Obama’s Poll Drop: We’ve Seen This Movie Before

Andrew Sullivan continues to freak out:

Here’s a dishhead bleg: when was the last time that a sitting president in a re-election campaign lost six percentage points in the polls in two weeks in October?

That’s pretty specific, and I suppose the answer is “never.” But let’s change the question: When was the last time Barack Obama lost six percentage points to a Republican challenger?

Pete Souza/The White House/FlickrPete Souza/The White House/FlickrAnswer: 2008. On September 1st, Obama led John McCain by 6.4 points. On September 10th, McCain led Obama by 2.5 points. That’s a swing of 8.9 points. But when the election was actually held, Obama won by 5 points.

Look: Polls change. That’s politics. Beyond that, though, there are a couple of specific reasons everyone should settle down a bit. First, the fundamentals have always suggested that this would be a close election. The consensus of the political science models is an Obama win by maybe 2 points or so. Second, I’m increasingly convinced that a couple of years from now some enterprising political scientist will write a paper thoroughly debunking the idea that Obama’s debate performance was as horrible as everyone is making it out to be. Instead, the recent poll changes will come down to three things:

  • A late September surge by Romney for reasons that are (at the moment) still a bit of mystery.
  • Reversion to the mean. Obama was never going to win the election by 5 or 6 points, and his recent drop has been baked into the cake for a long time. His big lead was mostly an artifact of stupid mistakes by Romney, and eventually Romney recovered from them.
  • The media freakout over Obama’s debate demeanor.

Obama didn’t turn in a great debate performance, but it was nowhere near bad enough to account for the kind of poll declines we’ve seen over the past couple of weeks. That’s my two cents, anyway.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend