Preference Polls vs. Favorability Polls

People may make up their mind about who they're going to vote for at the last minute—something conventional polling cannot account for or predict—but candidate favorability/unfavorability polls shed light on why voters like or dislike candidates on political positions as well as more personal, emotional levels.

That's why I think Newsweek's set of Obama and McCain favorability polls released today are so exciting:

Obama: Favorable +24.0
McCain: Favorable +23.0

Obama's number is down from an all-time high of +36, while McCain weighs in relatively high after a few months of polling placed him somewhere between +/- 0 to +20.

Do these numbers show that Obama is losing supporters and is now more widely disliked than he was previously? No. But the polling shows that two relatively well-liked candidates are running for the Presidency this November, and that's pretty exciting.

Start Believing

Rasmussen:

It would be truly stunning if Obama could turn Montana into a competitive state this November. George W. Bush won Montana’s 3 Electoral College Votes by twenty percentage points in 2004 and by twenty-five points four years earlier.

Rasmussen's latest Montana head-to-head poll shows Barack Obama leading John McCain by 5%.

As they say, truly stunning...especially when you look at how Montana voted in 2004.

Obama Gains Some Serious Ground

They may not be "battleground states," but Arkansas, Georgia, and Kentucky have been solid red states for some years now.

Suppose Obama doesn't win any of the three—chances are he won't—but in 2004 Bush won the three states by an average of over 15%.

Fast forward to Barack Obama, 2008, that number is down to just over 6%.

Holy smokes.

Is it even necessary to bring up that Obama is up now (by 1%) in Indiana, something yours truly didn't believe could happen.




[graphs from electoral vote]

Who's Stronger?

If I'm in the mood for some election polls, RealClearPolitics has been my first stop, but since individual polls are so difficult to interpret, cumulative nationwide surveys like the ones at ElectoralVote.com are much more interesting and are becoming more and more intriguing to consider.

Keep in mind, however, that Obama was trailing McCain by around 50 electoral votes on this site a few days ago; these polls move day to day and about a dozen states are frequently change sides.


No matter how close the above map makes Iowa and New Mexico look, I see those states going to Obama in November. On the record: Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan will go for McCain in November. Heck, throw New Hampshire and Nevada in there, too. All that is contingent upon whether or not McCain can stay as strong as he's been and was during the most difficult periods of his primary campaign. The states are their for McCain to win, he just needs to show up to fight.

Obama Must Face His "Red, White, and Blue" United States

Four years ago the soaring vision of the up and coming Senator Barack Obama united the Democrats; a future leader had a dream for America in which party politics were left behind in favor of the common good. Instead of that ideal turning into reality, it seems Obama's hope for a patriotic red, white, and blue America has played out literally.

As he shifts gear into a general election campaign, Barack Obama must now confront not one, but three Americas: Republicans, Obama-Democrats, and working-class white voters.

It's hard to decided whether or not to blame Senator Obama for the situation he is currently being confronted with. On one hand, Obama's "sweetie" and "bitter" comments have angered women and moderate to conservative rural democrats, his inability to distance himself from the inflammatory sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright (still), and Michelle Obama's statements that make us wonder why this man and woman want to be America's first family give me tremendous pause about Obama.

On the other hand, the long nomination process has forced Obama to draw distinctions between himself and Senator Clinton and expose weaknesses that otherwise may not have been discovered. This is not Obama's fault, and neither is the fact that the long primary season has forced Obama's name into the national media on a 24/7 basis, diluting his image as a Washington outsider with every news cycle featuring a story on him.

Kentucky's primary results from yesterday (a 35% win for Clinton) and West Virginia's from last week (Clinton's 41% victory) expose a critical weakness for Obama along certain demographics. What I've been so disappointed by in talking about this election is that I am often criticized for bringing up the fact that voters without a college degree in Kentucky, for example, voted for Clinton over Obama nearly 3-1. These observations, apparently, "divide us" and prevent us as Demographics from working to fix the problems that face us. I've heard it all before.

Don't get me wrong, I think much of Senator Obama's message represents a fantasic injection of life and energy into the Democratic Party that has not been around for years. But at the same time I am a Democrat first and foremost, and my biggest concern is not the preservation of the Obama campaign theme, rather that a Democrat wins in November. Though there are intricacies behind each of these statements that I could discuss, the following are simple facts in my eyes:

If Obama is a weak candidate among working-class white voters, Democrats should be aware of this instead of having John Edwards hop into the picture and try to pass on some credibility to Obama. Come November, endorsements matter much less than whether or not working-class whites are comfortable with Obama over McCain.

Regardless of whether or not Obama wins the Democratic nomination (and he will), I consider it presumptuous of him to make his quasi-victory speech last night. Not only had that plan been in the works for weeks, but as the Democratic-bashers at Boston talk radio 96.9 WTKK said repeatedly yesterday, Obama is declaring victory because he has more points at the end of the third period.

Finally and most important to me, can Obama beat John McCain? Can Obama win tough battleground states that he's lost in decisive primaries? What does the poll below mean?


In a state that rallied around Barack Obama during the Democratic Primary, North Carolina voters chose Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama when McCain sits across the ticket.

My guess is that Hillary Clinton, regardless of how well she does in certain general election polls, will be effectively "out" of the campaign by June 4th. So, as I prepare to become an Obama Democrat, I want to make some predictions as to how I see the 2008 election playing out. On the record, this weekend, I'll lay out how I see November's vote going down.

Thoughts on West Virginia and the Next Week

I have ten minutes to write up my thoughts on tonight's results from West Virginia (as well as what I think will happen over the next few weeks for the Democrats) before I've got to get back to AP Art History studying. Here goes:

1) Hillary Clinton beat the lowered expectations that I set for her a few days ago (scroll down two posts). Yes, I'm a Hillary supporter so you could see my "expectations" as being as useless as the campaign spin that Clinton's campaign likes to dish out before a "surprise" big win, but there have been precious few times this campaign where big leads in polls have held or where candidates truly beat their own expectations (South Carolina comes to mind as a big win for Obama). Hillary is currently up by 39% (EDIT: 41%), a figure I can imagine her campaign is actually surprised about.

2) Obama is smart (though I don't think it's a very polite tactic) to transition into general election mode. Hillary Clinton's speech tonight was successful in one key area: making Obama look bad for not spending more time in West Virginia. Unlike Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire—swing states that Clinton ended up winning, but where Obama campaigned heavily—Obama spent little time in West Virginia, writing the state off as a big win for Clinton early on. The result of this strategy? Hillary Clinton wins the state in head-to-head polling with McCain while Obama loses (look at the electoral map HERE).

3) No matter what happens in Kentucky next week for Hillary Clinton, the current wave she will ride for the next few days will end after the results from Oregon come in. Unlike Clinton's win tonight in West Virginia, Kentucky will not swing for the Democrats in November and the very loud and liberal Democrats in Oregon will push Obama to victory there.

Texas Exit Polls

Does this say it all?


If not, try these:






The Hispanic vote looks to have come through big time for Clinton, and an 11% margin in the white vote doesn't hurt either.

My prediction: Ms. Clinton takes the Texas primary by 4-7%.

Now, that Texas caucus thing is a whole different story....

Ohio Exit Polls

The most noteworthy nugget of information I'm pulling from a skim of Democratic exit polls from Ohio tonight are votes by "Independents." Where Obama beat Clinton among independents 69% to 30% in Virginia — by 39% — Obama is only winning among Ohio independents 54% to 46% — by 8%.

Exit polling numbers can't be taken too seriously, but these numbers could evidence a shift in the way independent voters view Obama. Obama is a liberal Democrat by all measures, not necessarily the middle of the road "progressive" that voters in previous states believed.

If Clinton stays in the race after tonight (and my guess is she will), than the long stretch of time before the Pennsylvania primary could work to her advantage. Where Obama's momentum was continued from Super Tuesday to Wisconsin without pause, the long six weeks before Pennsylvania could benefit Clinton like it appears to have in Ohio (and perhaps Texas, too).

A State I Know NOTHING About

South Carolina.

But what I do know is that whatever momentum still exists for the Democrats has been moving towards John Edwards. If it's not clear, Edwards is that little red line at the bottom of the graph above.

So does Edwards have much of a chance to win today? I'd guess not—the real battle is between Clinton and Obama. The stronger than expected finish for Edwards does mean his message resonated in South Carolina, and it will be interesting to see how many former Obama and Clinton supporters moved towards his camp after the recent mudslinging between the frontrunners.

I see the Democratic race being about Super Tuesday; South Carolina is only a momentum shifter leading into the 22-state contest. If Obama does win tonight, what kind of bounce can he expect in states like California or New Jersey?

One New Jersey poll released this past week by Quinnipiac University showed that 74% of Clinton supporters were "not likely at all" or "not too likely" to change their minds before February 5. Compare that to 32% of Obama supporters who are either "somewhat likely" or "very likely" to change their minds and today's outcome in South Carolina may not matter too much.

Watch the bounce.

He's Doing It

In a matter of weeks John McCain has had a second coming in New Hampshire. A poll just released today by CNN in the Granite State reaffirms how imprecise and changeable these measures of public support can be.

Notables:

Favorability ratings for Republican candidates:

John McCain — 81% favorable - 13% unfavorable (half of what it was last year)
Mitt Romney — 65 % favorable - 28 % unfavorable (slowly increasing)

Republican candidate likely to bring needed change:


Jan. 5th, '08 — McCain = 23%, Romney = 23%
September '07 — McCain = 13%, Romney = 25%


Not only is John McCain the most favorable candidate in the Republican field in the eyes of New Hampshire voters, but he's starting to get the "change" vote, an interesting factor that's hard to define but is definitely hot after Obama's Iowa victory. Tell me I'm wrong, but a McCain victory in New Hampshire would be huge...and it might just happen.



(photo credit: © 2008 by Luke N. Vargas. All Rights Reserved.)

Numbers I Like

Those would be two polls released the past week or so out of Iowa:






Obama's campaign press guy, Bill Burton, says it best: "There’s going to be a caucus and not just a coronation."

I wouldn't put up a fuss if Hillary were chosen as the eventual Democratic nominee, but months and months of 20%+ leads across this country for Ms. Clinton got me praying for the day Obama finally moved past her in a key state like Iowa.

Today's my lucky day.

Iowa caucus night is quietly gearing up to be a fight to remember...so much so that flying out to Des Moines for some holiday season political action might just sneak onto my list of New Year's resolutions.

Oh, and a second (or first) place finish in Iowa for Huckabee would put a smile on my face too.

The Good, the Bad, and the Uncertain Future: John McCain and the Iraq War

Whether or not you've been opposed to the Iraq war since the start or are determined it should end or continue, it's hard to prove that public opinion isn't begin to swing back in favor of Bush's surge strategy. Compared with polls taken one and two months ago, the number of Americans who believe the surge is improving the situation in Iraq has risen by nearly 10%, and a similar increase in percent now say America was right to take military action against Iraq (43% now vs. 35% in May). (CBS News Polls)


If the military and security situation is improving on the ground in Fallujah and across Iraq, the long term result of America's presence in Iraq is uncertain. Presidential candidates have, with varying degrees of clarity, staked out their positions on the war and the "surge," and it's yet to be seen which Democrat or Republican can turn changing public opinion into higher poll numbers. Even more, can a swing in public opinion on the war swing the voting public towards the GOP field in 2008? These are questions with few answers at the moment.

I remember watching Colin Powell's address to the United Nations and the warnings of mushroom clouds and vials of dangerous explosives and chemicals. At that moment I was scared, and I supported Bush's move towards military action against Iraq. Every day since the invasion, however, my support for the war has dwindled, and until recently I've maintained the belief that every day the United States is in Iraq is a day too long. And now we see Democrats such as Brian Baird of Washington supporting the surge and Hillary Clinton's recent statements announcing that progress is being made. While I haven't been won over enough to believe that the situation in Iraq is completely better and we need to recommit to a long-term engagement in the country, my support of Senator John McCain's steady position on the war has risen.


Now that we've seen Hillary Clinton announce success and failure, Barack Obama go from opposition to voting for troop funding bills, and a number of other candidate's doublespeak on their positions, John McCain's unapologetic support of the war is strangely refreshing. McCain sees Iraq as being an issue above politics--one that concerns our standing in the world and the survival of our nation--just as he speaks of issues such as immigration as a national priority--more serious than the cries of "sanctuary cities" by his opponents. Instead of jockeying for position on every issue like Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, McCain has stated where he stands and held true. Unfortunately for him, Rudy vs. Mitt attacks are more interesting to listen to, and McCain has been ignored of late.

It would be a shame for America if the Senator's mismanagement of campaign funds and personnel is what dooms him in 2008. Instead, I'd like to see McCain go down with the honor that so defines him--if the war he so believes in turns sour and he's the last man standing.

Unlike his competitors, McCain is the only man with the guts to remain standing.

(all photos: © 2007 by Luke N. Vargas. All Rights Reserved.)

Targeting the Base of Your Support...With an Actual Gun

I recently stumbled across an interesting summary of a Tom Tancredo event in New Hampshire. The Congressman spoke about protecting the right of Americans to own and carry guns, and it just so happened that a number of those in attendance were actually carrying concealed weapons and weren't shy about letting everyone know.

It's not hard to see why Tancredo's campaign is running into the ground; not only has he scaled down his campaign effort in New Hampshire, but he's not even talking about the issues that the top tier of candidates are having to wrestle with. Aside from the small portion of the population that considers protecting gun rights as the most pressing issue in America, the majority of us realize that a candidate whose strongest points are making sure only English is taught in schools, mandating that a 2,000 border fence is built, and broadening gun rights would fail to properly address issues like poverty, the environment, and a peaceful resolution of the Iraq war.

It's the most used saying in the campaign phrase book, and Tancredo seems to be using it now, "If we can place well in the __ primary, than our campaign will really take off."

I hate to rain on Mr. Tancredo's parade, but candidates such as Governor Mike Huckabee and Governor Mitt Romney (who have placed similar emphasis on states like New Hampshire) are actually seeing a rise in their support in the granite state.


Tancredo has nearly $600,000 in cash on hand for the '08 election, but he's got a long way to go before he can start building his border fence...

Who Are the 17%?

A CNN/Opinion Research Corportation poll released today shows why, contrary to what the media is making it appear, the primaries are still eleven months away--

Rudy Giuliani - 34
John McCain - 18
Newt Gingrich - 9
Mitt Romney - 9
George Pataki - 3
Jim Gilmore - 2
Sam Brownback - 2
Chuck Hagel - 2
Ron Paul - 2
Mike Huckabee - 1
Tom Tancredo - 1
Tommy Thompson - 1
Duncan Hunter -
UNSURE - 17

Rudy still holds a commanding lead over McCain and the rest of the pack despite a poor showing in the CPAC straw poll and a virtual disappearance from the public spotlight and campaign trail. Gingrich, although still not an official candidate, also steals a respectable sampling of the vote. Once again, nothing new here.

Lesser known candidates such as Sam Brownback and Mike Huckabee currently fall into the polling no man's land with low single-digit figures. Between the two, a 3% representation in polls raises an intriguing question; where is the evangelical vote going?

The answer rests quietly at the bottom of the poll. Assuming that a small percentage of evangelicals shove aside their religious inclinations and chose to support Rudy, McCain, or Romney, the 17% of voters who are unsure matches up quite closely with the 23% of voters in the 2004 Presidential Election who identified themselves as evangelicals.

What kind of impact will this demographic have in the coming months? A huge one. Though Huckabee and Brownback may have to fight it out, my bets are on Mike Huckabee grabbing the support of the religious right and having his new support from social conservatives throw him into the front tier of candidates. It may seem unlikely now, but there will be a time when the Republican base will realize Giuliani and Co. don't agree with core conservative social values as much as would be desired.