Pew poll: Obama 50, Romney 43

UPI ^ | July 12, 2012 | UPI

[xzins]

U.S. President Barack Obama leads presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney 50-43 among registered voters nationwide, a poll released Thursday found.

snip

Obama is favored by 88 percent of Democrats while 89 percent of Republicans favor Romney, who leads among independent voters 46 percent to 45 percent for Obama. The poll found 34 percent of Romney backers said they support him strongly, while 64 percent of Obama voters said they support him strongly. snip

Unemployment remains the No. 1 issue for voters overall. Forty-six percent said they favored Romney on the issue, and 42 percent favored Obama.

However, Romney has gone from an 8-point advantage on the question of which candidate is better able to improve the economy, to an 8-point deficit, trailing Obama on the issue 48 percent to 42 percent.

The poll was conducted by landline and cellphone June 28-July 9, 2012 among 2,973 adults, including 2,373 registered voters. The samples were weighted to account for demographic composition, with sampling errors taking into account the effect of weighting.

Pew said the survey has a 95 percent level of confidence for different groups.

[DarthVader]

Oversample of Democrats and Indy’s and not a credible representative sample. The current voter makeup in this country according to records is 35% GOP 31% Democrat and 34% Independent.

[Former Proud Canadian]

AND, read post 35.

[xzins]

I believe Rasmussen uses surveying to determine their party affiliation weightings. I think they were applying updates at monthly intervals last presidential election and then changed to twice a month...or weekly...due to complaints about accounting for people/situation changing as the election approached. I forget which. IOW, they were using self-reports.

Pew Poll, according to their web page, apparently uses a data set + the most recent census to determine party affiliation, and that is in the hands of something like “The Princeton Group”.

I have no problem with showing “registered voters” this far out from the election, because a lot of those could move into the likely category depending on their candidate’s ability to whip them into a voting mood. Remember: they ALREADY are registered. They simply have to get their sorry butts down to the polling precinct.

That becomes less true the closer you get to an election. If the conventions don’t fire these people up, then they’re probably not going to vote.

[Aleya2Fairlie]

All I have to say is that if there are that many blind, politically uneducated boobs out there then this nation is ripe for the plucking for a Communist/Marxist regime. It was a sad day when collective blindness won the Presidency for a hostile regime. If it happens this time; there will be no turning back.

It would also be amusing if it wasn’t so sad, that the Romney haters are so dense that they can’t realize they’re the most effective tool this enemy imposter has in his bid to bring down America.

[Lakeshark]

Sorry, there's a RINO squish who will disappoint us versus someone who wants to destroy this country.

It's time to learn the difference.

Palin, Newt, Cain, Perry, Santorum, Rush, Levin and every other conservative regularly supported on this forum agree with this sentiment. It really is a no brainer of a choice, one of them will win. To do anything to help the destroyer is nothing short of silly (and I'm trying to be nice here).

[xzins]

Yep, but the question is this:

Is that what people are honestly reporting when interviewed and when they submitted their census report?

If so, then those are just numbers being used.

The argument then becomes HOW to determine the most valid means of reporting party affiliation. I think Rasmussen uses survey self-report exclusively.

[chicken head]

Mitt Romney= Bob Dole

[Persevero]

If there is one FReeper who voted for Romney in the primary, they have yet to reveal themselves.

Of course I don’t read every thread.

[xzins]

Lake, I’m unable by faith to vote for a pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, pro-gay adopting, pro-government health care, pro-big government, radical liberal.

Now, there is a conservative in the race, so I’ll vote for him.

What other Americans do is between them and their God.

[Sudetenland]

You asked where he got the 20% from, I informed you. I made no assertion as to his veracity.

Frankly, I don't give a damn. I don't pay any attention to these polls. They have very little resemblance to reality and none of them will until October.

The only accurate polls being taken are the internal polls taken by the candidates; the rest are just propaganda which reflects the biases of the pollsters.

[devolve]

-

- In 2004 - the LA Times was oversampling democrats by 16% to get Senator John Kerry to be ahead of President George W Bush in LAT polls.

- We all know how that election turned out.....

-

[Little Bill]

Three polls worth following: Ras, Mason-Dixon, and Battle Ground the rest mostly suck.

[xzins]

Told the ABO’s so.

Apparently, they think selecting a conservative party candidate with open primaries, democratic cross-overs, and gop-e/media helping one candidate and bashing the others is an acceptable means of arriving at “the conservative choice”.

I don’t think it is.

I think that process means that Romney loses, but who am I. For all I know, he could win.

But, isn’t it good for you pro-romney conservatives to know that it is extremely close, and that you need to kick your candidate in the butt to start attacking Obama the way he did Perry, Gingrich, et al?

Instead, he spent a week on vacation.

[Persevero]

I respect your right to vote as you wish.

However is there no room in your mind for repentance?

“Lake, I’m unable by faith to vote for a pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda, pro-gay adopting, pro-government health care, pro-big government, radical liberal.”

Romney has changed his mind re: abortion and opposes federal socialized health care. Pro-big government is a subjective value, and so is radical liberal - there are ton more liberal than he on our political stage.

I am sorry to agree that he has bowed to the gay agenda. This I can’t stomach. It is his worst feature, in my opinion.

You may not believe he’s changed his mind on the other things, and that is your perogative, but it seems to me our goal is to change minds, and if someone does change their mind, they should be supported, not undermined. Ronald Reagan is a good example in re: the abortion issue.

[xzins]

Certain parts of the poll used all the sample and other parts used only the registered sample. They tell you which in the details.

The presidential match-up used only the registered sample.

[EEGator]

I’m not pro Romney in any way. I voted for Gingrich in the primaries. How many Freepers are there...1000, 5000, 10000? That’s a drop in the bucket. Freepers didn’t select Romney. Your holier than thou attitude doesn’t do shit for anyone or anything. Who are you going to vote for in the general election?

[Lakeshark]

Look, I know his record, I'm not being blind, not pretending he's a conservative, but he's running on a pro-life platform (hasn't budged), running on a pro-DOMA position, running saying he'll take out Bambi care.

Your conservative won't even get a 1/2%, and deservedly so, all you can do if you're in a battleground state and voting third party is to give it to the one we know will destroy everything you love. We know what the "one" will do, it's guaranteed what he will do, he not only has a record, he's continuing to do these things before your very eyes, and this during and election year.

[Notary Sojac]

Yeah, but think about how deep down satisfying it will be to "send a message" to the "GOP-e"

/sarc

[xzins]

If you were to go all the way back to the primary season leading up to the 2008 election, you’d find me NOT supporting Romney due to his pro-abortion, pro-gay agenda leanings.

After he lost, I wrote on some post way back then that Romney now had time to establish his conservative credentials. That if he toed the line as a conservative during those next 4 years that I’d give him the benefit of the doubt regarding a real change.

Within months, he was out with his pro-gay nonsense. I wrote him off as entirely disengenuous.

He is not a reliable vote for life. He has switched back and forth 4 times. He stepped away from the pro-gay agenda stuff in the 2008 primary, but as mentioned above, he was back at it within months.

So, do I call a fickle, unreliable pro-abortionist, pro-homosexualist a radical liberal, or do I give him the benefit of the doubt?

Track record and governing record led me to believe that his conversions are conversions of convenience. It is entirely rational for me to conclude that.

He would govern as a liberal is my analysis. Even floating pro-choice Condi Rice’s name as a trial baloon is evidence of that. His acceptance of gay couples 2 months ago says that. His announcement that these gay couples should be able to adopt says that.

If you had a converted pedophile in your church, who had only backslid a few times, and you were the pastor, would you allow him to work with your youth group?

[xzins]

The only conservative in the race with experience: Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party.

If all 40% of the American electorate that says they are conservative would do the same, then we wouldn’t have either Obama or Romney.