GatewayRedbirds.com

Obama was here again today. Last stop before he goes to Hawaii. On the news, they said it's the 47th time he's been here since the campaign began. That's got to be a record for here.

Early voting also begins here today, which I assume is a big reason why he came again. His campaign staff is really smart to emphasize this the way they have been.

PujolJunkie wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

New polling this morning from the Big Ten polling consortium and Quinnipiac University present a view of what the world might look like if Barack Obama wins in a landslide.

The Big Ten polls have Obama ahead by double digits in ten Midwestern states: he leads by 10 in Indiana, 11 in Pennsylvania, 12 in Ohio, 13 in Wisconsin and Iowa, 19 in Minnesota, 22 in Michigan, and 29 in Illinois.

Quinnipiac has Obama ahead by 14 points in Ohio, 13 points in Pennsylvania, and 5 points in Florida.

It's becoming bigger. He's also at the highest point he's ever been at on Rasmussen. 52%. He's also only 10 behind in Texas. TEXAS.

I wouldn't trust that poll. There's no way he leads by 10 in Indiana.

I don't trust the Indiana poll. Big Ten hasn't been spot on, in fact, they've been erratic. But the Ohio polls are more or less a flag going up. That's two Pollsters, one a VERY good one and the other a below average one, giving Obama a double digit lead in Ohio. Indiana isn't gonna be blue by 10 points. But it's leaning blue by a couple at this point.

EDIT: Indiana is virtually tied on Real Clear Politics. If another pollster gives Obama a 2 point lead or so, it flips to Toss Up, but in Blue. Ohio is now a 6 point lead or so.

PJ - whassup with that AP national poll showing a tie?

ghostrunner wrote:Obama was here again today. Last stop before he goes to Hawaii. On the news, they said it's the 47th time he's been here since the campaign began. That's got to be a record for here.

Early voting also begins here today, which I assume is a big reason why he came again. His campaign staff is really smart to emphasize this the way they have been.

It really is the greatest GOTV and ground game in political history. It's astounding.

I won't be completely satisfied unless it's a shutout. Someone needs to get going in Oklahoma.

ghostrunner wrote:Early voting also begins here today, which I assume is a big reason why he came again. His campaign staff is really smart to emphasize this the way they have been.

Alluding to comments I made in the "angry" thread over in Rants, I've been blown away by how the Obama camp has run their campaign. Purely from a marketing standpoint, it's been extremely impressive, and it's been going on for a long, long time. Back in January, I started getting texts from the Obama camp. But I didn't sign up to get them. I have no idea how that happened. That's a point in their favor in terms of mass exposure of their candidate.

JL21 wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:Early voting also begins here today, which I assume is a big reason why he came again. His campaign staff is really smart to emphasize this the way they have been.

Alluding to comments I made in the "angry" thread over in Rants, I've been blown away by how the Obama camp has run their campaign. Purely from a marketing standpoint, it's been extremely impressive, and it's been going on for a long, long time. Back in January, I started getting texts from the Obama camp. But I didn't sign up to get them. I have no idea how that happened. That's a point in their favor in terms of mass exposure of their candidate.

That's also how he's going to take all your paycheck...

Freed Roger wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

New polling this morning from the Big Ten polling consortium and Quinnipiac University present a view of what the world might look like if Barack Obama wins in a landslide.

The Big Ten polls have Obama ahead by double digits in ten Midwestern states: he leads by 10 in Indiana, 11 in Pennsylvania, 12 in Ohio, 13 in Wisconsin and Iowa, 19 in Minnesota, 22 in Michigan, and 29 in Illinois.

Quinnipiac has Obama ahead by 14 points in Ohio, 13 points in Pennsylvania, and 5 points in Florida.

It's becoming bigger. He's also at the highest point he's ever been at on Rasmussen. 52%. He's also only 10 behind in Texas. TEXAS.

I wouldn't trust that poll. There's no way he leads by 10 in Indiana.

I don't trust the Indiana poll. Big Ten hasn't been spot on, in fact, they've been erratic. But the Ohio polls are more or less a flag going up. That's two Pollsters, one a VERY good one and the other a below average one, giving Obama a double digit lead in Ohio. Indiana isn't gonna be blue by 10 points. But it's leaning blue by a couple at this point.

EDIT: Indiana is virtually tied on Real Clear Politics. If another pollster gives Obama a 2 point lead or so, it flips to Toss Up, but in Blue. Ohio is now a 6 point lead or so.

PJ - whassup with that AP national poll showing a tie?

Ah, the AP-GfK poll. Silver didn't really have a comment on it, but there was a post that mentioned it. Right now, in the swing of things, there are 8 national trackers that separate registered voters from LIKELY voters. There's a difference between the two. Among registered voters, the AP poll gives Obama a 5 point lead. Among likely voters, just a 1 point lead. A 4-6 point gap between LV and RV is ridiculous and that goes for any poll. Whether it's close or spread out.

Does that mean the poll is unreliable? In a way. People who have actually voted would are most likely excluded by their likely voter screens, which is an issue as well. More or less, it just comes down to the internals and the way things are conducted. Party weighting, demographic polling. Just the slightest point advantage to McCain in the demographics can push him 3 or 4 points closer in a LV model.

And to be honest, it could just be a straightforward outlier. It happens. Bad polling data, bad internals. Whatever the answer may be. Just like the Pew 14+ for Obama was most likely an outlier. There's no way Obama is 14 up on McCain. But there's no way that it's within 1. There's a more scientific explanation to the whole thing, but I would have to have Nate Silver or maybe Charles Franklin explain it. Because it digs down into the process of the polling itself.

EDIT: By the way, this is also where full transparency comes in. Places like R2000 reveal their internals and the guts of their poll. While bigger, more powerful organizations like AP don't show daily samples and such. Transparency is key. Anybody can start a polling agency and poll 1500 people. But you have to poll 1500/1500 of those people with 95% confidence or better or you're wrote off as [expletive]. AP has been pretty good throughout the process. Sometimes, things just go off track.

PujolJunkie wrote:

Freed Roger wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

New polling this morning from the Big Ten polling consortium and Quinnipiac University present a view of what the world might look like if Barack Obama wins in a landslide.

The Big Ten polls have Obama ahead by double digits in ten Midwestern states: he leads by 10 in Indiana, 11 in Pennsylvania, 12 in Ohio, 13 in Wisconsin and Iowa, 19 in Minnesota, 22 in Michigan, and 29 in Illinois.

Quinnipiac has Obama ahead by 14 points in Ohio, 13 points in Pennsylvania, and 5 points in Florida.

It's becoming bigger. He's also at the highest point he's ever been at on Rasmussen. 52%. He's also only 10 behind in Texas. TEXAS.

I wouldn't trust that poll. There's no way he leads by 10 in Indiana.

I don't trust the Indiana poll. Big Ten hasn't been spot on, in fact, they've been erratic. But the Ohio polls are more or less a flag going up. That's two Pollsters, one a VERY good one and the other a below average one, giving Obama a double digit lead in Ohio. Indiana isn't gonna be blue by 10 points. But it's leaning blue by a couple at this point.

EDIT: Indiana is virtually tied on Real Clear Politics. If another pollster gives Obama a 2 point lead or so, it flips to Toss Up, but in Blue. Ohio is now a 6 point lead or so.

PJ - whassup with that AP national poll showing a tie?

Ah, the AP-GfK poll. Silver didn't really have a comment on it, but there was a post that mentioned it. Right now, in the swing of things, there are 8 national trackers that separate registered voters from LIKELY voters. There's a difference between the two. Among registered voters, the AP poll gives Obama a 5 point lead. Among likely voters, just a 1 point lead. A 4-6 point gap between LV and RV is ridiculous and that goes for any poll. Whether it's close or spread out.

Does that mean the poll is unreliable? In a way. People who have actually voted would are most likely excluded by their likely voter screens, which is an issue as well. More or less, it just comes down to the internals and the way things are conducted. Party weighting, demographic polling. Just the slightest point advantage to McCain in the demographics can push him 3 or 4 points closer in a LV model.

And to be honest, it could just be a straightforward outlier. It happens. Bad polling data, bad internals. Whatever the answer may be. Just like the Pew 14+ for Obama was most likely an outlier. There's no way Obama is 14 up on McCain. But there's no way that it's within 1. There's a more scientific explanation to the whole thing, but I would have to have Nate Silver or maybe Charles Franklin explain it. Because it digs down into the process of the polling itself.

EDIT: By the way, this is also where full transparency comes in. Places like R2000 reveal their internals and the guts of their poll. While bigger, more powerful organizations like AP don't show daily samples and such. Transparency is key. Anybody can start a polling agency and poll 1500 people. But you have to poll 1500/1500 of those people with 95% confidence or better or you're wrote off as [expletive]. AP has been pretty good throughout the process. Sometimes, things just go off track.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arc ... al_sur.php

PujolJunkie wrote:

Freed Roger wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:

PujolJunkie wrote:

New polling this morning from the Big Ten polling consortium and Quinnipiac University present a view of what the world might look like if Barack Obama wins in a landslide.

The Big Ten polls have Obama ahead by double digits in ten Midwestern states: he leads by 10 in Indiana, 11 in Pennsylvania, 12 in Ohio, 13 in Wisconsin and Iowa, 19 in Minnesota, 22 in Michigan, and 29 in Illinois.

Quinnipiac has Obama ahead by 14 points in Ohio, 13 points in Pennsylvania, and 5 points in Florida.

It's becoming bigger. He's also at the highest point he's ever been at on Rasmussen. 52%. He's also only 10 behind in Texas. TEXAS.

I wouldn't trust that poll. There's no way he leads by 10 in Indiana.

I don't trust the Indiana poll. Big Ten hasn't been spot on, in fact, they've been erratic. But the Ohio polls are more or less a flag going up. That's two Pollsters, one a VERY good one and the other a below average one, giving Obama a double digit lead in Ohio. Indiana isn't gonna be blue by 10 points. But it's leaning blue by a couple at this point.

EDIT: Indiana is virtually tied on Real Clear Politics. If another pollster gives Obama a 2 point lead or so, it flips to Toss Up, but in Blue. Ohio is now a 6 point lead or so.

PJ - whassup with that AP national poll showing a tie?

Ah, the AP-GfK poll. Silver didn't really have a comment on it, but there was a post that mentioned it. Right now, in the swing of things, there are 8 national trackers that separate registered voters from LIKELY voters. There's a difference between the two. Among registered voters, the AP poll gives Obama a 5 point lead. Among likely voters, just a 1 point lead. A 4-6 point gap between LV and RV is ridiculous and that goes for any poll. Whether it's close or spread out.

Does that mean the poll is unreliable? In a way. People who have actually voted would are most likely excluded by their likely voter screens, which is an issue as well. More or less, it just comes down to the internals and the way things are conducted. Party weighting, demographic polling. Just the slightest point advantage to McCain in the demographics can push him 3 or 4 points closer in a LV model.

And to be honest, it could just be a straightforward outlier. It happens. Bad polling data, bad internals. Whatever the answer may be. Just like the Pew 14+ for Obama was most likely an outlier. There's no way Obama is 14 up on McCain. But there's no way that it's within 1. There's a more scientific explanation to the whole thing, but I would have to have Nate Silver or maybe Charles Franklin explain it. Because it digs down into the process of the polling itself.

They did a piece on NPR yesterday explaining the difference between the Gallup and the Gallup Expanded, and why there is a difference. For what it's worth, the panel pretty much thought that given the dynamics of this election that the Expanded poll was more likely to represent reality that the Traditional. If you don't vote regularly, the Traditional doesn't count you. Everyone felt that more young people and others that have not been regular voters will come out this time. The Exanded Gallup has Obama up about 4 more points than the traditional.

JL21 wrote:

ghostrunner wrote:Early voting also begins here today, which I assume is a big reason why he came again. His campaign staff is really smart to emphasize this the way they have been.

Alluding to comments I made in the "angry" thread over in Rants, I've been blown away by how the Obama camp has run their campaign. Purely from a marketing standpoint, it's been extremely impressive, and it's been going on for a long, long time. Back in January, I started getting texts from the Obama camp. But I didn't sign up to get them. I have no idea how that happened. That's a point in their favor in terms of mass exposure of their candidate.

Yes - regardless of issues and political preference - I dare say Obama campaign's marketing strategy has been almost brilliant. Just look at the BarrackStock event that drew 100,000 in St. Louis. It made a splash on the national news and was held at the most prominent landmark in the state. It was announced last minute and spread via street marketing. It had the appearances and feel of spontaneous event that came about from a groundswell upport (even though it was surely carefully orchestrated.)

Then contrast this to the subsequent hoedown by McCain's campaign, a cloistered ticket only event attended by a few thous out in a "planned" community way out in the uber-burbs. What a contrast.