Title: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Tender Branson on April 17, 2008, 02:32:30 PM
All polls conducted between April 11-13:
Massachusetts:
Clinton vs. McCain: 56-41
Obama vs. McCain: 48-46
New Mexico:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-49
Obama vs. McCain: 44-50
Missouri:
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Obama vs. McCain: 42-50
New York:
Clinton vs. McCain: 55-39
Obama vs. McCain: 52-43
Ohio:
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-42
Obama vs. McCain: 45-47
Oregon:
Obama vs. McCain: 51-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Virginia:
Obama vs. McCain: 44-52
Clinton vs. McCain: 39-55
Minnesota:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-43
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Wisconsin:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-44
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-46
Kansas:
Obama vs. McCain: 37-54
Clinton vs. McCain: 36-57
Alabama:
Clinton vs. McCain: 34-60
Obama vs. McCain: 32-64
California:
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-40
Obama vs. McCain: 50-43
Iowa:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 42-48
Kentucky:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-48
Obama vs. McCain: 29-63
http://www.surveyusa.com/electionpolls.aspx
Massachusetts:
Clinton vs. McCain: 56-41
Obama vs. McCain: 48-46
New Mexico:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-49
Obama vs. McCain: 44-50
Missouri:
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Obama vs. McCain: 42-50
New York:
Clinton vs. McCain: 55-39
Obama vs. McCain: 52-43
Ohio:
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-42
Obama vs. McCain: 45-47
Oregon:
Obama vs. McCain: 51-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Virginia:
Obama vs. McCain: 44-52
Clinton vs. McCain: 39-55
Minnesota:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-43
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Wisconsin:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-44
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-46
Kansas:
Obama vs. McCain: 37-54
Clinton vs. McCain: 36-57
Alabama:
Clinton vs. McCain: 34-60
Obama vs. McCain: 32-64
California:
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-40
Obama vs. McCain: 50-43
Iowa:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 42-48
Kentucky:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-48
Obama vs. McCain: 29-63
http://www.surveyusa.com/electionpolls.aspx
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 02:33:44 PM
Pretty bad news for Obama there.
I'll add them.
I'll add them.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: agcatter on April 17, 2008, 02:40:47 PM
As expected, Obama doing better in the Northwest (oregon) and upper midwest (Minn & Wisconsin) as well as Iowa.
As for the other states, Hillary needs to take these numbers to the super delegates.
As for the other states, Hillary needs to take these numbers to the super delegates.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Joe Republic on April 17, 2008, 02:43:02 PM
(
)
Green = Obama performs better against McCain than Clinton
Red = Clinton performs better against McCain than Obama
Gray = No data
>30% = Both candidates lose to McCain
>40% = One candidate wins against McCain, the other loses
>50% = One candidate wins against McCain, the other ties
>60% = Both candidates win against McCain
Green = Obama performs better against McCain than Clinton
Red = Clinton performs better against McCain than Obama
Gray = No data
>30% = Both candidates lose to McCain
>40% = One candidate wins against McCain, the other loses
>50% = One candidate wins against McCain, the other ties
>60% = Both candidates win against McCain
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: elcorazon on April 17, 2008, 02:45:34 PM
while these numbers are not great for obama, I don't see them as all that surprising. Hillary does better in Oh, Mo and NM (slightly surprising) (36 EV's)
Obama better in Iowa, Minn, Oregon, Wisconsin, Virginia (49 EV's)
In Kentucky Hillary looks competitive, but I don't believe it.
IN Mass, McCain looks competitive vs. obama, but I question that as well.
NY, Kansas, Alabama, California ain't changing sides regardless, so they're moot.
Obama better in Iowa, Minn, Oregon, Wisconsin, Virginia (49 EV's)
In Kentucky Hillary looks competitive, but I don't believe it.
IN Mass, McCain looks competitive vs. obama, but I question that as well.
NY, Kansas, Alabama, California ain't changing sides regardless, so they're moot.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 02:48:22 PM
Hah: McCain is within MoE of Obama among Kentucky Democrats. Ouchies.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Tender Branson on April 17, 2008, 02:49:03 PM
Compared with their last poll release, Obama gained in OH and lost badly in VA, NM. Why ?
East Kentucky is funny:
Clinton: 53%
McCain: 39%
"Other": 8%
McCain: 70%
Obama: 18%
"Other": 12%
:P
East Kentucky is funny:
Clinton: 53%
McCain: 39%
"Other": 8%
McCain: 70%
Obama: 18%
"Other": 12%
:P
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck on April 17, 2008, 02:51:10 PM
Survery USA gets some really strange results when they do these huge 10-15 state GE polls. I wouldn't pay much attention to them.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: ChrisFromNJ on April 17, 2008, 02:54:50 PM
OMG!!! Obama is going to lose Massachusetts. ()
It will be a fight in Ohio. But for Obama to only be back 2 points in Ohio, after all the media attention (and negativity) being on him for the past month or so, and John McCain not being touched by the media or the Democrats so far, is good news for him.
I'm a bit surprised about New Mexico, however.
It will be a fight in Ohio. But for Obama to only be back 2 points in Ohio, after all the media attention (and negativity) being on him for the past month or so, and John McCain not being touched by the media or the Democrats so far, is good news for him.
I'm a bit surprised about New Mexico, however.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 02:56:03 PM
Survery USA gets some really strange results when they do these huge 10-15 state GE polls. I wouldn't pay much attention to them.
Yeah, especially because they show Hillary doing better than Obama in a general election match-up in Kentucky of all places!
Everyone knows Obama would do a hell of a lot better than Hillary in Kentucky in November.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 02:59:47 PM
Obama actually loses the St. Louis area to McCain in this matchup ... ROFL !
I think we can safely put 'R' next to SurveyUSA from now on.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Joe Republic on April 17, 2008, 03:02:08 PM
Everyone knows Obama would do a hell of a lot better than Hillary in Kentucky in November.
Everyone in New America, that is. Everyone else knows that the opposite is true, of course.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Tender Branson on April 17, 2008, 03:04:14 PM
Obama actually loses the St. Louis area to McCain in this matchup ... ROFL !
I think we can safely put 'R' next to SurveyUSA from now on.
I just looked up SUSA's regional defintion and according to them "St. Louis" it's not just including St. Louis City and St. Louis County, but most of Eastern Missouri as well. Therefore it might actually be tied. But he wouldn´t lose the city+county alone to McCain ...
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 03:10:01 PM
What's their definition of East Kentucky, by any chance?
Do they mean just the good counties in the far east, or the hopeless ones in the southeast too?
(Granted, Obama's going to win 3 or 4 rural counties in the area, no matter what happens.)
Do they mean just the good counties in the far east, or the hopeless ones in the southeast too?
(Granted, Obama's going to win 3 or 4 rural counties in the area, no matter what happens.)
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Josh/Devilman88 on April 17, 2008, 03:11:34 PM
Funny numbers, but it is just a snapshot in time.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Tender Branson on April 17, 2008, 03:12:37 PM
What's their definition of East Kentucky, by any chance?
Do they mean just the good counties in the far east, or the hopeless ones in the southeast too?
(Granted, Obama's going to win 3 or 4 rural counties in the area, no matter what happens.)
Do they mean just the good counties in the far east, or the hopeless ones in the southeast too?
(Granted, Obama's going to win 3 or 4 rural counties in the area, no matter what happens.)
http://www.surveyusa.com/SUSA_Regional_Definitions_080220.htm
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 03:16:33 PM
What's their definition of East Kentucky, by any chance?
Do they mean just the good counties in the far east, or the hopeless ones in the southeast too?
(Granted, Obama's going to win 3 or 4 rural counties in the area, no matter what happens.)
Do they mean just the good counties in the far east, or the hopeless ones in the southeast too?
(Granted, Obama's going to win 3 or 4 rural counties in the area, no matter what happens.)
http://www.surveyusa.com/SUSA_Regional_Definitions_080220.htm
It's got Clinton County, Pulaski, Laurel, etc., so yes, I can see Obama getting beaten by a lot there. If it was just the part in the Charleston/Huntington DMA, I'd be far more worried about Obama.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: True Democrat on April 17, 2008, 03:23:36 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: elcorazon on April 17, 2008, 03:27:05 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck on April 17, 2008, 03:27:14 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
They really like the Clintons there... I truly believe that has a lot to do with it.
....and racism.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: True Democrat on April 17, 2008, 03:29:41 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
They really like the Clintons there... I truly believe that has a lot to do with it.
....and racism.
I haven't seen any polls out of Rhode Island, but is there any similar effect noticable?
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 03:33:23 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
They really like the Clintons there... I truly believe that has a lot to do with it.
....and racism.
I haven't seen any polls out of Rhode Island, but is there any similar effect noticable?
A SurveyUSA one on 2/28 had Obama +15 and Clinton +17.
A Brown University poll on 2/10 had Obama +12 and Clinton +11. The same poll found Clinton leading Obama in the primary, 36%-28% with 27% saying they would vote for Uncommitted and 9% undecided.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on April 17, 2008, 03:35:48 PM
IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY CANDIDATE THEN YOU A RACIST SIR, A GODDAMN DIRTY RACIST!!!!!!!11
Seriously though, while simple racism is a factor in some areas, other things are always at work. If Barack Obama was as white as his mother and called Dave Jones he'd still be polling badly relative to Clinton in the places where that's happening now.
Were this polls done after the bitter thing [question mark]
Seriously though, while simple racism is a factor in some areas, other things are always at work. If Barack Obama was as white as his mother and called Dave Jones he'd still be polling badly relative to Clinton in the places where that's happening now.
Were this polls done after the bitter thing [question mark]
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 03:37:11 PM
IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY CANDIDATE THEN YOU A RACIST SIR, A GODDAMN DIRTY RACIST!!!!!!!11
Seriously though, while simple racism is a factor in some areas, other things are always at work. If Barack Obama was as white as his mother and called Dave Jones he'd still be polling badly relative to Clinton in the places where that's happening now.
Were this polls done after the bitter thing [question mark]
Seriously though, while simple racism is a factor in some areas, other things are always at work. If Barack Obama was as white as his mother and called Dave Jones he'd still be polling badly relative to Clinton in the places where that's happening now.
Were this polls done after the bitter thing [question mark]
Monday, so yes.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: elcorazon on April 17, 2008, 03:40:14 PM
IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY CANDIDATE THEN YOU A RACIST SIR, A GODDAMN DIRTY RACIST!!!!!!!11
Seriously though, while simple racism is a factor in some areas, other things are always at work. If Barack Obama was as white as his mother and called Dave Jones he'd still be polling badly relative to Clinton in the places where that's happening now.
Were this polls done after the bitter thing [question mark]
Seriously though, while simple racism is a factor in some areas, other things are always at work. If Barack Obama was as white as his mother and called Dave Jones he'd still be polling badly relative to Clinton in the places where that's happening now.
Were this polls done after the bitter thing [question mark]
Hard to explain the wide gap between obama/mccain and clinton/mccain in mass, as opposed to places like Oregon, Washington, MInnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, where the gap is the other direction (not huge black populations in those states). I can understand Hillary outperforming barack by a few points in Cal, NY, NM, Ohio, but the wide gap is Massachusetts is highly suspect. Hopefully in the fall, the "liberals" will show up and elect Obama.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on April 17, 2008, 03:40:20 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
BECUZ PPL WHO DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA R RACISTZ
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Eraserhead on April 17, 2008, 03:41:30 PM
Hah: McCain is within MoE of Obama among Kentucky Democrats. Ouchies.
His skin color explains this.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: agcatter on April 17, 2008, 03:45:42 PM
Are we going to have to listen to this you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama drivel for the next 7 months?
Really, you're not doing your candidate any good with that stuff.
Really, you're not doing your candidate any good with that stuff.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on April 17, 2008, 03:47:56 PM
Democrats for Clinton: Racist
Democrats for Obama: Sexist
Democrats against McCain: Ageist
Republicans for McCain: Pretty damn awesome :)
Democrats for Obama: Sexist
Democrats against McCain: Ageist
Republicans for McCain: Pretty damn awesome :)
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 03:49:42 PM
Are we going to have to listen to this you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama drivel for the next 7 months?
We've listened to this "you're a traitor if you don't vote for Bush" garbage for the past 8 years, so fair is fair.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on April 17, 2008, 03:49:58 PM
Links to the database entries:
Wisconsin Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=5520080413019
Wisconsin Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=5520080413019
Virginia Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=5120080413019
Virginia Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=5120080413019
Oregon Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=4120080413019
Oregon Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=4120080413019
Ohio Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3920080413019
Ohio Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3920080413019
New York Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3620080413019
New York Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3620080413019
New Mexico Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3520080413019
New Mexico Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3520080413019
Missouri Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2920080413019
Missouri Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2920080413019
Minnesota Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2720080413019
Minnesota Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2720080413019
Massachusetts Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2520080413019
Massachusetts Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2520080413019
Kentucky Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2120080413019
Kentucky Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2120080413019
Kansas Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2020080413019
Kansas Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2020080413019
Iowa Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=1920080413019
Iowa Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=1920080413019
California Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=620080413019
California Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=620080413019
Alabama Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=120080413019
Alabama Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=120080413019
Wisconsin Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=5520080413019
Wisconsin Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=5520080413019
Virginia Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=5120080413019
Virginia Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=5120080413019
Oregon Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=4120080413019
Oregon Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=4120080413019
Ohio Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3920080413019
Ohio Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3920080413019
New York Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3620080413019
New York Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3620080413019
New Mexico Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3520080413019
New Mexico Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=3520080413019
Missouri Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2920080413019
Missouri Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2920080413019
Minnesota Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2720080413019
Minnesota Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2720080413019
Massachusetts Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2520080413019
Massachusetts Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2520080413019
Kentucky Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2120080413019
Kentucky Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2120080413019
Kansas Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2020080413019
Kansas Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=2020080413019
Iowa Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=1920080413019
Iowa Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=1920080413019
California Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=620080413019
California Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=620080413019
Alabama Clinton: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=120080413019
Alabama Obama: https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008/pollsa.php?action=indpoll&id=120080413019
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Aizen on April 17, 2008, 03:50:29 PM
Democrats for Clinton: Racist
Democrats for Obama: Sexist
Democrats against McCain: Ageist
Republicans for McCain:Pretty damn awesome Racist and Sexist
Democrats for Obama: Sexist
Democrats against McCain: Ageist
Republicans for McCain:
LOL
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: elcorazon on April 17, 2008, 03:51:01 PM
man, you people have your heads in the sand. I understand some people don't agree with obama. I understand some people prefer mccain, or hillary or just don't like the guy. I'm talking about an area that has been strongly democratic for a LONG time, which has gone to a dem nearly without fail for a really long time. They elect hardcore liberals. They define the word liberal to a lot of middle America. They also have a history of racism.
And now you have a black guy running who is quite popular among liberals across the country. Fine, he can lose the primary to Hillary, that's alright. But for so many hillary supporters to be supporting mccain in the fall in Massachusetts, I have a hard time explaining it any other way.
what's your best guess?
And now you have a black guy running who is quite popular among liberals across the country. Fine, he can lose the primary to Hillary, that's alright. But for so many hillary supporters to be supporting mccain in the fall in Massachusetts, I have a hard time explaining it any other way.
what's your best guess?
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on April 17, 2008, 04:01:46 PM
LOL at all the liberals in this thread. So let's get things straight. Rasmussen, Strategic Vision and SurveyUSA are all Republican polling firms. Who does that leave as legitimate polling firms?
This continues to confuse me, but it appears Massachusetts really doesn't like Obama. McCain's ceiling here is 46%.
The most surprising of all, but McCain isn't hated by Hispanics like some Republicans. I also wondered why Obama was doing so well there considering a lot of Hispanics do not trust blacks. I always thought it was premature to give NM to Obama right off the bat just because Richardson endorsed him.
No surprise. Missouri isn't a bellwether this year and will be firmly in the McCain column unless things change.
Obama will not break 60% in NY. He isn't Al Gore and McCain isn't Bush in 2000. Just because people on this forum think he's a panderer doesn't mean he has lost that maverick image to others.
Not a bad poll for Obama. I am really happy Clinton is not the nominee. She'd beat McCain in November.
Not a surprise. Obama does well out west while Clinton does not, but Oregon isn't a state that McCain needs to win in 2008.
I felt as if people were overestimating Obama in Virginia. He won't win there unless he landslides, so I'd put it at 52-47 McCain in the end.
No surprises in any of these.
I think McCain could outperform Bush in California, especially if the Hispanics give Obama a poor showing.
No surprises, but wow do Kentucky folks hate Obama. McCain could approach 70%.
Quote
Massachusetts:
Clinton vs. McCain: 56-41
Obama vs. McCain: 48-46
Clinton vs. McCain: 56-41
Obama vs. McCain: 48-46
This continues to confuse me, but it appears Massachusetts really doesn't like Obama. McCain's ceiling here is 46%.
Quote
New Mexico:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-49
Obama vs. McCain: 44-50
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-49
Obama vs. McCain: 44-50
The most surprising of all, but McCain isn't hated by Hispanics like some Republicans. I also wondered why Obama was doing so well there considering a lot of Hispanics do not trust blacks. I always thought it was premature to give NM to Obama right off the bat just because Richardson endorsed him.
Quote
Missouri:
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Obama vs. McCain: 42-50
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Obama vs. McCain: 42-50
No surprise. Missouri isn't a bellwether this year and will be firmly in the McCain column unless things change.
Quote
New York:
Clinton vs. McCain: 55-39
Obama vs. McCain: 52-43
Clinton vs. McCain: 55-39
Obama vs. McCain: 52-43
Obama will not break 60% in NY. He isn't Al Gore and McCain isn't Bush in 2000. Just because people on this forum think he's a panderer doesn't mean he has lost that maverick image to others.
Quote
Ohio:
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-42
Obama vs. McCain: 45-47
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-42
Obama vs. McCain: 45-47
Not a bad poll for Obama. I am really happy Clinton is not the nominee. She'd beat McCain in November.
Quote
Oregon:
Obama vs. McCain: 51-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Obama vs. McCain: 51-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Not a surprise. Obama does well out west while Clinton does not, but Oregon isn't a state that McCain needs to win in 2008.
Quote
Virginia:
Obama vs. McCain: 44-52
Clinton vs. McCain: 39-55
Obama vs. McCain: 44-52
Clinton vs. McCain: 39-55
I felt as if people were overestimating Obama in Virginia. He won't win there unless he landslides, so I'd put it at 52-47 McCain in the end.
Quote
Minnesota:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-43
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Wisconsin:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-44
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-46
Kansas:
Obama vs. McCain: 37-54
Clinton vs. McCain: 36-57
Alabama:
Clinton vs. McCain: 34-60
Obama vs. McCain: 32-64
Obama vs. McCain: 49-43
Clinton vs. McCain: 47-46
Wisconsin:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-44
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-46
Kansas:
Obama vs. McCain: 37-54
Clinton vs. McCain: 36-57
Alabama:
Clinton vs. McCain: 34-60
Obama vs. McCain: 32-64
No surprises in any of these.
Quote
California:
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-40
Obama vs. McCain: 50-43
Clinton vs. McCain: 53-40
Obama vs. McCain: 50-43
I think McCain could outperform Bush in California, especially if the Hispanics give Obama a poor showing.
Quote
Iowa:
Obama vs. McCain: 49-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 42-48
Kentucky:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-48
Obama vs. McCain: 29-63
Obama vs. McCain: 49-42
Clinton vs. McCain: 42-48
Kentucky:
Clinton vs. McCain: 46-48
Obama vs. McCain: 29-63
No surprises, but wow do Kentucky folks hate Obama. McCain could approach 70%.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Joe Republic on April 17, 2008, 04:04:24 PM
LOL at all the liberals in this thread.
All of them, eh? You can be extremely tiresome, you know.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 04:06:19 PM
No surprises, but wow do Kentucky folks hate Obama.
Which is odd, because people I know think he's a decent guy.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Lief 🗽 on April 17, 2008, 04:35:06 PM
When people blame racism for Obama's poor showing states like Mass and Kentucky, they're not, by any means, calling all McCain supporters racist. They're just pointing out a very real phenomenon of American politics and society; some people are racist, and they have an aversion towards voting for a man that is black.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 04:38:19 PM
When people blame racism for Obama's poor showing states like Mass and Kentucky, they're not, by any means, calling all McCain supporters racist. They're just pointing out a very real phenomenon of American politics and society; some people are racist, and they have an aversion towards voting for a man that is black.
Besides, the racists vote Republican anyway, so even if Obama wasn't black they still wouldn't vote for him.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on April 17, 2008, 05:03:54 PM
If they're a Rep. polling company, why did that throw OH into the Clinton category?
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on April 17, 2008, 05:05:52 PM
When people blame racism for Obama's poor showing states like Mass and Kentucky, they're not, by any means, calling all McCain supporters racist. They're just pointing out a very real phenomenon of American politics and society; some people are racist, and they have an aversion towards voting for a man that is black.
Besides, the racists vote Republican anyway, so even if Obama wasn't black they still wouldn't vote for him.
So why is McCain doing so well as compared to Bush? Why is Hillary have 42%? You are making no sense at all.
If they're a Rep. polling company, why did that throw OH into the Clinton category?
Just to fool everyone so they wouldn't catch on. Luckily, the Democrats here are too clever to fall for it.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Padfoot on April 17, 2008, 06:13:14 PM
I'm a bit surprised about the regional breakdown in Virginia, particularly the Southeast region. McCain will probably win Southeast Virginia like the poll says but I'm seriously doubting the 21 point margin they have him winning by there. I'm thinking 15 points tops, but I suppose it all depends on how the define the region though.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: agcatter on April 17, 2008, 06:24:31 PM
Yes, it all comes down to how Survey defines a region. heck, they never ever give anyone any indication of exactly how they define that region of any state they poll. Kind of frustrating really.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 06:25:47 PM
Yes, it all comes down to how Survey defines a region. heck, they never ever give anyone any indication of exactly how they define that region of any state they poll. Kind of frustrating really.
I'm sure if you emailed them, they'd be happy to provide the information. In some places it's pretty obvious. They do it by county (although I'm not sure if exchanges go by county...but it seems like they often add up to logical %s, county-wise).
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: ottermax on April 17, 2008, 06:26:56 PM
In New Mexico, Hispanics include Spanish whose descendants have lived in the region for centuries. So, basically many can be counted as Whites. Also, I'm surprised Clinton is doing better because many of the swing voters in New Mexico are in the fast growing Albuquerque region, who are suburban moderates. If Hispanics really hated Obama so much, then California would be horrible for him.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Gustaf on April 17, 2008, 06:38:58 PM
Interesting. Much worse polls for Obama than the last round from SUSA. Apart from the amusement factor of the comments (didn't SUSA use to be best pollster when they were showing Obama doing well?) I'll note my standard scepticism towards SUSA multi-state polling and, finally:
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
And don't you ask me "what's the matter with Kansas". It wouldn't be funny.
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
And don't you ask me "what's the matter with Kansas". It wouldn't be funny.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: agcatter on April 17, 2008, 06:44:35 PM
Alcon, I never actually thought about emailing them. Good idea. If I get any imfo back from them on regional boundaries in various states I'll post that information.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 06:50:14 PM
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
They poll on commission. They dropped a few states this time around for some reason.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Gustaf on April 17, 2008, 06:53:55 PM
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
They poll on commission. They dropped a few states this time around for some reason.
I understand that, but who in their right mind commissions a poll on Kansas? I know you like to slap senate races in my face when I make these glaring accusations against pollsters, but I don't believe there is any competitive race going on in Kansas this year, correct?
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 06:56:28 PM
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
They poll on commission. They dropped a few states this time around for some reason.
I understand that, but who in their right mind commissions a poll on Kansas? I know you like to slap senate races in my face when I make these glaring accusations against pollsters, but I don't believe there is any competitive race going on in Kansas this year, correct?
It's a pretty small part of a news station's budget, and that's who does it.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Gustaf on April 17, 2008, 07:01:12 PM
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
They poll on commission. They dropped a few states this time around for some reason.
I understand that, but who in their right mind commissions a poll on Kansas? I know you like to slap senate races in my face when I make these glaring accusations against pollsters, but I don't believe there is any competitive race going on in Kansas this year, correct?
It's a pretty small part of a news station's budget, and that's who does it.
Ah. I'm not American, so I keep forgetting that these small God-forsaken states have news stations of their own and stuff. :P I guess it makes sense then.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: ottermax on April 17, 2008, 07:41:10 PM
Kansas isn't that small for a news station considering that Vermont has its own, and Washington has multiple ones, and California has too many to count (one for virtually every metro area/region).
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 17, 2008, 07:44:50 PM
The smallest media market in the United States, Glendive, Montana's, has a news station that serves just over 9,000 people.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Beet on April 17, 2008, 08:10:21 PM
How much do these stations pay for these polls?
I can make a call a minute, or 180 calls in three hours between 5:30 pm and 8:30 pm, or 540 calls over three nights. Assuming a 20% response rate, six people can make enough calls. Assuming a payment rate of $10 an hour over 5 people over 9 hours each, that is $450. I can fit all of them into the basement of my house. So what is to stop me from picking 3,240 random names out of the White pages for a particular locality, and spend $450 to conduct my own poll?
Or rather, what is to stop the Atlas forum from collectively conducting a poll? If we had 20 volunteers, each would only need to make (600 x 5 / 20) = 150 calls, which can be made in the space of three hours. All we would need is for one person to cut the list. Then there is a simple formula to calculate margin of error. If our poll comes out as better than a reputable pollster, we have just established ourselves, gentlemen!
:P
I can make a call a minute, or 180 calls in three hours between 5:30 pm and 8:30 pm, or 540 calls over three nights. Assuming a 20% response rate, six people can make enough calls. Assuming a payment rate of $10 an hour over 5 people over 9 hours each, that is $450. I can fit all of them into the basement of my house. So what is to stop me from picking 3,240 random names out of the White pages for a particular locality, and spend $450 to conduct my own poll?
Or rather, what is to stop the Atlas forum from collectively conducting a poll? If we had 20 volunteers, each would only need to make (600 x 5 / 20) = 150 calls, which can be made in the space of three hours. All we would need is for one person to cut the list. Then there is a simple formula to calculate margin of error. If our poll comes out as better than a reputable pollster, we have just established ourselves, gentlemen!
:P
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Ban my account ffs! on April 17, 2008, 08:11:03 PM
The smallest media market in the United States, Glendive, Montana's, has a news station that serves just over 9,000 people.
We have one that serves rural western Minnesota.. and the top news story of the day?
Arv Schlammenhuerchter, of Clarissa, Minnesota, was injured when he fell asleep at the wheel of his combine and it rolled on a steep ditch. We have Tracy Rumpuswelter live at the scene. (Cuts to a scene of Tracy, dressed like a professional field reporter, in a pig sty full of various fecal matter with Arv's wife, Bertrum, offering bars and coffee to onlookers in the background)...
Oh, how I love the "local" news.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on April 17, 2008, 08:40:18 PM
In New Mexico, Hispanics include Spanish whose descendants have lived in the region for centuries. So, basically many can be counted as Whites. Also, I'm surprised Clinton is doing better because many of the swing voters in New Mexico are in the fast growing Albuquerque region, who are suburban moderates. If Hispanics really hated Obama so much, then California would be horrible for him.
He's only leading California by 7% in the most recent two polls. I would expect he'd be up by double digits.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on April 17, 2008, 08:41:27 PM
they poll 14 states. 14 chosen states. And one of them is Kansas. Not Florida. Not Pennsylvania. Not Nevada. Not Colorado. Not even New Jersey or Montana, Rhode Island or North Dakota. But KANSAS!
They poll on commission. They dropped a few states this time around for some reason.
I understand that, but who in their right mind commissions a poll on Kansas? I know you like to slap senate races in my face when I make these glaring accusations against pollsters, but I don't believe there is any competitive race going on in Kansas this year, correct?
Remember, we have certain people who believe if Obama picks Seblius that Kansas will flip to him. Maybe they just want to show us what an uphill battle he has.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Lief 🗽 on April 17, 2008, 08:42:55 PM
If I remember correctly, Kerry was also only leading by about 7 in California early on. Doesn't mean he didn't win comfortably.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 17, 2008, 11:07:49 PM
So why is McCain doing so well as compared to Bush?
Because Bush is an even bigger idiot.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: MODU on April 18, 2008, 07:55:15 AM
Just goes to show how screwy doing polls this far out can actually be.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on April 18, 2008, 12:42:56 PM
If I remember correctly, Kerry was also only leading by about 7 in California early on. Doesn't mean he didn't win comfortably.
He ended up winning it with a lead of just under 10.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Tender Branson on April 18, 2008, 12:45:09 PM
SurveyUSA released a new WA state poll as well:
Obama: 53%
McCain: 40%
Clinton: 48%
McCain: 45%
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=652bf5a0-ebbb-42de-9506-28376dc9abc3
Obama: 53%
McCain: 40%
Clinton: 48%
McCain: 45%
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=652bf5a0-ebbb-42de-9506-28376dc9abc3
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Lief 🗽 on April 18, 2008, 04:45:03 PM
If I remember correctly, Kerry was also only leading by about 7 in California early on. Doesn't mean he didn't win comfortably.
He ended up winning it with a lead of just under 10.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on April 18, 2008, 05:01:32 PM
If I remember correctly, Kerry was also only leading by about 7 in California early on. Doesn't mean he didn't win comfortably.
He ended up winning it with a lead of just under 10.
I wasn't saying that it wasn't a comfortable win (it clearly was).
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: 12th Doctor on April 18, 2008, 07:08:16 PM
So to sum up what we are seeing in the polls, Obama does better in the popular vote, but Hillary significantly exceeds him in EV performance. Hey, democrats, how do you win an election again?
If Obama is the nominee, then the Dems are locked out of Florida. Michigan, Ohio, PA and New Jersey are all toss-ups. Save Ohio, if the McCain wins any two of those states, then the game is over for the Democrats. Also, Massachusetts is in play!? Enough polls have come out to show that this is not a fluke. Obama hardly puts anything into play that the Democrats didn't win in 2004. Colorado and Nevada... big deal.
On the other hand, Clinton is running ahead in Ohio and PA and puts Florida in play.
If Obama is the nominee, then the Dems are locked out of Florida. Michigan, Ohio, PA and New Jersey are all toss-ups. Save Ohio, if the McCain wins any two of those states, then the game is over for the Democrats. Also, Massachusetts is in play!? Enough polls have come out to show that this is not a fluke. Obama hardly puts anything into play that the Democrats didn't win in 2004. Colorado and Nevada... big deal.
On the other hand, Clinton is running ahead in Ohio and PA and puts Florida in play.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 19, 2008, 12:19:08 AM
If Obama is the nominee, then the Dems are locked out of Florida.
To be honest, who the hell needs Florida? That's the one state that's pushed the party to the right by making the Democrats futilely chase its electoral votes.
The Democrats can win without Florida - and should. They should focus on the Midwest.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Gustaf on April 19, 2008, 04:30:18 AM
If I remember correctly, Kerry was also only leading by about 7 in California early on. Doesn't mean he didn't win comfortably.
He ended up winning it with a lead of just under 10.
I think his point was that if you win by 9.95% leading by 7% is not "only" or underestimating or anything like that. It is simply within margin of error of the actual result. So Obama or Clinton leading by 7% shouldn't be a surprise either. It's exactly what one should expect (especially since the margin often grows a little bit once undecideds start making up their minds).
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on April 19, 2008, 11:25:05 AM
If Obama is the nominee, then the Dems are locked out of Florida.
To be honest, who the hell needs Florida? That's the one state that's pushed the party to the right by making the Democrats futilely chase its electoral votes.
The Democrats can win without Florida - and should. They should focus on the Midwest.
Al Gore needed Florida.
So to sum up what we are seeing in the polls, Obama does better in the popular vote, but Hillary significantly exceeds him in EV performance. Hey, democrats, how do you win an election again?
If Obama is the nominee, then the Dems are locked out of Florida. Michigan, Ohio, PA and New Jersey are all toss-ups. Save Ohio, if the McCain wins any two of those states, then the game is over for the Democrats. Also, Massachusetts is in play!? Enough polls have come out to show that this is not a fluke. Obama hardly puts anything into play that the Democrats didn't win in 2004. Colorado and Nevada... big deal.
On the other hand, Clinton is running ahead in Ohio and PA and puts Florida in play.
If Obama is the nominee, then the Dems are locked out of Florida. Michigan, Ohio, PA and New Jersey are all toss-ups. Save Ohio, if the McCain wins any two of those states, then the game is over for the Democrats. Also, Massachusetts is in play!? Enough polls have come out to show that this is not a fluke. Obama hardly puts anything into play that the Democrats didn't win in 2004. Colorado and Nevada... big deal.
On the other hand, Clinton is running ahead in Ohio and PA and puts Florida in play.
You're forgetting the great state of Iowa, full of affluent, highly educated voters! Other than Colorado, Iowa, and Nevada, Obama does not put any states into play. Virginia is one the liberals dream about as being a state Obama could win, but I don't see him beating McCain there. Obama puts Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, West Virginia out of reach, and makes Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio and Michigan competitive. With Hillary, she probably would win West Virginia, Arkansas, and make Missouri, Ohio, Florida, and Kentucky close. She may lose Washington, Connecticut (possibly) and Oregon, but if she won Florida and Ohio, she wouldn't need it.
The point is, the election is much less certain for the Democrats with Obama. He could end up holding all of the Kerry states, but chances are he won't. Saying that you don't need Florida is just a ploy to cover up your reserves about him. The Democrats need to win 2/3 big three states. They can't rely on Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, Iowa and New Mexico. Iowa is probably the only sure thing in that list. New Mexico isn't solid Dem by any means, and I doubt the Richardson endorsement will make a whole lot of difference.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 19, 2008, 11:49:59 AM
Al Gore needed Florida.
Not if he'd focused on Colorado, Missouri, and West Virginia, the way a Democrat should.
He could have just written off the whole right-to-scab world except Iowa and still won.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Alcon on April 19, 2008, 11:52:30 AM
Al Gore needed Florida.
Not if he'd focused on Colorado, Missouri, and West Virginia, the way a Democrat should.
He could have just written off the whole right-to-scab world except Iowa and still won.
Al Gore lost Colorado by over 8 points.
But that's OK. Instead he should have focused on ending the rampant fraud in Kentucky where he clearly received a 2-to-1 victory.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 19, 2008, 11:56:15 AM
Al Gore lost Colorado by over 8 points.
If he was allowed to spend a thing there, he would have won it.
But no. The DLC told him we need "FLOOOOOOOOOORIDA!!!"
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: agcatter on April 19, 2008, 01:23:29 PM
Probably could have won kentucky also, eh Bandit.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Bandit3 the Worker on April 19, 2008, 01:25:51 PM
Probably could have won kentucky also, eh Bandit.
He would have, but for the DLC's scumbaggery.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on April 19, 2008, 01:42:57 PM
Young people in Kentucky must really hate Obama. Clinton also does better among African-Americans, so I don't know what happened there.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
Also, why can't Obama seem to do well in Massachusetts? This still baffles me.
They really like the Clintons there... I truly believe that has a lot to do with it.
....and racism.
I haven't seen any polls out of Rhode Island, but is there any similar effect noticable?
No, Obama does fine in Rhode Island. Mainly because Deval Patrick isn't governor there.
Title: Re: SurveyUSA 14-State Poll Release
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on April 19, 2008, 01:50:23 PM
How much do these stations pay for these polls?
In my past experience, a decent poll with a MoE of about 4 or 5 will run you $2,000 if done by live, non-accented operators. SUSA's costs may be lower, because they use automated response. Basically...it's not expensive to do.
I can make a call a minute, or 180 calls in three hours between 5:30 pm and 8:30 pm, or 540 calls over three nights. Assuming a 20% response rate, six people can make enough calls. Assuming a payment rate of $10 an hour over 5 people over 9 hours each, that is $450. I can fit all of them into the basement of my house. So what is to stop me from picking 3,240 random names out of the White pages for a particular locality, and spend $450 to conduct my own poll?
Or rather, what is to stop the Atlas forum from collectively conducting a poll? If we had 20 volunteers, each would only need to make (600 x 5 / 20) = 150 calls, which can be made in the space of three hours. All we would need is for one person to cut the list. Then there is a simple formula to calculate margin of error. If our poll comes out as better than a reputable pollster, we have just established ourselves, gentlemen!
Or rather, what is to stop the Atlas forum from collectively conducting a poll? If we had 20 volunteers, each would only need to make (600 x 5 / 20) = 150 calls, which can be made in the space of three hours. All we would need is for one person to cut the list. Then there is a simple formula to calculate margin of error. If our poll comes out as better than a reputable pollster, we have just established ourselves, gentlemen!
There's nothing to stop you (us?) persay, but there is more to polling than just asking questions. It is almost a science to properly rotate questions and ask them in the right order, and it crucial to find people who have no attachment to the results of the poll reading the choices to the people. Bias is really easy to pollute a poll, and it takes a good pollster to filter that stuff out best as possible.