Posted on 08/13/2012 7:16:34 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
For the next few days, we’re likely to see polling on the presidential race that captures a moment caught in amber --- before Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan to be his running mate. The first of these BR (Before Ryan) polls comes from Politico, with its Battleground poll conducted by George Washington University. The poll shows almost no change since its last iteration in May, but it does have a curious outcome in one key demo:
The poll, conducted in the days leading up to the Ryan announcement on Saturday, finds that despite the unprecedented millions of dollars being poured into the contest and the non-stop attacks from each side, the top line numbers are essentially unchanged from a previous Battleground poll in early May.
Obama takes 48 percent of likely voters in the new poll, compared with 47 percent for Romney – a statistical tie and well within the margin of error. In May, the numbers were flipped: Romney was at 48 percent and Obama was at 47 percent. The poll found 5 percent of voters are undecided.
“The overall sort of broader scope of the ballot is that there’s been little to no movement,” said Republican pollster Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group, who helped conduct the bipartisan poll.
The intro paragraph fails to note that it's been mostly Obama who has poured money into contest. Romney's fundraising has been focused mainly on general-election spending, which left the summer months to Obama. Despite a 3-1 spending edge, the race is pretty much at status quo ante.
Or perhaps worse:
Both candidates also maintained their previous advantages among specific demographic groups. Romney leads among independent voters by 10 points, 47 percent to 37 percent, the same margin he had in May. And Obama continues his advantage among female voters by 15 points – also similar to his May margin.
Er, how exactly can this race be tied when Romney leads indies by 10 points? Obama won in 2008′s Democratic wave election (D+7) by seven points, and Obama won independents by eight points, 52-44, according to the 2008 exit poll. Obama also won women by 13 points, 56-43. How can he still within a virtual tie with Romney if he’s only gained two points among women but lost 18 points in the gap among independents?
The answer is exactly where you’d think it was — in the sample. The Politico/GWU poll has a D/R/I of 36/29/34 for another D+7 election model. If one thinks that the 2012 election will be similar to the 2008 model, that makes sense — but no one outside of DNC headquarters and MSNBC think that will be the case. Even more odd, a follow-up question asks whether respondents vote strictly or mainly along party lines, or more evenly split it. That presents a functional D/R/I of 49/36/20, which makes me wonder exactly where GWU surveyed for its poll.
If Romney goes into the election with a ten-point advantage among independents, this election won’t be close.
Bullsh*t!
“If Romney goes into the election with a ten-point advantage among independents, this election won’t be close.”
As I’ve been saying for months, this election will be a blowout on the scale of 1988 (% wise) and 1992 (EV wise) for the GOP.
Agree with Ed here. If Romney leads with independents by 10 points, this election will not be close.
Also, it is even optimistic to assume that Dem turnout will be +3. Realistically, you are probably looking at even turnout, maybe even slightly R.
With that type of sample, Romney is ahead.
I’m sure the labor unions that Obama bailed out will be happy to rush to the Liaar-in- Chief’s aid since he shot so much of his campaign money on worthless ads that didn’t change anyone’s mind.
Talk to your people at church and enlist them in prayers for wisdom in our country as this crucial election approaches. The Holy Spirit can lead them to a wise decision for the well-being of our country.
Outside of liquor stores which accept food stamps.
Apparently independent and women are not overlapped. That’s why Romney can have +10 among I and Obama +14 among women but they’re tie overall.
Obama will carry only between eight to twelve states, closer to the eight, in reality. All these polls showing Obama with any lead at all are completely bogus. Why? Simple, Obama cannot raise money, and....Obama campaign events can only be held in high school or college gyms or field houses. And....those venues are never more then half full, even with all the union goons, thugs and nutcase, left-wing female whack jobs!!! Obama is toast.
We’re in agreement!
I put the following as SURELY to be under the Obama column... I don’t think he’s going to get any more then these in 2012:
New York,
New Jersey,
Delaware,
Connecticut,
Maryland,
Massachusetts,
Rhode Island,
Maine,
Vermont,
DC,
California,
Oregon,
Washington,
Hawaii,
Illinois
I love how polls find a way to TELL THE TRUTH, but then have outcomes that contradict it.
For example:
“Romney leads among independent voters by 10 points, 47 percent to 37 percent”
Now, that gives you I assume 16% of “undecided” swing voters, or 16% saying they will vote for someone else (nonsense, won’t happen).
Now without that 16% unaccounted for, (and if they are undecided they will break overwhelmingly Romney by election day) you have what the poll shows... a virtual tie.
Overall political breakdown is approximately 30 R 30 D and 40 I. Obama won 2008 by 7.2%, that means if 3.3% of independent voters change their vote, and the R and D numbers dont move Obama loses. 10% of the I vote = 4% of the overall vote... Now I know that 16% missing lowers those numbers a bit, so its not 4% but about 3.3-3.4% currently.
However, to get this you have to ignore other factors which I am sure are in the poll, but are not dribbling up the final conclusion. Such as R’s that swung to Obama in 2008, not a huge number, but guaranteed to be smaller this time and a repressed republican turnout in 2008 that WON’T happen in 2012. Add to this the disenfranchised democrats, that in some polls are showing as high as 1 in 5 democrats plan to vote for Romney... and there is no way you wind up with a horserace.
Independents will break at around 2-1 to Romney in Novemeber, Obama will lose large factions of the blue dog dem voters as well.. he cannot win re-election. These polls show the writing on the wall even if they don’t relect it in their conclusions.
Don’t bet on it, the UMW has already said no money for Obama or help this year. Obama has screwed over a hell of a lot of the blue dog democrat contingent. Most of the rank and file union folks I know don’t plan on pulling the lever for the guy.
I hope you are right - not because I am a Romneybot, but because we need to turn the ship of state around...
I’m in Maryland and I can tell you for sure Romney isn’t going to win here. I know that because we have to buy our own Romney yard signs to hand out. If you’re in a state that’s competitive, the campaign gives you signs. Here we need to buy our own from the printer.
I hope you are correct.
And I have been saying it will take the Dem's 20 years to recover they are gonna have their @$$es handed to them like they have never seen. The action will be in the Senate can we get 60 or more....
These national polls aren’t worth a pitcher of warm spit. The Presidency is still determined by electoral college votes. Hussein is not going to win in TX or AL. Willard is not going to win in VT. You can already call the election in 2/3 of the states and make a pretty a pretty good guess on some others. What matters are 6-10 so-called battleground states that are more or less on the fence.
I would disregard any state polls until after the RNC. I think we will see Romney/Ryan get a huge bounce over the next three weeks. Based on what I saw at the rallies yesterday, their convention speeches are going to bring down the house.
Speaking of convention speeches, this 1980 convention speech by Ronald Reagan is the gold standard. I still get goosebumps watching it. If you can block out 45 minutes of your time to watch this, it is well worth it.
I was just a 17-year-old kid when this speech was given and saw this speech on live TV. When it was over, my father looked at me and said "There's the next president of the United States."
AMEN!
If he’s tied in Polutico he’s winning.
“...this election will be a blowout on the scale of 1988 (% wise) and 1992 (EV wise) for the GOP....”
I’m starting to get that impression too. My area had a lotof Obama signs in 2008.
Many, many of those same lawns are now sporting Romney signs.
Talk I hear around me at the supermarket, gas pump, hardware store, etc., is that people are disgusted with FuBO and his mishandling of the economy.
Disgust that I do my very best to encourage, by the way.
A little activism goes a long way.
The rest? Yeah, Obama would still win them even if he got caught cooking and eating an aborted infant.
Polls are intentionally designed to mislead/demoralize. In August of 1980 gallup showed Carter ahead 47 to 29. Reagan won 44 states.
I am mystified.
"How can you give 110% - unless you ate too much for lunch?"
“If Romney goes into the election with a ten-point advantage among independents, this election won’t be close.”
As I’ve been saying for months, this election will be a blowout on the scale of 1988 (% wise) and 1992 (EV wise) for the GOP.
If they are accurate with that part of the poll, yes, I agree a 10 point edge among independents would definitely mean a landslide for Ryan! :)
So the media pollsters are doing their usual game, propping up the Dem candidate to keep lefty voters from checking out completely. Reverse out this over-sampling at tentatively you have Romney at over 50% and Obama under 45%.
Obama is toast.
Look at the sampling. Romney is actually ahead if the sampling were even.
“England” (correction)
I live in Westchester / Bronx area - and there is literally nothing at all for either party.
its strange
Good judgement!!! States to watch with potential to swing to GOP: New Jersey, Maine, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts and the absolute wild card, New York. California (Greece) is insane communist lunatics, just like Obama. DC is adrift at sea!!! When the west coast sees the political slaughter of Obama politically in the east, midwest and solid south, Oregon and Washington will go GOP, as believe it or not, Hawaii will also go GOP, including a new GOP Senator. Stay on your game, we need every single vote to destroy these Obama America haters!!!
I live in Westchester / Bronx area - and there is literally nothing at all for either party.
its strange
Ping.
Another Dem +9 poll and it’s a tie.
I heard quite a few pundits saying that Romney picking Ryan was akin to a Hail Mary pass, because he was falling so behind in the polls and needed a big game changer. Well, maybe not. Maybe Ryan is the All-American running back who was just handed the ball.
Maine, like Nebraska, splits it’s electoral votes according to congressional districts.
Granted, Maine has only two congressional districts and only four electoral votes. If Obama carries the First Congressional district (southern Maine, which has plenty of Massachusetts transplants), Obama gets one electoral vote. If Romney carries the Second Congressional district (the mostly rural northern half of the state), then he, Romney gets one electoral vote.
The winner of the popular vote statewide gets two additional electoral votes. So, in this scenario, Obama gets three electoral votes from Maine and Romney one. We’ll see.
Even this is not to be believed. ZEro does NOT command 48% of the vote. Maybe 45%.
First, how many of you know REPUBLICANS who this time around will vote for Obama? I know zero. How many of you know Democrats who voted for him last time, but won't vote for him this time?
This also will be a key statistic. You won't be able to find the number of GOP-Obama crossovers with a magnifying glass. Maybe Jon Huntsman. But Dem-Romney crossovers? It will be significant. I don't think huge, but I think somewhere in the neighborhood of 5%, maybe more.
If he loses indies by 10, and loses 5% off his Dem support AND the turnout models from 08 are entirely wrong (as I think they will be---they will be somewhat reversed), this could be a bigger gap than any poll (save Rasmussen, at times) has suggested.
Big Dem area or mixed??
Mt. Vernon, Bronx, Westchester?
This is ground zero for liberals, blacks, govt workers, etc.
In 2008 this area was plastered w obama crap all over the place.
Now, maybe a bumper sticker here or there at best.
Hmmm... My dad lives in Ohio, and he told me the opposite is happening there. He said he couldn't believe all of the support for 0 he was seeing - and he lives in a very rural area. My heart sank. We can't afford to lose Ohio.
Ohio is in bad shape. I was thinking that maybe since there are a lot more people on the dole now than there were in '08 that people are just excited about voting themselves more government goodies this time around. This is, after all, the liberal agenda in a nutshell - get people dependent and get guaranteed votes.
What I find striking is that Romney did not pick Rubio as his VP. That means the Romney campaign has polling that shows Florida is safe for him. Nor did he pick a politician from Ohio or Virginia which the media says are toss ups?
Obama is throwing everything except nuclear weapons at Romney, but it “aint” working. Also Ryan will fire up the conservative base of the GOP.
When I hear liberal pundits saying Paul Ryan will hurt the Republican ticket, it confirms to me that the liberals really think the democrats are screwed.
A lot of money was spent by Obama working the Bain Capital angle, and the polls didn't budge. Romney is developing teflon, and I've only seen this twice before, once in 1972 and again in 1980. A candidate develops teflon when his opponent is completely unpalatable.
There were a lot of bad things said about Nixon in 1972, most of them true, but they didn't stick because if people were to believe those things, they would have had no choice but to vote for McGovern. But McGovern wasn't remotely acceptable. Nixon won in a landslide.
The same thing happened with Reagan in 1980. The Democrats ran the same campaign against Reagan that they ran against Goldwater in 1964, but this time it didn't work. In 1980, if people were to believe all the negative things said about Reagan, they would have had no choice but to vote for Carter. But after four years of malaise, weakness, impotence, hand wringing, and stupid statements like, "Nobody really knows what causes inflation," a vote for Carter was an unpalatable alternative. Thus teflon.
Now Romney is beginning to develop teflon. This leads me to believe that we're looking at a blowout, something like 1932 in reverse.
What area of Ohio does your father live? Ohio is going to be a battle to near the end. I think the fact that Ryan is a devout Catholic will have a huge influence on Ohio.
“...the opposite is happening there. He said he couldn’t believe all of the support for 0 he was seeing...”
It’s a shame that people can’t see how they’re being screwed.
Some folks are complicit in their own enslavement and are too stupid to realize it.
“...ground zero for ...”
Wow...you, sir, have my sympathy...
Maryland passed a law requiring its electorial votes to be given to the winner of the national popular vote, along with other blue states.
I don’t understand what the legislators of Maryland were thinking. They are SUBORDINATING the state’s sovereignty by doing this.
We almost did not have a United States of America because states with smaller populations in the 1770’s did not want states with huge populations ( like New York and Massachusetts ) overwhelming them with their votes due to their size.
That is the reason why the electoral college was designed.
The Founding Fathers had seen the dangers of placing ultimate power into a single set of human hands. Accordingly, they feared that placing unlimited power to elect the president into the politically naive hands of the people could lead to a “tyranny of the majority.” In response, they created the Electoral College system as a process to insulate the selection of the president from the whims of the public.
Now Maryland in effect, wants to subordinate her sovereign rights to the rest of the other 49 states.
So, does this “subordination” law mean that Maryland would be forced to give all of its electoral votes to Romney if — as many expect — Romney does win the majority of votes cast nationally?
Ooops....
100% agree.
I hope the f**kers NEVER recover.
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.