Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Is Nader helping Obama?

Not a lot of big ideas here.  Just a little factoid I've noticed that I thought I'd draw to your attention.
Pollster.com has two graphs that cover the average of an aggregate of national polls.  One of these graphs is just Obama vs. McCain
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvO.php

Right now the spread here is 4 points.  It's O 46.9, M 42.9.
The other graph includes (some) third-party candidates.  Not McKinney, but Barr and Nader.
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvOand3s.php

The spread here is 9.5 points.  It's O 47.4, and M (brace yourself) 37.9.
In other words, Barack's number doesn't differ at all when third-party candidates are included.  Actually, it goes up slightly.  But McCain's drops 5 points.  
It gets weirder.  Barr only gets 2.6% of the vote, so he can't be responsible for McCain's whole 5-point drop.  Nader gets 4.2%.  This has got to mean that there are some people (at least 2.5%) whose preferences go, in this order,
NaderMcCainObama.
Go figure.  Ron Paul voters?  If you look at the trend lines, the level of support for Nader and Barr has been quite steady, so it's not a recent (post-FISA) phenomenon.
Of course, the states and the electoral vote are what really matter, and it's just July.  I assume that a lot of strays will come back to the Republican fold after things get bitter in September / October.  But it's still an interesting phenomenon, and one to keep an eye on.  Has anyone seen this discussed elsewhere?


Comments (32)

Sorry about the paragraphing. Need to stick with Firefox, avoid Safari.

Blasphemy. Well, at least you weren't recommending Internet Explorer.

In the few minutes since I posted, another poll got added and the numbers adjusted slightly. (It's now M 38.4.) But the overall significance remains the same. The inclusion of third-party candidates seems to hurt McCain dramatically, and Barack not at all. And it doesn't seem to matter whether the added candidates come from the right or the left.

avatar

It's an interesting find and may be worth watching, but polls are far too volatile right now to draw any definitive conclusions. It's essentially the difference between large numbers, and a small change in either can have a large effect on the difference. It's also important to understand the different methodologies that the pollsters use.

So the question mark seems about right. Once you have 4-5 comparable polls, this sort of comparison may become meaningful. Right now it's just a curiosity.

Re-read post. This is not a single poll; it's based on a compilation of more than ten polls.

avatar

Very interesting, Alex. Thanks.

A couple more thoughts. The more I think about this, the more I feel it explains the kinds of campaigns Obama and McCain have been respectively running.

We've heard a lot about Obama's perceived flip-flops, and in part because the center of gravity on TPM is somewhere to Obama's left, we tend to perceive that as a serious problem for him.

But you could view that problem as a symptom of a more important strength. Over the last month, Obama has been able to pivot to the middle -- at least rhetorically (I'm not claiming much actual policy movement). That's what presidential candidates usually do after the primary is over, and it's not really surprising.

What is surprising is that John McCain hasn't made a perceptible effort to do the same thing. And now I feel I know why. For whatever reason -- his own disconnect with the GOP base, the broader weakness of the Republican brand, whatever -- his voters are very willing to vote for someone else or just stay home. He has to keep feeding them.

For whatever reason -- enthusiasm for Obama personally, or bitter memories of the last eight years -- Obama's voters are solid. The hilarious thing is that we've spent the last three months bitching and moaning about party unity, as if that was one of the major threats we faced. In fact, I think it's near the bottom of the list of things we need to worry about.

Interesting. We take for granted that Republicans are unified, but you're right to question that, and I'm sure that McCain needs to be cautious about alienating an already tenuous base. That said, I see his lack of movement towards the center as more reflective of a simple lack of movement, period. I see no McCain game plan unfolding at all. You?

Elegantly put. Yes. I really couldn't tell you what his message is, beyond "I'm old and white." You never know, though; this could be an incredibly subtle Taoist strategy based on the principle of wu-wei, or "inaction."

You seemed uncertain in your post, but now I see that you were just pulling the old Wo Hu Cang Long (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon) routine ... holding back until just the right moment before revealing McCain's incredibly subtle Taoist strategy to us unsuspecting Gweilos.

Sneaky bastards (the two of youse).

avatar

LOVE the shirt. Very cool

avatar

I obviously don't speak for all Republicans, or even for a group of them, but I AM a long-time registered Republican who is VERY enthusiastically supporting (w/ time and money)Obama (see my earlier post "Let's Get Obama Elected First')

You should NOT assume that the Republicans are united, and McCain should be VERY worried. If Obama can pull me over to vote Democratic (1st time ever and I'm 56!) it shouldn't be too awful hard to pull over a lot more!

avatar

Alex,

I appreciate your posting this and hope you continue. Very informative and helps with perspective. Thanks again.

Nader will hurt Obama only if during the debates Obama obnoxiously sighs and breathes heavily into the microphone while McCain speaks.

Or obnoxiously remains quiet, attentive, and respectful--aloof when he could be praising McCain's military service quietly in the background.

Let's face it. If Obama doesn't win this race against McCain, he Democrats don't deserve to win. The war is unpopular, Bush is unpopular, the economy is in the tank and potentially heading for Great Depression levels, no one has any faith in the direction of the country, and McCain is an idiot. The only reason the Democrats might lose this thing yet is that the only thing less popular than Bush is the Democratic Congress. Unfortunately, they've earned that disapproval with their disastrous enabling of Bush. So, leaving out the possibility that Americans simply won't elect a black man as President (and it seems that most would), this is Obama's race to lose.

Alex39, I've not seen this discussed this anywhere else, regarding Nader and Obama. Having watched Nader go off on Obama, I get the feeling that Nader wishes that he could hurt Obama. This time he cannot hurt the Democratic nominee [yay!], partly due to Obama's brilliance in pivoting to the center, albeit rhetorically. Still, all the hair tearing, rending and crying about Obama and his various purported flip-flops have given me a good idea as to where many in the netroots/blogosphere are on Obama, and I am not as confident as you as to how all the criticisms will not eventually play out against him. I refuse to be confident this time. Still, I believe he can win.

Rec.

I don't want to foster overconfidence. Mainly, I'm afraid of what hrebendorf & co. will do to me if I do.

But -- barring some major event between now and Nov -- the fundamentals of the race appear to be in our favor. See this graph of economic growth plotted against election results.

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2008/03/doug_hibbs_sez.html


avatar

You're afraid of a cute lil' bunny wabbitt?

I've looked hard at that rabbit. The ears are fake, and it's got canines!

And we all remember how dangerous those rabbits in Monty Python and the Holy Grail were...

http://www.intriguing.com/mp/_pictures/grail/large/HolyGrail181.jpg

I'm not ready to give any money to Nader just yet - if he even wants any.

avatar

Sounds like there is a relatively set percentage of voters that's not going to vote for Obama (as of yet, anyway), but X percent are not all that excited about McCain either, so they'll take the alternatives if offered. If Obama gets 51%, I'm not all that concerned how the other 49% split. If ends up pulling a Clinton and gets less than 50%, I'm DAMNED concerned how the other 50%+ split.

Interesting stuff.

Yeah. My guess would be that the "X" group is mostly made up of people who have voted Republican in past elections. (After all, we know that it was close to an even split in 2000 and 2004.)

If you ask them "Obama or McCain" they'll say "uh, I guess, McCain." Either because they don't like Obama or because they're just not used to voting for Democrats. But if you give them more choices it becomes clear that their commitment to McCain himself is very weak.

I really don't think that Nader and Barr (and McKinney) are collectively going to get 7% of the final vote. For one thing, they're not all on the ballot in every state. A bunch of these wafflers will come back to the Republican party. Some may stay home. Some may bite the bullet and vote (D). So in the end I suspect we're talking about a much smaller third-party vote.

But the third-party vote itself interests me less than the magnitude of McCain's vulnerability. Without being overconfident I think it's fair to say that there's a lot of upside potential for us out there.

Alexander Humboldt! Get thee to an exorcist!

This poll is of necessity the work of Satan. If we are to believe that Nader supporters are not actually imps who gleefully deliver elections to Republican demons, it will destroy the structure of debate here at TPM.

Have you found lately that you enjoy swivelling your head in complete 360-degree circles? Do you find yourself scampering up and down stairways on your fingertips and toes with your navel to the sky? Do you look in the mirror and discover that the word "redrum" is painted on the opposite wall? (Oh, wait -- wrong movie.)

No, that's Desidero. You should have seen the old avatar.

You had to revive that memory?

After what happened in 2000, it would be good karmic payback if Nader's candidacy helped the Democratic candidate this time around.

I've noticed this for a while. It was evident in the Reuters poll released yesterday. I interpreted as a race thing - the white candidates splitting the white votes. Your analysis makes more sense. Although there's still probably a level of racism in the anti-Obama vote.

Yeah -- they're not mutually exclusive interpretations. The Republicans are now a 95% white party, so it's not always easy to tell what's party loyalty and what's, um, "racial loyalty."

I seriously like having Barr in this race. If the 2.6% you mention is national, it stands to reason it's gonna be considerably more than that in a few places that might just make staying up for the returns all that much more fun. Third party candidates? Bring 'em on.

Seems to me that by this stage, and increasingly as the campaigns wears on, the pool of undecided or not firmly committed voters is shrinking and likely becoming more difficult to characterize in political terms. These must be people who don't pay much attention to politics, who don't have strong opinions and whose accurate political characterization may be impossible. (I say this understanding that a few might be the opposite; Say passionate Naderites harboring doubts). So I think trying to apply logic, political logic, might be futile. And of course, this is the very population to whom it makes most sense to campaign! I think this explains the increasingly flaky nature of all political campaigns as election time approaches: There's little point in preaching to the choir and the target audience might not be so sophisticated or engaged.

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address