Rasmussen Tracking Poll [Obama vs McCain]

[Sbane]

Talking to our enemies... that seems like a good idea... maybe the bravest are the ones who step back to think before retaliating.

There is a difference between the type of enemy the liberals want to talk to, though.

A soviet leader could be spoken to.
A terrorist who will blow himself up to kill you, can not.

Osama Bin Laden= Terrorist... Ayotollah Khomeni or Ahmadawhatever- religious zealots but politicians in the end. We can talk to these religious zealots but I agree that negotiating with someone like Osama is not  helpful at all.

[Sbane]

Friday - July 18, 2008:

Obama - 47% (+1)
McCain - 46% (nc)

There has been much discussion about the potential demographic changes brought about by Obama’s historic candidacy and the fact that he won the nomination by ending Hillary Clinton’s historic candidacy. Rasmussen Reports reviewed data from our July polling and found somewhat surprisingly that Obama’s support looks a lot like John Kerry’s. The only big difference is that Obama is currently doing about five points better against McCain than Kerry did against George W. Bush.

Four years ago, exit polls showed Bush defeating Kerry among white men by a 62% to 37% margin. Today, Obama is doing four points better than that and trails 58% to 37% among white men.

The tale is the same among white women. Bush won that demographic by eleven percentage points, 55% to 44%. Obama is doing five points better and trails by only six, 48% to 42%.

Among non-white females, Obama leads by fifty-four points, up three from Kerry’s margin of fifty-one points. However, Obama lags a bit among non-white males. This year’s presumptive nominee leads by twenty-nine points among that group, down from Kerry’s thirty-seven point margin.

So, Obama's lead is small because Minority Men don't support him by the margin they supported Kerry... this seems wrong

Latinos and Asians?

I know a few minority females (Asians) that are for McCain. One of whom would move out of the country if a Black man was ever elected.

OOOh racist asians, now that is a socal speciality isnt it.

[Sbane]

Sorry but Obama gave much more specifics in his speech on what he will do while Mccain just elaborated on energy and schools. Everything else was just platitudes. I think he is getting a decent bounce because of his character, which people like, but he will have to do well in the debates and have some substance. We already know democrats will have substance since the public basically agrees with them on the issues.

[Sbane]

Is to seem with  pie in the sky or false  specifics better than not to seem with  no specifics at all, that is the question.

Speaking of pie in the sky what do you think of this love affair that republicans have with drilling. They must understand it will do almost nothing to solve our energy problem since that oil was going to be drilled out one day anyways. And the more we drill now the less we have for later so aren't we just playing into the hands of the speculators? The energy policy of the republicans is extremely shortsighted.

[Sbane]

Is to seem with  pie in the sky or false  specifics better than not to seem with  no specifics at all, that is the question.

Speaking of pie in the sky what do you think of this love affair that republicans have with drilling. They must understand it will do almost nothing to solve our energy problem since that oil was going to be drilled out one day anyways. And the more we drill now the less we have for later so aren't we just playing into the hands of the speculators? The energy policy of the republicans is extremely shortsighted.

McCain's energy policy is all of the above.  I can't see how that is "shortsighted".

"Drill baby drill" repeated a million times. WTF was up with that? I will grant you that Mccain's energy policy is better on one regard and that is nuclear. But he didn't even talk about anything specific with wind and solar, two technologies that could revolutionize energy. Here in california almost everybody with a house could produce all the electricity they need from solar. It just needs to be made cheaper which the government could help with by subsidyising it now for consumers which will lead to an overall reduction in solar panel prices later.

[Sbane]

Is to seem with  pie in the sky or false  specifics better than not to seem with  no specifics at all, that is the question.

Speaking of pie in the sky what do you think of this love affair that republicans have with drilling. They must understand it will do almost nothing to solve our energy problem since that oil was going to be drilled out one day anyways. And the more we drill now the less we have for later so aren't we just playing into the hands of the speculators? The energy policy of the republicans is extremely shortsighted.

I love questions like this. Thank you for asking! 

Here is the deal. As one goes father out in time, the present value of the financial event declines. Dollars saved now are worth more than dollars saved later, so one would have to posit that drilling when you are an old man, will generate a hell of a lot more dollars then to overcome the harsh mistress of the discount rate.

The idea is to use oil to tide us over, as we transition to nukes, and shale, and fusion, and much more efficient solar, more efficient consumption, etc. Plus we will never run out of oil: it will just get increasingly expensive to extract. The idea is to reduce the cost of the transition, both in financial terms, but also in national security terms, so that we (we including Europe and Japan here) can be less dependent on, and indeed, de-fund, actual or  potentially hostile powers. Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi, etc.

Leaving some easily accessable oil for the future is not exactly a bad idea imo. I favor drilling more in the gulf while I do not support it here in california and I am confused about ANWR. And if the idea is to use oil to "tide us over" then why isn't the government doing anything to create innovation. Why aren't more subsidies given to consumers who switch to solar and are rather given to huge oil corporations that just use it to drill more. If the oil companies aren't going to take responsibility then fine, but somebody has to. My problem with Mccain's speech was where he gave emphasis, on drilling and where he did not give emphasis, wind and solar. I think many republicans think of wind and solar and go "omgz thats pussysh**t". Gotta change that mentality.

[Sbane]

Is to seem with  pie in the sky or false  specifics better than not to seem with  no specifics at all, that is the question.

Speaking of pie in the sky what do you think of this love affair that republicans have with drilling. They must understand it will do almost nothing to solve our energy problem since that oil was going to be drilled out one day anyways. And the more we drill now the less we have for later so aren't we just playing into the hands of the speculators? The energy policy of the republicans is extremely shortsighted.

McCain's energy policy is all of the above.  I can't see how that is "shortsighted".

"Drill baby drill" repeated a million times. WTF was up with that? I will grant you that Mccain's energy policy is better on one regard and that is nuclear. But he didn't even talk about anything specific with wind and solar, two technologies that could revolutionize energy. Here in california almost everybody with a house could produce all the electricity they need from solar. It just needs to be made cheaper which the government could help with by subsidyising it now for consumers which will lead to an overall reduction in solar panel prices later.

Sure, he put plenty of emphasis on drilling, but I heard plenty of talk about geothermal, solar, and wind.

Here's a page on his website: http://www.johnmccain.com//Informing/Issues/17671aa4-2fe8-4008-859f-0ef1468e96f4.htm

But even on his website it's just one paragraph while he talks much more about other things like the battery challenge or whatever. I guess he is putting all his eggs in the nuclear basket but I do not know if that is a very good idea. We can have more nuclear power but it cannot increase exponentially. Wind, solar, biothermal have to be the future.

[Sbane]

I am not sure what "biothemal" is, but what if the wind stops blowing, or the sun doesn't shine?  I suspect both have somewhat limited application, and would be surprised if they ever make up more than a quarter of the mix. Those sources won't help with transportation I don't think.

LOL I meant geothermal. Also the wind won't stop blowing and neither will the sun stop shining, especially in your backyard. Of course every house will still be connected to the overall grid and on especially sunny or windy days could actually turn the meter the other way. That does happen to many current users of solar in the summertime. When the wintertime comes we will be more dependent on coal and nuclear but in certain parts of the country that means more wind. Construct some wind turbines along the oregon and northern california coast and trust me those will produce massive amounts of energy in the wintertime. As for transportation natural gas is a good alternative. It is much cleaner than diesel as well and has probably saved thousands of lives in New delhi already. In the end though everything, including our cars, will have to go electric I suppose. Which is why the government should encourage producing those kinds of technology as well and actually Mccain has taken a lead on that issue so I am satisfied.

[Sbane]

So the race is basically tied still right? I do believe a good Mccain sample just left today so the slight uptick for Obama should be expected.

[Sbane]

McCain will never be able to sustain a lead in this poll because of the hard party ID weighting that RAS uses. It is mathematically impossible. When you have that many Dems in the sample, of course it will make Obama's numbers look good.

And remember Obama's bounce was understated by Rasmussen as well. It's not some huge left wing conspiracy.

[Sbane]

McCain will never be able to sustain a lead in this poll because of the hard party ID weighting that RAS uses. It is mathematically impossible. When you have that many Dems in the sample, of course it will make Obama's numbers look good.

And remember Obama's bounce was understated by Rasmussen as well. It's not some huge left wing conspiracy.

Not saying it's a conspiracy. I'm just saying his party ID numbers are wrong.

Give it some time. I expect gallup to start swinging a bit towards Obama now. If it doesn't in another week or so then yes there has been change in party ID and I am sure Rasmussen will adjust it accordingly.

[Sbane]

A Democrat trailing in the polls to an 80-year-old man who farts mummy dust after 8 years of GOP in the WH....in this supposed "Democratic year".     I guess American voters are some pretty racist mofos.

Obama 08 = Dukakis 88.

Sen. McCain is 73 years old and in today's world people are living well into there 90s. Also Sen. McCain is nothing like Pres. Bush, unlike Pres. Bush, Sen. McCain has a record of working with Democrats to get things done. Sen. Obama just has empty words of Hope and Change, which the American people are starting to see right through them.

Obama has all of his policies up on the website and he talks about them in his speech too.It's not his fault you are too lazy to put in any effort to go to his website or actually listen during his speeches. All Mccain has is his service in Vietnam. Seriously that is all I took away from the RNC. Except for energy they don't want to talk about issues. Hell even his campaign adviser acknowledged they want this race to be about personalities and not issues.

[Sbane]

Obama has all of his policies up on the website and he talks about them in his speech too.It's not his fault you are too lazy to put in any effort to go to his website or actually listen during his speeches. All Mccain has is his service in Vietnam. Seriously that is all I took away from the RNC. Except for energy they don't want to talk about issues. Hell even his campaign adviser acknowledged they want this race to be about personalities and not issues.

It looks like I got a lot more out of the RNC than you did. Maybe you should follow your own advice.

Yeah I also got that only Republicans put their country first. I also got that tax cuts must be given to the rich because obviously only they deserve it. I also got that giving back to your community is faggy and you should rather make lots and lots of money for yourself, so the republicans can reward you with even more money with tax cuts. Oh I also got that apparently parents want a choice for their kid's education. Sorry left that out of the first comment.

[Sbane]

Yeah I also got that only Republicans put their country first. I also got that tax cuts must be given to the rich because obviously only they deserve it. I also got that giving back to your community is faggy and you should rather make lots and lots of money for yourself, so the republicans can reward you with even more money with tax cuts. Oh I also got that apparently parents want a choice for their kid's education. Sorry left that out of the first comment.

Nope, you didn't get it.

Then please enlighten me.

Edit: Let me just say this. I don't really believe that all Mccain offers is his Vietnam service. I think he has some ideas for issues but I disagree with them, thus I am supporting Obama. You guys can also show us the same respect and say that I have studied Obama's views on the issue and I disagree with them, thus I am voting for Mccain. Don't just say "OMGZ HOPE N CHANGE LOLZLOLZLOLZ".

[Sbane]

When have I said 'Hope and Change LOLz?'

McCain's message was against both corrupt Dems and Repubs.

You didn't but Key keeper did. Remember my first response was to his post.

[Sbane]

McCain getting a majority of the vote?

Yay!

Yes but Obama went up as well. According to 538 Mccain's bounce should subside slowly so next week around this time would be a good time to check back on these polls. If Mccain is still leading, then this lead is for real. I except the race to become a tie or Obama+1 by the debates. We will see.

[Sbane]

Remember when most people were saying, "Oh, yeah, this lead will be gone by the weekend (yesterday and today)."...?

Now it's, "Well, if it is still around by next week then it is serious."

Well this is according to 538 and they wrote this article a while back. Again I am not sure if it will happen or if the race has basically stabilized. I tend to side with 538 only because nothing too earth shattering has occured after the RNC, so if mccain's bounce is still sticking around it shouldn't be surprising.

[Sbane]

Remember when most people were saying, "Oh, yeah, this lead will be gone by the weekend (yesterday and today)."...?

Now it's, "Well, if it is still around by next week then it is serious."

Well this is according to 538 and they wrote this article a while back. Again I am not sure if it will happen or if the race has basically stabilized. I tend to side with 538 only because nothing too earth shattering has occured after the RNC, so if mccain's bounce is still sticking around it shouldn't be surprising.

It could be a shift to McCain.  Look, I was (maybe the first) guy who said, "Maybe it's a bad sample."  If that really was the case, McCain should not have increase.

You mean the lead is real? Yeah that could definitely be the case but it could still be a residual bounce and it is possible we might see it for another week or two, considering what happens in the campaign. If nothing significant happens it might even extend to the debates. But I doubt that. If Mccain is still leading by the time of the debates he is probably leading for real.

[Sbane]

If Mccain is still leading by the time of the debates he is probably leading for real.

"Probably leading for real?"

Mccain most probably still has a bounce. When and if it will melt away is the question. No point arguing here phil, we will find out soon enough.

[Sbane]

Why doesn't Obama's bounces last this long?

Palin pick took out all the air from Obama's speech. Then the RNC happened. If you remember Obama did have some very favorable samples right before the RNC when some of that initial Palin bounce subsided. The reason why I think Mccain is still having a bounce is mainly because he has not led by any more than this. He has been holding steady at about +2-3 and it is interesting that 538 predicted this. And considering nothing much has happened since the RNC, it makes sense why the bounce might still be occuring as republican leaning independents/irregular voters are still excited about the party. And the thing about a bounce is that it does subside. Mccain has not really lost much ground since the RNC has he. It should subside in a week or two. If Mccain is still leading by debate time then it probably is not a bounce and the numbers are for real.

[Sbane]

Remember when most people were saying, "Oh, yeah, this lead will be gone by the weekend (yesterday and today)."...?

Now it's, "Well, if it is still around by next week then it is serious."

Well this is according to 538 and they wrote this article a while back. Again I am not sure if it will happen or if the race has basically stabilized. I tend to side with 538 only because nothing too earth shattering has occured after the RNC, so if mccain's bounce is still sticking around it shouldn't be surprising.

It could be a shift to McCain.  Look, I was (maybe the first) guy who said, "Maybe it's a bad sample."  If that really was the case, McCain should not have increase.

You mean the lead is real? Yeah that could definitely be the case but it could still be a residual bounce and it is possible we might see it for another week or two, considering what happens in the campaign. If nothing significant happens it might even extend to the debates. But I doubt that. If Mccain is still leading by the time of the debates he is probably leading for real.

The bounce should have evaporated by now; even it it hadn't it shouldn't be coming back.  There may be a "real" lead.  I said 9/10 is when we should start looking and that we should know something around 9/15.  I'll hold off until the morrow, but that should be Obama's best day on Gallup.

You and 538 differ by about a week. Mccain's bounce has to subside right. Correct me if I am wrong but Mccain has not really led by more than 3 points has he. He is just staying steady on his bounce high.

[Sbane]

Remember when most people were saying, "Oh, yeah, this lead will be gone by the weekend (yesterday and today)."...?

Now it's, "Well, if it is still around by next week then it is serious."

Well this is according to 538 and they wrote this article a while back. Again I am not sure if it will happen or if the race has basically stabilized. I tend to side with 538 only because nothing too earth shattering has occured after the RNC, so if mccain's bounce is still sticking around it shouldn't be surprising.

It could be a shift to McCain.  Look, I was (maybe the first) guy who said, "Maybe it's a bad sample."  If that really was the case, McCain should not have increase.

You mean the lead is real? Yeah that could definitely be the case but it could still be a residual bounce and it is possible we might see it for another week or two, considering what happens in the campaign. If nothing significant happens it might even extend to the debates. But I doubt that. If Mccain is still leading by the time of the debates he is probably leading for real.

The bounce should have evaporated by now; even it it hadn't it shouldn't be coming back.  There may be a "real" lead.  I said 9/10 is when we should start looking and that we should know something around 9/15.  I'll hold off until the morrow, but that should be Obama's best day on Gallup.

You and 538 differ by about a week. Mccain's bounce has to subside right. Correct me if I am wrong but Mccain has not really led by more than 3 points has he. He is just staying steady on his bounce high.

The race seems to have stabilized after the bounce. 

When was Mccain's high point? He seems to be there right now. What's interesting to me is how 538 seems to have predicted this. According to them we should watch next weekend for whether the bounce subsides.

[Sbane]

If Mccain is still leading by the time of the debates he is probably leading for real.

"Probably leading for real?"

Mccain most probably still has a bounce. When and if it will melt away is the question. No point arguing here phil, we will find out soon enough.

We're not even talking about him having a bounce now. You said it he's ahead by the time of the debates then it is "probably" a real lead. How is it not definitely a real lead if he's still up a week from now?

Yeah check back next weekend/the week after that. Those numbers should be solid right before the debate. Then the debate basically decides the election.

[Sbane]

Damn why you guys hatin' on walmart. When I need cheap sh**t that's exactly where I go. Or target...same sh**t.

[Sbane]

Damn why you guys hatin' on walmart. When I need cheap sh**t that's exactly where I go. Or target...same sh**t.

The funniest thing just happened. My father began his sentence "Let me tell you...that f***ing Wal-Mart is amazing"...and went on to say that "I bought you a candy bar and picked up Hot Dogs and buns...the hot dogs and buns cost less than the candy bar."

$0.57 cents for a pack of eight hot dogs...that costs less than a milk chocolate Hershey bar.

Damn stuff must be cheap out in Ohio. I don't know what you guys complain about so much.