Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Survey: Obama has slim 3-point lead in Michigan as Romney gains support
WDIV Local 4 / Detroit News ^ | October 30, 2012 | Marisa Schultz and Kim Kozlowski

Posted on 10/30/2012 8:16:35 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin

Survey: Obama has slim 3-point lead in Michigan as Romney gains support

Survey results show President Obama maintains support in Michigan as Mitt Romney gains support among male voters

Author: Mara MacDonald, Local 4 Reporter

Published On: Oct 30 2012 10:39:05 PM EDT Updated On: Oct 30 2012 10:56:50 PM EDT

Obama's lead in Michigan cut to 3 points DETROIT -

Voting-for According to the results of a political survey commissioned by the Detroit News and WDIV Local 4, Michigan is a three-point race with President Obama in the lead.

Obama has less than 50 percent of the vote in Michigan which is an uncomfortable position for any incumbent. The President's support in this state has remained consistent. It's Republican candidate Mitt Romney's gains in Michigan which are significant.

According to the survey, 47.7 percent of respondents said they would vote for President Obama while 45 percent said they would vote for Romney. One must look at the breakdown to determine where voters are in this state.

Romney has a 6-point lead among male voters. That's a gain for the Republican candidate.

"This is all about turnout," said pollster Richard Czuba. "If Democrats turn out their voters, they win. If Republicans turn out more, they win. It's a pretty simple equation, as difficult as campaigns are."

Romney leads Oakland County by 8.9 percent and Macomb County by 16 percent. Obama is up by 15.7 percent in Wayne County. That number does not include the city of Detroit where Obama owns nearly all votes.

Debbie Stabenow has big lead in Michigan's US Senate race

According to the survey results, Democratic U.S. Senate incumbent Debbie Stabenow has 52.4 percent of the vote in Michigan to Republican Pete Hoekstra's 37.5 percent. Insiders say this is due to poor campaign management from Hoekstra's team.

"Well, I think the question is, is there really a Senate race on? Because the voters don't seem to be engaged in this race and Debbie Stabenow looks like she is moving toward a comfortable win on election night," said Czuba.

Find us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter

Copyright 2012 by ClickOnDetroit.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: 2012polls; 2012swingstates; mi2012; michigan; obama; poll; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
#Mittmentum
1 posted on 10/30/2012 8:16:49 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

It is odd that Detroit has lost population in every census since 1950, but it still dominates liberal MI. Look for Obama to win there. There are just too many soccer moms to overcome.


2 posted on 10/30/2012 8:26:18 PM PDT by Theodore R. (Annoy the Establishment! Vote for Akin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

If Romnney carries Oakland by 9 and Mccomb by 16 then he will win fairy eaiser on election night.


3 posted on 10/30/2012 8:29:23 PM PDT by Paul8148
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

No - its Detroit and the affluent suburbs around it.

To win MI, Romney has to do very well in the latter. Those have voted for Democrats for twenty years.


4 posted on 10/30/2012 8:29:42 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved FrieGrnd Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

Independents... Let’s roll and squash the big O here ( and the big failure S lady too!)


5 posted on 10/30/2012 8:29:42 PM PDT by wubjo (nO Terrorists; nO Tyranny; nObama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wubjo

Why didn’t Debbie Stabenow debate Pete Hoekstra?

why didn’t they do a democratic necessity???

how can the Democrats get away with this in Michigan?????

If Mitt loses Michigan could it be because of Pete Hoekstra’s lack of money
and campaign???

I contributed to him. He seemed a good person — would repeal Obamacare.


6 posted on 10/30/2012 8:32:47 PM PDT by preamble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

The Stabenow results are actually relieving in a perverse sense — it means this isn’t a poll with a high GOP sample. If it had been Stabenow in close to a dead heat too then I’d think it was a skewed sample (national GOP Senate campaign isn’t doing much for Hoekstra, which means we’re stuck with dim Debbie another six years).

So there likely is something to this poll on the Presidential side; it’s not some outlier driven by a bad sample.


7 posted on 10/30/2012 8:35:46 PM PDT by Numbers Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

Internals and so forth can be found here:

http://www.clickondetroit.com/blob/view/-/17202258/data/1/-/15knpck/-/Michigan-survey-results.pdf

Sample (with leaners) is Dem +3.4, which is not out of line (I’ll leave it to those with historical data to judge things, but it doesn’t stink to high heaven). Romney’s lead among independents is only 4 points, which is surprising, he’s as close as he is because Republicans are supporting him more strongly than Democrats are supporting Obama.

It also appears that the ballot proposals are in deep doo-doo, especially the collective bargaining and renewable energy proposals.


8 posted on 10/30/2012 8:45:20 PM PDT by Numbers Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: preamble

Pete Hoekstra ran a terrible campaign and he doesn’t have a chance.

Stabenow’s numbers are far than better than Obama’s. It should be the other way around!


9 posted on 10/30/2012 8:47:31 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved FrieGrnd Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

The msm would have us believe that Obama is winning Ohio by 3pts and only winning by 2.7 pts in Michigan. It just does not jive. Romney will win Ohio by 3 pts if this number in Michigan is true.


10 posted on 10/30/2012 9:03:14 PM PDT by MarkFLA77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wubjo

we need a big state...more than Florida/Va/NC/Col....we need a Wisconsin and an Ohio ....


11 posted on 10/30/2012 9:08:39 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cherry

Ohio has shifted to Romney


12 posted on 10/30/2012 9:15:44 PM PDT by scooby321 (AMS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Numbers Guy

For those of us in Michigan Prop 2 & Prop 3 passing would be about as devastating as Obama winning a second term, and this is not hyperbole.


13 posted on 10/30/2012 9:41:35 PM PDT by ConservativeTeen (Proud Right Wing Extremist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeTeen

Tip for the future: breakdown the issues at hand regarding Michigan Prop 2 and 3.


14 posted on 10/30/2012 10:11:15 PM PDT by torchthemummy (Middle East Islamic Democracy: "One Man, One Vote, One Time")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: scooby321; cherry

Unfortunately, Ohio is the place where Democrats are most active in getting illegal voters to reelect Obama, I think that is where they have the best chance of winning by cheating.

I really hope we do not need Ohio and Wisconsin, since Romeny’s chances of winning both these states are slim to none. Getting Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa and North Carolina will be a miracle. I don’t think getting all of those plus Wisconsin and Ohio is feasible for Romeny.


15 posted on 10/30/2012 11:37:55 PM PDT by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

Mitt’s numbers are not changing — the pollsters are just needing to start reporting the real numbers this week in order to not compromise their credibility any further.


16 posted on 10/31/2012 4:31:07 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (political correctness is communist thought control, disguised as good manners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: emax

Getting Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa and North Carolina will be a miracle. I don’t think getting all of those plus Wisconsin and Ohio is feasible for Romeny.
_________________________________

If Romney gets Florida, Virginia, Colorado, North Carolina,and Ohio, he won’t need Iowa or Wisconsin.


17 posted on 10/31/2012 4:41:14 AM PDT by Rumierules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: emax

“I really hope we do not need Ohio and Wisconsin, since Romeny’s chances of winning both these states are slim to none. Getting Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa and North Carolina will be a miracle. I don’t think getting all of those plus Wisconsin and Ohio is feasible for Romeny.”

That is why its good Romney has the people he has.

They dont think like this.


18 posted on 10/31/2012 4:44:05 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: emax; scooby321; cherry
Unfortunately, Ohio is the place where Democrats are most active in getting illegal voters to reelect Obama, I think that is where they have the best chance of winning by cheating.

That is entirely wrong. In 2012 republicans own the following offices: Governor, Senate, House, Supreme Court, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasurer. All are state-wide elective offices.

In Ohio, the secretary of state runs elections and is, by law, responsible for them. Since the Sec State is a Republican, the chances of cheating are FAR LESS than they were in 2008, when the Governor and the Sec State were democrats.

Expect a fair, impartial election, and if there are challenges, they will be handled by a republican Sec State, Attorney General, and a majority Republican State Supreme Court.

And, if it goes to the US Supreme Court, who do you think has the majority there? I'd also point out that the court of appeals in Cincinnati has a history of being conservative and rational.

19 posted on 10/31/2012 5:15:09 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: torchthemummy
Tip for the future: breakdown the issues at hand regarding Michigan Prop 2 and 3.

Prop 2 would enshrine collective bargaining as a right in the Michigan Constitution. That part, while not ideal, isn't particularly problematic (other than the effective ban on a potential right to work law) as there's no effort to repeal collective bargaining. The problem is that the proposal goes beyond that -- it would also bar the state from intervening on any issue that potentially could be subject to collective bargaining.

That would ex post facto repeal numerous laws on health care cost sharing, school safety, and so forth, and would repeal significant reforms put into place over the past few years (some of which even were enacted under Democratic Governor Granholm). The cost could be huge, in the hundreds of millions if not more.

Prop 3 would mandate 25% of energy be from renewables (up from 10% per state statute). That would increase costs, especially for business.

The other problem is that both of these are constitutional amendments, so if there are problems with them, there's no way to change them without another referendum. It's much easier to amend a statute.

20 posted on 10/31/2012 5:46:46 AM PDT by Numbers Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson