Posted on 10/30/2012 9:04:11 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
Since February 8th, Mitt Romney has led only once in the Rasmussen poll of likely Ohio voters and that was ages ago, in May. At the beginning of October, Obama was ahead by the thinnest of margins, just 1 point. But results from the Sunday, October 28th poll show Romney with a 2 point lead, 50-48, breaking the 48-48 tie of the previous week. (1)
Nearly one third of Ohio voters have already cast their ballots and among these early voters, Obama has a lead of 62%-36%. But according to Rasmussen, the good news is that “… Romney has a large lead among those who still plan to vote.” (1)
And here are some possible reasons why.
Of those who have already cast their ballots, 35% are female; 55% are black; 41% are Democrats; 36% are liberal and 37% are unmarried. These numbers are significant because they represent blocs of voters which...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
How do they have these stats about early votes? Are they counting early votes already? How do they know that Obama is leading 65% to 35% unless they are already counting votes. But surely it’s wrong to be counting and releasing results before most people have cast their ballots?
Or are these just fancy guestimates? If so, why does the article report them as if they are actual election results.
This early voting crap stinks.
I thought the 62% for Obama had been debunked numerous times already.
Female voters favor Obama by 53-45 and 35% of early votes have been cast by females. But the male vote goes to Romney by a 14% margin, 56-42. And only 28% of the early vote was cast by males.
35% of the early vote is female
28% of the early vote is male
So what are the other 37%?
FIFTY FIVE PERCENT of those who have already voted are black, and nearly one-third of the people have already voted? Even if one in six Ohio voters are black, (which I really doubt) they would already have to have had 100% turnout to reach this point. Moreover, if the sample is 55% Black and he wins this group, say by 90% (say 50 for him and 5 for Romney), it means that in the other 45% he is loosing by close to 3 to 1 (say 12 for him and 33 for Romney. If he is doing better than 90% in the black vote, he is loosing the non-black vote by even more.
While the numbers don’t add up, unless the black turnout is going to be at about the 200% level (which it looks to be on track to be), they don’t look good for O.
Voting turnout by blacks will reach 200% before election day and may hit as high as 500% on election day according to a new NPR sponsored Acorn poll.
“Female voters favor Obama by 53-45 and 35% of early votes have been cast by females. But the male vote goes to Romney by a 14% margin, 56-42. And only 28% of the early vote was cast by males.”
Hmm. So some other gender cast 37% of the vote? These numbers are obviously wrong.
What a contrast. Should there even be a question?
The other 37% is gender confused and they are going 100% for Obama
My guess is that they use exit polls.
“The other 37% is gender confused and they are going 100% for Obama.”
Oh. You mean democrats. 0 is heading for a huge victory if the population breaks down:
35% Male
28% Female
37% Gender confused Democrat
....
Thanks Oldpuppymax.
One question : how do we know for a fact that Rasmussen is the most unbaised, factually sound, reliable poll that does the best job in determing leads based on actual voting data ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.