Quote:
Originally Posted by keith4him
It is clear that McCain is struggling, the economy hasn't helped him. And unless some major SNAFU by Obama, it looks like he will win the election. Some time back a credible pollster said that the magic number for polls to show a accurate lead was 50%, with Rasmussen/Fox poll today he polled at 52% so he has reached the threshold.
This is not something I like to hear, but it looks like we may have a Democrat in the White House next year.
The good news, the early church grew, thrived and prospered under radical, unstable Roman Dictatorships. Nero being chief.
|
Keith, I havent read the rest of the thread, but here's the deal. Just wait, the poll numbers will change the closer we get to the election. Can you ever remember polls that said the GOP candidate was in the lead weeks prior to the election when the GOP candidate eventtually won? Kerry was in the lead. Gore was in the lead. Dukakis and Bush were supposedly neck and neck and Bush crushed him. The polls were calling for close results between Reagan and Mondale. Reagan won 49 out of 50 states. The polls are skewed to favor the Dems. These pollsters are a part of the East Coast media elite.
The reason they will change is because of two things: first, the pollsters have to be somewhat accurate in order to have any credibility or they won't make money. So they start getting much more accurate close to election time. I don't believe for a second Obama has 50% plus support from Americans.
Second, the McCain campaign is going to put the focus of this electn on Obama and his character, his past alliances, his record and his ultra liberal worldview. Many Americans who publicly in a poll will say they are voting for Obama will go to the voting booth and vote for McCain b/c of the fear to appear racist to the pollster but in the privacy of the booth will vote with their doubts about Obama in their mind. Its called the "Bradley Effect".
Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor's race despite being ahead in voter polls, the Bradley Effect refers to a tendency on the part of voters -- black as well as white -- to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a Black candidate, and yet, on election day, vote for his/her white opponent.
One theory for the Bradley effect is that some white voters give inaccurate polling responses for fear that, by stating their true preference, they will open themselves to criticism of racial motivation. This effect is similar to people refusing to discuss voting choice at all. If you state you are undecided, you can avoid being forced into a political discussion with someone highly partisan. The reluctance to give accurate polling answers has sometimes extended to post-election exit polls as well. The race of the pollster conducting the interview may be a factor into voters' answers.
My dad is 74, a strong union, FDR Democrat. He has only voted for one Republican for Prez in his lifetime and that was Nixon versus McGovern in 1972. He is no fan of Bush. He has very very strong political views. He is very Democrat. He is a big fan of Clinton. He voted for Hillary in the Ohio primary. He is having doubts about Obama. He wont say whether he will vote for the man or not. He doesn't ever hesitate to tell me who he is voting for. His brother, 84, a WWII veteran and no fan of Bush either, when asked said "I'm votin for the POW".
Obama should be 20 points ahead given the economic circumstances and the GOP in the White House. When MSNBC touts the "strong" six point Obama lead they are betraying their passion to see the man elected. When McCain was ahead in the polls right after the convention, it was callked a "bump". He was up 7-9 points. Today Chuck Todd called Obama's six points "strong". These pollsters lean liberal. They are biased along with the mainstream media.
Linear Mode
