So even though this whole site is (rightfully) breathing a big sigh of relief with this race moving back towards it natural state (a small Obama lead), I thought I'd step back about 3 days and address some of the worrying. Specifically, and for whatever it's worth, I've run comparisons on all of the state polling in selected battlegrounds taken between Septembr 1-September 17, 2004, and the same dates in 2008. I should note right at the top that the fact, demonstrated below, that in virtually every instance, Obama is running ahead of where Kerry was at this point in 2004, obviously isn't the end all be all. Kerry lost--and even if you believe he really won OH, there's no disputing a significant popular vote loss. So clearly Barack needs to outperform Kerry by a decent degree, and my glance at the numbers suggests that he's on pace so far. Bear in mind that all the numbers below are taken from polls conducted during what will almost without a doubt be the best polling period John McCain ever has in this race. Of course, I used the comparable '04 period, and since the '04 and '08 RNCs were similarly situated, the '04 numbers also capture something of a Bush high point.
If you've got enough time to sort through my babbling, please join me on the flip.
First, a couple notes on methodology.
- I limited my selection of polls to those that at least touched the beginning of September (i.e., I would use a poll taken 8/31-9/2, but not one taken from 8/30-8/31). Somewhat of an arbitrary cut off, but I wanted to balance between exclusively using polls capturing at least some of the RNC on the one hand and having a larger data set on the other. On the back end, because today is 9/17, polls concluding on that date made the cut--those extending beyond did not, even if they started in the relevent period. Hey, I'm no Nate--I'm a non-statistician corporate attorney who loves numbers.
- For each state, I've included the '04 and '08 averages, as well as the number of polls comprising the average.
- I did not take the time to eliminate outliers, so they may play a small role (though I didn't notice anything blatant in going over the polling).
- I've also included a column for "movement" under '04: this captures the difference between the actual '04 result and the polling averages between 9/1 and 9/17. I would not read too much into it--since I didn't do comparisons for previous years (I'd love to, but I'm not sure the '00 and '96 state polling is available), I can't really speak to whether given states have tended to move in a given direction as election day approaches, beyond the point that R-leaning states tend to get redder as time passes and vice versa. One notable exception here is Ohio, where I do think the "movement" metric captures something real. How "real" it is, though, I can't say.
- I make no assumptions about how undecideds will break. I want to see more numbers and might address that in a seperate post. I think one can argue it either way, perhaps a bit more persausively that undecideds, if they do break, should break for BHO (McCain is much more the virtual incumbent in the race, has been known for a lot longer, very high name recogntion, etc.--if folks don't want him now, it's not clear they ever will). At the same time, that argument, which has some historical support did not stand up very well in 2004, where, if undecidedes can be said to have "broken," they probably broke slightly for Bush. And I do worry about primary trends in which those making up their minds that day tended to go against Obama. On the whole though, I think the undecided apporpotionment won't be that far even, which makes the current numbers even more meaningful.
- I'm done pretending to be some kind of stats professor. Enjoy the numbers and analysis below. Please point out any errors you see--I have no doubt I'll edit this a whole bunch of times.
***PENNSYLVANIA***
2004
Bush 47.6
Kerry 46.3
Bush +1.3 (8 polls)
Movement: D +3.3 (Kerry won by 2)
2008
Obama 47.3
McCain 45.7
Obama + 1.6
Analysis: Despite the MSM bloviating re: Obama's failure to connect w/ working class whites, Reagan democrats (can we please stop calling them dems after 28 years), rust belt, etc., Obama's lead in PA has continually been larger than Kerry's at basically all points in the race. To be fair, this has something to do with John McCain, as Obama has not always enjoyed Kerry's level of support, whereas McCain has consistently polled worse than Bush. But during this two and half week period, almost certainly the best polling period McCain will ever have, he can't grab the lead, or even poll any higher than 47. Moreover, as Nate notes, at each point in the race, PA has polled more democratic than the national averages, consistent with a state that given its recent blue leanings, can't accurately be characterized as a tossup. It's either marginal toss-up or lean democratic. With the economy at the forefront, disproprotionate gains in voter registration, and a Democratic governor, if the national race remains even somewhat competetive, Pennsylvania stays in our column based on the data so far.
***MICHIGAN***
2004
Kerry 48.0
Bush 42.5
Kerry + 5.5 (4 polls)
Movement: R + 2.5 (Kerry won by 3)
2008
Obama 47.2
McCain 45.2
Obama + 2.0 (5 polls)
Analysis: IMHO, the whole election is here. Hold it, and BHO is going to hold all the Kerry states and have several paths to get over the top. Lose it, and it's a tough slog--it means, in the most likely scenario, winning OH. That's not that unlikely a scenario, but what I do think is extremely unlikely is the coupling of D-leaning MI going R, at the same time R-leaning OH flips in the opposite direction. That said, I do think Obama's "problems" in MI are overblown. I did a similar analysis, that I never got around to diarying, that compared the '04 and '08 polls from approximately June 1 to September 5. In that time frame, Obama's average MI lead was greater than Kerry's. That being said, whereas in PA, despite his losing the primary, I think Obama's being forced to get to know the state was an undeniable positive, his lack of early presence in MI was, I think detrimental. In the end though, I consider MI to be more similar to PA, than different. Democratic leaning over the past 20 years, absolutely beaten down economically under Bush. Democrat in the Governor's mansion. I do think a couple factors make MI more competetive than PA, most notably, as mentioned, Obama's not havign a major presence there until later in the game, as well as the potential for Kilpatrick to make even the tiniest dent in Obama's Detroit margin, which is going to be critical. At the same time, if this election comes down to MI, the Obama team has tools at its disposal, most notably McCain's being on the record about jobs that aren't coming back (straight talk or not, it's a political albatross that needs to be utilized). Moreover, I definitely believe that with the economic climate shifting away from "troubling" into the realm of "crisis," it's likely that some of the cultural stuff (I've seen troubling numbers re: Michiganers support, or lack thereof for affirmative action; Rev. Wright; some of the Muslim smears, etc.) won't play the same paramount role as it might othereise. In that sense, I do think this election has some (limited) paralells to 1992, where the GHWB slime (draft dodging, Clinton burning flags overseas, etc.) never really stuck in a climate where folks were really scared for their futures. If Obama continues to talk about the economy the way he has this week and (hopefully) ups the resources he's putting into the state (planting Biden there this week was a good start) I see no reason why in a close election it won't come home. Nothing in the data really suggests otherwise.
***OHIO***
2004
Bush 50.6
Kerry 42.8
Bush +7.8 (5 polls)
Movement: D +5.8 (Bush won by 2)
2008
McCain 48.6
Obama 45.9
McCain +2.7 (9 polls)
Analysis: As I review my analysis above, I'm going to try to stick more to data then to my gut sense impressions about these states, which have never been proven particularly accurate. A few things about OH. Nate is right, at this time, it leans McCain. But by a whole lot less than it leaned Bush at the comparable time in '04. And while obviously the '04 result isn't what we're hoping for, the data (admittedely limited, just two cycles) suggests that as a R-leaning state, Ohio is particularly prone to republican convention bounces, and when it breaks toward Dems, it breaks late. Note that while I don't have the numbers in front of me, the state also broke towards Gore late in 2000, despite the campaign's having left the state, leading to much monday morning quarterbacking, and setting the stage for OH as the FL of 2004. Obama's problem in the current batch of OH polls is he's underperforming Kerry both amongst democrats, and, mostly, independents. The former problem is largerly cancelled out by the increase in the number of democrats. But there's no easy fix for the independent issue. Kerry won OH independents 53-32. And while the recent Ras/Fox poll has Obama winning indies 59-40, there's also polling showing him losing indies 37-45, 36-39, and 44-45 respectively. As above, I absolutely believe that if the race is about the economy from here on out, and the economy is used as a proxy for turning McCain into a combo of GWB's twin, and the rightful ancestor of GHWB's out-to-lunch, out of touch, can we please get this done with vibe, then the state is winnable for BHO. That said, I wouldn't want to--and I don't--ever bank on it in mapping out an Obama path to victory. I do believe that having a democratic administration is a change the importance of which can't be overstated, in regards to getting people the vote, and counting the votes cast. But I do share some concerns--not to the MSM extent--of Obama's having connected much more in the younger, more independent live and let live western states, as well as the "new professional" class in some southern states, than in the Rust Belt. I worry about the racial angle here, with part of the state touching Appalachia and feeling a whole lot like KY. If I had to choose now, I'd say McCain wins here, but still loses the election. But folks should not--NOT, NOT, NOT--let the idiot MSM analysts tell you OH is now for McCain. The historical trends suggest the current numbers are consisent with a more or less toss-up, and giving that Mac can't win without it, it should be fought for, hard.
***MINNESOTA***
2004
Kerry 46.7
Bush 44.7
Kerry +2.0 (6 polls)
Movement: D + 1 (Kerry won by 3)
2008
Obama 49.0
McCain 44.3
Obama + 4.7 (3 polls)
Analysis Not much here, other than, don't panic over the two recent polls showing a really tight race (Obama +2, and even). Obama enjoys a greater lead than Kerry did at the comparable time in '04, and MN never really came into play--it's one of those states where Kerry's 3 point win is, in a sense, bigger than it appears, since it was never in doubt. For the nervous types, please note that between late September and election day, Bush actually led in 5 different MN polls and also led in one of the polls included here. There's also the distinct possibility of McCain enjoying something of a localized convention bounce. Not saying there's not a universe wherein MN couldn't go red, but the election will already long since have been lost.
***WISCONSIN**
2004
Bush 48.4
Kerry 44.6
Bush +3.8 (5 polls)
Movement: approx D+4 (Kerry won by under 1%)
2008
Obama 46.0
McCain 43.0
Obama +3.0 (1 poll)
*Note--for purposes of having more than one data point, I also ran the numbers with the most recent WI poll prior to September. With that included, the numbers jump to Obama 48.5, McCain 43.5 (Obama +5).
Analysis: Back in January, I had WI easily rated as the "least safe" Kerry state from 2004--it's a state I've long felt has just been dying to flip, and inches ever closer. But with Obama, it's never even been competitive. Indeed, Obama has led in all 11 WI polls taken since mid-May. The lead has never been less than 2, and it's been in double digits four seperate times. In the same time frame in '04, Bush led in more than half the polls, and Kerry never had an individual lead larger than 6. Maybe it's the IL thing, maybe it's continuing love from the primary (where I thought the WI victory might have been Obama's most significant). Whatever it is, WI, surprisingly enough, seems secure.
***IOWA***
2004
Bush 48.0
Kerry 44.7
Bush +3.3 (7 polls)
Movement: Roughly D + 3.2 (Bush won by well under 1%)
2008
Obama 53.5%
McCain 40.0%
Obama +13.5% (2 polls)
Analysis: Another state that I thought would be a fierce battleground that isn't even competetive--it's about as competetive as South Dakota, literally. Seems like the primary love affair never ended, and Obama probably doesn't even need a ton of resources in the state (though I'd keep a chunk there, so as not to give the appearance of a snub). This state has simply never been close in polling this year.
***ILLINOIS***
No numbers or analysis needed for Obama's home state (I will reciprocate when I get to AZ on another day).
***INDIANA***
2004
Bush 57.0
Kerry 37.0
Bush +20.0 (2 polls)
Movement: R+1 (Bush won by 21)
2008*Note: b/c there has been no September polling, I have substituted the August averages. This should be taken with a grain of salt, as it won't incorporate McCain's bounce period.
McCain 48.0
Obama 43.3
McCain +4.7% (3 polls)
Analysis: Likely leans McCain, especially with the Mac having largely consolidated his base, and the natural tendency towards party consolidation as the election gets closer. That said, I agree with Chuck Todd and others--keep your eye on it. As Nate notes, the disparity in resources between what Obama is doing here, and what McCain is (not) doing may be historic. And if this race becomes all economy, all the time, it could certainly come into play. That said, it seems 99% likely that if Obama wins IN, he'll have already won the election. But it is a prime example of the electoral situation, where McCain simply has more to worry about than Obama does.
*************************************
This is the Midwest edition. But I thought I'd just note the numbers, without any analysis, for the other states I've looked at thus far.
***COLORADO*
- Bush 46.8, Kerry 43.0 (Bush +3.8--4 polls)
- Obama 47.0, McCain 46.4 (Obama +0.6--4 polls)
***VIRGINIA***
- Bush 49.0, Kerry 43.0 (Bush +6.0--1 poll)
- McCain 48.0, Obama 47.7 (McCain +0.3--6 polls)
***NEW MEXICO***
- Bush 45.3, Kerry 44.6 (Bush +0.7, 3 polls)
- Obama 49.0, McCain 46.5 (Obama +2.5, 2 polls)
***MONTANA***
- Bush 60.0, Kerry 32.0 (Bush + 28%, 1 poll)
- McCain 51.0, Obama 44.5 (McCain +6.5%, 2 polls)
So that's the midwest. From where I'm sitting, this was always going to be a close election. I always thought the democratic to lose meme was just a MSM "set up the dems to fail" game (not a conspiracy mind you, just a framing decision). And it will be close. But I'm pretty happy with where the numbers are, especially in PA, VA, IA, NM, and CO. Especially with the economy moving back to the forefront, the series of McCain gaffes, the whole dishonesty meme, and slipping Palin favorability (as well as a decrease in Palin-dominated coverage), I feel literally a world better today than I did one week ago. I apologize for any mathematical errors, my eyes do tricks on me sometimes. And if y'all enjoy this, I'll break it down for other regions as well. I'm no Nate, but I love this stuff.