New WSJ Poll: Obama Beating McCain By Almost Every Conceivable Measure

cross posted from dailykos

There has been a lot of hyperventilating recently with the new Quinnipiac polls showing McCain gaining strength in several key swing states, including surpassing Obama for the first time in my own state of Colorado.

Breathless MSM outlets have siezed upon this one set of polls to push the false meme that McCain is catching up.

But the MSM reality seems to be an alternate reality. If we take a more holistic look at the situation, another side of the story emerges. Even as the Wall Street Journal tries depserately to zero in on statistically insignificant details of their own new poll to spin reality towards some kind of "good news" for their preferred conservative candidate they can not escape their own poll results.

For hidden within their own editorial are the seeds of a more profound reality.

Photobucket

By nearly every measure and in nearly every region, Obama is leading McCain. There are only a handfull of exceptions, a regional one and two demographic ones.

The only region where McCain leads is the South. Big surprise there, that region is the most reliably republican stronghold in the country and has been for 40 years, yet looking at the margin there is plenty to worry  conservatives. McCain is only leading Obama by 6 points 47% to 41% in the South. He loses in every single other region of the country by anywhere from 8 points to as many as 17, and that includes in their special breakout of swing states. Which almost certainly include the handful of states in the Quinnipiac poll.

On the demographic side, again, there are few surprises. McCain leads Obama among seniors aged 65 and up by 10 points 51% to 41%, but he loses every single other demographic group. Admittedly two of these groups are within the statistical margin of error, those being 35-49 and 50-64 age groups where Obama leads by 4 and 5 points respectively. But Obama's lead among younger voters aged 18-34 is a whopping 24 points!

The only other demographic group where McCain leads is among conservatives 73-15%. Big shock there, but even under ideology, Obama beats McCain by 26 points among moderates (55-29%) and of course among liberals (82-12%).

Even the breakdown by income is disappointing to conservatives, where Obama leads in every single income group. There really is nothing in this poll for conservatives to crow about, but it did not stop the WSJ from trying to spin it and bury it by providing a photographic link from the main article which does not mention one word about the obvious implications of the polling data.



Display:


See (none / 0)

Obama's lead among younger voters aged 18-34 is a whopping 24 points!

This is why the internals on that Minnesota poll are ridiculous.  The youth of Minnesota are not so different from the youth in the rest of the country that the difference could possibly account for a discrepency like that.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:43:15 PM EST

Untrue (none / 0)

hideous combovers have a special place in the hearts of Minnesotan youth.


by JJE on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:32:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Untrue (2.00 / 2)


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:48:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So this is a GOOD Murdoch poll? (none / 0)

I am confused. Do we throw out the ones that we dont' like and accept WSJ polls that we do?


by Mayor McCheese on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:49:27 PM EST

Re: So this is a GOOD Murdoch poll? (2.00 / 1)

You know, the diarist probably has no idea what you're talking about, since that was a different person completely.


We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies.
by Jess81 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:52:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am confused. (none / 0)

Nothing new there. The point seems to be that there is no base of evidence to support the corporate media meme that Obama is slipping, or that McLame is somehow stumbling toward the lead.


by Beren on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:56:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am confused. (none / 0)

Even if he slips in the polls, they are failing to take a number of things into account. Number one, few polls actually track people who have cell phones. LOTS of kids out there of voting age who have only a cell phone. Number two, they are polling REGISTERED voters that they get from a list. They don't have some sort of secret database of all voters that is constantly updated, so they miss any voters that Obama gets added to the registers, a group that is pretty substantial in size.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:53:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am confused. (none / 0)

The fact that each poll is different from those that predede it is another reason to look at them and shrug.

The best indicator of where McLame knows he stands is his incessant petty attacks. He wouldn't be discrediting his own image that way if he didn't see his campaign already spiraling down the drain.


by Beren on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 10:21:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's not really the point (none / 0)

Or not the only point anyway. The point is that the WSJ is desperate to spin this as somehow positive for McCain, even ignoring the vast majority of the data in their own poll. Notice how the article text focuses on the drilling argument that wasn't even part of the poll they used to support the article. Obviously they are hoping people won't click on the poll data link.

Additionally, if we believe the WSJ polls are likely to be biased towards conservatives, what does it say when their own poll shows Obama beating McCain by nearly every possible metric?


by Phil In Denver on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:01:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not really the point (none / 0)

You are right here. When I read the article I had to search to find who was actually in the lead. They led with some subsidiary data which looked better for McCain.


by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 08:51:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Probably depends (none / 0)

on what the definition of "we" is.


by JJE on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:31:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

u-huh..... (none / 0)

"I am confused...."

Yes, we know, we have read your other posts.


"Either you're the butcher Or the lamb but even so, Everybody pays as they go-Jakob Dylan"
by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:52:03 PM EST

Re: u-huh..... (none / 0)

Pretty lame, and unoriginal too.


by Mayor McCheese on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:09:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: u-huh..... (2.00 / 1)

I'm sure he just wanted it to match your stale and busted talking points.


We want to see Ivana [Trump] because we are so desperate in Alaska for any semblance of glamour and culture. - Sarah Palin
by spacemanspiff on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:36:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: u-huh..... (none / 0)

It's Friday, and I am fresh out of sparkling snappy comebacks.

What's your excuse?


"Either you're the butcher Or the lamb but even so, Everybody pays as they go-Jakob Dylan"
by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 08:06:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Phil (none / 0)

Hey Phil
If you did not get the word...
Saturday 7/26
Community Canvass West Denver
with Bill Richardson..
10a.m.-2p.m.

Start at SEIU Office
2525 W. Alameda AVE.


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:01:01 PM EST

Re: New WSJ Poll: Obama (none / 0)

The good news implied here is somewhat invalidated by the fact that the most committed Obama supporters have been telling us for months that the national polls don't count the only important ones are the state polls. So which is it guys. What we're seeing here is that needs her to bolster him in certain states. The Obama fanatics won't have it but its going to become inevitable.  


by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 08:49:41 PM EST

"blah blah fanatics blah blah cultists (none / 0)

blah blah blah McCain is going to win blah."

I'm sorry, were you saying something?


Donate!
by chrisblask on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 12:31:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "blah blah fanatics blah blah cultists (none / 0)

I certainly wasn't saying McCain was going to win. Now I've wiped your spittle of my face why don't you answer the question instead of behaving like a .......


by ottovbvs on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 09:42:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Who spit who? (none / 0)

I'm sorry, as a fanatic I can't do reason.

If I were going to spit on you I'd open a conversation with a comment not dissimilar to yours: "I want to get the freakin' idiots' views on global warming, so could you tell me what you think about the impact of the recent improvements in multicrystal silicon PVC's?"

Then, when you tell me to f-off I can look around innocently and say, "See? s/he just proved how unreasonable all of them are?"

Try sneering at your conversational partners next time you start a family or business discussion, then come back to me and justify the use of insults as conversational openers.

Fail.

-chris


Donate!
by chrisblask on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 09:59:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

As useless as polls are, this is interesting: (none / 0)

McCain leads is among conservatives 73-15%. Big shock there, but even under ideology, Obama beats McCain by 26 points among moderates (55-29%) and of course among liberals (82-12%).

note that 88% of conservatives gave a choice while 94% of liberals did.  IOW, 12% of self-identified conservatives answered "I don't give a rat's ass who wins".

-chris


Donate!
by chrisblask on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 12:35:33 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.