CNN Post-Biden Poll shows Obama-McCain dead heat -- 7% OBAMA LEAD GONE

[Sensitivity]

DENVER, Colorado (CNN) -- It's a dead heat in the race for the White House.


The first national poll conducted after Barack Obama publicly named Joe Biden as his running mate suggests that the battle for the presidency between the Illinois senator and John McCain is all tied up.

In a new CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Sunday night, 47 percent of those questioned are backing Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominees, with an equal amount supporting his Republican opponent, McCain.

"This looks like a step backward for Obama, who had a 51 to 44 percent advantage last month," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Even last week, just before his choice of Joe Biden as his running mate became known, most polls tended to show Obama with a single-digit advantage over McCain."

. . . .
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/24/election.2008.poll/index.html

I and my friends were eagerly expecting a BOUNCE from this solid and rationally explained V.P. pick.
Will it happen? Will be hard to tell after the convention starts and polls start tracking a convention bounce.

[davepc]

1. who cares, we dont decide whos president by popular vote

Obama has a 260 to 176 EC lead.

http://pollster.com

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. 2004, 2000... same story line

do you see a pattern?

[CreekDog]

2. did you notice this in Late Breaking News?

hi hidden.

[Quantess]

44. Hidden profiles get on my nerves.

[dhill926]

3. this is all so much bullshit.....n/t

[Barack_America]

5. Lol. Saturday evening polls...

Really representative of the electorate there.

These people obviously put as much effort into their poll design as they do into their "reporting".

[writes3000]

6. This post & its revision say so much about the OP. This one day, Sat night poll means squat. nt

[babylonsister]

64. Yup. The OP posted that with glee. nt

[DarthDem]

7. Dupe, Already Discussed

(1) Flash poll
(2) On a Saturday night to landline callers
(3) Unusually high MOE
(4) CNN obviously forcing a narrative to drum up ad revenue for their convention coverage


Nothing else to see here. And certainly no cause for concern. All of this metapolling and narrative-forcing, and Gramps only gets a tie.

[Drunken Irishman]

8. It's a ONE DAY FUCKING POLL!

How reliable are one day polls? ONE NIGHT POLLS, even? Especially if they're done on a Saturday night?

And don't pretend you didn't get excited about posting that pathetic headline. How about the ABC/WaPost poll showing Obama up 6? Oh, you ignore that...

[Sensitivity]

65. It's a 2 day poll, 1000 + sample, MOE 3.5. LET'S NOT PLAY THE HEAD IN THE SAND GAMVE

Let's understand the problem and work to turn things arouund

[Drunken Irishman]

84. IT DOES NOT MATCH ANY OTHER FUCKING POLL!

Are you really that dense or just trying to act dumb?

Every other poll released since the fucking pick shows Obama up. So why dwell on one piece of shit, pathetically small poll?

:eyes:

Obviously you want Obama to lose and you're dancing around at that thought. Path-fucking-thetic.

[gateley]

9. Your headline makes it sound as though Obama's lead disappeared overnight.

That was last MONTH'S lead as stated in the article. Why make it sound worse than it is?

Obama's lead has been diminishing (God knows why) all on his own. Biden is not to "blame" and I'm confident the polls will turn around.

Thanks for the sensational subject line.

[Sensitivity]

19. No Biden is a solid choice and a typical V.P. BOUNCE is rightly expected to bring Barack back up

[A-Schwarzenegger]

10. IF ONLY HE WOULD HAVE PICKED HAGEL LIKE YOU KEPT SAYING!

You were right just like I always said!

[d_b]

15. i iz wure abowt byden

duz hagel win?

[nam78_two]

Lol-GMTA

;)

[FrenchieCat]

11. This is some fucked up posting by DUers......

named "sensitivity". How Ironic! :eyes:

[Unsane]

12. PUMA much?

[JeffR]

13. And then of course there's this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6736442

[Sensitivity]

48. Aug. 19-22 Poll -- Was very heartening, but before the recent developments and McCain Ads

[Sensitivity]

14. Poll was obviously seeking to discover a BIDEN BOUNCE if one existed -- but found confusion

Implies that cause is die-hard Clinton supporters firming up against Obama since Hill is not on the ticket.

Could be the influence on these same of the barage of replaying of Hilary and Biden comments in McCain new ads about the V.P. selection.

There should have been a bounce. To look at these numbers and pretend that there is no problem is whistling in the dark.

[writes3000]

17. Obama announced Biden on Saturday morning. You expect an immediate bounce?

Are you an expert on polling?

Most pollsters, I suspect, would tell you that you need to wait a few days to let people's real reaction settle in.

And most pollsters would also do polling over several days. Not one evening.

[mwb970]

58. I wonder what percentage even knew about Biden by Saturday night.

I'll bet if you polled Americans today, or even next week, "Joe Biden" would get less than 50% name recognition. After all, this is a country where a large percentage of the people still don't know who the vice president is(!). And can't find America (or South Africa, or the Iraq) on a map!

Have you ever seen "Jaywalking" on The Tonight Show? That's the America I see in these polls.

[CreekDog]

18. what's the normal bounce for a VP selection?

we want real numbers.

[Sensitivity]

20. Gallup says 5%

[CreekDog]

21. cite?

[gateley]

24. Gallup also says their poll won't accurately reflect the Biden announcement

until Tuesday. So if you're going to cite Gallup, you might as well wait for their poll.

The first Gallup three-day rolling average in which all interviews will have been conducted entirely after the announcement of Obama's vice presidential selection will be reported by Gallup on Tuesday, and will give a clearer assessment of its impact on voter preferences in the presidential race. -- Jeff Jones

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109753/Gallup-Daily-McCain-Obama-Tied-45.aspx

[JeffR]

36. CNN's poll had either a 7.5 or 8 % MOE, for starters.

Furthermore, it is contradicted by a number of other polls.

Third, well-known RW hack Bill Schneider was given several minutes on CNN to "interpret" the significance of the poll, making almost exactly the same lame points you're making here.

So either you're Bill Schneider, which would really be too bad for you, or you're just echoing Bill Schneider, which would be even worse.

[Sensitivity]

38. MOE 3.5 - What is the point of spreading FALSE INFO. Does not help if this political fight.

7.5 just refers to analysis of Clinton supporter subgroup NOT the Obama/McCain matchup.

"The poll was conducted on Saturday and Sunday, with 1,023 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points for all voters. For registered Democrats, it is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points, and for Democrats who still support Clinton for the party's nomination, it is plus or minus 7.5 percentage points"

[JeffR]

40. False info is exactly the point.

This poll stinks like rotting cod. It's perfectly meaningless and is only intended so that a crappy cable news network can gin up the narrative they decided on months ago.

[JeffR]

50. That MOE is not what they showed on TV

at least when it first aired. Not at all.

[Sensitivity]

51. Please look at the polling reports for your info. It is standard 1000+ sample. Biased??

Maybe, but does not look like quick and dirty work.

[JeffR]

52. CNN's polls throughout the primaries have been notoriously inaccurate

and way out of sync with other polls, though I seem to remember they did some polls in cooperation with ARG that were better, but maybe I'm dreaming. This is only the most recent and very vivid example. And as something that purports to be a news network, I can appreciate that they do their own polls, but it's curious to me that they never compare their own polling to that of other organizations. That, of course, would require that they justify why their numbers are so suspect, I guess, so of course they'll never do it.

[JeffR]

16. oh i am nough so deprest i will 1rst killl myselph then vote for miccain

thanck u four yore timelly hedups senselesstivity

[mwb970]

59. LOL! /nt

[MarjorieG]

22. Does anyone ever remember opposition, negative ads played 24/7 during our nomination and convention.

Must have some effect, although those few, national, couldn't possibly. I do believe we are set up for theft not too much longer.

[Sensitivity]

28. Agreed. The McCain ATTACK USING BIDEN AND CLINTON WORDS could have an effect.

Research has shown that to be the MOST EFFECTIVE form of political smear.

[Thrill]

23. I would rather the Polls stay close. So the Young People and AA voters

don't take turnout for granted

[AndyTiedye]

34. Close Means the Repiggies Will Steal It Again

I don't think I could take another election
where we look like we're winning as the polls close
and the pre-election polls say we're winning
and the exit polls say we're winning

until all the numbers start changing and we "lose".

[Sensitivity]

25. An uptick in the Polls after Obama's pick WAS EXPECTED. See for example Gallup 8/11

August 11, 2008

Candidates Have Gotten Small Poll Bounce After Naming V.P.Average increase of 5 points in candidate support in last three elections.


by Jeffrey M. Jones
PRINCETON, NJ -- With Barack Obama and John McCain poised to announce their vice presidential running mates in the coming weeks, a review of Gallup Poll data finds that, since 1996, presidential candidates have received a slight bump in support in the polls after naming their vice presidential running mates.



Historically, presidential nominations were decided at the party conventions, and as a result, the vice presidential running mates were also selected at the conventions. That made it difficult to disentangle the effect of naming a vice presidential running mate on a candidate's support from the "convention bounce" that presidential candidates have typically received.

The situation has changed in recent elections. With the nominees known long before the conventions take place, presidential candidates have been announcing their vice presidential choices in advance of the conventions. Now that vice presidential announcements are separate events from the conventions, the polls can better isolate any impact the announcement of a running mate has on presidential preferences.

Since 1996, Gallup has conducted polls in the small window of time after the announcement of a presidential candidate's running mate but before the convention has taken place. During this time, there have been four instances of a non-incumbent presidential candidate choosing a running mate -- Bob Dole in 1996, George W. Bush and Al Gore in 2000, and John Kerry in 2004. A comparison of the multi-night polls taken before and after these candidates announced their vice presidential running mates shows an average 5-point increase in the candidate's support


http://www.gallup.com/poll/109381/Candidates-Gotten-Small-Poll-Bounce-After-Naming-VP.aspx

[FrenchieCat]

27. WAS?

is it too late already? Window of opportunity is one day? the day that a lot of folks aren't home. Too bad for Obama, I guess. Looks like he missed it according to CNN. :cry:

[writes3000]

31. "MULTI-NIGHT POLLS" Did you miss that part? nt

[Sensitivity]

33. No. But CNN has a point in quick poll, before the Convention starts and confounds any results

[JeffR]

32. Well, obviously the Obama/Biden ticket is headed for Palookaville

Appreciate the advance notice. You're a sweetheart.

[villager]

49. surely you noticed the phrase "multi night poll" in your own citation, right?

n/t

[NanceGreggs]

26. THIS JUST IN!!!

Poll conducted three minutes ago shows that Obama's support has dropped by 100 PERCENT!!!

People contacted for survey: Two

One voting kinda-sorta for McCain, the other didn't answer phone - however, due to "weighting" of non-answers by non-participants, the logical assumption is that the non-participant was an Obama supporter who changed his/her mind.

Man, you just can't argue with scientific data. Plain as the nose on your knee.

[FrenchieCat]

30. You didn't read it right.

That's a 110 PERCENT drop.

[NanceGreggs]

35. Shows you how much ...

... I understand about polls.

But I guess you're right: According to the latest polls, Obama has now lost support among people who don't even exist.

That's BAD news, huh?

[JeffR]

37. Media asks: WHY CAN'T OBAMA CLOSE THE DEAL WITH FICTIONAL PEOPLE?

McGoo is hugely popular with nonexistent voters.

[NanceGreggs]

46. Well, duh!

Of course he's hugely popular with non-existent voters - that happens to be his BASE!


:eyes:

[flamingdem]

47. I feel better now ... fictional people polls! nt

[dkf]

29. No you are right. Its all Hillary Clinton's fault.

I agree completely.

[Trajan]

39. Is this a Concern thread ?

Should I be ?

[JeffR]

41. Yes

and no.

[burythehatchet]

42. you're not bright

[FrenchieCat]

43. But is sensitive......

that's the story...yeah! Sensitive to overnight insta polls.

[CreekDog]

45. Poll shows Obama doing poorly with concern trolls

wish i had a link. :rofl:

[Hekate]

53. Are the pollsters still using land lines exclusively, while all the youngsters have cell phones?

That alone could skew the results.

Hekate

[pecwae]

54. Cellphones.

[Sensitivity]

63. Has something changed on the CELLPHONE issue in the last month to ex[plain the % drop?

[nc4bo]

55. Some jackass (not sure of name) was on CNN last night explaining how the (ALL) polls are

weighted to take into consideration all cell phone users.

I'm thinking, what a bunch of BS, fresh out the steer. I was on my way to sleep when CNN was having this conversation so didn't pay attention to names or organizations, wish I did.

CNN dude said well landlines-only worked fine for 2000 and 2004 and perhaps you could slide in 2008 with weighting the polls but in 2012, unless you get the cellphone-only households, the poll folks are gonna have big problems.

I'm thinking, hell, I think it's a problem NOW!

Poll shill said not to worry their formula was perfectly accurate (funny when he said that, it confirmed my belief they have NO idea WTF they're talking about). Shill then said cell phone users don't want to be called because it's annoying (?) and it might cost them extra $$ on their bills, blah-blah-blah.

What a hoot! The polls are pure unadulterated, inaccurate BS. heehee, but that's JMHO ;)

[nolabels]

68. Then there are other options too

Many people also have both and just ignore and or let the answering machine pick up the land line because of the thinking if was important and personal they would got contacted by cell phone. The other besides with caller ID you can also see it's just a toll free / tele-marketer # so why bother with it anyway :shrug:

[No Elephants]

56. Don't panic. Donate. Volunteer.

[No Elephants]

57. The local Obama organizations are geared up and ready for the nomination. GooooObama.

[AZSlacker]

60. Thanks for the heads up

I shall commence hand-wringing, garment-rending and teeth-gnashing.

[madrchsod]

61. bullshit poll from cnn

they have to keep the race even because of the ratings...no because of advertising dollars.

[DRoseDARs]

62. "CNN Poll Suggests Trouble for Obama, But Omits Proper Context"

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/cnn-poll-suggests-trouble-for-obama-but.html

[iconicgnom]

66. These are all fluctuations in the "stupid vote".

Consider it. The Paris Hilton negative ads caused a momentary downswing for Obama - these 4 or 5% of total fools saw how the ad compared Obama's supporters to Hilton's fans and reacted like "hey, I'm not that shallow so now I think I'll vote McCain", proving that they are in fact that shallow.

We're not supposed to say that, tho' - because they don't like it. We're supposed to call them "the salt of the earth" and so on, and praise them for having the gut instincts of the american heartland. They're the reason why B* won twice (along with the fixing of the elections).

I never respond to telephone pollsters. What a waste of time.

Biggest problems for Obama:
1. The Dems did too little, if anything, to make the voting system more transparent and secure. In fact, to the contrary the Dem power brokers, the ones who could initiate things, appeared totally oblivious.
2. Obama must maintain the excitement and momentum to bring new voters on stream. And to re-enlist those voters who've given up on a system that has betrayed them every time. US has a very low voter turnout. So low, in fact, that if there were a similar turnout in an "enemy" country the MSM would universally declare that it was a vote of non-confidence in the system, proving that the people have demonstrated their disbelief in the faux democracy. The low turnout isn't a sign of good health for US democracy, but it does show that there's ground to be gained for a progressive populist movement.

[jillan]

67. That's because of Hillary supporters that are mad that Hillary wasn't chosen.

The numbers of Hillary supporters that will vote for McCain went up.

[TheKentuckian]

69. It's pretty obvious what happened

if the numbers are accurate, Obama got a little lift and many of the sour grapes posse got off the fence and went to their guy.

Accounting for 3rd parties this would leave very little to get. We'll know about 1-3% after the convention, more than likely. We need to peel the middle and depress their vote.
Maybe Hillary and Bill can lure a few back but I think most are fired up to protest or whatever and are in effect McCain's base or at least the most reliable segment of it.

I don't know these folks but if they can be brought back to the light do it. The other segment is probably old and/or rural people that have been compromised by stupid mailers/emails and are worried about Muslim/Anti-Christ possibilities. Most of these folks have a pretty high regard for Joe Biden, hopefully he'll reassure them.

Everyone must show to the polls!!!

[Stop Cornyn]

70. I think McCain's "Biden on Obama and Biden on McCain" ad was the best of any candidate this season

so I'm not too surprised.

Am I the only one who thinks this ad stings?

http://video.google.com/?hl=en&tab=wv

[Sensitivity]

71. Using the other "Party's" own words against them has proved the most insidious and effective SMEAR

and propaganda strategy. The message tends to be believed even if delivered with little fanfare.

That is the real problem with derogatory statements being made in a primary. It is now compounded by the fact that so many prominent Dems have praised McCain in the past.

[Stop Cornyn]

77. I think it's a potential game changer. I think we had a safety cushion to win big. Now I'm just

praying for a win.

[clear eye]

79. Wrong link

[Stop Cornyn]

83. Sorry. Here's the correct link (it was too late to edit my post to fix the link)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDVUPqoowf8

[OllieLotte]

86. You are not.

I am certain that someone like Romney also said rough things about McCain, which will be brought up if he is chosen to be VP. Anyone who dismissed the ad is fooling themselves...it was effective. But it's only one ad and not a gamechanger.

[book_worm]

72. let's see where the polls are after the convention before we panic.

[book_worm]

73. and P.S. once again we can thank Clinton supporters because according to this poll

there are 30% of them still not willing to get behind Obama.

[clear eye]

74. The Wording of the Poll is Important

It might have been a "push poll". The media's bread and butter is close races. Another poll suggesting Obama has it sewn up would lower their ratings.

[clear eye]

75. For instance, they might have said

something like, "Now that Obama has nominated old-line Democrat Sen. Joe Biden for VP, do you plan to vote for Obama/Biden?" Quinnipiac I think ran the poll. They don't have the greatest track record.

[Arugula Latte]

76. Just wondering, Sensitivity. Why don't you have a profile?

You're a 1,000+ poster, after all.

[Sensitivity]

78. Not interested in self-promotion on DU, though this is a great board for contributing. Thanks.

[Erin Elizabeth]

80. Presidential polls in August are stupid.

[Terri S]

81. You might want to read this

Your 'concern' is noted.

Now how about some analysis of those polls here

[optimisticin08]

82. Biden was the choice days ago

I didnt expect any bounce. Biden is a solid guy but i dont think he helps our chances at all.

[Sensitivity]

85. The lack of the usual V.P. BOUNCE from te Biden pick is serious, esp. if McCain gets one

with his V.P. pick. We don't want to end up facing difficult climb out of a hole after the McCain V.P and RNC convention.

I feel the Obama campaign has to find a way to boost Biden's image and excitement about the pick during the convention

[nam78_two]

87. Of course he would have gotten that bounce if he had picked Hagel right?

:sarcasm:

I remember all those threads from the OP about how Hagel should be the VP :eyes:.

[demo dutch]

88. Sorry to say not surprised, Time to get dirty ... enough with the kumbaya!

Most of my co-workers thought most of first night of convention was boring.