Presidential Forecast, 10/28: 7 days left (2:00 p.m. update)

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:00


Electoral College: Obama 338, McCain 157 Toss-up 43 (270 to win, 269 to tie)
National popular vote: Obama 50.7%--43.7% McCain


(Dark Blue (291): Obama +6.0% or more
Lean Blue (47): Obama +2.3%-+5.9%
White / Toss-up (43): Obama +2.2% to McCain +2.2%
Lean Red (26): McCain +2.3%-+5.9%
Dark Red (131): McCain +6.0% or more
)

Targeting and Swing State Chart
States not shown here are further in either direction
State EV's Obama % McCain % Margin Polls Obama EVs
Obama Lock 217 217
Iowa 7 52.0% 41.7% +10.3% 3 224
New Mexico 5 53.5% 43.5% +10.0% 2* 229
Pennsylvania 21 51.4% 41.6% +9.8% 5 250
New Hampshire 4 51.3% 42.3% +9.0% 4 254
Wisconsin 10 51.0% 42.0% +9.0% 3 264
Colorado 9 51.7% 43.7% +8.0% 3 273
Virginia 13 51.0% 43.9% +7.1% 7 286
Nevada 5 49.0% 42.0% +7.0% 2 291
Ohio 20 49.3% 44.8% +4.5% 6 311
Florida 27 48.0% 45.6% +2.4% 8 338
North Carolina 15 48.4% 47.2% +1.2% 5 353
North Dakota 3 44.5% 43.0% +1.5% 2* 356
Missouri 11 47.4% 46.8% +0.6% 5 367
Montana 3 44.0% 44.0% Even 2* 370
Indiana 11 47.0% 47.3% -0.3% 3 381
Georgia 15 45.5% 49.5% -4.0% 4 396
Nebraska-02 1 44.0% 48.0% -4.0% 1* 397
Arizona 10 43.0% 47.5% -4.5% 2 407
West Virginia 5 42.3% 49.3% -7.0% 3 412
South Dakota 3 41.0% 49.0% -9.0% 2* 415
Lock McCain 123 538
* = Poll or polls more than one week old

I am going to try something different today. This is what the polling picture looks like at 2:00 a.m. eastern, before any of today's polls come out. I will continue to update it during the day, as new polls come out. We'll see how this goes.

Analysis and methodology in the extended entry.

Update (12:30 p.m.): New Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania polls added.

Update 2 (2 p.m.): New Colorado, Indiana, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin polls added.

Chris Bowers :: Presidential Forecast, 10/28: 7 days left (2:00 p.m. update)
Methodology
The methodology for the forecast is simple and straightforward.
  1. For each state, all polls with the entirety of their interviews conducted within the last 8 days from publication of the forecast are included in the averages. My rationale for this methodology is based on research I conducted back in June, which you can read here. There are some necessary exceptions to this rule.
  2. Every state has at least two polls. In the event that less than two polls were taken within the past week, the two most recent polls are used. (Note: "Most recent" is determined by the mid-point in the dates of the polls. For example, a poll taken from 9/15-9/17 has a mid-pint of 9/16. In the event that more than one poll shares the most recent mid-point (within 0.5), all polls with that mid-point are included in the average.)
  3. The second exception comes with polling firms that have conducted more than one poll in a state over the last 8 days. Every polling firm only has one poll per average.
  4. All telephone polls are included with equal weight. However, no Internet polls are used.
Analysis
A lot of poll watchers, myself included, tend to obsess over the daily fluctuations in the national tracking polls. The rationale for doing so is, on its surface understandable: tracking the day to day movement in the campaign. However, almost every single day, there are actually more state polls than national polls. Since we poll obsessives all have a pretty good idea of the partisan leanings of a given state relative to the nation as a whole, wouldn't it stand to reason that state polls are actually a better measurement of where the campaign stands?

My presidential forecast uses only state polls. According to my forecast, Obama first reached 270+ entirely among solid states back on October 9th. Since that time, with the exception of October 24th, Obama has passed 270 electoral votes entirely in states where he has led by 7.0% or more. In other words, according to state polling, with the exception of October 24th, Obama's national lead has not dropped below 7.0% since October 9th.

This is an extremely valuable metric, because the state polling picture utilizes far more polls than even the eight-poll tracker average. For example, the list of state polls above includes 55 polls that were conducted entirely within the past week, and all of the state polls released today will be added to it. That far exceeds the number of polls and number of interviews used in any national poll. This large number of polls has put Obama's lead between 7.0% and 8.0% for 17 of the last 19 days (one day was at 8.3% and one was at 6.0%), indicating a rather remarkable amount of stability in the campaign.

Maybe the trackers and the state polls today will show some sort of continued tightening, but it is going to take a lot of polls to convince me the campaign is closer than 7.0% right now. One Rasmussen or Zogby national poll is nothing compared to the six swing state polls each firm released within the past 36 hours. Six polls are more than one, just as fifty-five state polls are more than eight trackers. Obama's lead just isn't wavering at all in the swing states, as he passed 270 in states where he leads by 7.1% or more yet again. When that shrinks, then I will agree the campaign is tightening.


Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
According to Mark Penn, an Obama landslide is a mandate (4.00 / 2)
to repeat Clinton's economic policies.


The election seems to be heading toward a reaffirmation of moderate Democratic economic policies...These new moderate voters are better-educated, more in tune with the information age and far removed from the traditional labor base of the Democratic Party. They are more open to trade and sensitive to tax increases...They reject government handouts but believe that people must be empowered to make the most of their own talents...In the polls, Americans favor greater taxes on the wealthy, but in practice, it has backfired on every previous administration as the voters ask for greater fiscal responsibility but resist new taxes.

I guess we can add Mark Penn to the list of establishment figures trying to frame the meaning of the election before it happens.  Apparently it doesn't matter that Obama is winning handily because he has campaigned on fair trade, progressive taxation, and government taking a larger role in the economy.  What people really want, is more Clintonomics.

"Never separate the life you live from the words you speak" -Paul Wellstone


I forgot the link (0.00 / 0)
http://www.politico.com/news/s...

"Never separate the life you live from the words you speak" -Paul Wellstone

[ Parent ]
another tragedy of the financial crisis (0.00 / 0)
now there's not enough money in the world to make Mark Penn go away

[ Parent ]
I think if you made a list of Democrats who don't speak for Obama (4.00 / 4)
Mark Penn would be the top of the list.  

It's a good catch.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.


[ Parent ]
this is a complete disaster (0.00 / 0)
for John McCain

What about the old canard about state polls lagging (0.00 / 0)
Do people say that state polls lag simply because, at least earlier in the cycle, they were being published less often? Or is there some other factor which suggests that today's national tracking polls will be reflected in tomorrow's state polls?

These polls are all new (0.00 / 0)
These polls were all conduced from OCtober 20th through yesterday. Not really much of a lag anymore. State polls are showing Obama up +7.1%, which is almost the same as the national polls showing him up 7.6%. So, not only is there no lag, there is no real difference between them right now.

[ Parent ]
yeah -- and at this point if there is a difference between state and (0.00 / 0)
national polls, we would do well to assume this has to do with the relative levels of attention swing states are getting by the campaign vis-a-vis non-swing states.  

thus, if obama is doing better in the state polls than in the national polls, we should assume it is because he is flooding the zone in those areas.  


[ Parent ]
Mark Penn (4.00 / 1)
Please make Mark Penn go away!  He ruined the Hillary Clinton campaign, and now he wants to revive the failed economic and fiscal policies of Bill Clinton.  Please, please, just disappear.

P.S.  Back under Eisenhower the top U.S. income tax rate was 90%.  If the 50's could do it so can we.  


90% (4.00 / 2)
The wealthy are already good at avoiding taxes, and they only have to pay a top rate of 33%. If you tried for a truly confiscatory rate like 90% you wouldn't collect much more in taxes, but you would create a lot of economic distortion as rich people made weird investments that somehow reduced their tax burden. Also, it would be a boon for the Cayman Islands.

I do think, though, it would make sense to add a tax bracket above the "millionaire bracket," which under Clinton was 39% for income over $1 million (and which Obama wants to restore). How about 45% or 50% on income over $10 million? You'd probably see some capital flight at that level, but I doubt it would be too bad.

Stepped up enforcement on wealthy taxpayers would probably pay off nearly as well as increasing their rates, too. The Bush administration has gutted the IRS enforcement operation, especially the agents who were charged with going after the biggest earners.


[ Parent ]
Looking at money movement with the eyes of an eagle. (4.00 / 1)
Stepped up enforcement on wealthy taxpayers would probably pay off nearly as well as increasing their rates, too. The Bush administration has gutted the IRS enforcement operation, especially the agents who were charged with going after the biggest earners.

This is the money shot. We need real audits, investigators and forensic accountants to find out not just what is going on now, but what happened to get us where we are now.

The other 'fix' is a tax on speculation. A tiny tiny tax of say .05% or .1 % on money movement, would slow down purely speculative money flipping market distorting actions. Flipping money in and out of market vehicles could have it taxed three or four times a day, but serious investments, long term actions intending to create tangible goods or actions, would feel almost nothing.

Coordination across markets, a new Breton Woods, whose aim it is to protect real investment, produce actual goods and accumulate funds for capital works would actually be helped, as money brokers looked for no taxed placements.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


[ Parent ]
Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search