Skip to comments.Rove: Sifting the Numbers for a Winner
Posted on 11/03/2012 7:37:16 PM PDT by Iam1ru1-2
A crucial element: the mix of Democrats and Republicans who show up this election.
It comes down to numbers. And in the final days of this presidential race, from polling data to early voting, they favor Mitt Romney.
He maintains a small but persistent polling edge. As of yesterday afternoon, there had been 31 national surveys in the previous seven days. Mr. Romney led in 19, President Obama in seven, and five were tied. Mr. Romney averaged 48.4%; Mr. Obama, 47.2%. The GOP challenger was at or above 50% in 10 polls, Mr. Obama in none.
The number that may matter the most is Mr. Obama's 47.2% share. As the incumbent, he's likely to find that number going into Election Day is a percentage point or so below what he gets.
For example, in 2004 President George W. Bush had 49% in the final Gallup likely-voter track; he received 50.7% on Election Day. In 1996, President Clinton was at 48% in the last Gallup; he got 49.2% at the polls. And in 1992, President George H.W. Bush was at 37% in the closing Gallup; he collected 37.5% in the balloting.
Enlarge Image image image Associated Press
One potentially dispositive question is what mix of Republicans and Democrats will show up this election. On Friday last week, Gallup hinted at the partisan makeup of the 2012 electorate with a small chart buried at the end of its daily tracking report. Based on all its October polling, Gallup suggested that this year's turnout might be 36% Republican to 35% Democratic, compared with 39% Democratic and 29% Republican in 2008, and 39% Republican and 37% Democratic in 2004. If accurate, this would be real trouble for Mr. Obama, since Mr. Romney has consistently led among independents in most October surveys.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Rove has become a laughing stock as he explains why both candidates will win.
I think Rove knows more about polling / elections than anyone else in America. He’s brilliant. Very few candidates could win re-election in 2004 being down with independents, and Bush ended up winning because Rove helped him max out his base to an unprecedented degree.
Rove is still a Border retard, like W and Jeb.
I agree with you, Arec. Instead of cheap personal shots made early in the thread, I’d rather hear a discussion of the posted article. I think Rove makes very cogent points about the race. All indications are that there is no enthusiasm for Obama in Ohio. Take, for example, the event in Ohio last night. The crowd size was pathetic. He ran an almost completely negative campaign in Ohio, and Romney has shown Ohio that he’s not the person that Obama portrays him to be. Ohio is showing Obama that they don’t like negative campaigners. All indications are that Obama will come out of early voting with a decidedly smaller advantage than 2008. Turnout by Romney supporters on election day should carry the day and easily erase the small early-voting advantage.
Great, ask the guy who won two elections by a total of 12 votes!
Rove, you magnificent bastard.
And on January 20 they will swear in Mitt Romney and Joe Biden.
When you lose good will with your base it is very hard for people to trust you again. Dick Morris comes to mind.
Rove is an enemy of the state.
I remember Rove saying in 2004 when he saw those exit polls favoring Kerry that he felt sick to his stomach. If he is as smart as he’s supposed to be he would have known on the spot they were bogus.
“Rove is an enemy of the state.”
Certainly my state. I live in Maryland.
Whatever your thoughts on Rove, his Crossroads PAC is spending big money doing ad buys where they are needed most, and have the greatest sting, and for that, Rove is indeed a magnificent bastard.
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.