Here are the new polls. Decision Analyst is the new kid on the block. Whether their poll showing Obama ahead means much remains to be seen. For the moment, don't take it too seriously.
State Pollster End date Clinton Obama
North Carolina Elon U. Feb. 21 45% 31%
Ohio Rasmussen Feb. 21 48% 40%
Rhode Island ARG Jan. 21 52% 40%
Texas Decision Analyst Feb. 21 43% 57%
Texas Rasmussen Feb. 20 47% 44%
Vermont ARG Feb. 21 34% 60%
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Advertisement
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that John McCain has gained ground against Democratic front runner Barack Obama. In a general election match-up, McCain now leads Obama 46% to 43%. He also leads Hillary Clinton 47% to 44% (see recent daily results and summary of recent state general election polls). A commentary by Douglas Schoen looks at how the fighting has just begun between McCain and Obama.
Rasmussen reports:
MCCAIN VS OBAMA M=46 O=43
MCCAIN VS CLINTON M=47 C=44
So now the reality that Obama just might be the Nom and all of a sudden McCain jumps out ahead. I really hope we dont lose the 08 elections because a few months back the thought was unthinkable. Now though, it is starting to look probable....
P.S. New Poll Post debate
http://ivrpolls.com/index.php? option=com_content&task=view&id=36&Itemid=1
New Texas poll post debate. (thought this was pretty interesting)
Obama may not be closing as fast as alot thought:
Ran a poll Feb 20 using a new turnout model. Anyone who claims to know what Democratic turnout will be is lying, but analysis of earlier contests indicates many new primary voters resulting in higher proportions of women, African-American and younger voters. My previous polling has relied on historical turnout models and a sample of voters with past primary voting history. That worked fine when it was assumed that Texas would vote long after the nominations were effectively decided. For this round of polling, I have made several modifications. First, I have added general election voters who haven't voted in past primaries to the sample. I have added an oversample of young voters, not filtered by voting history. I have also added an oversample for certain areas with a high percentage of African-Americans, but historically low primary turnout. Finally, I have increased weightings for young voters and African-American voters. Those increased weightings also slightly boosted female turnout, so I did not specifically modify that weighting.
To filter the results for likely voters, I asked a few non-primary questions and then asked about intent to vote in the primary. Past primary voters were significantly more likely to say they intended to vote than those that had not previously voted in primaries.
Much more below
For comparison purposes, I first looked at the results using my previous weightings. Undecided was much lower than the Jan 31 poll, but the margin was similar. Rather than 48-38, the results showed 53-43, still a ten point margin. Looking closer, Clinton had regained her earlier strength among south Texas Latinos, while Obama had made gains in urban areas. Much of intra-state 'flyover territory' was unchanged.
Using the new weightings, Clinton leads with 50% to Obama's 45%. I only named the active candidates that are on the Texas ballot, but give options for 'other,' which got 2% as well as 'undecided' which got 3%. Ethnically, Latinos and African-Americans were mirror images, with Latinos giving Clinton a 75-23 lead and African-Americans giving Obama a 75-25 lead. Whites gave Clinton a 52-38 lead. These ethnic breakdowns are raw numbers, not corrected for age/gender weightings.
Because I do registration based polling, I am able to tie each response to its State Senate District and look at the delegate situation. Ignoring the undecided and 'other' votes, I calculated the percentages for Clinton and Obama in each district and applied the thresholds to award delegates to each candidate. Obama cleaned up in the handful of districts with a large number of delegates, but Clinton broke the magic 62.5% margin in a large number of four delegate 'flyover' districts and came away with an overall eight delegate lead. At >62.5%, a candidate receives three delegates in a four delegate district. Obviously, sample size per district is tiny, so take these numbers with a pound of salt. In a couple of cases where the percentages were borderline, I gave the extra delegate to Obama, just based on his campaign's edge in organization.
I asked about plans to attend the precinct convention. Obama supporters were more likely to indicate plans to attend, but Clinton led in most Senate Districts. As with the primary vote, Obama dominated in the handful of high delegate districts, but Clinton was dominant in the many smaller districts.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :hi: :thumbsup:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(321 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
