Oba-mentum

Gallup Daily: Tracking Election 2008

Barack Obama has now cut the gap with Hillary Clinton to 6 percentage points among Democrats nationally in the Gallup Poll Daily tracking three-day average, and interviewing conducted Tuesday night shows the gap between the two candidates is within a few points. Obama’s position has been strengthening on a day-by-day basis. As recently as Jan. 18-20, Clinton led Obama by 20 points.

Edwards’ exit will obviously change these numbers.

Also, there are a lot of variables floating around: the impact of Teddy (esp. among Hispanics), tomorrow night’s debate (usually better for Hillary), the Super Bowl on Sunday (a huge distraction from politics), absentee voters who have already cast ballots in some states (promising for Hillary in California), an Edwards or Richardson endorsement, etc. That’s a lot of variables.

Another point about polling, Polling is easier in general elections than in primaries, because voters strongly tend to “come home” to their party’s nominee. In a primary, it’s a free-for-all; there are no party loyalties to provide a predictable base to the polling data. It’s also generally tricky to poll on weekends, especially this Sunday. And the wacky, 22-state event is complicated to model in any circumstance.

Barring a meltdown by either candidate on Thursday night, I think this race will be “un-pollable” from here on in.

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator on 30 Jan 2008 at 5:06 pm

    Edwards Exits Presidential Race…

    Democrat John Edwards bowed out of the race for the White House on Wednesday, saying it was time to …

Comments

  1. Grim wrote:

    Why are debates usually better for Hillary, if Obama’s main strength is his inspiring rhetoric?

    Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 1:25 am

  2. John the Marine wrote:

    Grim,
    True enough but if Hillary cries and tells America how personal the debate is to her Obama is in trouble.

    Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 7:33 am

  3. John the Marine wrote:

    Stephen,
    I just read this on the WSJ and thought it was right up your alley.

    Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 7:55 am

  4. Redhand wrote:

    Mrs. Clinton’s willingness to ignore the truth for short-term political advantage is exactly what breeds the partisanship that’s paralyzed Washington for too many years, and the cynicism felt by so many Americans, especially the young. Getting ahead by any means possible is the strategy. Once elected, the candidate falsely believes that he or she will be able to set things right and govern differently. All that was said in the campaign is rationalized — it will be forgiven and forgotten as part of the hyperbole of the election process.

    From the WSJ article John the Marine linked.

    Probably the best summation of all I’ve read why a new Clinton presidency will be a disaster for America. With the Clintons, we’ll get more years of absolutely bitter divisiveness and superheated political hatred, resulting in stalemate.

    With Bubba’s and Bush ’43’s presidencies we’ll have had 16 straight years of this. Is it too much for Americans to expect a little honesty and character in their president? I will be really discouraged if HRC gets the nod, and Billary gets back in the WH. It’s a sickening, the-bad-guys-win prospect.

    Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 8:39 am

  5. Stephen wrote:

    Grim,

    Kevin Drum’s post is a good answer to your question.

    I’ll add that all this is in the eye of the beholder. When Obama speaks in a debate, he’s constructing his sentence and his thought as he goes along, like a real person, but a very intelligent one. So, in a debate, there are pauses … and such … as he develops a train of thought … perhaps bringing in his experience as an organizer on the streets of Chicago … or his votes in the U.S. Senate, or other references, but .. when he is done, .. unlike George Bush, … he actually pulls together a coherent thought.

    But.some.folks.like.sound.bites.better.

    :)

    Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 9:55 am

  6. John the Marine wrote:

    Redhand,
    I have to agree I thought WSJ article summed up what is so wrong about the Clintons in a nut shell.

    Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 9:18 pm

« Edwards out
Even! »