Skip to comments.CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac swing-state polls show Obama hitting 50% … (Massive oversampling of Democrats)
Posted on 08/01/2012 7:06:55 AM PDT by Qbert
Ive got good news and bad news for Hot Air readers today. First, the good news: After a few years of embarrassing sample skew problems in the CBS/NYT polls, the two media outlets have partnered with Quinnipiac, at least for this weeks look at three swing states Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The bad news? Im not sure the new partnership improved things.
First, lets look at CBS lead on the new poll numbers, which they tout as good news for Barack Obama and bad news for Mitt Romney:
President Obama leads Mitt Romney among likely voters in Ohio and Florida and has a double-digit lead in Pennsylvania according to a Quinnipiac University/CBS News/New York Times poll released this morning.
The poll, conducted from July 24-30, shows Mr. Obama leading his presumptive Republican challenger 53 percent to 42 percent in Pennsylvania. The 11-point lead results largely from independents, who favor the president by 22 points, and women, who favor the president by 24 points.
Mr. Obama holds a six-point lead in Ohio, 50 percent to 44 percent, a state where he holds a campaign event later today. His lead here is also due in large part to women, who back him by a 21-point margin. Romney leads by ten points among Ohio men, and seven points among Ohio whites.
In Florida, Mr. Obama also holds a six point lead, 51 percent to 45 percent. He holds a small lead among both men and women and a 19-point lead among Hispanics, while Romney leads by double-digits among whites and voters age 65 and above.
Now lets take a look at the partisan breakdown (D/R/I) in the sample data for each state, and compare them to 2008 and 2010 exit polling:
Florida: CBS/NYT 36/27/32, 2008 37/34/29, 2010 36/36/29
Ohio: CBS/NYT 35/27/32, 2008 39/31/30, 2010 36/37/28
Pennsylvania: CBS/NYT 38/32/26, 2008 44/37/18, 2010 40/37/23
The CBS/NYT model has Democrats a +9 in Florida when in 2008 they were only a +3 and an even split in the 2010 midterms. Ohios sample has exactly the split in 2008 (D+8), which is nine points better than Democrats did in the midterms. Pennsylvanias numbers (D+6) come closest to a rational predictive model, somewhere between 2008′s D+7 and 2010′s D+3, but still looking mighty optimistic for Democratic turnout.
In other words, these polls are entirely predictive if one believes that Democrats will outperform their turnout models from the 2008 election in Florida and Ohio. That would require a huge boost in Democratic enthusiasm and a sharp dropoff in Republican enthusiasm which is exactly the opposite that Gallup found last week.
CBS/NYT polling: New partner
Quinnipiac is not a quality pollster.
Oh goodie! Another SeeBS/NYT “poll”! ROTFL!
This seems skewed as well. This would be a 61/39 split in favor of Obama. That seems like a bit much to me. Anybody from PA who can comment on the likely split of Independents?
Unfortunately for Obuggery oversampling of Democrats in polls is not political reality.
The poll, when taken in the Hill District, Homewood and other black neighborhoods of Pittsburgh, had obama ahead of Romney 92-8.
Wow! Obama is doing great! No need to donate to him or even show up to vote for him- he’s got it in the bag!
(We made this mistake of too many of us staying home because we thought W had it in the bag in 2000, and Gore almost took it- Let’s let them convince themselves of the same thign)
In every poll by Rassmussen, Obama is behind with independents by around a 10 point margin, I don't even think any other pollster has Obama ahead, certainly not by a 22! point margin. Thats a whopping 32 point difference with Rasmussen. I have a feeling many of these so called "independents" were actually working in the Obama 2012 campaign office...
They’re counting on people just reading the headline and not reading further into the story to check the samples used. Perhaps to make the fraudulent results due to the massive Democratic turnout from the cemeteries seem more legitimate?
Personally, I think this is going to be a rout on the order of the those loses by McGovern and Carter. Indeed, as I recall, the NYT had a poll that showed Reagan and Carter tied just a few days before the election. At the time I wondered: “How can a prime interest rate of 21% auger well for an incumbent president?” We all know the outcome. I think these poll numbers are whistling-in-the-graveyard. A few days into next November, I think Ricky’s “I have some ‘splainin’ to do” will be appropriate for CBS and the NYT.
The entire poll is a joke. They supposedly have Romney trailing in the swing states even more than McCain in ‘08...:
Rush had it nailed yesterday. The mainstream media is in the process of shifting gears from shilling for Obama to explaining away an Obama loss. You cannot continue to goose polls like this and maintain any shred of credibility.
So this was a careful effort on the part of the "pollsters" to pick Republican leaning voters who voted for O in 2008 (or at least those claim to be leaning GOP). The whole thing doesn't not just stink: this is clearly a massive fraud, well financed and planned. Hopefully it cost NYT a lot of money.
"Theyre counting on people just reading the headline and not reading further into the story to check the samples used."
Yep. This is standard operating procedure for the left.
Another poll designed to try to influence people... (and a poll that completely ignores reality).
Guess who has a list of all the union members phone numbers.
Be mindful that nobody checked those polled for a Voter Card, they just took their word for it. Then, consider that these are the results of no verifiable basis or that they did not actually grab a much larger sample and then extrapolate the info they wanted to accomplish the stated goals for whoever actually paid for it.
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.