PA-Politico/InsiderAdvantage: Obama+9

[Tender Branson]

Obama - 51
McCain - 42

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

The Bucks County survey contained a sample of 531 respondents with a 4 percentage point margin of error. Statewide in Pennsylvania, the Politico/InsiderAdvantage poll tested 588 voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. All surveys were taken on Oct. 26.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/15024.html

[Keystone Phil]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

[tokar]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

uh...Kerry won Bucks by 2.8 and had no problem winning PA.  So +3 is good for Obama.

[Iosif]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

Is it really when he's still behind by 9 statewide?

[Keystone Phil]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

uh...Kerry won Bucks by 2.8 and had no problem winning PA.  So +3 is good for Obama.

No problem winning PA?  LOL

Obama only polling at 46% in Bucks = Good news for McCain.

[Sheliak5]

omg, obama is only up 9, mccain's strategy is gonna work! yay!

[Iosif]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

uh...Kerry won Bucks by 2.8 and had no problem winning PA.  So +3 is good for Obama.

No problem winning PA?  LOL

Obama only polling at 46% in Bucks = Good news for McCain.

He's clearly making it up somewhere else though if he's up by 9%.

[Keystone Phil]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

uh...Kerry won Bucks by 2.8 and had no problem winning PA.  So +3 is good for Obama.

No problem winning PA?  LOL

Obama only polling at 46% in Bucks = Good news for McCain.

He's clearly making it up somewhere else though if he's up by 9%.

Except this is one of the areas that everyone argues that he'd be "making it up" in. His numbers would have to creep near 65% in Montco, for example, for this to be true.

[Tender Branson]

Bucks County:

Obama - 46
McCain - 43

Good numbers for McCain.

uh...Kerry won Bucks by 2.8 and had no problem winning PA.  So +3 is good for Obama.

No problem winning PA?  LOL

Obama only polling at 46% in Bucks = Good news for McCain.

He's clearly making it up somewhere else though if he's up by 9%.

Except this is one of the areas that everyone argues that he'd be "making it up" in. His numbers would have to creep near 65% in Montco, for example, for this to be true.

Another possibility: IA's county polling suxx.

[afleitch]

Bear in mind that two polls released around this time of the race in 2004 had Bush and Kerry level - +9 is a very good polling margin at this stage in the game.

[Lief]

LOL @ Phil's furious spinning in this thread.

[Keystone Phil]

LOL @ Phil's furious spinning in this thread.

More substance from our favorite hack Lief!

I'm sure Obama's folks in Bucks would voice their displeasure with these numbers as well. We keep talking about a blood bath in the suburbs and the most Obama is doing is running even with Kerry's totals?

What are the Kansas numbers looking like, pal? Ready to flip it to Obama?

[Lief]

LOL @ Phil's furious spinning in this thread.

More substance from our favorite hack Lief!

I'm sure Obama's folks in Bucks would voice their displeasure with these numbers as well. We keep talking about a blood bath in the suburbs and the most Obama is doing is running even with Kerry's totals?

What are the Kansas numbers looking like, pal? Ready to flip it to Obama?

They're looking about as good for Obama as the Pennsylvania numbers are for McCain, friend.

[Iosif]

LOL @ Phil's furious spinning in this thread.

More substance from our favorite hack Lief!

I'm sure Obama's folks in Bucks would voice their displeasure with these numbers as well. We keep talking about a blood bath in the suburbs and the most Obama is doing is running even with Kerry's totals?

What are the Kansas numbers looking like, pal? Ready to flip it to Obama?

Why does matter if he's only up 3 in Bucks if he's up 9 statewide? Surely the fact that Obama's up 9 while being up 3 in Bucks, in a place you concede he should be doing better, is a bad sign for McCain? Or do you dispute that he's up 9 statewide because he's only up 3 in Bucks, despite the fact that both numbers come from the same poll?

Or are you just selectively reading the poll to suit your argument?

[Keystone Phil]

LOL @ Phil's furious spinning in this thread.

More substance from our favorite hack Lief!

I'm sure Obama's folks in Bucks would voice their displeasure with these numbers as well. We keep talking about a blood bath in the suburbs and the most Obama is doing is running even with Kerry's totals?

What are the Kansas numbers looking like, pal? Ready to flip it to Obama?

Why does matter if he's only up 3 in Bucks if he's up 9 statewide? Surely the fact that Obama's up 9 while being up 3 in Bucks, in a place you concede he should be doing better, is a bad sign for McCain? Or do you dispute that he's up 9 statewide because he's only up 3 in Bucks, despite the fact that both numbers come from the same poll?

Or are you just selectively reading the poll to suit your argument?

Dude, if he's only up by three in Bucks, he's clearly not leading statewide by nine. It just doesn't work out. Unless the poll is total crap (which I guess isn't out of the question considering the source).

(By the way, let's continue discussing like this. It helps to debate in a civil way.)

LOL @ Phil's furious spinning in this thread.

More substance from our favorite hack Lief!

I'm sure Obama's folks in Bucks would voice their displeasure with these numbers as well. We keep talking about a blood bath in the suburbs and the most Obama is doing is running even with Kerry's totals?

What are the Kansas numbers looking like, pal? Ready to flip it to Obama?

They're looking about as good for Obama as the Pennsylvania numbers are for McCain, friend.

Oh...oh my. 

[tokar]

Dude, if he's only up by three in Bucks, he's clearly not leading statewide by nine. It just doesn't work out. Unless the poll is total crap (which I guess isn't out of the question considering the source).

(By the way, let's continue discussing like this. It helps to debate in a civil way.)

(Bucks Win/PA Win is representative of a measure of how Bucks did in overshooting, or undershooting the PA victory)

Gore was +4.2 in Bucks, won PA by +4.17.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 101%
Kerry was +2.8 in Bucks, won PA by +2.5.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 112%
Casey was +17.04 in Bucks, won PA by +17.38.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 98%
Specter was +15.84 in Bucks, won PA by +10.63.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 149%
'06 Rendell was +40.22 in Bucks, won PA by +20.71.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 194%
'02 Rendell was +28.64 in Bucks, won PA by +9.04.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 317%
'00 Santorum was +16.09 in Bucks, won PA by +6.91.  (Bucks win)/(PA win) = 233%

So it seems you assessment MAY be correct, as far as Presidential campaigns go...so if Obama is +3 it would APPEAR he would win PA by +2.9-3.0.  We shall see though.