Obama, Clinton, and McCain: Electability by the numbers

This is a post about electability, but I'm not going to argue that either Obama or Clinton is more electable than the other.

Rather, I'm just going to offer a comprehensive review of available polling data, allowing you to draw your own conclusions.

Moreover, instead of zeroing in one one specific poll or polling organization, the data in this diary is based on averages of 62 different national polls and 20 different state polls.

Part I: National polling data

The national polling data consists of every single public poll I could get my hands on. The only criteria was that both Hillary and Obama had to be in the poll, and I only included matchups against John McCain. The only minor exception is Rasmussen, which has typically polled Clinton/McCain and Obama/McCain matchups in separate polls, but in the same timeframe. In those cases, I treated them single polls (almost all were within one week).

Altogether, I identified 62 polls, and I present them by quarter to show trends. Here's the number of polls per quarter:

Q107: 17
Q207: 15
Q307: 7
Q407: 9
Q108: 14

These charts might seem a little unusual. Typically, when you hear about a poll, you're interested in knowing the level of support for each candidate plus the undecided vote.

In these charts, the goal is to compare Obama and Clinton, so I provide a separate chart for the support for Obama and Clinton, the support for McCain, the level of undecideds, and finally, the margin between Obama or Clinton and McCain.

Each chart provides the relevant number for both Obama and Clinton.

As you can see, Obama is coded in orange (in honor of his strong level of support on Daily Kos) and Clinton is coded in green.

::

Here's national chart #1, which shows the level of support for Obama and Clinton against McCain, by quarter.

National chart #2 shows the level of support for McCain, also by quarter.

National chart #3 shows the level of support for McCain, also by quarter.

National chart #4 shows the size of the Democratic lead (or deficit), also by quarter.

::

Part II: State polling data

The state polling data relies exclusively on SurveyUSA polls since December 1, 2007. The data is presented in similar fashion as the national charts, but instead of showing trends, the charts are broken down by state.

The states are ordered left to right by number of electoral votes.

Here's the numbers of EVs for each state, along with the number of polls that the data is based on:

OH: 20 EVs, 3 polls
VA: 13 EVs, 2 polls
MO: 11 EVs, 2 polls
WA: 11 EVs, 3 polls
MN: 10 EVs, 2 polls
WI: 10 EVs, 2 polls
IA: 7 EVs, 2 polls
OR: 7 EVs, 2 polls
NM: 5 EVs, 2 polls

As with the national data, state chart #1 shows the level of support for Obama and Clinton.

State chart #2 shows the level of support for McCain.

Start chart #3 shows the amount of undecided voters.

Start chart #4 shows the size of the Democratic lead (or deficit).

::

Hopefully, this compilation of data was useful to you. If this primary continues to drag on, I'll try to do an update in a few weeks.

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Electability, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, polling (all tags)

Comments

7 Comments

Numbers are a waste of time

The facts are nothing has changed since '00 or '04 other than more Americans are indentifying as Democrats and we will have more cash this time around.

But both sides will start at 46 - 46, or 45 -45 and work from there.  

There are still red states, blue states, and purple states, and all the "hope" in the world isn't going to change that.

Who can win FL?  Who can win OH?   Who can take it to McCain?

by dpANDREWS 2008-02-08 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Numbers are a waste of time

Well, there's some OH numbers in this...very surprising #s in fact. I wish SUSA had FL #s and PA #s. Although IA is small, I didn't quite know what to think of those #s. I think those polls were taken in mid-December, though, which IIRC was one of HRC's valleys.

by jedreport 2008-02-08 11:43AM | 0 recs
I don't think we need to worry about IA

McCain didn't campaign here much in 2000 or this past year. Iowa Republicans are incredibly demoralized and don't have a strong candidate against Senator Tom Harkin or any of our three Democratic Congressmen.

I think either Obama or Clinton would win this state without too much trouble.

by desmoinesdem 2008-02-08 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think we need to worry about IA

Seems likely. What I was trying to get at was that I think the poll was a reflection of bad press in IA at the time. The OH numbers are really surprising. It's also pretty clear that there is strong correlation between the gap between Hillary's and Obama's lead and the gap between the level of undecideds.

by jedreport 2008-02-08 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think we need to worry about IA

Strike that. I meant the gap between the level of support for McCain.

by jedreport 2008-02-08 11:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama, Clinton, and McCain: Electability by th

The one that gets me is Obama vs. McCain in MN.  I just don't see it.  McCain didn't even win the Republican caucus there.  And the Democratic turnout was something like 3 1/2 times the Republican turnout.

by the mollusk 2008-02-08 11:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama, Clinton, and McCain: Electability by th

probably just a bad couple of polls -- just like Clinton in WA.

by jedreport 2008-02-08 11:54AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------