12 points if it's just Obama-McCain, and 15 if you include Nader and Barr.

These internals illustrate why Obama will win in November:

 

Moreover, McCain suffers from a pronounced "enthusiasm gap," especially among the conservatives who usually give Republican candidates a reliable base of support. Among voters who describe themselves as conservative, only 58% say they will vote for McCain; 15% say they will vote for Obama, 14% say they will vote for someone else, and 13% say they are undecided.

 

By contrast, 79% of voters who describe themselves as liberal say they plan to vote for Obama.

 

Even among voters who say they do plan to vote for McCain, more than half say they are "not enthusiastic" about their chosen candidate; only 45% say they are enthusiastic. By contrast, 81% of Obama voters say they are enthusiastic, and almost half call themselves "very enthusiastic," a level of zeal that only 13% of McCain's supporters display.

These internals illustrate why Obama will win in November:

 

I think some of that enthusiasm gap will bounce up for McCain after the GOP Convention. The numbers always bounce after that.

The only polls I put much faith in are Gallup and CNN....

Another registered voters poll. I wonder why Newsweek and the LA times choose not to use the more accurate "likely voter" polls?

I think some of that enthusiasm gap will bounce up for McCain after the GOP Convention. The numbers always bounce after that.

 

What about the bounce after the DNC convention?

Another registered voters poll. I wonder why Newsweek and the LA times choose not to use the more accurate "likely voter" polls?

 

Because the gap would be much smaller if they did that....

The only polls I put much faith in are Gallup and CNN....

Rasmussen and SUSA are the best, actually.

Another registered voters poll. I wonder why Newsweek and the LA times choose not to use the more accurate "likely voter" polls?

 

Because the gap would be much smaller if they did that....

LV has its own problems, including underrepresenting Obama's 'new voters.' I think the best at LV is Rasmussen because of the understanding of party identification.

Nationwide polls are useless anyway. EC map breakdowns are the important metric (RCP just updated theirs, and it's good news for Obama on that front as well.)

LV has its own problems, including underrepresenting Obama's 'new voters.' I think the best at LV is Rasmussen because of the understanding of party identification.

Historically, those new voters have not been very reliable and that is why likely voter polls are generally more realistic.

Historically, those new voters have not been very reliable and that is why likely voter polls are generally more realistic.

Generally, yes, but with the enthusiasm levels for Obama and current level of politicization in pop-culture, I think a wise pollster is weighting them heavier than they would historically.

What about the bounce after the DNC convention?

 

It depends upon whose convention is first and what is said. For example, the RNC didn't provide much of a boost for Bush in '92 after Robertson and Buchanan ranted on National TV.

I believe the polls in 2000 and 2004 also had Gore and Kerry way ahead too at this time. We shall see. Many polls had Gore and Kerry significantly ahead up to the last week. Sort of like I explain to the team I coach, while it is nice to be recognized at the top in the poll, the most important time to be at the top of the poll is at the end not the beginning...

I believe the polls in 2000 and 2004 also had Gore and Kerry way ahead too at this time. We shall see. Many polls had Gore and Kerry significantly ahead up to the last week. Sort of like I explain to the team I coach, while it is nice to be recognized at the top in the poll, the most important time to be at the top of the poll is at the end not the beginning...

 

There is a long way to go in this campain but I believe this election is Obamas to lose!