TNR BLOGS

July 05, 2009 | 4:05 PM
July 05, 2009 | 12:13 PM
July 04, 2009 | 11:18 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 05, 2009 | 12:02 PM
July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM

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

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
03.11.2008
Don't Panic--Reassurances From a Poll Neurotic

If you're the kind of person who obsesses over minor poll movements (and, if you're reading this, you almost certainly are), there's a good chance you noticed the slight tightening yesterday in Pennsylvania and Virginia, as well as the national tracking polls, which Nate covered in his daily write-up. Herewith, a couple reasons I'm not worried:

1.) The polls were always going to tighten a bit as McCain and the GOP made their final push. Among other things, the GOP was almost certainly hoarding cash for a final advertising blitz in key states. Watching TV yesterday in Washington (which is the same media market as Northern Virginia), I noticed a lot more McCain ads than I'd seen in a while. In Pennsylvania, we're even getting reacquainted with the good Reverend Wright.

Why am I not losing my s**t? McCain needed to steadily close the gap over the previous week to get close enough for this late movement to matter. That's why I was sweating the tightening I noticed early last week. But it didn't take. Though my national tracking poll average (minus Battleground and Investors' Business Daily, which lag too much for our purposes), dropped to 6.85 yesterday from 7.25 on Saturday and 7.33 on Friday, it's still up a half-point from a low of 6.28 on Wednesday. (Ignore the magnitude at this point, which depends on which average I use. It's the changes that matter.)

2.) As for Pennsylvania--which is basically McCain's only shot--yes, you'd rather see the poll numbers widening than narrowing. And it's admittedly less than ideal to see Wright starring in a new ad campaign. On the other hand, you've got to keep the following in mind: There are about 4.5 million registered Democrats in Pennsylvania, about 3.2 million Republicans, and just over one million voters who are either unaffiliated or belong to other parties. (Click here for complete registration statistics.) In order to carry the state, McCain either needs to run up a massive lead among the unaffiliateds and flip a chunk of Democrats, or he needs to flip a substantial number of Democrats. There just aren't enough Republicans out there to win any other way.

But here's the problem: A huge number of those Democrats and unaffiliateds either voted in April's primary or thought about doing so, meaning they're already familiar with Jeremiah Wright (who made more than a cameo in the run-up). Which is to say, Wright's probably baked in the cake for most of these people; the Democrats and Independents who tell pollsters they support Obama are supporting him despite Wright, not because they're unaware of him. So McCain's unlikely to win many of them via last-minute introductions.

Having said that, I think there will be more late defections, and that the final margin will be close in Pennsylvania (under five points). The absence of early voting there may be the biggest reason, since it denied Obama a chance to bank votes before McCain's last-minute push, and since he only has one day to get so many people to the polls in Philly and the 'burbs. The campaign and polling sites just might not manage to squeeze them all in. (Though I'm guessing they'll get pretty close.) For what it's worth, that logic also applies to Ohio.

3.) Speaking of early voting, that's the final reason I'm feeling relaxed today. A lot of commenters have made some version of the following argument: Yes, there's theoretically a way Obama could get to 270 without Pennsylvania. But if he loses Pennsylvania, things will have gone so catastrophically wrong it's hard to imagine him winning the other states he needs.

There's something to that, but I actually disagree. Because of the absence of early voting in Pennsylvania, I could see Obama winning Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida, and possibly North Carolina even if he loses the Keystone State. (The one place its hard to see him winning if he craters in Pennsylvania is Virginia, because there's isn't much early voting there, either.)

The early voting numbers in those five other states are simply gaudy--see this invaluable website--and there are a lot of ways to get to 270 with those states but without Pennsylvania and Virginia. For example, the Kerry states plus Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and North Carolina get you to 272. Throw in Florida--which I think Obama will carry--and it becomes a route.

Granted, all that could change if there's some unexpected external event (you know what I'm talking about, to paraphrase the eternally-wise Michael Goldfarb), or if millions of voters are simply lying to pollsters about who they're supporting. Short of that, Obama is extremely likely to be our next president.

--Noam Scheiber

Posted: Monday, November 03, 2008 12:01 AM with 23 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!

rozenson said:

"If you're the kind of person who obsesses over minor poll movements . . ."

You have no idea. I've been waiting for Nate's next write-up ever since his last one came out.

In point #3, you can also throw Ohio into the additional states Obama has a very good chance of winning that would make up for Pennsylvania.

November 3, 2008 12:08 AM

simon greenwood said:

Read the title, instantly knew who wrote it :)

I feel kind of left out here, I only bother checking the polls once a week or so.  It seems to me that polling is too inaccurate and the mindset of the electorate too opaque for it to be worth thinking about little movements.  If I remember my statistics, there's some formula out there you can use to calculate the margin of error of an aggregation of polls, but looking it up sounds like a lot of effort so I'm just going to WAG and say that the movements between 6.28 and 7.33 are meaningless.

November 3, 2008 12:37 AM

tj_emerson said:

Am I the only reader of these blogs who follows the prediction markets? I'm beginning to think so. Latest quotes: Intrade contract for Obama 89.4, for McCain 11.7; Iowa Electronic Markets Winner-Take-All Obama 87.3, McCain 12.9. Relax ...

November 3, 2008 12:59 AM

ackyri said:

You know, for better or worse, were the tables turned, the Republicans wouldn't lose an ounce of sweat at this point.

November 3, 2008 1:11 AM

psantillana said:

"you know what I'm talking about" ??? You mean the thing you guys keep not talking about? Are you going to talk about it after the election?

November 3, 2008 3:12 AM

jhildner said:

Obama's not going to lose Pennsylvania.  It won't be close.  It's comforting to contemplate the reasons why he doesn't *need* to win Pennsylvania, sure.  I've done some of that, of course.  But the scenario is highly unlikely.  If this campaign happend 30 times, McCain might win one of them.  Maybe 2.  Less likely, 3.  But he doesn't get 30 chances.  He just gets the one.

November 3, 2008 3:23 AM

jhildner said:

tj:  Well I, for one, look at those numbers.  They're even featured on the Real Clear Politics home page.  I think the prediction markets are being generous to McCain, and they're still giving him very low odds.  Silver puts his chances in the low to mid single digits.

November 3, 2008 3:27 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

Was in PA this weekend for Halloween at Gramma's house - every house had a sign, 5:1 Obama.  

The air buzzes there, everyone is so pumped up.  PA is always very political, but this year?  It's like Pakistian, only with beefy white union guys.

The neighbor is a Rendell-esque bad-ass precinct boss from way back for the Dems, a big Hillary guy who got over it (sort of).  He had us all laughing with stories of the irritated precinct captains who didn't get thier money this year from Team Obama (remember Obama refusing to play that 'walking around' money game? He's still refusing).  

I think the biggest factor outside of the cities in PA isn't bigotry, although its definately a factor - its that people there are the most change-averse group of human beings I have ever seen in my life.  It's a total black-out inclination to avoid change at all costs. It's nuerotic!  

No one even travels or has any inclination to ("why would I leave Philly?  I got everything I need right here.").  

Polls necessarily can't tell a whole cultural story.

Anyway. Mr Precinct Boss said Obama has PA sewn up no question, Obama by 5. Rendell snaps his fingers and the whole state jumps (remember that nine point leap for Obama 24 hours after Hillary conceeded?  People actually do as they are told in machine states, its hilarious).  

On the gossip side - he's known Billary for 20 years and laughed at the idea of Hillary on the Supreme Court. His words: "No way.  They are junkies to the bone and would be miserable with her stuck up there. She's staying right where she is."

November 3, 2008 5:21 AM

aeromonas said:

You're not the only one, tj.  I bought Obama contracts back in September at the only moment since the end of the primaries when Obama's price dipped below 50 (and below McCain's.)  

What interests me about those intrade numbers is actually that Obama's price isn't higher than 89.  I think that merely reflects the fact that a fairly sizable proportion of the small bettors on these online markets don't behave in a completely rational manner.  I don't think anyone who isn't letting his emotions get the better of him thinks McCain has an 11% chance to win this thing.  Not even close.  Say you bought a hundred bucks worth of McCain contracts at 33.  The rational move would be sell now and take a $66 loss rather than wait another day and lose your remaining $33 along with it.  But for too many penny-ante bettors, 33 bucks just doesn't make any difference; they're in it as much for the kick of the unexpected win as they are to make money.  Pulling out the day before the election at a 2/3 loss is, in their eyes, simply lame.  Better to hang tight on the off chance a meteor strikes and McCain wins, just so they can say, "I told you so" to everyone they know.

November 3, 2008 6:03 AM

aeromonas said:

I like those anecdotes, Wandrey.

November 3, 2008 6:08 AM

frilz1 said:

Why are the TV statkions all citing the Mason-Dixon polls, which always give McCain the best news of the voters? This poll is the only one showing McCain getting even close? Could it be they are worried about viewers tuning out a done deal for Obama?

November 3, 2008 6:10 AM

aeromonas said:

I just watched an hour-long piece of documentary style news coverage of the race in Ohio from Australia's ABC tv.  There's been a lot of this sort of thing on Aussie tele in the past week or so.  There was a piece from Ohio and Texas on the Aussie version of 60 Minutes, just last night.  What makes me laugh about this coverage is that all of it way oversells McCain's chances.  The Australian reporters just can seem to get it right.  Well, this 4 Corners show tonight did acknowledge at the end that Obama would likely win Ohio and with it the election, but if you just paid attention to the Ohioans they interviewed for the show, you'd think McCain was going to win in a landslide.  I honestly think the documentarians are just pandering to Australians' stereotyped view of what American's are like: stupid, jingoistic, gun-toting Evangelicals.

Everyone here thinks Bush is an idiot, and yet, at the same time, I think it serves as a boost to Aussie's self-esteem to think of Americans as all being the kinds of morons who'd elect an idiot like Bush.  The fact that a majority of Americans are going to get behind a suave, intelligent character like Obama is going to require Australians to rethink their attitude towards us yanks.  

November 3, 2008 6:23 AM

GoodLiberal said:

Hmmm.... But America did vote for Bush 4 years ago, right?

November 3, 2008 8:06 AM

kbecker said:

Why should I worry? Obama is going to win.

November 3, 2008 8:15 AM

The Plank said:

Don't Worry, Obama's Got This , By Noam Scheiber Why McCain's Last Stand Indulges White Voters'

November 3, 2008 10:26 AM

moran@sbc.edu said:

To Good Liberal: yes, but since '04 the economy has tanked and  Bush's approval ratings are way down. Also lots more voters are registered now. Still, here in central va I am freaked out by the number of McCain/Palin signs I see.  I'm fortifying self on Tues nite w/ both champagne & hemlock.

November 3, 2008 10:38 AM

Daily Intel said:

With so much on the line, many liberals are harboring anxiety that the whole thing could slip away.

November 3, 2008 12:06 PM

psantillana said:

Didn't the Aussies elect their own right wing freakazoid?

November 3, 2008 3:36 PM

Lyn39 said:

DailyIntel is correct.  I am one of those liberals harboring intense anxiety that the whole thing could slip away (or stolen).   I recall going to bed one Tuesday in November, 2000, thinking for certain that Gore had it in the bag and George Bush would never step foot in the Oval Office.  I think I have PTSD from the events that followed.  A loss this year would be ten-fold worse.

November 3, 2008 4:19 PM

aeromonas said:

Well, not really, psantillana.  John Howard was conservative as far as Australians go, and he did make Australia the little bro in the Coalition of the Willing, and he did pander to Aussies' worst instincts over admission of possible refugees to the country, but at the same time Howard was a hyperarticulate pro and his econonmic and domestic policies were more in line with your average centrist Democrat than any Republican.

November 3, 2008 4:20 PM

dubyadoubte said:

The election day weather forecast continues to deterioriate for much of the east.  What had been predicted just a few days ago to be partly sunny, had degraded first into p.m. showers, now the latest forecasts call for steady rain.  A wide swatch of NC, VA, PA and up through New England call for rain.  I hope this doesn affect turnout, with many people figuring Obama's "got it" and decide not to stand for hours in the rain.  

November 3, 2008 4:36 PM

stgla said:

lyn39 -- ha ha about PTSD.  With all due respect to people who actually have PTSD from real traumas, it's a good metaphor for those of us who survived two Bush elections.

November 4, 2008 12:07 PM

jwl2672 said:

If this guy wins, I want black people to shut the hell up about America being racist.

It's the only possible silver lining to this joke of a candidate (ala Dinkins) and his worthless economic and foreign policy plans.

November 4, 2008 1:51 PM