The polls! The polls! The polls!
NBC/Marist has a new poll of likely voters in the battleground states of Ohio, Virginia, and Florida. For the purposes of this poll, “likely voters” includes undecideds who are leaning to one candidate or another.
President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden lead Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan in all three, by margins that appear to be growing.
• In Ohio, Obama receives 50% to 43% for Romney
• In Virginia, Obama is up, 49% to 44%, over Romney
• In Florida, Obama garners 49% to 44% for Romney
Read more about these here.
September 13, 2012 - 7:25 PM
I guess Obama can just lay back and wait for the election.
As long as the liberals and gays control the media, there won’t be any truth to what the polls say. I think we have all learned that over the past 30 years. Simply put, whatever the polls say just be prepared for the opposite result.
Ads for Romney & Obama have stopped on local stations in northern Indiana. All we are getting is congressional, U.S. Senate, and governor’s race commercials. During local news (5:30-6:30 p.m.) there were 24 30 second spots for one candidate or another. Nearly half were by political organizations rather than the candidates themselves. It’s sickening.
Rasmussen? LOL.
The link is to the review document used by the McCain campaign to “vet” Romney – the fun stuff begins on page 195…should be titled the evolution of Romney’s flip-flops…very interesting reading.
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/104819538?access_key=key-11mwwv5r9uwjunyf8yvg
Well..
we havent gotten the latest Suzie Poll..
From a hillside dugout near New Castle.
Its not official until those numbers come
in.
Or..I could be totally wrong..she may have given up
and has taken to lazing in her “Botanical” garden.
Yes what Bernake did to day pretty much seals an Obama victory to the long term determent of the country
“As long as the liberals and gays control the media, there won’t be any truth to what the polls say. I think we have all learned that over the past 30 years. Simply put, whatever the polls say just be prepared for the opposite result.”
Snark: Indeed. After all, McCain was ahead of Obama on Election Eve 2008, right?
Truth: The gays control nothing, and same with the liberals. Most of the news media is conservative. This is not even disputed by anybody who can think.
@2 Comment by Kendra — September 13, 2012 @ 8:28 pm
As long as the liberals and gays control the media, there won’t be any truth to what the polls say. I think we have all learned that over the past 30 years. Simply put, whatever the polls say just be prepared for the opposite result.
[Snark on] Didn’t you forget to mention the commies and Jews “controlling the media”? [Snark off]
Danny Boy is in overdrive with this stuff. It sounds like he’s trying to convince himself. Rasmussen, traditionally the most reliable of polls reflected the brief bounce and is now back in the Romney column. That means Romney leads by approximately 7 points.
Everybody should keep in mind the polls showed Scott Walker in a dead heat on election day. He won by 7.
“The link is to the review document used by the McCain campaign to “vet” Romney – the fun stuff begins on page 195…should be titled the evolution of Romney’s flip-flops…very interesting reading.”
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/104819538?access_key=key-11mwwv5r9uwjunyf8yvg
Check on page 199:
“Romney says the Harlem Globetrotters have trouble making touchdowns.”
“Romney mocks Kerry, saying he threw his “yarmulke into the ring.’ ”
And page 200:
“Romney: “I’m wary of anyone who parlays background, money, and hair to political success.”
Re: Comment by Shrillary — September 13, 2012 @ 8:57 pm
Anyone have any know of have a link to any substantiation of the authenticity / legitimacy of that document?
If it is real, it is dynamite.
Re: my last.
I mangled it in submitting it.
Should have been, “Anyone have any know of or have a link to any substantiation of the authenticity / legitimacy of that document?”
Re: by last two comments:
Still lost a part. One more try:
“Anyone have any knowledge of or have a link to any substantiation of the authenticity / legitimacy of that document?”
ANOTHER poll, this one from CNN:
Question 16:
“Do you think Obama and the Democrats or Bush and the Republicans are more responsible for the country’s current economic problams?
Obama and Dems 38%
Bush and Repubs 54%
Both 5%
Neither 2%
Dunno 1%
This one is not even close.
Dave Hicks – this doc was originally one that downloaded as a pdf and a fee was required. Somewhere along the line someone posted the doc in its entirety and so Scrbd.com eventually allowed it to be a viewed on their site for free…
#10 most ill-informed posted “Rasmussen, traditionally the most reliable of polls” – oh goodie! Then you must agree with his polling of these categories:
“53% Think Obama Will Win, 33% Predict Romney”
“The race may be neck-and-neck in the daily Presidential Tracking Poll, but voters by 20 points predict that President Obama will be reelected.”
“President Obama has now moved slightly ahead in the critical battleground state of Florida despite the presence of the Republican National Convention in Tampa late last month.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Florida Voters finds Obama with 48% support to Mitt Romney’s 46%.”
“The fallout appears to linger in the Missouri Senate race, with incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill still holding a six-point lead over Republican challenger Todd Akin. But the race is tightening.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds McCaskill will 49% support to Akin’s 43%.”
“61% View Michelle Obama Favorably, 54% Say Same of Ann Romney”
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012
Now now “dearie” don’t panic too much…no, save that for Nov 6th.
Just played a little game with Nate Silver’s numbers. I took every state that he has given Obama an 85% or higher chance of winning; these are states that Obama has to get caught molesting a coyote to lose. If you only give him those states, he’s already got enough, 275. Furthermore, Obama is an 83.9% favorite in Colorado, and 83.6% in Iowa. Those two states total an additional 15 electoral votes, meaning he could lose either Ohio or Pennsylvania and still win if he picks up Colorado and Iowa.
The only reason I am reading this blog anymore is to watch Suzie rocket from mere hyper-partisan goofball to “2+2=zebra” lunatic. The night of the election will be fun.
The media is conservative? What planet have you been on? Yes, sure. On the day that the VP candidate Paul Ryan was announced, there were around 50 articles on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, NPR about him…everyone of them was negative. And you want people to think the media is conservative? You fit the bill exactly to prove my point.
Here is a good example of your “conservative” media. LOL. Rathergate (or Memogate): In an effort to damage George W. Bush’s 2004 run for reelection, Dan Rather — whose bias goes back decades — floated a story based on forged documents that claimed Bush had gone AWOL from his Texas Air National Guard unit back in 1973. Internet sleuths, though, realized that the documents purporting to have been created on a 1970s era typewriter were actually made using a Microsoft computer font and obviously these computers did not exist in 1973. Rather refused to admit the truth, however, and ultimate lost his spot as the anchor of CBS’s nightly newscast. This takedown of a network news anchor put the Internet on the map as a force to be reckoned with. Thank goodness someone reported the truth and didn’t have to accept the lies of the liberal media.
#2 Oh good god, another right-wing homophobe. Get in line Kendra, we’ve already got a ton of them posting on this blog.
“The only reason I am reading this blog anymore is to watch Suzie rocket from mere hyper-partisan goofball to “2+2=zebra” lunatic. The night of the election will be fun.”
Hmmm. Perhaps we need some more gun threads.
Kendra, most of the media is conservative. They’re part of the American corpotocracy. The largest circulation paper in the country, the Wall Street Journal, is conservative — or didn’t you know? Ditto the largest newspaper chain, Gannett, who’s large board shareholder is an investment banker. Clear Channel, owners of Premiere Radio Network, which syndicates Rush Limbaugh and others, is conservative. Ditto anti-union Comcast, which owns NBC/Universal. Have you ever heard of Fox News, the #1 cable news station? They are conservative, along with 2 of 3 daily newspaper in New York, both of the daily newspapers in Washington, and many, many other publication and TV and radio stations, including both of the talk radio stations in Roanoke.
Your problem is that you believe what Rush Limbaugh has “taught” you. You should look into this stuff for yourself.
As for your Rather argument: If CBS was so liberal, wouldn’t they have KEPT him?
I’d take more gun threads. Got a rifle for my birthday, will be going to the gun show next week to buy a revolver, and later this fall will be buying a Glock 17.
That said, the overall national polls don’t say much to the impact of the Electoral College, which is increasingly looking favorable for Obama. Though, there is an outside chance of a 269-269 tie, in which case the House would select the President, and the Senate the VP, if I remember correctly.
#22 Talk about brainwashed, Dan, I still see conservatives calling the Washington Post liberal. Jeez.
CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC…NPR…Washington Post…TV and radio. They are by far the major players of the media and they control the liberal bias…Thank goodness for the Wall Street Journal and FOX news, otherwise we would have the Josef Goebbels Nazi machine in place.
Kendra…has FOX become a liberal media outlet? Because, I hate to break this to you, the FOX News poll has President Obama up by 5+ and a majority feeling better off….
Fox News poll: Obama Ticket Has Edge After Conventions Wrap Up
“The president receives a five percentage-point bounce among women and a 12-point bounce among independents, in a Fox News poll released Wednesday. ”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/fox-news-poll-obama-has-lead-over-romney-in-post-convention-poll/#ixzz26PWW7uO2
and this headline,
“Fox News poll finds more people are better off now than they were a year ago”
http://www.examiner.com/article/fox-news-poll-finds-more-people-are-better-off-now-than-they-were-a-year-ago
http://www.pollingreport.com/life.htm?9/13/2012
Dan-
“Perhaps we need some more gun threads.”
Those are the ones that drove me away.
“Though, there is an outside chance of a 269-269 tie, in which case the House would select the President, and the Senate the VP, if I remember correctly.”
The way this works in the House is each state delegation gets one vote, thus Alaska carries as much weight as California. And we’re talking about the NEW Congress, which takes office in January.
Question: Assuming Republicans have a majority that way, do you honestly believe they would vote for Romney for president? Cuz I’m not sure they have to.
Welcome back, Jason!
“Thank goodness for the Wall Street Journal and FOX news, otherwise we would have the Josef Goebbels Nazi machine in place.”
OMG this is hilarious. Kendra, Limbaugh IS Goebbels. Take your blinders off, seriously.
Kendra posted, “Thank goodness for the Wall Street Journal”
Yep, thank goodness, for Pete’s Sake!
According to the WSJ – Election 2012:
President Holds Lead in Three Key States
“Obama leads Romney in Ohio, Florida and Virginia, three of the states considered key to winning the White House, new polls show.”
http://online.wsj.com/public/page/news-politics-campaign.html
Where do these people come from? Sheesh…
Truth: The gays control nothing, and same with the liberals. Most of the news media is conservative. This is not even disputed by anybody who can think.
Comment by Dan Casey — September 13, 2012 @ 9:35 pm
More bovine scatology from the leftist media. Yesterday we heard CBS and NPR coordinating with others at the Romney news conference to set the narrative to defend Democrat President Barrack Hussein Obama..(have you no shame) and let the facts speak for themselves. It was all out effort to defend BHO’s incompetence and lack of leadership.
This morning I read the Roanoke Times, Washington Post and NY Times and there were 1,2, and 2 (respectively) editorials about Romney “shoot first aim”.
These were blatant lies….and bs propaganda for the Fascist Democrat President. (an empty suit but had to get to Vegas instead of doing his job plus he attends only 1/2 of his national security briefings…Imagine that…must interfere with his golf outings.
This attacks in Libya were pre planned on 9/11…US Embassy in Egypt issued a TWEET..(call me Stupid THE US EMBASSY is the US GOVERNMENT..IE Democrat Barrack Hussein Obama) You own it and you built it Barry.
The media (entertainment tonight) is pathetic. (guess Barry did not want THAT 3AM phone call).
By the WAY the Marines in Egypt were not allowed ammo to defend the embassy and RECEIVED an ALERT on 9/4.
A complete diversion on Democrat President Barrack Hussein Obama and these editorials have not “gravitas”…(learned that word from the Drive by media regarding one of the recent republican campaigns).
Job creation for the “media”…do your job and stop relying on marching orders from Democrat Barrack Hussein Obama central planning..going soft boys! Or just call it what it is…PRAVDA (for the ill informed..main paper in communist Russia)
Don’t forget Dan is polled as a black woman according to himself. Elections are decided by voters. It’s september, the election is November. Vote when it’s time.
Speaking of polls, here’s more good news for Romney.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/romney-campaign-worse-mccain/2012/09/13/id/451773
The storm clouds are gathering in Romneyville. However, what happened this week in the middle east shows that current events can change things.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-polls-leading-romney/2012/09/13/id/451787
@ Dan #29:
“The way this works in the House is each state delegation gets one vote, thus Alaska carries as much weight as California. And we’re talking about the NEW Congress, which takes office in January.
Question: Assuming Republicans have a majority that way, do you honestly believe they would vote for Romney for president? Cuz I’m not sure they have to.”
Let’s assume only Pres. Obama and Gov. Romney win electoral votes (a fairly safe bet, since only NE and ME are not winner take all, an it’s unlikely anyone other than Obama or Romney will take the congressional district necessary in either state.
In that case the new congress, almost certain to have a majority of Republican-majority state delegations (unless there’s a Democratic wave at the congressional level that’s not felt at the top of the ticket, which is even less likely than a tie), would have to choose from among the two candidates who tied in the EC. Republicans currently hold a majority in 33 delegations while the Democrats hold a majority in 16. One is tied, which makes the magic number 25 for a majority. Their only alternatives in the contingency election would be candidates who received EVs, Obama or Romney (i.e. no Ron Paul options).
The only scenario more unlikely than an Electoral College tie at 269 is a string of events after a tie where Pres. Obama to sways the Republican led delegations of 4-8(depending on how many flip in the 2012 election) separate states to vote his way.
If you have some plausable scenarios around which Republican led delegations flip in a 50-50 presidential election, especially considering Republican leaning redistricting last year, and which of those left over switch to Obama in the event of an EC tie, I’d be interested to read what they are.
Can you jot them down on a piece of paper and throw it into Jack’s yard tomorrow morning? That’s where I have my paper delivered and I can take care of two errands with one trip.
” Limbaugh IS Goebbels”
You know Goebbels worked for the German government, right? Limbaugh is just a journalist on the radio.
Oh and Obama now admits he lied about his parents being married.
https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/246422716188614656
“Let’s face it, a mixed kid from Hawaii born to a single mom is not likely to become President of the United States.”
Dan quotes universal/NBC – as conservative. WOW! Can you say OBHERMAN, and MADDOW!
If I would have had a drink of coffee in my mouth when I read that..it might have come spewing out of my nose.
By the way, those 3 things you listed in #23 shouldn’t be considered MOST!!!!!!
Tell us about CNN, and CBS, and ABC dan.
“Limbaugh IS Goebbels.” Glenn Beck likes to dress up as an SS officer as well.
#26 Dang, can I predict stuff or what? Four minutes after I mentioned to Dan that some brainwashed folks still called the Washington Post liberal, there’s Kendra calling the WP liberal!
“President Holds Lead in Three Key States”
Awesome! Is this based on actual votes? Oh, it’s a poll? Wake me in November.
Thanks, Dan. It’s been a while since I read up on that aspect of election procedure. Talk about a mess if that happened…
hey Kendra, ol’ dano knows he’s lying.
Liberals are Nazis. Where were these people educated?
You a big WSJ reader, kendra?
Dan Casey wrote, “Most of the news media is conservative. This is not even disputed by anybody who can think.”
You, our little rotund liberal mouthpiece are out of touch.
Most of the news media is not conservative. It’s pretty even these days as far as I can see.
Mike, my question was not well articulated. It was meant to raise the prospect of GOP-led delegations voting for a Republican other than Romney, not Obama. I was unaware that the House’s choice would be limited to those two. Thanks for clearing that up.
And welcome back!
“Can you jot them down on a piece of paper and throw it into Jack’s yard tomorrow morning? That’s where I have my paper delivered …”
LOL. Funny.
“Dan quotes universal/NBC – as conservative. WOW! Can you say OBHERMAN, and MADDOW!”
NBC got rid of Olberman. And they also employee conservative Joe Scarborough.
Rasmussen has Romney up 3. These polls are really all over the place, but the battleground state polls still look solid for Obama.
“conservative Joe Scarborough.”
BAHAHAHA!! Scarborough is a RINO. He bashes all the conservatives in the Party like Cain and Bachman. Limbaugh is a conservative. Scarborough is a Republican flying monkey like Hannity. If Obama were to change parties at noon, Hannity and Scarborough would be signing his praises by 4.
“Most of the news media is conservative. ”
And they prove that by only hiring liberals. It’s the Backwards Principle.
@53 – Actual votes? oh still polls.
#54 Cal Thomas said the other day that he wishes both parties would stop talking about God. Guess that makes him a RINO by today’s standards, eh, Henry?
Any time a Republican isn’t full metal jacket RW nutball, they get terms “RINO”.
“termed”
terps
Some of that discrepancy is the way Rasmussen polls. Gallup includes people regardless of phone type, including cell phones, but Rasmussen restricts itself to landlines only. Guess who uses landlines…usually an older population. Guess which party is filled with Grumpy Old People?
To look at the Ras methodology go here:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/about_us/methodology
Even looking at the pictures that head this thread, you can see one guy looks presidential; the other looks like a boy who’s been thrust in there who’s not up to the job.
“If you have some plausable scenarios around which Republican led delegations flip in a 50-50 presidential election, especially considering Republican leaning redistricting last year, and which of those left over switch to Obama in the event of an EC tie, I’d be interested to read what they are.
Can you jot them down on a piece of paper and throw it into Jack’s yard tomorrow morning? That’s where I have my paper delivered and I can take care of two errands with one trip.”
Prediction: This will be the funniest comment all day long.
I agree Suzie, with a few clarifications. One guy looks like the President of the United States, the other guy looks like someone who’s never going to be President of the United States.
A rare moment of accord.
#60 “Even looking at the pictures that head this thread, you can see one guy looks presidential; the other looks like a boy who’s been thrust in there who’s not up to the job.”
What suzie is really saying is that one guy is whiter than the other.
BTW, in the photo of Romney his hair is sticking out on his right side. Looks like he just stuck his finger in a socket. And his grin is goofy.
#52…should read..“ and they also EMPLOY Joe Scarborough…Been doing this long ?
MOB AT US EMBASSY IN LONDON BURNS AMERICAN FLAG…
Protesters smash windows, set fires at embassy in Tunisia…
GUNFIRE HEARD AT EMBASSY IN SUDAN…
Report: German embassy in Sudan on fire…
Clashes intensify near US embassy in Cairo…
Embassies on high alert as protests spread…
Crowd in Lebanon torches KFC…
CARTER CORRECTS OBAMA… DER SPIEGEL: ‘Obama’s Middle East Policy is in Ruins’… FBI Warns of Violence in America…
Obamaville.
..after Gitmo, Abu Greg.(prison in Iraq where the girl put underwear on a prisoner) and how OBAMA will bring us altogether…College campus closing.
OBAMA KILLED OSAMA…and look what we get.
More propaganda from the drive by media and BHO has blood on his hand. Last US Ambassador to be killed in the line of duty Democrat President Jummy Carter. 1979….
Don’t bother BHO..you need to get to Las Vegas to raise money instead of WORKING..AND thanks for QE3..$40B a month in buy Mortgage Backed Securities..oil NOW $100 a barrel….25% interest rates UNTIL 2015 for BIG corporations..
Stimulus did not work..QE1 and QE2 DID NOT work….now QE3…A FRAUD!
The uproar is not about A FREAKING movie….9/11 and OBAMA kills OSAMA.
Did I forget BHO did a interview with a dj Pimp with a Limp…Thought Al Queida was DONE…dead..
Now we learn BHO is doing a Letterman show…does this fool every work and when he does…he can not even tell if Egypt is an ally…WH spin…”the term ally is an ART form”…HUH…
Pathetic and how the drive by media is complicit in propping up this ignorant fool!
riday, September 14, 2012
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 48% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns 45% of the vote. Two percent (2%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%
Latest poll..huh…we had Dukakis up 17 over 41…Jummy over Reagan, Mondull over Reagan, Gore over 43, Kerry over 43.
“The uproar is not about A FREAKING movie….9/11 and OBAMA kills OSAMA.”
Is there anything masquerading as a point to this?
Steve Nelson,
You’re a great example of why Obama is going to be re-elected, despite the economy, despite the fact that he didn’t close Gitmo, despite the fact that we’re still in Afghanistan.
The majority of voters are sentient, moderate, and reluctant to cast their votes with the crackpots.
I’m sure you don’t get this, and I’m not surprised.
I bet if Rmoney had to meet a good chunk of his supporters face-to-face, his delicate sensibilities would be greatly offended. I can just picture him talking to ole steve-o with a cologne soaked monogrammed hanky held to his face.
@61 I agree. Mike made a funny.
obama is beginning to unravel…It is so unnerving to watch a grown man become so irritated because of the things said by Romney/Ryan…What a thin-skinned punk.
” reluctant to cast their votes with the crackpots.”
Obviously not. They elected Obama.
“Abu Greg?” Sounds like a character on “The Simpsons.”
#64 Hey, Dolto, why don’t you go correct steve nelson’s and pammala’s posts? That’ll keep you busy for the next few weeks.
At this point I should probably note that RWT2557 is posting from an identical IP address as Jeff Doto and Doto’s previous pseudonym, Hokie Lover.
Perhaps one of them could explain this.
@76 Different folks living in the same trailer. Or, various aspects of a split personality disorder perhaps?
Doto’s over on another blog cutting and pasting himself. Very tricky of him. If anyone wondered, all of his personalities agree that 2016 IS A MUST SEE.
@76
What’s the point. Does Jeff the Dodo think his posts sound less stupid coming from another identity? Does he think that pretending to be somebody else makes us all believe more people sharen his perverted twisted point of view? Or is he just a schizophrenic nut? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Yeah what ever the only polls you can really trust are the ones about 2 weeks before the election, because the pollsters have to save their creditability. Most are over sampling democrats and liberals. That is fact even then husein is only up a couple.
Steve Nelson,
You’re a great example of why Obama is going to be re-elected, despite the economy, despite the fact that he didn’t close Gitmo, despite the fact that we’re still in Afghanistan.
The majority of voters are sentient, moderate, and reluctant to cast their votes with the crackpots.
I’m sure you don’t get this, and I’m not surprised.
Comment by Dan Casey — September 14, 2012 @ 12:28 pm
Oh really Dan Casey…The economy is in the tank. Unemployment 43 months at over 8.3 unemployment. Gas around $4.00. QE1,QE2 $787b Stimulus, Cash for clunkers, Cash for dishwashers, $40B a month to buy mortgages, 46m on food stamps,23M un or underemployed, 205 fund raisers..
The only crackpots is the amateur incompetent arrogant ignorant people in the WH and you the drive by are complicit for propping up the the Amateur.
Your “business” first comments were questioning Romney about his comments about Egypt US Embassy (BHO’s regime) instead of question BHO and lack of providing security to Libya (warned on 9/4). Not providing LIVE AMMO for the Marines in Egypt.
What are drinking? Who is the CRACKPOT? BHO….
Are you talking about Mitt Romney..Stanford grad, Duel MBA/JD at Harvard University or Paul Ryan…could not be talking about Barry or Joe “bite me” Biden…..”stand up chuck…oh your in a wheelchair” or “yall gonna be put back in chains” african dialect.
This is JUMMY carter on steroids…know you remember those days..17% cd, 11% unemployment, turning up thermostat to 72 to save energy, odd-even gas days..5 gal max purchase..
I know there are more of us then youzzz…as long as the don’t read the propaganda.
#78 One would think, Kristen, that Dolto would have been embarrassed to copy and paste his illiterate ranting onto another identity at the BRC blog. But then he DID disappear after I outed his butt.
“This is JUMMY carter on steroids…know you remember those days..17% cd, 11% unemployment, turning up thermostat to 72 to save energy, odd-even gas days..5 gal max purchase.”
The gas lines/rationing was in 1974, but steve nelson may believe it’s improper to blame that on a Republican president, so he blamed it on Carter, who took office in 77.
Or maybe he just got his facts wrong, again (sigh).
Comment by Maloof — September 14, 2012 @ 3:42 pm @80 posted, “Most are over sampling democrats and liberals”
This is the parroting being done by those who watch FOX, listen to Limbaugh or read Drudge…these are the EXACT words used in the new RW meme.
Each person whether a guest or “commentator” on FOX has used these words in the past few days. The reality is starting to hit the RWers, and to keep their low information audience from giving up all hope, they spin, spin and spin. Reality will be painful on election day, as they seem to have convinced the parrots that Romney will somehow win…
From FOX News:
The Pew Research Center made waves Friday with a new poll showing President Obama leading by a double-digit percentage – but the polling outfit is coming under criticism for ALLEGEDLY OVER-SAMPLING DEMOCRATS and skewing the results toward the president. [my caps for the dimwits]
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/03/pew-poll-puts-obama-ahead-by-10-points-amid-questions-about-its-methodology/#ixzz26U0r6wrH
Rush Limbaugh [radio] “People, the corrupt, liberal media is OVER–SAMPLING DEMOCRATS in these polls…”
Limbaugh – pathetic mound of blubber creates an alternative reality for his listeners where he re-spins reality to fit their ideological predispositions and feeds their misinformed, misguided beliefs. Pitiful and pathetic.
@85 Hey Shrill,
The links below are for your reading pleasure. Your post at #85 essentially states that anyone who believes in the notion that many polls oversample Democrats must be living in an “alternative reality.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2012/07/23/are_the_polls_skewed_toward_obama_285489.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/18/mitt-romney-polls_n_1680827.html?utm_hp_ref=@pollster
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/does-romney-have-an-edge-from-likely-voter-polls/
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/313061/over-sampling-dems-jonah-goldberg#
matt @ 86 So are you saying that the newest FOX poll which puts Obama up was an over-sampling of Democrats?
How about the WSJ’s recent polling which put Obama ahead? Are these republican tools over-sampling Democrats?
My point was not so much about the numbers, but how the parrot machine cranks up, and lo and behold, we find the same meme appearing on Dan’s blog – verbatim…Do you not find it suspicious that the exact terms keep being used, and pushed by RW media? [Obama's a socialist,where is his birth certificate, where are his college transcripts...blah, blah, blah]. Sometimes watching/listening to only RW meme-pushing media will distort your point of view, no? I go to conservative or RW sites just to know what the talking points by the RWers will be for the day…
The polls count more Democrats because there ARE more people who self identify as Democrats. If 58 percent of the respondents self-ID’d as Dems, and the pollster screened out the excess Dems so that their were equal numbers of them and Repubs, THAT would be skewed.
That’s what the RWers here want: for the polls to be artificially skewed to them.
Nate Silver now gives President Obama a 92% chance of winning, up 4% since yesterday. Anyone who thinks Doughy Pantload is objective has a screw loose.
No sugar high, voters are hardening against Romney
Where’s Frank when you need him?
hey mattr, you are supposed to forget those “little” things about libs like dano passing themselvs off as a little old black women! anyhow, you are spot on! the only poll which counts is the one taken on elelction day!
The polls count more Democrats because the GOP has gone so far to the right and nominated such a complete lack of a candidate that all sensible former Republicans have left the party. The Tea Party kept anyone with any capability from running for the Republican nomination. Accordingly, those that would normally vote Republican are deserting the party in droves.
Nothing is more telling of the lack of Romney support than the comments by the ultra right wing on this blog. They can tell of their hate for Obama bit never do they ever state why they are voting for Mitt Romney. They simply have tried to run against Obama with a candidate that no one likes, no one trusts, no one believes has the ability to be President. What a foolish way to appoint a candidate.
hey shrill, so tell me more about this obama “administration’s” handling of the Arab Fire-Storm? Did the obama administration really get hood-winked by un-sophisticated, un-organized radical islamists in multi-countries all pissed off about what they heard about a movie made in the US? or, do you think it might have originations in a deeper, more organized, multi-country TERRORIST network? I am interested in your opinion because you appear to be so smart…to some on this blog. What say you?
hey gdad, better be careful thunping your own chest (such as it is…) like that. bragging is one of those traits which serves the braggert no good end. but, I bet you didn’t know that…braggerts rarely do.
hey all you libs so infatuated with the polls…if obama is so far ahead, why is he out campaigning and not meeting with his State Department and Defense Department, and maybe David Petraeus? …I just heard that the islamist fire-storm has reached 21 countries…that must be one hum-dinger of a movie trailer. if the polls are assuring an obama win as you libs are crowing about on this thread, why isn’t he attending to the world’s business, if not our’s?
Hey Dan,
“88.The polls count more Democrats because there ARE more people who self identify as Democrats.”
Could you please link a source for that statement? I spent a few minutes looking into it and found some conflicting data. Thanks.
matt
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/933/a-closer-look-at-the-parties-in-2008
Thanks for the link, Dan. I should have specified a RECENT poll proving your statement-not a poll from over four years ago. Did Pew crunch out 2012 numbers?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends
Because it is so predictable what regressives will say in the event of an Obama re-election and failure by regressives to substantially change the composition of Congress, we can already be identifying some likely post-election excuses as November approaches. Here are a few:
1. “The polls oversample Democrats” in pre-election speak translates into “There was widepread voter fraud and intimidation by Democrats” in post-election speak.
2. “The GOP would have won in a landslide if they’d nominated a ‘true conservative’ for president”.
Mitt Rmoney has called himself “severely conservative”, and he picked an Ayn Rand disciple as running mate. Has Mitt’s GOP base fallen for a lie that he’s told, or do most American voters want leaders even more regressive than Ayn Rand?
3. “The tea party is a huge silent majority”. If so, they must learn what actually effects change, and that playing dress up in tri-cornered hats and claiming that the founders would entirely endorse their prejudices does not.
4. “The mainstream media wanted Obama to be president”.
Which begs numerous questions: Are Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Forbes magazine, and the Richmond Times-Dispatch, among others, mainstream media, or outsider outlets? Why would media businesses want Obama to be president? Because they put politics over profits, or because they think they’ll see higher profits under Obama, or because they are such a diverse group of small business owners, or because they all know each other, or they’re all paid by the Obama campaign, or they are all much less intelligent than average, or…???
5. “The election results were bought by a few billionaires like Oprah and Soros”.
If that’s true, are Rove, Adelson, the Koch Bros., Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Finance, and the NRA simply lousy shoppers, and does their history indicate as much?
6. “Obama only got elected because he got the support of unions, blacks, gays, atheists, Muslims and welfare recipients.”
Mayberry’s demographics always were fictional. Always were.
I like to waste time making up assumptions and hypotheticals too warren.
hey dano, speaking of PEW Research, have you found any standards on their wesite which apply to “opinion Journalists?”
Here’s what Pew says about 2012 electorate:
September 15, 2012
“Among registered voters, 28% call themselves Republicans, a decline of five points since 2004 and only a point above a record low level of Republican self-identification in 16 years of polling by the Pew Research Center, found in March 2008. Nearly four-in-ten voters (38%) identify as Democrats and 34% self-identify as independents.”
http://pewresearch.org/databank/dailynumber/?NumberID=757
Pew
LOL. There’s no way in hell more people have switched to Democrat the past four years.
hey suzie, as usual, you are correct. Please note the following facts:
1. ol’ dano’s link takes you to some peeuu article based on 2008 data compared to 2004 data.
2. shrill’s link takes you to another peeuu article, also based on 2008 data compared to 2004 data.
hmmmm, i see a pattern here amongst the dimwit libssssss…the multiple sss’s represent’s the hissing sound which air makes as it’s emitted from buffoons…oops, i mean, balloons.
3. matt provided a Rasmussen link which shows the following:
good guys(repubs) bad guys(dems) undecided
August 2012 37.6% 33.3% 29.2%
August 2008 33.2% 41.6% 25.6%
Even dimwit libs can do the math.
Frank, here’s a Gallup link dated Sept. 6-9, 2012.
Republican 27%; Independents 36%; Democrats 35%; Republicans (including leaners) 42%; Democrats (including leaners) 51%.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
Keep in mind that Gallup typically leans Republican by 2 points.
This appears to be the most recent data available from any source. I expect you to shoot it down though because it doesn’t give you the answer you’d like.
You will also note the the spread appears to have widened recently, which is entirely understandable, given the obstructionist Republicans in Congress and the GOP candidates in the Republican primary selection process.
Heck, even the notoriously GOP-leaning Rasmussen has the Dems ahead a the “generic” Congressional ballot, based on the link matt provided.
Yo, Frank.
Good catch, but Rasmussen surveys 15,000 adults. Pew at least uses registered voters. Big diff, guy. I’ll leave it to you to figure out why the Republicans have made inroads with white voters, but I think we already know.
As indicated by most ill-informed’s and frank[s comments, RWers are working under the theory known as “Facts, Schmacks…who needs them?”
Rasmussen is a notoriously skewered toward republicans…so, like you and your ilk, I will ignore it as over-sampling of republicans…
However, as typical RWers, put your fingers in your ears and bellow, “lalalalalala” so you don’t have to “hear” the FACTS…
“Currently, 38 percent of Americans self-identify as independents, while 32 percent are Democrats and 24 percent are Republicans. But most independents lean toward one of the major parties”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0604/Pew-survey-Partisan-polarization-in-US-hits-25-year-high
Because you wish to ignore FACTS, it nevertheless does not make them go away…the compendium of polls looking at self-identifying by party, have come to the same conclusion…the republican party is steadily loosing people who call themselves republicans…they’ve lost the majority of women, minorities, and young people…and according to Rick Santorum, they’ve lost the smart Americans…
GOP – Grumpy Old People.
#96 Gosh, Frank, why the heck would you care that I outed Jeff Dolto’s double? BTW, that would be “braggArt.”
Keep in mind that Gallup typically leans Republican by 2 points.
LOL. Gallup is a leftwing poll. They have article after article why Republicans suck.
1. ol’ dano’s link takes you to some peeuu article based on 2008 data compared to 2004 data.
2. shrill’s link takes you to another peeuu article, also based on 2008 data compared to 2004 data.
Frank,
These folks apparently aren’t bright enough to review their own links.
Gallup leans GOP by 2 points. Rassmussen leans GOP by 3.9. And their predication in the 2010 Hawaii Senate race (that Inyoue would win it by 13 points) was widely off the mark. Inyoue’s MARGIN (not the percentage of votes he took) was 53 percent. Rassmussen was off by 40 points, which is the largest polling error recorded in a general election since 1998.
Art,
The point to take away from the Rasmussen link is “it’s also the largest number of Republicans ever recorded by Rasmussen Report since monthly tracking began in November 2002.” This was a self-identity/partisan trends poll. Now, you state that at least Pew uses registered voters. Well, that is not the case, at least according to the Pew poll that Shrilly references in post #109. “Currently, 38 percent of Americans self-identify as independents, while 32 percent are Democrats and 24 percent are Republicans.” Notice that it does not say registered voters or likely voters, it says Americans, just like Rasmussen’s poll. Also, at the bottom of Shrillary’s link is: “The (Pew)study is based on an April (2012) survey of 3,000 American adults, with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.” So, if Rasmussen conducts this monthly self-identity poll on 15,000 adults/Americans, and Pew conducts their monthly self-identity poll on 3,000 adults/Americans (according to the link Shrillary provided), then whose poll is more accurate?
most ill-informed @ 112: Unfortunately I read your post because I thought it might add illumination. Please forgive me for being wrong.
#112 “These folks apparently aren’t bright enough to review their own links.”
Talking about yourself again. Or steve nelson for that mater.
Shrilly, this is what you posted at #104:
“Here’s what Pew says about 2012 electorate:
September 15, 2012
“Among registered voters, 28% call themselves Republicans, a decline of five points since 2004 and only a point above a record low level of Republican self-identification in 16 years of polling by the Pew Research Center, found in March 2008. Nearly four-in-ten voters (38%) identify as Democrats and 34% self-identify as independents.”
http://pewresearch.org/databank/dailynumber/?NumberID=757
Now Shrill, notice that you used the date of Sept. 15, 2012, telling your readers that this poll was released today(either that or you like to start your comments by telling everyone today’s date…even though that’s already done by the blog). You also said “here’s what Pew says about the 2012 Electorate.” So, us silly RWers actually follow the link you provided, and yet are unable to find the year “2012″ mentioned a single time. Hmm, why is that? Well Shrill, that’s because the link you initially provided is/was comparing 2008 data to 2004. That’s because the report you cited was released in Oct 2008. So, you post a misleading report, stating it is from 2012 when it was actually from 2008, you get called out on it, and then say things like “As indicated by most ill-informed’s and frank[s comments, RWers are working under the theory known as “Facts, Schmacks…who needs them?” and “Because you wish to ignore FACTS, it nevertheless does not make them go away…” Well, Shrillary, WHO provided those facts? YOU did. WHO initially cited a report and made claims that it was from 2012, when it was from 2008? YOU did. Don’t blame others because you were caught providing misleading information.
As for your post at #109 in which you actually DO provide information for 2012 (April), it seems like Art and yourself have a lot to talk about. According to Art, since the poll you reference was only conducted on adults/Americans, and not registered voters, it’s full of crap and probably not accurate.
Matt,
Can’t speak for the others. I linked an ongoing Pew poll that has conducted 223 surveys and interviewed 300,000 registered voters over 21 years. I invite you to do some research on Scott Rasmussen’s background, it’s hardly non-partisan.
and more FACTS Shmacks for the cadre of closed minded RWers:
“Yet, the Republican Party’s growth has been limited in two important ways. First, the steep gains in GOP leaning that helped the party in the 2010 midterms have not continued, as the overall balance of partisan attachments has held steady in the first half of 2011. Second, while more independents say they “lean” toward the Republican Party, the GOP has not gained in actual party affiliation since 2008 — just 28% of registered voters, in both years, call themselves Republicans. Instead, the growth category continues to be political independents, with a record high 34% of registered voters choosing this label in 2011.”
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2067/2012-electorate-partisan-affiliations-gop-gains-white-voters
So follow the link and look at the chart depicting the loss of voters who identify as republicans – years 1990 through 2011 – maybe more comprehensible to those with low reading skills…you know, no big words…
Gee, Shrill, I think you made Matt all upset.
Dan,
From wiki:
1) “According to Politico, Rasmussen’s 2008 presidential-election polls “closely mirrored the election’s outcome.”
2) “At the end of the 2008 presidential election, there were eight national tracking polls and many other polls conducted on a regular basis. Polling analyst Nate Silver reviewed the tracking polls and said that while none were perfect, and Rasmussen was “frequently reputed to have a Republican lean”, the “house effect” in their tracking poll was small and “with its large sample size and high pollster rating [it] would probably be the one I’d want with me on a desert island.” After the election, Rasmussen’s poll was rated as the most accurate, when compared to various other final pre-election polls.”–I know Silver has flip-flopped on Rasmussen as of late, but there seem to be numerous reasons for this, not all of them being rooted in objectivity. And Silver’s own methodology has come under fire, even from Mark Blumenthal of Huffington Post and Pollster.com.
3) A quote from Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia posted on the Rasmussen homepage reads, “Rasmussen produces some of the most accurate and reliable polls in the country today.
4) Journalist Mickey Kaus (Democrat) said, “If you have a choice between Rasmussen and, say, the prestigious New York Times, go with Rasmussen.”
The 2010 Hawaii Senate debacle was bad, for sure. But I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge an entire polling firm on one bad poll, especially when that firm has a pretty good record when it comes to accuracy.
Just 28% of registered voters may be Republicans, but they make 90% of the noise and always think they are talking for everyone.
Art,
Your link was from July, 2011–so it won’t be as accurate as similar polls conducted today. But there are some interesting nuggets in your link, so let’s consider them, just for fun:
“As the country enters into the 2012 presidential election cycle, the electorate’s partisan affiliations have shifted significantly since Barack Obama won office nearly three years ago. In particular, the Democrats hold a much narrower edge than they did in 2008, particularly when the partisan leanings of independents are taken into account.”
“While the number identifying as Republicans has remained relatively flat (28% in both 2008 and 2011), more independent voters lean to the GOP than did so in 2008 (16% now, 11% then). When leaners are combined with partisans, Democrats only have a four-point advantage among registered voters – 47% of voters are Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party while 43% are Republicans or lean to the GOP. In 2008, Democrats held a 12 point advantage over Republicans (51% to 39%).”
“While Republican gains in leaned party identification span nearly all subgroups of whites, they are particularly pronounced among the young and poor. A seven-point Democratic advantage among whites under age 30 three years ago has turned into an 11-point GOP advantage today. And a 15-point Democratic advantage among whites earning less than $30,000 annually has swung to a slim four-point Republican edge today.”
“The Democratic Party’s advantage among young voters has declined from 28 points in 2008 to 13 in the first half of 2011. The Democrats’ edge among voters ages 30 to 64 also has narrowed (from 10 points to three points). And Republicans now hold a two-point lead among voters 65 and older (47% to 45%); Democrats held an eight-point lead among seniors in 2008 (49% to 41%).”
“Republican gains have been substantial among voters with family incomes under $75,000. Notably, Democrats held a 12-point advantage among middle income voters ($30,000-$74,999) in 2008, but now as many identify with the Republican Party as with the Democratic Party. Democrats continue to maintain their advantage among lower income voters, but it is smaller now than in 2008.”
“Unlike 2008, Republicans now have the advantage across virtually all groups of white voters. Most notably, Republicans now have an 11-point lead over Democrats (52% to 41%) among whites under the age of 30. In 2008, Democrats held a seven-point edge among this group (49% to 42%).”
“Democrats have lost their edge among lower income white voters. In 2008, Democrats had a 15 point lead among white voters with family incomes less than $30,000. Republicans now have a four-point edge among this group. The GOP’s lead among middle income white voters also has grown since 2008, and Republicans maintain a substantial advantage with higher income white voters.”
“The Millennial generation – those born after 1980 – were a topic of much discussion in the 2008 election. These young voters – the oldest turned 27 that year, and are turning 30 now – leaned Democratic by roughly two-to-one in the 2008 election, and their commitment to Barack Obama, and relatively high voter turnout, was a substantial factor in the election’s outcome. While these voters remain the most Democratically oriented generation today, the advantage has narrowed substantially since 2008. Currently, 52% of Millennial voters are Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party while 39% are Republicans or lean to the GOP. This 13-point edge is less than half the size of the 32-point edge Democrats held three years ago. Among voters in other generations, Democrats have lost adherents while Republicans have gained.”
1) If Democrats outnumber Republicans, then it make perfect polling sense to poll more Democrats than Republicans. Jesus, even the Republicans should WANT that — it gives them a more accurate picture of how their candidate is doing, rather than artificially inflated numbers. And that can help them adjust during the campaign.
2) The stats regarding white voters would be very important if only white were allowed to vote. There are some folks here in America who would like to see that. But it’s not the reality. Therefore, any edge the GOP has with white voters is meaningless in terms of the outcome.
Here’s a fun little exercise, which can tend to expose the “myth” you hear regarding electoral politics from conservatives such as Michael Howdyshell. (The point Michael like to make is that the Republican candidate usually wins more square miles of the nation. And that would make a difference if cows could vote. But they can’t.)
Go to this link on Real Clear Politics.
Near the top of the page in headline font you’ll see “General Election: Romney vs. Obama”
Below that, click on “Map with no toss-ups.”
This provides a pretty good picture of where things stand in each state right now, based on the AVERAGES of polls in those states.
Obama is winning in 26 of those states, and among them are the most populous in the country with the exception of Texas. Romney is ahead in 24; of those, 7 states have 10 or more electoral votes. Most of the rest have more cows than people.
In other words, not only does Obama presently seem to lead Romney 332 to 206 electoral votes (according to the map), Obama has the lead in more STATES as well — including Fla., New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, New York, Penn., Virginia, Illinois, California and Washington.
Here’s another way to look at it: If Romney wins ALL the states he’s currently leading in, PLUS by miracle California, Obama would still win re-election.
Or, let’s say Obama kept Calif in his column (which he most certainly will do). He can still afford to lose in Fla., Ohio and Wisconsin AND New Hampshire and still win the election.
It’s looking real tough for Romney.
Matt,
I read the link, thanks for refreshing my memory. You assume blind loyalty among Republicans and that they have nominated a viable candidate. You’re smarter than that. Ryan appeals to the fringe and Romney has no solid position, even party loyalists are begging for specifics. Then there is the matter of his tax returns, an issue that is not going to go away. You also assume the numbers have gone in your favor since 2011, but that has yet to be shown by an objective source. The only poll that matters occurs in November, and Obama has the power of the incumbency. You and your fellow GOP’rs ignore this at your peril. Nice chatting with you, have a pleasant evening.
Shrill,
You linked the same article as Art, from Pew in July of 2011. This poll was formed over 21 years with 300,000 total registered voters polled, for an average of just under 1,200 registered voters per month. Meanwhile, Rasmussen conducts the same poll on 15,000 adults per month. With voter registration being relatively high in the U.S., it’s fair to say that many of these “adults” would also be registered voters. Either way, on average, there would be more registered voters in the Rasmussen poll than the 1,200 in the Pew poll.
Now, in your last post you state: “So follow the link and look at the chart depicting the loss of voters who identify as republicans – years 1990 through 2011 – maybe more comprehensible to those with low reading skills…you know, no big words…”
Yes, let’s look at those chart(s), Shrill, because it appears you didn’t bother (again). Also, let’s include Democrats, since I noticed you failed to mention them at all in your post (I wonder why?).
1) Chart #1 is showing Changes in Party Identification from 1990-2011. Republicans went from 31% to 28% in that time period (-3). Democrats went from 36% to 34% in that time period (-2). Ohh, the horror! Look at the Republicans dropping like flies! Yep, in reality, over that 21 year period, there is a whopping 1 point difference between the two parties.
2) Chart #2 is showing Party Identification Including Leaners from 1990-2011. This chart shows Republicans going from 42% to 43% (+1), and Democrats going from 47% to $47% (+0), over the 21 years. Yikes!
And you told RWers to follow the charts, as they “maybe more comprehensible to those with low reading skills…you know, no big words…”
Shrill, you can’t even follow the charts properly…
The debate on the #s of Repubs vs. Dems started over the issue of alleged “oversampling” in certain polls we have seen recently. I’m not sure what, specifically, critic mean by that.
BUT, if they simply mean that more Dems were polled than Repubs, that seems justified by the Rew and Gallup polls. Because both of those suggest there are more people who self-identify as Dems than Repubs.
For Repubs to want EQUAL numbers polled, lacked equal numbers of each in the population, is the same as sticking their heads in the sand.
I’ve noticed that most of our right-wing friends would benefit from a remedial course in current events. They are long on rhetoric but short on substance, and if I want their opinion I’ll ask Hannity for it. Say goodnight, Art…
Gallup leans GOP by 2 points. Rassmussen leans GOP by 3.9. And their predication in the 2010 Hawaii Senate race (that Inyoue would win it by 13 points) was widely off the mark. Inyoue’s MARGIN (not the percentage of votes he took) was 53 percent. Rassmussen was off by 40 points, which is the largest polling error recorded in a general election since 1998.
Wow. Since 1998.
Actually leftwing Gallup completely missed the 1980 election by perhaps the largest margin on record. An October 24th, 25th, 26th, 1980, Gallup poll had Carter leading Reagan by; eight points. Reagan ended up winning by ten percentage points.
actually, gdud, you don’t need to capitalize the 2nd “a” in braggart.
hey art, yeah, the previously rational whites who voted obama in 2008 have since turned, and are coming out of the closet as racists…
matt, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
I didn’t even know that it was debatable about the numbers. Independents are the only segment of the political population showing measurable growth. Which way those Independents may lean is irrelevant; this is about branding. Democrats and Republicans both have stagnated as brands, and the numbers show that clearly.
You guys can play stat-jitsu all day long, but all it’s doing is highlighting the problem on BOTH ends of the spectrum.
BTW, if any numbers should be discarded when it comes to this debate, the statistical outliers on both ends should go. Discarding them because of their source is absurd. That’s not how you calculate trends in statistics.
I’ve noticed that most of our right-wing friends would benefit from a remedial course in current events.
Poodle is saying all those whites who voted 0bama in ’08 have suddenly turned racist.
3:57 A.M. and he hadn’t gone to bed yet. Is there an adult in that house?
…this has been a good thread, …full of libs having been hoisted on their own petards…
This has been a good thread … full of “conservatives” desperate to undermine polls that show their guy losing. They’ve proved that to them, sticking your head in the sand is a good antidote for grim reality.
Imagine if McDonald’s conducted their business that way. They would have folded long ago.
At last! A post from Frank ( aka gomer pyle) that doesn’t start with the word “hey”. I’m impressed Frank. Tryiong to dress up that image a bit huh?
hey J.M. White, I think the point MADE by Suzie, Matt, and I was that both dano and shrill, as they tried to “prove” their points, posted links to PEW research articles which were FOUR years out-of-date. Matt then posted a link to a more current Rasmussen article, which is up-to-date as of August of this year, and that appears is where the “games” began, as dano and shrill, and others, took issue with Rasmussen as a credible source.
Hey JM White, keep in mind that matt acknowledges (when he asked me for a link documenting there were more dems and repubs) that he did not ask me for a 2012 survey. After he finally did, I gave him Gallup (which leans GOP) and which is the most recent one available. Including leaners, it found the edge at about 51 dems, 41 repubs.
And today, as ever, Obama is leading nationally, crushing in the EC, and is widening his favorability gap over Rmoney. Strangely, the Rmoney strategery of making hay on the back of dead State department workers hasn’t worked out.
Fat lady’s singing. The GOP would be smart to start trying to save some house and senate seats.
oh man, dano… are you REALLY going with THAT? what a pathetic pretzel you’ve twisted yourself into! I don’t even think shrill would do that to HERself!
hey gdud, “hey” was absent because my comment was not pointed to one person. It is easily discerned from your posts that the pea-brain you have in your pin-head is not able to think.
sheesh, dave, I thought you were gdud! Gdud, I apologize! I was referring to Dave’s pea-brain in his pin-head, not yours!
Dano, you are right, I figured you would actually link a source that was current, not try and slide one by that was from over four years ago. Since you failed to provide a current source, I had to ask you for one. Either way, you finally provided the recent Gallup source (which I appreciate), and I provided Rasmussen (released a few weeks ago).
Dano, If you notice, I never trashed your source, or tried to undermine it as a polling firm. Art, Shrillary, and YOU all tried to trash/undermine my source. Regarding Pew, I only pointed out the differences in methodology between Pew and Rasmussen. Seeing this requires a person to be looking through an objective lens, and that’s not your bag, is it?
Frank,
If you’re right (thin as your evidence may be) and those who ID as repubs outnumber those who ID as dems, then the GOP will take White House in November, may take the Senate, and will increase their majority in the House.
I’m willing to wager a lunch that none of those things will happen. Are you?
Comment by matt — September 16, 2012 @ 2:59
Did you notice the red line in the chart called “Changes in Party Identification” ? The red line is the Republican’s plummeting in number of self identified republicans. Statistics work best when looked at longitudinally, so when the numbers are looked at over a long period of time, a PATTERN develops which one can only conclude – republicans are losing all but their base. Older white primarily males, blue collar workers who feel threatened in this economy,and an added mix of evangelicals is what remains in the republican party . That isn’t to say, the Democrats haven’t lost some voters – the high percentage of individuals who call themselves Independents had to come from both parties – however, republicans lost more voters than they gained.
So when you and most ill-informed decry using past years [oh the horror!] for comparison, it makes you both look unintelligent. As the US population has grown, conversely one would thing there would be a growth in the separate parties. The republicans have a negative growth rate. I didn’t say the Democrats’ numbers grew, but the point was that when polls are conducted, there will be MORE Democrats in the numbers, because there are simply more self-identifying Democrats, just as there will be more self identifying independents, although there is no such third party now.
Independents are partisan in their voting – because they still must choose between the republicans and the Democrats. In 2010 independents were comprised of more disenfranchised leaning republicans – therefore the republicans received more of the independents’ votes. That doesn’t appear to be the current trend with independents.
Framing the argument the way you do, and by ignoring the many studies of percentage-of-party-affiliation [most of which show a declining republican base ] doesn’t make the FACT that the
republican base is in free-fall. Once it was taken over by the teabaggers, moderate republicans fled the party or were driven from the party. Some went over to the Dems side, the majority called themselves independents.
This is not a numbers game, the percentages are what they are – however you wish to ignore them. If the republicans want to increase the number of self-identifying republicans, they will need a philosophical change that provides a “big tent” perspective. No party can win when they have such a narrow demographic as the current republican party has. And running from reality will not change the facts – whether by redirecting to one sentence in an entire study or declaring the use of longitudinal studies as not relevant – the facts show diminishing returns on republican party affiliation. Let’s not keep belaboring the point. I live in a reality based world, therefore trying to discuss a topic with one who doesn’t, is simply exhausting.
you offer a tempting wager, dano. but, i think that the issue was not which party was gonna win the potus, the senate, or grow a majority in the house.
the issue, as I understand it, was that the current data shows that self-identified repubs are growing, while self-identified dems are falling. in fact, there are likely lots of people who do what you do, and mis-self-identify their party, just to play with the polsters. …oh, i get it now, THAT’s whats been going on! …must be that more dems are falsely self-identifying as repubs, than repubs who are falsely self-identifying as dems!
i bet if some lib university think-tank will apply for whatever’s coming next in “job-creating stimulus funds” to study that phenomenon.
Frank, it’s no surprise you don’t want to wager lunch on those items. Of course, it’s because Dems outnumber Repubs and even you realize they’re sucker bets. You’re unwilling to put your money where you’re mouth is, and that’s understandable given the facts.
After the Dems keep the Senate, grow their numbers in the House, and after Obama is re-elected to the White House, I look forward to your analysis on how the Republican majority accomplished that.
KABOOM!!! (Sound of Frank’s head exploding.)
Here’s the why-Romney-is-tanking Quote of the Day:
“The Republican convention was a three-day display of what the Republican Party has become, and by the end of it, Americans viewed Romney, not just as an individual, but as the standard-bearer of his party. Only 36 percent of those who listened to or watched the Republican convention said that it made them more likely to vote for Romney, versus 46 percent less likely. As far back as 1984, there is no precedent for a convention that repels more voters than it attracts. Indeed, during the past three decades, national conventions have generated—on average—a positive response (more likely minus less likely) of 18 percentage points. So while the impact of the Democratic convention (plus 10) was below average, the Republicans managed to stage the least effective convention in modern political history.”
And to that I would add: Clint Eastwood rocks!
The Democrat keynote speaker should have addressed an empty suit. An apt analogy to Rmoney.
#149 Dan,
“After the Dems keep the Senate, grow their numbers in the House, and after Obama is re-elected to the White House, I look forward to your analysis on how the Republican majority accomplished that.”
Comment by Dan Casey — September 16, 2012 @ 3:00 pm
I’m going to start working on a concession speech template for Frank and (door)matt next week so they’ll be able to sound somewhat coherent after November 6th when their teabagger dreams get shattered.
It is funny that “polls” suddenly mean something when they show one’s candidate ahead.
I have said before, and will repeat, polls mean nothing at this point; the election is still too far out, and things can change in an instant, as we have seen this week. It will be interesting to see what happens when the truth comes out about this administration’s inept handling of protection for our diplomats, and our sovereign territory overseas.
“Leading from behind inevitably puts one man’s face in another’s rear”…
@151
The Republican apology tour has begun.
mike 0,
The Romney campaign (and American Crossroads and some other pro-Romney so-called “independent expenditure outfits) have pulled their ads from Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Why? It’s because of the polls in those places, and how far behind Romney/Ryan are in them. That told Romney, et al, that money spent in those states would be wasted, and that their cash could be much more effectively spent in states where the polls show the race is tighter, such as Florida and Virginia.
In other words, polls have some very profound meanings. Just ask the TV stations in Pa and Michigan! (Or those in Va and Fla, where the other cash has been redirected).
Frank @148 – You will never be accused of being the dumbest blogger, you are so over-qualified.
Speaking of Polls, VT has dropped out of both the AP & USA Today top 25.
hey shrill, thakns!
hey dave hicks, well i guess they should have. that was a sorry effort against a winless, un-ranked team, and the stinking starts with the coaches.
by the way, does anyone know where uva might be in the polls? also, where’s uva in the standings in the ACC Coastal Division?
how ’bout that Iggles game today!
mike O-
“It will be interesting to see what happens when the truth comes out about this administration’s inept handling of protection for our diplomats, and our sovereign territory overseas.”
Diplomatic missions, which include embassies and consulates, are not sovereign territory.
Yeah, only Shrill can sit there and accuse others of being dumb after she gets caught posting lies and failing to know the information contained in her own links. You’re a “special” kinda person, Shrill.
#162 matt – I really can’t spend any more time trying to teach you stats and how polls work…you can deny all you want this fact: “There is no intentional over-sampling of Democrats”. The links that Dan and I provided don’t match with your incorrect reading of the links. Fact is that there are MORE self-identifying Democrats, and LESS self-identifying republicans as demonstrated over and over by the links. When polling, the calls will be made to a pool of either RVs or LVs – because of the diminished number of republicans, they will be represented less often in the polls. If you do have a master’s degree, I don’t see it reflected in your posts. English is your first language, no? If not, then I completely understand your not comprehending the one fact indicated to you…less republicans, more democrats. Geez.
Hey Shrill, you can wear yourself out trying to explain it to them. But you will never be able to understand it for them. To a huge extent you’re dealing with a 2+2=5 crowd.
Smack them in the head four times and they still won’t get it.
No Shrill,
I shredded you on how you were incorrectly using your own links. I basically had to read your own links to you. I also caught you lying and intentionally providing false information. You bring up my education, which is common of people of your ilk. Well Shrill, your failure to even read your own links correctly and your attempt at selling the rest of us lies speak quite highly of your own education (or lack thereof).
Hey Dan,
“To a huge extent you’re dealing with a 2+2=5 crowd.”
Is that like 2012=2008?? Lol.
Why I’m not taking any bets:
http://tinyurl.com/8rlje57
**
Obama’s Lead in the Polls is Not a Historical Anomaly
Ilya Somin • September 17, 2012 10:45 am
Ever since Obama established a narrow but clear edge in the polls after the Democratic Convention, conservative commentators such as Niall Ferguson, Andrew McCarthy, John Hinderaker, and Peter Robinson have claimed that this is a unusual historical anomaly explicable only by Romney’s poor campaign strategy or lack of personal appeal, or by some sort of transformation of the electorate in a left-wing direction. They assume, as Hinderaker puts it, that “this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans” because of the poor state of the economy.
In reality, however, standard economic models of presidential election outcomes all point to a close race, for reasons I explained in this post [ http://tinyurl.com/8jj8672 ]. Larry Sabato’s recent summary [ http://tinyurl.com/8d76wpu ] of the predictions of 13 standard election models relying primarily on economic variables also points to a close race with a small edge to Obama. On average, the models predict that he will get 50.2% of the two-party vote. A crude summary of the reasons why the models come out this way is that 1) there has been some improvement in economic conditions since 2008, even if a modest one and 2) things were pretty bad in 2008 to begin with, which leads some swing voters to blame Bush and the GOP for the slow pace of the recovery as much or more than Obama and the Democrats.
SNIP
The bottom line is that if Obama is overperforming historical expectations, it is only by a slight margin. Similarly, Mitt Romney is doing at most only slightly worse than historical averages would predict – unless you want to argue that Obama is running a highly incompetent campaign that has somehow been offset by even greater incompetence on Romney’s part. We can’t categorically rule that possibility out. But I think it’s pretty obvious that the Obama campaign has displayed at least average levels of competence, if not better.
SNIP
**
Comment by matt — September 17, 2012 @ 11:56 am
matt, matt, matt – you really need to get a handle on your delusions…when I link to information, because you don’t want to believe it, well, that’s your problem and certainly doesn’t make it a lie. Those were not my statistics – did you even bother looking at the chart I keep pointing you toward? It shows FEWER REPUBLICANS… I won’t be posting to you again, you are too dense to grasp the concept…yikes!
Shrill,
You are a fool. I essentially read YOUR chart(s) to YOU, because you didn’t understand it. Let’s try this again, even though I already explained all of this to you several posts ago (why do you keep asking if I’ve read the chart?) Are you just pretending to have missed my posts? The first chart does show fewer Republicans over that time period, and it shows Democrats dropping by almost the exact same percentage. The repubs dropped by 3 points, the dems dropped by 2 points. FAIL. The second chart, when leaners are included, shows Democrats remaining flat while Republicans gained a point in identification. FAIL. Of course, this was AFTER you linked an article from 2008, and then wrote the date of Sept 15, 2012 over top of it(lying), making anyone who read your post believe that those stats were current, and not four years old.
matt – the DATE of the linked article was September. The author used some data from previous elections including 2008….please go A W A Y you are seriously making my IQ drop.
and matt – here is a poll you might be able to understand…
NBC/WSJ poll: Obama leads Romney nationally by 5 points
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/18/13944838-nbcwsj-poll-obama-leads-romney-nationally-by-5-points?lite
No Shrill,
All of the data in your link was from 2008, yet you stated “Here’s what Pew says about the 2012 electorate: September 15, 2012.” As I said many posts ago, the year 2012 was never mentioned in your link-not ONCE. That’s because it was comparing 2008 data to 2004, from an article released in Oct 2008. You then attributed a false date to the article and also gave an intentionally misleading statement as to the article’s take on the current electorate. You did that, not me.