In the final polll published just before the 2000 presidential election Rasmussen predicted a George W. Bush victory by 9 percentage points: 52% to 43%.

http://members.cox.net/fweil/FinalPolls2000.html

The actual popular vote result was:

Bush - 47.87%

Gore - 48.38%

Rasmussen was WAY off. Farther than any other major polling company. The Fox and Harris polls, in contrast, were dead on.

So I'm glad people are relying on Rasmussen (snicker) to make them feel good about McCain.

What mattered in 2000--as in 2008--are the electoral votes.

As of today, August 20, Election Projection predicts the following based on data from national and state polls INCLUDING Rasmussen:

Projected Electoral Votes

* Barack Obama: 298

* John McCain: 240

Projected Popular Vote

* Barack Obama: 51.72%

* John McCain: 47.28%

The electoral vote prediction above is the closest since June 2 (a summary is prepared every week). On June 23 Obama led McCain by a whopping 160 electoral votes. The results have gone up and down with the news cycles. The most recent news cycle has favored McCain since Obama was on vacation in Hawaii for the week.

This is all prelude to the selection of VP candidates, the conventions and the final sprint to the finish. A lot can change. But most analysts agree the race is Obama's to lose.

Therefore, expect the attacks on Obama to become even more fierce as McCain and his surrogates get increasingly desperate.

R_T is confused about how polls work.

First, some 14 percent of voters in Rasmussen's polls are undecided in the presidential race, nearly twice as many as the 8 percent in presidential polls four years ago. This supports the assertion that we have moved from two-party warfare politics in which almost all voters are committed to one side or the other, to open-field politics in which many more voters are voting for candidates, not for parties, and more Americans are debating whether to vote or not vote at all.

Second, Scott Rasmussen's monthly recalculations of party identification show a 2 percent drop of voters identifying as Democrats in July. This is not necessarily good news for Republicans. Democrats still have a 39 percent-to-32 percent lead advantage in party identification—a much more favorable position than in November 2004 (39 percent to 37 percent Democratic) and about the same as in November 2006 (38 percent to 31 percent Democratic). The peak advantage for Democrats, 42 percent to 32 percent, was reached in May of 2008.

Gee, people leaving the democratic party? Can't imagine why...

Realist,

It's pretty simple. A lot of Hillary supporters moved to the fence once she dropped out of the race.

A few of those people will vote for McCain. But most will come to in November and realize that voting for McCain is not just a protest vote against Obama. It's a vote for more conservatives on the Supreme Court and for more war (both in the military sense and against the poor and middle class) and for more bad foreign policy. They'll come around.

The election is Obama's to lose.

Actually, while the Rasmussen poll is interesting, and there may be some elements that can be drawn from it like Obama is going downhill the more he speaks,

I found another interesting poll... http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1204

which shows

that age is more important than race

that blacks are more race oriented than whites or hispanics

that the economy is more important than the war in Iraq or Terrorism

that Democrats think that Iraq is different from the war on terror

that President Bush has lousy approval ratings of ~30%

that the Democrat controlled congress has pathetic approval ratings of < 15%

As someone who does not have a horse in the race, I figure either way I win.

If McCain wins, I get a better chance of a couple supreme court justices that support our constitution.

If Obama wins, I get a Republican Congress in 2010.

R_T: You said, "as someone who does not have a horse in the race, I figure either way I win."

It might be more accurate to say 'either way you lose.' You're obviously not equally happy with both candidates, so you couldn't possibly be equally satisfied with whoever took office.

Apologies for my candor, but I get the impression you're not a big fan of Sen. Obama.

Having diligently read your posts over the years, it's become clear that no American candidate (except maybe David Duke) could ever represent your unique perspectives on law and government.

But you keep watching those polls and let us know what happens, OK?

BTW: nice chart. What program did you use?

"Every time he opens his mouth without a teleprompter,,,". How does that statement apply to McShame? Let's see: The "Anbar Awakening" was a result of the "surge" . The Awakening began months before the announcement of the "surge". Also, this is the statement that was edited in a CBS interview. CBS inserted another, less stupid (don't dare call him "confused") response. So much for the "liberal media". "In the 21st Century, nations don't invade nations". Uhhh, isn't that what happened when we began the Iraq adventure that, according to John Sidney, might keep our troops there for a hundred years. The Russia/Georgia conflict is "...the probably first serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War" (another grad of the George W. Bush School of Public Speaking?). Uhhh, what about Serbia/Bosnia/Kosovo, the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the first Gulf War, 9/11, our invasion of Iraq? These are serious gaffes in an area, foreign policy, in which John McCain claims superiority over Obama. Is the Senator from Arizona lying or just stupid? Neither is acceptable...

TP: I will give you credit for discerning that either way I lose as well.

Oh well, I guess I am just an optimist and prefer to see the glass half full.

TP: I will give you credit for discerning that either way I lose as well.

Oh well, I guess I am just an optimist and prefer to see the glass half full.

Yeah. That's you. Optimistic. Sanguine. Panglossian.

- A new NEWSWEEK Poll shows that Obama has a substantial double-digit lead, 51 percent to 36 percent, over McCain among registered voters nationwide. (Princeton Survey Research Associates International)

- Sen. Barack Obama has widened his lead over rival Sen. John McCain to 9 points, according to a new national poll. Registered voters backed the Democratic presidential hopeful over his Republican foe, 49 to 40 percent, in a Gallup survey.

"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." ~ Nietzsche

Today McCain was asked about the eight houses he owns and replied that he didn't know how many houses he owned. Now there's a guy that is really reaching out to the common man. The average person has to know what medication is more important than food, has no way to find out what is wrong (healthwise) and can't afford to get to the doctor anyway, no retirement savings and lives from paycheck to paycheck.

Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, which turned to gold after dumping his first wife to marry the richer than God Cindy.

Yeah this clown has the best interests of the average American on his mind. He knows what is best for you and for me. Give me a break.

Now, c'mon, Chunga! Give McCain a break! How can he be expected to remember ANYTHING at his age, especially something tough like how many houses he owns?

Chunga, Cindy McCain may be richer than God but certainly she's not richer than Teresa Heinz. Never saw or heard any Democrats say bad thing about John Kerry for marrying the widow of a Republican billionaire and indulging in all the nice things your wife's, well, her late husband's money can buy. Maybe if someone had asked Kerry how many houses he owned he could not have answered either.

So.... Why blast McCain and give a free pass to Kerry. Oh, yeah, he's a Democrat.

The final and only real poll takes place on election day. Let's wait and see.

loomis, is McCain running against Kerry this year?

As I recall Kerry got skewered regularly for his family wealth. Remember the diners in Texas that took Heinz ketchup off their tables? The fun people made of both John and Teresa's ability to speak French? It was just as stupid then as it is now.

Let's see, McCain was asked what made the difference between middle class and rich. His response was $5million. His response was considered satirical by the media. Was it?