What do you know, a decent Party ID and Romney is pulling ahead nationally — ABC/Washington Post

Despite this being a Battleground State blog, I have hammered the national polls when they come out with unrealistic surveys and pass them off as credible.  ABC just released its national tracking poll in conjunction with the Washington Post with a party ID of D +4 (Dem 34, Rep 30, Ind 31).  In 2008 party ID was D +7 (Dem 39, Rep 32, Ind 29).  For my tastes it is still too high since I think the electorate will be D +2 but this is more than acceptable for cuffing the national electorate.  With a reasonable balance in party identification ABC finds Mitt Romney leading by 3-points and kissing the all important 50% mark at 50 to 47.


  • Romney leads on handling the economy 52 to 43
  • Who can better handle foreign affairs? Obama leads by only 1-point 48 to 47
  • Who can help the middle-class? Obama only leads by 5-points 50 to 45

The debates effectively killed Obama:

  • By a broad 47-10 percent, independents say the debates left them with a better rather than a worse impression of Romney. In the same group, by contrast, just 17 percent say their impression of Obama improved – and 26 percent say it got worse.


  • Romney leads with men by 17, 57 to 40 — an 18-point swing from 2008
  • Obama leads with women by 15, 56 to 41 — +2 for Obama vs 2008
  • Youth vote: Obama leads 61 to 35 — an 8-point swing from 2008
  • Seniors: Romney leads 56 to 39 — a 9-point swing from 2008
  • White: Romney leads 59 to 38 — a 9-point swing from 2008
  • Hispanics: Obama leads 79 to 18, +1 for Obama vs 2008
  • Romney leads with Independents by at least 19 points, 57 to 38. Obama won Independents by 8-points in 2008 — a 27-point swing from 2008


  1. valleyforge
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    “these economic measures…reflect movement in Romney’s direction almost exclusively among white men, and particularly among less-educated white men.”

    Bodes well for Ohio and the rest of the Rust Belt.

    • PeterJ
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It is possible though that the overall national numbers need to be a couple points higher for Romney, as in leading by 5+, for the effect to carry over to the rust belt which was partially bought out by the auto bailout. It would be nice if these national polls broke it down by state/region as well.

      Re the auto bailout beneficiaries, Romney needs to make the case that they only got a temporary reprieve and there will be no more coming regardless of who wins. And that by letting the weakest company die (GM) the way it is supposed to happen in a free market, the other auto companies will be stronger long-term (and presumably union rules require hiring of union members from defunct companies in preference to other first time hires).

      Romney also needs to make the case that the gap is not between the teeny percentage of millionaires and those making only a little above minimum wage, but precisely the distance between those coddled union wages and barely above minimum. And that the way it works is that by creating better jobs where an extra $10/hour means almost doubling one’s income, that in turn leads to them buying more cars and helping the auto industry. Instead the bailed-out wage earners just trickle down part of their income to maintain the status quo for lower wage earners when only they are “bailed out”.

      • Todd
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

        The Henry Ford example.

    • AussieMarcus
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Plus a nice little “Romney only won cause of the dumb white trash redneck vote!!” handle for Lefties to console themselves with.

  2. Tom
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Mitt-mentum. I say yet again as I have on a number of posts on this blog. Romney will win with 350+ electoral votes. For those of you who will dissent, I say in advance that I agree that we disagree 🙂

    • Dogfish
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Tom, I sure hope you are right. When I hear about the Democrat ‘Ground Game’ that instantly translates to Democrat ‘Voter Fraud’. After seeing what the Democrats did in Minnesota with Al Fraken, you know they will do ANYTHING to retain power.

      I’ll be happy with Romney getting 271

    • allthingsgeography1
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:45 pm | Permalink | Reply

      If that happens, I’ll get on Facebook and call it the “Romney Revolution”…then go to bed, so I don’t have to watch the ensuing electoral bloodbath.

      • Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

        Gotta stay awake for awhile… the Obamatons are supposed to riot and all that.

        I understand there’s a “2 in the trunk,, 1 on the hood” limit this time.

  3. Blackcloud
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

    If Romney can stay at 50 through the weekend in this, Ras, and Gallup, it’ll set the media agenda for the Sunday shows since they’ll be talking about how Romney’s at 50 heading into the last full week of the campaign. That’s big, I think.

  4. JGS
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

    There is zero chance that Romney wins nationally by 3 points (or, for that matter, by 1 point) and loses Ohio. Here are the results from the last three Presidential cycles. In 2008, Obama was +4.59% in Ohio, vs. +7.27% nationally, a spread in favor of the Republican Presidential candidate of 2.68% (comparing Ohio performance to national performance). In 2004, Bush won Ohio by 2.12%, vs. 1.47% nationally, a spread in favor of the Republican of 0.65%. In 2000, Bush won Ohio by 3.51%, while Gore won the popular vote by 0.51%, a spread in favor of the Republican candidate of 4.02%. Ohio votes more Republican than the nation as a whole, and while Democrats can work on their “early voting” and try to create a false sense of momentum, it would seem that they are simply cannibalizing their election-day vote performance by doing so. There is every reason for confidence in Ohio, as the national polls (except for IBD/TIPP) are now pretty consistently showing a 2-3% lead in favor of Romney over a multi-day period.

    • No Tribe
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Give TIPP to Sun/Mon for the high Obama numbers to drop off and it will be just as strongly Romney.

  5. Eric
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Obama has known for a while that he’s going to lose. It won’t be close. They’ve purchased a luxury home in Oahu to move the family to next year. Michelle Obama’s mother has been excited about moving to Hawaii and has been telling her friends about it. Also, young Obama staffers have been contacting staffing agencies in Chicago for employment next year.

    Just look at the way Obama was acting in the last debate. Does that look like a confident man? He was desperately trying to change the trajectory of the race. Romney looked calm and in control. Ignore the spin. 12 days until he’s done. We just need to keep an eye on what Obama might do before Mitt Romney takes over in January.

    • Dave
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’d take some secret service duty at O’s new house in Oahu!

    • Dave
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Kind of agreed. If you take a look at that, the debate performance, only a supremely confident person plays it safe in the last debate, and a less confident person takes agressive risks like Obama did in the last debate. That was telling. Still, hard to believe given all the protection and support by the establishment Obama has received over the year. Then, take a look at their travels and where the money is being spent by both candidates. Again, Obama trying to shore up his base and play defense and Romney playing offense. Then there is the background chatter of finger pointing at Bill Clinton (see article in NY Time today and The Hills analysis of it — linked on RCP) and reports of pulling up leaving states and so forth (true or not — is it really all RNC conspiracy?). And then you have a logical anlysis of the situation like the kind provide by this site confirmed by poll numbers coming out slowly. Still, anything can happen in a race this close but if Obama knows he’s winning then why all the last minute agressiveness, risky appearances on the tonight show (Michelle on Kimel’s — more free air time) and negative background chatter, etc? A hail mary? Is that something you do a couple weeks before the election if you’re confident of your chances? Dunno. Maybe in a close race. Then you have reports of Treasury Secretary leaving “regardless” of the outcome, Bernanke saying this is it for him and generally and impoortant figures that helped shaped Obamas economic policies, leaving.

      Still I am skeptical of the establishment. They obviously have a preference and have been using their power to try and get Obama elected the honest way — persuading people, propaganda, to vote. That’s all there is to explain the massive effort by the MSM this election cycle to support Obama. I can’t remember anything quite like it. But if that doesn’t work then there are perhaps other ways. There is a pot full of $$$$ at stake and that usually attracts a lot of people who refuse to play by the rules — Chicago politics at its finest. Republicans should be good at that game too so perhaps the net effect is a wash but there seems to be an awful lot of institutional support for Obama that even the power behind the GOPmay not be able to overcome.

      Romney needs to win big.

  6. damien
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    38 percent white…

  7. Eric
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Democrats are going to hate Ohioans when the votes are counted Nov. 6th. They’ve placed all their hopes on Ohio. They’re going to hate the state when it votes for Romney.

  8. No Tribe
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It’s a model with 75% white. Obama’s campaign will be complaining shortly…

  9. Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    CNN had an article this morning on their site the headline of “is 40% the magic number for Obama” talking about he needs (especially with depressed ethnic enthusiasm) to hit or exceed his 2008 40% support among whites. They mentioned him being under 40% in most polls and that could be problematic.

    Funny how all we heard for a while now is GOP is dead because they can’t appeal to minorities, whites don’t matter, etc. While true the GOP has to appeal to minorities I think it will come with some softening of stupid social positions held by the GOp platform.

    But nationally speaking…I am with what Keith and many others have said and that is it is very hard to imagine Romney up in the majority of national polls by more than 2 points and lose the election. That would be epic in terms of history. Bush lost the popular by a scant margin. Hard to think Romney could win by a full couple points and still lose.

    • SpiritOF1776
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

      What exactly is so stupid about the GOP platform on social issues?

      • Dave
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

        If you’re trying to appeal to minorities and a broad base of moderates, there are some.

    • Morse Fan
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 11:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

      People assume minorities are liberal/moderate on social issues. It depends what “social issues” mean. Many are very pro-life, disproportionately religious, etc. Moderating on some issues may not have the electoral benefit one might think.

  10. Pete
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    47% That’s a number that has been in the news alot lately. Lots of polls with Obama at 47% as well. Hmmmmm

    • Pete
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Someone posted this at Ace of Spades:

      Via RCP, Obama’s vote share in the most recent polls:

      Average: 47

      AP: 45
      Ras: 47
      ABC: 47
      IBD: 47
      Gallup: 47
      Monmouth: 45
      NBC: 47
      CBS: 48
      Zogby: 50
      Politico: 47

    • Morse Fan
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 11:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

      In many ways, Mitt Romney’s campaign looks a lot wiser now than it did a few months ago as some things have turned out to seem more prescient than one might have thought then. Even 47 percent!

  11. Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Romney +3 nationally means NH, IA and NV go to Romney. Maybe even WI. Romney +3 means Romney doesnt even need OH, although Romney +3 means Ohio also goes Romney.

    Sitting president at 47% less than two weeks from election = DOOM!

    Challenger at 50% less than two weeks from election = president-elect.

    • Tom
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      100% correct greymarch

    • fab4gal
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I concur.

    • No Tribe
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It would have to be an epic collapse for Romney to lose at this point. Unprecedented at the national level. I guess you could go back to Dewey vs Truman, but the comparison isn’t too apt. Romney’s campaign script has played out perfectly.

      • Porchlight
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

        If it turns out that Obama’s share of the vote is 47%…so Romney was right about that number…that is going to really mess with their heads. Ouch.

  12. Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It seems most pollsters are conceding defeat nationally and using reasonable looking samples to show Romney’s ahead.

    Some of them are still playing funny buggers in the state polls though, to maintain the meme of “Romney winning national vote but losing EC!!”. But that will change.

    • spottedreptile
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “Funny buggers” is such a delightful Australianism! Good to hear from a fellow Aussie. I happen to think Romney will win the EC and popular vote quite comfortably, and suddenly all the anti-EC stuff from the Left will go away.

  13. JAS
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’m wondering about the psychology of these polls. PPP for example put out two perfectly timed polls showing that Obama is tied in North Carolina and ahead by four in Colorado. Assuming that those polls are bunk, as they probably are, what advantage does Obama get from them? Won’t the psychology on Election Day, no matter what, be that this race is too close to call, so show up to vote if you care who wins? Whether Obama is up by four in Colorado (per PPP) or down by, four (per Rasmussen), will that really affect the results on Election Day?

    • fab4gal
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is an interesting question. Campaigns sometimes go one way, then the other. One campaign will try the “Oh no we’re losing, you need to get out and vote!” in hopes it will turn things around. But then others try the “We’re winning, it’s inevitable” tone to also hope they turn things around. I honestly don’t know if either tactic works. Honestly though, I think with 12 days to go, there is nothing Obama can do at this point to win. He can’t give 23 million people jobs and put food on their tables in 12 days so he’s done.

      • spottedreptile
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

        Well, after the Gloria Allred disaster came crashing down in flames around him today, he’s got nuthin’ left.

      • wholefoodsrepublican
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

        he can attack a country in self-defense (dictators do that to unite the masses). he can cancel student loans. he can reveal something unsavory about romney… the bigger the margin of victory. the more likely the senate will flip. the less likely cheating will have an affect.

    • JGS
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well, for one things, the bogus PPP poll in NC was sufficient to cause RCP to re-classify the state from “Leans Romney” to “Toss-Up” (which had the effect of changing the RCP electoral college figures, excluding toss-up states, from 206-201 in favor of Romney, to 201-191 in favor of Obama). Yes, I know, it’s all meaningless, but I believe that it is solely on account of the bogus PPP poll in NC, and the equally bogus Time poll from yesterday afternoon showing Obama +5 in Ohio (but with a D+9 sample), that the trading price on Intrade has moved up today from the 55-45 range for Obama vs. Romney to the current 62.5-37.5 price. And all on account of two completely flawed polls with oversampled Democrats and other methodological problems pointed out well on this site.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

        Yep. The whole point is to change the RCP average to make it look like O still wins. RCP edits what they post and don’t post too. I never saw the Susquehanna Mitt +4 PA poll on RCP, nor have I seen either of the two recent polls showing Akin leading in MO senate, instead they’ve only posted ones with Claire M… however you spell it ahead.

    • Ron
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Just watched ABCNews with Diane Sawyer on the new poll. If you blinked your eyes, you would have missed it. She characterized the poll as “showing the race extremely close” and immediately turned to the reporter in OH who announced Obama was “slightly ahead.” They then showed several clips of Obama making his pitch, one while being witty on Jay Leno’s show, none at all of Romney making any kind of pitch at all. The media isn’t giving an inch. Not that it matters. The public is on to them.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

        And the Nate Silver’s and others with their mocking “HA! Stupid GOP, the race is over! Obama is still the most popular person ever and there’s 0 chance for Mitt to beat him;” Remember this: the left always claims they are going to win every time. I remember the MSM saying Gore would win, saying for sure Kerry would win, etc.

      • Dave
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

        They are skilled porpagandists and put that on display every night…NBC, ABC and CNN…Comcast/GE, Disney, Time Warner.. the worst.

  14. Tom
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 5:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    What will be the excuses on election night for obama loss? My guess is RACISM! Who agrees/disagrees?

    • fab4gal
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Obama is half white and was raised by his white grandparents. The racism card is BORING.

    • No Tribe
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I don’t see it happening. People are going to blame his 1st debate performance. I have not noticed that card being used since that time as much. Although, with articles being written about Obama’s lack of white vote, it could be coming….

      • Tom
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

        You must not be watching MSNBC. However that is a good thing. Keeps you sane.

      • No Tribe
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

        lol, only when I have too. They have about 11% of the cable news market, which translates into a couple of percentages of the population being exposed.

      • Eric
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

        I’m going to watch MSNBC Nov. 6th. First and last time probably. Have to see that meltdown. They actually believe that Obama is going to win! LOL

      • Tom
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

        Lets say the MSNBC viewers translates to about 1%. See they ARE the 1%! LOL.

    • Dogfish
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Tom, agree… it will be RACISM that Tingle Matthews and the others at MSNBC will be screaming.

      The other dinosoar media talking heads that are less maniacal will say that it is the economy and that Obama just didn’t get his message out. They will be wrong, but that will be the rationale.

      • Tom
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

        I think you are correct. The left never understands or just refuses to look in the mirror. It’s only the conservative message and record that fail, never the socialist one.

    • Dave
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You’re starting to see this chatter show up on CNN website…cries that it will be the racist whites that defeat Obama. Funny that he beat a white man (and women) last time by an AMPLE margin and if you look at polling numbers by race now, you see more whites as a percentage of the race-based voting block voting Obama than blacks and hispanics voting for Romney. Who appears to be more sensitive to race?

  15. No Tribe
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Today’s poll results:

    1st tier:

    R+3 – 50/47 – Rasmussen
    R+3 – 50/47 – WaPost
    R+3 – 50/47 – Gallup
    R+2 – 47/45 – AP
    O+2 – 45/47 – TIPP

    Romney’s advantage is back to 2% overall again. Last 4 days lead: 0,2,1,2. His average, at 48.4 is the highest to date. Obama, at 46.6 has dropped slightly.

    2nd tier (internet and partisan):

    R+1 – 47/46 – IPSOS
    O+1 – 48/49 – PPP
    R+2 – 47/49 – UPI
    O+5 – 45/50 – RAND

    The 2nd tier is for informational thought on what Nate Silver, TPM, and HuffPo have been reduced to relying upon in order to show an Obama lead. Who would have known that he’d be reduced to internet polling and obscure betting parlors for his correlative evidence.

    • PeterJ
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

      In line with my reply above, Nate et al. are going to say that the national number level for Romney is not yet sufficient to lift all the battleground state boats, especially in the face of contrary state by state polling. And that early voting has diminished the capacity for election day Romney vote total wins to actually win those states. I suspect there is some truth to that and that Romney needs to be +5 or better nationally consistently and have awesome turnout for it to translate to the states that actually matter. Otherwise it is just padding his margins in states he is sure to take anyway.

      • Eric
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

        That’s one of the most ignorant comments I’ve ever read. If a candidate wins the popular vote by more than 1%, then they’ll carry the states necessary to win. This whole bogus theory that Obama is better in battleground states is false. It’s based on the faulty assumption that Obama leads in Ohio. Newsflash! He’s behind in Ohio. The Ohio polls show a 2% lead for Obama, but they are based on a turnout of DEM+8. Turnout in Ohio in 2008 was DEM+5. It was REP+1 in 2010. It’s going to be closer to 2010 than 2008, and even if it was 2008 Obama would still lose.

        Obama’s hope for winning is holding New Hampshire, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Nevada. He has to win all of them to win. He’s not going to win Ohio unless Romney’s campaign falls apart in the next 12 days.

      • JGS
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

        I’ve never quite understood this. Romney is not campaigning in CA, NY, IL, MA, or NJ, five enormous states where Obama will rack up huge margins in his favor. (These 5 states accounted for about 25% of the 2008 vote.) Same for less populous, but still significant in population, WA, OR, CT, MD, DE etc. But no one ever seems to talk about Obama “just padding his margins in states he is sure to take anyway.”

      • Eric
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

        The states campaigns don’t really affect the states by more than a few points. Most of the movement in a state is affected by the national environment. Obama can blanket a state with ads as much as he likes. It’ll only gain him 2 or 3 points. Every state isn’t an independent entity. They all move in the same general direction, and most of vote in a state is determined by the demographics of the state.

      • damien
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

        if romney wins by more than 2% he wins the ec…if you really think its 5 then thats on you

      • Michel Daoud
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

        But what about the Ras Ohio poll that has the race tied at 48% with Republicans +1. Doesn’t that worry anyone else? If Romney is truly ahead, wouldn’t it show up in that poll?

        I’m going crazy over Ohio, someone settle me down.

  16. mchlgregg
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

    What’s the skinny on the new NBCNews Poll numbers that were just released:

    New NBC/WSJ/Marist polls: NV: Obama 50%, Romney 47% among LVs; CO: Obama 48%, Romney 48% among LVs

    • fab4gal
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’ve read that a lot of pollsters put people who have been confirmed as already voting (i.e. early voters) in the “likely voters” category. Since early voters are largely Democrats, this explains the oversampling of democrats in all these polls.

    • JGS
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The Colorado poll has a sample that is D+1, vs. R+1 in 2008 and R+8 in 2004 — so it is 2 points more Democratic even than the 2008 election which will not be replicated in 2012. Even if you adjusted the sample to R+1 (and not something closer to 2004 or halfway between 2004 and 2008), it would be a Romney 2-point lead in Colorado.

      The NV poll had a margin of D+6 (39 D, 33 R, 28 I). In 2008 it was D +8 (Dem 38 Rep 30, Ind 32) and in 2004 it was R +4. Most people think that NV has become more D since 2004, but also it seems unlikely that it will again be anything like D+8 in 2012. So who knows whether D+6 is fair or note. Rasmussen also has Romney down 3 in NV so probably still an uphill climb there.

      • fab4gal
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

        “Even if you adjusted the sample to R+1 (and not something closer to 2004 or halfway between 2004 and 2008), it would be a Romney 2-point lead in Colorado.”
        Exactly. So to say CO is tied is ridiculous.

      • WillBest
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

        You can’t quibble over D+1 vs. R+1, you have no idea what the CO electorate will look like, and its a plausible number as any. Also a tie in CO is consistent with Ras Rom+4 so you can’t really just go an chuck this thing because you don’t like some internals that have 5% MoE.

    • Dave
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Guaranteed that state poll gets a 3 minute spot on the NBC nightly news. LOL.

  17. allthingsgeography1
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I think it’s hard to know what states who will win based on the national polling. Obviously if the average were something large like +5-10, you could estimate, but +2-3 is hard to tell. Depends on where the votes are actually coming from to fill up the national poll. The state polls are what ultimately matter, everything else is just extra. If we make adjustments considering we believe may be a reasonable Party-ID (and I think halfway between 2004 and 2008 is reasonable), what we have a competitive race but one which appears to me to be leaning Romney’s way. But I certainly think as long as the polls are within the margin of error, Ohio is still a toss up, although I’d believe Romney is probably leading marginally. Historically, Ohio has voted more Republican than the electorate as a whole, but something may very well be different in this election, perhaps related to the things Obama has done for the Rust Belt or less suburban swing voters for Romney to capitalize on or whatever. There’s a reason why Ohio is a tough nut to crack this time. Even the norms can be broken once in a while. Romney has the advantage, but I still think it may be a long election night with close races in multiple states…at least based on what I see as of tonight.

  18. dizzymisslizzzy
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Whenever I start panicking, I always come here to read and I feel better:)

  19. Missing 5%
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Dem 34% Rep 31% Ind 30%

    = 95%

    What about us????

  20. damien
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    5:34 PM EDT triumph wrote:
    So basically, Romney changed from conservative (in order to win the nomination) to centrist (in order to win the election).
    What happens if he actually wins?
    Which Romney will we get?

    5:35 PM EDT EmJayEs responds:
    The one that’s not Obama.

    Classic smackdown on intrade earlier today

  21. PeterJ
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 6:49 pm | Permalink | Reply


    Everything is a probability that can go either way to some degree, when Romney is not ahead outside the margin of error. While I don’t buy 538’s methodology they do make some reasonable arguments on concepts, but not necessarily on application of same. And I am not saying that Obama is ahead in all those battleground states including OH. But rather that absent a lot of polls consistently showing him ahead above the MOE, any one state is still in fact a tossup, including OH. Obviously all can change in the next week and a half.

    Rasmussen just came out with PA +5 for Obama. Obviously I would rather Susquehanna be right instead (assuming there has not been some groundswell for Obama between the two polls which is unlikely). So you almost have to make the case that not only is Rasmussen more accurate than others in general, but in fact is understating Romney’s support in general by a couple points or so for PA to be positive for Romney.

    I guess I am discounting some, but only some, of the analysis of party turnout figures because I think there is a large margin of uncertainty due to some voters seeming propensity to easily shift affiliation every so often. I mean going back and forth not just between R and D, but between either and undecided. Let’s face it, most of us here and in the other camp likely vote straight ticket. But many “undecideds” constantly seem to be shifting from undecided to leaner to certain one way or the other.

    BTW, the biggest LOL of Nate’s model lately is in his handling of PPP as has been mentioned here before, and in refiguring so-called house effects of various polling firms like PPP in the runup, instead of after the election when such effects, if they exist, could more reasonably be calculated.

    Again my point is that regardless of problems in polling methodology, a statistical MOE does exist for even the most accurate polls and thus there is more uncertainty that seems obvious when the current margin is not outside that MOE. This is a hugely complicated issue, i.e. handicapping shifting sentiments on the way to election day, with a lot of moving parts. And I don’t think we can on the one hand bash Nate’s specific (and surely pro-Obama) choices of methodology, without also realizing that our own also have a greater or lesser degree of inherent uncertainty.

    • jeff
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Actually if you look at past history. Ras doesnt exactly have a stellar record of calling the statewwide elections. In fact hrs been way off in some of his state polling for 2010, I honrestly believe that Romneys internals show a very close race in PA.

      • WillBest
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

        Ras has as good as track record as any on the national vote. And if he is off by 1 again and its really Rom+2 then Romney just won the election.

    • Eric
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yeah I agree with you that Nate’s model is completely inaccurate. There’s a degree of uncertainty of where the race currently is. I think it’s Romney leading by 3-4% right now, but it could be anywhere between 1-6%. What I look at are things like Obama’s demeanor in that last debate. That’s the look of a candidate who knows that they are behind and has to shake it up. Romney looked like he knew he was ahead.

      As far as turnout models. Yeah we don’t know with any certainty, but we can make reasonable guesses. Rasmussen has been polling on partisan identification since early 2004. Their recent polling for right now has a greater advantage for Republicans than in the history of their poll, and it’s not even particularly close. They’ve been accurate in the past too.

      In 2004 they had D+1, it was even turnout
      In 2006 D+6. Actual was D+2
      In 2008 D+7. Actual was D+7
      In 2010 D+3. Actual was Even.

      It looks like they are good at measuring turnout in presidential years and they are off by about 3 points (favoring Democrats) in midterm elections. That makes sense because midterms have a more Republican and lower turnout.

      For August, they have R+4.3. September was R+2.6. Polls today look more like they did in August than September, so it’s likely that today’s electorate is somewhere around R+4. They would have to be off by such a huge number that they entire firm is discredited and out of business for Obama to win this election.

      Turnout needs to be somewhere around D+5 or better for Democrats in order for Obama to win. Republicans always win more crossover voters than Democrats do and independents are favoring Romney right now.

      That has all the makings of a blowout. It’s not in the bag yet merely because things can change in 12 days, but if the trajectory remains the same for the next couple of weeks, Romney’s going to win going away.

      Once you understand that, then Obama’s demeanor in the debate makes sense. I was ecstatic when I saw the debate Monday night because I saw both Romney and Obama’s style and strategy confirming everything that I’ve been postulating about the state of the race. I also read today that the Obama’s have purchased a large home in Hawaii to move to next year. Sounds about right.

      Keep working. Keep praying. But it’s going to take a miracle for Obama to win this thing.

      • Dave Ped
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

        Could not agree more.

        1.Rasmussen part ID numbers R+4 2.Enthusiam gap R+14. 3.Romney up +10 or more with indies = lights out for Obama.

        I took a look at those numbers and they have been accurate and even R outperformed. I am thinking based on these numbers that this will be a R+4 election. If anything it has kept building since 2010. We will see soon enough.

  22. housebroken dad
    Posted October 25, 2012 at 7:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Even if you wanted to be conservative with predicting the ’12 electorate, it’s not going to be any worse than 50/50 D/R. Something like 36/36/28 looks very plausible.

    • allthingsgeography1
      Posted October 25, 2012 at 8:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      If R+2-5 panned out in the national electorate, I wonder how the state-level electoral votes would pan out…

      • Dave Ped
        Posted October 25, 2012 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

        They would look like Bush 04 but to the R moreso. I think it will look like Bush HW first election in 1988.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: