-
Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant
May 24, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats
May 24, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Dismantling Networks, Preventing Footholds
May 23, 2013 | 3 comments
-
I Agree With Andy McCarthy: No Special Counsel
May 23, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Issa Recovers
May 22, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Gallup prefaced the results of their recent Obama vs. Generic Republican poll results thus: “A generic Republican presidential candidate has a slight but not statistically meaningful edge over Barack Obama, 44% to 39%, in registered voters’ preferences for the 2012 presidential election. Historical data from June in the year before an election have not been very predictive of the outcome.”
In my view, Gallup’s language understates just how bad this news is for President Obama.
Let me stipulate that Gallup’s assertion is true that this poll, based on past history, is not highly predictive. (One then has to wonder why they bother with it.)
But to argue that it’s not statistically significant seems an excuse too far.
First, President Obama trails the generic Republican by 5 percent while the notes to the poll give it “95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.”
Second, the last time the same poll was taken — a month ago — Obama held a three point lead over a Republican-to-be-named-later. Thus, the swing is a large 8 percentage points, an amount which can’t possibly be statistically insignificant. (And again, if it is, then this poll question should never be asked in this way.)
Finally, it’s one thing for an incumbent to trail in polls against a particular opponent. But it’s another thing entirely to trail a generic, nameless, faceless candidate. In the two prior election cycles where there was no front-runner at this point in the election cycle, Gallup polled the question of the incumbent versus a generic member of the other party. In both cases, the incumbent had a huge lead — although George H.W. Bush ended up losing to Bill Clinton. For Barack Obama to trail a generic Republican right now shows far more weakness than Gallup would have us believe.
View all comments (35) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Ross Kaminsky
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/06/17/on-obama-vs-generic-republican
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Obama’s Drone War
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Wayne | 6.17.11 @ 12:13PM
What it says is that my 92 year old mother would get more votes than Obambi. It is the equivalent of running Obama vs "none of the above" and Obama losing.
SpiralArchitect| 6.17.11 @ 12:40PM
Let's just continue on as if there will be no spilt involving a third candidate of recognition...
Teflon93| 6.17.11 @ 12:21PM
You need to look at the populations polled during that one and this one before popping the corks. How much of the 8 pct swing is explicable by differences in the demographics of the respondents for each poll?
These generic polls also have a built in problem---the generic candidate has low negatives. The flesh-and-blood candidate will not--particularly when the media gets through savaging them.
Ross Kaminsky | 6.17.11 @ 1:18PM
Teflon, that's true, but the flesh-and-blood candidate will also have positives.
In any case, an incumbent being behind a generic is noteworthy and unusual.
Teflon93| 6.17.11 @ 4:19PM
Is it either, though?
Wasn't Dubya in the same boat vis-a-vis a generic Democrat?
If a RINO is nominated, there won't be any positives to speak of, the RINOs agreeing with Obama on precisely the things America doesn't like about him.
Teflon93| 6.17.11 @ 4:23PM
Here's one, but Zogby's not really credible:
http://www.zogby.com/news/2003.....ew-plural/
Ross Kaminsky | 6.17.11 @ 5:06PM
According to Gallup, a poll taken at a similar time during W's first term had W up 12 against a generic Democrat. George H.W. Bush was up 23 and still lost!
Teflon93| 6.17.11 @ 5:18PM
Good point---the timing does matter. I haven't found a historical table of poll results on the generic question so I don't know how rare it is for an incumbent to be down against a generic.
Ross Kaminsky | 6.17.11 @ 8:31PM
The Gallup article says that it hasn't happened at this point in a cycle in their polls, though an incumbent has been down to a named opponent.
EscapeFromCalifornia| 6.18.11 @ 1:49AM
The problem Obama has is that the poll trends are bad - and they correspond to a deteriorating economic, fiscal, monetary and foreign policy trend that he is unlikely to be able to reverse by the time perceptions set it.
Yes, the Republican could blow it. But the election will be about the incumbent - and events and policies are working against him in profound ways. You'll recall Bush I was seen as similarly disconnected, and the economy was no where near as bad as today. And Clinton's economy was recovering nicely, and foreign policy was benefiting from the end of the cold war.
Obama has everything working against him - and seems clueless.
He's a goner.
W| 6.17.11 @ 12:30PM
Bachman will beat obama. She is and will be like Margaret Thatcher.
SpiralArchitect| 6.17.11 @ 12:44PM
More than once that thought has crossed my mind - MT, the old battle axe :)
Occam's Tool| 6.17.11 @ 1:07PM
BTO was a great band, man. (10 points if you can name the MST3K movie commentary that line was from. Hint: "it's the worst thing to ever come out of Canada.")
Casey Abell| 6.17.11 @ 1:58PM
Gallup knew this was an explosive result that would generate huge chatter among the chattering classes (here, for instance). So they hemmed and hawed and qualified. Can't blame them.
But Obama's weakness is evident. He needs a strong, visible economic recovery soon, or it's looking more and more like the public speaker circuit in 2013.
PattyMor| 6.17.11 @ 2:36PM
Elmer Fudd could beat Obummer. No jobs, housing is still going down, everyone (except wall street, banks, & George Soros) doing poorly. Now expect high energy prices as Obummer puts coal out of business. If the polls keep up, I would expect that Obummer bows out. You know the pressures of the jobs, yaddda, yadda, yeadda.
Ross Kaminsky | 6.17.11 @ 3:46PM
Elmer Fudd could beat Obama, but there are some who couldn't. A few who come to mind: Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin.
Teflon93| 6.17.11 @ 4:20PM
John McCain.
beebop| 6.17.11 @ 6:48PM
John McCain was running against fairy dust and unicorns. People now have a RECORD -- an abysmal one at that and we are sooooo over what an "historic" event it would be. At least the adults are.
Clint| 6.17.11 @ 6:36PM
“Ron Paul cannot get elected” President, declared Donald Trump at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference. Trump, who has never run for office, let alone won an election, may want to reconsider his parroting of this common refrain: A new CNN poll finds that, of all the Republicans being discussed as potential presidential candidates, the longtime Texas congressman has the greatest chance of beating Barack Obama, while The Donald comes in dead last.
In a hypothetical match-up between Paul and Obama, Obama beats Paul by only seven percentage points (52 to 45 percent). Meanwhile, Obama bests former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee by eight points, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney by 11 points, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich by 17 points, former Alaska Governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin by 19 points, and Trump by a whopping 22 points. (The poll, by the way, was taken April 29 – May 1 and completed before Obama’s announcement of Osama bin Laden’s death. It has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.)"
subframer| 6.17.11 @ 11:34PM
then let's nominate elmer fudd and get on with it already....
Gary DeYoung| 6.17.11 @ 5:09PM
Also- they were polling registered, not likely voters. This is even worse news for Obama (and better news for normal people) because Republicans generally have better turnout - and should in 2012.
Ross Kaminsky | 6.17.11 @ 8:32PM
Gary, that's exactly right. I had intended to mention that and then forgot when writing the blog note.
aaron fleszar | 6.17.11 @ 5:48PM
Osama Obama Biden Bin Laden
One coincidence? Two coincidences?
NO COINCIDENCE
http://illuminaticonspiracy.blogspot.com
jpm16| 6.17.11 @ 6:01PM
First of all, ±4% means that each value can be ±4%: the poll means that with 95% certainty, Obama's support against "Generic R" is 35-43%, and "Generic R"'s support is 40%-48% (within the 95% confidence interval). Therefore, the shift is fully plausible within a 95% confidence interval. Also, "Generic R" has been stronger than anyone in the Republican field thus far. Using RealClearPolitics' polling averages, Obama has a 2.2% lead over "Generic R" (a poll by NBC/WSJ over the same time interval as Gallup's had Obama leading 45%-40% over "Generic R"). With real opponents, it has Obama +5.2% over Romney, with all other candidates trailing Obama by over 10% (Pawlenty 13%, Bachmann 17%, etc...). Even though some of these candidates will benefit from increased name recognition, there is plenty of evidence here that the generic is more popular than ANY Republican. The generic is not a "none of the above" option, as Wayne said. It is a thumbs-up/down on Obama, and since the Republican field is weak (per approval ratings, etc...), the generic understates Obama's position, as the generic often represents a candidate with no liabilities, no baggage, etc...
somnolence| 6.17.11 @ 7:20PM
Kaminsky, give me real evidence that Obama could really beat Palin. The election is about him, not her, and she is more aggressive than Romney, Pawlenty, or Huntsman----therefore, would fare much better in attack and debate. Until, then I suggest you had better worry how you are going to get the base, like me, to ever vote for any of the 3 I mentioned above.
Ross Kaminsky | 6.17.11 @ 8:34PM
Somnolence,
It's just my opinion. Obviously there isn't good data on any of this stuff yet.
That said, I think that for the GOP to have the best chance of winning this election it must be as much as possible about Obama, as you imply.
I think that of all the potential GOP candidates, Palin is the one most likely to cause the election to be about the Republican rather than about Obama, which is precisely why I don't want her to run.
Krauthammer suggests the same without using her name:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201011190054
Me| 6.17.11 @ 8:09PM
What a pity Generic Republican isn't running for president because none of the flesh-and-blood Republican dingdongs actually running have a snowball's chance in Hades of defeating Obama in November 2012.
Morgan| 6.18.11 @ 12:38AM
Yes, because the American people can't get enough of 9% unemployment, rising inflation, record-breaking deficits and a collapsing housing market. Barring a sudden turnaround, Obama's in trouble.
theduke| 6.17.11 @ 8:39PM
Obama beat McCain by 7 points. Was that statistically significant?
Morgan| 6.18.11 @ 12:39AM
Yes - but now he has an actual record to defend.
Tom| 6.17.11 @ 9:13PM
I would think that the "generic Republican" could also easily beat the actual Republican candidates.
Rick| 6.17.11 @ 9:44PM
Your a rasist!
The Diet Solution Recipes | 6.17.11 @ 10:52PM
The Diet Solution Program tells you how to determine your body and metabolic type. Knowing this will help you to create your own unique weight-loss meal plan.
subframer| 6.17.11 @ 11:33PM
Hey Me, I look forward to you eating your snarky little words in Nov 2012. I guess you like teleprompter reading puppets, since you can't possibly like policy, leadership, vision, wisdom, any of the other hoped-for qualities in a president.
EscapeFromCalifornia| 6.18.11 @ 1:45AM
I'll say it now. Obama loses, and loses big. The economy, the dollar and a collapsing foreign policy all are working against him . And the depth of the economic mess - and his seeming disconnectedness from it - are corroding his personal connection with the public. Taken together, they suggest at 35-40 state win is more than possible (and a significant popular vote spread is very likely).