Posted on 09/08/2014 11:48:43 AM PDT by mandaladon
Jim Geragthy, acclaimed author and National Review’s chief campaign analyst, has been grousing about the lack of quality polling in key Senate races this year. His frustration is well-founded. So yesterday must have felt like Christmas in September for Jim and political junkies everywhere, as two pollsters released a deluge of surveys covering the most contested races in the country. In light of the results, I’d expect that national Republicans are kicking off the week with an extra spring in their step, as well. We were leaked an advance copy of last week’s much-anticipated Politico/GWU Battleground poll, which was packed with more than a few hopeful morsels for conservatives. This weekend’s polling volley applies those national trends to roughly a dozen contests across the 2014 Senate landscape — the contours of which I outlined here. An overview of the fresh data:
Alaska: Accurately polling this state is infamously difficult, but the new New York Times/CBS News/YouGov poll shows a stark reversal in the race, with Republican Dan Sullivan now leading incumbent Sen. Mark Begich by six points — 45 to 39, including leaners. The Begich campaign is still reeling from a furious backlash over their desperate TV ad that falsely tied Sullivan to a terrible case involving child rape and a double murder. The family of the victims demanded that Begich pull the ad, with Sullivan slamming the spot for being factually inaccurate. Begich has voted with President Obama 97 percent of the time, according to a Congressional Quarterly analysis.
Arkansas: Three new polls out of this race, one of which Jazz covered yesterday. NBC/Marist finds Republican challenger Tom Cotton leading Sen. Mark Pryor by five points, 45-40, among likely voters. NYT/CBS/YouGov shows Cotton up four (with leaners), 43-39.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Make no mistake, the GOP could very easily boot this. But even if they win, Obama will go into overdrive starting at midnight on 11/4 - I'm sure the GOP won't be prepared for it.
Make no mistake, the GOP could very easily boot this. But even if they win, Obama will go into overdrive starting at midnight on 11/4 - I’m sure the GOP won’t be prepared for it.
Yes, Obama is going to really go wild after the election. If the Republicans take the Senate he’ll be very nasty until they are sworn in.
“Goodbye Harry!”
Best Republican slogan I have heard so far!
Where are all the Tillis Tarheels? Kay Hagan shouldn’t have a pulse in NC.
The Democrats may cheat, but they don't need to cheat.
Nationally, they outnumber Republicans by about 4%.
If they turn out their voter base - non-whites, immigrants, single women - they can stop a GOP Senate majority legally.
That would be based on registered voters, and as anything to do with government a dubious stat.
There’s a song out by a young lady that has lyrics “...just because I said it don’t mean I meant it....”
Missing from your list:
5) Really crappy pretend Republican as our nominee who supported both Abortion and the Gay Agenda.
Referring to Kashkari?
Yes. I know. Will have to hold my nose on that one.
But I have never voted for Jerry Brown and I’m not going to start now.
It’s my statistic, actually, and it’s based on eligible voters, not on registered voters.
After the 2012 election, which Romney lost by 3.9%, I decided to calculate what the popular vote would have been if every eligible voter in the USA had voted.
I used the racial, gender, and age statistics collected by NEP, which is the exit pollster used by all major USA news media.
I used the eligibility stats calculated by Pew Research.
And I used the 2012 population stats from the US Census Bureau.
My result?
Romney lost by 4.1%.
In my personal opinion, that number is low, and is probably 5% or more.
Why?
Historically, white Conservatives turn out at a higher rate than any other ethnic or political group.
To me, that indicates that a 100% turn out would bring more Left wing voters to the polls, and fewer Conservatives.
Did you take into consideration the vast quantity of Bible belt voters, the evangelicals if you will that DID NOT VOTE due Romney being a Mormon into your figures? THAT would make your result moot.
I've commented on that exact subject here at Free Republic many times in the past.
There is no clear statistical evidence that white Conservatives stayed home in 2012.
Romney actually got 1 million more votes than John McCain got in 2008.
Most important:
Obama lost 4.5 million white voters in 2012.
Superficially, a person could conclude that ALL the white voters who stayed home were disillusioned Obama voters.
To my knowledge, no one has ever taken a poll to find out how many Conservatives stayed home in 2012.
I am not saying you are wrong.
But I am saying that the incomplete statistics we do have for 2012 raise a lot of doubt about your conclusion.
“But I am saying that the incomplete statistics we do have for 2012 raise a lot of doubt about your conclusion.”
What conclusion was that?
Re: What conclusion was that?
“Did you take into consideration the vast quantity of Bible belt voters, the evangelicals if you will that DID NOT VOTE due Romney being a Mormon into your figures? THAT would make your result moot.”
OK, I understand now. My question somehow became a conclusion. Thanks for clarifying.
That didn't sound like a question.
As I said earlier, there is no statistical evidence that supports the idea that Conservatives stayed home in 2012.
In fact, the evidence supports the idea that white Obama voters stayed home in 2012.
Here’s only eight samplings of news articles on the subject of voters staying home. It ain’t stats, but it’s only eight of hundreds of articles published on the matter, so I think it was amply covered. Thanks for the discussion. Time for this old timer to hit the rack.
http://lonelyconservative.com/2012/11/three-million-republican-voters-stayed-home-on-election-day/
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/333135/voters-who-stayed-home-andrew-c-McCarthy
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/08/why_did_three_million_republicans_stay_home
http://carnageandculture.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-voters-who-stayed-home.html
Had to run home and get my notes and calculations.
7 of your 8 links are for reports written within five days of the election.
The numbers they are using are wildly wrong.
One of them claims that McCain got 2.5 million more popular votes than Romney.
Wrong - Romney got 985,000 more popular votes than McCain.
Andrew McCarthy at National Review Online claims that the total popular vote in 2012 went down by 11 million votes.
Wrong - the total popular vote in 2012 went down 2.2 million.
Dick Morris waited one month to write his article.
He claims that 7 million white voters stayed home.
Not even close - 4.2 million white voters stayed home.
Bottom Line:
(1) In 2012, Obama lost 5.5 million white voters compared to 2008.
(2) In 2012, Romney gained 1.4 million white voters compared to McCain in 2008.
I used the Congressional certified vote totals from the Federal Election Commission.
I used the ethnic percentages determined by NEP, the exit polling organization that is used by every major news bureau in America.
If you want to see the basic math calculations and links I used, just ask.
Or, you can do the math yourself in less than 10 minutes.
My God and Mother tell me not to hate people, but I am finding it hard not to hate, loathe, despise H.Reid.
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.