(Mine is on the back window of my pickup.)
Posted on 08/08/2012 7:27:34 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Today's Washington Post/ABC News poll gives a little bit of good news to Barack Obama --- and therefore some bad news for Mitt Romney. In an advance look at the overall poll results, Obama leads Romney on favorability. However, the gap narrows when the poll reports only from registered voters, which the Post and ABC fail to mention:
Although 40 percent of voters now say they hold a favorable opinion of the former Massachusetts governor — virtually unchanged from May — those holding negative views of him ticked higher in the new survey, from 45 percent to 49 percent.
Meanwhile, President Obama remained in positive territory on that measure, with 53 percent of voters reporting favorable opinions of him. Only 43 percent say they feel unfavorably toward him.
To find the favorability gap among registered voters, one has to look at the report from the pollster, provided by ABC News. Among RVs, Obama leads in favorability 49/42. That represents a tie for the Obama low in this poll for 2012 (also 49% in February), while Romney's 42% is the second-highest report for him since the primaries started in January. Dropping three points in a month isn't exactly great news for Romney, but it's also not as bad as Obama's drift as an incumbent — especially an incumbent who has spent well into nine figures this spring and summer trying to destroy Romney’s credibility through harshly negative advertising.
Of course, we have a lot of problems in the WaPo/ABC poll series with sampling. In these advance results reports, the sampling data is not usually included, and today’s report is no exception. We can’t evaluate these results fully until we determine how well the modeling of the sample data matches that of the electorate in 2012. That doesn’t mean that the information is entirely useless, however, especially within party-affiliation demographics. Those results are a mixed bag for both candidates, too:
INDEPENDENTS – Obama’s gained back ground he’d lost among independents, customarily swing voters in national elections. In late May he fell numerically underwater among independents for the first time since December (45-52 percent favorable-unfavorable). He’s now back far in front of Romney in this group, largely because of gains among independent women.
Among all independents, Obama’s favorability rating is now 16 points higher than Romney’s (53 percent vs. 37 percent). At the same time, that narrows among independents who are registered to vote – 46 percent favorable for Obama, 38 percent for Romney – indicating, among other factors, the potential importance of voter registration drives in the few months ahead.
That’s an eight-point swing among independents between general-population adults and registered voters — which sounds a little odd to me. I’d expect to see some difference, but eight points is pretty large. Still, this isn’t good news for Romney, who needs to beat Obama’s seven-point win in 2008 among unaffiliated voters.
However, Romney has some good news on the Republican-unity front:
Among partisans, Romney’s caught up with Obama in popularity within his own party; 83 percent of Republicans rate Romney positively, as do 84 percent of Democrats for Obama. That’s Romney’s best-ever rating with the party faithful, up 25 points since mid-March.
Romney’s rated favorably by fewer conservatives, 65 percent, though this, too, is a new high.
That’s not a bad development, nor is Romney in desperate straits as we roll toward the conventions. Team Obama still hasn’t scored a knockout, and they’re three weeks away from getting seriously outpunched in the general election. Having an incumbent at 49% favorability among registered voters suggest that it’s probably lower among likely voters — and both are bad numbers for the candidate looking for re-election.
Update: Yes, I meant to say three weeks – or to be very precise, three weeks and two days. Romney can start spending general-election cash once he accepts the nomination at the convention, and that is the official start of the general election.
I still think “favorability” is a misleading indicator. I think a lot of people don’t want to admit they don’t like him because of the “R-ism” issue.
Sounds like a formula for a mystery third-party celebrity candidate appearing at the 11th. hour.
(Mine is on the back window of my pickup.)
METHODOLOGY - This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cell phone Aug. 1-5, 2012, among a random national sample of 1,026 adults. Results have a margin of sampling error of 4 points. The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates of New York, N.Y., with sampling, data collection and tabulation by SSRS/Social Science Research Solutions of Media, Pa.
Random sample, not even registered voters let alone likely voters.
the fact that this is in play at all, is very very bad news for this country.
we are in decline.
I hope and pray that the country wakes up, but I do not think it will. Perhaps we just haven’t hit rock bottom yet. Perhaps we haven’t hit that point that some reformed alcholics call “the moment of clarity”.
In the large cities, from culture to food stamps I see a country full of fat, whining, lazy-ass citizens, and millions of free loaders who are illegal immigrants. So many people on the public dole.
I will most certainly have to leave the city soon. The wife and I will seek out a slow paced, safe haven.
Also, the ref to VOTER REGISTRATION becoming important. So, it will be of value for both candidates to have dedicated folks on the ground getting out there to get other folks registered to vote ('cause they can't vote if they're not registered).
Good luck with that on Romney's score. He's planning on winning with TV ads. The 40% of the Republican voting base who are Conservative provide the foot soldiers who do that registration battle.
Obama may have a similar problem as well. If the black ministers aren't supporting his effort to make homosexuality mandatory, they sure aren't going to be running registration campaigns.
This is still a race to the bottom and all the statistical analysis in the world won't tell you what you want to know in time ~ those things only work when interest in campaigns is building and people are getting fired up to campaign for their guy.
Also, the ref to VOTER REGISTRATION becoming important. So, it will be of value for both candidates to have dedicated folks on the ground getting out there to get other folks registered to vote ('cause they can't vote if they're not registered).
Good luck with that on Romney's score. He's planning on winning with TV ads. The 40% of the Republican voting base who are Conservative provide the foot soldiers who do that registration battle.
Obama may have a similar problem as well. If the black ministers aren't supporting his effort to make homosexuality mandatory, they sure aren't going to be running registration campaigns.
This is still a race to the bottom and all the statistical analysis in the world won't tell you what you want to know in time ~ those things only work when interest in campaigns is building and people are getting fired up to campaign for their guy.
I think it is clear Obama is now ahead and is the favorite in the race. I wish it weren’t so, but demographics and an increasing moocher class have made it inevitable.
I do think Romney still has a chance to win a close race. He’ll have to run a stronger campaign than he has to this point, and he is going to have to find a way to convince disenchanted conservatives to give him a shot. A difficult task for sure, but not impossible.
Though I am not a fan, I hope he can pull it off. Undoing four more years of Obama damage will be difficult at best, and potentially impossible.
The real poll numbers
The media is trying to create a sense of momentum and of inevitability about the Obama candidacy. One benighted Newsweek reporter even speculated about a possible Democratic landslide.
On Friday, I saw the real numbers. These state-by-state polls, taken by an organization I trust (after forty years of polling) show the real story. The tally is based on more than 600 likely voter interviews in each swing state within the past eight days.
The trend line is distinctly pro-Romney. Of the thirteen states studied, he improved or Obama slipped in nine states while the reverse happened in only four. To read the media, one would think that Romney had a terrible month. In fact, the exact reverse is true.
Romney is currently leading in every state McCain carried plus: Indiana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Nevada, North Carolina, and Colorado. If he carries these states, he’ll have 228 electoral votes of the 270 he needs to win.
To win the election, Romney would then have to carry Florida where he trails by two points, and either Virginia (behind by two) or Ohio where he’s down by only one.
If he carries all three of these states and also wins all the others where Obama is now at 50% or less – Iowa, New Mexico, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey — he will get 351 electoral votes, a landslide about equal to Obama’s 363 vote tally in 2008.
The strong probability is that Romney does, in fact, carry Florida, Ohio, and Virginia and a share of the other states where Obama is below 50% of the vote.
So don’t believe the garbage being put out by the media. The attempt to portray Romney as not catching on and as dropping in the polls is ludicrous. It is, at best, the product of incompetent polling and, at worst, the result of deliberate media bias. But Romney is winning and expanding his lead each week. That’s the real story.
http://www.dickmorris.com/the-real-poll-data-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/
RE: I think it is clear Obama is now ahead and is the favorite in the race. I wish it weren’t so, but demographics and an increasing moocher class have made it inevitable.
Here’s a question for everyone -— at this point in time in 1980, how was Jimmy Carter in the polls compared to Ronald Reagan?
I sure hope Dick Morris is right
...And in other news I’ve got a poll showing most agree the sun comes in the morning.
Democrats are much harder to dislodge when all you can offer them is what was once described as "me to".
I think that was directed at Willkie, a very Romney-esque fellow, by Roosevelt in his third campaign.
A Democrat will vote for a Republican who has some fundamental ideas straight about truth, justice and the American way and who is not a weak kneed wimp.
Otherwise a Democrat will vote for another Democrat every time ~ even twice if he can get away with it.
Not so. This is no different than the blow out elections of 1994. Democrats and indies booted the Democrats out of congress becasue they did not want anyone messing with theor heqalth care. this is no different.
Romeny will win 60/40 the same as those opposed to Obamacare.Real simple!
I seem to recall we had a Democrat in 1992 and in 1996 ~ and this looks more and more like 2008 with a Democrat, then a Republican take over of the House in 2010, and then we run another loser against them and the Democrat squeaks by again.
So, you don't like my Willkie analogy?
I think that there will be historically dem states that will not only be in play but Romney will pick up. Last week, Rush mentioned a poll in Connecticut where Romney was leading by 7. Even States like Mass will be close considering that Romney was gov there and Scott Brown is running. Also, Michigan will be in play since the Romneys are from there.
The economy is getting worse, not better. And the “You didn’t build that” statement by Obama is still resonating.
Lastly, look at the Tea Party victories in Indiana, Texas as well as conservative victories this week in Kansas and Missouri. And let’s not forget about Scott Walker winning convincingly in Wisconsin in June.
The dems have shortened there convention to 3 days and have brought in Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton to speak. Still, a growing number of Dems are not going to the convention. They would still not attend if Obama was so favorable??
Finally, Romney and his PAC’s are raising much more money than Obama is for the 3 straight month. This will continue in my opinion. And Romney and the PAC’s haven’t really begun to spend their money yet.
When you look at the above, something very special is happening. I think it may even dwarf the 1980 Reagan landslide. But we have to be vigilant and ignore these misleading polls.
The moment of clarity will come for many when they stop receiving their government checks or when they dollars they try to use will become worthless due to hyper-inflation. I, too, hope that enough or our fellow citizens wake-up before then, but right now, it is not looking too good.
I still contend that come election week most Americans will take a hard look in the mirror and have a very difficult time moving ahead with a Obama conformation.
The electorate is completely different today and there are less thinking Americans than there were then... we have generations of indoctrinated leftists... trained and mis-educated in the public school system. We have a man that is one of the worst gop candidates of my lifetime. I know many of you think that it is not true but even those that I know that are 100% certain to vote for romney... do not like him. We all know why... You Tube is full of mitt in his own words, describing himself as a progressive and then articulating his support for all agenda items that Conservatives stand against.
mitt has done absolutely nothing to win over the base, when all polling is showing that he has a problem with us. Many of his moves seem to be hostile to the Conservative base. He thinks that he can skate to a victory and that is not going to happen. Today abc news reported that Gallup is showing mitt at the lowest approval rating of any presidential challenger candidate in our history. Maybe that is true and maybe it is not... but perception is reality in politics the reality is that mitt is considered a weak candidate. IMHO he is just that.
mitt would be a formidable candidate if he were a dim... but he is not a dim... at least he is not running as a dim. mitt himself needs to decide that he wants to win and he needs to fight against obama and those horrible mccainiacs that he has running his campaign. He must find a way to win over those of us that do not trust him... he must find a way the secure his base and then win over America with firm plans and sincere pledges to do what MUST be done to save America. I have my doubts that he is capable of doing those things and that is why I think that this election is so close... when it never should have been.
LLS
LOTS of leadinfg polls coming out in the last couple of weeks.
The headline polls are all “All Respondents, and NBC is using +16 Dems, NYTimes +9 Dems etc.
THEY ARE ALL BOGUS, but they are meant to DRIVE OPINION, not determine opinion.
+/-4 MoE means that there could literally have been no change from poll to poll. Sloppy.
The issue is Obamacare not re-election. People will come to the polls to vote against Obamacare and the only way to do that is to vote against Obama. In 1994 was an off year election where Clinton was not up for re-election. In 1994 not a single pollster predicted how pissed off the elctorate was that government wanted to take their health care. Not one and yet democrats and indies came to vote against Hillarycare. Nothing has changed. People have been consistently against Obamacare 60/40 and will come to the polls to vote against Obama 60/40. Simple math.
Democrats will not tell a pollster they will vote against their party being they are afraid of being found out. They will however throw Obama under the bus just as they threw the Dems under the bus in 1994. Nothing has changed. People want hands off their health care. That is why Scott Brown won Kennedy’s seat.
Given the trend toward more than 50% of the electorate voting early, and the large number of voters who have already decide who they are voting for, I think these polls are pretty meaningless. Those who haven’t decided yet are such a tiny percentage, that I don’t think the election hinges on them now.
These are the dog days, the period before the convention. “I think a lot of people don’t want to admit they don’t like him because of the “R-ism” issue.”
THAT, and Romney running like a scalded dog from the Chic Fil A episode, a master opportunity for the fool to stand up, for just once, on speech and religious liberty.
I guess his favorability would “plateau”, among devout Christians, and real conservatives, when he publically rebukes us by ignoring the constitutional concerns screaming in the Chic Fil A brouhaha. This is the Romney way of disinfrangizing, marginalizing the conservative Right.
I get the message and I am happy to return the favor he laid on us. Down ticket voting and letting Myth twist in the wind is the only answer if there is any future for conservative thought in the Republican Party, or elsewhere.
Random sample, not even registered voters let alone likely voters.
I tried to find the party breakdown. Shockingly, it was nowhere to be found. I did notice that the independents broke heavily for Obama (by 13 points). I thing there were a lot of Democrats in Independent clothing on this one!
Dang, you had me until I found out it was dick morris.
Those who find him likeable obviously haven’t seen him on the campaign trail. He’s one angry, nasty piece of work.
His likeability is a function primarily of two things;
1. Whites who think it would just be wrong, and probably racist to think ill of Obama.
2. Overwhelming media and pop culture bias. The image of Obama is that of a brilliant, cool, historic, transformation figure. That is the narrative the media and Hollywood push. Just listen to the late night jokes; Republican jokes are much more mean-spirited. Romney is an aloof, uncaring aristocrat. Bush was an idiot (and he actually was in many ways, but not the way the media portrayed it). Republicans hate women. Republicans hate blacks. Republicans hate hispanics, and so on and so on. The jokes directed at Obama are much more tepid, and never about his unassailable character.
A Republican with the same personality, speaking skills, and record as Obama would have been labeled arrogant, sneaky, and a total incompetent failure.
Plus in 1995 the economy was not mired in a multi-year recession
Your lips to God’s ears, but if Romney wins Rhode Island, I’m going to start buying lottery tickets again.
It is the cities which create culture and civilization as the very word implies. It is also true that it is the Blue states which pay more (in general) in federal taxes while the Red states (in general) are net takers. So it is a myth that welfare is only because of the cities.
Not only that but a large minority of welfare recipients, if not a majority, are people who migrated to the cities from elsewhere. Rural areas have sent people into the cities for centuries.
Republicans have to figure out how to get the votes of the cities in order to have a constant chance of winning elections.
You actually believe polls which DESPERATELY avoid polling “likely voters” and which routinely OVERSAMPLE Democrats can be depended on for providing the truth?
I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.
100 million on welfare, 47% on food stamps? That is the reason Bama wins all the Blue states and some Purple. Enough to nip Mitt. We just do not have enough real Americans anymore to outvote the takers. The only hope is if the takers do not come out in full force to vote then and only then could Mitt enable enough states to cobble together for the 270 electoral votes. It is a real shame that so many people want a soviet America but that seems to be the case: likeable or not, Mitt has an agenda to stop that. Many Americans now do not want it stopped. The Makers, the Producers are their enemies. See Bama in Pueblo , Col. today promising to bail out all industries if they will only give their freedom to him. Sounds very Stalinist.
I think you are right. It reminds me of a businessman I once knew, people would say something like, “Yeah, I know he’s a crook but he’s a nice guy.” I could never understand how a person can be both.
“The electorate is completely different today and there are less thinking Americans than there were then.”
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
You got that right, the myth is still being promoted that we have a higher level of education now. It is said that the average WWII soldier only had an eighth grade education which is true but what is left out is that the average recent college graduate has LESS THAN an eighth grade education by the standard of 1945. Anyone who doubts it need only read samples of the writing done by those soldiers and compare to what people write today. I am constantly amazed that TV “stars” of today don’t understand the use of pronouns, something which used to be taught in grade school.
One of the worst examples is Obama himself, we are told that he is a super genius but in samples of writing which are KNOWN FOR CERTAIN to be his own writing he cannot make subject and verb agree!
A perfect explanation of our education situation. Well stated.
LLS
“A Democrat will vote for a Republican who has some fundamental ideas straight about truth, justice and the American way and who is not a weak kneed wimp.”
Hilarious stuff. While that might have once been true (and this is extremely doubtful) those characteristics are the LAST things Democrats look for and they reject them every chance they get.
People have to get over the idea that there is an alternative to Romney or some kind of miracle can happen at the convention. As much as Romney is not our choice here he is the choice of the GOP and infinitely preferable to The Disaster.
Your idea of allowing This Disaster to slither back into the White House is destructive of the nation’s future. You need to tone back the fanaticism for our kids sake.
And spare me any BS about whatever Loser you are contemplating throwing away your vote for.
Next thing you know they were running Lyndon Baines Johnson. He won in a landslide.
As events progressed it was quite demonstrable that he was the worst possible choice Democrats could have ever had.
Next election up Richard Nixon ran on Conservative issues and not only won, he pulled over millions of white Southerners who never looked back.
We have the same sort of situation here ~ think of Obama as a bad LBJ. Almost the entirity of the Roman Catholic voting base in America is up for grabs ~ and so we are running a guy just like Obama.
These great power shifts don't happen everyday. Why we are giving away this one is a very good question.
It’s the same disaster with either candidate.
There is no comparison of The Disaster to LBJ. LBJ was a political genius compared to this goof.
Nixon only won because the Democrats had turned the nation against them by the War not because of anything he said or did. His “Secret” Plan to end the War? Given me a break. Not only that but the Democrats were bitterly divided as exemplified by the Convention riots and the fact that Wallace took a lot of Democrat votes with him when he ran as a Turd Party. Wallace won states that, at that time, would not vote Republican for anything.
Are you comparing LBJ to the goofy Romney or the goofy Obama? You have to be specific ~ they are remarkably similar.
Not by a long shot are they the same.
Romney is NOT anti-American.
Romney is NOT anti-Business or a socialist.
Romney has NOT associated AT ALL TIMES (or any time) with America-hating Left Wingers.
Romney IS constitutionally qualified to be President.
Romney has NOT hidden his college transcripts.
I could go on and on but this is sufficient to prove there is nothing in common between these candidates except they BOTH have two legs.
First off, you know those donor lists ~ with the "Little people" ~ you won't get to use them in future campaigns.
Second, no one worth appointing will be willing to serve in a Romney regime. Obama has had a similar problem ~ remarkably similar. He has the worst bunch of appointees I can recall. Romney attracts the same class.
Nixon ran on Law and Order because the Democrats were rioting at their convention and the Blacks were burning down their neighborhoods in big Northern cities. Had little to do with “conservatism” which had been discredited by the Goldwater debacle.
You are the one bringing up LBJ not me. What I said was that he was a political genius compared to The Disaster.
Presumably you are equating JFK’s assassination to a “miracle”. But that was a big factor in LBJ’s getting elected because of the enormous sympathy it generated. Rather than being portrayed as a corrupt, racist, mobbed-up, vicious scum-bag, ole LBJ was the inheritor of the saintly mantle of Camelot.
Once again no bearing on this election.
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.