Skip to comments.Obama vs Romney Polls: When You Crunch the Numbers, Romney is Actually Doing Very Well
Posted on 09/25/2012 5:30:24 AM PDT by Kaslin
Editors' note: this piece originally appeared at PolicyMic.
Two things typically happen after the major parties conventions come to an end. People that normally do not pay attention for most of the year start to pay attention to the news and polls more, and voter enthusiasm jumps up as a result. The major polls that are appearing on the daily newscasts, in the newspapers and on the internet have become incredibly important. While meant to accurately reflect the views of the nation, these polls today have unfortunately turned into a weapon.
Many major organizations have skewed their polls as of late. They do this a couple of subtle ways that most people will not notice unless they bother to do a little digging. By over-sampling Democrat voters and under-sampling both Republicans and Independents, the poll organizations have been able to make it appear as though President Barack Obama has a decisive lead over former Governor Mitt Romney.
Aside from over-sampling, they also base their samples on previous voter turnout. Typically this is done with the last major voting year, which would have been 2010. Unfortunately for all of us, most polling agencies are basing their samples off of the 2008 turnout model. In 2008, the Republican vote was depressed, while Democrats came out in record numbers. In 2010, the Republicans returned in force, resulting in one of the most dramatic turnovers in history.
Considering that the GOP has maintained relatively high voter enthusiasm, there is no reason to believe that their numbers will be as low as in 2008. In fact, according to Rasmussen, Republican Party affiliation is at an eight year high, while Democratic Party affiliation is over four points behind. While Democrats have been registering more people over the past month, it is highly unlikely they will be able to overtake the GOP's lead.
So why should we believe that Democrats will come out in such superior numbers?
Conventional wisdom says that Obama should be trailing Mitt Romney in the polls, and the fact that he doesnt appear to be doing so means that Romney must just be that weak of a candidate. Thankfully, some people have "unskewed" the polls, showing what looks to be a much different race than what weve all been fed by the mainstream media.
A look at the Unskewed polls shows us a spread of Mitt Romney being nearly 8 full points ahead of President Obama. While conservatives will naturally want to jump for joy, they should first remember the wise words made famous by President Reagan: Trust, but verify.
Rasmussen shows the current party affiliation as 37.6% Republicans, 33.3% Democrats and 29.2% Independents. However, the sample from the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll shows an over-sampling of Democrats by 8%! Instead of the plus four margin that the GOP should be enjoying to accurately reflect the current voter rolls, the Democrats are instead being reflected by a plus four margin. With the data unskewed and the appropriate number of independents reflected, Mitt Romney would actually lead by a near 7-point margin.
One sample is an outlier. Two or more? That's something else.
A recent New York Times/CBS poll came out showing 49% for Obama and 46% for Romney. Again, the data was wildly skewed in favor of Democrats. Unskewed data shows Romney with a lead again, 51% to 44%. The sample for that poll broke down with 44% Democrats, 39% Republicans and 18% Independents.
Polls have constantly shown Romney leading with Independent voters by double digits. Massive over-sampling of Democrats and under-sampling of Republicans and Independents was used again to make it appear that Obama is doing much better than he normally would be.
Each polls that the website shows leads to an Examiner article that breaks down the data. Each article links to the polls and the raw data. After looking though the data, it becomes obvious that the analyst was spot on. The links are there for everyone to see. Click on the stats if you have questions and add up the percentages for yourselves. When one takes into account the high levels of party loyalty, the truth becomes apparent. Again, trust, but verify.
The ultimate question is, why skew the data for President Obama? The answer to that is simple.
Polls can be used as a weapon. The result is a de facto means of voter suppression. Those that may be hoping for a Romney victory may see poll after poll with President Obama supposedly in the lead, and believe that its not worth voting. Even if it were to peel off 1% or 2%, it could end up having an effect on the election. If you don't believe so, ask Al Gore if a scant few votes can make a difference.
This is not the result of some grand liberal media conspiracy. Rather, it is a time honored technique that liberal-leaning groups have used for years. This is nothing new.
Two Gallup polls that came on Thursday should have the Obama administration worried. Even though the numbers were slightly lopsided and they were polling registered voters instead of likely voters, the polls showed bad news for President Obama. One poll showed Obama and Romney tied at 47% each, while the other showed Obamas approval rating back down to 46%.
In an age when it seems like every news company and organization has an agenda, it always helps to read between the proverbial lines. When you look through the samples that each poll puts out there, the truth beomes clear.Obama does not have an unsurpassable lead, and Romney is not a weak candidate.
Just like with McCain though it will come down to a few states and which way those states go. Really percentages of possible overall turnout and voting do not give the clear picture. If Mitt cannot take the needed battleground States he could possibly be 3 points ahead and still loose.
Higher poll numbers means higher donations.
Pray for America
The electoral college projections at RCP are still a bit troubling to me. I’d like to see more points in Mitt’s column right now.
I keep hearing and reading this assertion but what is the basis for it? (besides Rush said it.)
There is also a theory that if a candidate peaks too soon that the voters can get buyers remorse and the other candidate becomes the underdog, demotivating the first's base voters and motivating the second’s base voters. In addition the media gets bored and starts going after the one on top to keep the story going, no story without a race.
Why bother voting if you are not enthused and you think your side will win easily anyway?
I am always suspicious of these grand conspiracy theories.
How did the exit polls do in 2010? Garbage in Garbage out, they are only used to defeat us.
Pray for America
I dont remember any polls showing Dems would win in 2010. In 2010 Freepers loved the polls then. Where was the grand conspiracy then?
I think the Debates are going to be interesting. Romney practiced last week and Obama is practicing this week in Nevada. We will have to see how the first one goes next week.
I should have said ‘many’ polls, Dems did win NV and DE and CA Senate races.
Romney is no Reagan (THERE -- I got the #1 objection out of the way!) but what the MSM is doing today is exactly what the MSM was doing in 1980.
The best indicator that Obama is in trouble, is his frenzied campaigning in battleground states, and his neglecting of his job at the White House.
When our embassies are burning and our people are getting killed, the president should be spending more time addressing those problems, but, his biggest priority is campaigning, the problems of the country be damned.
He knows that the polls showing him ahead are not reflecting reality, and thus, he has to spend every minute he can campaigning.
...”This is not the result of some grand liberal media conspiracy. Rather, it is a time honored technique that liberal-leaning groups have used for years. This is nothing new.”....
I disagree with the author that this is not a grand liberal media conspiracy. I think it is, based on the existence of the Journolist “scandal”. The so-called MSM are all in on Obama and are pulling out all the stops. However, it will do them no good - they have awakened the sleeping giant, and we will crush them and the Affirmative Action Squatter who despoils our White House.
Such experienced pols/pundits as Newt Gingrich have been saying that the idea of a few states controlling, apart from the whole electoral college and popular vote, is bunk.
Newt pointed out that states don’t go wildly opposite the rest of the states, or opposite the popular vote, but fit in within a historical trend and with other facts of the vote.
He’s not talking about polls well before the election but the actual vote.
He also does not believe in aiming a campaign at each of several individual “swing” states as if that would pull the country along. Instead, he says the country as a whole and the swing states will tend to perform collectively and individually “in sync”, therefore run a national campaign WELL, and the necessary states will come to you ON ELECTION DAY.
McCain ran an awful campaign, and he was up against a candidate that mesmerized the country with youth, teleprompter speaking ability, the first Black potiential president, etc. Yes McCain won certain reliable Republican states anyway, because the nation IS divided along somewhat reliable lines.
But the reason he saw Indiana, NC, VA, FL, OH etc slip away ISN’T THAT HE FAILED IN THOSE STATES BUT THAT HE FAILED NATIONALLY.
Very nice analysis of the phony lib polls. But I get nervous when I read this:
Rasmussen shows the current party affiliation as 37.6% Republicans, 33.3% Democrats and 29.2% Independents.
Unfortunately Raz is the one pollster that we consider trustworthy and, given his view that the GOP has a 4 point party affiliation advantage over the Dem, it seems very, very unlikely that he is using a Turnout Model that oversamples Democraps.
And Rasmussen has the race essentially dead-even.
You really cannot reconcile the Rasmussen polling with the conclusions of this article. At least I can’t.
Better yet, call R+R and tell them to quit screwing around and to get on O’s case.
Praying for a specific candidate to win doesnt seem like that great of an idea. Usually backfires.
I dont remember anything like that. It was constant cheering and giddiness here and circular firing squads over at DU, pretty fun to read too. Lots of complaining about Obama in those days.
The only concern here was over a couple of Senate races.
Just like the mainstream media, pollsters are much less interested in credibility than they are interested in RELEVANCE.
If you own a polling company and want some press, you must put out a poll that puts Obama in the lead. There is a reason that unskewedpolls.com doesn’t find its results on the front page. It simply doesn’t help the narrative that both the media and pollsters want to push.
Relevance is what they seek, they are attempting to persuade, not report objectively.
You are quite right.
Mitt has a shot. But he hasn’t won yet.
And the clock is ticking. I’d sure like to see a 3 point bump in each of Ohio, FL and VA.
Short of that, and that in the next 45 days, obama will win. But, with that, Romney will win.
It’s that simple.
The RCP electoral college projections are based on the same type of D-skewed polling, and is subject to the same error.
Any state where the poll average has -bama with less than an 8-point lead is either in play or in Romney’s camp.
Go through the RCP projections and see how that knowledge changes your concerns.
Wrong, all of the polls showed the Dems either holding the house or losing around 5-10 when they lost 65. I remember since I was saying they would lose 100 and was laughed at until the election.
They showed Brown losing, Walker losing and lately tons of Tea Party candidates losing primaries.
Freepers love being negative, it makes them feel smart.
This will be a landslide.
Many older southerners registered D decades ago. They vote R. There were only a few thousand Republicans (registered as such) in Louisiana in the late 1980s.
I can’t cite it or link it, but on poll threads I have read that RAS is not using his current Repub/Dem breakdown results or the 2010 turnout in his current polls.
Just what he IS using has been guessed at, or surmised, by people who study these things, and they claim it’s either past models or somewhere in between then and now, and 08 and 2010.
IOW, just because he has alternative info to what the clearly flawed polls are using doesn’t mean the most updated info is baked into his polls. He picks and chooses like a cafeteria menu, they are saying.
His polls obviously are better than the ones showing Obama with a sizable lead.
That’s about the size of what we can claim for RAS.
The most troubling poll to conservatives is the Fox News poll. I doubt Fox News would be part of a liberal conspiracy.
My opinion as well and I've held that opinion since this time last year.
Yes I remeber on Fox guys like Krauthammer, Barrone and Hume all handwringing, that meme "Don't get all excited, pollsters say..blah, blah". Well election night a.... big DUH!!!!! Ok this is fairly simple and proven out through about 15 election cycles now, if the MSM shows a tie the Republicans win. if they show a small lead for the R, its a blowout. If ALL the polls like 2008 with Oblameo with a 5-7 point lead then we can be fairly certain the R will lose. I thinks its a 3-5% fudge factor for the Democrats, they do it every election cycle. Obama as it stands right now is going to lose period. Some Freepers can mine info to the contrary, but book it, its over.
really? All the polls said that HUH?? Did Rush just say that?
Funny thing, I dont see any complaining that these polls dont mean anything on that thread.
I remember this
Is Rush using mass hypnosis now? What is it with these crazy 'We all thought we were losing in 2010' comments?
You can download the "Polls Adjustment Calculator" fron the link below: "
The first section is to enter the results from a media poll, including % of democrats, % of Republicans, % of Independents, enter % Obama, % Romney, % Undecided, % Others for each of these groups ( i.e. demorats, Republicans, Independents)
The second section is to t adjust the % democrats, % Republicans, % of Independents to match a more realistic elections turnout for each group. The worst case scenario would be democrats + 3% over Republicans. Make sure that when you do the adjustments for each of these group that they add to 100%.
The third section is the assignment of the % of undecided to each Romney and Obama. So you need to enter the % of undecided for Romney and those for Obama. Historically the undecided go 2:1 for the challenger
I do not think that Rasmussen is using R +4 in his polling. The evidence is that Romney is winning independents in the vast majority of Rasmussen polls (as well as other media polls including the biased ones) but still Romney is tied in Rasmussen, slightly ahead, or slightly behind. I think Rasmussen is using D+3 in his pollings.
Even with the over-sampling, these polls are hardly showing Obama with a "decisive" lead. The Gallup and Rasmussen polls have showed basically a dead heat and state polls clearly show Republicans in a stronger position then in 2008, which is why Romney was out in Colorado over the past weekend (a state that went to Obama by nearly 10 points in 2008).
??? You too? Mass hypnosis? WTF?? You folks are scary.
This 2010 FR post says polls were showing Rs 47 leading, 52 total ahead and another 20 in danger , thats 72 total. Yet some freepers here remember polls saying Republicans would lose seats 2010, or break even.
Republicans are now leading in 47 congressional districts held by Democrats. (This is up 8 just since last week.) There are another 5 seats held by retiring Democrats in significantly Republican-leaning districts which have not been polled. That's a total of 52 seats, almost equal to the number gained by Republicans in the 1994 election (54). There are another 20 where Republicans have pulled very close to Democrats, and the Democrats are polling well below 50%, normally a sign of grave danger this early in the election season. And of course, although the media tend to poll the races where the suspect the greatest likelihood of a strong challenged, there are still dozens of competitive seats which have not been polled yet.
District-by-district polls already show 2010 should eclipse 1994. (So make it happen!) Various poll sources ^ | 9-6-10 | Dangus Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 7:46:37 AM by dangus
Considering the failure of this incumbent this race should not even be close nationally. It is. The only ads and spin I see coming from the Obama campaign are personal negative attacks vs the challenger basically because Obama has no record to run on and absolutely no ideas.I see no negative Obama ads put out by Romney. Romney needs to bring a gun to this knife fight.Can the soaring rhetoric for now and go negative on Obama and the Obama economy all the time to get Obamas numbers back down.I want to see ads with plenty of foreclosure signs, unemployment office lines,high gas price signs, out of business signs ending with a photo of Obama on the golf course to emblazon this failed economy on the minds of the short term memory voters currently distracted by shiny objects the MSM and Obama campaign is flashing at them to distract them from the issue of this failed economy.
Rasmussen seems to have Romney mired in about a -1 position. Romney seems “stuck”.
I’d like to see some movement out of that rut....
Lets not cherry pick info to buttress our negativity, shall we.
That’s Newsweek. Who cares about what they think?
That reminds me of someone on FNC yesterday calling MSNBC Maddow the MSM.
You missed this then ,
I am sure MSNBC found a poll too that showed Dems ahead at the time, irrelevant as Newspeak
but that doesnt explain all the freepers here saying that all the polls they saw Republicans were not doing good, or in one case great when that 2010 FR post HEAR clearly showed that multiple polls were showing Republicans winning a landslide’
Notice there was not one comment on that FR poll post calling those polls meaningless.
Definitely mass hypnosis, Rush maybe?
Human nature, my FRiend. Karl Rove used to be a hero here, with many "Rove, you magnificent bas***d!" quotes appearing almost daily. Then he said something a few didn't like and he was thrown out like yesterday's trash. Same happened to Ann Coulter, Marco Rubio, the list goes on and on.
If it's any consolation, spend a little time trolling over in DUmmieland. They're saying and doing the same things we do. And like us, they believe every poll is rigged, every lost election was stolen through voter fraud, etc.
Back to my initial point, it's human nature, especially when emotions are running high and so many of are deeply invested (emotionally and financially) in our side. Yes, the MSM is in the tank for Obama, but we can either constantly bemoan that fact, or work our tails off to get-out-the-vote. I'm for the latter.
Yes or a D+4 that I've read. Something between the 04 and the 08 elections.
Even if some polls may be skewed in one direction or another, they are actually collectively indicating the same thing - Romney losing to 0. No question about that.
The aggregate trends are all pointing in the same direction, even if the exact numbers may be slightly off. And we should believe these aggregate trends, more than the hysterics of Freepers in denial.
We saw the same characters saying the same things here in 2008, but as you point out, when polls were all indicating massive Republican landslides in October 2010, no one complained about MSM conspiracy theories.
Fox News polls SELDOM have good news for Conservatives. This has held true pretty much since I started watching them years ago. They will only have good news for conservatives when the reality is, a near landslide is coming.
The problem is the company that does the polling for them. Opinion Dynamics is NOT Fox News but a polling company. Why is it they lowball our side in their polls, consistently? I don’t know. I don’t know why Fox News uses them. All I know is the history.
Rasmussen is far more accurate by results than Fox News.
You accuse others of being in denial. Denial is not limited to one side in the great poll debate.
2010 was a landslide for a REASON. Turnout was very high on our side and not so for the other side.
Republicans are now a larger slice of the electorate than they were a few years back, and independents are a very large slice.
Turnout models MATTER. Partisan sampling balance MATTERS. These are used to weight the sample results and mess with them.
If polling is OFF because of methods or weighting or for whatever reason, then electoral college projections will be equally off.
There are polling experts here...people who have followed it and analyzed it for years...who are explaining why the polls could be OFF right now. They have valid, reasonable points to consider.
You have taken their opposite side and accused all of them of being in denial.
Denial is a two way street.
” The best indicator that Obama is in trouble, is his frenzied campaigning in battleground states, and his neglecting of his job at the White House.”
Rasmussen is using a Rat +2 for his national polls. I’d assume he is also weighting his state and battleground polls in the Democrat’s favor.
Rasmussen is using a Rat +2 for his national polls.
That sounds about right for Raz. What is your source?
Polls 6 weeks out are close enough, skewed enough, that nobody can say this election is ‘over’.
The validation tests have been run on these polls and they are a big FAIL. Simple reason: They are running with 2008 turnout models, results are just reporting pretty much the D/R split. Yes, if 2012 is like 2008, Obama wins; big duh there. But we know 2012 will be more like 2010 than 2008. What’s changed since 2010? More economic uncertainty, more poor growth, $2 trillion in more debt, and Obamacare’s burdens, taxes and regulatory folly is still out there. Are the American voters that stupid?
We dont know if 2012 will repeat 2010 or 2008, so dont believe the polls and dont disbelieve them either. In Sept 1976, Gerald Ford was down 10 pts, by election day, it was a squeaker; in 1948, Dewey was ahead in all polls, until election day when he lost. And we know the Reagan story: Gallup had Carter up by more than they have Obama up now, yet Reagan won by almost 10 pts. Just know the fat lady hasnt sung on this election, not by a long shot.
I do know this as well: Obama is a failed President running the most dishonest and dishonorable campaign run in a long while. What can we do about that?
Get every Republican and independent to reject it and call Obama out on it. That’s more productive that letting the pollaganda get to us.