Zogby/WND: Nader 1.6%, Barr 1.2%, Keyes 0.7%, McKinney 0.2%, Baldwin 0.1%

A Zogby/WorldNetDaily poll of “1,205 adults, 93 percent of whom were registered voters,” conducted August 7-10 (+/- 2.9%) found Barack Obama leading the presidential race with 38.1%, followed by John McCain 33.6%, Ralph Nader 1.6%, Bob Barr 1.2%, Alan Keyes 0.7%, Cynthia McKinney 0.2%, and Chuck Baldwin 0.1%. The remainder were undecided, or said they would not vote, would vote for an unlisted candidate, or would write in another name.

32 thoughts on “Zogby/WND: Nader 1.6%, Barr 1.2%, Keyes 0.7%, McKinney 0.2%, Baldwin 0.1%

  1. Nexus

    This seems like a realistic poll to me. How do any of the bottom five break from the pack?

  2. SovereignMN

    Barring a miracle I don’t think any of the bottom 5 can break from the pack unless one of the front-runners makes a severe mistake.

    If McCain goes with a pro-abort running mate then Barr and Baldwin may see a little bump.

    If Hillary staged a coup in Denver then you might see a number of black voters go to Nader and McKinney.

    More than likely though if any of the above 2 scenarios played out you’d see more people stay home rather than go 3rd party. 🙁

  3. Robert Milnes

    Nexus, agreed. This poll is more realistic. It is probably just as The Libertarian Vote said. The closer to the election, the less the libertarian polls. Reality sets in. I’ve already said how one could break out of the pack. A fusion ticket.

  4. Austin Cassidy

    If Alan Keyes could get on the ballot in more than a handful fo states, he’d probably be able to make a strong showing. But that’s not going to happen.

    Pretty bad for McKinney and Baldwin though.

  5. Nexus

    I am curious as to how Keyes, who is on the ballot in 2 states, is out-polling both Baldwin and McKinney, who are on more states than not.

  6. Trent Hill

    Ballot status was not considered.

    Take Keyes’ vote total and divide it by….15 at least.

    And after removing Keyes as a possibility in most states—more of those people would be going to Baldwin than to anyone else. Furthermore, I dont know what the margin of error is–but a CP presidential candidate has NEVER gotten such a low percentage.

  7. SovereignMN

    What’s so curious about that? Keyes has more name recognition and the poll doesn’t take into account a candidate’s ballot access status. It simply lists all the candidates as options.

  8. SovereignMN

    “And after removing Keyes as a possibility in most states—more of those people would be going to Baldwin than to anyone else. ”

    I don’t agree with that. I bet most people who choose Keyes are upset Republicans who will eventually select McCain….assuming McCain doesn’t pick a pro-abort running mate.

  9. Trent Hill

    SovereignMN,

    Maybe on election day. In this poll,if they’re choosing Keyes–they wouldnt choose McCain.

  10. johncjackson

    Why didn’t they poll “‘likely voters”? Doesn’t including non-voters LOWER the accuracy of the poll? On election day non-voters will not count in the breakdown of the vote totals. How many of the 20%+ unaccounted for are actually “undecided”? It’s likely accurate for the minor parties with another 20-25% to be divided between Obama and McCain.

  11. Nexus

    “Barring a miracle I don’t think any of the bottom 5 can break from the pack unless one of the front-runners makes a severe mistake.”

    There is one possibility. It wouldn’t be a miracle, but it is a long shot. That would be Ron Paul. An endorsement from the rock star of the liberty movement could lead to a spike in campaign cash and polls numbers for either Barr or Baldwin(I doubt Nader, Mckinney, or Keyes can count on Dr. Paul’s endorsement under any circumstances). Again, this is a longshot at best. I doubt Dr. Paul will endorse anyone. Even if he did, I don’t know how effective it would be.

  12. JimDavidson

    So, I added up the numbers and got 75.5% for named candidates. Which means 24.5% undecided or planning to write in Ron Paul, or not voting. Interesting. (Do we assume that the 7% not registered have figured out that they need to register if they want to vote?)

    One wonders how New Hampshire looks with George Phillies on the ballot as a Libertarian Party candidate for president.

  13. Deran

    The poll seems fairly dubious if Keyes was given as an equal option as candidates, much more potentially, on enough state ballots to theoretically secure the winning number of Electoral Votes.

  14. Austin Cassidy

    What it does say is that if the Constitution Party wanted to win a lot of votes, they should have put Keyes on their ballot line. Apparently, if ballot access was equal, he’d outpoll no-name Baldwin by 7-1.

    Having said that, Keyes is a kook and it understandable why they didn’t pick him. But he would have brought it many more votes.

  15. inDglass

    I am glad the Constitution Party took the higher road than the Libertarian Party and nominated the principled candidate who is true to their beliefs, rather than the former Republican, borderline-neocon option that might get a few more votes.

  16. inDglass

    Wouldn’t polls be the most accurate if they listed whatever candidate will be on the ballot in the state of the person they call? If the ballot isn’t going to list the candidate then the poll shouldn’t either.

  17. Fred Church Ortiz

    That’d be the right way inDglass, but for some reason pollsters (and apparently, WND) obsess over getting a nationwide percentage, which is close to useless for determining who the next president will be, and well past useless for those of us watching candidates that aren’t going to be on all 50+1.

  18. G.E.

    Having said that, Keyes is a kook and it understandable why they didn’t pick him. But he would have brought it many more votes.

    Probably true. However, Keyes is a bad match for the CP platform (just as Barr is for the LP) and the CP showed some institutional self respect. Besides, Baldwin COULD HAVE possibly caught the Ron Paul wave, and Keyes had no hope of doing so.

  19. inDglass

    I always thought Ruwart might have the potential to catch the Ron Paul wave. Dr. Paul introduced the libertarian message to so many new people. If the LP would have put a real libertarian on the ticket, I think they would have had more success than in previous years.

  20. Hugh Jass

    Seconded. In related news, I wonder who Dr. Paul will endorse next month? Baldwin, Barr, maybe he’ll surprise us and pick McKinney?

  21. VTV

    I have to disagree. As is becoming painfully obvious to me in dealing with the “Ron Paul Revolution” there are a lot of religiously motivated people who would get one wiff of “legalized child pornography” and lose interest quickly.

  22. Steve LaBianca

    VTV // Aug 21, 2008 at 11:56 pm

    As is becoming painfully obvious to me in dealing with the “Ron Paul Revolution” there are a lot of religiously motivated people who would get one wiff of “legalized child pornography” and lose interest quickly.

    I agree that there are many strong religious motivations within the ranks of Ron Paul supporters. Yet, for many of the “R3VOLytionaries” this sentiment doesn’t carry over to the state fighting the war on drugs, even though most oppose drug use/abuse. By the same token, I believe that properly and correctly presented the “age of consent”and/or “child pornography” mischaracterizations would generally be diffused.

    This characterization of “legalized child pornography” is a slander of you-know-who. There never was, nor ever will be a place for “legalized child pornography” within libertarianism.

    Saying that child pornography laws and age of consent laws are counterproductive in protecting the rights of young people to not be coerced is VERY, VERY different than the slanderous idea that libertarians support “legalized child pornography”. Please stop making this connection with the use of the slanderous terminology – “legalized child pornography”.

  23. Steve LaBianca

    My hat is off to the CP delegates at their nominating convention, by nominating a candidate who closely adheres to their principles.

    324 delegates to the LP convention abandoned the LP’s principles. Shame on them.

  24. G.E.

    Hmmm… Libertarian positions on age of consent and child porn on one hand (Ruwart); socialist positions on health care and education and Maoist democratic centralism, pro-central banking on the other (Gravel).

    I choose Mary!

  25. Steve LaBianca

    Unfortunately G.E., 324 delegates to the LP convention didn’t see this as “THE” choice. . . . Ruwart vs. Gravel. This is one reason in the final analysis, why 324 voted for Barr.

    I and others in the Ruwart camp failed to correctly clarify tothe delegates, the “libertarian/Ruwart” position on these issues.

  26. jnack

    This poll could be accurate, but there are numerous others.

    One recent poll found that one in ten respondents supports Nader, McKinney, or Barr. This is a finding of a poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation, released by CNN, according to a report by Angus Reid Global Monitor dated August 6, 2008.
    http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/seven_point_lead_for_obama_in_us_race/

    The ORC poll found 6 percent support Nader, 1 percent McKinney, and 3 percent Barr.

    What these recent polls are collectively telling us, is that anywhere from 2 to10 percent are still opting for alternative candidates in the face of tremendous “lesser of two evils” pressure brought about by the two party system.

  27. langa

    Steve,

    Unfortunately, I think no matter how well you or anybody else managed to enunciate the libertarian position, many of those 324 delegates were not interested in hearing it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *