Ohio: Romney 49%, Obama 49% (Romney Must Win VA, FL, And Either OH/WI)

RasmussenReports ^ | November 05, 2012

[Steelfish]

Ohio: Romney 49%, Obama 49%

An Unpredictable End to a Very Predictable Election By Scott Rasmussen Virginia: Romney 50%, Obama 48% Wisconsin: Obama 49%, Romney 49% Sign up for free daily updates

November 05

The pivotal presidential state of Ohio remains all tied up on the eve of Election Day.

The final Election 2012 Rasmussen Reports survey of Likely Ohio Voters shows Mitt Romney and President Obama each earning 49% support. One percent (1%) favors some other candidate in the race, and another one percent (1%) is undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Ohio is still one of eight Toss-Up states in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections, along with Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia and Wisconsin. Polls in Ohio close at 7:30 pm Eastern tomorrow. If Romney wins Virginia and Florida, he also will need to win either Ohio or Wisconsin to be on track to capture the White House.

The race in Ohio was tied late last week after Romney posted a slight 50% to 48% advantage a few days earlier. The candidates have been within two percentage points of one another or less in every survey in Ohio since May.

Forty percent (40%) of likely voters in the Buckeye State have already voted. Obama leads 60% to 37% among these voters.

Ninety-three percent (93%) have made up their minds whom they will vote for, and it’s Obama 50%, Romney 49% in this group.

[Birdy]

So the dems pushed a bunch of their likely voters out early while ours are waiting until election day. I know I’ve been keeping my powder dry with my Ohio vote, as has every conservative voter I know. I wouldn’t get spooked by this yet.

[xuberalles]

Welcome! It’s pointless for people to get so rattled before the polls have even opened. Nothing is guaranteed but I like our chances when you break down the numbers. I get the feeling Rasmussen wants to call the election, but they don’t want to eat crow. That’s why we get these anecdotal state polls like this.

[HannibalHamlinJr]

This is a set of numbers I’ve also been following - and read Rove’s article. Also - the aggregate he used matches what happens when you add it up from the spreadsheets from individual counties. (Rove’s not wrong.)

That said, I only post this for one reason: As of last week, emailing friends, I had to keep saying ‘virtually overcomes the entire 2008 early lead’ because the net dem loss was about 257K, just short.

Alas!!!! The net loss for Dems in early voting and absentees as of this morning actually overcame the 2008 winning margin. Something like 263K to 262.4.

You are now free to use one word like “obliterated” rather than having to hedge with phrases like “virtually overcame.”

[xuberalles]

The Dems pushed like hell to get the early vote out and they still fell way short of 2008. Even better, early Republican voting is quite a bit higher than 4 years ago. It’s simply much harder to run as the incumbent when you have so many failures, especially the economy. Common sense should tell people that when you’re losing the independent vote by double digits, the other party has more voters and a huge enthusiasm gap, that you have an uphill climb...both ways!

[xuberalles]

lol Well said. That should put it in perspective for people.

[Birdy]

That’s right, xuberalles. I know personally I’ve been waiting to do this for 4 years, and I’m darn well going to do it on the day your “supposed” to vote. I still have a good feeling we’ll be swamping the polls tomorrow in Ohio.

[funfan]

Well there are democrats who will vote but not for Obama just as there will be Republicans I am sure that will vote for Obama or at least some Republicans voted for Obama in 2008.

[nathanbedford]

As I understand it, Rasmussen asked those polls whether they had voted and he got a return that said "40% of likely voters in the Buckeye state have already voted."

Question: what is the margin of error? I would guess + -3% or 4%.

Since the assertion is that this 40% figure is of "likely" voters, what is the margin of error in identifying likely voters? Is it also + -3% or 4%? If so, should these two sums be added for a total margin of error of 3% or 8%?

The report also says:

"Obama leads 60% to 37% among these voters."

Question: is there a margin of error here? Could this be 57% to 40 %, for example? Again, is this a margin of error cumulative? If it is the fact that Rasmussen has gotten corrupt data in that nothing like 40% have already voted, rather 28% according to official statistics have voted, is all of this corrupt? Is it possible that this poll is correct and that the official statistics are lagging and will eventually come up to his poll? How much credibility does this deserve?

The report goes on:

"Ninety-three percent (93%) have made up their minds whom they will vote for, and it’s Obama 50%, Romney 49% in this group."

Since Rasmussen obviously did not question everyone who has made up his mind among likely voters, is it correct to assume that there is a margin of error in identifying the group that he says is 93%? Is it also fair to say that the margin of error here should be an added to the original margin of error? Is it fair to say that the cumulative margin of error could be as high as 8%?

If Rasmussen has one point separating Obama and Romney (50%-49%) "in this group" it seems to me the margin of error is cumulative in identifying the group and identifying the result within the group. Is the margin of error 3% +3% or only 3% of 3%?

We are talking about subgroups within subgroups and a difference of 1%. How can we draw any conclusions from these data in such a close race?

[zencycler]

I look at it this way. Romney will win FL, NC, VA, CO and NH - which brings him to 261. Among the larger tossup states, that leaves WI, MN, MI, PA, and OH. All are close, and Obama would have to win all 5 to keep Romney below 270.

But even if he does win all 5, Obama would need also need to take 2 out of 3 from IA, NV and OR.

And even if he does take IA nd NV, Romney can still get to 269 by taking OR and winning 1 electoral vote from Maine.

So for all this talk about Romney needing to "run the table", the way I see it, Obama has to virtually run the table among the tossups I mentioned, which admittedly could go either way.

[yadent]

I’m putting my ‘faith’ in this projection-—http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university

[svcw]

Seriously I detest the “must win this or that”, Romney must WIN - period

[line drive to right]

Thank you, Hannibal. Good to see that trend was continuing. I was a little concerned there would be a late rush that somewhat negated the previous direction.

[Steelfish]

Rove said the same this this past Saturday.

[nclaurel]

Party may be counted but the vote is not. Many Delphi workers voted for O in 2008, but you think they will make the same mistake now after losing their pensions because of him? Just because someone’s is considered Democrat by past votes does not mean they are still fools.

[LS]

STRONGLY disputed, both in actual numbers and percentages as per Jay Cost on Twitter. Wasserman (a lib) admitted to Nat Silver ha their turnout model is wrong based on Red county turnout.

[LS]

And of that 28%, red counties up big, Ds down from 08. EV margin very small according to those #s. I love how people can’t wait to panic.

[LS]

If D's lead in earlies from the 28% is "less than 10%," I'd like to know where you got that. But if true, it means that the magic number is 156,000. Doable, but tough.

However, if the magic number is closer to 5%, then it's over for Obama.

Bush won this state by 118,000, so at the 156,000 number we'll have to have a combo of increased 38,000 in additional Rs and/or I advantage and/or D-R flips.

[Teacher317]

Ohio: Romney 49%, Obama 49% (Romney Must Win VA, FL, And Either OH/WI)

Real Clear Politics has the current EV at 201-191, with the following 11 states "in play":
Colorado (9)
Florida (29)
Iowa (6)
Michigan (16)
Nevada (6)
New Hampshire (4)
North Carolina (15)
Ohio (18)
Pennsylvania (20)
Virginia (13)
Wisconsin (10)

Handing Obama OH, FL, VA, and WI gives him 272 and a victory. Take out any one of those, and he can lose. There are no "must-win" groupings of any 2-3 states for either side. Obama or Mitt will need about half, if not more, of those 11 states to take the election...

and my prediction is that one of them will. =^)

[patriot08]

[rlbedfor]

Rove had Romney down by only 75K last night in OH early voting ( with all the normal assumptions about who people actually vote for ).