TNR BLOGS

December 01, 2008 | 2:02 PM
December 01, 2008 | 1:00 PM
December 01, 2008 | 12:42 PM

December 01, 2008 | 11:22 AM
December 01, 2008 | 11:10 AM
December 01, 2008 | 9:57 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

December 01, 2008 | 1:36 PM
December 01, 2008 | 12:00 PM
November 29, 2008 | 3:23 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
04.09.2008
NYT Poll: Obama Sliding Everywhere But Clintonland

There's something strange about this afternoon's CBS/New York Times poll, which has the race tied. On the one hand, it shows Obama backsliding among men, women, Democrats, and Republicans--not only compared with last week's poll, but with the same poll released before the Democratic convention. On the other hand, today's poll shows Obama making significant progress among Clinton supporters over the same period: He now leads this group 69-16, versus 58-22 last week and 60-23 the week before.

Which is to say, Obama's worst showing among Clinton supporters came after what was by all accounts a unifying convention. His best showing comes after getting pummeled by the GOP for a couple of days.

I'm not sure what to attribute that to, or why he'd be climbing among Hillary supporters but dropping everywhere else. Is it possible that Hillary supporters are disproportionately down on Palin--and all the conservative red meat being dished out in St. Paul? At the very least, I'd guess they're more partisan than the average Democrat...

Update: A friend flags another weird detail I should have mentioned earlier: The poll has an equal number of men and women, even though women tend to make up a larger portion of the electorate.

Update II: Also, as a commenter points out, the poll has a pretty small sample size. In case it wasn't clear earlier, the results should be interpreted with a real grain of salt. That said, the Clinton supporter result is well outside the margin of error.

--Noam Scheiber

Posted: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:27 PM with 7 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

timteeter said:

Note that the CBS/Times poll was of a mere 734 voters, and registered (as opposed to likely) voters at that.  Some individual state polls call more people than that, and the CBS/Times polls have a poor record.

Not that I don't think the race is getting closer.  It is, or it will.  But tied today?  Nah.

September 4, 2008 9:02 PM

johnalthousecohen said:

That's easy to explain. It's all based on how vivid their options are. When they see a vivid Clinton option they think, "Awww, I want THAT instead!" When they see a vivid McCain/Republican option, they think, "Oh no, we can't have THAT!" Which leads to supporting Obama.

September 4, 2008 9:06 PM

teplukhin2you said:

It's about abortion and Palin. Look at how some of our own TalkBacker feminists have gone off the deep end ("FASCIST!!!!") since Palin was selected.

September 4, 2008 9:19 PM

mattnewman said:

It's one poll with a small sample. Over the exact same time period, Gallup has Obama up 7 points, Rasmussen has him up 5, and Democracy Corps has him up 5. (Look at pollster.com, which does a good job of aggregating the polls.) So don't panic.

Really, you should never post on polls; you make this mistake (focusing on a single poll) all the time.

September 4, 2008 9:38 PM

tomeg said:

Mebbe, tep, but the NYT/CBS poll appears to be an outlier - today's other polls reported a modest Obama lead, not much different than yesterday. Still..

September 4, 2008 9:46 PM

sleepyavl said:

teplukhin, Palin is not  'FASCIST!!!!'. She a fascist. I lived ina Communist country and I know the bastards well. She exactly like them.

September 4, 2008 10:23 PM

CraigMcGil said:

I don't know about other Clinton supporters, but the combination of the DNC convention and the Sarah Palin pick has gotten me a lot more fired up than I was. I was always planning to vote for Obama but I actually contributed a little to his campaign.

September 4, 2008 11:44 PM