Press "Enter" to skip to content

Zogby: Nader 1.9%, Barr 0.9%, McKinney 0.2%, Other 1.3%

The latest Zogby tracking poll of 7,000 likely voters across the U.S. (+/- 2.9%) has independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader at 1.9%, Libertarian Bob Barr 0.9%, and Green Cynthia McKinney 0.2%. No other alternative presidential candidate was included, but 1.3% said they would vote for someone else, and 2.2% said they were undecided. Democrat Barack Obama is at 50.2%, and Republican John McCain 43.3%.

About Post Author



  1. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli October 30, 2008

    Rumor denied by Greens @ BAN:

    # RM Says:
    October 30th, 2008 at 9:57 am

    McKinney’s campaign has been in contact on this debate as it was being organized and willing to participate on another date but today’s date did not work for her. She will participate in a debate, just not one that is organized by Tobin. Same for the Barr campaign I understand.

    Tobin has nothing to do with organizing today’s debate.

    # Scott McLarty Says:
    October 30th, 2008 at 10:26 am

    If these debates were to be arranged fairly, the organizing work would either be done by someone entirely independent of the campaigns or by the alternative party and independent campaigns together.

    Imagine that McCain’s staff planned a presidential debate to take place two or three days later, set the ground rules and format, hired the moderator, sent out press releases announcing that both McCain and Obama would participate… and then sent an invitation to Obama. No one would be surprised when Obama declined to participate.

    That’s essentially what Nader staffer Christine Tobin did to Cynthia McKinney. If a McKinney staffer had done the same to Ralph Nader, he’d be equally justified in declining.

    Christina Tobin says above that “It was clear to me since April 2008 that [McKinney] would never participate in a debate. The video showing her recent support for Obama came as no surprise.”

    This is pure slander. McKinney accepted an invitation to participate in the debate online on Oct. 19, and unlike the other candidates she followed through on her promise.

    McKinney does not support Barack Obama. She’s campaigning to build the Green Party. Every vote for Cynthia McKinney is an investment in a permanent progressive noncorporate political party with a hope of achieving major party status in the years to come. No other candidate in this election can make the same claim.

    Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, Green Party of the United States

  2. AnthonyD AnthonyD October 30, 2008


    Well, I agree with you to a point. Barr is a politician, you’d think he would have seen how well RP did among the anti-war left and followed in those footsteps. I don’t know why he positioned himself so strongly as the candidate for only the disaffected conservative. Is that perplexing? Sure. On the other hand, he was still a far better choice than any of the other alternatives in Denver.

    On the other hand, I really am at a loss to figure out what you are saying about the people who end up voting LP. I could care less what party they are a part of or what they call themselves, once they vote Libertarian, they have thrown their support behind the LP. How exactly is the LP supposed to grow if you only let libertarians vote for the LP candidate? What is your intention, to position LP members at each precinct and ask voters if they are voting LP, then interrogate them as to their libertarian bona fides? What is this thinking?

  3. Steve LaBianca Steve LaBianca October 30, 2008

    AnthonyD’s point about GOP voters not voting for Barr is probably true, to a great extent. The idea, promoted by the Barr campaign that conservatives will send the GOP a message by voting for Barr will turn out to be a mythical figment of Barr’s imagination. Why then, be overjoyed with Barr getting anywhere near 1 million votes?

    If these are GOP voters who potentially give Barr more votes than Badnarik or Browne (for example, as these are the recent LP campaigns) who cares?

    If it were libertarians who provided a higher vote total, then I say GREAT! However, I am certain that a huge chunk of libertarians will NOT cast their vote for Barr (myself included) because Barr sends a conservative message, not a libertarian one.

  4. AnthonyD AnthonyD October 30, 2008

    If Barr gets anwhere close to a million, I’ll be overjoyed. I expect it to be much less. The frenzy the GOP has gotten its base into over the possibilty of an Obama presidency is unbelievable. Most of them dont have the cojones to go in and vote for Barr.

    I expect mass suicides within the GOP the day after Obama wins the election.

  5. Steve LaBianca Steve LaBianca October 30, 2008

    Well, from what I understand, Barr has indicated that he will only debate Nader in a 3rd party debate. In his mind, he is pushing Baldwin out and may not even so much as acknowledge Baldwin as a participant. Just one more delusion on Barr’s part.

    NOTE: Barr may actually shake Baldwin’s hand, but could conceivably not respond to or acknowledge anything Baldwin says.

  6. SEXYJC SEXYJC October 30, 2008

    Funny how in Barr’s web site it says: Barr to debate Nader with no mention of Baldwin.. How disgusting is that? That tell you a lot of this man.

  7. Steve LaBianca Steve LaBianca October 30, 2008

    Assuming that these percentages are indicative of polling, that is actual voting, with there likely to be 125,000,000 votes cast, here is how the final vote total would end up:

    Obama – 62,750,000
    McCain – 54,125,000
    Nader – 2,375,000
    Barr – 1,125,000
    McKinney – 250,000
    Others – 1,625,000
    Undecided – 2,750,000

    95%+ of the undecided will go to McCain and Obama

    Each of the “third-party” candidates support will see at least 1/4 of their “support” evaporate in by the time the voters reach the voting booth.

    Thus, Nader will be likely not get 2 million votes, and Barr is likely to get about 650 to 850 thousand votes.

    We’ll see what actually transpires in a few days.

    NOTE: This is just one poll which projections are extrapolated. However, even Harry Browne was polling at near 1% at this time 8 years ago.

  8. SEXYJC SEXYJC October 30, 2008

    I would like to say Barr ran a terrible campaign. He was his own worst enemy.

    But in general, it’s all about money. The one with the most money always wins Presidential elections.

    Please donate to your candidate of choice one more time this last week.

    Nader is running ads in a dozen states and we need money to keep airing them , please donate today at even if it is only $10

    Please make that one last sacrifice.

  9. rdupuy rdupuy October 30, 2008

    And it begins. FOR ONCE, I would like to see a 3rd party educate its membership.

    I cannot guarantee it will work, but I think its worth an experiment one election cycle.

    As the interested people come in, educate them. The pundits will tell them they need to switch their vote and vote ‘lessor of two evils’ on election day.

    From day one, explain we won’t win. Explain the percentage will drop. Explain the need to vote 3rd party, even in the face of not winning.

    But everyear its a traditional two party campaign, with ‘if we all believe we can WIN this thing’

    and all the early interest is based on winning and you see the cycle of disillusionment every time.

    I’m not concerned with it, I just wonder if any of the third parties have effectively managed the phenomena to achive the highest possible retention rate.

    The Barr campaign has been great in many ways. Media appearances, phenomenal.
    But, they believed in hyping false expectations instead of long term party building, and I imagine they got a lot of ephemeral support for that reason.

    I got a little sick hearing Bay Buchannan talking her talking points on CNN, saying we have to ‘stop Obama’ — meaning Barr supporters.

    As if we care if Obama or McCain wins. I could care less which of these two big government supporters wins. Take a look at 2000. I’m proud of my libertarian vote. If that election had gone to Al Gore instead of George W. Bush, well… so what. If anything Al Gore would have been a better president.

    Thats the problem, we have two big government parties, but one of the two big government parties is completely adrift, enacting record deficits as kind of knee jerk reactions rather than based on any plan.

  10. NewFederalist NewFederalist October 30, 2008

    If 4.3% of the vote is all that choose somebody other than McBama I guess as a nation we must be pretty satisfied with things as they are. Sad.

Comments are closed.