Forums | MacLife

Hehe, no I mean for all of us, nobody in particular.
Your trend analysis would be the only thing even remotely interesting to me right now but even that is too soon.
So many ways for each of them to screw the pooch or look brilliant with so much time to go yet.
If early polls mattered we'd have had a President Dukasis.

bratboy wrote:

i blame daddyo

perish the thought

I have to disagree with Kevin, though I understand his reluctance to look at polling at this point.  Yes, we all know things can change a lot between now and November -- that's an historical fact.  But this election is so different for a variety of reasons, that if you dig into some of the poll's internal numbers I think you might see why it's important.

In the new Quinnipiac poll Obama has a 9 pt. lead without any overwhelming support of independents -- that sector is largely neutral.  He's getting this lead just with a coalition of women, youth (meaning up to age 34) and black voters.  That's kind of amazing, and I question the conventional wisdom of how much one needs to run to the center if that constituency leads to a 9 pt. lead, but sure that's just looking at a popular vote not a state one -- but even state by state he looks fine.

Voters are still much more comfortable with a black president, than an old president -- by 20 pts.

The one breakdown I don't see there is the Latino vote, and they're very important electorally this year in NM, CO, FL and NV -- all states that Bush won last time.  McCain has a much more difficult task talking to these voters and not pissing off conservatives at the same time, for obvious reasons, and they now make up almost 10% of eligible voters.  In other polls Obama leads with this vote almost 40%.

And the other big factor is the "enthusiasm gap" -- I know in one poll that broke it down Obama had much more "hard support" numbers than McCain did, in fact the %'s were almost reversed, so I'd say depending on news events between now and November Obama can easily improve his showing with Independents more easily than McCain can.

Dunno... when you see North Carolina on the "battleground state" list (much less Virginia) you know it's an entirely new ball game.

I think if Obama took a few days off, especially from campaigning, it'd probably help him long run. The guy is obviously tired and he tends to put his foot in his mouth and have a harder time explaining is motivations when in that state. Short term I say it'd hurt him but then again so will campaigning in his current level of fatigue.

bedstuy wrote:

I have to disagree with Kevin, though I understand his reluctance to look at polling at this point.  Yes, we all know things can change a lot between now and November -- that's an historical fact.  But this election is so different for a variety of reasons, that if you dig into some of the poll's internal numbers I think you might see why it's important.

In the new Quinnipiac poll Obama has a 9 pt. lead without any overwhelming support of independents -- that sector is largely neutral.  He's getting this lead just with a coalition of women, youth (meaning up to age 34) and black voters.  That's kind of amazing, and I question the conventional wisdom of how much one needs to run to the center if that constituency leads to a 9 pt. lead, but sure that's just looking at a popular vote not a state one -- but even state by state he looks fine.

Voters are still much more comfortable with a black president, than an old president -- by 20 pts.

The one breakdown I don't see there is the Latino vote, and they're very important electorally this year in NM, CO, FL and NV -- all states that Bush won last time.  McCain has a much more difficult task talking to these voters and not pissing off conservatives at the same time, for obvious reasons, and they now make up almost 10% of eligible voters.  In other polls Obama leads with this vote almost 40%.

And the other big factor is the "enthusiasm gap" -- I know in one poll that broke it down Obama had much more "hard support" numbers than McCain did, in fact the %'s were almost reversed, so I'd say depending on news events between now and November Obama can easily improve his showing with Independents more easily than McCain can.

Dunno... when you see North Carolina on the "battleground state" list (much less Virginia) you know it's an entirely new ball game.

You make some good points.
Perhaps I'm wrong in these early polls being totally meaningless.

ScifiterX wrote:

Yeah easy guess that's why most of Cheney's heart attacks were pre-election. Obama & McCain have to work and campaign at the same time and not just at a few local places. As Bill Clinton once observed, it's a hardcore drain on one's system leaving the candidate among other things, sleep deprived.

Cheney isn't President and he doesn't have much heart left to attack .
I've yet to see one come out looking like they aged any more than the rest of us. Presidents age in dog years on the other hand.

Thread title gave me an idea for new song.

Shine Obama shine
Fill this land with the forefathers glory
Blaze, Obama blaze,
Set our hearts on fire ....

I bet it would be a big hit.

I bet few here will recognize my blatant rip-off.

Polls matter in that so many people are like sheep and will follow whatever they think is the most popular movement. Just like the global warming hoax, the media drums up the hysteria and everyone jumps on the wagon without having knowledge or facts.(No, this is not an attempt to hijack my thread.)
My point is that a lot of people want to be told how to think and following the pack is easier than thinking.

I knew someone would jump on that statement, the hoax is that we are causing it, not that it is happening.

Daddyo wrote:

I knew someone would jump on that statement, the hoax is that we are causing it, not that it is happening.

What I jumped on was the irony of you accusing other people of "following the pack" while yourself falling in with the GW hoax "pack".

(besides, that's a strawman - the concept is that we are greatly accelerating it, not causing it)

Daddyo wrote:

...using the intelligence that God gave me.

My, you really are quite the pack animal!

resedit wrote:

Jdude wrote:

robco wrote:

I do live in a safe Democratic state. Obama will take CA, there's no doubt about that. So I don't feel guilty at all about voting for another candidate. I think more on the left in safe states should do the same. Those in swing states should suck it up and vote for Obama.

This pretty well illustrates the fact that there really is no party for the left in the US. It's either vote right or center-right. Kinda sucks if you're a liberal.

Obama is the second most left person in the Senate. Just how left are you?

By his voting record that seems to be the case - but many of his recent statements and the way he voted on the telecom bill are more moderate than left. Hopefully this means he is a reasonable Democrat (like Lieberman) and is starting to see reason.

Er, Lieberman is not really a democrat anymore though. He was excommunicated for his nonadherance to the non reasonable party stance.