Gallup Tracking Poll Thread [Obama vs McCain]

[J. J.]

J.J.'s first rule is stupid.

he has a God-complex.  it can be fun to watch him spew his garbage if you take the right attitude about it.

Meh. He has a manner that eliminates all amusement value from it, unlike AuH2O for example for those who remember him.

I don't really care if you are amused or not; I do care if the rule works.  So far, it has.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

J.J.'s first rule is stupid.

he has a God-complex.  it can be fun to watch him spew his garbage if you take the right attitude about it.

Meh. He has a manner that eliminates all amusement value from it, unlike AuH2O for example for those who remember him.

I don't really care if you are amused or not; I do care if the rule works.  So far, it has.

Yes it certainly worked for Obama against your Hillary hackery (and constant insistence Hillary was going to do better than the polls.)

[J. J.]

J.J.'s first rule is stupid.

he has a God-complex.  it can be fun to watch him spew his garbage if you take the right attitude about it.

Meh. He has a manner that eliminates all amusement value from it, unlike AuH2O for example for those who remember him.

I don't really care if you are amused or not; I do care if the rule works.  So far, it has.

Yes it certainly worked for Obama against your Hillary hackery (and constant insistence Hillary was going to do better than the polls.)

It worked 4 years ago.  It worked 2 years ago. It looks like it's working this year.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

J.J.'s first rule is stupid.

he has a God-complex.  it can be fun to watch him spew his garbage if you take the right attitude about it.

Meh. He has a manner that eliminates all amusement value from it, unlike AuH2O for example for those who remember him.

I don't really care if you are amused or not; I do care if the rule works.  So far, it has.

Yes it certainly worked for Obama against your Hillary hackery (and constant insistence Hillary was going to do better than the polls.)

It worked 4 years ago.  It worked 2 years ago. It looks like it's working this year.

Yes it did because Hillary didn't win despite your prediction she was underpolling every single time.

[J. J.]

J.J.'s first rule is stupid.

he has a God-complex.  it can be fun to watch him spew his garbage if you take the right attitude about it.

Meh. He has a manner that eliminates all amusement value from it, unlike AuH2O for example for those who remember him.

I don't really care if you are amused or not; I do care if the rule works.  So far, it has.

Yes it certainly worked for Obama against your Hillary hackery (and constant insistence Hillary was going to do better than the polls.)

It worked 4 years ago.  It worked 2 years ago. It looks like it's working this year.

Yes it did because Hillary didn't win despite your prediction she was underpolling every single time.

Neither rule was violate, though Hilary came close at one point.

[elcorazon]

Not good news for Obama.  It should have closed.

He's only down by 2 points.

It really doesn't matter.

It makes no sense to microanalyze day by day tracking poll trends and then deem such gains or losses as "bad news" for a candidate. Especially when the race is this close.

There should have been a weekend bounce for Obama.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:  "If a candidate that say something like 'I don't look at the polls,' or 'The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,' that candidate will lose."

You are flirting dangerously close to violating that one.
 

Go Yankees is Obama!!! Wow.  I had no idea.

[J. J.]

Not good news for Obama.  It should have closed.

He's only down by 2 points.

It really doesn't matter.

It makes no sense to microanalyze day by day tracking poll trends and then deem such gains or losses as "bad news" for a candidate. Especially when the race is this close.

There should have been a weekend bounce for Obama.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:  "If a candidate that say something like 'I don't look at the polls,' or 'The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,' that candidate will lose."

You are flirting dangerously close to violating that one.
 

Go Yankees is Obama!!! Wow.  I had no idea.

Same holds true for the supports.  It's gotten close a few times.

[Brittain33]

Tuesday -  September 16, 2008:

McCain  - 47% (nc)
Obama  - 46% (+1)

[elcorazon]

Not good news for Obama.  It should have closed.

He's only down by 2 points.

It really doesn't matter.

It makes no sense to microanalyze day by day tracking poll trends and then deem such gains or losses as "bad news" for a candidate. Especially when the race is this close.

There should have been a weekend bounce for Obama.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:  "If a candidate that say something like 'I don't look at the polls,' or 'The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,' that candidate will lose."

You are flirting dangerously close to violating that one.
 

Go Yankees is Obama!!! Wow.  I had no idea.

Same holds true for the supports.  It's gotten close a few times.

If the rule applies across the board to all supporters, then it really is a dumb rule... if only for the fact that it gets violated ALL THE TIME by nearly every campaign at some point.

If you limit it to official parts of the campaign itself, then at least it COULD  be relevant.

[Aizen]

So Obama gained one in Rasmussen and Gallup... my question is... how pro-Obama were today's samples in each tracking poll? +1 Obama?

[Aizen]

Also, this is not good for McCain. McCain should be up by more.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Tuesday -  September 16, 2008:

McCain  - 47% (nc)
Obama  - 46% (+1)

Damn it's the end of Obama!

[Sam Spade]

Has to do with the economy, probably.

[Brittain33]

So Obama gained one in Rasmussen and Gallup... my question is... how pro-Obama were today's samples in each tracking poll? +1 Obama?

I was wondering that myself since we seem to have lost the thread of estimates. Reading back through this thread, someone said that Friday's sample, which dropped off, must have been reasonably good for McCain--like M +4. Which means McCain could have been polling consistently +1 since then to explain both the +2s afterward and the change today. I know that is not good math, though.

[KeyKeeper]

Also, this is not good for McCain. McCain should be up by more.

He should? Sen. McCain should be ahead by more? But this is a Democratic year, or at least that is what everyone keeps on saying. The fact is, this isn't good for Sen. Obama, he should be up by at least 5%.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Also, this is not good for McCain. McCain should be up by more.

He should? Sen. McCain should be ahead by more? But this is a Democratic year, or at least that is what everyone keeps on saying. The fact is, this isn't good for Sen. Obama, he should be up by at least 5%.

*whoosh*

That's the sound of the point of that post going right over your head.

[Iosif]

Also, this is not good for McCain. McCain should be up by more.

LOL

[Vsanto5]

Has to do with the economy, probably.

I concur.

[J. J.]

Also, this is not good for McCain. McCain should be up by more.

He should? Sen. McCain should be ahead by more? But this is a Democratic year, or at least that is what everyone keeps on saying. The fact is, this isn't good for Sen. Obama, he should be up by at least 5%.

*whoosh*

That's the sound of the point of that post going right over your head.

Weekend bounce on Gallup.  He should have gained some and I was expecting it.  Not by 5%, but there have been some movement.

[Sam Spade]

Has to do with the economy, probably.

I concur.

The key is figuring out whether this is only a one-day spike, and not a continuation of the gradual movement we've observed since last Thursday.  Like I said in the other thread.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

This thing is going to settle back into a modest Obama lead that's only going to get worse for McCain over the course of the debates. 

[J. J.]

This thing is going to settle back into a modest Obama lead that's only going to get worse for McCain over the course of the debates. 

More than a bit of wishful thinking. 

[Person Man]

This thing is going to settle back into a modest Obama lead that's only going to get worse for McCain over the course of the debates. 

More than a bit of wishful thinking. 

It will depend on how well each candidate does in the debate.

[Lief 🗽]

Obama is finished.

[Lunar]

McCain's in trouble now!  The trend is there!  THE TREND