Obama, Romney Gaining In California

by: Chris Bowers

Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 21:40

Given results in New Hampshire and South Carolina, many people have grown wisely skeptical of primary polling results this year. They would be wise to do so, since primaries are elections with highly variable turnouts, and since there are such widely varying candidate preferences among different Democratic demographics this season. If a poll either over samples or under samples a particular demographic, it can end up being quite far away from the reality on the ground. Further, given that a large percentage of the primary electorate just tuned in over the last few weeks, support remains soft and voters can change direction in a hurry. In other words, view all primary polls with caution, especially when they so wildly contradict each other as they current do in California.

Right now, there are recently conducted California polls showing results anywhere from Clinton ahead by nine, to Obama ahead by six. The six-poll average in California shows Clinton ahead 41.8% to 40.0%, and probably further ahead than that in early voting (although many polls include early voters in their totals). This messy situation is replicated on the Republican side, with McCain now only leading Romney by a margin of 35.5% to 33.0% in the six-poll average.

For either Obama or Romney to win California would be stunning, but right now both seem possible. While I feel as though the numbers require a suspension of disbelief, check out the Republican and Democratic polling averages for yourself, along with the new Zogby poll . In fact, Obama's position actually improves if you remove the California poll from ARG. Numbers like these don't make much sense, but I suspect we are in for a long tonight on Tuesday.

Chris Bowers :: Obama, Romney Gaining In California

Tags: President 2008, Polls, California, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Obama, Romney Gaining In California | 10 comments

Long Day on Weds Too (0.00 / 0)

Given the number of absentee ballots potentially in play we may not know what happens in Cali into Weds...

by: Wanderer @ Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 21:07:10 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Can we (0.00 / 0)

all just remove American Research Group's polls from the equation altogether? They have it at Obama 51, Clinton 40 in Illinois, for christ's sakes. They've had a horrid track record for most of this primary season, and their polling seems to favor Clinton far more than any other polling firm.

by: JesusSinfulHands @ Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 21:30:36 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Field poll is god in California (0.00 / 0)

and it shows a 2-point campaign.

I'd guess that the most important factor is what happens on Hispanic radio tomorrow and Tuesday. If Piolin and el Cucuy make a play in either direction, that would matter a lot.

The coverage of the Shriver endorsement might also matter, depending on how it goes.

I'd be shocked if any other big endorsements came through tomorrow, and given that neither Hillary nor Barack nor, if he knows what's good for him, Bill is going to say or do anything significant, it's just ground game and execution from here through Tuesday.

Lots of undecideds still -- it'd be nice if something happened to push them towards Barack. I don't see what it'd be though. Monday is probably too late for Gore Edwards Carter Richardson to make a move. If Schwarzenegger says some really nice things about Barack tomorrow, and doesn't botch the execution, that could maybe matter. Feingold hasn't endorsed either, though I doubt he will on Monday or Tuesday.

by: texas dem @ Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 23:40:01 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

We need to know which polls include early voting (0.00 / 0)

and how they correct for them. This, along with undecideds, seems to be the key unknown.

If they call, do they ask if you have already voted? Or do they just ask who you support? If the latter, it seems like some sup-group of people might say they support candidate A (truthfully, because they do now) even though the voted for candidate B already. This would seem to overestimate Obama. If the former, do they keep those who say they already voted in the sample? If not, this again overestimates Obama. If they do keep them in, are those who already voted more or less likely to continue with the entire poll then those who have not already voted? All these issues have not been addressed.

by: the new @ Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 00:01:58 AM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Why keep saying absentee goes to Clinton?? Field says tie... (0.00 / 0)

Chris, not sure why you keep saying that Clinton is ahead?

by: fredhampton1 @ Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 01:47:42 AM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I guess it is an assumption (0.00 / 0)

When early voting began, Clinton was well ahead in California.

by: Chris Bowers @ Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 03:32:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Early voting is part of field (0.00 / 0)

And if Obama has such good field in CA, why not with early voting? The bigger wild card is the early Edwards voters, of whom I know of more than a few.

The Field poll does include early voters, asking "who would you vote for, oir, if you have already voted, who did you vote for?" They understand early voting.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

by: Mimikatz @ Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 06:26:02 AM CST

[ Parent ]