Swing State Chart, 9/29: Obama Close To Bill Clinton Win #s

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Sep 29, 2008 at 20:30


Here is the latest swing state chart, using only polls with a majority of interviews conducted since September 22nd (except for states that didn't have at least two polls conducted in that time frame, in which case I used the two polls with the most recent mid-point dates for their interviews. Each polling firm is only allowed one survey per average):

Swing State Overview (270 to win, 269 to tie)
(Swing States are defined as states closer than 5.0%. Before you ask, if a state isn't listed, it isn't that close right now.)
State EV's Obama % McCain % Margin # Polls Obama Total
Obama Base 247 247
Colorado 9 48.8% 44.3% +4.5% 4 256
Maine-AL 2 49.5% 45.0% +4.5% 2 258
North Carolina 15 48.0% 46.0% +2.0% 2 273
Minnesota 10 47.5% 46.0% +1.5% 2 283
Virginia 13 48.3% 47.0% +1.3% 4 296
Maine-01 1 -- -- +1.3% 0 297
New Hampshire 4 46.8% 45.8% +1.0% 4 301
Nevada 5 46.0% 45.5% +0.5% 2 306
Ohio 20 46.5% 47.0% -0.5% 2 326
Florida 27 46.5% 47.3% -0.8% 4 353
Missouri 11 46.0% 47.5% -1.5% 2 364
Indiana 11 45.0% 48.0% -3.0% 2 375
McCain Base 163 163

Quick summary: Pennsylvania moves off the swing state chart, and Obama gains in virtually all remaining states.

In 1992, Bill Clinton scored 370 electoral votes. In 1996, he pulled in 379. Right now, Obama is only 1.5% away from scoring 364, meaning that he is now very close to Bill Clinton's margins of victory. Obama's national lead of 4.7% is also much closer to Bill Clinton's victories (which averaged +7.0%) than to Gore and Kerry's performances (which averaged -1.0%).

Obama has frequently been compared to Dukakis, Gore and Kerry during this election, but I haven't heard many comparisons to Bill Clinton. Current polling indicates, however, that Bill Clinton is exactly the Democratic nominee with whom Barack Obama should most regularly be compared.

Chris Bowers :: Swing State Chart, 9/29: Obama Close To Bill Clinton Win #s

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Swing State Chart, 9/29: Obama Close To Bill Clinton Win #s | 47 comments
I doubt Bill Clinton will allow Obama (4.00 / 1)
to get 370 electoral votes
I don't see how Obama loses this (0.00 / 0)
Not to bring out the Complacency Cops or anything but Obama is going to win and he's going to win big.

His margin is still growing; he has hidden, time-delayed advantages (GOTV, registration, cellphones, enthusiasm); there are fewer game-changing events left; time is running out; Palin has jumped the cultural shark; the economy is tanking; independent and swing voters are getting more comfortable with Obama; we're roughly financially even with them; we're roughly even with them in terms of last-minute 527 capabilities; and McCain is behaving like he's running for President of the Keystone Kops.  

complacency indeed (0.00 / 0)
many may decide not to vote for Obama at the last minute because of his race (believe it or not). there is only one black in the us senate (obama) and blacks are underrepresented in the us house. i wonder why. it isn't because there aren't enough qualified blacks. it's because our nation is racist and dumb. our nation elected bush twice. it will truly be a miracle if Obama wins.  
[ Parent ]
There's very little evidence for the Bradley effect (0.00 / 0)
This argument was settled months ago and it's time to put it away.
[ Parent ]
at your own risk (0.00 / 0)
how can the bradley effect argument be settled? we haven't had the election yet.  
[ Parent ]
Other races and the primaries (0.00 / 0)
There have been studies examining the Bradley effect in the past and in the primaries and it doesn't hold. The Bradley effect appears to have been real up until the last 10-15 years or so. Nate Silver at 538 has examined this pretty extensively. Racism in this day and age appears to be built into the polls.

And your blanket statement that Americans won't elect a black candidate just seems so pre-Iowa.

[ Parent ]
not realistic (4.00 / 1)
i'm not saying obama is going to lose. i'm saying he is likely to win by smaller margins than many obama supporters wearing rose-colored glasses think he is. if you think obama is going to win by margins represented at 538.com, you are naive. a site with a more established track record can be found here: http://www.electionprojection....

and you and others are wrong to think the bradley effect is a non-factor until the results come in. if obama gets 278 or higher then i am wrong and will be glad to admit as much. but your unrealistic certainty is naive.

do i believe obama can win in a landslide? absolutely, but all the stars and planets have to be in place and everything between now and nov 4 has to be just about perfect. not likely.  

[ Parent ]
clean it up (0.00 / 0)
First, you wrote:

it will truly be a miracle if Obama wins.

Less than an hour later, you wrote:

i'm not saying obama is going to lose. i'm saying he is likely to win by smaller margins than many obama supporters wearing rose-colored glasses think he is.

Get your act together, man.

The truth about Saxby Chambliss
[ Parent ]
it never was dirty (0.00 / 0)
nstrauss,

my initial unsolicited post below states my prediction that obama will win by a narrow margin 273-265 which i believe will truly be a miracle.

why don't you get all the facts together before you get on your high horse.

many here are predicting an obama landslide. i believe obama will win but only by 8 electoral votes (a miracle).

exactly where is the contradiction?

[ Parent ]
contradiction (0.00 / 0)
Then why did you write that "it will truly be a miracle if Obama wins?"

The truth about Saxby Chambliss
[ Parent ]
because (0.00 / 0)
the definition for miracle according to webster is "an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment." in my opinion it would be extremely outstanding or unusual if obama won the election considering that he's a minority and we still have formidable racism in the US.

you falsely deduced that i thought obama was going to lose because i said it would be a miracle. i still think obama will win, albeit by very narrow margins, which is a miracle in my opinion.

this is the 21st century and many other nations have already elected minorities to the highest levels of government. why hasn't the US, the beacon of freedom where "all men are created equal", accomplished the same? imo, because many of our voters are still ignorant, biased or downright racist. yes, it truly will be a miracle...

[ Parent ]
Don't underestimate the danger (4.00 / 5)
posed by the Jeremiah Wright and/or Bill Ayers commercials that will soon begin running. I'm not saying they are going to sink Obama, but it's possible that he will be severely damaged. Wright was toxic enough that Obama had to limp to the nomination, and that was in a Democratic primary. Indy voters are likely to react more negatively.

It all depends on how events play out, of course. Right now, the campaign is being dictated by things outside of both candidates' control. And it is getting late. But there are still a handful of cards for McCain to play, including the race card, which has been the most effective way to beat Obama, historically.

[ Parent ]
very real possibility (0.00 / 0)
i thought mccain or the republicans might air rev wright ads following the first debate, but i suspect they will wait now that the economy is in the tank. playing the race card just after the dow sank 777 points might very well bakcfire. however, they may introduce the ads after the last debate on october 15. but it might be too late at that point to save mccain.
[ Parent ]
Of course they'll run them but (0.00 / 0)
if that's all they got, I'm not worried. Wright is old news. People are bored with this one. Obama disowned him months ago and hasn't looked back.

As I've said before, unless they've got photos of him naked doing lines in a hottub at a Black Panther party, his 'sordid past' isn't gonna work. And, guess what, if there were such photos, we would have seen them by now. These guys aren't clever or safe enough to keep that kind of gunpowder dry for that long.

[ Parent ]
??? (0.00 / 0)
you think too highly of a nation that elected bush/cheney twice. why is mccain even polling above 40%? have you seen the state of our nation recently (excluding the bailout and the stock market sinking)? mccain voted with a very unpopular president over 90% of the time, we have had a stagnant economy for the middle class for many years, home foreclosures out the ass, gas hovering around 4$, war in iraq costing $10 billion a month, highest unemployment in 5 years, 47 million uninsured, 4000+ dead US soldiers in iraq, outsourcing of jobs, etc. etc. btw, it's not a rhetorical question. please tell me why mccain is even polling above 40%?
are you sure racism isn't involved? are you sure every voter has seen the wright tapes? are you sure there are no more skeletons in the closet?

[ Parent ]
Oh, I never said racism isn't involved (0.00 / 0)
I've said it's built into the polls and results thus far. The main thing we've learned about racism is that it's a function of geography. Folks in the Midwest, heartland and Mountain West had no problem voting for a black man. Some folks in the Rust Belt and Appalachia did (and of course the Deep South). But it was accurately reflected in the polls.

Obama is winning by about 7% in the tracking polls, which tend to skew toward McCain. That is whoopass landslide territory. Sure, he could be ahead by a lot more but I'll take just a regular old whoopass landslide rather than a record breaking one.

We'll know in 35 days...

[ Parent ]
im still waiting... (0.00 / 0)
for a rational explanation to perfectly reasonable question.
[ Parent ]
Yeah. (4.00 / 1)
   But the Reverend Wright scandal was covered ad nauseam for all of the spring, so I doubt it has the power to move voters who weren't moved by it in the spring.  The Ayers saga is just so phony that I don't think many will care.

John McCain lets lobbyists shape his economic policy
[ Parent ]
I believe the term shall heretofore be known as... (4.00 / 1)
...jumping the moose.  
[ Parent ]
Good one! (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Your welcome everybody for North Carolina (4.00 / 1)
:)
That was you??? (4.00 / 1)
Great work!
[ Parent ]
You bet! (4.00 / 2)
Oh and the other 10,000 volunteers, hundreds of staff, and millions of dollars of advertising. Them to I'd say.  
[ Parent ]
my prediction 273 Obama 265 McCain (0.00 / 0)
Obama wins a close one: 273-265
He wins 2004 Kerry states + Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico (and maybe Nevada)

I just don't see Obama taking Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, or Ohio.

And if Obama happens to lose Pennsylvania or Michigan, we are doomed.    

this comment is so last month. nt. (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
i'm willing to bet money... (0.00 / 0)
but i'll be glad to eat my words and pay out if i'm wrong. i just don't trust the american voters or our voting machines.
[ Parent ]
Out of curiosity (0.00 / 0)
Obama's national lead of 4.7% is also much closer to Bill Clinton's victories (which averaged +7.0%) than to Gore and Kerry's performances (which averaged -1.0%).

How's it compare to Reagan's polling in 1980?

quick question: (0.00 / 0)
historically, do presidential races tend to stay pretty stable during the last 5 weeks, or are big fluctuations common?
Bill Clinton compared Obama to Bill Clinton (0.00 / 0)
at his convention speech.
Unfortunately... (0.00 / 0)
...it's starting to seem that Obama is pretty close to President Triangulation in political philosophy as well.
[ Parent ]
Mondale (0.00 / 0)
I've seen Obama compared to every nominee in my lifetime (and many before) except Mondale.  Let's hope there's no reason to.  


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
Mondale was polling horribly throughout almost all of the campaign (0.00 / 0)
even if Obama manages to lose badly, Dukakis would be the more logical comparison.
[ Parent ]
And let's be honest (0.00 / 0)
The fundamentals on this election couldn't be more different than those of 1984.
[ Parent ]
come on.. (4.00 / 1)
Come on guys, I know we are leading right now but let's not forget how quickly things can change. Wasn't it just 2 or 3 weeks ago that we were all depressed that Palin may have saved McCain? We still have 5 weeks left in this thing. That is a long, long time. Things can change on a dime. It's very easy and very tempting to see the results out there and sit back and relax. I think it's easy because it feels good. But again, and I can't say it enough, things can change very quickly.  
Nobody's sitting back and relaxing (0.00 / 0)
I am a firm believer that Obama's going to win big; I am also going canvassing this weekend and will be stopping by the local Obama office this week.

But the chances of things changing on a dime, while real, are becoming increasingly slimmer as the election approaches and 'dime-changing' events become fewer.

[ Parent ]
good (4.00 / 1)
That's great you are canvassing. I'm gonna be doing it for the first time this weekend with my family in Missouri. But just to add some emphasis to my point, 5 weeks ago none of us even knew who Sarah Palin was.  
[ Parent ]
We did our 100k door-knocks for Obama this weekend (4.00 / 3)
in NC. Response (at least from what I gathered) was very positive. Things are definitely much better down here compared to when I was going out about 2 weeks ago. The mood has shifted dramatically.
[ Parent ]
Cool (4.00 / 1)
It's hard to be objective about this sort of thing but it sure feels like to me we've got a big relative activism edge this cycle. It helps that I'm in Hampton Roads, VA, which is a critical swing area in a critical swing state but there is a palpable pro-Obama air blanketing this area. I live in a subdivision filled with Naval officers and see next to nothing for McCain, the ex-Navy pilot war hero.
[ Parent ]
nevada (4.00 / 2)
I felt the same thing when I traveled to North Las Vegas last weekend. The area had a very Republican feel to it (strip malls and tract homes), but Obama support was loud and proud and the organizers couldn't have been more energetic.

If anyone is feeling despondent about the election, go volunteer. I guarantee you'll come out of it feeling better about our chances.

[ Parent ]
Canvassing in PA (0.00 / 0)
My wife and I start our canvassing in Joe Sestak's district tonight. We've got some Obama blocks to do and some Sestak blocks, too.

I'm really glad to see participation by folks in so many swing states. I bet my nephew (he's conservative and lives in OH) a pizza that BHO would win PA. I wish I were as sure about Ohio.

Keep up the good work!

Karl in Drexel Hill, PA

[ Parent ]
that was then (0.00 / 0)
McCain was enjoying his convention bump and Palin was the flavor of the month. Now he's lost a debate on his supposed best issue and she's a national joke who lied about every qualification she presented. Their approval ratings are down, and for her at least I think it's a one-way trip.
[ Parent ]
Minnesota (0.00 / 0)
Why has Minnesota been so close lately? It seems out of whack.

The truth about Saxby Chambliss
Because no polls have been done there lately. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
worried? (0.00 / 0)
kerry and gore won minnesota by very small margins. we certainly shouldn't take minnesota for granted.
[ Parent ]
Agree with you here (0.00 / 0)
This map could end up looking pretty weird after all. (In my landslide theory Obama holds these states but I think it will be closer than some other places.)
[ Parent ]
Shouldn't McCain be compared with Dole (0.00 / 0)
as well?

THere are quite a few similarities with those campaigns... although McCain is almost spectacular in the frequency and seriousness of campaign gaffes. It's almost as if he's trying to say, "let's see how horrible of a campaign I can run, and maybe Diebold will still deliver me a victory".

Clinton not really a good comparison. (0.00 / 0)
Clinton got those margins in no small part because of H. Ross Perot.  In both 1992 and 1996, Perot spent millions on advertising, and, particularly in '92, siphoned millions of votes from both Bush 41 and Clinton.  If I recall the exit polling, Perot pulled more support from Bush than from Clinton, by a significant though not overwhelming margin.  My point being, that I'm not sure there is a good comparison to any contemporary Democratic candidate; but to the extent there is, I would say that you have to distinguish between Clinton's first and second terms.  Obama would be more closely comparable to Clinton's second election than his first; Clinton faced a weaker candidate, and the third party candidate got far fewer votes.

The presence of a substantial third-party vote made Clinton weaker in his first term.  Put it this way:  If Obama gets 370 EV's or more, and wins with 52% or more of the vote, that gives him far more of a mandate than Clinton had when he entered office in '92, because he will have won both a decisive Electoral College victory as well as a decisive victory in the popular vote; Clinton was elected with only a plurality in both elections, but with nearly 50% of the popular vote in '96.  

What will be really interesting to see is if Obama's eventual margin of victory is close to Ronald Reagan's in 1980; I doubt that it will be that much of a blowout, but with McCain acting as erratically as he is, and with the economic crisis dominating the political dialogue over the next 5/6 weeks, it seems a real possibility.  

Swing State Chart, 9/29: Obama Close To Bill Clinton Win #s | 47 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox