ARG Puts McCain Ahead In VA, NC and NV

    Three states have flipped back into John McCain’s column in the Hedgehog Report Electoral College Watch as new polls from American Research Group in North Carolina, Nevada and Virginia all put John McCain ahead of Barack Obama.

    John McCain (R) 49%
    Barack Obama (D) 47%

    John McCain (R) 49%
    Barack Obama (D) 46%

    John McCain (R) 49%
    Barack Obama (D) 46%

    All three polls were done September 27-29 among 600 likely voters in each state. Also out today is a new poll for the state of Ohio from Survey USA that shows McCain ahead by a single percentage point.

    John McCain (R) 49%
    Barack Obama (D) 48%

    This poll was done September 28-29 among 693 likely voters. Finally, one state going against John McCain is Florida, where Public Policy Polling claims Obama is ahead by 3%.

    Barack Obama (D) 49%
    John McCain (R) 46%

    This poll was done September 27-28 among 941 likely voters. No other polling organization has released a poll from Florida claiming Obama has this big a lead since June.

    Posted by Dave at 12:57 pm
    Filed under: 2008 President | Comments (322)

    322 Responses to “ARG Puts McCain Ahead In VA, NC and NV”

    1. eric says:


    2. victrc says:

      crap thought I was going to be firstb LOL

    3. AF Rico says:

      Florida to Obama? Are there crosstabs on that?

      Maybe all that money he has spent there is finally paying off?

      Then again, it’s a Dem polling firm.

    4. Hellbelly says:

      Gallup: Obama +6….down from +8 yesterday.

    5. Hunter says:


    6. Robbie says:

      McCain is rolling again!!!

    7. rdelbov says:

      PPP is junk. The other polls are painting a more realistic view of the states that they polled.

      Not my favorite pollster, but even blind dogs find goldfish in some shallow water at times.

    8. Hellbelly says:

      …….by the way, am I the only person out there who has found CNBC to become almost unwatchable.

      1) Their political expert is right out of the Olberman/Matthews model. One of the women questioned his impartiality on air this morning and I thought he was going to have a stroke.

      2) Their economics advisor apparently got his expertise at Havana university.

      3) They now go to their self-annointed “All-Star Panel” after lunch to fill in all of us peons with wisdom from on high.

      4) They have decided that screaching at each other is the way to ratings (with a healthy mix of armageddon mixed in).

      5) When Jim Cramer is the “voice of reason” on the network, you’ve got problems.

      …..on the other hand, they still have Becky Quick 🙂

    9. Darrell says:

      Like I said in the post below, ARG went from the most left leaning in 2004 to the most right leaning in 2008. Screwy? Or do they know something we don’t?

    10. Hellbelly says:

      ….although i do like Rick Santelli…but the other’s on CNBC will shout him down when he starts mouthing anything related to free markets.

    11. bartman says:

      MTSU poll for TN today:

      McCain 48%
      Obama 36%
      Undecided 10%

      Alexander(R) 50%
      Tuke(D) 26%
      Undecided 23%

      93% of McCain supporters are firm
      90% of Obama supporters are firm

      22% of Hillary supporters will now vote McCain

      56% of Hillary supporters will stick with the democrat

      Although I’m not big on university polls MT has a history of being on the mark.

      Also, look for me on ESPN2 tonight at the MT game.

    12. Hunter says:


      It’s still NBC…

      Listen carefully sometimes and they’ll let their political views be known…

    13. Hunter says:



    14. rdelbov says:

      I still can barely stand CNBC-won’t watch NBC news and MSNBC is total trash.

      As a GE shareholder I am ashamed

    15. David says:

      ARG is the best polling company in the business except when they do Florida polls. I believe the PPP poll makes the 2nd poll showing Obama ahead.

    16. Brutus says:

      Based on what I’ve seen on other sites and this, I predict that the O-hole won’t be “swift boated” this year.

      He will be pelted by 527 Acorn ads.

      Some of the media (Lou Dobbs last night, Fox today) is discussing this connection already and its ties to the bailout. I think there is enough there to make a dent.

    17. David says:

      I am glad to see that McCain is actively campaigning today in Iowa. come on, while Obama campaigns recently NC, VA, MI, CO and NV, McCain attends a conference in Iowa.

    18. Polaris says:

      #13 Yes but you need to read the fine print on the BG poll.

      Battlefield changed their model in the middle of their track. They no longer weight by partisan ID as of yesterday.

      Bottom Line: BG caved to pressure from other pollsters/MSM.


    19. Phil says:

      Looks like Battleground is starting to unravel as well. Yesterday’s numbers must have been brutal and I don’t even want to look at Battleground by the end of the week. In fact, I’m not looking at any of them. The longer this financial mess lasts the further McCain will drop. It’s really out of Mac’s hands.

      The perfect storm for Obama.

    20. Brin says:

      What? They no longer weight by partisan ID. Hilarious!!!

    21. Benni says:

      Forget PPP

    22. Polaris says:


      Read the fine print on BG.

      They changed their methedology

      I strongly suspect they did so because of outside pressure. That means I downgrade BG as well until it’s reweighted.


    23. Marcus says:

      #19 or more likely, they’ve come to the same conclusion as the other pollsters. You can’t tell me that NONE of them as any clue as to what they are doing. They are putting their own reputation on the line if they mess up big time. I seriously doubt they’d like to become like Zogby…

    24. Brin says:

      Well, if they are not weighting by party ID then they don’t know what they are doing.

      That’s pretty clear.

    25. Polaris says:

      #24 I don’t see why. DemCorps is flat for example. The only logical reason I see for the change is outside pressure and if 538 and other O-sites are callout out BG and calling it “garbage” then the pressure on Cecillia Lake must have been incredible. I think that the partisan weights in BG were dropped or else the Dem half of the poll would no longer play ball.


    26. Polaris says:

      #24 In addition it’s incredibly lonely (I know!) to stick your neck way out even if you are certain you are right…and there is very much a pack mentality with pollsters.


    27. Marcus says:

      Or maybe they know something you don’t.

    28. Benni says:



    29. Cyrano says:

      Love the C(NBC) headline: Stocks claw back . . .

      I didn’t know that regaining almost half of yesterday’s loss was a “claw back”. Seems as expected even CNBC is carrying Obama’s water.

    30. Brin says:

      By dropping party ID? How is this demonstrating they know something? They should have a party ID weight even if its wrong, they should have a weight.

    31. Polaris says:

      #28 I don’t see it. Look at the 2006, 2004, 2002, and 2000 partisan IDs of actual voters.

      It’s almost flat and never changes by more than five and no party ever has an advantage of more than three.

      Any poll that DOESN’T do a partisan weight is fundamentally flawed. Partisan weight is just as much a “fixed” demographic as age, gender, ect based on the empirical evidence.


    32. Darrell says:

      29…link? details?

    33. AF Rico says:

      So what are they doing now? Just blindly questioning LV’s?

    34. Brin says:


      By your logic, the pollsters could have a sample of 75%R 25%D but never know or not care because “hey we know something you don’t and decided to drop Party ID”. Doesn’t make sense.

    35. Polaris says:

      #34 Basically what it means is when they screen their sample, they no longer make sure they have the correct number of republicans. That makes the poll flawed so you have to reweigh.


    36. Brin says:

      Which by the way 75R/25D would only be legit in parts of Utah etc, etc.

    37. Howard Dean says:

      Was that a one day BG poll?

    38. Jim says:

      If Gallup is Obama+6 today, that’s a cumulative +18 for the three days. By my count, three nights ago was O+4, two nights ago was a huge O+16, which indicates that last night was McCain +2 or approximately so. Not bad at all, if it’s more than a temporary blip.

    39. Darrell says:

      36…so basically they become a pollster with great volitility day to day?

    40. Howard Dean says:


      Comment by Hunter

      Folks, obama’s support is soft.

      He flirts with 50% and then recedes.

      Soft and vulnerable.

      MAc has to come out swinging.

    41. Polaris says:

      #38 No HD but what it was is 2 days of a good BG track and then Lake (D) [IMHO] caved to pressure to allow a monster Obama day in by removing the partisan weights.

      We need to downcheck BG too until they restore the correct weights. Any poll without a hard partisan weight is fundamentally flawed.


    42. Polaris says:

      #39 Jim you’re right but also consider that for the same day Ras had to have had an O+12-14 sample.

      It’s ridiculous and it’s a mug’s game. The fact is we’re trying to poll in a political hurricane which is problematic.


    43. Jay says:


      It’s truly a crazy day when we have to discount GWU/Battleground and depend on ARG to get things right.

      *shakes head*

    44. Polaris says:

      #44 I know, I know. The pollsters have been abysmal this year, but I did warn everyone when I reappeared around the GOP covention to expect this.

      I am very sad that BG caved to outside pressure because I’m virtually certain that’s what happened.


    45. eric says:

      Polaris, so what did Battleground do exactly? I’m a little confused. Did they do 2 days with a weighting, and then the 3rd day no weighting? What are they doing from here on out? Makes no sense. Do you think they actually caved to the criticism? The guy over a 538 just had a critique this AM of BG’s methods.

    46. Polaris says:

      #46 You have to understand how the Dems operate. 538 is basically a bought and paid mouthpeice of the Obama campaign. Understand that first and formost. That means that if they publically trashed BG’s methods then the private pressure on Cecillia Lake (a Dem pollster) had to have been intense.

      Look the Dem/MSM party is trying to sell a story here and BG was fouling up the works by daring to call the race as it was. Thus they had to be threatened and BG finally caved.

      Do I know for an absolute fact that’s how it went down? No. But given what I am hearing in newsrooms, and elsewhere, AND how I know Dems operate in general….AND given that this year the Dems seem to be even nastier under the table, I am virtually certain I’m right.

      They don’t care about Zogby for obvious reasons.


    47. Polaris says:


      Forgot to answer your question: Battleground stopped screening for partisan weights. That means they no longer make sure their model has enough republicans for a realistic sample.

      In short, they’ve joined the other junk pollsters in one fell swoop. You MUST do partisan weighing. The empirical evidence is very clear about that.


    48. Frank says:


      Taking a close look at Gallup’s poll today, it appears as if McCain had a very poor day on Saturday night. His support went from 44% to 42% on a once night sample.

      That night should roll off tomorrow. Unless McCain does worse than last Saturday night, his number should improve to at least 44%, and maybe more. His performance yesterday (staying at 42%) means that his performance must have been the same as the day the race was 48 – 45%.

      So does this mean that McCain should have a better look tomorrow (in Gallup)?

      Is my analysis valid?


    49. Marcus says:

      #35 This isn’t just about Battleground. If I were to believe you guys, NONE of the major polling firms is doing their job. That’s quite a stretch, since they’re putting their reputation on the line and it will hurt them BADLY if they get it wrong. The supposed short term gains just don’t weigh up against the long term losses. This just doesn’t make any sense what so ever. All of them can’t be wrong. Some sure, most possibly, but ALL?

    50. Akula says:


      Based on what I am reading, are we to infer that all the daily tracking polls have become nothing more than a rallying point for Obama supporters and a tool to keep McCain supporters depressed?

      If so, there is no recourse, because the only polls the average american see are those from the major organizations. I don’t see how there is a way to break this circle unless McCain is so far ahead that they can’t hide the actual values.

      Hopefully it will have the opposite effect and get people out. For example, the Wayne Co (MI) GOP office can’t keep enough McCain signs in stock due to the enthusiasm up there.

      A little rambling on my post, but it’s a Lone Star Tuesday.

    51. Frank says:


      Do you think that BG (really Tarrance Group) should come out with a separate poll with Party ID?


    52. Polaris says:


      Your analysis is reasoable. However, that depends also on what rolls on tonight. I have been suspicious of Gallup for a long time.


      This year, yes I do believe that if not all then most are doing it. The MSM pressure this year has been intense and pollsters do cater to clients. I realize that’s hard to swallow, but the fact is that pollsters don’t have to worry about any poll except the last one.

      Don’t believe me? Compare the polling methedologies from this year to 2004. Forget the top line numbers and look at the structure of the polls. You find that those that did use variable partisan weights shifted them at major juncture points like the end of the GOP convention, first debate and others to drive the ‘horse race’ story. However many polls used hard partisan weights and showed relatively modest movements. Moreover almost all polls then were LV polls.

      None of that is true this year.


    53. eric says:

      Thanks Polaris. I can’t get the BG link to open. Do they give info on the party break down that they polled?

    54. Polaris says:

      #52 It would be labled an (R) poll, but yes I really think he should.


    55. Polaris says:


      One more point. The only poll people remember from public pollsters is the last one. Until then, they have carte blanche w/r/t public perception.


    56. Brin says:

      The party ID has to have some statistical backing. All polls with known party weights are valid at some level but this year especially, the top line value is not true (unless you believe that 16% more dems will show up than repubs according to ABC’s party ID weighting).
      So, yes, this year the top line number of most polls needs a correction some more than others. Just because you want O to win doesn’t mean you should n’t be outraged, you are being lied to also.

    57. Marv says:


      You’ve mentioned before that the last poll before the election is when a polling firm will make or break its reputation.

      Is that when a firm will throw their client bias aside and re-weight the party ID? If so, then the weekend prior to the election will show a surge to McCain, if that is where the actual voting public is.

    58. No Way says:

      As I feared, GOP operatives are botching the media war of public perception. The assumption is to call it a “rescue” package, and basically call a pig with lipstick, i.e. the SAME BILL with a few homeowner bonuses, and worse, possibly Dem giveaways on a second version of the bill that does NOT involve free market based solutions exclusively, which is essential.

      If the GOP had any brains, they’d be on the talk shows, and calling this a fight for FREEDOM, against socialism being the end product result of the Bush bill in its CURRENT FORM.

      A Republican alternative plan based on free market solution capitalism, not government, must be offered and acted on.

      But, we are being MSM railroaded now to accept this argument that since the credit crisis will kill the average Joe, we must pass essentially the government bailout bill version!

      Folks, call your media outlets, tell them other plans exist and should be considered first over this plan that failed Monday. Past history shows such an approach will only prolong the effects, not cure them. But pro growth alternatives will still maintain our values of freedom from national socialism.

    59. Frank says:


      Is there any way that you know for us to start lobbying Tarrance to publish a second poll with their hard party ID?

      Any email address or anything?


    60. Polaris says:


      That would be the logical conclusion and there is some basis for it. In 2004 we did see a bunch of polls do a mini-bounce towards Bush to get within shouting distance of the actual final result. Before that final mini bounce (check the RCP archives), Bush was bouncing between Even and +1 or so in the RCP.

      Of course what the MSM is counting on is by the time this happens, the race will have been so thouroughly distorted that Obama really is that far ahead.


    61. Polaris says:


      I think his firm’s email address is part of the public record. I’d email his firm.


    62. bio mom says:

      Maybe the pollsters like the MSM just want Obama to win. So they convince themselves that they are being non-partisan and these are just the trends. Don’t know. I have stopped paying much attention. I think all polls are junk. It’s like all those predictions about the employment numbers each month. Why predict when you can just wait and get the answer? Otherwise you open yourself up to unneeded euphoria or despair. So, work for McCain; write about things people should know; etc. Other than that just wait until election day.

    63. Middle of the Roader says:

      I’ve given the benefit of the doubt to Polaris’ “analysis” up to know, but to get one bad polling day from Battleground (i.e. they show Obama ahead), and now he cries that they are a bad/junk poll too, throws out his credibilty.

      If even Battleground is showing a trend, as ALL other polling orgs. have, it IS a trend (NOT THE SAME THING AS SAYING THE ELECTION IS OVER, HOWEVER!! Don’t use that canard).

    64. MikeKS says:

      64 — what if he’s right? It seems to me he has good reasoning for his analysis.

    65. SarahPalin says:

      Do not believe what you read, only believe what Polaris tells you, because He is the only one who has it right and yet he spends a lot of his very valuable time in here instead of sharing his infinite wisdom with the rold and make some money in the process.
      Or he may just be full of hot air.
      11 polls are showing an Obama lead of at least 4, even Rasmussen. And Ploris is telling you that it’s the MSM pressure. Let me guess, now Fox news is also part of the left leaning MSM? You are killing me.
      Some of you are actually buying it. You are showing yourselves to be clueless sheep.
      This is funny reading. Keep it up.

    66. Brin says:

      I’ve given the benefit of the doubt to Middle of the Roader but now he comes out and tries to apply validity to the topline number of all these polls. He is trying to apply logic and substance simply to the observance of a topline number.
      Even though the party weight ID’s don’t match up with historical exit polls he still dismisses it as Polaris’ personal bias which throws out Middle of the Roaders credibility.

    67. Keystone says:

      Palin – Do you enjoy going on to sites like this and posting insults?

    68. bonncaruso says:

      Read the WHIO poll article carefully.
      Montgomery Co. is THE BELLWETHER for OH, and Dayton usually goes for the winner with a nearly identical average to the national average. If the two are essentially tied in Dayton, then the state really is tied.

      Food for thought.

    69. Darrell says:

      And yet no one SHOWS Polaris how he is wrong…just keep attacking him this way. Keep it up.

    70. Brin says:

      Anybody who doubts any analysis can easily look up the numbers yourself. Its really easy to do on the internets.

    71. MDefl says:

      Here is my opinion fwiw. I do think the polling is a joke this year. The press is openly campaigning for Obama. Hannity is correct in that journalism died this year.

      Having said that, if Mac is within 5 to 7 points of Obama on 10/15, even in these obviously flawed polls, then he still has a solid chance of winning on 11/04. The narrative will begin to change to Obama not being able to close the sale. The polling firms will begin to weight their polls and use LV, not RV. On October 29, the race will be tied and Mac could ultimately win by 3 on 11/04. This is not a guarantee, just a scenario that I believe is feasible. The polling firms will not want to look like idiots, so they will adjust their models. Also, the late breakers will go to Mac by 65/35 to 70/30.

      All of this gets thrown out the window if we cannot unfreeze the credit markets. I think the market has punished the financial firms who made bad decisions. I am much more concerned with small businesses, who are really the driver of our economy, not having the liquidity to meet their basic business needs.

    72. Tim Van says:

      14- Have you written to GE to express your disgust/dismay ?

    73. SarahPalin says:

      And yet no one SHOWS Polaris how he is wrong…just keep attacking him this way. Keep it up.

      Stating none sense does not have to be proven wrong, it is none sense. You are making my point that all of you are clueless sheep.
      If I tell you 2 = 1, do you have to prove me wrong mathematically?

    74. Tim Van says:

      sarah, we already have a full house as far as troll goes. please take your comments over to kos,du,talkleft, or mydd. or better yet, try to add some intelligent discourse, something our current trolls are incapable of providing.

    75. rdelbov says:


      Thanks for trolling.

      No if you had bother to be around here you would know that many of us having pushing the McCain is ahead line for months.

      Let me say again.

      McCain is rolling ahead.

      I have posted on partisan distribution and its affects on polls for months. On a near daily basis.

      I will say yet again that the Party ID gap is wrong because its based on people being anti Bush and anti GOP congress.

      The Partisan gap on election day will be +1 or perhaps +2 D and of course McCain will win by 3 to 5%

    76. Tim Van says:

      sarah, do you mean nonsense ?

    77. Tim Van says:


      You may wan’t to brush up on spelling 101 or grammer 101 before you post your dribble.

    78. Frank says:

      Polaris et al,

      As per my post above (#60), it is very easy, VERY easy, to email them a comment about publishing two polls. I just did so. I mentioned that they shouldn’t change their weighting in the middle of a stream without publishing both sets of results.

      Everybody please do so. Send an email. Who knows, we may create some “change”.

      They may contact you personally with their response.


    79. SarahPalin says:

      Sure Tim, you caught a typo, you are a genius, lol. Now go back to your hole.

    80. Tim Van says:


      Until and unless you prove me mistaken, I assume you are just another troll, so this will be my last response to you. I IGNORE trolls.

    81. Brin says:

      You guys that are for O in here, this is not an attack on O neccessarily but an attack on the MSM. Ideally, you would be on board with this also. The MSM is lying to all of us. How are you going to feel if O was really down or tied in certain states but the MSM keeps saying he is up and trending way up. What if O buys into this and miscalculates part of his campaign.

      The internal numbers don’t lie, check them for yourself, what are the national average party ID % difference?
      D’s on average have a 2.8% advantage. Then why was ABC’s national poll at 16%?

      As Obama supporters you are susipicous of being lied to by the repubs, well you should be suspicious of being lied to by the MSM also.

    82. Polaris says:


      I am not discounting BG because they showed a strong Obama push. If you bothered to read my posts yesterday, I was concerned that might happen…so I would not have been suprised at all.

      However BG changed their model

      This is like changing the rules in the middle of a game becasue you don’t like the score….and that move deserves all the jeers it’s getting.


    83. Jay says:


      The campaigns both have internal polling that (presumably) tells them where the race really stands. They’re not depending on the public polls for anything but trending.

    84. Tim Van says:

      OK Sarah, You baited me to make one last response. I believe I caught MORE than a typo. I believe I caught someone that lacks BASIC EDUCATION.

    85. Brin says:


      I understand that.

    86. No Way says:

      Today proves my points about the media. Instead of having all our free market espousing operatives on all the TV networks, peddling a FREE MARKET alternatives, Reps are spending today defending their stupid PR failure quip that Pelosi’s rant ruined the vote.


      But, Dems are appearing *ALL DAY* getting their message of fear out of

      1) credit crunch if you do not agree with the bailout version.
      2) Renaming bailouts “rescues” etc.

      Where are Mike Pence, et al, etc. explaining to the public on ALL NETWORKS free market non-socialism approaches? Where is it? Instead, people think they vetoed the package over Pelosi!

      You see, conservatives are their own worst enemies. It is not so much the media is biased, they are-it is that we do not follow GOOD talking points with repetition with operatives using the media anywhere as good as the left does!

      Hour by hour, Dems are managing the PR war better, convincing people that the original plan will affect “main street” if we do not pass the same pil of horse crap that lost Monday but Mark Levin’s take is NOT getting full air!

      This is *why* we lose, you guys…

    87. eric says:

      SP…Your trolling has reduced the collective IQ of this blog preciptously. Please, if your going to waste out time, at least make a cogent argument against Polaris. Otherwise slink back to Kos. JohnMcCain is calling!

    88. Polaris says:

      Frank and Jake,

      Thanks for the contact link to tarrence. Everyone please do the same. Ask (politely please) that they include the partisan weights in a seperate poll if they must. The cost to them probably would be minor, but be nice.


    89. Mose says:

      The PPP Florida poll used the following partisan composition: 44/38/18 D/R/I (+6 Dem).

      Per CNN exits, the partisan composition of the Florida electorate in 2006 was: 36/39/25 D/R/I (+3 GOP).

      Per CNN exits, the partisan composition of the Florida electorate in 2004 was: 37/41/23 D/R/I (+4 GOP).

      If you re-weight the PPP poll from 44/38/18 D/R/I to 38/38/24 D/R/I, the new result is McCain 47.5%, Obama 47%. And that is with a partisan composition that is 3 points more Dem than in 2006, a great year for Dems.

      It’s hard to know what to make of the polls. If the electorate has become as partisan Dem as they suggest, then Obama wins in a rout. But if historical norms hold and, for instance, Florida is closer to GOP +3 (the 2006 result), then there are going to a lot of very shocked liberals the morning after election day. Only time will tell.

    90. Polaris says:


      You are correct and those private firms that both campaigns have are some of the best in the business, but we’ll never see those numbers.

      Watch what Obama and Mac do. That will tell the story.


      I just noticed that some of Obama’s music industry buddies have SLAPPed the first video that tried to show the CRA/FannieMae/Obama connection. Nice.


    91. Howard Dean says:

      Forward this to all PUMA sites:

      Unlike Clinton, Biden Gets Pass for Saying He Was ‘Shot At’ in Iraq

      When Hillary Clinton told a tall tale about “landing under sniper fire” in Bosnia, she was accused of “inflating her war experience” by Barack Obama’s campaign — but the campaign has been silent about Joe Biden telling his own questionable story about being “shot at” in Iraq.

      By Bill Sammon

    92. Polaris says:


      I don’t believe for a moment that somehow in two years the entire country has gone through a radical Dem shift. Such a thing would be completely ahistoric.

      This is just like the so-called “youth” vote. I’ll believe it when I see it and until then I don’t take such claims seriously and neither should any of you.

      So I’d weight to 2006 for a first cut approximation of what the polls really say.


    93. Middle of the Roader says:




      B. only Polaris knows the truth.

      And, it is up to others to show why B is wrong?

      That makes sense.

    94. knova_red says:

      M.O.R. – We are all delusional and in denial. You seem to spend a lot of time here telling us that. I am curious as to why you feel that it is important that you tell us.

    95. Phil says:

      Holy cow. I was just over at the Battleground site. They did indeed throw out the party weighting. Now just weighting for age and race? What??? Changing methodology in the middle of polling? I’ve never seen that before and I NEVER expected it from Battleground.

    96. Polaris says:

      #96 Or the pollsters are telling the MSM what they want to hear because they want to get paid….and shoot-the-messenger syndrome is all too common when it comes to polling.

      Given how much the MSM is completely in the tank this year for Obama, I believe this is a reasonable conclusion.

      Also with internet and other nontraditional phone options (and I don’t just mean cell phones) the pollsters are probably unreliable anyway. If that’s true it’s not possible to get any useful predictive power from them.


    97. Hellbelly says:

      Is it “middle of the roader” or “road kill”?

    98. rdelbov says:

      As a reward to Sarah Palin for actually showing up here. I going to post yet again my points on partisan distribution in polls. For those not up on my points in 2004 the exit polls show a party distribution of 37D-37R-26I so if you took a poll the day after election day in 2004 you would use that distribution.

      Why is party distribution important in polls? Well McCain gets 80% or so of Republicans and Obama gets 75% of democrats so partisan distribution of your poll determines who wins.

      In 2004 as noted party ID was even and yet in 2008 we see polls with an edge to democrats between 6 & 14 % on the national basis. I say that is bogus. Look for Party ID to be perhaps at most 2-3 % plus to the democrats.

      a. Look and compare party ID from many states at the 2004/2006 sites for CNN. 2006 was an absolute miserable year for the GOP and yet party ID on state to state movement was between 1 & 5 percent. Could you find any state with more then a 5% move?? Yet in 2008 a 10% partisan edge to the democrats are the norm.

      b. With this huge party ID change from 2004 to 2008 you would expect a huge movement to the D’s in registration numbers. Nope its in the 2-3 % range overall with most numbers attributed to the Obama/Clinton primary push. Plus frankly the democrats do not purge voters off the roles. That helps their party registration numbers.

      c. In addition party ID questions are really a referumdum on the Party in the White house. Who’s the leader of the GOP? Bush or McCain? Maverick McCain attracts voters to him, but not to the GOP. Thou Palin has helped tons in that way.

      D. Finally here’s the classic question”what party do you identify with?” Well over half the states register by party so do they mean “register or identify?” Plus if you are voting for McCain, but also voting for Warner in VA with what party do you identify with? The guy in NC who votes the Democrat Sheriff and is a registered democrat, but always vote GOP, how does he identify himself?

      I never get any libs to discuss this point as its a given that Pollsters are infalliable when Obama leads. Yet that lead is built completely on Party ID.

      That’s why I say that McCain is rolling ahead

    99. Polaris says:

      #99 There’s a difference?


    100. knova_red says:

      Polaris – I don’t trust any poll exept the one on election day. I am just trying to find out why the others here think that it is so omportant to tell us that we are wrong, delusional, in denial, etc. Funny, not one has given me an answer yet.

    101. Hellbelly says:

      Back in my misspent youth I was pulling out of a bar and saw a guy crawling down the middle of the road on his hands and knees.

      I slowed down and asked him “why are you on your hands and knees in the middle of the road.”

      He looked up with blurry eyes and said “for the heat”.

      ….a true story and about as logical as Middle-of-the-Roaders comments.

    102. Drowsy says:

      Any update on what the high visibility Hillary backers who now support McCain are doing?

    103. Friend says:

      Every national poll shows McCain losing, every major conservative journal recognizes that and is giving advice to the McCain camp, Schmidt says” we’re behind” and state polls now begin to reflect the shift to Obama. But it is all a grand conspiracy and the “real” answer based on a bumbo-jumbo theory of weighting which corresponds to no available date is that McCain is really ahead. Gotcha.

    104. Polaris says:

      #102 It’s certainly true that the “Poll” on election day is the only one that matters. However, polling in general is a very useful tool and it can give good information for a campaign if done correctly

      I am irate (and I don’t use that term lightly) because I am seeing gross and blatent misuse of polls to push an agenda.


    105. Tina says:

      I think PPP for FL telegraphed their results based on commentary here from Sun?

    106. knova_red says:

      Friend – why is it important that you bring that to our attention?

    107. Polaris says:


      It’s just a matter of doing the math. Both Obama and McCain know where the race really is. I’ll give you a hint: Mac would not be stumping in Iowa if he were behind.

      As for those “conservative friends”, frankly most of them are clueless when it comes to polls especially this year. The assumption they are making (and RCP is making) is that pollsters are basically honest.

      Not this year. The demographics give the story away.


    108. Annie says:

      Khalid al-Mansour and Obama’s long ago past…look it up, folks.

    109. MDefl says:

      I am now laughing at the polling firms. IMO – this is what we are going to see from here on out:

      10/08 – The headline – “Obama Retains Lead”

      10/15 – Headline – “Obama Slips But Still in Command”

      10/22 – Headline – “The Race Tightens – Can Obama Close the Sale”?

      10/29 – Headline – “The Election is Now a Horse Race”

      11/05 – Headline – “Obama – What Happened? How Did the GOP Steal the Election”?

      The narrative is going to change as the polling firms start to shift the way they are doing their polls. They do not want to all have egg on their faces at the end of the day. All Mac has to do in order to have a good shot at winning is to be within 5 to 7 on 10/15. Again, BO has a shot win with that type of lead also, but I think the best he can do is win in a squeaker.

    110. Darrell says:

      Even on election day 2006, pollsters were saying Kerry in a landslide. Some in the media were calling him ‘President Kerry’ so lets just wait until the votes are counted this year too.

    111. Howard Dean says:


      In an open-ended question, a quarter of all voters said George W. Bush is responsible for the economy’s relatively poor performance, more than any other single cause. About a quarter name Congress (8 percent), the federal government (8 percent) and Democrats and Republicans (5 percent each) together. Eighteen percent said Wall Street financial institutions and banks shoulder responsibility, 7 percent blame “everyone” and 5 percent highlighted the role of individuals who borrowed too much.

    112. gnasher says:

      An analysis of what’s been wrong with BG…

      The poll seems to be making a relatively fundamental mistake: it is not weighting by age.

      Take a look for yourself at the “weighted tables” that Battleground released a couple of days ago (PDF). These crosstabs provide a ton of detail — kudos to Battleground for doing so — but unfortunately there is one red flag. This is the age makeup of their weighted sample:

      18-34 17%
      35-44 12%
      45-64 40%
      65+ 31%

      Intuitively, this probably looks fairly wrong to you — almost twice as many age 65+ voters as age18-34 voters? And in fact, it almost certainly is wrong. By comparison, here is the approximate age composition of the electorate in 2004, as according to the US Census Bureau**:

      18-34 26%
      35-44 17%
      45-64 38%
      65+ 19%

      Battleground’s numbers are not even close. About 19 percent of voters were aged 65 and older in 2004, as compared to the 31 percent in the Battleground sample. On the other hand, 43 percent of voters were aged 18-44, as opposed to Battleground’s 29 percent. These differences are much, much too large to be attributable to chance alone. (And all of this is assuming that turnout in 2008 will match that in 2004, even though youth turnout increased markedly in the primaries and is at least somewhat probable to do so in the general election.

    113. Howard Dean says:

      What do you think Rezko is telling the Federal Prosecutors?

    114. Phil says:

      Our “Friend” is back from Daily Kos. Does he have anymore made up quotes from Meet the Press?

      Wow. What credibility. You’ve already been outed as a liar friend. Hit the road pal.

    115. Tina says:


      What about this headline. Socialist Piglosi head of the Politburo suspends the election.


    116. Annie says:

      I’ll state it again, lest it get lost in the statistics of polling data…Khalid al-Mansour and the youthful Obama’s relationship – look it up!

    117. Darrell says:

      “White folk’s greed runs a world in need” – Obama

    118. MDefl says:


      His sentencing is on 10/28. Who knows? He probably is being offered a deal to keep quiet.

      Also, where are the 527’s who should be exposing BO’s ties to characters like Rezko. Also, what about Barney Frank’s denials of any problems with Fannie or Freddie? The GOP needs to get moving.

    119. eric says:

      Friend, I see another of your drive by posts. What’s your point? If Mac is losing, then you should be happy. No need to convince anyone here, and why would you bother? We get it, it’s done, Mac’s toast. Thanks for setting us straight.

      Gnasher, Another troll already gave us the scoop on the 538 Dem take on BG. We get it. Too many old people polled, and the youth are being short changed. Bob Beckel…’Show me a candidate who relies on the youth vote, and I will show you a loser!”.

    120. Howard Dean says:

      Patience on the 527’s people.


    121. AlN says:

      OK, Polaris is starting to convince me! As I’ve said before, I’m an M.S.-level statistician and I teach statistics at Indiana University. For a crash course on why pollsters NEED to do partisan reweighting, here are the 2 main reasons:

      1) When a poll is taken, it is assumed that those called are a random sample, representative of the entire voting population. An example of violating this assumption was in the 1952 Election when Gallup (the only pollster then) conducted only phone polls. That was a major flaw, since just 80% of the population had phones then. Guess who didn’t have phones? The poor, who voted overwhelmingly Democrat. Thus, based on their biased sample, Gallup reported the Republican Thomas Dewey way ahead on the eve of the Election. The Chicago Daily Tribune believed this and printed their infamous headline, “Dewey Beats Truman”. Today, this kind of bias can be introduced by many factors: cell phone only people, no-call lists, etc.

      2) Even if the people being called are representative of the real voting population, a major source of bias is whether or not the people who actually respond to the poll are representative. The most well known source of this bias is the weekend effect, where many believe that Republicans are far more likely to be gone on weekends. It’s also possible that one party is more likely to use call-screening, or to hang up on the pollster.

      To overcome these 2 possible sources of bias, the pollster SHOULD us weightings to ensure that the results of his poll show the same partisan percentages as are commonly known to exist. For example, if it’s known that a state has 50% Democrats and 50% Republicans, but his poll has 60% Dems and 40% Reps, he can mathematically force his results to that 50/50 split by giving each Republican respondent a weight of .50/.40 = 1.20, and each Democrat a weight of .50/.60 = 0.87.
      Hope this helps!

    122. Tina says:

      Barack confused:

      Obama, yesterday:

      “I was on the phone every day with Secretary Paulson and the congressional leaders, making sure that the principles that have ultimately been adopted were incorporated into the bill,” Obama told CBS’s Bob Schieffer, explaining, “I think, [that] is an indication of the degree to which, when it comes to protecting taxpayers, I was pushing very hard and involved in shaping those provisions.”

      The New York Times, today:

      Aides to Mr. Obama said he had not directly reached out to try to sway any House Democrats who opposed the measure. But where Mr. McCain had accused Mr. Obama of taking a hands-off approach to the financial crisis, Democratic advisers said they believed that Mr. McCain now had a role in the legislation’s failure.

      From Campaign Spot.

    123. Howard Dean says:

      PPP NC shows 74% of D’s for Obama.

      PPP FL shows 81% of D’s for Obama.

      Can’t win with those numbers.

    124. Benni says:

      Susa Poll IN





    125. Drowsy says:


      It’s been awhile. Good to have you back!


      One youtube video explaining that this leap year voting will done on Wednesday and the youth vote will be properly managed.

      I expect most would believe youtube before anything else that is mainstream.

    126. TheMassMouth says:

      Glad to see some state polls shifting back to Big Mac. I think the Financial Crisis has spread blame all around and soon will recede from the campaign. After all the Suicide Squad does not include Big Mac or BHO.

    127. Tina says:

      Did Barack call the House members of the Black Caucus, and 3 D members from Illinois?

    128. TheMassMouth says:

      By the way: Hi Tina! LTNS..

    129. DrJay says:

      How honest is 538? From the depths of the article…

      “** Note: the Census Bureau uses slightly different age groupings from Battleground — in particular, they group 18-24 year-old voters together, and 25-44 year-old voters together. To match the results to Battleground’s numbers, I have assumed that half the Census Bureau’s age 25-44 voters are between ages 35-44, and the other half are between ages 25-34, which are then lumped together with the 18-24 voters.”

      Oh, sure, that makes sense…HUH?????
      Talk about intellectual dishonesty… they could have gotten the numbers from their very own link, but were too LAZY.

      If you bother to spend a couple minutes to add them up, the census bureau numbers look like about (young to old) 23.5-19.5-37.5-19.5, and that assumes no one lied to the census bureau to look more “citizenly”. I’ll stick to the exit polls, thanks– you can’t fake walking out of the voting booth.

      Anyway, even with those numbers, it translates to a Mac has a lead of about a point.

      Will we now see a 538 story on how “Battleground has it wrong” by not weighting by party ID?


    130. TheMassMouth says:

      I doubt that Barack called anyone. But as I said, there’s enough Suicide Squad members to attach their bit of Death to everyone. This is simply a MASSIVE collapse of ALL leadership.

      Perhaps the winner in November is going to be candidate most different from what voters consider to be a leader. That would be Ron Paul. Ugh…

    131. Darrell says:

      OH – SUSA

      McCain 49
      Obama 48

    132. Tina says:

      I tend to agree with Polaris. If Obumbler was up 5 to 8 points, he should be pulling in W. VA; Kentucky; OHm, and possibly Indiana. AFter all, Clinton won many of these states – W. Virginia and Kentucky.

      I sense that the un-msm is playing us.

      Top line #s do not coincide with national #s.

    133. Benni says:

      Susa Poll IN
      hi there
      Hussein-Sidney :-))




    134. Todd says:

      ON MCCAIN!

    135. Tina says:

      Hi TMM.

    136. TheMassMouth says:

      Still, things right now look so glum that I’m just demoralized… All of my investor / lender / business friends are taking the next two days off. To get drunk or something…

    137. Tina says:

      The recent state polls (exc. PPP – D) suggest that MccCain is resurging.

    138. Howard Dean says:

      So SUSA Oh sample is D =6.


      Obama gets 80% of D’s.

      That will go back to roughly 74% after the 527 assault.

    139. rdelbov says:


      did you see my post on partisan distributions #100. Yes partisan distribution and partisan classification is the surest (other then being black) way to determine how one votes. So Partisan distribution is the key.

      Gnasher you are wrong my friend. The battleground poll can be absolutely correct with that age breakdown. Race/Sex/Party ID are more important then age distribution.

      Sure they may have too many old folks, but do old black voters vote differently then young black people? Do young republicans vote differently then old republicans?

      If you swap 100 old democrats for 100 college republicans are you better off??

      Age is not as absolute as party ID or race

      GOP 80% McCain Democrat 75% Obama Black 95% Obama

      18-34 perhaps 55% Obama-over 65 perhaps 55% McCain.

      Yet is there a partisan difference between old whites and young whites?? Very little. Or young blacks and old blacks. Like none. Battleground is fine as fine as long its party ID is correct

    140. TheMassMouth says:

      Hi to Howard Dean too…

      and Todd… I like your post. maybe there’s still hope left…

      ON Mc CAIN !!! And ON PALIN !!!

      I promise I will put some mojo in Sarah Palin’s coffee Thursday evening !

    141. Benni says:

      isnt it interesting that McCain is campaigning in IA???

      1.I thought it wasin BHO bag
      so why is Sidney there??

      If mccain would be behindso much he woul never campaign there

    142. MDefl says:

      OK guys, despite the attempts of the msm to spin yesterday as a failure on the GOP side, the story did not stick. Everyone is getting the blame. I somehow think Comrade Pelosi is going to be very quiet come this Thursday.

      I have come off the ledge although I still stick to my position that we need a deal or else small businesses will be forced to close, in masse, within 2 weeks. Just my opinion and what do I know?

    143. TheMassMouth says:

      Tina : so it seems. In OH yesterday he sounded the best I have EVER heard him ! Tough … on target … passionate … populist !

    144. Randy says:

      Buy! Buy! Buy!

    145. Howard Dean says:

      DOW +407

    146. No Way says:


      Now a press conference was called for free market solutions. Several were fine, but…

      Dems, like Nancy Kantor and Dogget, were the alternative bill introducers! Even still this alternative needs to be pushed, so that all the talk is not on a new ram down throat of s near twin of the original bad bill on Monday!

      Where is/was the house conservative GOP Pence, etc. with a similiar plan for the Repubs. Do not get me wrong, I would not mind if their plan was passed instead, but it IS important that REPUBLICANS draft and take credit for a free market version, thus helping Mac from the bottom up.

      No wonder we keep struggling upstream…

    147. Mad Dog says:

      While obviously the events of the last couple of weeks have not been good for McCain, despite everything he’s only down by 5 points. I’d say when you factor in the Bradley-Wilder-Dinkins effect, the race is even. Assuming Gov. Palin holds her own with Hairplugs this Thursday, things calm down on Wall Street, and McCain does as well in the final two debates as he did in the first one, I suspect the race will be just about even in the national polls election day–and I would therefore look for about a 5 point McCain win in the PV, possibly a little less. That should be enough, more than enough, to produce 270 EV.

    148. TheMassMouth says:

      Good point re IA

      I agree that Speaker Pelosi blew it. You think that Sam Rayburn or Tip O’Neill would have lost 40 % of the Dem caucus on a must vote ? Not a chance.

    149. TheMassMouth says:

      The second McCain – Barack debate is going to be the big one. For the first one, everybody was too distracted by the Financial Rescue bill. That won’t happen at the 2nd debate.

    150. Polaris says:


      You beat me to it. The unpalable fact that 538 (which is a bought and paid for Dem site btw) and others are missing is that young people don’t vote by contrast old people do

      What that means is when you base your demographic on actual voter performance over past election cycles young people will be badly underpresented when compared to the US Census.

      They should be.


    151. rdelbov says:

      Okay guys I call a thousand people and get a party ID of 42D-35R-23I okay that’s plus or minus 3.5 %

      Now I plug in my 42-35-23 party ID into a poll of 1000 and I believe my result is 3.5+/- right?

      Wrong yes its plus or minus 3.5%, but its based on a 3.5 +/- calculation.

      What would the poll result be if the party was should be 39-38-23??

    152. Polaris says:

      #145 I’m with you MDefl. I have calmed down too a little but that’s contingent on something being done to thaw out the credit markets….even a bad solution at this point is better than none.


    153. Polaris says:

      #154 Precisly which is why you should never weight a poll on the basis of another poll and that’s precisely what the unweighted polls do although they won’t tell you that.


    154. Aaron_in_TX says:

      “This is just like the so-called “youth” vote.”

      It’s already happened. People just ignore it. Kerry would have lost by much more had he not carried the youth vote.

      It’s not so much the increase of youth voters that should concern the R’s, it’s the margin among them.

      Since 2000, their numbers have increased. True, their turnout is still low compared to the others, but even a small increase could mean a lot if they go heavily for Obama.

      In 2004, their turnout went from 36 to 47%.

      A similar phenomenon happened when you compare the 2002 and 2006 midterms. The youth turnout in ’06 was double that of ’02, and much more strongly democrat.

      In 2000, Gore led this group by 2 points. Kerry by 10. In 2006, it was 61-39 Democrat.

      So if Obama gets youth turnout up to just 52-53 or so, and those voters break for him by 60-40, yes that it is significant, especially in “younger” states.

    155. tanda says:

      123. Ain,

      Dewey defeats Truman was 1948, not ’52.

      The infamous Gallup poll due to low use of telephones was 1936 FDR v. Landon.

      Nice try, though

    156. Jay says:


      That’s a lot of assuming. And of course, that’s not taking into account the MSM spin. Never underestimate the ability of the American people to believe what they’re told and not what they watch or read.

      See also: 1992 through 2000, 2006.

    157. Polaris says:

      #123 Good work AIN. This should be basic polling 101 stuff for all those who fisk polls.


    158. DrJay says:

      Polaris, I can excuse 538 about having an opinion, even if misguided, about how many youth turn out.

      What I CANNOT excuse, is that they knowingly passed off FAKE numbers. And in fact showing the real numbers is a counterpoint to their argument (actual voters were NOT equally distributed between 25-34 and 35-44– there numbers were off by 2.5 percent)

      This is akin to the Gallup poll you alluded to, in which they gave Kerry all the undecideds.

    159. Aaron_in_TX says:

      There’s the proof. Obama is all over college campuses. I don’t remember there being much activity with Kerry. The text message stuff and the facebook/myspace strategy is smart. Obama understands more clearly how these people communicate.

    160. addisonst says:

      Does anybody know a live human being who has changed choices for ores in the last 3 months? I’m in the heart of obama country and I don’t know a single person who hasn’t made up their mind. There is no way that a bunch of Americans who were too neutral to decide have suddenly gone to obama or even less likely flipped over. If obama is the first dem to break 50 percent of the total vote in 32 years, I will eat a hat.

    161. Howard Dean says:

      DOW + 464

      NAsDaq + 103

    162. Polaris says:

      #158 I thought the FDR mis-poll was a reader’s digest poll that polled those with car registration….at a time when car ownership was not typical.

      However, both represent the same thing: An methodological mistake that generates an atypical sample.


    163. Middle of the Roader says:

      Blah, blah, blah.

      Everybody who disagrees with Polaris is either in the tank for Obama, or a mistaken fool.

      I agree with the guy who noted that with all this knowledge Polaris supposedly has, WHY IS HE HANGING OUT HERE with us plebes?

      He should be working for McCain or the RNC.

      Heck, if ONLY the great POLARIS knows the truth– Open your OWN polling firm!

      Only Polaris can fend off the MSM and give the public “the truth”!

      Stick YOUR neck out there and come up with your own polling numbers and then let a “Polaris Twin” attack your numbers.

    164. Cyrano says:

      If Biden tries to diminish Gov Palin by calling her Sarah, what do you think her reaction should be?

      I would like to see something of a Judge to Jack Nicolson moment from “A Few Good Men”.

      What is the over/under in minutes before his first condescending comment?

    165. Polaris says:

      #162 You said the same thing about Kerry four years ago Aaron in Texas. Every four years we hear: “The college crowd is motivated and will really make a difference”

      Well how well did that work out for President McGovern?


    166. Annie says:

      My two “youth vote” sons (ages 20 and 24) are voting for McCain – in the People’s Republic of Davis, CA, no less!

    167. Annie says:

      Oh, and their girlfriends are also voting for McCain. The youth vote – not all for Obama after all.

    168. Drowsy says:

      Middle of the Roadkill,

      With all your hot air why aren’t you providing free energy to those cities that need it?

    169. Polaris says:

      #163 Precisely. This race is basically frozen. I would put the true undecideds at less than 5%. Significantly less in fact.

      #166 MiddleoftheRoader, the truth is out there even in these trash polls. They can’t hide the raw data…just reweight accordingly. Again, as I’ve said to everyone here, please *don’t* take my word for it. Use the 2006 demographics (quite pro-dem) and plug in the raw data and see what you get.


    170. knova_red says:

      MOR – I agree that we mindlessly follow Polaris. This seems to bother you. Can you tell me why that bothers you and why it is so important that you tell us?

    171. Polaris says:

      Idea for a drinking game: Every time Sen Biden makes a condescending remark to Gov. Palin take a drink.

      What does everyone think?


    172. Aaron_in_TX says:

      re 168

      I didn’t post here 4 years ago, so I don’t think I could have said that then. But I just showed you they did make a difference when you compare 2000 and 2004. Kerry got a different breakdown than Gore, and actually should have lost by more, but the youth propped him up.

      And it’s an unfair comparison to 1972. There’s no similarity between that election and 2008.

    173. Polaris says:

      #173 It bothers them because they are afraid I’m correct. In fact I happen to know that many senior DNC dems think I’m correct and have been trying to warn the Obama campaign in vain.

      Again, I’m not into the worship bit. Check it for yourselves.

      I am also honored in an ironic way that I’ve been very openly targeted. I used to be a Dem and a very political one at that. If I am being targeted like this, then I suppose my message is getting out. Thanks for the feedback, trogs.


    174. Cyrano says:


      I would run out of beer or have to take smaller sips.

    175. mystery says:

      Thank you all for your great analysis….this is the place to get all the facts and data.

    176. Frank says:


      Have you emailed Tarrance Group yet? Go to their website, click contact us, and send them a message to publish two polls, one weighted by party along with their new “old” poll.

      Please do it.



    177. Polaris says:

      #175 If it wasn’t you in 2004 it was someone with your exact same nic. Look Aaron, every four years we are told, “The Youth Vote will appear this year”.

      Yes the raw Youth vote did turn out for Kerry, but so did every demographic group that year so on a relative basis, the Youth vote for Kerry never really materialized.

      Seriously, every four years we hear about the Youth vote. It’s become almost a joke in political science at this point….sort of like how the Arizona Cardinals are going to be really good this year….no really. Every year someone does it like clockwork.


    178. rdelbov says:

      Well until Polaris, and thank goodness he did, people here were mindlessly following Howard Dean and Gary Maxwell.

      I know most of the trolls are new here and so some fine posters newly back (Hunter) they would know we have been following this line for months.

      I can always tell a troll because they insult, disagree and never debate.

    179. Frank says:

      So far a pretty good day with polls.

      True they are from ARG but they have a fairly good party ID, and when it is wrong, it still breaks for McCain.

      SUSA polls are good too.

      I still do not trust PPP. They keep weighing ID’s poorly.

      Where are the (R) polls?


    180. rdelbov says:


      let me say that Kerry won the ground war in 2004. Heck Gore won the ground war in 2000.

      Kerry got a big youth vote in 2004, but let me also say that blue collar/older democrats also came out huge for Kerry in 2004.

      Sorry guy, but in my opinion those folks (think Clinton voter) will not turn out for Obami.

    181. Jeff S. says:

      While all this media/poll group manipulation is aggravating, to say the least, on the flip-side it tells me there is real fear/near panic on the part of O’s campaign for this to be so widespread. Coupled with McCain being in Iowa (Iowa???) makes me wonder what his campaign is really seeing. Care to comment, Polaris?

    182. Polaris says:


      I am starting to wonder if ARG is pulling a “Zogby”, i.e. trying to regain their reputation.


    183. mystery says:

      I hope you don’t think I am a troll…I have lurked here a long time and run my own GOP site…I value the opinions stated here…it helps me keep my sanity.:)

    184. knova_red says:

      AATX – I have two kids in college and a highscholler that turns 18 on 11/1. Even in my little family the youth vote is not voting as a block. In Austin what do you think the breakout between O an Mac will be? Then ask yourself about say Liberty University?

    185. knova_red says:

      highscholler = highschooler. She also spells better than me.

    186. Frank says:


      They are doing something different. Aren’t they?

      Have you reviewed Zogby’s methodology for their IA polls. It appears as if they are really trying to be better too.

      After having checked their methodology, do you have any additional comments of their polls?

      I have chilled and I am feeling pretty good today.


    187. mom in sc says:

      #174 – Think anyone would make it through the entire debate that way? I’m not quite sure…

    188. Polaris says:

      #184 Jeff, I think you are overstating it a bit. I think the credit crisis has the potential to go very badly for Mac and the GOP and the Obama campaign knows it….but they can’t openly root for an economic meltdown or they’d lose the advantage.

      I also think that most of Obama’s rank and file actually believe the MSM spin (which is a bad thing for Obama btw), and I think that Obama himself being very much a political novice might personally believe the public polls over his own private pollster…MIGHT (I wouldn’t count on this).

      All that said, I know there is some very, very serious concern in senior DNC circles over this race because to them Obama doesn’t have nearly the lead their (DNC) models say he should have or thinks he needs…and they ARE aware of the skewed nature of the public polls. Bascially the DNC wants Obama up by at least 10 going into October if not 15.


    189. Mad Dog says:

      mystery, Polaris was our Voice of Reason in the 2004 campaign and was dead on when push came to shove.

    190. Frank says:


      I also have two college kids (a senior and a sophomore). They go to school in CT and NY respectively.

      They are both voting for McCain, although my son says why vote when we already know who is going to win the state. A valid point that needs to be fixed.


    191. Aaron_in_TX says:


      I showed you the increase in numbers as well as margin, yet you disbelieve it.

      Dem Margin: 2000 +2, (no data due to bad exit polls 2002) 2004 +10, 2006 +19.

      Turnout: up 11% 2004 over 2000. up 25 % 2006 over 2002.

      I’m not suggesting that youth turnout alone can swing the election. Obama still has to perform well among the other groups, or the youth will not matter. However, increased margins among them can give him some breathing room.

    192. Polaris says:


      Not really other than Zogby seems to be making an honest effort to use HARD demographic weighting based on actual past voter bahavior this time. Zogby is calling out the other posters.

      However, the Zogster is still very much on double-secret probation. I think the Zogster is trying to regain is street cred.


    193. Dylan says:

      #176 Polaris–what is the origin or your moniker? (if I might ask–if that is too intrusive, no need to reply). the reason i ask is I am wondering if the Dems know who you actually are and why you are so adept at disecting the polling data?

      As for the bill of goods being sold the public by MSM-sponsored polls relying on totally flawed assumptions, wouldn’t you think that if these same polling outfits suddenly reverse course at the very end, they utterly damage their credibility? Who would pay for this crap moving forward? (unless of course polling has just become another psy-ops related vehicle)

    194. AloneInOregon says:

      #174 –

      I recommend you drink beer in that case, otherwise you won’t survive the debate.

    195. mystery says:

      “mystery, Polaris was our Voice of Reason in the 2004 campaign and was dead on when push came to shove.

      Comment by Mad Dog ”

      Well, I can tell that he still is….Polaris, may I quote you at my website..I have a lot of very nervous nellies there?

    196. Polaris says:

      #194 I believe the numbers, but you are only showing one side of the ledger Aaron in Texas.

      The other side is this: In 2004 the OLDER voters and Evangelical voters, and many other demographics were up by more than 11%

      That means that on a relative basis, the youth vote didn’t turn out for Kerry even if the raw numbers and raw percentage increase says that they did.

      Basically, it’s no good if your profolio goes up 20% if the market goes up 50%. Same idea here.

      Every cycle we hear about the “undereported youth vote”. It’s a running joke.


    197. Frank says:

      I really want to see how Palin does in the debate. Her expectations are so low, that she should do quite well. In fact, if she does well, it could be spinned as a win.

      Any thoughts?


    198. Aaron_in_TX says:

      “although my son says why vote when we already know who is going to win the state.

      You know Frank, I feel the same way, and I hear that all the time. I feel like so many people say that, if they’d all go vote, the state might get closer after all!

      I try to tell them that local races are far more important to their daily life than president anyway.

      I’m not saying that there aren’t young conservatives. There are college republicans after all.

    199. Dylan says:

      #197 And don’t forget, buy gold, lots of it.

      As a general comment, you know what is so darned depressing to me–is that Democrats for the most part take varying degrees of joy when BAD things happen to the country (i.e. losing in Iraq, the economy tanking, the bailout failing). I contend that in general, these are not good qualities to have as an american. to root for things to deteriorate so you can gain politically–heck–in 2005, the average dem was hoping that there would be 30,000 floating bodies in Katrina as a result of Bush failing the city of new Orleans. I’m just so tired of it.

    200. Polaris says:


      I base my nic from the “Noth Star” or “Guide star” and that’s what I consider my role here to be.

      As for if the Dems know who I really am, I am sure some do. I will say that I was raised in a hard core Dem family and I know a lot of the tricks.


    201. Polaris says:

      #200 I agree and I’ve seen videos of Palin’s past debates when she was running for governor.

      This could get ugly for Biden.


    202. If you guys want proof that Polaris is ultimately right, you don’t have to look any further then where the candidates are campaigning. Each camp uses their own internal polling, which is much more accurate then Gallup/Ras, etc. to tell them where they need to be. Why is McCain still in IA? Why is Obama going to Michigan and PA if he is up 8 points nationally? The answer is because this election is still basically a toss-up and the battle ground states that we all thought were in play are still in play. These campaigns are not stupid.

    203. knova_red says:

      I try to tell them that local races are far more important to their daily life than president anyway.

      One of the most astute things that has been said on this board…even AATX can come up with the occasional nugget.

    204. Frank says:


      I am trying to get my kids to vote for our republican member of the house. He needs every vote possible.

      I just saw an ad on TV for one of our new Democratic congressmen saying that he wants to do things to improve the economy. I need to check to see if he voted against the bill yesterday. He is from a very conservative district.


    205. Phil says:

      Probably very few college Republicans at UT, but then Austin is our Texas Berkely. It’s a state within a state. Totally different culture.

    206. Dylan says:

      #203 Guide ye do here.

      Generally, if the “credit cascade failure” happens, and I hope to god it doesn’t because people will be hurting, Platinum would be a great buy IMHO. It’s corrected from about a high of $2300/oz down to about $1100, just a couple hundred dollars more than gold. Upside potential in an inflationary meltdown is huge.

    207. Polaris says:

      #196 I expect the public pollsters will act in much the way that MDefl has already outlined. The race will slowly “tighten” all through October and suddenly Mac will have a lead at the very end….and the analysis will be “What Obama did wrong” which will be exactly the wrong analysis.


    208. Aaron_in_TX says:


      You proved my point about Gore and Kerry getting different coalitions. Gore won the 60 and older vote in 2000 by a small margin. Bush won them by 7 in 2004. Had Kerry gotten the same +2 among younger voters that Gore got, he would have been beaten in a landslide.

    209. Jake Towson says:

      Now these polls look a lot better! I don’t like being down in Florida but I’ll take all the rest!

    210. AlN says:

      Oops — you’re correct, “Dewey Beats Truman” was 1948. But I’m relatively sure there was a phone polling bias in 1948 as well.

    211. Polaris says:

      #211 What was the percentage of youth vote 18-24 in 2004 compared with 2000 and other prior races.

      That’s the key point you are missing AITX. Sure Kerry did better with the youth vote than Gore did. Never said otherwise.

      It is also besides the point

      The point is that young poeple don’t vote in the numbers their census percentages would otherwise indicate. They never have. OTOH older voters over-represent when compared with census numbers and pretty much always have.


    212. Aaron_in_TX says:

      A good example of local races mattering was when I was living in San Marcos going to Texas State a few years ago. Students always complained about the bar hours closing at 12am. The previous mayor was for changing the law so they could remain open till 2.

      However, the challenger in the mayoral race ran a campaign “against” the students and won by 250 votes out of 4000. Bars remained closed after midnight. Students still complained. When I went to go vote I asked them how many students had come out. They told me a few dozen at most. Had just 2% of the student population come out to vote, it would have been different.

    213. Aaron_in_TX says:

      * I meant 2% more

    214. Tina says:

      Polaris, did U see my previous comment? I do not think O is up 5 to 8 nationaly.

      The recent batch of state polls excluding PP – D do not look good for him. States like WV, KEntucky – a Democrat who wns by that margin nationnall -Wins.

    215. Polaris says:

      #215 Which annecdotally proves my point. Students love to whine and love to ‘act political’ both in speech and in various forums and blogs, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty business of voting, they by and large don’t.

      This has been known for years.

      Since I also currently live in Austin, there are College Republics (YCT-Young Conservatives of Texas) but they tend to be NRO types and I avoid them.


    216. Jay says:

      Remember the new Dem bill I was telling you guys was being passed around yesterday? The one from Defazio and the unions? Here it is:

      Time to break out the barf bags, because this makes the one that got shot down look positively glorious by comparison. The same friend on the Hill I had leaking me this bill yesterday says the Dems are
      “slowly” lining up behind it. He can’t tell yet if it’s “slowly” because of the holiday or because it’s not getting welcomed as warmly as they want it to be.

      The good news is that the RNC and McCain have some really good ads up. We’ll see how they play in the lead-up to Thursday’s debate.

    217. Polaris says:


      I absolutely agree. The race is essentially tied at worse and my personal guess is a Mac +2 lead allowing for slight erosion over the past 2-3 weeks. The fact is that most polls are also far too volotile as well.

      At any rate before talking about inherenty non-pollable things, I think Mac has an edge but it’s definately a MoE thing.


    218. Tina says:

      Wow 485 – Dow.

      Awesome baby awesome.

    219. Phil says:

      Polaris, I agree. I’d rather be around Dems than NRO types any day.

      I’ve developed a real distaste for the Corner and those that write over there.

    220. Tina says:

      Yup, there is a disconnect between the national and state #s. I do accept your premise. I prepared for disaster in these results – and I just do not see them.

      I still see it at Mac +3 nationally.

    221. Aaron_in_TX says:

      “The point is that young poeple don’t vote in the numbers their census percentages would otherwise indicate. They never have.”

      You’re right. That’s why I think the emphasis for the Obama people is the margin, not as much turnout increase. They need to improve on Kerry’s margin by 5-10%, try their best to get more turnout, and stay even with what Kerry did in 2004. You can see the counter-strategy at work with McCain’s choice of Palin. So far she’s not performing up to expectations. I actually expect her to redeem herself somewhat at the debate.

      It’s hard to get a large number of young people to care about politics. Most often, like Frank says, I hear people say that their vote doesn’t matter because they already know who’s going to win.

    222. Polaris says:

      #221 A lot of it is a dead cat bounce. Don’t get too excited yet.


    223. Akula says:

      So comes the bumper sticker

      “Keep Austin Weird”

      Am I correct?

    224. Tina says:

      I do not see a 5 to 8 point Obama lead translated into any state polls seen here the last 2 days.

      I do not buy the PPP-D poll either.

    225. Aaron_in_TX says:

      * stay even with kerry’s performance among the other demographics in 2004

    226. derrick says:


      Your last might be the funniest post EVER. 7 national polls show McCain losing tremendous ground,polls show a lost debate, the state polls are cratering, the BG poll you tout now shows Obama ahead, Dem registration is surging, McP have become a laughing stock, the country blames Reps for the financial crisis. And now — you’re touting ARG and Zogby, the acknowledged worst pollsters in US.

      Says Polaris:

      I absolutely agree. The race is essentially tied at worse and my personal guess is a Mac +2 lead allowing for slight erosion over the past 2-3 weeks. The fact is that most polls are also far too volotile as well.

      At any rate before talking about inherenty non-pollable things, I think Mac has an edge but it’s definately a MoE thing.

    227. Tina says:

      Oh, I am in a holding pattern with stocks – especially after WAMU.

      My guvement pension is what i worry about next.

    228. Keith says:

      Apologies if this has already been posted, but here’s a link to a five battleground polls released by Fox/Ras:

      O M
      CO 49 48
      FL 47 47
      OH 47 48
      PA 50 42
      VA 50 47

    229. Jay says:



      Watch the news over the next two days for more on the bill I mention in #219. If we haven’t heard anything beyond that report when the House reconvenes, we may yet dodge the Socialist Pork bullet.

    230. rdelbov says:


      In 1948 yes Dewey was up in the polls and yes Truman won. Could have been phone bias.

      Gallup was wrong in 1948 (I think Harris was right in 1948 or was it vice versa) and repeated his polling a week after the election. He came up with the same three point Dewey lead.

      If anything was missed in 1948, however, in my opinion were three hard to find trends that year.

      1st There was a sullen rural rebellion against the GOP in parts of the Midwest and West. Pollsters missed and frankly perhaps even the Trumann whistle stop campaign energized this move to Harry.

      2nd Truman desergrated the Army and while that cost him huge in the South. Truman was strong in the black community in 1948.

      3rd and finally while the Jews were always a democratic bloc many jews flirted with Henry Wallace. Yet Harry, perhaps because of his decision to recognize Israel, got a strong Jewish vote

    231. Polaris says:

      #228 That’s a tall order Aaron in Texas and that assumes the GOP won’t be able to counter as they did in 2004 with their own Gotv

      Basically when you talk about the “youth vote” it’s smoke and mirrors AITX. Maybe this once Obama gets the youth vote that’s meaningful.

      Given past political history, I wouldn’t count on it.


      If five people make an error and one person does not, it doesn’t mean the five people are suddenly right. Bear that in mind. I’ve already stated WHY I believe what I do. I am not pulling the number out of a hat.


    232. Polaris says:

      #226 Indeed, that is the slogan.


    233. Darrell says:

      231…was yesterday’s news

    234. Polaris says:

      Saying that Zogby is still on double secret probation is hardly endorsing him.

      However, check him out, he is trying to rehabilitate himself.


    235. Polaris says:

      Gotta go, people to see and things to do and all that.

      I’ll be back later tonight.


    236. Middle of the Roader says:

      The difference between Polaris and I, is that if I see two contradictory polls (like Battleground vs Gallup) I say that we’ll see who was right and that the truth probably is in between. Polaris, looks at Battleground and if it supports his view, then they are a poll to take seriously. Today? Obama is a ahead, and now Battleground has “joined the junk” pollsters!

      Heck, ALL pollsters now are “junk” because they have Obama ahead.

    237. rdelbov says:

      The Trolls always hit and run. They never debate substance.

      We post our points and lay out our reasons.

      The trolls came and laugh. They never contest our points.

    238. Keith says:

      @236 — Oops, sorry. It was dated today on the website.

    239. Polaris says:


      You never address WHY I think the other polls are junk polls. I respect DemCorps(D) even though they have an Obama lead.

      Care to understand why? I really have to go now but perhaps the others will explain it to you (without partisan weights it’s garbage in==garbage out)


    240. Darrell says:

      Arizona 59-40 for McCain according to new rasmussen poll

    241. Darrell says:

      I was wrong on that poll….59/38 is what they show

    242. knova_red says:

      MOR – I am still curious as to why you feel it is so important to point this out to us. If we believe in bad polls, why does this matter to you?

    243. Darrell says:

      I know that Arizona is not Colorado or New Mexico, but I am hoping that McCain has opened up a big lead like this in AZ, that there will be spillover across the borders of AZ. I guess Colorado does not technically border Colorado, but is diagonally bordering it.

      August polls showed a much tighter race in AZ.

    244. Darrell says:

      *246…Colorado doesn’t technically border Arizona

    245. Brandon says:

      Obama only gets 77% of D’s in AZ.

    246. derrick says:

      I don’t recall criticisms from you when all the trackers showed McCain up 2-4 points in early Sept. I guess, in a grand conspiracy, they all decided to push their results towards Obama. Probably had nothing to with the economy cratering, McCain’s erratic behavior, and Palin’s disastrous interviews. All of a sudden, everyone changed their “demographics.”
      We’ve got to remain in the reality based community if we’re going to debate polls seriously.

      Check out all the markets — intrade, Iowa, etc. They’re all showing McC around 35%. I guess people are just throwing their $$ away in a conspiracy to make McCain look bad.

      Let’s be serious here, ok?

    247. Darrell says:

      troll…run along. Polaris has been consistent all along about the way these polls have been done.

    248. KeyBored says:

      Obama sill hitting Tampa area hard with ads. I’ve seen the three below the most. Lilly Ledbetter concerns equal pay for woman – she lost Supreme Court decision against Goodyear.

      Lilly Ledbetter

      Obama on Social Security

      A stronger Economy (second on list)


    249. rdelbov says:

      trolling trolls posting and not responding.

      Derrick go back to post #100

      partisan distribution does matter.

    250. That is because when the polls showed McCain up, most of the polls were using a different party weighting. There are lost of ways to play around with the internal of polls to get results you want. Polaris and the rest here have been very consistent in calling crap crap. When Zog has had some polls in the past that showed good results for McCain, but the internals were questionable, we all criticized those as well.

      When Ras and Gallup keep playing with their numbers and changing weighting, etc. of course we are going to call them on it. It has nothing to do with who happens to be up at the time.

    251. rdelbov says:

      Darrell if you want more Obama on “White Folks”

      White in deed

    252. Jay says:

      Has anyone else heard McCain is going to Missouri tomorrow?

      That’s odd, considering I’ve yet to see any polling that makes it viable for Obama. Oh well, better safe than sorry, I guess.

    253. KeyBored says:

      On youth vote, if home is in a battleground state, college students are being encouraged to return home to vote.


    254. derrick says:

      Post 100 is full of misinformation. Dem reg #s are surging. Can’t possibly use 2004 #s. Look what happened in 2006. Why do you think so many Rep congressmen retired. The party id in Rasmussen and others is conservative. I’m afraid we should all know that Polaris makes most of his stuff up.

    255. derrick says:

      Someone who disagrees ain’t a troll.

      Don’t we all have enough confidence in our analysis to exchange reality-based views?

    256. derrick says:

      Everyone ask themselves: if mcCain were really up by +2, like Polaris thinks, why in the world would McCain have to be spending time and $$ in North Carolina, Virginia, or Indiana??? Bush didn’t need to….

    257. Aaron_in_TX says:

      Dem registrations are up. It’s true. The million dollar question is, will they vote? I certainly hope they do.

    258. Chris says:


      Here’s the deal on the BG poll as I understand it. They were not weighting their poll numbers by age group and were greatly overpolling the age 65+ folk and underpolling the under 45 crowd. Nate Silver at five thirty eight noticed this and so posted. Here’s the link to his site which also shows supporting data.

      I used the actual 2004 voter age breakdowns and it looks like this error resulted in about a three point result swing in McCain’s favor.

      From this point on what follows is purely my conjecture. My guess is that people read Nate’s post and contacted the BG folk to point out this obvious problem. It looks like their “fix” included getting rid of party affiliation weighting. So it looks to me like they traded one polling problem for another.

    259. rdelbov says:


      that’s a mighty weak response. I guote numbers and stats.

      You quote opinions.

      What is your basis for them??

      A troll just says you are wrong and does nothing else.

      Think a little bit and explain how partisan distribution can change 14% in four years as some polls have shown?

    260. rdelbov says:


      did you not bother to read my posts, earlier on this thread, that explains why that does not matter?

      Are you just trolling or posting other’s opinions.

      Could you think and respond for yourself??

    261. Chris says:


      What are you talking about?

    262. rdelbov says:


      have you looked at any of these posts for discussions on the battleground polls??

    263. Chris says:


      I didn’t read all 260 plus posts, but I got the gist. I was trying to add my own analysis to the discussion, and in particular engage Polaris, whom I respect. I thought he might be interested in the five thirty eight post.

      Honestly, you are throwing the word “Troll” around too much. I’m still trying to figure out what I said that was so horrible.

    264. If the polls used partisan breakdowns from 2006 these would all be a lot closer. 2006 was a big year for Dems and the GOP was pretty pissed and didn’t turn out. So, accept 2006 as the floor for GOP support, which I think was about 3 points less then the Dems. Do you folks in the “reality based community” (man you KOS kids crack me up) really think that in a presidential election year you can increase your voter id by more then you had it in 2006? Even in the best of all outcomes you might be able to increase it by a point, maybe two. No way are the Dems going to have a 6 point great turnout, there is zero evidence to support that.

    265. Middle of the Roader says:

      knova red, turning the question back — why do feel it necessary to keep pointing out to those who might have another opinion, that we can’t EXPRESS that opinion? And, why do folks keep calling anyone with a contradictory message a “troll”?

      And, I AM addressing Polaris on a factual level. If ALL the polls are showing one thing it is incumbent on the contrarian to prove them all wrong. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of statistics knows you can maniupulate any stat to suit one’s goals. I totally agree with some of Polaris’ points that something like the Kos poll showing Obama 11 points up is an outlier. But, now Polaris (once Battleground “turned” into a “junk poll”) is out there saying EVERYBODY is wrong but him. And, we’re the ones on the defensive for pointing that out? Less than 24 hours ago, Battleground was the gold standard, but because they adjusted their model (calling on YEARS of experience in polling, not years of posting on blogs), THEY are junksters?

    266. Dannylandulf says:

      #262 Yeah but if you think about thinks rationally then you can’t hold onto the delusion of thinking McCain is actually in the lead.

    267. derrick says:

      Folks, that 14% # is made up.

      But, I do know that in states like NC and Penna, Dem registration has gone up 400k to 1 million, while Republican has FALLEN. That could make a huge difference from 2004.

      But, anyway, we;ll see. McCain sure isn’t acting like a guy with a 2% lead, spending so much $$ and time in red states like Va, NC, and Indiana. But, maybe his polls are fixed too.

    268. Akula says:

      My only technical input into this entire polling discussion, as an engineer:

      When you continue to tweak variables to get what you believe is the right answer or to fall in line with other results, i.e., other polling groups, you are not being true to your science.

      On a personal belief, I think the polling institutions haven’t kept up with new lifestyles and the distribution of demographic groups over the last twenty years. We as a people are changing too fast to be accurately profiled, designated and questioned.

      As I wrote, it’s an opinion.

    269. rdelbov says:

      Chris read my post #142

      In my opinion I detail how age is not as important as partisan distribution.
      So Battleground is valid in my opinion.

      A troll is someone who comes and does not add to the discussion except for tauting, teasing or disagreeing and defending or discussing.

      If you want to disagree. Fine. I am just pointing out to you that we discussed your points and dealt with them.

      You can agree or disagree with us ,but there you are.

    270. derrick says:

      Akula is right

    271. derrick says:

      If we keep denying polls here, we’re gonna sound like Baghdad Bob.

    272. Akula says:

      As was stated on this website before; voters are dying every day.

      Could someone note in NC or PA how many DEMs died in the last four years? I would be more interested in the net change.

    273. Dannylandulf says:

      New InAdv/Pollposition polls has Obama +2 in Ohio and +6 in Virgina.

      But I’m sure its just another reputable polling coming thats completely wrong right?

    274. KeyBored says:

      Ohio McCain 45, Obama 47
      VA Obama 51, McCain 45

      Arizona McCain 59, Obama 38

      Georgia McCain 52, Obama 44


    275. rdelbov says:

      Sorry derrick you are wrong. There have been national polls with a 14% D edge.

      Sorry you also have your registration stats wrong. Your NC numbers are pure fantasy.

      So far no one has knocked down my or Polaris’s ideas on partisan distribution.

      Which is the key point and absolute greatest link to accuracy to how a poll is run.

    276. DrJay says:

      MidRoader, your comments are disingenuous, and insulting to the many posters here of intelligence, various demographics and differing ideologies. I began commenting here four weeks ago, and Polaris was not around at that time. A great many posters have said the same things as Polaris independently. He is a prolific and respected poster, and picks up other arguments he agrees with as well as his own.

      The problem is that you see everyone who agrees with Polaris as mindless. Others see people of many differing opinions coming to the same very logical conclusion espoused by Polaris.

      You say, you believe the truth of contradictory polls is somewhere in between; well, what a wonderfully precise mathematical argument. On the other hand, you are presented with one by statisticians and mathematicians and political consultants on this site, and you discount it. So who is simply believing what they want to believe?

      You clearly are not interested in a real discussion of the facts in regard this topic. When we say, Battleground and others is good because it properly weights by party ID, and then you come back and say we’ve changed our mind because of an Obama lead, after we have already stated that the original premise has been violated (they no longer weight by party ID starting with this poll), then this becomes clear. That’s why someone else labeled you a troll.

      Explain why we are supposed to be so worried about BG because of age weightings, and not worried when they remove party ID weightings? (as Chris was alluding to)

      derrick, yes there was criticism of pro-Mac polls as well. Case in point, why don’t you go look back at when Gallup showed McCain +5 with +10 among likely voters, and ask yourself why gallup is not using the likely voter screen.

      Read this article by Gallup itself, which states why polls of adults and registered voters are junk:

      Their excuse for not using an LV screen at this point is that they don’t think people are in position yet to determine whether they are likely to vote on election day. And so, by their own admission, their numbers are inaccurate.

      It includes this:
      “Bush won the popular vote over Kerry by about 2.5 percentage points, almost exactly what our likely voter estimate predicted. Had we reported only registered voters, we would have estimated a [+2] Kerry victory. In other words, had all registered voters turned out in 2004, Kerry would have been elected president. But all registered voters didn’t turn out. There was a Republican advantage among those who did turn out.”

      Chris, that argument was debunked above by AIN and myself. 538 admittedly fudged those numbers in the favor of its argument, Mac still leads upon reweighting with the proper numbers from the census bureau. I don’t think you’re a troll though, just didn’t read the posts on 538.

    277. Benni says:


      naturally it will be closer in many states of GWB this time
      one reason why think Obama will win the popular vote and lose the election
      example is texas
      bush was near 70% there
      McCain will never be!!
      The highest will be 60%
      no question that VA IN NC LA TX will be much closer than o4 andObama will be betteras kerry in Dc MA MD OR IL IA DE WI RI CT VT
      and naturally he illwin the other blue states solid
      but it will be much closer in the other direction in PA NH MI andOH and FL will be out of play for Obama
      think of the blue coolar reagandemocrats

    278. Gary Maxwell says:

      Look who figuring out that we are winning in Iraq:

      For the first time since Rasmussen Reports began polling on the issue, a plurality of voters in September say the U.S. mission in Iraq will be viewed as a success in the long term.

      In a national telephone survey Monday night, 41% said history will rate the war in Iraq a success versus 39% who said it will be seen as a failure, with 20% undecided.

    279. KeyBored says:


      Assuming dems dying is from natural causes, and many elderly dems trend rep, a plus for dems?

      Do reps ever die?


    280. Dannylandulf says:

      282 A successful pile of poo is still a pile of poo.

    281. MDefl says:


    282. Chris says:


      I agree that 1 percent of partisan ID error makes a lot more difference than one percent of age group error. In this case the magnitude of the age error was so big that it had a large impact on the result.

      I’m curious, what do you think the partisan breakdown should be? I think with already registered voters it has swung back toward the Rep’s since 2006. I’m also thinking that Dem’s have the advantage with new registrants. Where I am clueless is how to guage the magnitude of these trends and the likelihood the new registrants actually voting.

    283. Howard Dean says:

      IA polls are a joke.

      Remember when they had MAc +1 in GA?


      3 debates, 527 ads and an Oct surprise to go.

      No it ain’t over!

    284. MDefl says:

      Naturally the trolls are out in force to attack Polaris. Personally, I wish Glenn Reynolds and Red State would pick up on his analysis. He absolutely knows what he is talking about.

      If the trolls are so confident that their guy is going to win 57 states and Cuba, then why not just leave us alone to live in our little delusional bubble? It is because they really don’t believe that and know that their guy cannot seal the deal. Look what happened with HRC. She actually had more votes than him in the end.

    285. KeyBored says:


      US overthrew Iraq, got rid of Saddam Hussein, won every battle, didn’t find WMD – but now we know there is none. Yes, we won – lets get out.


    286. Dannylandulf says:


      Unless it’s good for McCain

    287. Howard Dean says:

      With the current political/economic climate and the msm endorsing Obama, he should be +25.

      Not even close.

      He’s at a very anemic 49% in Gallup.

      +5 or +6.

      A 3 point swing = TIED.

    288. KeyBored says:


      Didn’t dems come out in huge numbers for primaries – huge numbers each for Obama and Clinton?


    289. MDefl says:


      As was proven in 2004 in Ohio, the “new registrants” issue is a joke. More often than not, the same people reapply again and again. Most of them are not really new and some that are do not vote. That is why a Democrat has not received 50% of the vote since 1976 in a national election. They are maxed out and no matter how creative they get, they simply cannot get more votes. 2006 was an anomoly in that the social cons sat the elections out in protest of being used by Bush who they felt betrayed them. He did – look at GMA as exhibit A. What did he actually do about it? Nothing and in 06 had the guts to actually try to manipulate that group in the same exact way. Even though I don’t agree with them on some issues, these are not stupid people. Those people are coming home in this election so I think the party should be Dem +3. The weightings of the current polls are an absolute joke. I am actually laughing when I read the internals.

    290. MDefl says:

      Sorry, I need to use paragraphs.

    291. Dannylandulf says:

      291 Is there any possible way that the media could cover the campaign that wouldn’t cause cries of ‘liberal’ bias?

      You see a bias because you are looking for it.

    292. MDefl says:


      We have criticized numerous state polls that had Mac ahead where it did not make sense. Thanks for stopping by troll. Your battery is almost dead and your server, is calling you home. Run along troll.

    293. MDefl says:


      I will not even comment on that. Dang, what is that “tingle running up my leg”?

    294. MDefl says:

      The press is rooting through Palin’s garbage in Alaska but refuses to ask any questions regarding Ayers, Rezko, BO’s own quotes in his 2 autobiographies and ACORN. I am leaving out about 100 other examples.

      Again troll, why bother? I know you are confident that your guy is going to win 57 states and Cuba. Why waste your time with all of us misguided Republicans?

    295. Marv says:

      New thread

    296. Chris says:


      Sorry, I should have read your post better. I guess we will just have to disagree that in this election there is no difference in McCain and Obama support based on age. I can see how there must be the most correlation based on party affiliation, but I can’t completely discount age as a factor. It seems to me very likely that older white Democrats would in general have more difficulty voting for Obama than younger white Democrats.

      If pollsters weighted properly for all factors and then this argument about whether a factor was important or not would be moot.

    297. rdelbov says:


      we can agree to disagree on battleground. As I related 85% of R’s for McCain, 75% of D’s for Obama and 95% of blacks for Obama those are big relationships.

      So if you are short of R’s-D’s or Blacks that really moved the polls.

      If 18-34 is 56-34 Obama and +65 is 52-44 McCain will moving seniors do anything?

      If it was a pure stat move. Yes it would, but if the seniors are 25% blacks or 45% D’s. Well maybe not.

      If you remove 150 seniors and add 150 18-34 voters and the partisan breakdown remains the same (say move 62 democrats-52 republicans and 36 indies) will that change the poll?

      Okay I am discussing the point. Move the old folks to 18-34 and keep the partisan distribution.

      Will that change that poll all that much??

    298. Chris says:


      The primaries generated huge Democratic interest, but I don’t know how much was due to new registrants. I think a lot was because of increased turnout and more participation from Independents and Rep’s.

    299. rdelbov says:

      oops I started my post before your response popped up Chris.

      Since you agreeded with some of my points I want to be more gracious.

    300. rdelbov says:

      NC numbers for 2008 as of August (last available)

      2.719 Million D
      1.953 Million R
      1.321 Million Other

      From 2004

      2.582 Million D
      1.908 Million R
      1.084 Million Other

      Not to be a grumpy old man, but some of our newbies here did not real all posts over the spring and summer detailing voter registration stats. So lots of this has been discussed over and over again by me as new visitor finds an AP story talking about registration stats.

      Yes some republicans changed party registration to vote in the democratic primary. Many also changed to other as they vote in either primary that way.

      Since 2004 the democratic and repubican % of registrations have declined while the actual number of new democratic voters is up 200K.

      Of course I also detailed over the summer how voters are no longer purged anymore so actually the % of registerd voters is declining as the total number of voters increase

    301. KeyBored says:

      WTF? GOOG down 60 closing @ 320. Everyone please buy google. I want to be rich like you guys 🙂


    302. Chris says:


      Probably not; my original adjustment didn’t move the polls that much, only 3 points. So assuming that the partisan weights are correct, I wildly guess that the poll would be off by about a point.

      I would still try and factor in all factors possible. Maybe there is some way to come up with correlation coefficients between the various factors and adjust, but it would be easier just to poll a representitive sample.

    303. rdelbov says:


      I appreciate you discussing your points.

      I officially, in my book, move off the troll list

    304. DrJay says:

      Chris, again, the numbers from the census bureau in the 538 article are incorrect. Please read post #131. The numbers do not result in a 3-point swing.

    305. Sharon says:

      253….why,oh why, won’t they run that as an ad?

    306. derrick says:

      #298 — What in the world do you think has been missed by media on Ayers or Rezko? And how could that compare to Troopergate, lies on per diem, 25k gifts, all sorts of National Enquirer rumors, and total ignorance on matters of public policy?

    307. Sharon says:

      Does anyone know if Lieberman has been in south Florida? If not, he better because Nelson is pounding the pavement down there and he is very popular. However, I think Lieberman could sway the Jewish vote if he spent some time there. I live in north Florida and haven’t heard anything about Liberman coming to Florida. Big mistake if they don’t send him.

    308. derrick says:

      the latest from dick morris — is he a troll too?

      The polls now make it clear that McCain lost the first debate, and has lost ground during the entire gambit of suspending his campaign, going off the trail, going to Washington, and working on the bailout. He was tied, or 1 to 2 percent behind when he made the suspension announcement, and he is now 5 to 6 percent behind.

      The fallout in the electoral map does not make for a pretty picture. Core Republican states like Louisiana, Tennessee, West Virginia, Arizona, and North Carolina are now really toss ups, and even states like South Carolina and Georgia are in play.

    309. rdelbov says:


      I don’t know. I have always deplored the Rev. Wright and Obama twenty years of church membership

      In one video I posted Obama said he did hear any of the controvosial stuff that Wright said.

      Yet right here a man of God (Rev Wright) says “the White man’s greed runs a world in need”.

      What a disgrace that Obama would acknowledge that someone said that. In addition I might add that for many years the premier cruiselines has been in control of Jews.

      Yep many of those cruiselines leave right of Jewish Miami and the tourists throw their excess food in the water as they sail by Haiti

    310. derrick says:

      Is that worse than Palin’s witch doctor?? And she was THERE!!!

    311. rdelbov says:


      a troll is someone comes and posts his/her points, but does not care to engage in debate or discussion. They come here to post, sometimes on assignment from the DNC and have no interest in reading other posts or actually discussing matters.

      You can disagree with the conservaties here and not be a troll. Engage, discuss and don’t name call.

      Derrick frankly Dick Morris has a spotty record on political predictions. President Hillary Clinton can verify that point.

      I personally don’t put much stock in what he says. I am surprised that you do, but that’s your right.

    312. Akula says:



      As usual you missed the point.

      Show me the net gains for DEM and GOP registered voters and I’ll consider the registration delta.

      Otherwise, it’s all unsubstantiated gossip.

    313. Cyrano says:



      I think you’re confusing fallout from contamination. If you want to make a statement concerning the loss in core GOP states, feel free to show the numbers.

    314. Wes says:

      Has PPP had any Republican at all ahead this year?

    315. PPP has had Mccain up in FL/NC/GA

      I/A S/V
      PPP CNN

      I take it thats the general consensus on accuracy this year?

    317. Annie says:

      Perhaps more could and should be stated about Obama’s promise to cut back our military arsenal and not to pursue further new military technologies – at a time when Putin has his military in the Caribbean and threatens our Eastern European allies, Iran is seeking to destabilize the Middle East, and China will surely desire Taiwan. Not to mention the on-going threat from Al-Qaeda.

    318. Annie says:

      Oh, and check out Obama’s early contacts with Khalid al-Mansour.