Comments on: Update: Obama’s 50 State Strategy

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 18:59:42 +0000

I just thought Nevada should be mentioned. It, too, went Bush back in 2004 by a very small margin but leans ever so slightly towards Obama now. It's worth mentioning because it's 5 electoral votes creates a scenario in which Obama could lose FL, OH, and even Virginia but still win so long as he keeps all of the Kerry states and picks up NV, NM, CO and IA, which all seem likely at this point.

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 18:55:26 +0000

fivethirtyeight.com has actually been covering this topic. They point out that while many pollsters ARE cellphone friendly now, cellphone inclusion in polls give Obama a 2.8 point advantage on average.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/estimati...

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 14:59:42 +0000

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 14:55:26 +0000

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 11:59:42 +0000

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 11:55:26 +0000

By: Nquest

Nquest — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:04:39 +0000

I don't know where I first saw/heard it but after I came across the speculation, I found this:

http://www.11alive.com/news/politics_govt/elect...

At this point, I'm tired of people in the media trying to 'manufacture consent' and make the news instead of accurately reporting it.

By: monica

monica — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:24:02 +0000

i heard the news about Obama closing in on McCain's lead in WV. It's important to also remember that Huckabee won WV for the GOP. While Palin's religious and family views should have helped McCain, it seems the economy tanking has become a bigger priority for these voters. My parents are phonebanking in WV and my dad is going to drive voters to the polls in WV in November as well.

It's also important to know that WV has been dominantly blue except for W. They went red for W cause Gore came in talking clean coal.

WV was blue even for Carter over Reagan.

By: tvanel

tvanel — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 21:19:27 +0000

From the GA state Director

You may have seen reports in the past week that the Obama campaign is shifting resources from Georgia to other battleground states. I want to assure you today that while the campaign will continue to make strategic decisions about the best use of resources, Georgia is still very much a battleground state.

Today we have more than 30 field offices all across the state, with two more opening just last weekend. Dozens of field organizers are working to organize thousands of active volunteers on a daily basis. In fact, our volunteer base in Georgia is one of the most active of any Campaign for Change in the country. Over Labor Day weekend, Georgia Campaign for Change volunteers registered more than 32,000 new voters. These new voters were registered not by paid field organizers, but by regular Georgians like you that volunteered for change. More than 4,000 volunteers participate on a daily basis - registering new voters, hosting house parties, or phonebanking and canvassing for change. Our huge volunteer organization will allow us to run the largest ground game Georgia has ever seen.

Georgia is a battleground state, and we need your help to turn it blue. With less than 50 days until we make history (and less than three weeks to register voters), we need everyone who is ready for change to pitch in and lend a hand. Please visit http://ga.barackobama.com to join the campaign and show America that Georgia is ready for change.
Sincerely,
Antwaun Griffin
State Director, Obama for America

By: rikyrah

rikyrah — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 20:11:57 +0000

hadn't heard that nquest.

By: Nquest

Nquest — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 19:56:30 +0000

There are some rumors that Obama is conceding Georgia since campaign office(s) were closing. Anybody know anything about that?

By: Val

Val — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:53:57 +0000

I say – forget the polls. The best strategy is for folks to understimate how well we will do in each state. McCain's team won't know what to fight or where. They will have to take a best guess and to your point Rikyrah – this forces McCain to spend big money in states like FL.

I especially agree with the inconsistency with the polling because it does not incorporate most of the folks using their cell phones.

Because we “don't really know” . . . it plays into the fact hat we all have to remain involved, keep our eyes focused, take nothing for granted and PUSH to win this thing in November.

By: MotorCityBadBoy

MotorCityBadBoy — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:37:35 +0000

Even though that is one theory… I didn't see this theory bear fruit in the primaries… The polls were pretty accurate, and I didn't see any great deviations or upsets. (Besides Clinton winning New Hampshire, but those folks just like to be contrary.) I still think Barack will win, but I feel that if over the course of a few weeks the polls show more than a 2 point advantage for a candidate in a particular state, that candidate is going to win it. IMHO

By: Suprk

Suprk — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:43:25 +0000

In my opinion and I would love to hear from others is that these polls are not as accurate as they have been in the past. I say this because these polls only reflect those with land lines, or home phones. These polls never reflect those homes that only use cell or mobile phones. As Pollster.com concluded months ago

If the compound growth rate in 2007 and 2008 remains as it was in 2003-2006, then more than 25% of U.S. households will only have cell phones during the second half of 2008 (that is, when pre-election polling will be at its peak). "

That is where I feel Obama has a huge advantage. His campaign is tied into a huge chunk of these people. When he announced his VP selection, he sent it out via paging and e-mail. These are many of the people these polls have no direct link to. It would not surprise me that on election day there will be a huge effort to contact these people, and provide a larger effect to this election than these polls reflect.