Today's Gallup figures are at my "sure thing" level.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

I think it is best to be conservative about polling numbers so I use Gallup Traditional Likely Voter Model +1. There's no way that new registrations and greater enthusiasm will not account for an extra 1% for Obama versus the turn-out patterns of 2004. The "real" number is probably higher but 2004 was a BIG turn-out election so there's no reason to assume too much. (Numerically non-voting Republicans may be as big a factor than new-voting Democrats.)



Today the traditional LV is at 50-45. So my conservative LV number is 51-45.

Six points is a lot... enough to make up for bad weather, voter intimidation, undecideds breaking stronger for McCain than I'd expect and/or whatever psychotic surprise bullshit the pugs have in store.

I won't be shocked if Obama wins by 53%-43% (4% third party) or even more. And if the polls are a flat tie before the election I still expect Obama to win.

But I prefer Traditional LV+1 because I know for SURE that I haven't priced any rosy optimism into my sense of the race.

[Curtland1015]

1. Oh noes! Confidence!

That must mean (using logic I learned here) that you are so complacent you won't even bother voting!

Noooooooooo!

:sarcasm:

[treestar]

7. And we will stop phone banking too and stop canvassing

and stop giving $$ to the campaign!

:sarcasm:

[Sinistrous]

2. I would like to think I helped those numbers.

I was polled by Gallup this past weekend. My answers should have put me in the "likely voters" for Obama column.

[tpi10d]

3. Looking at the polls I see 4-5% Obama victory

But if there is a crazy unanticipated result-I see it going to Obama. As you said I would not be shocked by more than +6% (delighted). I hope the Powell endorsement helps hold the weakest Obama supporters between now and election day.

At any rate I will enjoy studying the election returns and hope to see some new positive patterns for the future.

[WeDidIt]

4. Wow, even the Likely Voter (Traditional) model is worse than Rasmussen

Today, Rasmussen is the Great Freep Hope poll.

[Jennicut]

5. Its a 5 to 7 percent race which translates in to a 3 to 4 percent win.

Sounds like Obama will win. I guess I am too complacent as well. But huge turnout, good #'s for Obama across the board and McLame having to get all the battlegrounds and one blue state mean this is s tough one for McInsane. Go Obama!

[woolldog]

6. I was reading in a magazine (the Economist) last night

That in the last 10 days of the 1980 election Reagan was at 37% and Carter at 49%. And he made it all up and won.

I'm very skeptical that that happened. Can anyone who was around then explain?

[abumbyanyothername]

8. Don't know about the timing, but the 1980 election turned on

"Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?"

And I think that was a line in a Presidential debate.

I would note that polling science has made giant leaps forward since 1980.

We definitely have to keep working, but I am betting that the Obama internals are showing what I am seeing . . . we're heading for a landslide . . . perhaps enough to tip some pretty unlikely states as people climb on the bandwagon, and others (on the other side) lose interest.

[Arugula Latte]

10. Plus, Carter was the incumbent and a known figure.

Reagan was unfamiliar to lots of people, and that late debate made a lot of people fall for his stupid folksy avuncular act. Not me, though. I saw right through the bastard. That's when I decided I was a liberal. I was 14. :)

[woolldog]

12. So Reagan did make up all that ground in 10 days?

and went from 37% to a landslide? in 10 days???? Even though the source is reputable, I had a hard time believing that. How is that even possible?

[Arugula Latte]

14. Hmm... Mixed picture. Here is what the Wash. Post says:

Reagan's "Comeback"

When John McCain's bid for the GOP nomination nearly flatlined last summer, his campaign trumpeted Ronald Reagan's comeback win in the 1980 primaries as a model . Now, down in the polls with just three weeks to go, some are again suggesting a "Reagan-esque" path for their candidate.

It is an intriguing notion: A story today suggests Reagan trailed then-President Jimmy Carter by eight percentage points in late October, and that, when paired with Reagan's 10 point win on Election Day, would have made for a remarkable turnabout.

But a review of the late 1980 polls shows that while Reagan soared over the final week (following the campaign's one and only debate on Oct. 29), the contest up until that point was tightly competitive, not trending toward the incumbent Democratic president. At the time, the Associated Press reported "new polls say the race between the two men remains too close to call."

A post-election summary of polls by then-CBS News pollster Warren Mitofsky shows that at no point over the final two weeks did Carter have a lead bigger than three percentage points. There is a published Gallup poll not included in that report showing Carter up six among likely voters in a poll conducted Oct. 24 to 27. Whether six or the eight points cited today, Carter's advantage in Gallup polling was offset by similarly large Reagan leads in NBC-Associated Press or DMI (Reagan's pollsters) polls.

The bottom line is that there was no evident momentum for either candidate as the 1980 presidential election neared its completion. That is until Reagan's breakthrough debate performance.

Of course, at that time Carter was the president with sub-30 percent approval ratings, and Reagan the relative outsider seeking to prove himself to be a "safe" choice.

[leftynyc]

9. I like that Sen Obama is over 50%

in all three models. If he gets that 50, it doesn't matter what mclame gets.

[Fluffdaddy]

11. Personally I don't see the Fat Lady yet

If these numbers holds with one week to go I will feel a lot better

[David__77]

13. We could see the best percentage for a Democrat since 1964.

That's an important point. It's the national coalescence of a new Democratic coalition. One that has existed previously, but is more successful now due to changing demography over decades.