<p>I find it interesting that Republicans want to argue strongly that Clinton would be more electable in November. Is this because it makes them feel better about the possibility that McCain might win? Do they want to sow doubts about Obama? I’m not too impressed by any of these polls, though. Any poll you wanted to look at a year ago would probably have said that Hillary had the whole thing locked up. I think this election could easily play out with either Obama or McCain winning in the fall. I have my own preference, and my prediction, but I wouldn’t care to bet the family farm on it.</p>
<p>Tom Edsall on Huffingtonpost has an interesting account of the history behind proportional representation, caucuses and superdelegates. I shows Harold Ickes role in developing the rules, which makes the Clinton strategy somewhat baffling. At the same time, it gives credence to Hillary supporters’ argument about her electoral strength.</p>
<p>I’d like her to get an important cabinet post. I’d be more willing to see her as VP is Bill was not such a strong player and if we had not had Cheney as VP. But giving Hillary and important cabinet position would make use of her formidable talents and work ethics. </p>
<p>[Obama’s</a> Debt To Harold Ickes - Politics on The Huffington Post](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Obama's Debt To Harold Ickes | HuffPost Latest News)</p>
<p>campaign alert according to the major news sources - she will admit tonight that Obama has the nomination.</p>
<p>“which makes the Clinton strategy somewhat baffling”</p>
<p>I think it makes the Clinton strategy perfectly transparent, and it does not look good in that light.</p>
<p>To Lax. </p>
<p>THATS your response? parts of the polls are from February so they don’t matter?</p>
<p>Way to completely ignore whatever part of the argument is not convenient to you?</p>
<p>Hey Lax- Did you look at the realclear link? It is an average of several polls. The ras poll you mentioned is is >2 weeks old btw. I prefer more recent data. Sen. Obama is up and is widening against HRC and McCain. See for yourself at link.</p>
<p>[RealClearPolitics</a> - Election 2008 - Latest Polls](<a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html]RealClearPolitics”>RealClearPolitics - Election 2008 - Latest Polls)</p>
<p>Tuesday, June 03
Race Poll Results Spread
Democratic Presidential Nomination Gallup Tracking Obama 52, Clinton 43 Obama +9.0
Democratic Presidential Nomination Rasmussen Tracking Obama 49, Clinton 42 Obama +7.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton USA Today/Gallup Clinton 48, McCain 44 Clinton +4.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama USA Today/Gallup Obama 49, McCain 44 Obama +5.0
Massachusetts: McCain vs. Obama SurveyUSA Obama 46, McCain 41 Obama +5.0</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You seem lost when it comes to how polls are weighted so I’ll do my best to help you out. Today is June 3. It’s only acceptable to take a poll from February if you assign that poll very little weight. Unfortunately in the link you provided every poll, whether it was from February or yesterday, was given the exact same weight. What we all know however is things have changed from February so you can’t give it the exact same weight. Weighting the polls, by providing recent and more accurate (based on past performance) polls with larger weight, ensures that you have a better indicator of the actual, real time situation. </p>
<p>The link I provided does just that. It’s not just that “some” of the polls were from february in your link, every state had a poll that was from february and skewed the final result.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>See above. Averages don’t work unless you weight (RCP doesn’t). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Popular vote on a national level doesn’t matter because we don’t use it to elect a President. Show me state by state popular votes that determine the electoral college.</p>
<p>Um, HRC wants to use the pop vote to get the nomination from the superD’s. Guess it’s suppose to work that way when you’re you’re behind.</p>
<p>Thanks for taking the time to explain the weighting of polls. RCP remains the standard bearer on polls however. It’s used campaign and media wide.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe I don’t understand your demand <you didn’t=“” say=“” please=“” ;)=“”> or perhaps I’m misinformed, but I thought the majority of the popular vote in each state, determines to which candidate the EV’s go.</you></p>
<p>FTR, I think it’s a moot point to compare HRC and McCain anymore.</p>
<p>Hot off the press Lax: [Election</a> 2008: Presidential, Senate and House Races Updated Daily](<a href=“http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Jun03.html]Election”>Election 2008: Presidential, Senate and House Races Updated Daily)</p>
<p>:D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is 100% false. I’ve worked on two campaigns and neither of them used RCP for the exact reasons I mentioned above. They do internal polling. It is far from the standard when it comes to polls but the media likes to use it because it’s 1) easy to find and 2) nice to look at (you average all the polls, that must give us the most accurate prediction possible!!!). </p>
<p>
</you></p>
<p>Look at it this way: Say there are three states in our country, whoever wins the most EC votes wins the election. State 1 is New Hampshire, state 2 is Ohio, and state 3 is Oregon. </p>
<p>Obama could win the popular vote big (he loses 50.6-50.4 in NH/OH and wins 70-30 in Oregon) but still lose the EC vote. Multiply this over and over and you see why looking at the popular vote doesn’t work. This is compounded in an election like this when “blue” states are going ever bluer than before whereas red states are closer than before. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s the same map from 270towin.com and I’ll tell you why it’s wrong. They don’t weight polls either. Look at Ohio for example. They say it goes Obama by a little, then scroll down and look at the Ohio polls. Had the “Obama +9” poll been the only one released in May then it would be telling, but we see two other polls released in may that show it a very close race, with a slight edge to McCain (+4 in the most recent, and +1). Further looking at the history of the polls it becomes clear that the realiability of the Obama +9 poll is in question because in terms of vote %'s for each candidate it appears to be an outlier…a trend that has become common with SUSA polls in Ohio. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. </p>
<p>You seem genuinly interested in this so I suggest you look at fivethirtyeight.com . There is a whole section dedicated to how they weight their polls and the advantages of doing so. Furthermore they gather all the recent polls on a daily basis (unlike 270towin or rcp) so you get the newest info up to date.</p>
<p>So only polls that favor your opinion matter?</p>
<p>You can’t weight past polls anymore because they are going to change so dramatically as Clinton supports Obama.</p>