STOP with the national polling numbers comparing Obama and McCain,

[RichardRay]

It's a very long way to November. Head-to-head polls are pretty meaningless at this point.


The polls at this point are pretty much useless in determining the outcome in November. If they make you feel better, or justified, or whatever, go ahead and follow them, but just don't make any decisions based on them.

In truth, May horse-race polls have the predictive powers of a 7-year-old dressed up as a swami and using an upside down goldfish bowl to peer into the future. In the last five presidential elections, the Gallup Poll conducted right before Memorial Day got the eventual winner of the national popular vote wrong. From Michael Dukakis' 13-percentage-point lead in 1988 to John Kerry's 4-point edge in 2004, the Gallup Poll (like other national surveys) pointed in precisely the wrong direction. The only unequivocal success story was 1996, when Gallup (along with virtually every sentient American) figured out that the then-youthful Bill Clinton would handily defeat Bob Dole, the oldest first-time presidential nominee in history (McCain included).

What passes as political news in May often looks like trivia in hindsight. Four years ago this week, the political news provided few clues that the 2004 election would pivot around Republican turnout in rural Ohio. Kerry was still bandaging the last lingering wounds from the Democratic primary, effusively praising Dick Gephardt (and implicitly boosting him as a vice-presidential favorite) before the Teamsters in Las Vegas and then appearing with Howard Dean at an antiwar rally in Portland, Ore., designed to counter Ralph Nader's return-bid spoiler presidential campaign. For the record, Gephardt was not Kerry's running mate (though Rupert Murdoch's New York Post ballyhooed his selection in an epic wrong-call front-page headline) and Nader, who did not appear on the ballot in Oregon, won only 464,000 votes nationally.

Salon Article by Walter Shapiro

[suston96]

1. Yeah, stop them - especially if they have bad news.......

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May18.html

[DerekJ]

2. ummm .. Clinton is losing to McCain with the same margin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/May18.html

[suston96]

4. Clinton is losing with the same margins? Better look again......

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/May18.html

May 18
Electoral Votes: Clinton 279 McCain 242 Ties 17


May 18
Electoral Votes: Obama 237 McCain 290 Ties 11

[johnaries]

8. I love that site! And maybe you should look at the Main Page.

News from the Votemaster
While there has been a lot of talk about Barack Obama's troubles connecting with white working-class voters, there has been less talk about his incredible popularity among black voters. A story in the NY Times says that if Obama is Democratic nominee, in November we will see the largest turnout of black voters in the history of the United States. That turnout could cause a lot of trouble for Republicans in states like Virginia, North Carolina, and other southern states. Combine that with a massive turnout among young voters and Democrats may suddenly be competitive in places where they haven't been competitive in years.

But even with white voters, the full story may be more complicated than it first appears. The NY Times has a nice map of Appalachia and it appears Obama's troubles with white working-class voters seem to be mostly in this economically depressed region. He did reasonably well with white working-class voters in Virginia, Wisconsin, and other states.

You should also read the FAQ's.

The poster upthread is correct, these national polls are meaningless at this point.

[Gore1FL]

11. you should look again

there are way more states in play with Obama.

There are GOP 97 electoral votes weak or slim with Clinton
But 143 weak or slim Dem electoral votes and 17 tied

With Obama, there are 193 weak or slim GOP electoral votes
and only 95 weak or slim Dem electoral votes with 11 tied.

With Obama's map, there is a better chance of keeping the states he already has and making McCain play defense. This bods w\ell all the way through the ticket.

[Gore1FL]

12. Additionally,

polls are a snapsht of the past and not indicators of the future.

[RichardRay]

3. The point is that they contain NO news.

They are noise, pure noise. I don't care if they show Senator Obama 30 points ahead, they're still noise. They have no demonstrable predictive value. Zilch.

Here:

"Obama beats McCain by 200 electoral votes - landslide victory predicted."

There, does that convince you? No? Well the polls right now contain exactly as much predictive information as that does. They are useful in determining where candidates might benefit in focusing their efforts in the next week or two, not in the outcome of the vote in November.

[suston96]

6. I never use polls to "convince" me of anything. The electorals I linked are based....

....on poll averages and other information including recent presidential elections.

But the trends that well prepared and studied polling indicate often can be construed as bad news or bad noise for the candidates and their campaigns.

[johnaries]

10. Yes, and in 2004 that very site swung in several different directions

all during the the campaign. It is full of good information, including how you really can't trust the polls. Even the poll averages the day before the 2004 Election were wrong. Of course, that may be because of the "issues" during the election itself.

[Zachstar]

5. They are going to have bad news for another month or two

The party is not in GE mode yet. Republicans are. Once we are in GE mode and start hitting the republicans hard as a unified front, McCains numbers are going to start to shrink VERY fast.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

7. HOLY CRAP!!!

You can't stop the polls.

[BlooInBloo]

9. No need to stop. It's good to know where we're starting from.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Yes, national polls in May only give us an idea of what voters are thinking.

But a lot can change.

Hell, national polls nearly had Bush leading Gore wire-to-wire in the 2000 election. In fact, it was as early as late summer that Bush had opened up what appeared to be an unbreakable lead. Then Gore climbed back into it and even won the popular vote.

Americans aren't even focused on the general election yet. They're focusing in the Democratic Primary, which has handicapped Obama because he hasn't been able to fully focus on McCain and it doesn't help that there are some Democrats who probably are saying right now they won't vote for Obama because of the primary process.

Once the Democrats unite behind a candidate and actually begin running FOR the general, instead of focusing on primary states, the polls will dramatically shift. I don't believe all Clinton supporters, or even a minimal number, will vote for McCain or sit the election out. When Clinton endorses Obama and the focus is on McCain, the numbers will begin to shift in Obama's favor.

Now if Obama is down 1 or 2 points, or even up 1 or 2 points, in October, then we need to worry. But May to October is a long ways away. It's essentially like predicting the NBA Championship based on the first quarter of the first day of the season.