8 replies to this topic

[Caesar]

The USA Today-Gallup Poll shows McCain now ahead, 50 percent to 46 percent.

That puts the Republican's lead beyond the margin of error.

The survey was taken from last Friday to Sunday, after the Republican National Convention, and indicates the Minnesota gathering gave him a substantial bounce.

Obama had a seven-point advantage following the Democratic convention the week before.

The addition of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket prompted 29 percent of the voters surveyed to say they were more likely to vote for McCain.
Source
I only think its going to get better

In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote. The survey of 1,022 adults, including 959 registered voters, has a margin of error of +/— 3 points for both samples.
its strange they have two polls

McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote

McCain leads Democrat Barack Obama by 50%-46% among registered voters

USA Today, Gallup Poll: John McCain, Sarah Palin Take Ten Point Lead

Edited by Caesar, 08 September 2008 - 06:56 AM.

[SoCrazes]

Looking back over the years, how accurate are these polls?  Are they intended to be a "reflection" of U.S. voters or a "deflection" of the poll takers?

[Aztec Warrior]

The Liberal main stream media and their biased attacks have really backfired. That, and the Republican convention bounce really explains these numbers. A 14 point swing in 10 days in quite remarkable. Obama nearly up 10 points last week to McCain up by 4.

That may also explain Oberman and Chris Mathews relieved of their anchor duties. The mean-spirited and biased reporting only increased support for the Republicans. Thanks for the help guys!

SoCrazes on Sep 8 2008, 06:13 AM, said:

Looking back over the years, how accurate are these polls?  Are they intended to be a "reflection" of U.S. voters or a "deflection" of the poll takers?

Fairly accurate.

[AROCES]

SoCrazes on Sep 8 2008, 11:13 AM, said:

Looking back over the years, how accurate are these polls?  Are they intended to be a "reflection" of U.S. voters or a "deflection" of the poll takers?

True, does not mean McCain wins now. But shows we have another tight race, not an easy win for Obama that many have thought.

[Homer]

SoCrazes on Sep 8 2008, 07:13 AM, said:

Looking back over the years, how accurate are these polls?  Are they intended to be a "reflection" of U.S. voters or a "deflection" of the poll takers?

I believe polls are reasonably reflective of voters at the time the poll was taken. Polls are designed, among other things, to give an estimated understanding of where people stand on the issues/candidate/whatever based on the question asked.
Sometimes the way in which polls are taken can directly affect the outcome, and polls don’t take into account that many of the polled won’t actually take the time to vote.

In my unrealistically humble opinion, polls are reasonably reflective of how voters feel, but completely irrelevant in estimating the outcome of an election.

[Nxt2Hvn]

I believe this is about the point in time during the 2004 election that President Bush started pulling ahead in the polls ......

[Guardsman Bass]

SoCrazes on Sep 8 2008, 05:13 AM, said:

Looking back over the years, how accurate are these polls?  Are they intended to be a "reflection" of U.S. voters or a "deflection" of the poll takers?

Closer on to the election, they can be more accurate - with only a few exceptions, Gallup has called the popular vote winner correctly most of the time over the past 70 years.

Keep in mind, though, that national polls don't really mean anything other than a general "is your candidate overall "up" or "down" with the American public?". What matters is how Obama is polling in the key swing states, and what his current electoral vote total would be if the vote were held today. George W. Bush, for example, still managed to win the presidency via the electoral college in spite of losing the popular vote.

That said, I'm slightly unnerved by the "54-44" split, although not that much; we still have nearly 60 days until the election for that to change. The "50-46" split doesn't bother me at all, when you consider that the margin of error is +/-3%, meaning that if that decided the race, it would be almost too close to call.

[MasterPo]

This afternoon CNN was covering Biden at a town hall style meeting.

It was bad.

He sounded angry.
He wasn't talking to the people as much as lecturing or scolding to them.
He was mono-toned. Really hard to listen to.
He looked like stone. Nope a pleasent appearance.

[Aztec Warrior]

Yeah, I saw that too. He was mean, angry and with a scowl that could melt ice. He is not helping his cause with that demeanor.