost none of Obama’s are. No brainer
jeanie on September 9, 2008 at 3:01 PM
It’s all in the timing. Both polls came out after everybody knew Sarah Palin would be John McCain’s VP nominee, so I wouldn’t expect a lot of additional Republican support to show up here.
steveegg on September 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Thank you. Why am I not surprised that we hear a skewed figure?
OT. Has anyone looked at Obama’s tax returns (2000 through 2007)? He and his wife had one year (2004) when their AGI was as little as $207K, but that year aside, their AGI figures (rounded) were $241K (2000), $273K (2001), $259K (2002), $238K (2003), $1.655M (2005), $983K (2006), and $4.14M (2007). Yet for 2000 through 2004 Obama and his wife reported $72 of interest income (taxable or tax-exempt) and no dividends.
In 2005, they reported taxable interest of $13,385 and dividends of $2,754; in 2006, taxable interest of $4,590 and dividends of $1,188; and in 2007, taxable interest of $1,442, tax-exempt interest of $45,851, and no dividends.
In February 2005, the Obamas bought two stocks, but they were out of them by November 2005, selling one for a $2,700 gain and the other for a $15,200 loss.
I don’t know about anyone else, but these tax returns seem to demonstrate two people who don’t know anything about personal financial planning and little about the financial markets.
To be fair, the two McCain returns that I’ve seen show AGI figures of $339K (2006) and $387K (2007). He receives a military pension of, I think, around $60K a year that’s nontaxable because it’s been classified as nontaxable disability pay. In 2006, he reported $14 of taxable interest and no dividends. In 2007, he reported $48 of taxable interest and dividends of $74. From the pages 1 and 2 of Cindy McCain’s 2006 return, she seems to be invested in the markets.
I’m not sure which way this information cuts, but anytime Obama is touted as better on the economy I think of his tax returns. I wouldn’t let him run a lemonade stand. McCain may joke about it as a weakness, but I’m much more comfortable with the idea of Republican economic advisers than I am with the idea of Democratic economic advisers. Indeed, I’ve always thought that the expression “Democratic economic adviser” was an oxymoron.
BuckeyeSam on September 9, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Like David Brooks said:
Obama can’t compare to McCain’s record of standing up to (and at times infuriating) his own party. Listening to McCain criticize his party in his acceptance speech (at the RNC, no less) was music in Independents’ ears.
RightOFLeft on September 9, 2008 at 3:52 PM
What’s interesting to me is this graf:
Am I wrong, are is Gallup basically predicting a McCain victory and saying an Obama come-back is a long-shot?
docweasel on September 9, 2008 at 4:25 PM
Obama can regroup and reorganize all he wants – but then the next attack from McCain will come where he doesn’t expect it and he will be back on his heels again.
My guess? It’s going to be an attack on Obama’s and the Democratic establishment’s ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is a political scandal of epic proportions and it ALL will hit Democrats if the Republicans have the nerve to get the facts out.
rockmom on September 9, 2008 at 4:40 PM
That’s because there’s a lot of ‘pessimistic’ people within the GOP that are still sore about McShamnesty. I suppose some of them will stay home on Nov. 4th.
There will be those too, mainly on the West Coast, who will get into their cars after work and turn on talk radio. Once home they’ll turn on MSNBC, CNN, or Fox. A sudden sense of panic will wash over them as they realize that they’re acting like angry drunken sailors and walking a fine line of suffering a major hang over the likes they won’t be able to get over for more than 4 to 8 years. They’ll vote before 8PM guaranteed.
Sultry Beauty on September 9, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Well, yes and no. McCain’s support among Republicans is significantly more solid than it was a month ago (see the Rasmussen crosstabs). That’s not shift, granted, but it is strengthened support — and Obama’s soft support are potentially McCain voters.
rightwingprof on September 9, 2008 at 5:34 PM
Then there’s this out of Florida; not the best news ,for sure!
I hear Sarah won’t be going to Florida, how come…?
J_Gocht on September 9, 2008 at 6:00 PM
Me and my other independent friends and relatives like the Rep ticket for one reason mainly: spending reform. They both have a record and have the best chance of success at continuing it.
Otherwise, both parties are not much different. More of the same. Little nibbles of difference around the edges.
Stop the madness in DC; that’s the message they’re sending, and we hear it loud and clear.
PattyJ on September 9, 2008 at 7:13 PM
Obama, wrapping up the women’s vote with sensitivity:
Obama: ‘Lipstick on a pig’
Amie Parnes reports from Lebanon, VA:
Obama poked fun of McCain and Palin’s new “change” mantra.
“You can put lipstick on a pig,” he said as the crowd cheered. “It’s still a pig.”
“You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It’s still gonna stink.”
“We’ve had enough of the same old thing.”
The crowd apparently took the “lipstick” line as a reference to Palin, who described the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull in a single word: “lipstick.”
docweasel on September 9, 2008 at 7:16 PM
For all of you who are so enthusiastic about the latest polls, here’s what the polls were showing around this time in the 2004 presidential race.
Bottom line: McCain/Palin’s numbers are overall nowhere as good as Bush’s were (apart from one of Gallup’s poll) and he barely won by 1.5% at the end.
CBS News (931 LV) 9/20 – 9/22 Bush +9
AP/Ipsos (931 LV) 9/20 – 9/22 Bush +7
Pew Research (989 RV) 9/17 – 9/21 Bush +3
NBC News/WSJ (787 LV) 9/17 – 9/19 Bush +4
Zogby (1066 LV) 9/17 – 9/19 Bush +3
IBD/TIPP (650 LV) 9/14 – 9/18 Bush +3
ARG (LV) 9/7 – 9/21 Bush +1
CBS News (1048 RV) 9/12 – 9/16 Bush +9
CNN/USAT/Gallup (767 LV) 9/13 – 9/15 Bush +14
Battleground (1000 LV) 9/12 – 9/15 Bush +4
Pew Research (725 LV) 9/11 – 9/14 Bush +1
Harris (867 LV) 9/9 – 9/13 Kerry +1
Newsweek (1003 RV) 9/9 – 9/10 Bush +6
IBD/TIPP (674 LV) 9/7 – 9/12 TIE
Zogby (1018 LV) 9/8 – 9/9 Bush +4
Time (857 LV) 9/7 – 9/9 52% Bush +11
AP/Ipsos (899 LV) 9/7 – 9/9 Bush +5
FOX/Opin. Dyn. (1000 LV) 9/7 – 9/8 Bush +4
ABC News/Wash Post (LV) 9/6 – 9/8 Bush +9
Pew Research (745 LV) 9/8 – 9/10 Bush +16
CBS News (909 RV) 9/6 – 9/8 Bush +7
CNN/USAT/Gallup (778 LV) 9/3 – 9/5 Bush +7
Newsweek (1,008 RV) 9/2 – 9/3 Bush +11
jim m on September 9, 2008 at 8:15 PM
Actually, his numbers are approximately the same as the ones you list. He’s up 10pts in one poll. 5% in a couple others. 2% or more in a couple others. Just like the ones you’ve listed.
Also, the Gallup article makes note that whoever is ahead after the conventions shake out invariably wins, and if Obama retakes the lead, he’ll be bucking history.
Not saying things won’t change, but it looks damn good for McCain. Especially when Obama moves to capture the woman vote by calling Palin a pig.
docweasel on September 9, 2008 at 8:38 PM
Other than the one Gallup poll, McCain is ahead at most by five, tied in one and losing by one in one other.
At this time last year, the worst poll for Bush had him up by four.
jim m on September 9, 2008 at 8:41 PM
Bush was also an incumbent, which is definitely worth a few points.
The race is definitely McCain’s to lose at this point.
venividivici on September 9, 2008 at 9:14 PM
McCain’s up 54% to 45% among likely voters in Gallup
and then there’s this:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JI03Aa02.html
which proves the race is over, done, cooked stick a fork in Obambi.
docweasel on September 10, 2008 at 2:24 AM
bigger fish to fry Gucci
sven10077 on September 10, 2008 at 2:54 AM
But Chicago… clean as the driven snow….
CC
CapedConservative on September 10, 2008 at 12:02 PM