Posted on 10/25/2012 1:21:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned like a rock star, especially in places hard hit by the economy, like Ohio --- which Obama won by five points in the election, while enjoying a D+8 turnout. Four years later, the rock-star vibe has utterly faded, and the campaign has turned into a grind for Team Obama as they dig up every vote they can find to try to hold off a resurgent Mitt Romney in the Buckeye State. Byron York describes it as "the magic is gone":
Messina is particularly focused on what are called low-propensity or sporadic voters --- that is, voters who can't be relied on to show up at the polls regularly, who might or might not make it to vote on Election Day. If Obama can bank their votes early, he won't have to worry about them on November 6. "Sporadic voters matter," Messina explained. "It can't just be about getting your traditional Democrats to vote early. If that were the case, then we&'d be wasting our time and money. This is about increasing the overall share of people who may be drop-off voters…"
So far, there are indications the Obama/Messina plan is making progress. In the latest Rasmussen poll, released Wednesday, which showed the race in Ohio locked in a 48-48 tie, Obama led among early voters by ten percentage points. The problem is, that’s less of a lead than Obama had among early voters in 2008. So now, the president is frantically pursuing all those sporadic voters out there, begging them to cast a ballot early.
That’s the essence of the Obama re-election effort less than two weeks from Election Day. Team Obama knows the campaign doesn’t have the magic it had in 2008. Crowds are enthusiastic, but not over-the-top enthusiastic. Obama’s strategy is to make up the excitement gap by just grinding it out, doing the organizational work of getting the people most likely to support the president — blacks, Latinos, women, the young — to vote early. By doing so, he hopes to build up a sufficient bank of votes to prevail over Romney on November 6. It’s the no-magic campaign.
But it’s not all magic, as York reminds us. Obama may have done poorly in the debates, and step on his message in extemporaneous conversations, but on the stump Obama is formidable:
One fact that seems sometimes lost in the obsession with early voting and the ground game is that Obama remains a very, very good campaigner. Certainly at Triangle Park he delivered what could only be called an extraordinarily polished performance. In recent days the Romney campaign has characterized the president’s stump speeches as “increasingly desperate.” Perhaps that’s true, but the fact is, Obama is still an impressively effective campaigner when it comes to delivering speeches at old-fashioned political rallies. Comparing Romney and Obama on the stump is no contest. Even without the messianic promise of his 2008 campaign, the president is still a far, far better performer.
Yesterday, Time Magazine released a poll in Ohio showing Obama up by 5, 49/44, but the sample was D+9, with lower Republican turnout than in 2008. No one took it seriously, including Chuck Todd — and as he reports, neither of the campaigns did either:
Let’s take a look at a poll that went largely unremarked yesterday. Survey USA polled 609 likely and actual voters (those who have already cast ballots) in Ohio and found the race in a virtual tie, 47/44 for Obama, and found the same in the Senate race, with Republican challenger Josh Mandel just one point behind Sherrod Brown, 42/43. The sample is also a little suspect at D+7 (39/32/25), but the internals are interesting in the presidential race:
It’s a razor-close race in Ohio, but if Romney has knocked six points off of Obama’s 2008 gender gap and turned an eight-point deficit among independents into an eight-point advantage in a cycle where Democratic enthusiasm won’t come close to matching 2008, I have to think that the magic has already shifted to Romney.
Luntz is a closet Liberal and lets lose his bias from time to time... Liberals like to cut loose with disheartening news for conservatives. However, several others say Romney could do it without Ohio, one of those being Dick Morris.
are the early votes actually cast for the person or are they sealed till nov 6th and they are just assuming that every early demcrat vote is for obama?
I don’t understand why you say landslide based on these figures. The constant drumbeat of the press for Obama makes me feel he has a huge advantage. Educate me. I’m nervous.
That's my question too. In all of these states with early voting, are they recording and reporting the actual vote counts, or is this just party affiliation? Seems to me that reporting actual vote counts would not be really kosher.
Ohio generally votes a point or so more republican than the national popular vote. With most national polls showing Romney with a 3 point lead, Ohio would have to drastically change its voting pattern this year. The media narrative has been for Ohio to be the big battleground. If Romney is shown to be winning in Ohio, there is no real path for Obama, and therefore nothing to hype.
Someone should run an ad featuring Dave Letterman agreeing that Obama lied about the Auto Bankruptcy position of Romney. Its an issue that plays in OH, and most people realize that Letterman is a liberal regarding politics.
These low propensity voters....what are they getting for their vote?
If they can’t get these people to vote THIS TIME, then those folks really don’t wanna vote! Thus, they will need an incentive of some kind to vote especially to cast their vote for O. So what could it be?
RE: Ohio generally votes a point or so more republican than the national popular vote.
Have you found this to be true during the past 3 or 4 Presidential election cycles?
The only poll I need is the Chick-Fil-A poll.
The Chick-Fil-A poll was a proxy for the voting booth on November 6th. People are chomping-at-the-bit to vote against Ubama.
The turnout is going to be historic. Establishment polls can't predict that.
O-hi-o says, Oh,bye 0..?
Have you found this to be true during the past 3 or 4 Presidential election cycles?
Not entirely true. Ohio has picked the winner dating back to Kennedy/Nixon in 1960 (where they still may have picked the ACTUAL winner less RAT fraud in Chicago and Texas, but I digress).
In all those elections, Ohio has been within three points of the national number, usually slightly favoring the winner. It's hard to believe that will change in this election.
I don’t think it’s going to be close. I doubt O will get 47% and 200-220 EV’s.
Obama didn’t have magic, He only had mojo and
very little of that, now the suckers are few.
Gas prices are dropping in Ohio — it can not be a coincidence.
It ain’t over til it’s over! Don’t get complacent folks - continue to get out the vote whatever state in which you live.
It ain’t over til it’s over! Don’t get complacent folks - continue to get out the vote whatever state in which you live.
LLS
2008 - McCain OH - 47 - National - 46
2004 - Bush OH - 51 - National - 51
2000 - Bush OH - 49.97 - National - 47.9
1996 - Dole OH - 41 - National - 41
1992 - Bush OH - 38.35 - National - 37.5
1988 - Bush OH - 55 - National - 53
1984 - Reagan OH - 58.77 - National - 58.8
I don’t see Romney losing Ohio if he wins the national popular vote, especially if he wins by more than a point or two nationally.
They won’t mind to much. Most of the OD’d years ago
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.