Ohio Is Closer than You Think (Superb analysis!)

National Review Online ^ | 10/20/12 | Josh Jordan

[TonyInOhio]

Just a few weeks ago, Ohio was a state that was considered almost every media outlet to be a solid lock for Obama. There’s no need to rehash the actual headlines, but some even suggested Romney give up on Ohio and look elsewhere for a path to victory. Before the first debate, Romney was down 5.6 in RCP’s Buckeye State average. Today he is down 2.5, cutting his deficit by more than half, presumably in large part due to his strong first-debate performance. Here are a few reasons why it’s even closer than that:

Democratic turnout advantage from 2008 probably wasn’t as big as you think: Last cycle was a wave election and Barack Obama took Ohio by 4.6 percent, 51.5 to 46.9. The exit polls showed a split of 39 percent Democrats, 31 percent Republicans, and 30 percent independents. If that had been the actual turnout, according to exit polls’ measurement of how members of each party said they voted, Obama would have won 52.8 to 45.6, for a 7.2 percent margin victory, substantially bigger than the margin by which he actually won. This means that the exit polls were off a little, which is unsurprising since they are, after all, just polls.

But we have actual vote totals to compare these polls to. If you use the exit-poll numbers for reported voting by party and then look at what kind of a turnout by party you’d need to get to the actual state vote tally, you come out with this breakdown: 37.5 percent Democrats, 32.5 percent Republicans, and 30 percent Independents (that gives you a vote of 51.6 percent for Obama and 46.9 percent for McCain — pretty close to actual results). So while the 2008 exit polls show an eight-point Democrat advantage, in reality it was likely closer to five percent. That is a big difference when analyzing current polls.

Romney is up big with independents: In 2008 Obama beat John McCain by 8 percent among independents in Ohio. Of the seven current RCP polls that give independent numbers, Romney is up by an average of 8.7 percent:

That’s a 16 percent swing in independents toward Romney from 2008′s numbers. If you assume equal turnout in 2012 as 2008 (using my number from above) but take Obama’s 8 percent edge with independents and give it Romney, that 4.6 percent 2008 margin becomes a tie. At that point, Romney would win if he chips away at the five-percent turnout advantage from 2008.

The current poll samples have Democratic turnout matching or exceeding 2008 levels: Of the seven current RCP polls in Ohio, the average Democratic advantage in party ID is 5.5 percent. That is, if we assume 2008 advantage was D+5, as explained above, then the average poll in Ohio right now assumes a 2008-level turnout. While anything is possible on November 6, there are not many people on either side thinking Obama can match his 2008 turnout advantage.

Early voting is not as positive for Obama as it was in 2008: This is the last point, but a huge one. Take this quotation, from CNN today: “Four years ago, Democrats made up about 42 percent of the early and absentee vote while Republicans made up 22 percent. Through Wednesday, however, the margin has narrowed: Democrats account for 36 percent of the early and absentee vote while Republicans make up for 29 percent.” The current polls have been seriously inflated for Democrats because they’re reporting Obama with 30+ percent leads in early voting (which is then automatically counted in “likely voter” samples), which seems to be vastly overestimating the Democratic advantage among these voters. As CNN explains, Romney is making huge gains from 2008.

Obama won in 2008 largely because of a healthy lead among independents and a highly enthusiastic base’s turning out votes. Right now Romney is leading big with independents, has a more enthusiastic base, and is drawing crowds in Ohio that rival Obama’s. While he is down 2.5 points in the polls, the average poll is assuming 2008 turnout which is unlikely to repeat itself this year. Adding the fact that early voting is trending more Republican than in 2008, there is a lot of reason for optimism that this race is much closer than the current polls suggest. Not bad for a candidate who was declared dead in the state just a few weeks ago.

[TonyInOhio]

Finally, an article that ties it all together. LS, Ravi, perdogg, Jet Jaguar, and others have been on to this for weeks, and it is beginning to dawn on the MSM that they should be paying attention. Bravo, gentlemen!

[TonyInOhio]

Gents, here is the recognition of the trends you’ve been seeing, and LS, thanks for getting it in front of people in the media.

Mod, I screwed up the title - can you remove the duplicated words, please? Thanks!

[tatown]

Great article.

[LS]

Thanks, but as Einstein said when they did the third test of his Theory of Relativity, confirming it as a "fact," "It just means it hasn't been disproven YET."

Election day is YET.

[Perdogg]

ping

[trebb]

Ohio was a KKK and union stronghold and has been Dim for decades. Many swallowed thier “roots” to vote for Zero because he was on their side of the aisle. I have in-laws there and it was enlightening to talk with them during a vacation a couple months ago. I would hazard that Ohio is really R-51 O-47 with 2% undecided. Of course, I thought that Palin would put McPain in the win column so what do I know? (rhetorical - no response necessary unless it is really witty and humorous).

[over3Owithabrain]

Kudos for the NRO mention.

I actually think a sizable amount of those Democrat early ballots are voting for Romney, which will make it an even bigger win for Romney in Ohio.

[A.A. Cunningham]

the MSM (sic)

No such thing as a MSM. The DLEMM - Dominant Liberal Establishment Mass Media - is composed almost entirely of leftists. Leftists aren't mainstream. Stop referring to them as if they are.

National Review is no longer what is was when Buckley was the editor but they certainly aren't part of the DLEMM.

[OrangeHoof]

The other thing to consider is the D/R/I split in 2010. It’s a non-presidential year but it is a more recent sample and the election saw many Republicans surprisingly swept into office.

[Ravi]

Excellent article. Take data over a poll any day.

[CincyRichieRich]

I live in Ohio- Cincy to be exact - in the city - near UC - near Xavier...I can say anecdotely that the enthusiasm isn’t there like 2008; no buzz - AND NO ONE HAS knocked on my door for votes!!! I had 10 people by now in 2008.

No way no how is any poll accurate...we conservatives/libertarians/whatevers simply hang up on pollsters simply don’t answer simply want to be silent majority and put 0bummer out on his keester in a couple weeks...he can live in his miserable life with Mooshell and their weird relationship like Clinton...$$$ ain’t gonna make him happy in Hawaii with his lifetime pension and commie circle of friends...

Point is, Ohio is going to Romney. These folks near me with their signs in their yards ain’t gonna crawl across broken glass like they did in 2008...but I will.

[StAnDeliver]

"Early voting is not as positive for Obama as it was in 2008: This is the last point, but a huge one. Take this quotation, from CNN today: “Four years ago, Democrats made up about 42 percent of the early and absentee vote while Republicans made up 22 percent. Through Wednesday, however, the margin has narrowed: Democrats account for 36 percent of the early and absentee vote while Republicans make up for 29 percent.” The current polls have been seriously inflated for Democrats because they’re reporting Obama with 30+ percent leads in early voting (which is then automatically counted in “likely voter” samples), which seems to be vastly overestimating the Democratic advantage among these voters. As CNN explains, Romney is making huge gains from 2008."

Not only is this graf critical, but it omits an opportunity to ask the question -- when has early voting sustained a movement election? When has early voting ever overcome a 52% PV? Or less! 2004: we've heard this shit before. Did Kerry win Ohio? Don't get me started on that...

The final margin of Bush's Ohio victory was 126,885, just under the population of Dayton (166,179) as Ohio's 7th-largest city. It was a substantial Ohio win by Bush in '04 by any measure.

To illustrate: the number of votes that Kerry lost Ohio by was much greater than the number of votes needed by Bush to have taken WI, PA, MI, and NH in a Reagan-like sweep -- in fact, less than 100,000.

Early voting is a f...ing unicorn and is going to get slaughtered in this election.

[hinckley buzzard]

The two major variables are the turnout and the indie vote. In 2008 the McCain campaign had only the most feeble ground game. No one was excited about him and the Obama forces were skyhigh.

Republicans generally were still reeling from the backlash against the Taft debacle in 2006, and they lost two longheld seats in Congress plus the statehouse majority in 2008. GOP was dispirited and lackadaisical which also meant in addition to an anemic turnout, they were conceding the indies to Obama-- who went after them aggressively.

Almost the total oppposite situation holds today.

[goldstategop]

Romney will win OH next month. Only the brain dead Nate Silver and the MSM continue to assure us Obama can still win - yeah, sure.

The early voting in OH looks very good, compared to 2008.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Sorry, not going to be witty. McLame sunk himself when he “suspended” his campaign to concentrate on the financial meltdown. Plain supercharged his lackluster effort and it took a concerted effort from comedians and the MSM to paint her as a dunderhead. Plain was the only one running in 2008 with “gravitas.”

[LS]

I don’t. I think it’s about 85% D for Zero, about 93-95% R for Romney. That in itself is big enough.

[hinckley buzzard]

Ohio was a KKK and union stronghold and has been Dim for decades

Ohio has been a bellwether state, voting with the winner every time since 1964. It has voted republican in 7 of the last 12 elections. As of 2011 the workforce is 13% union, mostly government workers. The demographics are 82% white, 12% black and 3% hispanic(regardless of race).

[wny]

I never thought OH was a lock for the demholes. I posted a (humble, personal) theory back in August. Basically I opined that if you look at the '09 gov races in VA and NJ, then the rise of the Tea party, the mid term elections....especially the races where entrenched demhole incumbents that normally won by 30 points, were "only" winning reelction by 10, that's a big swing. then factor in all the crap in WI....then factor in the Occupy cretins and all on O's failures that there's no reason to expect anything has subsided any swung back to the dems. My point then was that the starting point in any given competitive state would be Obama 5 points less than his 2008 tally. now since then, we have the first debate beating, Libya and the train wreck that is Obamas campaign since then.

Obamas last, best hope is vote fraud.

[Wasichu]

I live in the Akron area, a solidly Dimocrat city. Every street in our neighborhood has at least one property with up to a dozen Dim yard signs...but I have yet to see even one Obama sign in the mix.
Either they are so sure of victory that they saved money on the signs, or the homeowners are running away from the Obama campaign.
Even with this area being solid Dem territory, I have observed more Romney signs than Obama signs.