The Phantom's "Quick" Look at the Polls

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

Obama stumbles when he has to think on his feet and Romney is very polished in that regard.

In what alternate universe? Just that statement alone negates any credibility of your worth in analysis.

When Obama has a teleprompter he's one of the best speakers I have ever heard. God forbid it ever breaks down. He bumbles, stumbles, and damn near stutters. Romney is solid in debates. His answers are clean, clear, and stick a point. There's a reason why he got the nomination. He never had a "death debate" like the rest had. Well unless they have changed the rules, Obama aint gonna have a teleprompter at the debates. He will handle the initial question ok, but when Romney presses him he's gonna be fucked.

Are you serious? I'm going to guess that you are refering to the republican debates. Mittens was "debating" the most pathetic group of assclowns ever pushed in front of the American citizens. Who among THAT sad little troup was a serious debator? Baffoons.

If that is the height of your bar then you and RobMyMoney are in for a shock. Mittens won't be fag prancing out on a stage in front of paid and screened well wishers in the debates wearing a long sleeved white shirt desperately attempting to appear human. His glib juvenile quips compared to the thoughtful remarks by Barak Obama will be an embarrassment to caucasian people. I'm doing "wince" excercises just so I don't pull a muscle watching the things.

Has anybody else noticed the level of mental meltdown amongst the k00ks..............like this asshole? The perpetually miserable getting even more miserble. Its classic. Every 4 years, these meatheads bring this class warfare crap which is always a loser........and always has been. No bonafide liberal has ever been elected in this country...........lest we forget that Obama bamboozled the political middle 4 years ago into thinkig he was a solid moderate. Cant get away with that shit this time s0ns!!!


ANd to be sure, I'll be in here on election night rubbing the gigantic grain of salt in the wounds of the k00ks and will revel in every single moment of it...........gonna be a fucking hoot. And lefty nutters like this Huggy asshole are going to spend the next few months walking around with a perpetual telephone pole stuck way up thier ass........ungreased I might add. If you are a conservative like me, this place is going to be like a dialy visit to a comedy club as all the Keynesian shit gets mothballed for 2 generations.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[Article 15]

Obama stumbles when he has to think on his feet and Romney is very polished in that regard.

In what alternate universe? Just that statement alone negates any credibility of your worth in analysis.

When Obama has a teleprompter he's one of the best speakers I have ever heard. God forbid it ever breaks down. He bumbles, stumbles, and damn near stutters. Romney is solid in debates. His answers are clean, clear, and stick a point. There's a reason why he got the nomination. He never had a "death debate" like the rest had. Well unless they have changed the rules, Obama aint gonna have a teleprompter at the debates. He will handle the initial question ok, but when Romney presses him he's gonna be fucked.

Yeah, you go with that

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5vOMIN673A]President Obama Full Q&A - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Greenbeard]

Obama stumbles when he has to think on his feet and Romney is very polished in that regard.

In what alternate universe? Just that statement alone negates any credibility of your worth in analysis.

When Obama has a teleprompter he's one of the best speakers I have ever heard. God forbid it ever breaks down. He bumbles, stumbles, and damn near stutters. Romney is solid in debates. His answers are clean, clear, and stick a point. There's a reason why he got the nomination. He never had a "death debate" like the rest had. Well unless they have changed the rules, Obama aint gonna have a teleprompter at the debates. He will handle the initial question ok, but when Romney presses him he's gonna be fucked.

Yeah, you go with that

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5vOMIN673A]President Obama Full Q&A - YouTube[/ame]

It's been a while since I've seen that footage but it was an excellent moment (or hour) for Obama--wading into the lions' den of the Republican retreat and taking on all comers with ease and panache.

It also reminds me of Politico's explanation the following year of why Obama and the TV cameras weren't invited back: "Last year, they opened the doors at their winter retreat to President Barack Obama — and to the media — and were quickly schooled on policy and politics on national TV. Obama stole the spotlight at the Republican meeting, and the GOP looked weak." Delightful.

And while it should put to rest the absurd notion that Obama can't speak without a teleprompter or "bumbles, stumbles, and damn near stutters" his way through hostile questioning, I doubt it will since there's a certain faith-based approach to reality some folks take.

That said, Romney has a clear advantage stylistically in the debate format. Obama is good in formats like the one you posted: extended dialogues and discussions of the issues. He's at his best when given the chance to take apart an opposing argument or policy proposal and able to put forth an explanation of his own approach, world view, policies, and so on.

But that's not what these debates are. With their 1-2 minute answer periods, they're tailor made for the more vacuous, empty-headed candidates who spew platitudes and pithy falsehoods like Romney. Opponents have no time to push back on that nonsense or probe more deeply, nor do they have time to really get into the issues in a substantive way. It'll be tit-for-tat and witty one-liners, not substance. And Romney's at his best in situations that don't require substance.

The last I heard, Obama's debate prep is focusing heavily on trying to make him more succinct. We'll see how that goes. Ironically, I think Obama's a lot better suited to the Lincoln-Douglas style debates Gingrich wanted to have with him.

 

[Foxfyre]

And is there any possibility that the media rather misrepresented what happened at that meeting? And Obama won't go anywhere or do anything without his surrogate media in tow? There are usually two sides to stuff like that. If I was in a planning meeting and wanted honest and open dialogue with people being free to speak without being misrepresented in their words and intentions, I would keep the Obama friendly media out too.

Want more evidence? Look at how much polls that favor Obama or look bad for Romney are front page above the fold news and get a prominent slot on the evening news. Polls that do not favor Obama or that do favor Romney are much more modestly featured if they are featured at all.

 

[mamooth]

There is no enthusiasm gap now, just as there was no enthusiasm gap in 2008. The electorate in 2012 will look very much like 2008 -- that is, a slight Republican advantage in the percentage of the base they turn out. And the polls reflect that. There is no magical turnout fairy waiting in the wings to save the Republicans, and anyone counting on that is setting themselves up for a big letdown. The polls were accurate in 2008, in 2010, and they're accurate now. Except Gallup and Rasmussen, due to their strange likely voter models.

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to Gallup, there's been a recent BIG upturn in Democrats' enthusiasm for the election,

so all those confident predictions that a severe case of Democratic apathy was going to sink Obama can be tossed out.

Democratic Enthusiasm Swells in the Swing States, Nationally

You really want to go with that? The question wasn't are Enthusiastic for voting for THE president. They might be Enthusiastic to vote obama out.

That crazy theory might work if we weren't seeing Democratic enthusiasm in the swing states rising coincident with Obama's poll numbers in those states rising.

 

[Foxfyre]

The enthusiasm barometer still isn't really strong for either candidate according to Rasmussen. From today's Presidential tracking poll:

Sunday, September 23, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows President Obama and Mitt Romney each attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

When “leaners” are included, the candidates are tied at 48%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question.

Obama is supported by 89% of Democrats. Romney gets the vote from 85% of Republicans and holds a 12-point advantage among unaffiliated voters.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Republican voters are following the race on a daily basis, along with 47% of Democrats. Interest in the race is often a good indicator of turnout
Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports™

 

[bigrebnc1775]

According to Gallup, there's been a recent BIG upturn in Democrats' enthusiasm for the election,

so all those confident predictions that a severe case of Democratic apathy was going to sink Obama can be tossed out.

Democratic Enthusiasm Swells in the Swing States, Nationally

You really want to go with that? The question wasn't are Enthusiastic for voting for THE president. They might be Enthusiastic to vote obama out.

That crazy theory might work if we weren't seeing Democratic enthusiasm in the swing states rising coincident with Obama's poll numbers in those states rising.

A skewed poll? of course those will do that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There is no enthusiasm gap now, just as there was no enthusiasm gap in 2008. The electorate in 2012 will look very much like 2008 -- that is, a slight Republican advantage in the percentage of the base they turn out. And the polls reflect that. There is no magical turnout fairy waiting in the wings to save the Republicans, and anyone counting on that is setting themselves up for a big letdown. The polls were accurate in 2008, in 2010, and they're accurate now. Except Gallup and Rasmussen, due to their strange likely voter models.

Blacks support for obama has drop because his defense of gay marriage
Blacks unemployment rate is 14.1
record number of Americans on food stamps at 64.7 million Americans. Yes I agree their is no magical voting fairy that will help obama win this election.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well it’s unfortunate that my life got too busy to continue my previous polling analysis thread, but I did want to pop in and give a breakdown of what I see right now from the numbers and what, at least I believe, should be taken from them.

Obama is safe in the following states: ME, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, NH (yes NH….Romney isn’t taking NH), NJ, DE, MD, PA (yes PA…let’s be realistic here), DC, MI (Republicans can only dream that MI will flip), IL, MN, NM, CA, OR, WA, AND HI. That’s a total of 241 Electoral Votes (EV)

Romney on the other hand is safe in AK, AZ, UT, ID, MT, WY, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, TX, LA, AK, MO (Yes MO…Dems can dream but Obama won’t take MO), MS, AL GA, SC, TN, NC (yes NC…again we’re being realistic and NC is out of Obama’s reach), KY, IN, and WV. That’s a total of 206 EV.

So let’s look at the states that are left and I will list them in the order that I am most confident to least confident about my predicted outcome. Keep in mind I am using the following as a basis for analysis

a) Current polling data from RCP which is easily verifiable by anyone

b) 2008 results indicate the best Obama will do in any given swing state

a. In 2008 Obama was riding a wave of enthusiasm and the electorate was furious with Bush and the GOP because of the stock market crash which happened right before the election. Obama cannot rely on that level of enthusiasm/fury this time and so we will use 2008 as the high benchmark because if that’s what he got in a state when everything was rolling in his favor he sure won’t do better with a stagnant economy , high unemployment, etc.​

c) Undecided voters usually break for the challenger as the election nears

d) Debates will likely favor Romney

e) Obama is currently experiencing a “post-convention bounce”, which is significant because this year the DNC came after the RNC so Obama’s position is fresher in the minds of the electorate.

So with those “established” let’s have a look.

1) Romney takes Florida (Obama 241 / Romney 235)
The RCP average currently has Obama up by 1.3 points. Considering point e above that’s pretty pathetic. Obama took Florida in 2008 by a mere three points (51% / 48%) despite everything rolling in his favor. For Obama to really be challenging in Florida he needs to be up by at least 5%, maybe 7%. When the debates get underway and as Obama’s DNC bounce continues to dry up (as it has been) Romney will gain strongly and score a pretty easy win.

2) Romney takes Virginia (Romney 248 / Obama 241)
In the last 10 elections Obama has been the only Democrat to take Virginia and he needed the perfect storm to do it. There is a legitimate argument that the demographics of Virginia have changed and it’s solidly a “purple state” now. In 2008 Virginia pulled out a 53% / 46% win but the current RCP average is Obama +0.3%. Go re-read the notes on Florida.

3) Obama takes Nevada (Romney 248 / Obama 247)
Obama scored a 13 point win in 2008. The most recent data in Nevada is way out of date. In late August it was Obama by 3.3%. Right now my guess is that it’s more like 6% - 7%. What will tell the tale is Reno. Vegas is primarily liberal and the rest of the state is Republican. Reno is kind of in the middle and that’s where the state will be won or lost. Now in elections since 2008 Reno has gone strongly Republican indicating that Romney has a chance to take the state back. I just don’t see it. It sure as hell won’t be the 13 point whopping Obama delivered in 2008, but I imagine Obama will manage to pull off a victory by maybe 2% - 3%.

4) Romney takes Iowa (Romney 254 / Obama 247)
Iowa is a tough one that really flips back and forth. Obama scored a strong 10 point win in 2008 54% / 44% but the most recent polling has Obama +0.2%. Granted that data is pretty old so it’s reasonable to assume that since the DNC Obama has picked up points and it’s probably more like Obama +3% now. Still it’s not enough. With nearly 10% undecided or favoring a third candidate (according to the average) and keeping point c in mind all signs suggest that Romney will squeak out a narrow victory by a point or two. This is a tough one to call because the data is so old.

5) Romney takes Ohio (Romney 272 / Obama 247)
The current RCP average has Obama +4.2. In my opinion it’s probably no more than Obama +3, maybe even 2%. There are two polls in the current average (PPP(D) and Marist) that totally suck and demonstrate massive Obama bias and that is skewing the numbers. Obama took Ohio 52% / 47% in 2008. Even if we accept 4.2% as the current number it’s probably not enough to seal the deal when you consider a 4 point advantage while experiencing a bounce of roughly 5% is not good news for team Obama. Add in Romney’s closing favorables in points c and d and it’s looking like Romney wins a squeaker.

6) Romney takes Colorado (Romney 281 / Obama 247)
You can pretty much take my comments for Ohio and insert them here. The current RCP average is being skewed by two Democratic agencies (PPP and Project New America [a polling firm run by David Axelrod’s son]). SUSA has it at 1 point and they are a pretty solid firm to look at. Obama scored a 9 point win in 2008 but consider point b above. He was riding a tidal wave. Historically Colorado is a pretty safe red state and my guess is that it will return in 2012.

7) Obama takes Wisconsin (Romney 281 / Obama 257)
Boy it’s close in Wisconsin. It’s reasonable to look at my previous analyses and say “well the RCP average only has Obama +1.4 and you have said previously that that spread in a post convention bounce is not enough”. You could argue that Wisconsin is experiencing a pretty strong GOP wave since 2010 and that Democratic victories in Presidential elections in 2004 and 2000 were razor thin. You could argue that Obama’s 14 point massacre of McCain in 2008 was a result of the tidal wave he was experiencing at the time. Yeah…that’s all true and that’s why I have this prediction as my least confident call. All signs are pointing to Romney flipping the state, but there’s just something in my gut that is telling me to be very careful about making that call right now. Perhaps as the election gets closer I will be more confident in making that prediction, but right now I am sticking with history and predicting another razor thin Obama victory in Wisconsin.


So at the end of the day what it really comes down to is Ohio….nothing new there really. That’s pretty much how it usually goes and this year is shaping up to be no different. Now it is worth nothing that if Obama holds on in Ohio and Romney takes Nevada we have a 269 / 269 tie and a tie favors Romney since the House breaks the tie and the House is controlled by the GOP. So a tie essentially means a Romney victory. And of course Romney could lose Ohio and still win by taking WI and NV but I think that would be a pretty bold prediction.

Anyhow…there it is. The point of course is that right now we’re seeing a lot of Democrats that are incredibly excited about the current data but they are not putting it into context of what is happening to create Obama’s current leads and they are ignoring that between now and election day Romney’s favorables dramatically outweigh Obama’s. Romney should close at least 5% maybe even 7% between now and then in some states. If I were a liberal that’s not a situation I would be very thrilled about.

The problem with the above 'analysis' is that it's not really an analysis at all. It's really just a long rambling of wishful thinking disguised as analysis.

Update: Quinnipiac, another one of BP's deadly accurate pollsters, now has Obama up by 10 in Ohio.

Anyone ever lose Ohio after being up by 10 at the end of September?

RealClearPolitics - Latest Election Polls

 

[JakeStarkey]

Read all of the polls then study RealClearPolitics carefully. The intrade odds reflects current professional rating.

 

[Foxfyre]

Whatever poll is consulted, it is important to look at the methodology and how the poll is weighted for results.

Who do you believe? Those who say Obama is ahead in almost all polls and the RCP average is the most accurate? Or do you believe observations like this:

. . .Frustration that polls are skewed in favor of Obama has escalated among some on the right in recent weeks. One website, UnSkewed Polls -- erasing the bias to show an accurate picture of politics, recently began re-weighting the mainstream polls to closer track the demographic assumptions of conservative polling outlet Rasmussen Reports. The re-weighted polls all show Romney ahead in the race, with leads of between 3 and 11 percentage points.

Democrats counter that the sample sizes used in polls are accurate because there is no reason to think the makeup of the 2012 electorate will be proportionately different than in 2008. They also point to census data that shows minorities making up a greater share of the population, something driven by the surging Hispanic population. . . .
GOP takes aim at

 

[JakeStarkey]

A "unskewed" site that serves the narrow, biased interests of the far crazee right or libertarian wings?

Really?

RCP is objective, and that is good enough for any American.

 

[Foxfyre]

I scan over the RCP polls almost every day. And they do reflect current trends, but the RCP average has been several points off the final vote in the last several elections. And that is because they report the polls as published by the various organizations and make no effort to analyze them via demographics or any other manner of scientifically weighting the polls.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Which is far, far better than sites that cater to one wing or the other.

No measuring system is perfect, for sure. But RCP has been consistent that the narrowness of this election is slowly but inexorably widening for Obama in 10 of the 12 swing states.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't care who caters to who so long as they use proper scientific weighting and honest reporting. I am quite sure the internal polls conducted by the Democrats and Republicans are conducted quite scientifically and are among the most accurate out there. I am also quite sure that if the MSM is seeing those at all, they have no interest in reporting them.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I scan over the RCP polls almost every day. And they do reflect current trends, but the RCP average has been several points off the final vote in the last several elections. And that is because they report the polls as published by the various organizations and make no effort to analyze them via demographics or any other manner of scientifically weighting the polls.

They were 3/10ths of a point off the 2008 election result.

You people need to man up and accept the reality. Romney is behind, period. He is not magically leading in defiance of dozens of polls.

He now needs not just to run the table on undecideds, he needs takeaways from Obama voters.

 

[Joshuatree]

I scan over the RCP polls almost every day. And they do reflect current trends, but the RCP average has been several points off the final vote in the last several elections. And that is because they report the polls as published by the various organizations and make no effort to analyze them via demographics or any other manner of scientifically weighting the polls.

They were 3/10ths of a point off the 2008 election result.

You people need to man up and accept the reality. Romney is behind, period. He is not magically leading in defiance of dozens of polls.

He now needs not just to run the table on undecideds, he needs takeaways from Obama voters.

Yes, because everybody knows how extremally succesful Obama's first term has been.