Posted on 10/11/2012 6:39:55 AM PDT by SoftwareEngineer
Thursday, October 11, 2012
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows President Obama attracting support from 48% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 47%. Two percent (2%) prefer some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.
Consumer confidence spiked immediately following last week’s jobs report which showed unemployment falling to 7.8%. However, after approaching the highest levels of 2012, the bounce quickly faded. Confidence today is back to the pre-jobs report level. Twenty-nine percent (29%) of Americans now believe the economy is getting better. That’s exactly the same as before the jobs report. Fifty-three percent (53%) believe it is getting worse.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Thanks for that. One other item: I do not think midterm elections should be automatically dismissed from turnout projections. More often than not, the results of the midterm elections signal what is in store for the next presidential election. For example, the Republicans’ disastrous losses in the 2006 midterm election was a signal for what was in store for them in 2008.
You got me. I think he’s being cautious.
If you look at his polling in the past it has always reflected his party id survey. I mean why bother with a party id survey and then ignore it? Makes no sense.
For example in 2008 his party id survey had D+6 and that’s what his sample was based on, D+6.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/mood_of_america_archive/partisan_trends/summary_of_party_affiliation
It’s weird.
I agree. The mid term trend is telling.
In 2002 Rs won and then won presidency and congress in 2004.
In 2006 Ds won and then won presidency and congress in 2008.
In 2010 Rs won (in a landslide) and yet it is all but ignored.
Read this article about Gallup and then remember that the Obama administrtion sued Gallup just before the convention. Then ask yourself if other polling companies have capitulated to the pressures from the White House.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-politics-and-gallup-poll_654143.html
Why bother with a party id survey and then ignore it?
That’s the question. I can think of three answers:
1 - By weighting it differently, the race becomes tight and we spend time on his site, people sign up and he makes money.
2 - Political pressure by the Obama camp to not show the race as a Romney lead
3 - Peer pressure to not show the race as a Romney lead in order to keep in line with the other polls
You forgot the added pressure of the fact that the Obama administration is suing Gallup after they reported that that Romney was ahead,
...somewhere a horse is missing its head
Orrrrrrrrr.... Romney’s losing ground. But your idea is more fun.
It kind of depends on the cycle, but I can be a doomer on here, but I really am not too concerned. I think we’ll win. If we don’t, it will be really, really bad though.....we will get through it and come back stronger for next time, but the damage will be harder to undo.
It is hard to imagine us actually losing though. Just hope we can pull of a Senate miracle due to the Supreme Court vacancies that will happen...likely 2 at least.
I figured that was pretty much implied as a combination of both 2 and 3 (political pressure and peer pressure)
The balance would be upset is one of the right-leaning justices retired: that really narrows down to Scalia or Kennedy.
My sense is that Scalia loves it, is healthy, and will issue rulings from his deathbed if necessary.
Kennedy and Scalia are both 76, but I have no real sense of Kennedy except I’ve heard he leans libertarian.
Thomas, Alito, and Roberts (right-leaning?) are all young.
The oldest of the justices is Ginsberg at 79, she has questionable health, and I’ve heard she wants out. If so, why didn’t she when Obama had the Senate at 60 votes?
There’s something going on there, and it’s puzzling. Here we have a possible change coming up, Democrats still in control of the Senate, though not filibuster proof, and she still hasn’t retired.
Unusual.
Breyer is 74, healthy, and I hear he likes it, too. Again, though, why not retire when they had a 60 vote Senate?
Unusual.
Unless he's factoring in the Donkey voter fraud factor [/semisarc].
I agree. The one thing we KNOW is that Obunga/Holder have made major efforts to get to Gallup and it doesn’t figure logically that they’d go to that much trouble over Gallup and ignore Rasmussen.
If I looked at Obama's numbers, I'd conclude he's using steroids.
Ginsberg might retire during the lame-duck session, when Dingy Harry’s Senate would rush through her replacement’s nomination.
They don’t have the numbers to overcome a filibuster, so the only way is to use the nuke option again, a choice they’ve shown themselves willing to make in whatever vote that was earlier this year.
If the repubs have won the Senate, that might make him pause.
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.