June Polls Don't Hold Up

This week's polls showing Barack Obama with small, but significant, single-digit leads among likely voters are certainly welcomed by Democrats, but recent history hasn't been kind to early frontrunners.

In fact, only one of the last five June election-year polling averages has correctly predicted the popular vote winner in November - Bill Clinton in 1996. Even then, the polls missed his win-margin by more than 9 percent.
   
As hard as it may be to believe, Michael Dukakis (left) was leading the first George Bush by an average of 8.2 percent in June of 1988. Bush went on to win the general election by 7.8 points.

Mr Bush led the relatively unknown Bill Clinton by 4.9 percent In June of '92, but managed to lose in November by 5.6 percent.

June 1996 polls showed the incumbent President Clinton leading by a whopping 17 points, but even Bob Dole managed to close the gap to a more respectable 8.5 percent.

2000 was different only in that George W. Bush led by 4.7 percent in June, won the election, but lost the popular vote to Al Gore by 0.5 percent.

And finally, John Kerry led in the June 2004 polls by an average of 0.9 percent, but lost the popular vote, and the election, to the incumbent Bush by 2.4 points.   

So, while Mr Obama's leads are certainly signs for Democrats to be optimistic, history points to caution. A lot can happen between June and November.

Comments

[Trafford]

Here's to hoping Obama's chances go down in flames, carrying historical precedent!

[Ted]

AndLet's get Barack a helmet.

[J Rodriguez]

Well we can only hope that Americans are intelligent to defeat Marxism...again, and vote McCain

[louis]

I am glad that I live in the world's greatest country, for you in the UK and Europe to follow and cover what's happening in the States, is a testament to this nation's glory and stature.
And by the way, Obama is not going to win.
Aargh the horrors, another Bush !!!

[Reverend Craig X Rubin]

Can we get any more choices?

[Pierre]

Your numbers shows pollsters have improved their methods.

[Mike]

If were dumb enough to elect Bill Clinton twice were dumb enough to elect Obama. His supporters don't seem to notice that hes good at delivering speeches.... that don't say anything at all. If we elect Obama ( and I believe we will ) this country is screwed, all hes interested in doing is rehashing failed policies. He is a Marxist, an idiot, the most liberal senator and he hasn't even completed a single term as Senator. Zero experience. Simply put it will be another Jimmy Carter debacle and the US Military can't kiss its funding goodbye!

[Joe]

I realize its a slow news day but come on. Dukakis was a stiff and the Democrats lethargically got behind him as a "no" vote for Bush Sr. On the other hand Obama has a massive energy in his Democrat supporters. Bill Clinton didnt even have as much going for him, in voter support, as Obama does. Sorry, I know its annoying when someone debunks a journalists sensationalistic story, but this isnt a very good story.

[Jeremy Staden]

McCain is a Marxist just like Obama. McCain will not cut spending in any meaningful way. He is too closely tied to all the $pecial Intrest$. McCain is a corrupt politician, but GOP voters don't care. They just fall for his image and believe his words - useful idiots the lot.

Do you know what's more expensive than Marxist social programs? 100 years of Middle-East War.

GOP may think they're saving money and the economy by voting for McCain, but the truth is that McCain is the worst option on voting day.

[FlynnMD]

Sorry guys, Obama up 51-36 in latest polling.
Just set back and get used to the idea!
And the landslide...

[Roan]

Obama brings change... but change to what? He promises hope.. hope in government? Never had a reason to believe in government and certainly don't know. Now he is on the "private" donor payroll, which means he goes to the highest bidder.

Say no to O!

[Lanny Davis]

Go Barack!
Can you smell the toast, McOldMan?

[Rick Martinez]

I pray to God that He would be gracious and allow John McCain to be voted the next president of the United States.

Barack Obama may not be a bad guy, he's definitely charismatic but he's not ready to be president. Not during these times.

[Greg S]

None of the above!! We need a real leader not a choice between two puppets!

[TaraCole]

I only hope that the Americans and the world will see though this 'hope/change" bs and look at the issues. Obama has already broken one promise to the people; he is already on the take with lobbyists. Why do you think he turned down British style debates with McCain? He knows he will go down in flames.

[TaraCole]

If you brits like Obama so much you can have him... Though I do like UK and usually do not wish unwell of my friends....

[Douglas]

Stop and think... did Obama ever do anything good before this election? If so, what?

Those in Europe and the UK only want this man to win because he is seen by you as the polar-opposite of George Bush. I can see why you may not like President Bust. That said, do you really want this guy, Obama, and his .com whacko friends to have there fingers on the biggest trigger in the world? It may be stylish or fashionable for you people in the UK and Europe to complain about the USA and to hate President Bush, but please be careful as you might get what you are wishing for.

[BERT CONVY]

*
Consider all the millions of the unborn that will never get the chance to vote if the abortion loving Obama takes the helm and loads the courts with more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs.

*Bert

[dana blasi]

yes! I'm ready to end this democracy experiment! Welcome Socialisim! Obama will lead us through this change!!!

[JP]

Hey Louis -

I live here too and am among the most proud to be from the US. However great our country is, I think it's a testament to the rest of the world's (or perhaps just Europe's) "worldliness" and our isolationist tendencies than proof of our country.

The men and women battling terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest of the world is proof enough of our world's character and resolve. We're not insecure enough to need a foreign news article to prove it.

[Consultofactus]

As the article indicates, early projections are range from wrong to laughable. Lefties and leftmedia have a track record of trumpeting huge leads in these largely manufactured "news" stories about how the polls show their candidate to "have it in the bag". The article mentions Dukakis - the same was true for al gore and may I mention how wrong the polls were in recent primaries. I have in my library the 1/4/04 Time Magazine where they fawned over Howard Dean with an article entitled "Can Anyone Beat Dean?" The answer some five weeks and one scream later was...yes. Same for Queen Hillary this primary season - I'm looking to collect on a couple of bets as soon as Hil is officially NOT the dem nominee. (BTW - I have a 10:1 bet that says the Dem convention will be brokered and neither Obama nor Clinton will be the nominee).

[Dan Lopez]

From Jolly England, Ed.
You must become more international.

[John]

It's the Democrats turn. Our elections cycles are just that. The pendulum swings right and left. No candidate can get the nomination of his/her party without sucking up to the " base" translated as way liberal or way conservative, then they each slide towards the middle, translated, the rest of the country, i'e. " silent majority." Because of that, do we REALLY know who McCain and Obama are and what they REALLY believe in? The answer is no. It is all smoke, mirrors and complete bull****

[Jared]

The GOP had a chance to pick a REAL leader and they blew it. Mitt Romney is and was by far a better choice than McCain.

[Mike Cee of Tennessee]

We Americans are very busy people, with watching "American Idol" and other brainless TV shows and of course busy, busy, busy with our social networking sites on the Internet - too busy to pay attention right now. Hopefully, a few days before the November elections, a few will turn off the TV and actually pay attention to this Obama guy. In addition to being an "empty suit" with charisma and the ability to speak articulately, he is a communist, Marxist, Leninist. He's really rather a dullard when it comes to intelligence. If we Americans decide to sleep through the election, then Obama will win. If we wake up, then we get McCain, another lousy choice but better than a communist. A choice like what had you rather have: A second-class fireman or a first-class arsonist?