The variance in the national polls is striking. Newsweek had it at 15. Now Times/Bloomberg at 12. Gallup has had Obama up between 2-5%. Rasmussen varies between 5-7%. Obama leads but nobody knows by how much. My gut feeling (which means absolutely nothing) is he's up 5-6%. There can be no doubt that Bob Barr's candidacy would hurt McCain to some extent. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll25-2008jun25,0,5763707.story TIMES/BLOOMBERG POLL Obama holds 12-point lead over McCain, poll finds A Times/Bloomberg Poll says that in a two-man contest, 49% of respondents favor Barack Obama, while 37% support John McCain. With Ralph Nader and Bob Barr added to the mix, Obama holds 15-point edge. By Doyle McManus Los Angeles Times Staff Writer 2:00 PM PDT, June 24, 2008 WASHINGTON — Buoyed by enthusiasm among Democrats and public concern over the economy, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has captured a sizable lead over Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) at the opening of the general election campaign for president, the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll has found. In a two-man race between the major party candidates, registered voters chose Obama over McCain by 49% to 37% in the national poll conducted last weekend. On a four-man ballot including independent candidate Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr, voters chose Obama over McCain by an even larger margin, 48% to 33%. Obama's advantage, bigger in this poll than in most other national surveys, appears to stem in large part from his positions on domestic issues. Both Democrats and independent voters say Obama would do a better job than McCain at handling the nation's economic problems, the public's top concern. In contrast, many voters give McCain credit as the more experienced candidate and the one best equipped to protect the nation against terrorism -- but they rank those concerns below their worries about the economy. Moreover, McCain suffers from a pronounced "enthusiasm gap," especially among the conservatives who usually give Republican candidates a reliable base of support. Among voters who describe themselves as conservative, only 58% say they will vote for McCain; 15% say they will vote for Obama, 14% say they will vote for someone else, and 13% say they are undecided. By contrast, 79% of voters who describe themselves as liberal say they plan to vote for Obama. Even among voters who say they do plan to vote for McCain, more than half say they are "not enthusiastic" about their chosen candidate; only 45% say they are enthusiastic. By contrast, 81% of Obama voters say they are enthusiastic, and almost half call themselves "very enthusiastic," a level of zeal that only 13% of McCain's supporters display. "McCain is not capturing the full extent of the conservative base the way President Bush did in 2000 and 2004," said Susan Pinkus, director of the Times Poll. "Among conservatives, evangelicals and voters who identify themselves as part of the religious right, he is polling less than 60%. "Meanwhile, Obama is doing well among a broad range of voters," she said. "He's running ahead among women, black voters and other minorities. He's running roughly even among white voters and independents." Among white voters, Obama and McCain are dead even at 39% each, the poll found. Earlier this year, when Obama ran behind Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) among white voters in some primary elections, analysts questioned whether the African American senator could win white voters in the general election. But the great majority of Clinton voters have transferred their allegiance to Obama, the poll found. Only 11% of Clinton voters have defected to McCain. Nader, a consumer advocate who ran as the candidate of the Green Party in 2000 and as an independent in 2004, and Barr, a former Georgia congressman, both appear to siphon more votes from McCain than they do from Obama. When Nader and Barr are added to the ballot, they draw most of their support from voters who said they would otherwise vote for the Republican. Obama's strong showing also stems from a broader trend among voters of support for Democratic candidates and Democratic positions after almost eight years of an increasingly unpopular Republican administration. In this national poll's random sample of voters, 39% identified themselves as Democrats, 22% as Republicans, and 27% as independents. In a similar poll a year ago, 33% identified themselves as Democrats, 28% as Republicans, and 30% as independents. The survey found public approval of President Bush's job performance at a new low for the Times/Bloomberg Poll: only 23% approved of the job Bush is doing, and 73% disapproved. A bare majority of 51% of voters said they have a "positive feeling" about the Democratic Party; only 29% said they have a positive feeling about the Republican Party. "It's a Democratic year," Pinkus said. "This election is the Democrats' to lose." The Times/Bloomberg Poll, conducted under Pinkus' supervision, interviewed 1,115 registered voters across the nation June 19-23. The poll's margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points.
Concur. This is an interesting take by Dick Morris, especially since issues should be paramount in this campaign. www.dickmorris.com/ OBAMA'S NEW STRATEGY By DICK MORRIS Published on TheHill.com on June 24, 2008. Have you noticed a change in Barack Obama’s campaign? Instead of avoiding controversies over values, religion and race, he seems to welcome them and wade into the debates with an increasing enthusiasm. Characterizing how the Republicans will attack him, he predicted that they would criticize his “funny name” and add “and by the way, did you notice that he’s black?” Obama used to go out of his way to avoid this kind of reference, but now he brings it on. Deliberately. Why? Obama and the conservative right are mutually trying to keep the debate about his candidacy on the existential level — is he the hope for America’s future or a Manchurian Candidate, a kind of sleeper agent sent to destroy our democracy? That debate, which pits Obama’s rhetoric against the Rev. Wright’s rantings, is a contest that could go on all day, and Obama would win it. It is simply a bridge too far to believe that Obama is that evil and that invidious. But the more the debate covers such fundamental questions, the more it ignores the details — details which could bring Obama down.. Quite simply, Obama would rather address his religious views and his optimism about America and his embrace of diversity than talk about his plans to raise taxes, let gasoline prices soar and socialize healthcare. In our new book, Fleeced, we try to bring the debate back down to earth, focusing on the specific plans that Obama has announced during his presidential primary campaign and discussing the consequences. This is the debate Barack Obama hopes he can avoid. Consider his proposals: • In effect, he would legislate a 60 percent tax bracket for upper-income Americans, killing all initiative and innovation. He’d raise the top bracket to 40 percent. He’d apply FICA taxes to all income, not just that under $100,000 as at present. So add 40 percent plus FICA’s 12.5 percent plus Medicare’s 2 percent plus state and local taxes averaging, after deduction, at 5-6 percent, and you have a 60 percent bracket. • He would double the capital gains tax, saddling the 50 percent of Americans who own stock with dramatically higher taxes. • He’d double the dividend tax, hitting elderly coupon-clippers now retired and depending on fixed incomes. • He wants to cover 12 million illegal immigrants with federally subsidized health insurance, dramatically driving up costs and forcing federal rationing of healthcare. As in the U.K. and Canada, you will not be permitted certain medical procedures if the bureaucrats decide you are not worth it. • He proposes requiring Homeland Security operatives to notify terror suspects that they are under investigation within seven days of starting the investigation • He says that unless they can establish that there is “probable cause to believe that a certain individual is linked to a specific terrorist group,” Homeland Security cannot seize his documents and search his business. The current standard is only that the search be “relevant” to a terror investigation. • In effect, he would legislate a 60 percent tax bracket for upper-income Americans, killing all initiative and innovation. He’d raise the top bracket to 40 percent. He’d apply FICA taxes to all income, not just that under $100,000 as at present. So add 40 percent plus FICA’s 12.5 percent plus Medicare’s 2 percent plus state and local taxes averaging, after deduction, at 5-6 percent, and you have a 60 percent bracket. He does not oppose $5-per-gallon gasoline but only says that he wishes there had been a more “gradual adjustment” to the higher prices. Obama can talk about the Rev. Wright and flag lapel pins and his wife’s love of America all day long. But what he resists is a specific discussion of his own plans for our country. That’s the discussion he fears and he avoids. And it’s the discussion John McCain must force upon him if he is to have any realistic chance of winning the election.
^ LOL - I guess this is why nobody pays Dick Morris anymore. Republicans claiming that their policies are going to be their savior in the campaign shows they're even more hopeless than they appear to be. The public atttitude toward republican "policies" is summarized in GWB's approval rating.
funny nobody here complained when anti-Obama peeps had nothing else to bring up aside from controversies over Obama's values, religion and race over the past few months
I didn't mind that stuff being brought up since it is relevant what kind of people a Presidential candidate associates with. But it's borderline criminal that we're just over 4 months away from the election and barely touching the surface of what each candidate would do if elected. Obama in particular. He seems more interested in talking about imaginary GOP smear ads than the issues.
Dunno. I just throw these things out there when I see 'em. I do think its interesting everybody is quite intent on majoring on the minors (issues vs. non-issues).
Good point but I disagree on the "Obama in particular". At this moment in time, I think it's less clear what McCain represents. How much of a clean break he makes from Bush and the right-wing of his party will determine if I can support him. But he's been all over the place. I don't think even Republicans know what he will stand for.
Chances are you know a whole lot more about both candidates - both personally and in terms of platforms - than any Presidential race in recent history. 4 months doesn't seem a like a lot, but historically, you don't hear much about plans and specifics until well after the party conventions in August.
Personally i've always relied on the gallup poll. Here's the latest. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108376/Gallup-Daily-Obama-McCain-Tied-45.aspx Gallup Daily: Obama, McCain Tied at 45%Obama had held at least a slim advantage for most of JuneUSA Election 2008 Gallup Daily Americas Northern America PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update on the presidential election finds John McCain and Barack Obama exactly tied at 45% among registered voters nationwide. Voter preferences had been fairly evenly divided for the past week, with Obama generally holding a slight advantage of two or three percentage points. This is the first time since Gallup's May 31-June 4 rolling average that Obama does not have at least a slim advantage over McCain. Obama's largest lead to date has been seven points. (To view the complete trend since March 7, 2008, click here.) Since the changes from Tuesday's results are well within the margin of sampling error, it is unclear at this point if today's results represent a further tightening of the race. The last two individual nights of polling have, however, been more favorable to McCain that what Gallup has shown for most of June. -- Jeff Jones Survey Methods For the Gallup Poll Daily tracking survey, Gallup is interviewing no fewer than 1,000 U.S. adults nationwide each day during 2008. The general-election results are based on combined data from June 22-24, 2008. For results based on this sample of 2,600 registered voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points. Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only). In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls. To provide feedback or suggestions about how to improve Gallup.com, please e-mail feedback@gallup.com.
True, McCain has flip-flopped quite a bit. I'm hoping that his latest position on energy is his final one. If so, it's a fairly comprehensive plan(offshore drilling, nuclear plants, coal, researching alternative energy sources). Obama on the other hand is a lot more vague. He's waffled on nuclear energy. He supports ethanol, but it's looking like that's because of who he has ties to rather than because it's sound policy(cuz it clearly ain't). He's against domestic drilling. He's in favor of a windfall profit tax on oil companies which won't produce any energy and will only drive up the cost of gas. Honestly, the vast majority of his policy is alternative energy sources. Which is fine in the very long-term, but what about the next 5-10 years? See, THIS is what I want all the magazines and newspapers and morning shows to ask these candidates. I swear 99% of Obama interviews are dominated by questions like "Are you prepared for the Republican attack machine?".
