Comments on: The Last 8%

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 04:35:14 +0000

While I think it’s true that most undecideds at this point are probably not well informed, I think we need to be careful not to paint everyone that way. I’ve heard numerous people say basically that you’d have to be stupid to be undecided at this point. I disagree, and I think it’s actually unfortunate that so many voters are so stubborn that they latch onto one particular candidate that they innately relate to without giving the other candidate’s argument any consideration. Let’s not be so naive as to think that any one candidate has a monopoly on the truth, or so simple-minded as to think one candidate is a saint and the other is evil. The issues we face are complicated, but we only get bumper-sticker campaigns instead of real debate.

Take the debate on taxes, for example. I think if you put two intelligent people in a room, you could have a pretty good discussion about the pros and cons of various tax policies. But we don’t hear that from campaigns, because it’s not easy to pin down who is the “winner” and “loser” in such discussions. Instead, we hear, from one side, that Obama is a socialist. And from the other side, we hear that the rich should “pay their fair share” (whatever that means). Those are easy to put on bumper stickers, easy to cheer for when your candidate says them. But they don’t even come close to the real debate we should be having on these issues. Frankly I can’t wait until after the election when hopefully we can have some of these discussions without the election forcing them to dumb-down.

I am an undecided voter, but I don’t fit into the stereotypical mold. I’ve posted several posts on my blog about my pending decision, and my defense of the undecided voter, so I won’t repeat myself here. I was hopeful this election, given that both candidates appeared to be of a different mold than typical politicians. I was disappointed and I will am not excited about voting for either of them on Tuesday.

By: Rob in Denver

Rob in Denver — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 22:57:30 +0000

FiveThirtyEight's got an analysis of undecideds from yesterday. He sez:

Long story short ... given optimistic assumptions (McCain wins 2/3 of white undecideds, 100 percent of third-party support collapses [and goes his way]), the undecided vote is worth a net of about a point for McCain. Given what I'd consider to be more neutral assumptions, there's no particular reason to think that the undecided vote favors him. My guess is that the truth is somewhere in between and that this is worth, say, half a point for McCain. Even give him the full point if you like. This effect is probably smaller than that of the cellphone problem, from which there may be 1-2 points of cushion in Obama's direction. If on top of that the polls are being overly conservative with their likely voter modeling, the numbers are more likely to be underestimating Obama's standing than overestimating it.

By: mike mcEachran

mike mcEachran — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 22:18:16 +0000

I went door-to-door in PA for Obama last weekend and spoke to undecideds. I was startled at how apathetic the undecideds were – or maybe I should say “unenthused”. I suppose that’s what you’d expect from people undecided this late in the game. But it lead me to believe that many, many of them will just not vote. Several told me that. I asked one woman, “So you’ve decided not to vote this year?”. She corrected me, “Oh, I’m voting, but not for President. But my husband is for Obama.” I never expected that response. Also, I think the media attention proclaiming Obama the likely victor will further suppress the undecided vote.

I think 25% won’t vote, 25% will break for McCain for “fear-based” reasons(yes, racism, anti-christ, socialist, etc.) and the remaining 50% will break evenly. So, at 8% undecided nationally, I predict 4% for McCain, 2% for Obama, and at least 2% no-shows.

By: michael reynolds

michael reynolds — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:44:56 +0000

They’ll break for Obama. He hasn’t sold them, but McCain has unsold them. I think they’ve decided against McCain. Americans are optimists.

By: wj

wj — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:29:28 +0000

And 1952 might not be the best possible analog for this year either. After all, as I recall the question that year was not “Will Eisenhower win?” Rather, it was “Which party will convince Eisenhower to be their candidate?” (The Democrats did not succeed, but it wasn’t a foregone conclusion at the start of the electoral cycle.) Not quite the situation this year…..