MSNBC presents outdated poll as evidence the race in battleground states is "tightening"
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: MSNBC anchors presented "new" Arizona State University-Southwest poll numbers for New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada as evidence the race is "tightening" in those states. However, the poll was conducted over a period of 26 days and was concluded on October 17, two weeks before the results were released, and a newer poll contradicts the ASU-Southwest poll's conclusion in New Mexico.
On October 31, MSNBC Live anchors Contessa Brewer and Tamron Hall both highlighted a presidential poll as evidence the race is "tightening" in some Western battleground states. Brewer, Hall and anchor David Shuster all described the poll as "new." In fact, the poll they cited was completed two weeks before, and was conducted from September 22 to October 17. Notwithstanding the anchors' characterization of the poll as "new" and its results showing the race in New Mexico as tied, a newer poll shows Sen. Barack Obama leading there.
Shuster presented Arizona State University-Southwest poll numbers for New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada that he said "suggest it's getting closer in many states, at least some of the poll numbers." He then said, "This is an organization that has never polled in New Mexico before, according to our own political unit. But this number is getting some attention because it shows Barack Obama and John McCain tied at 46, and again, this is a state where NBC News' political unit has been projecting New Mexico in Barack Obama's column for over a month." However, a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted on October 28, 11 days after the ASU-Southwest survey was concluded, shows Obama leading in New Mexico.
From the 9 a.m. ET hour of the October 30 edition of MSNBC Live:
TAMRON HALL (anchor): We are here. The final weekend of this 2008 presidential campaign is upon us, and new poll numbers in the battleground states suggest this race is anything but a done deal.
[...]
HALL: Four days left for candidates on the trail and new polls show the race may be tightening in the battleground states. You might say it's all hands on deck in this final stretch.
[...]
CONTESSA BREWER (anchor): Coming up after the break, we'll dig deeper into the new battleground polls that show John McCain gaining ground on Barack Obama out west.
[...]
BREWER: Let's go to David at the politics desk with more on those tightening numbers in the battleground states. I did see the pumpkins out there. There is some Halloween spirit out there.
[...]
SHUSTER: We are approaching -- well, we're approaching a crucial hour in the race for the White House. And new poll numbers suggest it's getting closer in many states, at least some of the poll numbers. There's a new poll that is out of New Mexico. This is a Western poll. This is an organization that has never polled in New Mexico before, according to our own political unit. But this number is getting some attention because it shows Barack Obama and John McCain tied at 46, and again, this is a state where NBC News' political unit has been projecting New Mexico in Barack Obama's column for over a month. But, again, anytime a pollster, even one who has not polled in a state before, comes out with a number, it does get some attention.
Now, in Nevada, one of a handful of toss-up states, Obama's lead is 48-44. I've got to check and find out which pollster this one is, because, obviously, we don't have it on the screen. But in any case, the other number that's getting some attention are the numbers from Arizona, John McCain's home state, where yet another poll yesterday put Obama within striking distance. Again, political analysts tend to sort of discount any -- and here's of course another poll that shows John McCain up by 11. Do we know which poll number this one is? OK, ASU/Southwest. So, in any case, let's bring in CNBC's chief Washington correspondent John Harwood.
And, John, first of all, what do you make of -- I mean, a lot of polling out there -- some show races tightening, some show races not tightening. What do you make of it?
HARWOOD: Well, first of all, David, I just want to say from that exchange with Contessa, you sound like somebody who does not yet have a Halloween costume. So, getting a little defensive there, I know.
SHUSTER: OK.
HARWOOD: Look, I -- there are lots of polls out there. The methodology depends or influences heavily your model of the likely electorate, what the numbers are going to be. And, certainly, there are some polls nationally and in those key states, which have a wide variance in the margins. Some of those national polls show Barack Obama up 2, 3, 4, 5 points, and others show a significantly higher result. But what we're seeing in total is Barack Obama ahead in the battleground states that he needs to get over 270 electoral votes. Some tightening in some other states, but so far, we haven't seen anything and I haven't heard from any Republican pollsters any news that they have that suggests to them that John McCain is on the verge of making this a race that's much closer than we've seen so far the last few days.
SHUSTER: Well, the other thing about it, sometimes I feel like with all these polls out there, John, that maybe the best thing to do is sort of look at where the candidates are in that the candidates have their own internals that they trust more than some of these other polls. For example, if New Mexico were really in play, wouldn't we see both John McCain and Barack Obama essentially heading to New Mexico?
HARWOOD: Yes, although there are so many battlegrounds, it depends on how many electoral votes you're going for. The idea that Barack Obama might be contemplating a visit to Arizona tells you something. The fact that John McCain has been advertising on television in places like West Virginia also tells you something, although some of the West Virginia stations, of course, provide some value in the state of Virginia, which is a battleground.
But Barack Obama is trying to push the envelope here. He spent a lot of time in Florida, where I was with him yesterday. That's a state that was not high on the Obama radar early in the campaign. Older voters, more tradition-minded voters, some resistance among Jewish voters to Barack Obama -- and the fact that he sees himself as within range, that it's worth repeatedly going back, appearing with Clinton, appearing with Gore, tells you about the way in which he's trying -- pushed the envelope out to places that we didn't think where Barack Obama has a chance to win over 300 electoral votes. He could still lose the election, but he has many more opportunities to break through than John McCain appears to right now.
SHUSTER: All right, John Harwood. Thank you very much. And again, when we have that, sort of, chyron that says "Barack Obama and McCain tied in New Mexico," according to a Southwest poll, again, we should point out that this is -- at least according to our political unit -- a polling unit that has not polled in New Mexico before. So, cautionary note.
The only polls I see tightening right now are the ones from Pennsylvania but that's expected. I don't think anyone in their right mind thought Barack would win the state by double digits.
Do you get the feeling that the people who run MSNBC in the mornings are completely different than those in the afternoon and evening?
From 6 am to about 2 pm, it's as if the FOX guys are coming over supervising everybody. After that, things radically change. It's schizophrenic-- as if the top management boys are insisting on hard right bias in the morning to counteract the perceived dangers of Maddow and Olbermann. It's like a different network.
The only thing I see tightening are the Dem's sphincters. Are they soooo afraid that a tightening poll will demoralize their sheep that they feel the need to deny even the natural tightening of polls that occur near election day? Or is it somehow leaving room for doubt about Obama if it doesnt' appear to be a landslide victory that will cause a loss of faith (and a subsequent increase in the cost of Kool-aid distribution) that has you all scared? Even at the "don't matter squat" and minutia level you people are quaking in your boots. It seems to me that level of fear of the populace is found only with totalitarian dictators- perhaps that in and of itself should be your first clue as to what horse..er... jackass, you are buying here.
"With malice towards none, with charity towards all..." Guess you've kicked Lincoln out of your party.
Republican racists sure are desperate, aren't they?
Latest GOP smear plot revealed: Professor paid to try to tie Ayers to Obama biography
The professor, Dr. Peter Millican, teaches philosophy at Hertford College, Oxford. His software is designed to detect when works are by the same authors by comparing the use of similar words and phrases.
The offer was revealed Sunday in a British newspaper.
“He was entirely upfront about this," the professor said of the Republican businessman who made the offer. "He offered me $10,000 and sent me electronic versions of the text from both books.”
Millican said he took a preliminary look and found the charges that Ayers had had a hand in ghostwriting Obama's book “very implausible.” A deal was agreed for "more detailed research," the paper said, but when Millican "said the results had to be made public, even if no link to Ayers was proved, interest waned."
Yeah, I saw that too, Snoopy. It is desperation time indeed for the rethugs. Its all they have left.
I guess the presence of a lot of semicolons is proof positive that radical professors are spiking our books.
Snoopy,
Thank you once again for bringing remarkable information to our attention! Clearly, these Republicans should have hired some professors or PhD's affiliated with FOX. (They could have gotten such for half the price!)
If Obama wins, the honeymoon will end Wednesday morning. I heard some nutbag on "Coast to Coast" last night, and he has filed a petition with the Supreme Court to stop the election until Obama proves that he's an American Citizen. I predict that this whole Birth Certificate nonsense will be the basis for a Troglodyte Coup after the election.
By the way, this nutbag claimed that William Ayers was really behind the website Factcheck.org.
Anybody see this video of some reichpublican who actually refused to give holloween candy to kids if their parents supported Obama? Watch the video, because republican christianity on display is scary!
McCain Supporter Denies Candy To Children Of Obama Supporters On Halloween (VIDEO)
Huffington Post November 1, 2008 10:09 PM
Kids in this suburban Detroit neighborhood cried foul after a McCain supporter refused to give them candy because they were the children of Obama supporters. Whatever your politics, I think we can all agree it's beyond the pale to deny children candy on Halloween.[WATCH]
That's priceless Snoop. The woman's just being a good Republican, totally against handouts. Except to those who agree with her.
Utterly psychotic, no exaggeration. Was she kept up at night because she was worried that she might be giving candy to children of Obama supporters? It's remarkable that this would even occur to someone as a cause for concern. If it's that big a deal, turn out the damn light altogether.
This woman deserves all the scorn she gets.
Joe the Plumber, meet Shirley the Jackal.
Now a real American would have denied all children candy and instead have offered fresh fruits or vegetables (Organic of course).
...or maybe arugula?
Every time I see the word "arugula" I imagine it being said in Scooby-Doo's voice.
What the story didn't report on was that the guy who lived next door wasn't asking any child who they supported. He just asked whether or not his/her family made more than $250,000, or whatever Joe Biden thinks the number is today. If they answered Yes, he grabbed their candy bag and slammed the door.
in other words, the government will confiscate everything you make over 250,000? you and joe the plumber must have attended the same math class.
Dave THINKS he's being funny. What a maroon.
That is so awful. As if the McCain ticket needed yet another bit of bad publicity. Honestly, if anyone did this kind of thing on Obama's behalf, does anyone think the media wouldn't be all over Obama to personally denounce it?
I know of a youngster--he was one of my students at church--who went trick-or-treating in 2000 while dressed up as a voting booth, and he let the adults put candy into either the "Bush" or "Gore" slots; he and his family were for Bush, but he didn't mind that the Gore box got a lot more votes that night.
I have to wonder if the kids in the Grosse Pointe area will be dressing up as Shirley Nagel next year, or will that be too scary?
Congrats to the gentleman for his "candy for all" attitude, although he needs to brush up on his iconography--that wasn't a peace sign, it was a Mercedes symbol. Still, his heart's certainly in the right place.
was this a student project? releasing results two weeks after the poll ends sort of defeats the purpose.
They're still on Windows 3.1. These things take time.
From Raw Story:
If the McCain campaign believes voter fraud from groups like ACORN tainted the result of Tuesday's election, it will resort to "legal remedies," McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said.
Fox's Chris Wallace asked Davis the following: "But I just want to make it clear. You reserve the right, if you feel that something has gone down wrong in any state in the country, that you'll go to court."
There you have it folks. McCain can't earn a victory, so he intends to sue for one. How pathetic the GOP has become.
Sue for the presidency. That really goes with the "Country First" motto, doesn't it?
Oh, well, of course. Is that the same principle that right-wingers applied to Gore in 2000, or did they call him a "whiner"?
If there's a genuine case to be made that ACORN stole the election, he can pursue it. But since Obama's expected to get somewhere around 350 EVs, McCain will have to show how enough people took advantage of fraudulent registrations to tip a bunch of states to Obama. I'm looking forward to seeing that argument.
I was HAPPY to see this evil woman exposed as an example of the kind of cruel and mean-spirited Republicans can be. I can't imagine any Obama households doing this. This woman's face and voice should be posted on every web site for all to see. A perfect example of a McCain/Palin supporter and extreme right-wing nut case. Hey, Sarah, this is NOT a "reel amerikan", no-siree.
That's a dangerous game to play. She doesn't represent anyone else any more than the person who had a Palin effigy hanging from his roof represents Obama supporters. There are people who cross the line on both sides. If you want to argue that it happens on one side more than the other, that's fine, but trying to attribute one isolated incident to millions of Americans is another matter.
I get Maddog's enthusiasm, and understand that it's exactly what the McCain camp would do, but I agree with you, Brab. That thinking opens the door for any nutjob, or faker from the other side, to provide an equal example. She's a lone fruitcake.
"A perfect example of a McCain/Palin supporter and extreme right-wing nut case."
Only if the McCain campaign recruits Shirley the Jackal for his "Real Americans" tour, which I seriously doubt.
I think McCain is content with using someone who thinks the government is going take away money he doesn't have but some day might if he bought a business he'll never buy.
I see evidence that the race is tightening here in our household. All of us already voted for Obama, and are uptight that people are willfully uninformed enough to vote for Grumpy McBush.
On the other hand, there was a wonderful piece on CNN yesterday, about a young lad who trick-or-treated as a polling booth. His Obama receptical got 111 pieces of candy, and his McCain side 27. From the mouths of babes. (Which is not an endorsement of stealing candy from babies.)
Tell me again how its liberals who are against free speech? From the dailyKos:
Montana gunsmith Dan Cooper has been ousted as chief executive of the rifle company that bears his name after pressure from gun owners who are angry that he is supporting Democrat Barack Obama.
Cooper, founder and part owner of Cooper Firearms, told USA TODAY in a story published Tuesday that he has voted for Republicans for most of his life, but he is backing Obama "probably because of the war. And also because the Republican Party has moved so far right in recent years." Cooper said he was attracted to the Democrat's message about "the retooling of America, which involves the building of middle-class jobs and helping American small business be competitive with those overseas."
[snip]
In a portion of the interview that was not included in Tuesday's story, Cooper said, "I don't believe that what's being said about Obama and his policies about guns are accurate. I have had a conversation with the senator ... he is a stanch supporter of the right to hunt and the right to bear arms."
The company posted a statement Wednesday night on its website that said:
"The employees, shareholders and board of directors of Cooper Firearms of Montana do not share the personal political views of Dan Cooper. Although we all believe everyone has a right to vote and donate as they see fit, it has become apparent that the fallout may affect more than just Mr. Cooper. It may also affect the employees and the shareholders of Cooper Firearms. The board of directors has asked Mr. Cooper to resign as President."
I keep hearing that corporations are legally obligated to try to make money. Blowout elections result in low ratings.
Aren't they therefore legally obligated to make it look like a tight race, facts be darned?
Schuster is reporting 4 days before the election--that's about October 30. According to the data being shown, the polls concluded on October 17. They're TWO WEEKS OLD! Schuster is either naive, a fool or thinks that all his viewers are either illiterate or diots?
Schuster is reporting 4 days before the election--that's about October 30. According to the data being shown, the polls concluded on October 17. They're TWO WEEKS OLD! Schuster is either naive, a fool or thinks that all his viewers are either illiterate or diots!
Wow, Carlileb. I've always attributed the schizm between the a.m. and p.m. MSNBC as a Macchiavellian balancing act reluctantly begun when Countdown found its legs and it became clear that the show's rising numbers weren't just a flash in the pan. I think tha was when the evening MSNBC tone slowly evolved from reporting through overtly Rightwing colored lenses to begrudgingly building on an the alien concept that seemed to be drawing viewers. Your theory is elegantly simple (seriously) and would explain why the a.m. MSNBC is like watching a different network, just another franchise of Republican National Network.
I will wake up gleefully tomorrow morning knowing I will not tune into the McCain/Palin show, aka Morning Joe ever again. Gone are the days I will subject myself to the pompous insufferable troika of shills and their sidekicks feigning neutrality when, in fact, they are bought and paid for stenographers for the GOP corporate media, or worse, true supporters of the racist hate ticket. Scarborough can barely conceal his racism--repeatedly and contemptuously sighting the "Bradley Effect" with his vile Floridian drawl, whilst fawning over warmongering thugs the likes of "Likud" Joe Lieberman.
I will not for an instant miss the stomach churning arrogance of Scarborough pandering for McCain, Mika's secret lust for Sarah Palin, or Mika shamelessly worshiping her own image on the monitor as her pastel lip gloss drips onto the desk, or the despicable little gerbil Willie Geist, who was seen campaigning for McCain on the Upper West Side this weekend. Like his politics or not, Pat Buchanan is the only honest one in the bunch and a breath of fresh air.
These people are the worst kind of frauds. Subversive liars. At least the folks at Fox make no bones about what they are.
Tin-Foil Hat time:
Maybe they have to keep telling us that the race is tightening so that, after the Republicans steal the election, they won't have to explain why every single pollster was wrong.