Comments on: Obama Gets ‘Big Bounce’ in Gallup Poll

By: Steven Donegal

Steven Donegal — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:28:49 +0000

I was reading an interview with David Pouffle (Obama's compaign manager) who said they don't care about the national polls. He said they care about 18 states and that Obama is where they want him to be in those states. The race Obama is running seems to be on a different track than the national media thinks it is.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:34:32 +0000

Ah: Yes, Obama had a meaningful lead months ago. It's been statistically tied, though, for quite some time. A 3 point fluctuation in a single poll is just random error.

By: Evan Vaida

Evan Vaida — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:44:31 +0000

Just because Rasmussen has them tied does not mean they actually are. Rasmussen indicates that the bounce is may be coming based on their day-by-day polling data. Also, just because Rasmussen uses a likely voter model does not make their polls more reliable. Mark Blumenthal's answer to which polling method is better:

...Listen closely now: We. Don't. Know.

By: charles austin

charles austin — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:30:54 +0000

Analyzing poll results seems about as meaningful as trying to interpret tea leaves.

By: Jeffrey W. Baker

Jeffrey W. Baker — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:55:35 +0000

Michael is correct. In your own words you said that Obama's "lead in the polls has all but vanished." That's not some pundit's quote. A few hours later, when the same lead reappears, it's sampling error. Don't misunerstand me. I'm firmly in the random fluctuation camp. I'm just bemused by the fact that the same evidence leads to opposite conclusions when it suits the author.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:33:52 +0000

Sorry, should have linked to the article in the above post: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/what_obama_needs_to_do/

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:32:38 +0000

He's probably referring to this:

Democratic pundits are understandably nervous about the fact that Barack Obama’s once impressive lead in the polls has all but vanished.

Though in that post you weren't clear if you were merely talking about the perspective of the pundits, or even how far back you were going in your reference to Obama's impressive lead.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:28:25 +0000

Which post are you speaking of? Every post on polling I've had in the past two weeks has said that the race is essentially tied with random fluctuaton.

By: Jeffrey W. Baker

Jeffrey W. Baker — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:19:41 +0000

You say this is insignificant fluctuation, but if one scrolls down three or four posts on your own blog, one sees another article predicated on the significance of a similar-sized drop in Obama's lead. Either they are both insignificant, or they are both significant. It can't be that the drops are significant and the bounces are not...