Early Ballots, Youth Vote and Cannibals

Karl Rove has his usual data driven column in the Wall Street Journal that sheds great light on both the national picture and most importantly the Battleground State of Ohio.  Since this blog is all about the Battlegrounds and only the Battlegrouds we will focus on that portion of the column. Rove hits on three key issues that will likely decide the Ohio vote. First, in 2008 President Obama lost the election day vote in Ohio to John McCain but banked so many votes in early voting he carried the state by solid margins. For the final two points it is important to recall that nearly all Obama/Biden campaign stops are on college campus.  This is designed to achieve two important goals.  First, engage a key demographic for Obama whose support has flagged this election cycle.  The second is to energize this low-propensity demographic to cast their vote again for Obama without cannibalizing votes the campaign was already certain to gain.  In each one of the above facets in the Ohio vote, President Obama re-election effort is failing miserably:

Early voting

Adrian Gray, who oversaw the Bush 2004 voter-contact operation and is now a policy analyst for a New York investment firm, makes the point that as of Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot. That’s down 181,275 from four years ago. But 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot, up 75,858 from the last presidential election. That 257,133-vote swing almost wipes out Mr. Obama’s 2008 Ohio victory margin of 262,224. Since most observers expect Republicans to win Election Day turnout, these early vote numbers point toward a Romney victory in Ohio. They are also evidence that Scott Jennings, my former White House colleague and now Romney Ohio campaign director, was accurate when he told me that the Buckeye GOP effort is larger than the massive Bush 2004 get-out-the-vote operation.

The youth vote

Democrats explain away those numbers by saying that they are turning out new young Ohio voters. But I asked Kelly Nallen, the America Crossroads data maven, about this. She points out that there are 12,612 GOP “millennials” (voters aged 18-29) who’ve voted early compared with 9,501 Democratic millennials.


Are Democrats bringing out episodic voters who might not otherwise turn out? Not according to Ms. Nallen. She says that about 90% of each party’s early voters so far had also voted in three of the past four Ohio elections. Democrats also suggest they are bringing Obama-leaning independents to polls. But since Mr. Romney has led among independents in nine of the 13 Ohio polls conducted since the first debate, the likelihood is that the GOP is doing as good a job in turning out their independent supporters as Democrats are in turning out theirs.


  1. Kyle F
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Finally Some good news!!!!

    • tmcvei
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Question … Is early Democratic voting down 181,000 from the same date las election or from the total of early votes cast before election day. If it is compared to total early votes the entire 181,000 could still be cast in the last 6 days.

  2. Ranger375
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Seems credible to me.

  3. Medicine Man
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It is called objective perspective. It is why RR is pretty much keeping th eye on the ball. FLA, VA, OH and one more (CO probably).IA,NV,NH and one wildcard of WI. Throw some $$ at MI, Penn, and MN and see what sticks..

    • Jim S.
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

      From Mitt’s perspective if he can lock down 270 by sticking with the “key 4” FL-VA-OH-CO you do that, because you have to remember that three of those states have important Senate races as well.If Mitt wins the presidency and can help flip 2 out of those three senate races(being realistic) he only needs to net one more senate seat from MT,NE,ND,WI,MO,IN,NV,MA,CT to have both houses.

  4. Jim S.
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Wow at those young voter stats. Also, given the increased GOP enthusiasm/intensity this cycle you have to imagine Romney carries election day OH at an even larger margin than McCain did.

    • Ron
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:11 am | Permalink | Reply

      This explains why Obama went on the comedy talk shows, did a “my first time” sex ad, used the slangy b.s. term–all in an attempt to jack up the youth vote. He’s got the minorities, more or less. But the kids are turned off. He needs them turning out in record numbers or he’s toast.

  5. No Tribe
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Updated schedule appearances:


    Tue/23rd: Florida, Ohio
    Wed/24th: Iowa, Colorado, Nevada
    Thur/25th: Florida, Virginia, Ohio
    Fri/26th: – (DC)
    Sat/27th: New Hampshire
    Sun/28th: – DC
    Mon/29th: Florida, Ohio
    Tue/30th: – (DC)
    Wed/31st: – (DC, New Jersey)
    Thur/1st: Wisconsin, Nevada, Colorado, Ohio
    Fri/2nd: Ohio, Ohio
    Sat/3rd: Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Virginia
    Sun/4th: New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, Colorado

    Tue/23rd: Nevada, Colorado
    Wed/24th: Nevada, Iowa
    Thur/25th: Ohio, Ohio, Ohio
    Fri/26th: Iowa, Ohio
    Sat/27th: Florida
    Sun/28th: Ohio, Ohio, Ohio
    Mon/29th: Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin
    Tue/30th: – (Ohio)
    Wed/31st: Florida, Florida, Florida
    Thur/1st: Virginia, Virginia, Virginia
    Fri/2nd: Wisconsin, Ohio, Ohio
    Sat/3rd: New Hampshire, Colorado, Colorado
    Mon/5th: New Hampshire

    Just one more open day for Obama, on the 5th, where does he go? For Romney, all day on the 4th (one more trip to Nevada?) and then all of the 5th leading up to NH. Probably a 4-stop day on both the 4th and 5th for Romney.

    • Brad
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think it’s interesting Mitt isn’t going to be in OH after Friday.

      • No Tribe
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Permalink

        Princeton elections and the betting markets. LOL. My guess is you don’t even know the correlation of RDI with results over the past 4 cycles, right? They don’t teach about that there…

      • No Tribe
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Permalink

        Brad, that was meant for the troll cbr66 below.

      • jeff
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Permalink

        Because the numbers dont lie. The absentee early votes advantage that Obama had in 2008 has vanished. In order for Obama to win Ohio he would have to exceed the turnout advantage of 2008. Thats not going to happen. Romney is going to destroy Obama on election day. Remember Mcaine beat Obama by a margin of 140000 but lost because of Obamas overwhelming absentee vote margin which has been wiped out. The writings on the walln The numbers dont lie. Romney will win Ohio and the guys at Chicago know this as well.

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

        I’m thinking Ohio should turn out well for Romney. Rove did a good job of going over the numbers and McCain got more votes there on election day. Then there’s the independent swing, even if the indies are even. I doubt they are and think they’ll go Romney by at least 10. You win indies, you win Ohio. The Democrats need a massive election day turnout which is something they actually aren’t great at. I think Romney is fairly confident in Ohio.

    • Medicine Man
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Is it me, or does Obama’s schedule look like someone who is behind? (Going to 4 different states in one day?)

      • Dan
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

        me thinks it is because he is…behind.

      • cbr66
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

        Do you even look at the polls, fivethirtyeight,, Princeton Elections, and betting markets? Do you really think the entire world is trying to pull a fast one on you? When this is over I hope you take a hard look at the people who are spewing this misinformation to you and think hard about the lies they have been telling you. If I am wrong I promise to do the same. It is not a conspiracy. Obama is winning. Get used to it, It will not be the end of America, I promise.

      • No Tribe
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

        That can’t be what they envisioned a month ago, that’s for sure. They have been flailing for quite a while. The only surprise I had with Romney is that he was able to scale back on Virginia to just one day thus far. That’s pretty amazing considering where it was a month ago. And that he added New Hampshire so late– I didn’t see that one coming. Is he really taking Sunday off?

      • stuckinmass
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

        fivethirtyeight has a track rerecord of one election. The iversity of Colorado model has correctly predicted every election since 1980. it has Romney winning by a significant margin

      • Svigor
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

        CBR, an 0bama win is of course entirely possible and easy to imagine. Trouble is, I don’t think it’s going to happen. The polls on which an 0bama win is being predicated stink to high heaven. Simply put, it looks to a lot of people like a lot of garbage polls are creating a GIGO model; garbage in, garbage out. Please look at the polls and explain them to us. Me? I can’t make any sense out of these polls. It’s NOT that they’re telling me 0bama will win and I disbelieve. I’m neither Republican, nor conservative, though I am rooting for Romney, and I do have little more than contempt for the 0. So I’m not all “go team go!” here. No, the problem is the polls don’t make any sense. It’s like when the headline of an article contradicts the body.

        On the other hand, if you can believe:

        1) 0bama will significantly improve on his 2008 performance.
        2) 0bama will significantly improve on his 2008 performance while losing indies by 10 points.
        3) 0bama will significantly improve on his 2008 performance while losing indies by 10 points and Romney won’t improve on McCain’s 2008 performance.

        Then hey, go forth and prosper, young man.

      • Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:46 am | Permalink

        It is my understanding the university of colorado model is relatively new but retroactively correctly nailed all the races back to 80. Meaning they havent been doing it for 32 yrs but ysung their methodology plugging in tne numbers from each presidential year their system then hit it nearly dead on.

      • Porchlight
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 7:42 am | Permalink

        That is my understanding as well re: the UC model (Bickers and Berry). Plus, the professors involved look too young to have been doing this since 1980. However, I’ve also read about them making changes to the model over the years. The reporting on this isn’t particularly clear.

    • William Jefferson Jr.
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Obama’s November 4th looks like a nightmare.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

      There’s talk of 1-2 Romney appearances in Penn. Sunday i guess with nothing scheduled would be the obvious day.

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

        I guess when you play on blue turf, you can talk about stuff like that even if you really don’t mean it or not.

  6. Ron
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It comes down to real numbers rather than pollsters’ fantasies. OH early voting is clearly a wash. That leaves the big turnout on Nov. 6 for the win.

    • MikeP
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I wouldn’t call it a “wash”, but it’s clearly quite a bit down. Obama currently has a 82,500 advantage (Roughly may translate to a 1.6 advantage). From now until election day, that number may grow a some to 140,000 ( just a gut feeling). My guess is that Romney will surpass that on E-day, ( by guess Romney will have a 165,000 to 240,000 advantage on election day, considering John McCain had roughly a 100,000 vote victory on E day in 2008).
      Overall feeling quite good about those early voting numbers.

      • jeff
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

        Actually Rove calculates the Democratic absentee advantage will be neglible by election day and tjrres evidence that the rste for Dems is slowimg as e day approaches.

    • jeff
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Exactly and Obama would need to exceed the 2008 turnout to win Ohio on election day.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think the Obama absentee and early advantage is negated by the indies going to Romney in early voting. It’ll be near even with the GOP turning out in big numbers on election day. The Democrats, not so much. They couldn’t match the GOP in turnout on election day in 2008 when the GOP didn’t have a great GOTV machine in place. Now they do and took a play from Obama, getting the low propensity voters out early. Obama did the opposite, likely in an attempt to post big numbers to discourage Republicans from voting.

      This election for Obama has always been about disheartening his opposition because he has no accomplishments to run on.

    • MikeP
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:06 am | Permalink | Reply

      Well 140,000+ may end up a being a little generous to Obama and I do except Romney to very significantly exceed McCains E-Day advantage.

  7. Gary Maggard
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I live in Va …in the Southwestern part…..there are tons of RR signs but just a couple OB …we are motivated here …Obama has waged war on coal and coal miners and their families are mad as heck!! I hope other states will rally with us Virginians and vote for RR!!!

    • Tara
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I live in Loudoun County, Northern VA which went for Obama by 11pts in 2008. Hardly any OB yard signs or bumper stickers to be seen. It’s Romney country in 2012!!

      • easternimm
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

        good luck! VA is a must for RR…

      • Dogfish
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:10 am | Permalink

        Tara, since you live in Va, do you have any insight you would be willing to share about the Allen/Kaine race.

        I think Romney will become president (great!!), but we also need a Republican Senate.

        Any thoughts about Allen’s chances?

      • Jeff
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:55 am | Permalink

        Like Tara, I also live in Loudoun, and agree with the assessment on the R/R signs vs. Obama. The Kaine/Allen race .. phew .. that one will be REAL CLOSE. Maybe Romney can drag Allen across the finish line with him, but its no guarantee.

    • ed
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I love coal!!!!

    • Dogfish
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:09 am | Permalink | Reply

      Gary, since you live in Va, do you have any insight you would be willing to share about the Allen/Kaine race.

      I think Romney will become president (great!!), but we also need a Republican Senate.

      Any thoughts about Allen’s chances?

  8. Avenging Angel
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

    RCP has added a National Journal poll which takes away Romney’s edge in the poll . Await your opinion

    • John
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This pole was discussed at length earlier today. It is based on assumption of D+8 electorate and almost certainly bogus.

      • edtitan77
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:48 am | Permalink

        Jay Cost destroyed it earlier, same firm did Pew poll on same days and came up with 5 pt difference.

        Since the consumer of the poll is NJ, a liberal publication well draw your own conclusion.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

      just ignore any polls where Obama is ahead, they are skewed and have bad samples

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

        Finally, Peter has gotten with the program (or he has looked past the top line results). Welcome sir to statistics 101. Next lesson we will discuss the meaning of a P value.

      • Pa John
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

        What’s a 47% er doing on this fantastic blog?

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

        I don’t know about statistics 101, but in statistics 1 they explain how Ras totally messed up in the 2000 election and why you shouldn’t simply check their current website to know what he did in the past.

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Permalink

        We keep him around for fun. He is our emotional punching bag..

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:13 pm | Permalink

        Past 2 elections…he sure gotten it right since then…r we going to start this again? We know you hate the guy for some odd reason (he is bald or whatever)…but PRESIDENTAL elections SINCE 2000..which would be 04 and 08 he was done quite well.

        I don’t just look at Rass, I look at Gallup and Pew, Indies and voter enthusiasm. Also look at RECENT prior accuracy (thru respected independent ranking of pollsters).

        Anyway Peter, I could say the sky is blue and you would say pink and it wouldn’t matter. At least I’m humble enough to admit when I’m wrong. After Tuesday, you will be one of those somewhat cranky, liberal trolls that we won’t hear from again….or maybe in 4…

        God Bless you sir

      • Svigor
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:31 pm | Permalink

        Funny how the sarcasm is the truest thing he’s said so far…

      • live_free290248
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:20 pm | Permalink

        Peter, it’s really funny to read the comments. Any and every poll that looks good for Obama is wrong, and the ones that favor Romney is right on the money. Every single poll in Ohio except one shows Obama leading, but guess what, all those are wrong except one. There will be a lot of crying come election day. This blog has pretty much given up on blogging the polls excepting a couple that shows “good news.” You read some of the comments here and it’s like an alternate universe where math does not exist. By the way, I think Romney can win, but Obama has a much better chance of re-election.

        The sad thing is all the people misinforming the masses will not pay a price. It will be as if they never said it, called it wrong and purposely distort. Look at Dick Morris as your example. He gets it wrong all the time, and is still given a platform. It’s amazing.

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

        Here’s the thing Peter and live_free: over 30% of Colorado has already voted and Republicans lead Democrats by 35,000 in ballots cast. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Obama is even, much less leading, Colorado independents and the McCain counties are massively overperforming. It is nearly impossible to come back from that unless the geographic distribution of votes counted is uneven (not the case here) or Dems get the big surge on election day (they don’t). Colorado is just about over.

        Despite this, the last time I checked (two days ago), intrade had Obama winning Colorado, two liberal prediction gurus did as well and some polls showed him ahead. YOU DON’T NEED POLLS OR PREDICTION MARKETS WHEN YOU HAVE RESULTS. Your team is down two touchdowns and you are talking about the pre-game spread. The reason you two are citing polls is because the results in Ohio, Florida, Colorado, Virginia and possibly Wisconsin and Iowa show Obama getting his behind kicked.

        And you’re right: the sad thing is that the people misinforming the masses (i.e. Nate Silver) will pay no price whatsoever. I have graduate degrees in statistics and the law (Nate has a B.A. in econ), have forgotten more about politics and statistics than Nate ever knew, was running a campaign when Nate was 6 and called 2010 far more accurately than he did (I did not prognosticate 2008 because I was running a campaign). Notwithstanding this, the NYT will keep featuring him, because he feeds their masses what the NYT wants them to hear.

      • MikeP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:30 am | Permalink

        To be fair, historically, polls can be systematically wrong (especially state polls). Most state polls rcp averages underestimated Obama lead in 2008 ( in some cases by a lot). I don’t believe these polls were “biased” for McCain or the Republicans, rather i think polls have a harder measuring voter enthusiasm.
        This might be happening to a milder degree in 2012 (except the Republican Candidate has the enthusiasm advantage). Considering that there was roughly a 6 pt in democratic swing from 2004 to 2008 (when Democrats had the enthusiam advantage), I don’t see a 5 pt swing back to the GOP that unreasonable when they a enthusiasm advantage greater then they had in 2004. A D+2 is almost 3 points better the they have on the average party ID poll….. enough to easily tilt the election to Romney.

  9. Dan
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I love the smell of data in the evening. Smells like…

  10. TheTorch
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here we go…


    • William Jefferson Jr.
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Powerful Senator up for re-election? Or maybe not up for re-election.

      • TheTorch
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:40 pm | Permalink

        Apparently a democratic senator, according to Ace of Spades?

      • GV
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

        Since it’s on Drudge and Daily Caller I guess it’d have to be a Democrat? And probably up for re-election, that would explain the timing.

    • margaret
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It’s a Dem Senator. It’s obvious from Drudge’s photo placement as well. Drudge is on our side (luckily). He makes a wicked enemy.

      • William Jefferson Jr.
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

        Feinstein? How old is she?

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

        I think I know the Senator. The only clue I’ll give is it involves a prominent political journalist and the race is unfortunately not close (i.e. the scandal is unlikely to affect the race). Think West Side Story …

        Addendum: I just read Ace’s story (http://minx.cc/?post=334468). If he’s right then I’m wrong fwiw.

      • cbr66
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

        If it is on drudge it must be true. It was so informative when they played that old Obama speach. Do you remember? the one that they played in 2008. NOT!

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Permalink


      • TheTorch
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

        Menendez – NJ

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:31 pm | Permalink

        Is he considered powerful?

      • Svigor
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

        CBR, what does that post mean? Some of us are old fuddy-duddies and don’t speak kid.

      • Mike D.
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

        West Side Story: MARIA!. Maria Cantwell, of Washington! Do I get a prize?

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

        If it turned out to be true, I would have refunded your annual membership fee. So you have that going for you…

      • Svigor
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

        I’m not much on conspiracy theory, but a sex scandal could be a wag-the-dog thing to suck the air out of any Benghazi comeback. Clinton bombed people to get off the news.

      • RhodyKev
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

        Sherrod Brown would be a stroke of luck

      • Mike D.
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:05 pm | Permalink

        That and a Romney victory would more than satisfy me, Mr. Backer!

      • Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:29 am | Permalink

        Aw i figured it was more about sex lawsuit filed against McCaskills husbands company…guess not.
        This will get little attention, Carlson shot his wad with the supposed Obama racist speech, he got blasted for that will be ignored on this except by nutball Hannity (cant stand him or savage).

  11. stuckinmass
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    a good summary of things to keep in mind!

    also look at how much Obama’s lead has slipped in the “safe” blue states. how can that happen but yet the swing states aren’t moving? it doesnt seem likely.

    its been a day of crap polls because the more credible polls are on hiatus due to Sandy

  12. valleyforge
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Big news: Pew just confirmed that Romney leads early voters nationwide by 7 points, same margin as Gallup reported yesterday.

    Of course they buried the lede under a heading “Neither side has ground game edge”.

    They report 19% of RVs have already voted (as of Sunday) and of those Romney leads 50-43 with 7% somehow not knowing how they voted. Overall they are tied 47-47 among all LVs.

    It’s one thing to blow off Gallup as an outlier, but you can’t ignore two of the best pollsters in the business reporting the same thing one day apart.

    It’s official: Romney is winning thexearly by 7% to date.

  13. Paul8148
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Dems are slowing down this week in early voting in Cleveland. 4 years ago they were gaining stream in week 2.

    • edtitan77
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      You only can elect the first black prez once.

  14. M. White
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Rasmussen on Hannity….Electorate D+2 overall, Independants going for Romney nationally by 7-8 points. Likely win in NC, FL, VA, not sure about Ohio or Wisconsin. He states that he doesn’t know who will in, and he said if anyone thinks they know they are crazy. At least he isn’t saying Obama!

    • jeff
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Of course he knows or has a pretty good idea whose going to win but its good for business to keep it close.

  15. M. White
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

    But reading between the lines, I think he may think Romney will win by a small margin!

  16. M. White
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Please read this column about Ohio, it really puts into perspective!

  17. Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    “Mr. Romney has led among independents in nine of the 13 Ohio polls conducted since the first debate.”

    I’d love to sort those polls by time, and see how independents have trended over the past month. I remember one recent poll where Obama lead with Ohioan independents, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the “9/13” ratio became more favorable to Romney if we only took polls from the second half of the month, once the R/R momentum was in full swing.

    Just the fact that Obama’s early-voting lead has shrunk makes me VERY optimistic. Go Romney!

    • valleyforge
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think Jay Cost had tweeted it was actually 15 out of 19 where Romney led Indys by an average of 12 points, and two of the 4 outliers were CNN polls.

    • Porchlight
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 7:49 am | Permalink | Reply

      Actually I think Romney has been winning indies in most polls for quite a while, since August at least. Some of the ones where Obama wins them are quite recent. So timeliness doesn’t really factor in. But Romney wins indies in the vast majority of the polls, both in OH and nationwide.

  18. John
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    If Scott says electorate is D+2 is that how Ras weights their polls? Not that much different from many out there then.

  19. M. White
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Very different…most polls are weighing with D+5-9, so that can mean 3-7 percent difference, however Gallup makes it clear the electorate is R+3. If Scott Rasmussen is weighting with D+2, Romney still wins since he is winning the independants by 7-8%. Other polls are weighting D+5,6,7,8,9, so of course it will show Obama leading by a couple of points. Most of these polls are ridiculous and amounts to voter depression and suppression. Dems are always accusing Republicans with this but they do it way more and in ways that are not always visible to the common voter. Only when you study the polls do you see the bias. They want Republicans and Independants to see the polls with Obama leading so they will think twice about wasting their time to vote since the other guy is winning. It’s a great technique, but don’t think it will work this time because so many sites are available to the public now such as this one and there are many conservative websites and Fox News where people can find out the truth. If the media had done their job on Libya, Obama would not even have a chane at this election but they chose to ignore it, although if it were a Republican, they would have crucified him.

    • No Tribe
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Right, I think Rasmussen knows he’ll still be right with that model in his predictions. Any word as to when Gallup and TIPP turn back on? I expect TIPP to revert to the Gallup DRI, as they have done in the past, the last couple of days of the election.

    • easternimm
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

      election 101: do not believe the polls. go vote irrespective of what the polls say.

  20. jvnvch
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I think Rove is being a little on the conservative side, but can’t blame him for that. I’ll take 51-48 and 279 happily, if that’s how it turns out.

    • Ron
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Michael Barone made the point that the midterm party House election closely correlates with presidential election results two years later–unless the president changes course.

      In 1998, the popular vote for the House was 49 percent to 48 percent Republican. In 2000, the popular vote for president was 48 percent to 48 percent.

      In 2002, the popular vote for the House was 51 percent to 46 percent Republican. In 2004, the popular vote for president was 51 percent to 48 percent Republican.

      In 2006, the popular vote for the House was 53 percent to 45 percent Democratic. In 2008, the popular vote for president was 53 percent to 46 percent Democratic.

      In 2010 the popular vote for the House was 52 percent to 45 percent Republican. Right now that’s the ratio in favor of Romney in early voting according to Gallup. It’s also close to the final result predicted by Battleground Poll and now by Rove.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

        If that’s true “the polls” are WAY off

      • jvnvch
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:57 am | Permalink

        Seven points is also the lead Romney has in early voting according to Pew. In 2008 Pew had Obama with a 19 point lead in early voting. It all seems to portend a Romney victory.

      • Porchlight
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 7:57 am | Permalink

        If you tell this to a Dem they will say “yeah, what about 1996?” 1996 is the exception because after 1994 Clinton saw which way the wind was blowing and agreed to some of the GOP reforms. These were popular so it saved his skin. Obama is not as smart as Clinton. Since 1996 the rule holds.

  21. Fred S
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Bob Beckel followed Karl Rove’s segment on O’Reilly and offered that Rove’s EV numbers showing a 257,000 swing to Reps from 2008 is flawed. He claims that there are still 5 days of EV and that Dems bring most of their EV in late and those numbers will increase the current 82,000 Dem advantage. Mike P mentioned above that he thinks this could increase to 140,000. In the Nevada model (which I thought applied throughout the Dem ground game) the Dems banked most of their EV votes earlier rather than later. IMO, Beckel is trying to spin a very bad sign for Obama. O’Reilly was too busy making a fuss over Beckel’s suspenders to challenge him on this.

    I know there have been some knowledgeable posters about Ohio on this blog. Anyone have any insights on how the EV mix will change in the last five days?

    • Medicine Man
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Permalink | Reply


      • Bryan
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:27 pm | Permalink

        I’ve been watching that chart, as well as the absentee ballots by city report in Cuyahoga. Two days ago, there were 160,000 EV/AB, yesterday, about 170,000, and today’s report showed 196,000 EV/AB. Confusingly, those numbers also include early voters showing up at the polls. So, while it looks like the number of people showing up to EV is lagging a bit behind last year, today’s jump in the overall # is a little worrisome. Unfortunately, I’m not aware of any site that compares last years EV/AB numbers to last year in Cuyahoga county, rather than just the EV numbers, which are pretty small in relation to the whole. It would be nice to know that info.

    • jeff
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Some one posted that the request for absentees for Dems has actually slowed in Cleveland rather than acceleratedn A bad sign for Obama if true.

    • Tom
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m here in Ohio and dems usually get the EV vote out early, not late. That is why Obama is in big trouble. He needs to be up around 15% with the absentee vote by Election Day to have a chance because we conservatives vote in droves on Election Day. Romney should win ED by 7-8% and since 66% of all votes are cast on ED that gives him a big advantage. Bottom line-if Obama isn’t up by at least 250,000 going into ED he will lose Ohio.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:14 pm | Permalink

        What are the present numbers there? Haven’t heard much.

      • Porchlight
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:54 am | Permalink

        Check the top of the page in the main post. Looks pretty good so far.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Democrats here in FL usually get the early voting done as early as possible. Don’t know if it works like that in Ohio, but the GOP ballots and votes come back a little later.

  22. Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Repubs apparently won Washoe again today.

  23. Paul8148
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Wednesday, Oct 31 = 7,679
    Dems = 2,841 Reps = 3,128

    Washoe numbers

    • No Tribe
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The two counties to follow in Nevada are Washoe and Carson City. If Romney flips those two, he’s flipped the two that went Bush/Obama. It doesn’t mean he’ll win because Bush barely won, but he’s in the right position for it to happen.

      Republicans out-voted Democrats in Carson City in week 1, by a margin of 4628 to 3368.

  24. No Tribe
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Rove makes the point I adhere to about Obama’s final average. Past presidents had a range of Bush (1.7), Clinton (1.2) and Bush I(.5) increase from their final number. Taking the average, 1.1% and add it to his current numbers:

    RCP: 47.4
    HuffPo: 47.1
    TPM: 47.4

    There’s no way around seeing that Obama would have to defy the historical trend by a percentage unprecedented to even get to 49 percent.

    • No Tribe
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

      And just to close the loop here for the Nate Silver followers. 538 is predicting that Obama will wind up at 50.5% a gain of 3.1% to 3.4% over the three tracking polls. A doubling of the largest instance in the sample. That’s not statistics, that’s partisan wish-casting.

      • Medicine Man
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

        So he is eking out a popular vote win?..but a clear EV win…so really when he means a 77.457% change of O being re-elected, he really means 50.5%.

      • Remember the Alamo!
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

        One of the reasons why I moved to Texas was that my heart simply couldn’t take all of this electoral nail-biting. Romney will win Texas by circa 60% to 40%.

        And Ted Cruz, a Tea Party US Senate candidate for the Republicans, will track with that number nicely.

        I love Ohio, and I hope they give Romney/Ryan the win, but My heart is in Texas!

      • M.Remmerde
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

        If you run the numbers on 538’s undecided breakout, he’s basically predicting these late undecideds to go 4:1 for the incumbent.

        That simply has never happened. Ever.

      • Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:25 am | Permalink

        The 538 77% forecast is for the EC. His popular vote forescast is a squeaker at 50.5

    • William Jefferson Jr.
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Rove’s numbers are with respect to Gallup’s last poll for the candidates.
      W’s final poll was 49 (50.7% on election day)
      Clinton’s final poll was 48 (49.2% on election day)
      H.W. Bush’s final poll was 37% (37.5% on election day)

      What Rove neglected to mention is that these guys lost a few points in the final days of the campaign. Bush was at 51% one week out; Clinton polled at 52% 5 days before the election. George H.W. Bush was at 40% a few days before the election. So Obama’s 46% on Gallup is hardly his bottom. He could go lower in the closing days.

  25. mchlgregg
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Reblogged this on Michael Gregg.

  26. Mike D.
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    So the party identification differential in early voting in 2008 was, according these numbers, 14% (57%D-43%R). In 2012, we have a differential of 8% (54%D-46%R). That is a 6% shift away from the Democrats. If anybody was still taking these D+8% polls seriously, they can stop.

  27. johnfisher
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Dateline: DES MOINES, IA


    GOP leads both DEM and INDY in CASTING of early votes — on a % basis.

    GOP — 84% requested ballots cast

    DEM — 81% requested ballots cast

    INDY — 75% requested ballots cast

    • John
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is a good sign for enthusiasim but because Dems requested 82,000 more ballots statewide they have also returned 50,000 more. Through yesterday, Dems have returned 232,462 Reps 171,272 and Ind 127,620. Data available here: http://sos.iowa.gov/elections/pdf/2012/general/absenteestats.pdf No conclusion can be drawn from this the way I see it.

      • bman77
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

        Maybe I’m getting my states mixed up, but I believe it has been indicated that if the early voting gap in Iowa Is 60k or less by election day then Romney is in good shape.

    • Svigor
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks, I’ve been looking for some good news about Iowa. I’ve been paying so much attention to Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, and North Carolina that I haven’t seen much on Iowa.

  28. Brad Jones
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:45 pm | Permalink | Reply

    GOP wins Washoe again

  29. Matt
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 10:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It seems like several of Rove’s claims are based off of Ms. Nallen’s information. Who is she and what kind of data does she have access to? Her numbers are quite specific. Just curious.

  30. C-Bus GOP
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Transmitting from on the ground in Ohio:

    I wouldn’t get too charged up just yet about the diminishing numbers on the Cuyahoga county website (as linked above in post #21). Parts of Sandy actually hit up as far as the great lakes, and there was a great big wind surge across Lake Erie which knocked out power to many in Cuyahoga county especially right near the lake/downtown. This likely accounts for some of the diminished turnout. Through last week, the early in-person voting was actually a bit ahead of last election.

    If the trend holds again tommorow, then we may be on to something (weather is improving, things are getting back to normal). However all in all this is a small number and even if Obama rallies to meet or exceed last election’s Cuyahoga county in-person early vote totals, I don’t think it helps his case. This year all in all there are a lot fewer dems and a mildly increased number of GOP in Cuyahoga county. As Rove said above Obama’s early voting is cannibalizing his election day turnout so if he gets them in early all that may do is decrease his number on election day.

    As I have said before and will say again: I am on the ground here around Columbus, I have lived here my whole life (40 years). I have been a political junkie since high school. I have intently followed every election since 1988, mainly from the Ohio perspective.

    I am telling you – Romney is winning this state.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Good info. Thanks

    • EpiphoneKnight
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Rasmussen got it right along with Scripps in ’04 when everyone else got it wrong. Rasmussen is making the call for Mitt 50-48 this time. Can they be the desert rose again?

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

      No where near the resume of you, but I’m originally from Ohio (Elyria) and have a lot of family up there. Heard the same from them – Romney is winning Ohio. My uncle in Sheffield Lake (Lorain County, just west of Cuyahoga – my home county) has said the Romney support is strong in Lorain. That is a county won by Obama last time. I found it funny earlier in the campaign how Obama was in Elyria on the same day Romney was in Lorain (port north of Elyria on the Black River). That told me that Romney was targeting an attempt to swing Lorain County. I also think Lake County to the east of Cleveland may swing. Also think the Mahoning Valley area may swing and expect Cincinnati and Dayton to go Romney.

      I’d be interested in your take, but I think that Lucas, Cuyahoga, and Franklin Counties are the only sure bets for Obama and he’ll win there by less than he did in 2008. Thoughts?

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:31 am | Permalink

        Romney will win Franklin (flip). Cuts hogs and Lucas won by O with smaller margins vs 2008

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

        I mean cuyahoga not cuts hogs

    • Christopher
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 3:18 am | Permalink | Reply

      Thank you! Nothing like boots on the ground…..

    • Fred S
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:01 am | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks C-bus. That is encouraging news from someone on the ground.

    • Posted November 1, 2012 at 8:25 am | Permalink | Reply

      Update from SW Ohio….
      I have been working in GOP HQ in Miami county. I have met hundreds of people and spoke with hundreds more on the phone. Dems, Ind & GOP all speak the same… they have had enough! We are completely out of yard signs, bumper stickers, etc… The sign saturation in Miami county and the surounding counties is unbelievable! But take signs for what they are worth and really not a true indicator of results to come. I give much credit to the Romney Ground game here. We have had volunteers working relentlessly for months! This includes our phone bank as well! Commenting on Dayton (Montgomery county) will be tough to call. The inner city of Dayton will probably go blue, but Huber Heights, Kettering, Centerville will be pushing hard to be red. I agree with Cincinnati (Hamilton) along with Butler and Warren counties going red as well. We also have a Romney staffer in our office, which has been working with groung game volunteers and provides me with information that he is able to share. Any stats or numbers I can share align with other posts already seen. The Buckeye State will go to R&R!

  31. Tall Guy
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Rick Barry was the NBA’s second all time leader in free throw percentage, because he used a underhanded shooting style known to children everywhere as the “Sissy shot”. Since Barry retired, not a single NBA player has tried the Sissy shot, despite the fact that quite a few would benefit. Shaquille O’neal (a horrible FT shooter) once admitted that he would probably score more points if he let Barry teach him but he would never do it because he didn’t want to look stupid. I’m actually sort of shocked that Shaq said out loud what I’m sure nearly every NBA player has thought to themselves.

    Karl Rove would fit in very well in today’s NBA. Looking like a winner is far more important than actually trying to win. In 2000, Rove had a choice for the final weekend of the campaign. Florida was extremely tight but he didn’t want to admit it. It had always been red and Bush’s brother was governor. Going there would be a sign of weakness. He had no shot whatsoever in California and would ultimately lose it by well over a million votes. But that didn’t matter. Going there would be a bold confident move that showed he was trying to win a landslide and not the tight race everybody else in the country knew was going on. He couldn’t admit it was tight and he couldn’t admit they might lose Florida. He chose false bravado and it damn near cost him the election. Rove has always been really confident before every election. He’s confident before the Republicans win. He’s confident before they lose. No matter what happens he sees clear skies ahead and a win so easy they barely have to try. After all, only losers actually try to win races.

    Several people on here we’re openly mocking the fact that Obama is planning on visiting 4 states (NH, CO, OH, FL) on a day when Romney is going to only NH and CO. This proves that he knows hes a loser. Only losers would try to hustle in that many local headlines. Here’s the question though, if you wake up and find out that Obama won Florida or Ohio by a couple hundred votes, do you still think that? Or do you think that all of this false bravado with the game on the line was a complete waste of time.

    Believe it or not, Democrats really do think we’re winning this thing. But we know its close. I don’t give a damn whether we’re up two points or down two points, if its the end of the game, I’m running up and down the court as fast as I can. And I know that I’d much rather shoot Sissy style and win a championship than shoot like a man and lose.

    If you end up losing (and I believe you will), you really should go back and look at all of the deliberately misleading numbers the Republican establishment has been spoon feeding you.

    • C-Bus GOP
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      But nobody is spoonfeeding us anything – as per my post below it is all a matter of facts (real data) vs. fiction (D+8 polls).

      Of course no campaign is going to admit they are losing. I would never expect either side to flinch – there are too many senate and house races down the tickets to actually show any weakness.

      I don’t think Rove is in quite the same position now vs. 2000. Then he was in the trenches trying to win an election. Now he’s probably more concerned about his credibility. He is not a paid member of team Romney

      • Tall Guy
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:39 pm | Permalink

        He is still a Republican talking head though and he isn’t quoting real facts at all. 530,000 Ohio Democrats have cast a ballot. Ohio doesn’t classify voters by party so there is no way to track who is a Democrat and who is not. What he means is that 530,000 people who voted in the last Democratic primary have cast a ballot. Since the last primary was an uneventful formality, there aren’t many “Democrats” and so that is not a particularly meaningful stat. He’s trying a sleight of hand to make you think its based on actual registrations when its clearly not. That’s why it is misleading as hell.

        He is not trying to protect his credibility because he is known as a Republican talking head and thats more or less what he was hired for. Fox and the WSJ know the difference between real voter regs and info from the last primary. They don’t care, because his job is really to rally Republicans.

        My question is whether you will hold him (and people like him) responsible for spoonfeeding you obvious bullshit if you lose.

        Before you even ask, if Romney does win by more than a point or two, yes I will hold pollsters responsible for misleading info and there will be serious damage to there reputations.

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:51 pm | Permalink

        Tall guy that “the D’s are masquerading as R’s” that Natey boy and his buddies keep perpetuating is absolutely baseless and without a shred of supporting evidence.

        You are correct that you can become a D or an R in OH based on who you last voted for in a primary. So the spin is that all these D’s showed up to throw their hat into the big Santorum vs. Romney showdown and as such they are now R’s.

        Well – look at the numbers. there were about 150K more total votes cast in Romney/Santorum as opposed to the McCain/Romney primary in 2008. Not a huge number first of all.

        But wait….there’s more!!

        Remember in 2008, Hillary vs. Obama was in full swing and Ohio was a must-win to keep Hillary in the race. Remember how Rush Limbaugh went on the air telling R’s to cross over and vote for Hillary to keep the D primary going? I know a lot of die-hard R’s that did that and became D’s in the eyes of the state. These people would of course come home and vote in the 2012 primary and likely account for a large portion of that 150K.

        And why would Dems have cared about the Santorum/Romney race anyway? It was clear to just about everybody that Santorum, while popular with conservatives, just did not have the $ to go the distance. This was not a race I would expect D’s to be chomping at the bit to jump into.

        So – in summary the whole D’s are really R’s argument is….Malarkey!

        I’m C-Bus GOP and I approve this message

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:56 pm | Permalink

        and to directly answer your question yes there will be a lot of head scratching if between 11/1 and 11/6, 1 in 6 Republicans all of a sudden becomes an Obamanista…..Not because Rove was wrong, we’ll be scratching our heads because we won’t know where Obama got all those free “Obama Phones” to hand out so quickly! Or maybe once the wreckage clears, Obama will find 700K Ohio registered democrats washed up on the Jersey shore…..

      • Tall Guy
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:14 am | Permalink

        Its not that Dems voted in the Rep primary. I agree that is an overstated argument. Its that Dems just didn’t vote at all in either primary. To use the fact that they sat out of a meaningless primary as some sort of excuse that there are less of them is disingenuous. Its a horribly misleading stat.

        Your second answer is what is really disturbing to me. You’re going to lose. You’re going to lose completely legitimately and in roughly the way that everybody is studying the election objectively says that they you are and you’re never going to believe it. It had to be fraud because their is no way the American people could pick our side over yours. You won’t believe any poll. Even the 120,000,000 strong sample that gets taken next week.

        If you want to put on your tinfoil hat, be my guest. I actually feel like this is a major reason why the American people still have a strong Democratic lean even after a fairly tough economic times.

      • Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:23 am | Permalink

        Tall guy
        Funny thing is messina and axelrod are using those same 530k votes to champion why they are doing well in Ohio….so which is it the numbers mean nothing or they are a sign dems are winnging?

        Also dems keep comparing how well they are doing in precients compared to 08 when all precients have been redrawn and therefore are apples to zebras….sleight of hand?

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:35 am | Permalink

        I believe the polls. I believe that if it a poll has Obama by a few points with a D+8 or 9 sample and Romney carrying the independents, given what we know about the composition of the electorate, that it is bad news for Obama. I believe the poll data, just not necessarily the conclusions of the top line.

        Tall Guy it is not up to you and me, it is up to the American people the majority of which do not come on to boards like this. So don’t take it so personally. If you do have such thin skin, go back over to DU I’m sure you will find some other fine marxists who will agree with you.

        In reality, I think Obama knows he is done, and I don’t think he would want to keep the job even if he could win it. What happens for the next 4 years if Obama wins a squeaker by dragging enough busloads of Obamanistas down to the polls? He will have had his mandate shredded – IND, NC, FL, VA, and CO seem off his map. I think RR will win OH, IA, NH and possibly NV and WI but lets say for argument’s sake that Obama squeaks it out by taking enough of those –

        With his mandate ripped from them, and likely losing the popular vote even if he wins the electoral college – will Obama really be able to step in and lay down a bold new agenda? I have my doubts…….The world would be a cold and ugly place for Obama in that setting and that isn’t his style.

        How will the midterms go for him in 2014? I think if Romney loses, the midterms in 2014 will be an even greater R shellacking than 2010. All those 2008 Obama coattails senators coming up will be shredded….

        He won’t have the House in 2012 or 2014.

        Obama does not want any part of this. The country knows it.

      • Tall Guy
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:19 am | Permalink

        I’m not entirely sure I know why I’m coming here. I guess I’m just a bored insomniac.

        —- ” given what we know about the composition of the electorate”

        This is the part I just don’t get. Republicans criticize the partisan samplings of practically every single poll. Its taken as a given that people have moved en masse to the Republican party when you really have no evidence of that whatsoever. Its possible that every poll is wrong and we’ll find out on Tuesday. My own theory is that whatever people’s disenchantment with Obama, they aren’t buying the Rep platform either. The ratings for the Rep congress are abysmal. To the extent that Obama is losing popularity, Republicans aren’t gaining it. I think even Romney gets this. He only started to rise in the polls when he basically dumped the Republican platform and started running as a bipartisan moderate. It might be enough to gain him some independent support and its definitely got him higher than he was when he was “severely conservative”. If you look closely at the polls, you’ll see that most have both Ds and Rs lower than 2008. To a certain extent, the people that left the Dem party have been matched by those that left the Rep party. A pox on both your houses.

        You guys keep acting as if the pollsters are weighting their samples to get to D+8. They aren’t. They don’t weight for anything that is an opinion and not a demographic that can be checked against the census. You don’t like the fact that it is D+8, but the pollsters are reporting that because that is what the American people are reporting to them.

        I suppose its possible that Republicans are somehow turning down pollster’s calls at a significantly greater rate than Democrats. Possible, but I highly doubt it. i don’t see any reason why they would. It hasn’t happened before and if anything, I’d expect the opposite, since both sides agree Reps are more enthusiastic, it seems likely they’d be more willing to return calls. Also, the two groups that are systematically excluded from most polls (cellphone onlys and non-English speakers) are both heavily Dem leaning.

        —-“With his mandate ripped from them, and likely losing the popular vote even if he wins the electoral college – will Obama really be able to step in and lay down a bold new agenda?”

        Despite all this absurd posturing on the Rep side, I think that most intelligent people realize that neither man is likely to get much of a mandate. If Obama wins, I think he’ll do fine implementing his agenda. For one thing, he doesn’t really have to do anything. Obamacare is set to go into place. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire. All he needs to do is block veto Republican attempts to change those two basic facts and Dems will be happy. He doesn’t have a bold new agenda because he doesn’t want a bold new agenda. What he wants is to protect the things that are already there. I don’t think it will be all that complicated.

        But the same question applies to Mitt Romney. If he is elected, he will be elected in a very small squeaker. He has given almost no clue as to what he would do as president. Realistically, I think you know that cutting PBS and Amtrak won’t get you anywhere near what he needs to pay for the tax breaks. He is going to have to cut some popular programs. FEMA? mortgage deductions? medicaid? Nobody even knows what because he hasn’t given us a clue. How do you think he is going to do that without any mandate and without having told the American people hardly anything about his plans before barely more than half of them voted for him?

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:30 am | Permalink

        D+8 polls in Ohio come from:

        1. Weak LV screens. the most recent SurveyUSA Ohio poll took 98-99% of polled as LV. There are more D’s than R’s in the world. That is a fact. But since turnout for presidential elections is only 65-70% historically, the sample is not representative. Given the increased R enthusiasm this year, you would expect more R’s in the LV sample.
        2. Overrepresentation of EV’s. All these polls are claiming 30-40% have already voted when in actuality it has been 15-20% over the last 2 weeks. Although nationally R leads O in EV, in OH it is well established that O leads.

        Only Rasmussen adjusts his poll sample to a projected turnout. Of course most pollsters consider this blasphemy, however Ras has been pretty accurate over the last several years….

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:32 am | Permalink

        And as far as a mandate goes for Mitt-

        1. This is why he is expanding the map lately, to try to get a broader mandate and to pull some senators in with him.
        2. Just knocking off an incumbent brings some degree of a mandate

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:34 am | Permalink

        “He doesn’t have a bold new agenda because he doesn’t want a bold new agenda”

        THIS is the problem.

      • Tall Guy
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:42 am | Permalink

        “THIS is the problem.”

        No. Its not. Not everybody wants major change. Obviously, Obama and his supporters don’t want it in the conservative direction. You should be fairly happy to know that he doesn’t want it in the liberal direction. Sometimes you don’t need to force through major changes. Truthfully, this is the way it is with most second terms. Mitt Romney has a whole list of things he is going to do on day 1. If he got every change he wanted, would he need to keep making new ones for the hell of it.

      • Tall Guy
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:51 am | Permalink

        “however Ras has been pretty accurate over the last several years…”

        Except for the fact that they haven’t been

        You like them for the obvious reason. They give you the results that you are looking for. But they have an obvious Republican lean and its demonstrated itself when comparing results to actual election results. They also don’t call cellphones. It saves them money but it eliminates a significant voting bloc, that leans Democrat.

        Only including the polls you like is cherry picking. Whatever, if you want to delude yourself, its okay. I think you’ll find the truth in less than a week. The thing that I don’t get is that even when you exclude all the polls except for the one from the firm with a long history of tilting in your direction, you still only get to a tiny majority, yet to hear Republicans talk, its like they all think its going to be a landslide.

      • C-Bus GOP
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 2:17 am | Permalink

        I don’t know – Nate himself seems to indicate Ras was pretty on top of 2004, 2006, and 2008. yeah he was off on some races esp. the NV senate race in 2010.

        I really honestly don’t get what you come here for. Do you expect me to say “well gee whiz it’s all over I should just go curl up in the fetal position and cry me a river”…..This is a GOP board if you haven’t figured it out. We’re not here to be convinced that we’re wrong. We don’t go over to DU to try to convince them of anything.

        Look I feel different than you. You believe what you want, I will believe what I want. That’s all there is to it. And for the record I never said and I don’t think it will be a landslide. I think Romney will win based on carrying NC, VA, FL, CO, and OH. I personally think he also carries NH, WI, and IA. Hopefully NV but I am not sure. I am not in the Dick Morris camp thinking RR will carry PA, MN, and MI. Honestly I think Morris is a hack who just wants to sell books.

        I will leave you with this, however – I guarantee you you received better and more respectful treatment over here than one of us would have received at DU.

      • Tall Guy
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 3:51 am | Permalink

        I’m not sure why I came here.

        I stumbled onto this site when I clicked a link on RCP that talked about white turnout dropoff in 2008. At first, I thought the author might have some decent points. Then I ran a few of the numbers myself and realized that he was making some patently absurd assumptions (90% of white nonvoters would vote Rep if they bothered to vote, etc). Then I started to wonder about why you guys were doing this to yourselves. You’re painting some ridiculously happy scenario in your own mind that is almost certain to lead to bitter disappointment.

        There has been a lot of that this week. i feel like Rove and Morris have been doing some absurd spinning and some really bad math and I also feel like you guys are buying it hook line and sinker. I guess I’m a student of human nature. I try very hard to think about realistic assessments of situations. I’m curious why and how other people delude themselves. Perhaps, I’m just deluding myself to think I can be objective.

        As for rolling up in a fetal position and crying, I don’t expect that and I wouldn’t do that in your position. Honestly, I think you are in the same position we were in the Gore and Kerry races and I can tell you that I wasn’t crying a river. We were behind but those were definitely winnable races that could have gone either way. Its really like being in a 1 run baseball game in the 9th inning. It can easily go either way, but its also not exactly a true tossup. It is much better to have the lead. Still, the team with the lead doesn’t have any reason to be overconfident and the team behind really shouldn’t give up.

        “We don’t go over to DU to try to convince them of anything.”

        In a way, thats part of the problem with this country right now. Everybody is surrounding themselves with only people they already agree with. They refuse to consider anything no matter how logical that comes from the other side. They believe everything no matter how illogical that comes from their own allies. Trust me, I know liberals that do this as well.

        You really should go to DU. You should keep an open mind about some of the things you hear there. You should call bullshit bullshit when you see it. Our country benefits when people actually talk to each other and don’t just recite talking points.

        I did come here with an open mind. I do think the party ID numbers are noteworthy and somewhat surprising. I’m not dismissing that they might be D high out of hand. The thing that I don’t get is that I don’t buy conspiracy theories. Rove and Morris are paid to cheerlead and be hacks. Everybody knows that when you ask them who will win any race they’ll say the Republican, even when they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell. PPP and SurveyUSA are not. Pollsters are ultimately paid on accuracy and I don’t think that they’d want to sacrifice their entire careers for anything. There are a couple of really bad pollsters (Susquehanna is a hack…I could tell you why in a longer post) but the rest of them are trying really hard to be accurate. For what its worth, I don’t even buy the argument that many Democrats are floating that Rasmussen is a hack that is intentionally painting a rosy picture for Republicans. I think their whole business model rests on being cheap. Being cheap means robocalls. Robocalls means you can’t call cellphones. Not calling cellphones means you miss a key group of Democrats. They aren’t trying to be bad, but at some point cutting costs inevitably infringes on quality.

        Even if I bought that one or two pollsters were painting rosy pictures for Dems, I’d really never buy that all of them were. What exactly is the gain? We’ll find out the truth soon enough. Then they won’t get any more business for being so wrong. How much is the DNC paying these people anyway? Why haven’t any of them made a wiretap of the payoff? Presumably, without a career anymore they’d want to sell the movie rights for what would be an interesting story. Wouldn’t somebody eventually sell out? I especially don’t buy ones that involve basically everybody in an entire industry.

        So if every poll is wrong and they aren’t doing it on purpose, what are they doing wrong? I’m enough of a political junkie to be intrigued by the question. I’m open minded enough to actually listen to a legitimate Republican argument on the subject. I guess thats the really long answer of what I’m doing here.

    • jeff
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I admire your pep talk but Florida is not even going to be close. Ive lived here for somrtime and understand its politics and knew that.. Obama had it won in 2008, 2012 tells a much different narrative. If Obama thinks he can even eke out a victory here then let him keep on wasting precious time and money feeding his delusion.

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:56 pm | Permalink

        Amen. Only reason Romney was here today was to support Mack. Romney is thinking about winning the Senate. He’s the one acting confident – but Romney’s history shows that he only acts confident when he actually is. I’ve read a lot about him, including the bio from the Boston Globe guys. Romney doesn’t do head feints and he doesn’t move away from a weakness if it needs to be shored up. The fact that he’s not going to Ohio after tomorrow as it is now is telling. He knows he has it.

        Obama knows he’s finished. He’s just putting on a brave face so his party doesn’t get wiped out completely and any chance at a legacy doesn’t get further tainted.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You heard it here. It’s not close. Your boy is going to lose by 6 points or more nationally and Romney will clear 300 EVs.

    • Ron
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:44 am | Permalink | Reply

      You’re right about Rove. I noticed this also about him–which is why I don’t read his columns much. I remember when he went sledding with Bush in NH the day before the primary in an attempt to look confident.

      That said, this report by him was different. It’s full of convincing specifics. He went out of his way to cite chapter and verse. He may be wrong about some of the details but the overriding argument is compelling. Obama’s numbers just don’t add up. His early vote turnout is lackluster–not too bad but not good enough to oppose what’s coming. His problem with the youth vote is obvious and there’s little he can do about it. Meanwhile Mitt’s getting crowds four times bigger than McCain’s. That’s got to mean something on ED.

    • Posted November 1, 2012 at 4:52 am | Permalink | Reply

      Karl Rove predicted an Obama blowout win in 2008 so you are wrong that republicans will cheerlead for the republican in hope they will win even if the evidence is against them


  32. C-Bus GOP
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keep in mind the following:

    1. When you talk to a GOP about Ohio, they tell you they feel good because of early voting statistics, voter registrations, absentee ballot requests, enthusiasm and crowds at the rallies, etc. In other words, real facts.

    2. When you talk to a Dem about Ohio, they tell you they feel good because of RCP averages, Nate Silver, and Obama campaign memos. In other words, non-facts.

    Personally I’d rather have the facts behind me than the RCP averages – When you average a bunch of D+8 crap polls together, you still have crap. And all Nate Silver does is puts the same crap polls into his “model”. Obama campaign just spins whatever the hell it can at this point.

    • jeff
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 12:58 am | Permalink | Reply

      Axlerods demeanor lately ie defensive cranky etc. is quite telling and is probably indicative of a campaign manager who knows hes losing. They har Reice Prebus on Greta and hr seemed genuinely confident by contrast.

    • Ron
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:02 am | Permalink | Reply

      It’s not about polls, it’s about people. The ability to attract crowds is a real measure of broad popularity. Brian Williams took note of Obama’s diminishing attraction. Instead of 50,000 people, he’s lucky to attract 5000 in 2012. So how can anybody claim this will be 2008 redux? You’d have to be deluded not to notice the lack of enthusiasm in his support.

  33. Posted November 1, 2012 at 1:37 am | Permalink | Reply

    Dick Morris Why The NY Times Poll Is Wrong.. Says the same thing Keith has been writing, Good Read


  34. zang
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 4:19 am | Permalink | Reply

    Tall Guy, have no idea if you’re still here. Issue is not “every” poll is wrong. There are plenty of polls to backup our assumptions on what the electorate will look like… Gallup, Pew, and Rasmussen. The Dems retort is national polls don’t matter. And basically, all they can point to is a single election in the last 120+ years where the electoral college did not follow the popular vote.

    Right now, Romney is looking very good in the popular vote according to some reputable pollsters. I’d be willing to wage that Pew’s final number will be 51-48 for Romney. And with that kind of number, the electoral college follows.

  35. Posted November 1, 2012 at 4:29 am | Permalink | Reply

    Is this poll accurate?

    University of Cincinnati Ohio 2012 Presidential Poll

    Barack Obama-Joe Biden 48% {49%} [51%] (49%)
    Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan 46% {49%} [46%] (46%)


    • zang
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 4:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      Karl Rove is not a paid hack. He predicted Obama’s 08 win and was never optimistic about McCain.

  36. Evan3457
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 5:35 am | Permalink | Reply

    I don’t know if this is good ettiquette or not, but I had to link this Dan McLaughlin piece at Red State. It says, in great detail and insight, what I’m thinking about the state of the polls:

  37. DAO
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 7:13 am | Permalink | Reply

    Trolling on twitter:
    The difference between polls my be how loose they perform likely voter screens. With horrible response rates, it gets more and more expensive to perform a large enough poll. One way to make it cheaper is to loosen your screens, resulting in a different estimated turnout of the voting age population (VAP)
    RT https://mobile.twitter.com/justkarl
    Gallup is projecting 56%
    ABC/wa Po 73%
    ABC is almost a registered voter poll
    2008 turnout 56.9% VAP
    I am new to this so I hope I gave proper referencing to jay cost and justkarl

  38. DAO
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 7:55 am | Permalink | Reply

    Thanks for that great link!
    It was a very good read. This is the hardest time I have had making sense of polling since seriously following polling over the past four presidential elections. It will be interesting to see how the crazy variability is reconciled once the votes re counted and recounted and the legal challenges are settled.

  39. Fred S
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 7:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Any updates on Ohio EV today?

    • A.D.S.
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 4:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      I broke down the numbers for the Ohio EV, and figured I’d post them here, in a reply to what you said, as I can’t find much of a better place to put it.

      From some of the top four, Obama counties from 2008: (This is calculated by taking the total number of Early Votes cast in these counties and dividing them along the margins that Obama won that county by.)

      Cuyahoga County: -39,050 Votes
      Franklin County: -18,225 Votes
      Montgomery/Summit Counties: -7,270 Votes
      Total: -64,545 Votes from President Obama

      Math will tell us that from the 1,257,320 Early Votes cast, and using the CNN Poll giving Obama a 59 – 38 lead in early voting, shows that President Obama has about 741,819 Votes in Ohio. By comparison, Romney only has 477,782 Votes in Ohio. This is a cushion for the President of 286,037 Votes.

      The same CNN poll says Romney leads 51 – 44 with those who intend to vote on Election Day. For all intents and purposes, since early voting dropped off by about 14%, I will say that the overall votes in Ohio also drop by about 3%. This means there will be around 4,380,963 people still left to vote on election day. Taking this, Romney will win 2,067,822 votes on Tuesday, while President Obama will get 1,784,004 votes. Let’s also assume that, among those numbers that go for other or are undecided, let’s say they split 55-45% for Romney, and we have a 2% showing of the Independent candidates in Ohio. (In 2008, it was 1.81%)

      Final Ohio Talley
      Romney (R): 2,791,411 49.50% Winner of the State of Ohio
      Obama (D): 2,734,357 48.49%
      Other: 112,514 2.00%
      Margin: 57,054 1.01%
      Total Ohio Voters: 5,638,283 (-3% from 2008, -2.5% from 2004) [Gallup reports that turnout for the 2012 election will be below 2004 and 2008 levels.]

One Trackback

  1. […] Sur le early voting, ce qui est intéressant, c’est de lire comment le camp Obama cannibalise ses électeurs du 6 novembre pour faire croire que l’enthousiasme est pr…. […]

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: