Is This Election Really That Close?
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Democrats, McCain, RepublicansWhen you follow this race every single day, each piece of data that comes in starts to create a kind of picture, and the one I’ve been seeing take shape squares with what Larry Sabato is describing…
Except for a few days when the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls showed a tie, Barack Obama has led John McCain in every national poll in the past two months. Obama’s average margin has consistently been in the 4-6 point range during this time. By contrast, the polls in 2000 and 2004 showed much more variation over time.State polling results have also consistently given Obama the advantage. According to realclearpolitics.com, Obama is currently leading in 26 states and the District of Columbia with a total of 322 electoral votes; McCain is currently leading in 24 states with a total of 216 electoral votes. Obama is leading in every state carried by John Kerry in 2004 along with six states carried by George Bush: Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio, Indiana, Nevada and Colorado. A seventh Bush state, Virginia, is tied.
Obama is leading in 11 of the 12 swing states that were decided by a margin of five points or less in 2004 including five of the six that were carried by George Bush. And while Obama has a comfortable lead in every state that John Kerry won by a margin of more than five points in 2004, McCain is in a difficult battle in a number of states that Bush carried by a margin of more than five points including such solidly red states as Indiana, Montana, North Dakota, Virginia, and North Carolina.
And to the idea that we could see a landslide this fall…
And remember these June and July polls may well understate Obama’s eventual margin. Ronald Reagan did not capitalize on the huge structural advantage Republicans enjoyed in 1980 until after the party conventions and presidential debate. It took a while and a sufficient level of comfort with the challenger for anti-Carter votes to translate into support for Reagan. If Obama’s performance over the last eighteen months is any guide, a similar pattern could unfold in 2008.
Let’s not forget that Obama’s effective use of social media tools means his ground game will probably make any “get out of the vote” pushes before it look antiquated in comparison.
So…is this election really that close?
This entry was posted on Thursday, July 24th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Democrats, McCain, Republicans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 24th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
The analysis is correct and the point totally valid. But who out there is calling it a toss-up? Who isn’t accounting for these factors? I’d have liked to have seen Mann, Sabato, etc. offer a little proof. Sure, in stories that cite a recent poll finding and that are circumscribed to that topic they don’t have to reassert these larger points in Obama’s favor but is a story wrong or if it doesn’t mention those larger structural factors every time? Maybe so. Doesn’t seem like it to me though.
July 24th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
[...] Sabato for one doesn’t think so: Except for a few days when the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls showed a tie, Barack Obama has [...]
July 24th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I think its a lot closer than Dems would like to think. Its certainly a race, which, considering the primary turnout numbers is still somewhat surprising to me. I mean, consider that Obama and Hillary were routinely garnering more than double the entire combined Republican turnout during those contests. I know, I know, not exactly apples to apples. But Im surprised all the same.
July 24th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Polls will never capture voter enthusiasm completely. So in every poll, there is a requirement to represent a representative slice of the electorate, i.e. the % of Rs, D, and Is, young and old, college-educated and non, income level, etc. etc. But the reality is that on election day, because of the much greater enthusiasm for Obama’s candidacy amongst his supporters, and his vastly superior GOTV infrastructure, what looks to be a close race may turn into an historical electoral landslide.
July 24th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
It’s fabricated drama. The news has become a reality show, because fake drama sells more papers and gets more clicks than the truth. Remember when the MSM spent days speculating if Obama was going to pick Hillary as his running mate — when there wasn’t a chance in hell that he would? More fake drama.
Plus there’s the media’s fear that negative news (i.e., the truth) about McCain would alienate readers and viewers who’ve been brainwashed by too much Fox News.
So it’s not so much conservative bias as placing ratings above accurate reporting.
July 24th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
The entire mainstream media? They’re trying to say this is a horserace and Obama should be WAY ahead. Trust me, anything that points to an Obama weakness they highlight. This meme is all over cable news. And that’s to be expected because that makes things seem like they’re close, which makes voters keep watching and reading.
But yes, this is what I’ve been noticing by following the polls every single day, noting the enthusiasm gap between the candidates and seeing how it all breaks down when you look at the electoral map. I’m obviously not ready to call anything yet, but I definitely think this is Obama’s to lose because McCain is turning out to be the Republican’s Kerry.
July 25th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
The real issue is not how well Obama or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn’t have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote — that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Because of state-by-state enacted rules for winner-take-all awarding of their electoral votes, recent candidates with limited funds have concentrated their attention on a handful of closely divided “battleground” states. Two-thirds of the visits and money were focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money went to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 20 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring this legislation into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
July 26th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
[...] am beginning to think we should postpone the coronation, and go ahead and hold the election. This entry was posted on Saturday, July 26th, 2008 and is [...]