Skip to comments.1984 Newsweek Poll: Walter Mondale beating Ronald Reagan by 18 points
Posted on 06/25/2008 7:01:10 PM PDT by maccaca
There's a little gem of Newsweek's embarrasing polling history buried under the perpetual poll sucker Howard Fineman's latest piece. http://www.newsweek.com/id/143258/output/print
But nothing like in 1984. That was the most embarrassing example of the latter kind of survey. It predates PSR but remains seared into our institutional memory. The day the Democratic convention ended in San Francisco in 1984, the Newsweek poll showed Walter Mondale 18 points ahead of President Ronald Reagan. Mondale ended up getting clobbered, 49 states to one.
This is pretty good, can somebody dig out this poll? I'd love to see.
I don’t expect McCain in a landslide, but there is no way Obama is going to win some of the states they are projecting him to. There is also no way Obama is up 15 points. It will be another nail-biter election where just a few swing states will decide it.
John McCain is NO Ronald Reagan. Not even close.
I think that Newsweek poll was a rigged poll, done for the purpose of allowing biased news organizations to report on it to shape public opinion. DNC TV was all over the Newsweek poll this morning, along with an LA Times poll that had similar “results”.
The Gallop poll shows the race being even, and Gallop is a solid non biased polling organization.
Barack Obama is NO Walter Mondale. Not even close.
Ah, the wonderful years of the Mondale Administration. Higher taxes, a nuclear freeze, the Soviet Union getting rid of Gorbachev and going on another roll. Definitely one of our lesser presidents, the perfect followup to Jimmy Carter.
PSR = Princeton Survey Research
Fred Barnes says the next one will show a lead for Obama, and he seemed quite defeated. Must be a FReeper.
Polls this early are as useful as tennis shoes for a blowfish.
I’ve been paying attention to Presidential elections and their coverage in the MSM since Reagan’s first term, and I don’t remember a single one in which media-sponsored polls didn’t show the Democrat, whoever it was, solidly ahead in the months before election day. Every single time.
They will show the Democrat with a comfortable lead until sometime in October. Then the race will be said to be tightening, and “journalists” with long faces will express surprise, and then suspicion. The GOP will be said to be “buying” the election. Campaign financing will become an issue.
Finally, just before the election, the polls will be “too close to call.” A few will show the GOP candidate ahead by three or four percentage points; this lead, which was called “comfortable” or “commanding” when it was enjoyed by the Democrat candidate, will now be called “a statistical tie” or “inside the margin of error” when it favors the Republican.
If the GOP wins, exit polling data that favored the Democrat will be used to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the entire election. Investigations will be called for. Lawsuits will be encouraged.
Thanks for posting this.
I didnt have numbers but have been telling people this for weeks.
Yep. Goes well with the polls predicting that Guliani and Clinton would be respective GOP and democRat nominees.
America has not been pussified to this extent yet.
Yes, and if IIRC the 1988 campaign had MSM pollsters saying Dukakis was far ahead of Bush, Sr. for a long time — weren’t the polls around Labor Day saying Dukakis should win by 20+ points? I seem to recall some nonsense like that......
McLame is too much a RINO and a liberal to be Reagan. Vote third party or write in your favorite conservative in 2008. Juan has always tried to destroy conservatives and the GOP.
And socks on a chicken.
Bingo! Bambi will lose handily, maybe even a landslide. However, the polls will likely continue to show him ahead no matter what, and when he loses, even if it is a big loss, they will cry foul.....and there will be riots and rumors of riots....and wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Yep, last year at this time we were going to have a Giuliani-Clinton race, with Fred Thompson in close second. Polls right now are useless. The conventions haven’t even been held, nor the campaigns in full swing.
President Reagan and Vice President Bush lead their Democratic opponents, Walter F. Mondale and Geraldine A. Ferraro, by 18 percentage points, a Newsweek magazine poll released Saturday showed. Among those polled, 57 percent said they will vote for Mr. Reagan compared to 39 percent who prefer Mr. Mondale. Some 81 percent of those polled agree with Mr. Mondale that taxes will have to rise next year, but 57 percent say the Republicans will be better able to keep the country prosperous. Only 30 percent believe Mr. Mondale could do the job. For the Newsweek poll, the Gallup Organization interviewed 1,055 people nationwide by telephone. The margin of error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.
He will win if all those dead folks who are registered show up to vote.
Not to mention the outcries of “racism” and “Bradley effect.”
Threats of riots in the streets . . . “burn baby burn”
McLiberal is Mondale. He’s not the great one.
Exactly what I was thinking.
Gallup June 1992 General Election
Ross Perot 34%
George Bush 32%
Bill Clinton 24%
I found a NYT article, dated Sept. 17, 1984 discussing a Gallup poll done for Newsweek. According to the article the poll, released the Saturday before the article was published, showed Reagan with an 18 point lead over Mondale.
Here’s the link:
FTA: "Mondale ended up getting clobbered, 49 states to one."
Sad to say, in the 2008 replay John McCain plays the part of Walter Mondale and barely carries his own home state.
...haha exactly what I was thinking
I plan on accompanying my nephew around the neighborhood and wearing an OBama mask.
If I don’t see enough candy, I’ll just blurt out “What are you, racist?? Fork over the sweets...whitey!”
Just be careful you don’t purchase a surplus OJ mask!
Dead on !
I can see a scenario where Osama wins the popular vote while McPain ekes out the electoral victory. Let's say that things pretty much work out to the same red-blue state split we've seen in the last 2 elections. The only difference being that there is off-the-charts black turnout in the south. Now, while this huge black turnout in the South drives up Osama's popular vote total higher than Gore/Kerry, it does not yield him a single electoral vote. While the margins of victory for McCain in the southern states is less than what would normally be expected from a GOP candidate, he still WINS all those states.
Now, if this does indeed happen, can you imagine the hue and cry from the msm and the black population? How many cities will burn?
I gree with your assessment. I can’t remenber when a Republican was ever the front runner in an election.
As a young boy I do rmember the 1972 election and the
excitement over McGovern. The biggest shock to me was Carol O’Connor, Archie Bunker, endorsing McGovern for president.
The smothers Brothers mocked Nixon, the pop culture
hted him and on it went.
Funny how the MSM throws a party to announce polls showing Obama up 15 or 12 points, gleefully reporting and plastering it all over the place on the web, but they’re so silent when more reliable polls like Gallup and Rasmussen show the race virtually tied. Why do we go through this every election? Oh wait....