Posted on 09/29/2012 8:21:34 PM PDT by smoothsailing
September 29, 2012
Byron York
For all the complexities of polling, says Scott Rasmussen, there are some fairly simple numbers to remember when thinking about this year’s presidential race. “For the last 20 years, between 37 and 39 percent of voters on Election Day have been Democrats,” says the pollster. “Republicans have ranged from 32 to 37 percent. Right now, our sample looks like 36 percent Republican versus 39 percent Democrat.”
The bottom line, Rasmussen continues, is that there is most likely a two, three, or four percentage point advantage out there for Democrats. That’s what it’s been for nearly a generation; that’s probably what will happen on November 6.
Given that, and factoring in independents, Rasmussen’s national surveys show Barack Obama leading Mitt Romney by a small margin. The president has a two-point advantage in the latest Rasmussen national tracking poll, and comparably small margins in the super-swing states of Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. “I think the race is tilting, just barely, in Obama’s favor, with the potential to shift between now and Election Day,” he says.
After some polls, particularly one from Quinnipiac and the New York Times, showed huge Obama leads in the swing states — nine points in Florida and ten in Ohio — there’s been a contentious debate about the relationship between state polls and national polls. Romney aides constantly point reporters toward the national polls. Of course they do; those polls are closer, and at the moment the Romney campaign is fighting hard against the impression, gaining momentum in some media circles, that the race is virtually over.
Team Romney has a point. When there are national polls showing a very tight race and big swing state polls showing a blowout, something is likely wrong. If the national results are close on November 6, it’s very unlikely that Ohio and Florida will be blowouts. And if Ohio and Florida are blowouts, it’s very unlikely the national race will be close. “When all is said and done,” says Rasmussen, “it is impossible for me to conceive of a circumstance where there is a huge discrepancy between those key states and the national numbers.”
And whatever the numbers are at this moment, Rasmussen expects them to move by Election Day. In the last three elections, he notes, the polls moved against the incumbent party in the final weeks of the race. That’s not an unbreakable pattern, and it might not happen this time, but it suggests Romney will gain on Obama, at least a bit, before November 6. Of course, some major, unexpected event might move things more.
Meanwhile, Republicans across the country continue to express skepticism, scorn, and in some cases outright contempt for the polls. Last week in Ohio, voter after voter at Romney-Ryan rallies complained about the polls, with most saying they just don’t believe them. It’s something every pollster, left, right, and center, is hearing every day.
“When polls appear to be in dispute,” says Rasmussen, “partisans go to the ones they like best and say they are right and everything else is wrong. Then they rationalize it. You rationalize things to fit what you want the world to be.”
“I’ve seen it happen in PA. In this case it was more about Romney’s personality and perceived intelligence than his political positions. This is not someone who would stay home but someone who said Romney is so unlikable that he might actually make them consider voting for Obama.”
Romney is better the more anonymous he is, and his campaign of being the more efficient Obama isn’t helping him, it’s hurting him. This fight, therefore, will be a personality and intelligence contest. It shall rise and fall with the zinger and the catchy phrase, or with events outside of the Obama vs Romney match. If the Republicans are lucky, the economy will collapse under Obama instead of next year. Obama asked the Euros to prop up Greece at least until after the election. We’ll see how successful they are.
If it is close, Romney is going to win because the undecided would break at least 2:1 toward him...
Far enough. How many of that "2-4" points are voting for hussein again?
He is hedging. Basically he’s saying, based on the historical party identification and turn out, Democrats have 2-4% advantage, so Obama might win. However, we have many people who are on the fence. Historically,they break for the non-incumbent, so Romney might win. Either way, he’ll keep the status of most accurate pollster.
+15% of white democrats for Romney
+15% of middle class families for Romney
+15% of independents for Romney
That’s huge and Romney IS NOT GOING TO LOSE with those numbers.
The people whose minds can be changed will feel they have no reason to watch them if the polls show a zombie landslide long enough.
Like 1994, and 2010, the great conservative and even moderate American sleeping giant will turnout and MAKE HISTORY. This WILL NOT BE a "normal election". They (we) are deeply fearful for our nation and will turn out and vote.
Why are those shenanigans not in effect? All ACORN did was change names and split into disguised companies.
What I would like to know is who are those 10% registered Republicans who are voting for Obama!!!
Also, with the economy being the most important issue for most voters, how can so many in each category vote for Obama?!
Our 16% edge in enthusiasm plus Catholic vote and Obama’s done for.
There is no way Obama gets 10% of the GOP vote. If anything he gets 5-6%. There are going to be way fewer O-bubican votes coming down SCOAMF’S way.
On the other hand if Obama loses 10-12% of the base to Romney and loses 51-53% of Indies, it’s going to be an early, very happy night.
Think of how many self-identified Democrats register that way because of their union jobs in the private sector or government employment. How they vote is a different story.
In addition, after the Bush big government fiasco, many GOP members became independents or small “L” libertarians. They won’t be thrilled voting for Romney but it is about getting Obama out of office as the greater of two evils.
Just these two groups alone should skew the numbers 10% or so towards the GOP. Factor in a depressed voter turnout for Obamessiah by his key constituencies, and it is a rout even with the voter fraud that will occur.
polling as most here know has become very political. it’s seems most of the polling data is very suspect. let’s not forget the recent threats from Obama admin against Gallup. that was about a month ago. everyone’s talking about biased polling:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/09/27/everyone_is_talking_about_skewed_polls
http://nation.foxnews.com/polling/2012/09/26/dick-morris-poll-numbers-are-not-accurate
Another, site Dick Morris has been talking about:
http://unskewedpolls.com/
Please bookmark and pass around. Numbers seem more accurate to me. Get the word out to the community. The author of the unskewed polls site wrote several articles as well about these issues. This is psychological warfare. We need to counter this in any way we can. It’s done to suppress voter turnout and to give the perception that something is reality that in fact is not.
First, polling has never been an exact science, far from it.
Modern polling methods started with Gallup in 1936 just in tine for the Roosevelt-Landon election. Gallup picked the winner and embarrassed the Literary Digest out of business.
Yet even back then, Gallup wasn’t accurate. From 1936-1952 they were mediocre to terrible(especially Dewey-Truman in ‘48). From 1956-1976 they were pretty accurate with very good results in 1960 and 1968. However, from 1980-2012 with the exception of 1984 and 2004, they have been simply crap.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/9442/Election-Polls-Accuracy-Record-Presidential-Elections.aspx
WVA has a 3 to 1 Democrat advantage and Obama won’t win that state
The election is close. Absent a serious screwup by either candidate it will remain close. It all boils down to turnout. hussein is a failed president with an incredible political machine and support of the state media. willard is a reasonably competent non-conservative with a much improved political machine. Neither inspire much enthusiasm outside of their hardcore supporters.
I think the south to a state goes for willard and the north with the possible exception of NH goes for hussein. And the election ends up being decided in the midwest.
The states to watch on the east coast are VA, FL, and PA. If PA, FL and VA go for willard, it’s over for hussein. If PA, FL and VA go for hussein, it’s over for willard. If it salts out how I think it will, PA will go for hussein, VA and FL go for willard and it’s decided in the midwest.
Like 1994, and 2010, the great conservative and even moderate American sleeping giant will turnout and MAKE HISTORY. This WILL NOT BE a “normal election”. They (we) are deeply fearful for our nation and will turn out and vote.
Both of those elections were mid-terms when Democrats don’t typically vote.
I suppose it is possible he does not just use his affiliation numbers directly in his party affiliation models for some reason or another that I suppose only he could explain.
+++++++++++++++
Raz does not use his party affiliation results in his Turnout Model. He collects that data and may use it to fudge his D+2 to D+4 model one way or another but, based on the article, he thinks the historical voting patterns are the more important element.
Note that Unskewedpolls.com does use the Rasmussen party affiliation figure as the likely Turnout Model. Right now that number is, IIRC, R+4. Compare that to Rasmussen’s presumed D+3 and you have a 7 point differential.
Not good.
OTOH, we should win if it’s D+2, we normally do. This race is still winnable. We did it in 2010 and we will do it in 2012.
That has nothing to do with the magnitude of the GOP turnout, what I referred to.
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.