Pew: Obama Leads By 19 Among Already Voted
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, McCain, PollsLooks like that early voting strategy is really working out for the Dems and could literally give Obama a 19% edge with 31% of the voting population.
Obama holds a 53% to 34% lead among the sizable minority of voters (15%) who say they have already voted.Among those who plan to vote early but have not yet voted (16% of voters), 56% support Obama, while 37% support McCain.
And some more numbers that should scare McCain…
- Obama leads in battleground states 53% to 35%
- Obama leads in Democratic states 57% to 31%
- And the bombshell…Obama leads in Republican states, 47% to 43%
By the way, battleground states are Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania Virginia and Wisconsin.
So…since Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Hampshire and New Mexico are in the mix…they could be skewing the battleground numbers a bit. But you’re still talking about an 18 point lead.
Now, Pew could be wildly off. But this is not a polling organization with a shoddy track record.
Here are some cross tabs…

More as it develops…
This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 28th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, McCain, Polls. 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.










October 28th, 2008 at 9:42 am
This is great news for John McCain.
October 28th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Although the data is interesting, I wonder why people who have already voted the numbers would be 53% to 34%. It’s not like you don’t know who you voted for. It will be interesting to see who those 13% that were neither actually voted for.
October 28th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
These numbers mean absolutely nothing. In no way are these people anywhere near representative of the U.S. (or specific state) population. How can you put any credence on something that shows voters broken down like this:
Republicans: 361, Democrats: 490, Independents: 411
This is just another poorly thought out survey that people are latching onto like the gospel. As I said before, I will admit that Dems are more “passionate” this election which is showing in early voter turnout, but that does not mean that Republicans will not show up on Election Day. Additionally, I do not think it is fair to say that “early voting” is traditionally more Republican because there has never been as much opportunity for early voting as there is this year. I agree that absentee voting has favored Republicans in the past because much of it comes from the military, but those figures are not represented in this survey.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
This done and dusted attitude from Obama supporters will see McCain all the way into the Whitehouse.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Split-Party Household “How can you put any credence on something that shows voters broken down like this:
Republicans: 361, Democrats: 490, Independents: 411″
That’s really not far off the true party id weightings at all. There should be more independents and less Democrats, but the numbers work out to 29, 39, 32 when they should be more like 28, 36, 36.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Are McCain supporters so naive to think that Obama supporters aren’t going to vote because of these preliminary figures? The Obama campaign, which many have claimed to be the greatest campaign ever run in modern day politics, is relentless in getting out the message that every vote counts, regardless of the margin. If anything, these types of reports will discourage McCain supporters who already know their man is down as much as 14% in national polls, and down roughly 200 electoral votes, from wasting their time to go out and vote for McCain. Nobody wants to be associated with the losing team.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Split Party Household,
You could be right. We’ll see on election day.
October 28th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Joe, you a fake plumber by any chance? and how much is that meth addiction costing you?