Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« This Is (Hopefully) the Worst ... | Money Market Fund Breaks the B... »

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Obama Up in Daily Gallup Poll

posted by on September 17 at 10:44 AM

todaysgallupobamaup.jpg

RSS icon Comments

1

The Palin bounce has peaked and the lipstick is starting to come off the pig. And how about McCain saying yet again on Monday that our economy is "fundamentally sound", even as Wall Street crashes?

Posted by gary | September 17, 2008 10:57 AM
2

what are the odds that mccain now announces nominated anne coulter for the newly created position of "Second Vice President of the United States." anything for a bump ...

Posted by superyeadon | September 17, 2008 11:03 AM
3

There is so little real hope for this country. With all the evidence of mismanagement, greed, short-sightedness, and stupidity of the last 8 years staring the American public in the face, there should be at least a 20 to 40% gap in the polls in Obama's favor. The only possible reasons why this is not the case just rock me to the core and lead me to despair.

Posted by rob | September 17, 2008 11:03 AM
4

all across america, meetings are taking place as an emergency response to the AIG and assorted messes. Those meetings times and places are stored in blackberry PDAs; those going to the meetings are cursing the name of the inventor of the device and situation they are a slave unto. MAC SAME!! why oh WHY!!!!!

Posted by Phenics | September 17, 2008 11:06 AM
5

I find it hard to be excited about a 2 percentage point lead (see rob's comment above). But, I suppose it's better than trailing by 2 percentage points.

Posted by Julie in Chicago | September 17, 2008 11:07 AM
6

*sigh* so now we're back to cautious optimism on the Slog, after a few days of McCain leading in the polls nearly sent many of our commenters into a neverending spiral of depression.

What's the lesson to learn? Fuck the daily polls, they are nothing to freak out about (or conversely, get too excited about) on a day-to-day basis.

Posted by Hernandez | September 17, 2008 11:11 AM
7

@3: As I was walking through the supermarket check-out line last night, I was confronted with People Magazine's puff-piece "Meet the McCains," Newsweek's "Palintology" cover story featuring Sarah holding a shotgun over her shoulder, and a bunch more flattering celebrity coverage of the nominees for the American Fascist Party -- I'm sorry, the GOP. There were no pictures of Obama.

This is pretty typical of the fawning, soft-ball coverage they have been receiving, and yet a substantial number of voters aren't buying it in spite of the fact that it is being shoved down their throats 24/7. That is actually encouraging from where I stand. It means there are a lot of idiots, but also a lot of people who want something better and maintain a healthy skepticism of the media's "political" coverage.

Regardless of the election's outcome, that's a lot of people who are willing to risk something in order to bring about a positive change. Enough people to make a difference.

Posted by flamingbanjo | September 17, 2008 11:13 AM
8

So will you all stop whining about temporary fluctuations in polls now? You youngsters who have never followed an election closely before may have an excuse, but anyone who's lived through one should have a little more perspective. Kerry led Bush in polls for a few periods in 2004.

Posted by tsm | September 17, 2008 11:18 AM
9

So in 1998 S Carolina repealed its ban on inter-racial marriage. What do you think the margin was? 95 % 90% ? 80% ?

Nope... 60-40. I wonder what the polling looked like on that one.

(Alabama did the same thing 2 years later with the same margin.)

Posted by daniel | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM
10

Well, Hernandez, freaking out about the daily polls inspired me and tons of people I know to get out their credit cards and make large donations to Obama. So panic can have an upside.

Posted by Dan Savage | September 17, 2008 11:25 AM
11

Trending consistently upward since the RNC. I was never worried.

Posted by Chris in Tampa | September 17, 2008 11:32 AM
12

For once, crisis in the country is helping the Democrats. Because the Republicans are experts on protecting us from terrorist "threats", but when it comes to providing for the American people, they're lost. Nice of Wall Street to draw the eye away from the bullshit and give people a glimpse of the actual problems facing us.

Posted by Mr Fuzzy | September 17, 2008 11:33 AM
13

Good CHRIST I'm gonna have ulcers before November!!!

AAaaahhhhh!!!! [head explodes]

Posted by Reverse Polarity | September 17, 2008 11:37 AM
14

There's a very valuable (and scary) analysis of the impact of race on the election in the current New York Review of Books.

"As I write, several polls give Obama about 47 percent and McCain about 45 percent...The rest of the respondents say they are undecided. Yet now and later, there's a chance that the real percentages will be the reverse of those I've cited. Some people who are telling pollsters they're for Obama could actually be lying.

Such behavior has been called the "Bradley Effect ," after Tom Bradley, a black mayor of Los Angeles who lost his bid to be California's governor back in 1982. While every poll showed him leading his white opponent, that isn't how the final tally turned out. Things haven't been far different in some other elections involving black candidates. In 1989, David Dinkins was eighteen points ahead in the polls for New York's mayoral election, but ended up winning by only a two-point edge. The same year, Douglas Wilder was projected to win Virginia's governorship by nine points, but squeaked in with one half of one percent of the popular vote. Nor are examples only from the past. In Michigan in 2006, the final polls forecast that the proposal to ban affirmative action would narrowly prevail by 51 percent. In fact, it handily passed with 58 percent. That's a Bradley gap of seven points, which isn't trivial.

...Almost all people who reject black candidates say they have nonracial reasons for doing so. And many undoubtedly believe what they're saying. So I'm not persuaded that the Bradley gap won't emerge this year. The Obama campaign would do well to print signs to post prominently in all its offices: ALWAYS SUBTRACT SEVEN PERCENT!"

Posted by Gurldoggie | September 17, 2008 11:40 AM
15

Gee, now that Obama's up it's okay to cite the Gallup Daily tracking poll again.

The reason to look at these indicators (n.b.: indicators; not predictors) is to gauge how you are doing relatively.

Yes, Obama has a good ground game, maybe it's worth a few points. And yes, the racism thing is also worth a few points.

But come on. The fact this thing is fundamentally tied when all the economic and other fundamentals are so in favor of the Democrats means something.

It means they're running a shitty campaign.

They need to get on one phrase that economically connects to the swing voters and repeat it ad nauseum.

Winning due to the luck of being coincident with the biggest economic meltdown of 50 years is not an indication of a good campaign message.

Obama needs to blame greed and corruption and the malefactors of great casino style wealth and give hard and fast and solid proposals and say how they will protect the well being and pocketbook of middle Americans in the swing states.

His ad is all about restoring a sense of unity and shared purpose. Very vague, very wussy, not too tangible. We should be kicking ass and blaming the stupidity of voters or racism is no excuse -- these factors were well known 20 months ago.

Obama is on TV right now good he's on the economy, I hope he gets it boiled down to a gripping sound bite that connects.

Posted by PC | September 17, 2008 11:54 AM
16

oh shut the fuck up flamingbanjo. your selective memory is bordering on alberto gonzalez levels.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | September 17, 2008 11:57 AM
17

@16: I love you too, sunshine!

Posted by flamingbanjo | September 17, 2008 12:02 PM
18

The Obama campaign put out a great video on the battle plan today. It made me much more hopeful than the Gallup poll.

Five Thirty-Eight still has a ten vote (point?) McCain advantage in the Electoral College, and moved Ohio into "Lean GOP" for the first time. That's when I broke out my credit card.

Posted by Demolator | September 17, 2008 12:14 PM
19

This is not even an oldie classic SusanUnPC post, but from only a couple weeks ago. She's basically making a full on attack on the Democratic VP nominee, without even shrouding it in phony "advice" to Obama or any other lies about wanting Obama to win. Pretty much "PC"s true colors: she wants McCain to win and she'll say anything to make that happen.

"PC" why do you hate the Democrats so much? And why don't you just admit whose side you're on?

Posted by elenchos | September 17, 2008 12:49 PM
20

Wall Street is not crashing you morons. You people would call a simple car accident an attempt at genocide.

Posted by Will | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM
21

people don't understand % vs. absolute # Will

Posted by Bellevue Ave | September 17, 2008 2:06 PM
22

The latest CNN poll out this afternoon shows Obama overcoming the Palin bounce and is now leading in Ohio, virtually a dead heat in Florida and similiar in the other key "battleground" states that Kerry lost in 2004. Today's 450 point stock market crash, and it is a crash, will further help focus middle american minds on whats really at stake in this election.

Posted by Gary Clark | September 17, 2008 2:24 PM
23

I did an analysis of the worst days for the S&P 500 since it's inception using the ranking of 3 day losses, 2 day losses, and 1 day losses, then averaged their ranks together and built a ranking on that. the results;

10/19/1987
10/26/1987
8/31/1998
10/27/1997
5/28/1962
4/14/2000
10/16/1987
10/13/1989
9/26/1955
3/12/2001
7/22/2002
11/30/1987
1/8/1988
8/5/2002
7/10/2002
7/19/2002
9/17/2001
9/11/1986
11/18/1974
10/1/1998
8/4/1998
6/26/1950
7/23/2002
8/23/1990
8/6/1990
9/20/2001
1/9/1974
1/4/2000
9/3/2002
8/27/1998
8/29/1966
10/25/1982
9/17/2008 - 33rd!
10/21/1957
10/12/2000
3/24/1980
9/13/1974
9/19/2002
1/17/2008
10/23/1962
7/12/1950
4/14/1988
5/20/1970
12/8/1980
9/30/1974
4/14/1987
9/12/1986
8/2/2002
4/3/2001
10/10/1955
1/9/1998
9/29/1980
9/12/1974
12/20/2000
9/21/2001
2/27/2007
8/14/1974
9/27/1974
3/17/1980
8/24/1981
7/8/1974
9/23/1957
10/3/1955
10/15/1999
6/14/1962
1/24/1983
10/4/2002
11/15/1991
5/21/1970
7/2/2002
10/22/1951
10/15/1987
9/15/2008
10/7/2002
3/31/1997
1/20/1988
11/10/2000
2/18/2000
2/29/2008
1/2/2001
3/30/1987
12/15/2000
10/9/1979
11/10/1987
5/23/1962
9/4/2008
3/14/1955
3/23/1999
11/20/1973
6/12/1962
2/21/2001
1/24/2000
7/6/2001
5/19/1987
11/22/1963
5/25/1970
2/5/2008
9/7/2001
4/11/1997
5/14/1973 - 100th

Posted by Bellevue Ave | September 17, 2008 4:05 PM
24

@23: So 3 of the worst trading days in the last fifty years have occurred in the last two weeks? Is that what I'm supposed to get from that stack of numbers? Or is that what I'm supposed to not get, because it's deliberately presented in a format that A:Discourages reading and B: Makes you look ever so smart.

"Look, everyone, numbers! It's called 'economics!' You should take a class, like I did! Seriously, I've read several books."

Before you go off defending your latest non-point, realize that the stock market fall is generally being cited as a symptom of a larger problem, and not the entirety of the problem in and of itself. If you really think that the failure of banks, insurance companies and 150-year old investment firms isn't anything to be concerned with, at least say so.

Posted by flamingbanjo | September 17, 2008 6:36 PM
25

flamingbanjo, the point is there have been other periods in time that had far worse stock market falls. October 87 for example. Were you alive then? This isn't economics either. this is simply looking at the numbers and diving out the worst days of trading in 50 years.

And people are treating the market as the problem itself. at least we arent like the Japanese.

And there is cause for concern but waxing over the market doesn't help.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | September 17, 2008 8:23 PM
26

@20 - yeah, so a 5 to 6 percent drop each day three times in a week is just a "mental recession, huh?

Let's face it, you obviously are one of those GOP backers who think they'll get rich while only the top 0.1 percent have done well over the last eight years ... a "mental midget".

Posted by Will in Seattle | September 17, 2008 10:45 PM
27

"As I was walking through the supermarket check-out line last night, I was confronted with People Magazine's puff-piece "Meet the McCains," Newsweek's "Palintology" cover story featuring Sarah holding a shotgun over her shoulder, and a bunch more flattering celebrity coverage of the nominees for the American Fascist Party"

Geez, sorry People Magazine isn't giving you the hard-hitting groundbreaking journalism you're looking for.

Posted by MBI | September 18, 2008 5:49 AM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.