Poll: Obama opens double-digit lead

[Willie99]

over Clinton


and only two days before the primary

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) -- With Tuesday's New Hampshire primary fast approaching, Sen. Barack Obama has opened a double-digit lead over Sen. Hillary Clinton in the state, a CNN-WMUR poll found Sunday.
<!--startclickprintexclude-->
<script type="text/javascript"> var CNN_ArticleChanger = new CNN_imageChanger('cnnImgChngr','/2008/POLITICS/01/06/nh.poll/imgChng/p1-0.init.exclude.html',2,1); //CNN.imageChanger.load('cnnImgChngr','imgChng/p1-0.exclude.html'); </script> <!--endclickprintexclude--> Obama, the first-term senator from Illinois who won last week's Iowa caucuses, led the New York senator and former first lady 39 percent to 29 percent in a poll conducted Saturday and Sunday

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/06/nh.poll/index.html

 

[Willie99]

Tuesday, January 08, 2008
-->

The final Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in New Hampshire’s Democratic Presidential Primary shows Barack Obama leading Hillary Clinton 37% to 30%.




----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ras had it down to seven on election eve

 

[Willie99]

What is it with Obama and polls not matching?

Unprecedented in the modern era of American politics.

 

[BetIt]

It's nice when you pick up the most obvious polling error in the primary.

Some states were dead on, some weren't.

You have to keep in mind they were polling primaries....so many more factors going into predicting the electorate...and it's also so much more fluid. Especially NH with it being only a few days after Iowa.

 

[BetIt]

And to add, good friend of mine worked in NH for Obama...they hit their win number....turnout was just so much more than expected. The Clinton machine there worked wonders with squeezing out votes.

 

[Willie99]

It's nice when you pick up the most obvious polling error in the primary.

Some states were dead on, some weren't.

You have to keep in mind they were polling primaries....so many more factors going into predicting the electorate...and it's also so much more fluid. Especially NH with it being only a few days after Iowa.

Isn't that all it would take?

Is it possible for any variable you suggested to be a mitigating factor could actually become reality again?

Are these polling irregularities not unprecedented?

 

[gtc08]

hey betit, willie99 just dont want to admit anything is going good for obama, so he dismisses the poll numbers.

 

[BetIt]

Sure...

But you're 2nd post in here is wrong...

It's not just Obama always underperforming..
Nor is a poll being wrong pre election day unprecedented ..
he's over performed polling just as well in the primary

If the point of your post is....polls aren't the bible or these polls we see could be wrong come election day...you aren't finding any arguments here...but to tie it to strictly an Obama phenom is wrong.

 

[cussin'it]

Wooly my boy. ....if it keeps on raining the levee's gonna break...


:lol:, instead of cyber-plugging holes in the dam, let's do some serious repair....battleground states ring a bell?

The number of unsafe dams has risen by
33% since 1998. ASCE’s 2005 Report
Card for America’s Infrastructure gave
Dams in the United States a grade of “D.”
Additionally, the number of high-hazard
potential dams (dams whose failure would
cause loss of human life) is increasing
dramatically. Since 1998, the number of
high-hazard-potential dams has increased
from 9,281 to 11,883, with 1,006 in
North Carolina alone. The combined effect
of rapid downstream development,
aging/non-compliant structures and
inadequate past design practices, coupled
with a predicted increase in extreme
events, demands fully funded and staffed
state dam safety programs, as well as
substantial and proactive funding for dam
repairs.

Even more alarming, states presently
report more than 3,200 “unsafe” dams,
which have deficiencies that leave them
more susceptible to failure. Several states
have large numbers of deficient dams,
including Ohio (825), Pennsylvania (325),
New Jersey (193), and Indiana (445).

http://www.damsafetycoalition.org/files/pdf/2007damsafety_final.pdf

:howdy:

 

[Willie99]

did I say "always"?

I was looking for a summation of polling numbers vs results, but couldn't find anything of substance.

Of course the polls can and do change, but they don't usually swing 15 to 20 points in one day. I'm suggesting there may be underlying causes, such as race.

 

[Willie99]

Cuzz, :lolBIG:

:trx-smly0

 

[BetIt]

did I say "always"?

I was looking for a summation of polling numbers vs results, but couldn't find anything of substance.

Of course the polls can and do change, but they don't usually swing 15 to 20 points in one day. I'm suggesting there may be underlying causes, such as race.

Yes I get where you're going...and if it wasn't for race I'd say this election is over already..I'm not sure in a country where you have had only a few black politicians win top of the ticket races you can ever be comfortable

But you're comparing apples and oranges with these primary polls here. Primary polling is always less accurate because it's always less predictable. Primary polls to be that way off aren't unusual. Primary polling is very hard

I would think if you look at the cross tabs of rasmussen's final polling and compare it to the actual electorate they aren't very similar.

And you had Obama up 37-30 the last day of the primary........that's 1/3 of the electorate that is undecided.....and 37-30 is still with leaners. I mean those numbers are so fluid.

 

[BetIt]

Edit...forgot the adulterer who cheated on his dying wife was still in the race...did notice though Obama ended up with 37% of the vote