2008 Polls Versus 2004 Polls
Something funny happened in 2004 where a lot of progressives convinced themselves near the end that John Kerry was likely to win the election even though he was narrowly behind in the polls. Then a lot of people have gone and misremembered that as thinking that Kerry was likely to win because he was ahead in the polls, which he wasn’t. Thus, many are left unable to believe that Obama’s lead in the polls makes his victory likely.
Fortunately, Chris Bowers has a comparison chart we can believe in:
As you can see, Kerry is running well ahead of where Obama was. The theory behind “Kerry’s gonna win” was that undecideds were likely to break heavily for the challenger — heavily enough to make up his small gap in the polls. That wasn’t a crazy thing to believe, but it clearly had a whiff of wishful thinking about it. At the moment, though, Obama just has a big lead.
51 Responses to “2008 Polls Versus 2004 Polls”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:24 am
Don’t freak us out: Obama is running well ahead of where Kerry was.
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:28 am
I am now extremely nervous about Obama’s chances to win in 2004 against Bush.
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:33 am
Republicans (see Morning Joe) remind me of myself 4 years ago – hoping and wishing everything will fall in line for my candidate. The big difference is that Obama is far ahead of where Bush was in the polls 4 years ago.
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:35 am
“If Obama wanted to run against John Kerry, he should have run four years ago. …”
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:45 am
I don’t think you’ve ever read a post after typing it.
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:48 am
Did anyone notice that the Republicans and Fox News have been crowing about how the race is “tightening,” but skipped the part where they acknowledged they were “losing”? I thought McCain said a week ago that he had Obama where he wanted him.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I would add that voter suppression nibbles around the edges. Voter suppression made a difference in 2000 because FL was close, and it could make a difference in some close Senate elections (such as in GA). Voter suppression is not going to make much of a dent with numbers such as these, particularly with an electorate that is determined to vote and armed with photo IDs, utility bills, and cameras.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Sometimes Matt writes his posts like Mad-Libs, then fills in the blanks randomly, just for kicks.
On Wednesday, we’ll probably be scratching our heads over an Yglesias post like this:
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
What made the 2004 wishful thinking even more plausible was that undecided’s had broken to Gore in 2000, enough to gain him a narrow win (but not a victory, oddly enough).
But that’s undecided’s breaking to the Democrat … not undecided’s breaking to the “challenger”. Gore was the quasi-incumbent, and Bush the challenger in 2000.
I don’t recall where Clinton was in the polls just before election day in 1996, since it was a foregone conclusion, but I remember Bush being behind enough in ‘92 for SNL to do their “don’t make me a one-term loser” sketch.
Sometime undecideds break for the incumbent, sometimes for the challenger. This time I would not be surprised if undecideds break for McCain, just because the Obama ground game is so good, they’ve converted a lot of undecideds leaning Obama into supporters.
But by the same token, McCain does not seem to be sitting in a position where he can win on that basis alone.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
“Sometime undecideds break for the incumbent, sometimes for the challenger.”
Undecideds almost always break against the incumbent.
Bush’s ability to run even among late deciders in ‘04 (aided by OBL) was the exception to the rule.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Wow, the number of typos and mistakes in your posts today is surprising.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm
The reason we were optimistic about Kerry’s chances in 2004 was not the national polls, where he was somewhat behind, but the state-by-state polls, which showed both Ohio and Florida as toss-ups. Despite being very likely to win the popular vote, Bush absolutely needed to win both of those states, and that made Kerry a slight favorite. It turned out that the Florida polls were way off, but we couldn’t know that before the election.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Petey,
Out of curiosity, were you an Intrade wizard in 2004? I’m curious as to what their final Kerry and OH/FL values were. I’ve heard they got every state right but OH at Bush 55% vs 75% are quite different things.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
“It turned out that the Florida polls were way off, but we couldn’t know that before the election.”
Everyone knew FL was going Bush in ‘04 a week out. All the final week action was centered around OH and the upper midwest. Follow the candidate visits.
“Despite being very likely to win the popular vote, Bush absolutely needed to win both of those states”
Four days out, Bush wasn’t “very likely” to win the popular vote.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:32 pm
> Out of curiosity, were you an Intrade wizard in 2004?
Intrade? Isn’t that the gambling site that recently announced their odds were being jacked by a player with a lot of money to throw away?
Cranky
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Re: Everyone knew FL was going Bush in ‘04 a week out.
True, but the polls still predicted a much narrower margin for Bush. My county (Pinellas) was expected to go for Kerry,
but went for Bush instead by a few hundred votes.
Another poll blooper in 2004: Wisconsin was expected to go for Bush, but instead Kerry got it.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
OK, but where is Kerry in December compared to where Obama was in April?
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
“Petey, Out of curiosity, were you an Intrade wizard in 2004?”
Yup. Made an absolute killing in the primaries. Made a killing in late September on the Kerry bounceback. Gave (a relatively small) part of my winnings back over the final week as Bush closed better than I expected.
The ‘04 primaries were crazily mispriced. You could buy Edwards plus Kerry for about 12% the weekend before IA, after it was already clear the wheels were off the Dean bandwagon.
I’m curious as to what their final Kerry and OH/FL values were. I’ve heard they got every state right but OH at Bush 55% vs 75% are quite different things.
I have no specific memory of the Intrade pricing on those states, but going on my memory of what the CW was, I’d guess that 24 hours out OH was 55/45 Kerry and FL was 70/30 Bush.
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Apologies. I accidently bolded when I meant to italicize…
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Ty-poo Po-lice sezs:
“As you can see, Kerry is running well **ahead** of where Obama was.”
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:41 pm
“As you can see, Kerry is running well ahead of where Obama was.”
This quote should go at the top of the home page, under Matt’s name, as fair warning to new readers of what they may encounter here.
November 2nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
“As you can see, Kerry is running well ahead of where Obama was. ”
Noooo! Don’t even type stuff like that!
November 2nd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
This socialist narrative is becoming interesting.
Team McCain is responsible for it and obviously it is responsible for some poll movement to McCain.
At the moment, there is no current anti-McCain narrative. My guess at the reason is that both Team Obama and the left-wing echo chamber do not feel the type of urgency that creates pressure to invent negative narratives about the opponent.
Team Obama also strikes me as tempermentally squeamish about creating and advancing negative narratives about its opponent. I doubt the left will support another candidate with these qualms in the foreseeable future.
We’ll see. My best guess is that Obama will win the states that he’s projected to win big, and win the presidency more closely than expected and McCain will win the close states but it will not be enough.
November 2nd, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“At the moment, there is no current anti-McCain narrative.”
It’s bizarre, no? It’s as if Obama decided to suspend his campaign for the week before the election.
Team Obama, as is usual for them in crucial moments, is ceding the air war.
—–
“Team Obama also strikes me as tempermentally squeamish about creating and advancing negative narratives about its opponent. I doubt the left will support another candidate with these qualms in the foreseeable future.”
Well, given that the foreseeable future of the next eight years will involve the left supporting Obama, I’d have to say I disagree.
The genius of the Axelrod school of trailblazing African-American politicians is that the left gets locked in by the racial appeal and thus can’t complain about the lack of partisanship.
November 2nd, 2008 at 4:41 pm
“This socialist narrative is becoming interesting. Team McCain is responsible for it and obviously it is responsible for some poll movement to McCain.”
McCain has been reeling in downscale whites in PA over the past week, but I’m not sure if that’s a localized effect due to his focus on PA, or represents a more national trend.
If it is national, it still won’t be enough to save McCain, but it could hold Dem House pickups to less than the 25 to 30 seats everyone is predicting.
November 2nd, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Team Obama, as is usual for them in crucial moments, is ceding the air war.
Team Obama has in fact realized that the air war is over. They’ve moved on to another phase of the campaign while McCain has remained stuck in the mud.
Obama’s campaign is laser focused on positive messaging and GOTV. Petey’s snark notwithstanding, the campaign is in high gear. He may have missed Obama’s 30 minute commercial on 7 networks the other night, but I didn’t. Also, Petey is obviously unaware of the massive operation underway across the nation, the tens of thousands of volunteers knocking on doors, pushing people to the polls. I’ve been participating in this in my own small way in my own small corner of the country, and it’s an amazing thing to behold.
November 2nd, 2008 at 6:16 pm
“Petey’s snark notwithstanding, the campaign is in high gear.”
It’s not snark. It’s reality.
I understand what Team Obama is doing from their perspective. It’s just a different set of priorities than what I have as a lefty Democrat.
Obama is successfully running as an Eisenhower. I want an FDR or an LBJ.
They are ceding the partisan argument to win the national unity argument.
November 2nd, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Re: McCain has been reeling in downscale whites in PA over the past week, but I’m not sure if that’s a localized effect due to his focus on PA, or represents a more national trend.
Mostly it looks to be a PA effect. To be sure McCain is picking up some support nationally as some of the GOP-leaning undecideds start deciding, but it still looks to be very limited. And the latest polls show no overall trend: McCain up some PA, OH, IN, and MO (but with PA still in Obama’s column, and OH still leaning Obama), while failing to gain much nationally, as his supoort is also weakening in AZ, GA and now AR. (FL and NC are still tossups, with a slight Obama lean; CO, NM and NV have been unaffected, or are slightly stronger for Obama)
A little scary for those who like to fret (that includes me), but realistically with only a day and a half to go, too little too late for McCain.
November 2nd, 2008 at 6:58 pm
“A little scary for those who like to fret (that includes me), but realistically with only a day and a half to go, too little too late for McCain.”
Again, the issue here isn’t the Presidential race, where the cake has been baked for a month now.
The issue is at the House level, where Obama’s decision to take a victory lap ahead of the vote may cost us 10+ seats.
November 2nd, 2008 at 8:00 pm
the foreseeable future of the next eight years will involve the left supporting Obama
I’m foreseeing past eight years. There’ll be candidates after Obama. The left elevated him in the primaries despite his mildness in standing for causes rather than because of that mildness. I think a less approval-seeking Obama would have been a better candidate and would win by more, but none was available. I expect the next approval-craving candidate not to be as lucky as Obama was.
It doesn’t matter now though, except a blowout would have been nice for practical as well as aesthetic reasons.
laser focused on positive messaging and GOTV
If Obama outperforms the polls, I was wrong. But positive messaging and GOTV are not incompatible with advancing a negative narrative about the opponent. GOTV is probably helped by the existence of a reason to vote against the opponent.
It is pretty clear that the polls are moving in McCain’s direction now both in important races and nationally. Probably not by enough, but if the difference isn’t that there is a currently active negative narrative about Obama – that he’s a socialist/wealth redistributor and none about McCain then what is the difference?
Team Obama to a large degree outsourced his negative narrative construction to the left echo chamber and the left echo chamber hasn’t moved on it since wardrobe-gate.
The right echo chamber has been much less effective this year than the left, when Team McCain began pushing its narrative the right echo chamber at least had something to follow.
Petey is more focused on the economic conditions which did have a major impact. I’m more intrigued by seeing the left echo chamber actually become more effective than the right – even with the handicap of lacking the central direction the right echo chamber gets from Team McCain.
But economic conditions, the left echo chamber suddenly becoming better at setting the national tone than the right and the new availability of a torrent of money on the left seem to me to be powering Obama into office despite the fact that Team Obama itself may actually be worse at campaigning than Team Clinton I, Team Gore, Team Kerry or Team Clinton II.
Amending that, Team Obama may well be better at mobilizing volunteers and GOTV but worse at what Petey is calling the air war than any major presidential candidacy I’ve ever seen.
Fortunately, in future elections when economic conditions and other factors don’t favor the democratic candidate as much as they do this year, the left is much more likely to rally behind a candidate who actively sets a narrative about his opponent.
November 2nd, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Another factor in Obama’s favor but that was outside of Obama’s control is that Team McCain turned out to be much more inept than any of the Team Bushs.
It’s as if the gods conspired to put Obama in office this year despite a relatively ineffective candidacy.
This is assuming, and fervently hoping, that Obama actually wins on Tuesday.
November 2nd, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Re: The issue is at the House level, where Obama’s decision to take a victory lap ahead of the vote may cost us 10+ seats.
Au contraire: every time the McCain campaign brags about how it is pulling even (in some mysterious, never-to-be-seen “internal poll”) it gins up Democratic turnout. Which is OK with me and in fact I fret that if we were seeing endless headlines about a looming Obama landslide not only might we see depressed Dem turnout, but some centrist voters might deliberately vote GOP in the Congressional voters out of fear of too much liberal triumphalism.
Re: It is pretty clear that the polls are moving in McCain’s direction now both in important races and nationally.
What polls are you reading? Overall, as I posted abive, Mccain has made some incremental gains here and there, but the averaged national numbers have barely budged, beyond random tiny fluctuations. And for every state where McCain has pulled closer to Obama there’s one where his numbers have declined.
November 2nd, 2008 at 8:27 pm
What polls are you reading?
Fivethirtyeight’s average has declined. The dailykos poll shows half the lead it showed ten days ago.
Probably not enough for McCain to win. Hopefully. But the movement is in that direction instead of the other.
November 2nd, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Re: Fivethirtyeight’s average has declined.
The RCP poll spread has also declined but only by about a percentage point, and mainly because McCain has come up– there has been no significant erosion in Obama’s numbers. This shows (if anything) that McCain has captured some of the GOP-leaning undecideds. However we have also seen a fair amount of bobbing up and down by a point of two in this average for the past month, so I don’t know if it means anything.
There’s no late McCain “surge” out there, any more than there was a late Kerry surge in 2004 despite the hopes of the Democrats that year (and that year’s spread was a lot narrower all along than this year’s).
As for DailyKos, I no more trust anything coming out of that partisan site than I’d trust Lucianne.com on the Right.
November 2nd, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Thanks
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:37 am
I’m not sure that I buy Matt’s claim that people have misremembered the 2004 election optimism being a result of polls showing Kerry ahead. As I recall, one of the last polls to come out before the election was a Zogby poll that showed Kerry ahead narrowly in the national poll, and ahead by larger margins in the state polls. That obviously was optimism (it was Zogby, after all), but it isn’t misremembering to remember that.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:28 am
Re: As I recall, one of the last polls to come out before the election was a Zogby poll that showed Kerry ahead narrowly in the national poll, and ahead by larger margins in the state polls.
I think you are not remembering this correctly. On Zogby’s site there’s a boast that the poll correctly called the 2004 election– which obviously it did not if the above were the case. The numbers were very close, and in several states within the margin of error, but that’s about it.
December 11th, 2008 at 3:55 am
The latest supercomputer horse race came down to a photo finish. IBM ’s Roadrunner inched out Cray Inc.’s newly beefed-up XT5 Jaguar to retain the top spot on the bi-annual Top500 list of supercomputers. The latest list was released
January 18th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
laptop battery
laptop batteries
March 11th, 2009 at 4:52 am
Incredible site!
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:23 am
tramadol
Great site. Good info
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:30 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:19 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
cheap brand pfizer viagra