Pew Has Obama Up by Five

A new poll by The Pew Research Center has been released that shows Obama has a five point lead over John McCain:

Barack Obama 47

John McCain 42

There is much delight among people who do not want Senator Obama to become president that the two daily tracking polls right now show Obama with a one or two point lead. It is important to keep the totality of polling data in mind when we analyze any given result. This Pew poll bears striking resemblance, for instance, to data that CNN released the other night. When we take together the totality of polling results, there is a strong statistical chance that the notion Barack Obama and John McCain are tied is close to ZERO.

As Brian Schaffner from observed the other day:

Obama has consistently led in national polls over the past two months. In fact, according to national poll results listed on, Obama had been tied or ahead in 50 consecutive national polls through Sunday. Sure, many polls may show Obama holding a lead within the statistical margin of error, but if Obama and McCain were actually tied, we'd expect as many polls showing McCain ahead as show Obama ahead. Based on some basic calculations, the probability that 50 consecutive national surveys would show Obama tied or ahead if the candidates were actually tied is .0000000000000009. In short, this race is not a "statistical tie," despite what a few scattered surveys (drawing disproportionate attention from the pundits) indicate.

Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain (all tags)



Close to zero
is the chance that Obama is anything but ahead of McCain at this point. It's a long way to Tipperary, but people need to be honest where the race stands today.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 07:11AM | 0 recs
No doubt from me that he is ahead

But not by much. Long, long way to go yet. It is interesting to me however that the panic merchants tend to be the same people who comment on big Obama poll leads that ''Dukakis lead by 17 points and lost!'' They can't have it both ways.

by conspiracy 2008-08-01 07:17AM | 0 recs
Thanks, Beltway...

For reminding us not to freak out too much about the recent polls. McBush still can't take the lead, and the race isn't the "dead heat" the media claims it to be.

by atdleft 2008-08-01 07:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five

Plus, the real thing to look at is the Electoral College where Obama is winning so many states it would be considered a landslide.

by Lolis 2008-08-01 07:30AM | 0 recs

Oh, I thought it happened already.

(OK, I admit that this is snark.)

Seriously though, I think Obama should have pulled ahead with a much more comfortable lead than the single digits that we're seeing in the polls.  We were so energized during the primaries, it's a change election year, the economy is in ruins, the Republicans are SO F*CKING CORRUPT that another news about Gonzales's (In)Justice Department or Senate Republican corruption isn't registering any longer in the Richter Scale of politics. (Imagine that happening during the Clinton administration-- impeach!! impeach!!).

One way to get a double digit lead, and keep it till November, would be to put Hillary Clinton in the ticket as VP.

by Sieglinde 2008-08-01 08:14AM | 0 recs
Are you kidding?
Look how narrow the last several elections were. If Obama is give points out on election day, it will the most yawning gap in several election cycles.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 08:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Are you kidding?

All the more reason to put Hillary as VP!

(Though sadly it's no longer a real possibility, according to most insiders.)

by Sieglinde 2008-08-01 08:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Are you kidding?

If they don't nominate Hillary and then they drop ohio, pa, florida and hence the election....Obama's career will be over and he will never be president.

That is unless Obama really can out GOP the GOP in GOP states.

At this point any decision not to nominate Hillary as VP at this stage will be remembered as vindictive after a loss and destroy Obama's power structure just like Nader in 2000.

by dtaylor2 2008-08-01 08:39AM | 0 recs
they're not going to nominate Hillary. That's just a fact.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 08:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Well,

Meant for VP

by dtaylor2 2008-08-01 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Well,
They're not going to nominate her for VP, either. I think Hillary's story in 2008 is all over except for the keynote address.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 10:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Well,

Well then Hillary in 2012

by dtaylor2 2008-08-01 01:02PM | 0 recs
Oh stop it

You are like a broken-record. If, perish the thought, he were to lose he will still have a long career in the senate ahead of him. He could run for governor. He could even pull a Nixon. We have no idea what the future holds.

by conspiracy 2008-08-01 08:54AM | 0 recs
He could be thirty points ahead and it...

...wouldn't be over. See all the huge national leads Hillary held. The only poll that matters is on election day.

by conspiracy 2008-08-01 08:27AM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...

And even the poll on election day can be corrupt.

So basically we're all f*cked.

by Sieglinde 2008-08-01 08:33AM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...
No, I don't think so. I think it may be different this year. I am not sure that Obama could have been elected in other years, but I think he can be elected this year.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 08:47AM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...

I think you are largely right but not without Hillary as VP.

I would say at least 3-5% of her supporters currently backing him reconsider after Hillary isn't VP.

Because these people won't be concentrated in california the effect will likely be magnified with respect to the electoral college.

by dtaylor2 2008-08-01 08:50AM | 0 recs
I'll believe it when I see it

Maybe if she refused to campaign for him. Which she isn't so they won't.

by conspiracy 2008-08-01 08:56AM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...

Ooh, ooh!  Can I pull numbers out of my ass too?

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-08-01 08:59AM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...

22% of any given sub demographic 69% of the time during the primary voters didn't go to the restroom prior to voting...

by notedgeways 2008-08-01 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...

I communicated clearly that the number was my estimate.

communicating with words more descriptive then the words some and many is an important part of being able to more information.

I never said you had to agree with my numbers.

But to mock me for using a word more descriptive than some, more, many, a whole bunch, etc.

Anyway now you know why I troll rated you.

by dtaylor2 2008-08-01 12:55PM | 0 recs
Re: He could be thirty points ahead and it...

12%-18% of the party (both sides) do not vote for the candidate on any given presidential election.

Clinton is going to campaign for Obama, both Clintons are going to campaign. I counter your 3-5% with saying I bet 20%-40% of current PUMAs end up voting for Obama because of how the Clintons act after the convention.

by notedgeways 2008-08-01 10:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five

Good news.  Now we can all calm down a bit.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-08-01 09:18AM | 0 recs
McCain Democrats are few and far between

The number of Democrats voting for McCain is very small. The only reason this race is close in the polls right now is that a lot of Democrats and still undecided. They almost always come home to the Democratic party once the convention begins. Most of these folks aren't paying a lot of attention, which is why high-news events like Obama's Berlin speech pulls them back to the fold.

The other factor is Independents. John McCain's latest desperation gambit may rally some Republicans to vote against Obama, but it is turning a lot of Independents off to him. He won't win those voters back. Many of them feel that the man they loved in 2000 was a fraud. Obama will win them if he looks good at the debates.

This is like Reagan in 1980. It was close the whole summer. Reagan even trailed many polls, even with the Iran hostage situation and the economic troubles. Carter sowed doubts about Reagan: is he just a fluffy Hollywood actor? Is he an extremist who would start nuclear war? John Anderson seemed a more credible anti-Carter force until Reagan showed him up in a debate. Then Reagan convinced voters in his October debate with Carter that he was safe. Reagan rolled to a 10-point win from there.

by elrod 2008-08-01 09:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five

Obama's lead stinks because he's only getting on average 75-77% of the Democratic vote--I guess we PUMA's aren't as inconsequential as you think--except maybe if you follow Ludacris' thinking--"The BITCH is irrelevant"

by handsomegent 2008-08-01 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five

You aren't worth the characters in this sentence, and there's about as many of you.

If you folks were so numerous Hillary Clinton would already be out of debt.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-08-01 10:04AM | 0 recs
Good timing, comming exactly after

a comment that actually talks about it in non insulting terms. Sweetie.

by notedgeways 2008-08-01 10:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Good timing, comming exactly after

I for one gave HRC 500 bucks but will give her nothing now since she's being so nice to Obama.  And what about the 75-77% figure?

by handsomegent 2008-08-03 09:59AM | 0 recs
This should be worrisome

5?  Thats it?  Over Grandpa McCain?  After all the love and all the press and all the money?

Obama should have put McCain away by now.  

Go after the old man and show the world how a) old he is, and b) how insane he is.

All you need to do is make commercials out his post Florida victory comments.   His glazed eyes saying there will be more wars, and his gem saying that he isn't good on the economy.

Apollo Creed toy'd around with Rocky and look what happened.   Obama but put McCain away before the end of the summer or it will become a real race.

by dpANDREWS 2008-08-01 10:38AM | 0 recs
Polls now are meaningless

Kerry was up 5 in Rasmussen on same date last election.  The only poll that counts is the one on election day.

by activatedbybush 2008-08-01 10:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Polls now are meaningless
there is something different here this year. There is a palpable desire in the country for something new. And Kerry was running against a sitting president who was not yet as unpopular as he was to become. I am perfectly able to believe that Obama's lead won't last, but there is no data to date that you can claim to make the case. On the other hand, there is plenty of data to make the claim that Obama has sustained a lead for two months.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 11:34AM | 0 recs
Polls now are meaningless

The actual result will be determined in November.   Up, down, tied - really makes no difference.  

I agree that Obama is favored due to the political environment (and also his fundraising edge).  Just don't look to the polls to support or oppose that premise.

by activatedbybush 2008-08-01 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Polls now are meaningless
I can do whatever I like.
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 11:43AM | 0 recs
by engels 2008-08-01 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five
read the damn diary, engels
by Beltway Dem 2008-08-01 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five

Time for you to change your sig since latinos and whites are on board. It's only the bitter that are left like yourself.

by sweet potato pie 2008-08-01 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Pew Has Obama Up by Five
you wish.
as i said before, i can repeat again:
forget about groups mentioned in my sig: majority of them will not support obama for multiples reasons i explained many times
by engels 2008-08-02 12:48PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads