It was polls of Hillary supporters in the primaries, ones that said 75% of her supporters are voting for Obama. There are many democrats who supported others in the primaries and even more who are uncommitted and they will also largely be voting for Obama. The media spin and the TV ads are coming from Republicans trying to influence Hillary's supporters. Of course, I don't accept it. Your scenario has too many "ifs". It could happen, but it ain't very likely. I've already said that if enough Hillaristas bolt, Obama can lose, but even 25% is not enough, in my opinion. The curve has fluctuated and will continue to do so, as it always has. My point is that the "trends" in today's polls will not last any more than those of last May's polls. They tell what voters say today, not how they will vote in November. I think you overestimate the number of liberal democrats that will shun Obama over Hillary. I think you overestimate the number of moderate democrats who will vote republican this year at all. And I think you underestimate that there are disgruntled conservatives who will not vote for McCain.
Does the popular vote really matter when the election will come down to electoral college votes in a handful of states? Does anybody believe Obama will somehow win the midwest? Does anybody believe McCain will win in the northeast? Whoever wins this election will not be a popular choice with the majority of Americans. In fact, this could be the least popular choice for president in the history of this country. Does anyone expect either of these two to serve eight years or is this just a temporary fix until either party can find a decent candidate?
Good question. It's possibility that 71-year-old cancer survivor McCain may not be medically able to serve two terms. His VP candidate will be interesting. This is someone who has a higher chance of being an accidental President than anyone in recent history. If either of them have a good first term, they will go for 8. But if our current problems are not addressed it will be a one-term experiment. We need a sharp and decisive change of course right now.
Maybe I need to clarify...less popular prior to being elected. In most elections there seems to be optimism even if the candidates aren't the voters' top choice. With the exception of a few people who believe McCain's a maverick or Obama is God, most people seem relegated to voting for the lesser of two evils. I'm guessing that more people will vote against someone rather than voting for someone this election. That's pretty sad considering we have nearly 300 million people in this country. You would think we could do better. :dis:
the winner will have at least near a majority. the winner will have a much higher % than Clinton in 92.
No, it's not media spin. It's a poll. And it reflects hard data as of today. Actually my scenario had only one if. If the data you provided was accurate, Obama would stand to lose 4-6 million Hillary voters to McCain. At last you take a stand on the data you provided, instead of going off on a tangent about the convention, November elections, or the amount of fluctuation. I didn't make the numbers up, but I do disagree about their impact. If Obama loses this many Hillary votes, I believe he will lose. Never in dispute and has no relevance to what I asked. My estimate is from polls you listed. Whether it fluctuates or not in the next 3 months, I have not overestimated today. You have no data to support this. And you have no data to support this either.
The link below keeps track of the polls and applies them to the electoral votes. You can clearly see where the battleground states will be and it seems to be updated fairly regularly. I think today it shows Obama getting 274 electoral votes(270 is the magic number). http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/
Dude, I don't need data to support "I think that you overestimate". I'm the worlds friggin' expert on my opinion and I'm referring to what you glean from your data.
