David Weigel | May 2, 2008
The much-maligned Zogby poll, which so badly blew the New Hampshire and California* primaries, actually did quite well in Pennsylvania and Texas. Zogby's tactic is to enter the field late and publish poll results over the last week before voters go to the polls; in those last two states** that meant he caught late movement to Hillary Clinton and called the results exactly right.
Here's what Zogby's saying about post-Wright North Carolina, where 15 percent of voters say the pastor's soured them on Obamania:
Obama - 50 percent
Clinton - 34 percent
Someone else(?) - 8 percent
Other - 8 percent
And Indiana's a 42-42 tie, with 21 percent of voters fretting about Wright. Zogby's outlook is a bit sunnier for Obama than most pollsters, but I'm convinced that he's worth following again. There's just no way that Obama can lose a state, like NC, where close to 40 percent of voters will be black. He'd have to lose the white vote by 60 points to lose, worse than he even did in Mississippi, and North Carolina has a fair sight more college kids and latte liberals than Haley Barbour's fiefdom.
I bring this up because of the engaging back-and-forth going on between Daniels McCarthy and Larison over at the AmCon. Larison thinks Obama has been done in by Wright; McCarthy thinks he's hit his nadir and is bound to rise against a GOP opponent who hasn't taken a punch all year.
The political environment that exists now, however, is nothing like the one that will exist in the summer, let alone November, when the Democrats will be fighting McCain instead of each other and the media glare will be upon the Arizonan as well as Obama. The present circumstances are—as several commentators, including me, have pointed out—the best that McCain is likely to enjoy for the rest of the season. I suspect present conditions are also nearly rock-bottom for Obama, though it’s a mistake ever to underestimate how much slime a Clinton can excrete. Nevertheless, barring new skeletons spilling out of Obama’s closest, the race is going to get better for him and worse for McCain.
McCarthy daydreams about the Democratic Convention and the bounce Obama will get when the party unites behind him. I think that's right, and I think Obama's Wright explosion this week, paradoxically, is making an Obama nomination more likely. For the first time Obama's entering a primary as bruised and mocked as Bill Clinton was before the 1992 New Hampshire primary. A week ago he was expected to win North Carolina easy, and Indiana would be the "tiebreaker" that the media paid attention to. Now if he loses Indiana narrowly and wins North Carolina by about 10 points (the black vote plus 30 percent of whites), he can sieze back the spin.
Another Zogby result from earlier in the week, predicting a four-way general election:
Obama (D) - 45 percent
McCain (R) - 42 percent
Barr (L) - 3 percent
Nader (I) - 1 percent
Barr rises to 4 percent in a Clinton matchup.
*Some of the explanation for that was the high absentee vote for Clinton. She won on election day narrowly, but won big with postal voters.
**Yes, Mississippi and Wyoming came between them, but they were so safely Obama that no one really polled them.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
though it's a mistake ever to underestimate how much slime a
Clinton can excrete
Brilliant.
Polls consistently show 20-30% of Democrats saying they will not
vote for the other candidate vs. McCain.
Those numbers are similar to previous contests, and historically,
that number has proven to overstate previous voting patterns by a
factor of four.
So, head-to-head general elections matchup polls taken today have a
built-in underestimation of the Democratic candidates, even without
the speculation about what the race will look like in the summer
and fall.
Wait, I've got that wrong. That 20-30% number needs to be cut in
half, since that's both candidates' supporters.
So, we're talking about 10-15% of the Democratic primary
electorate. Generously assuming a 50/50 partisan split, that's
5-7.5% of the overall primary electorate.
Conservatively assuming that the primary electorate is only 20% of
the general election electorate, that's a 1-1.5% built-in
underestimation of the Democratic candidates' votes.
I don't claim to know what is going to happen but Zogby being right in Penn is the equivilent of a stopped clock being right twice a day. I wouldn't use his results as anything but fish wrapper. The guy has been too wrong too many times for one correct prediction to make any difference in his credibility.
Barr getting 4 percent in the general is huge, if those numbers are accurate.
Barr's poll numbers are interesting, but does anyone really know
who Bob Barr is? A pollster doesn't explain the positions of each
candidate. So is the 3-4% really for Barr or is it for any generic
"Libertarian" candidate?
Even if half the polled percentage disappears it would mean the
highest LP vote for president ever. Because voters will be paying
attention, then it is important the LP put someone up who can
calmly, rationally, and
convincingly explain real libertarian positions, and not some pale
imitation of Reagan Republicanism.
Creech -- you got a problem with the LP finally getting above 1%
of the vote? With Republicans disaffected by the last 7 years
jumping ship and becoming more libertarian? Most importantly, with
the LP becoming the crucial swing voters become their numbers are
greater than the margin of victory in swing states?
I'll vote for any LP candidate besides Gravel, and if Barr can pull
in the votes and get some air time to explain libertarian
principles, good on ya mate.
http://husaria.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/do-you-want-to-open-this-box-on-inaugeration-day/
Zogby's polling is either really good or really bad.
They rarely seem to do just ok.
Prolefeed, I'm voting Libertarian no matter who is the candidate. I'm saying the poll results are probably for "Libertarian Candidate," not for Barr and that the Denver convention should take advantage of the opportunity - that is, the LP will corral significant votes - to make sure he/she is a candidate we can be proud of as libertarians.
Barr's numbers will never go above the percentage of fat in low-fat mother's milk. Borat put a curse on the man.
"I'm voting Libertarian no matter who is the candidate."
Some of the other meaningless things I do is clean my toe mustard
out with cur tips, sleep with my head at the bottom of the bed, and
shit with my feet on the toilet seat.
That poll basically offers a choice between two leftists and two conservatives. Wouldn't it be nice if the Libertarian Party actually nominated a libertarian instead?
I'll be voting for whomever the Libertarian candidate is, even
if it is Gravel.... He's an unlikely choice for the party, but my
wrath for Republicans and Dems is far keener than any mild distaste
for Gravel.
He'll get his dots connected soon enough.
Barr does have a decent amount of name recognition, which is to his
credit. In an ideal world, voters would care enough to research
those with whom they are unfamiliar.
Paul vs. Clinton
The lawsuit claims that Peter Paul was fraundulenty induced to make
a 1.2 million in-kind contribution to Senator Hillary Clinton's
2000 senate campaign in exchange for former President Bill Clinton
to be a rainmaker for this company once he left the White House.
Paul claims that former President Clinton backed out of the $17
million deal, and his company collapsed.
4% for Barr in the national election translates to over 5
million votes.
Think about that for a second. The highest the LP ever achieved in
the past was 920,000 with Ed Clark in 1980.
Such a vote total would immediately propel the Libertarian Party
into a position of major prominence within the American electorate.
They will indeed be "America's Third Party."
The GOP is likely to react post-November with a major shift towards
the libertarian side, to pick up that libertarian support.
It's a win/win for the entire libertarian movement.
BTW, if you all haven't heard yet, London England just elected a "Libertarian" as Mayor. Just minutes ago, it was confirmed that the Tory, self-described "libertarian" beat incumbent Leftist Livingstone.
MY FELLOW "BITTER", STUPID, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE :-)
If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just
a bunch of "BITTER"!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON
FODDER. :-(
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be
better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on
the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-)
husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and
prosperity in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal
health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who
anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and
fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal
health care for all the American people.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us
out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband
(Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he
absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time
against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE
AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment
is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton)
left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and
protections in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is
better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made
higher education affordable for every American. And created higher
job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or
since.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than
Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President
Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest
Presidents in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that you can change the way Washington works with
pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and
political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like
Hillary and Bill Clinton..
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the
Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think
he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton.
:-)
Best regards
jacksmith... Working Class :-)
p.s. You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you don't know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama
campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the
insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and
killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones
the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make
more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your
suffering...
You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve
to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for
everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds
of thousands of you each year. :-)
Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a
rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another
120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in
other developed countries don't die from. And I could go on, and
on...
OBAMA AIDE: "WORKING-CLASS VOTERS NOT KEY FOR DEMOCRATS" :o
DEBATE! DEBATE!! DEBATE!!!...
DEBATE! DEBATE!! DEBATE!!!
It's time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real
chance of winning the national election in November at this time.
His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear.
His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a
ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.
Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her Pennsylvania victory
speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have proved he had
some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and
their unlimited money, and resources.
But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the
Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a
very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing
all that they can to help keep us propped up.
Hillary Clinton say's that the heat, and decisions in the
Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail.
But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes
to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the
truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people
by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted
assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse
for the American people, and the World.
Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to
the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal
sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that
Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people.
She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this
November. You have to remember that the Clinton's have won the
Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.
If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope
that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American
people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual
support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman.
But she is only human.
Sen. Hillary Clinton: "You know, more people have now voted for me
than have voted for my opponent. In fact, I now have more votes
than anybody has ever had in a primary contest for a nomination.
And it's also clear that we've got nine more important contests to
go."
Sincerely
Jacksmith... Working Class :-)
Nice Stars reference, Weigel. I was just listening to that album yesterday.
You are an idiot if you equate experience with being married to
Governor or President.
Personally, I think it was a mistake not to defend the Clinton
Administration in 2000 and 2004. But to pretend you have experience
from being a wife, a lobbyist (albeit for a not for profit group)
and a lawyer for the biggest law firm in Arkansas does not give you
35 years experience. Hillary Clinton has a year experience working
on universal health care during the Clinton Administration and 8
years as a Senator ---- all of this is great experience. 35 years
---- give me a break
Well, I doubt that Jacksmith will be back cuz he seemed like
more of a *ahem* hit-and-run spammer than anything else, but just
in case I have to say to him:
Dude, I think you took a Right turn when you shoulda turned Left at
Albaqoikie.
This here is reason.com. Nobody here is voting in the Democratic
Primaries, except for Joe and he's only here because Affirmative
Action forced us to take him.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245