Romney +6 in Florida — Mason-Dixon

Miami Herald/Mason-Dixon show Mitt Romney with  a 6-point lead 51 to 45 in Florida:

Mitt Romney has maintained a solid lead over President Barack Obama in the latest Miami Herald/El Nuevo Herald poll of likely voters who favor the Republican by six percentage points. Romney’s strengths: independent voters and more crossover support from Democrats relative to the Republicans who back Obama, according to the survey conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research.  Romney’s crossover appeal is fueled by strong support in rural North Florida, a conservative bastion where a relatively high percentage of Democrats often vote Republican in presidential election years. “I’m pretty convinced Romney’s going to win Florida,” said Mason-Dixon pollster Brad Coker, who conducted the 800-likely voter survey from Tuesday through Thursday. “Will it be fivepoints? Maybe. Will it be three points? Possibly,” Coker said, of what he expects Romney’s margin will be. “I don’t think it’s going to be a recount … I don’t think we’re going to have a recount-race here.”Romney is winning handily among men, marginally losing with women voters and has outsized support among non-Hispanic whites. He’s essentially winning on the issues as well: the economy, Medicare, foreign policy and looking out for the middle-class.

Interestingly, the party ID may have been D +4 which is very pro-Obama:

Across Florida, registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by 4.5 percentage points — about the same margin as the proportion of respondents in this poll.

And in another anecdote why Florida is slipping away from Obama:

 

170 Comments

  1. Waingro
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:15 am | Permalink | Reply

    Can anyone confirm here whether Rasmussen switched to a D+1 model today? Thanks.

    • William Jefferson Jr.
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:20 am | Permalink | Reply

      I see D+2.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:41 am | Permalink

        @NumbersMuncher @JonahNRO Looks like Rasmussen is back to D+4 today. So odd.

      • William Jefferson Jr.
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:43 am | Permalink

        If you enter the internals to the 3 Unknown calculator: http://www.1728.org/unknwn3.htm you get D+2. I don’t know where D+4 is coming from.

    • Brad
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:43 am | Permalink | Reply

      It’s coming from @NumbersMuncher

    • Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Why is Rasmussen doing that? Does he honestly think there will be 2% more Democrats this year?
      ~ Brittany

    • AC
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I am watching the WSJ Report on FoxNews, and Whit Ayres (a Republican pollster) said that he is assuming D+4. (He is also seeing Romeny +12 with independents.) He mentioned a poll that he just completed for the Resurgent Republic polling organization.

  2. Bob San Diego
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:16 am | Permalink | Reply

    Do they break out early voting by candidate after the election?

    I.e., will they say Obama (or Romney) actually *won* the early voting,or do they just leve it by party ID and that’s it?

  3. cbr66
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:23 am | Permalink | Reply

    People need to consider that Scott cut early voting by a week giving less opportunity to vote early. I imagine you will see huge lines and a bigger turnout in Dem precincts on Tuesday. Does anybody really think Romney is going to win by 6 in Florida?

    • AJ
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:24 am | Permalink | Reply

      i do. hope and change baby

    • Bob San Diego
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:28 am | Permalink | Reply

      Presumably you mean Sandy.

      Yes, i think the Reps are going to blow away the Dems on turnout.

      • Barf
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:33 am | Permalink

        I agree Bob, our Chick-fil-a moment is Tuesday.

      • cbr66
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

        No I mean Governor Scott cut early voting by a week this year.

    • William Jefferson Jr.
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:44 am | Permalink | Reply

      I believe that cut applied to Republicans as well as Democrats, correct? Why should their margin decrease because of that? You’re struggling cbr.

    • Brad
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:44 am | Permalink | Reply

      I do. I think he could even win by as much as 8.

      • Freddie
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:56 am | Permalink

        +8 – me too. I was thinking +7 to +8. FL is decent at keeping cheating down. Obama is toast in Florida.

        FL generally has had a good economy for 50+ years due to migration. Even the Carter years were not that bad. The economy under Obama has been terrible for Florida. 10 to 13% unemployment is unheard of for Florida. All from Hope & Change.

    • Freddie
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:46 am | Permalink | Reply

      Cbr66 – I think Romney wins Florida by +7. Obama has lost a lot of Catholic voters and many Jewish voters. Soft liberals/moderates are seeing their pocketbooks harmed even professional people. Under Obama – they have become poorer.

      Bill Maher coming out today claiming blacks know where white Romney voters live and that they will coming to get the white Romney voters – will not help.

      • cbr66
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

        I can’t stand Bill Maher. I too wish he would shut up. He used to be funny before he became so political. Same thing with Dennis Miller.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

        Bill Maher is one thing: hateful. The man spews hate and anger anytime he opens his mouth.
        ~ Brittany

    • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:54 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yes. Firstly Scott and the legislature cut it due to cost and diminished need. Most counties, like mine, had already moved to encourage mail ballots instead and limited early voting locations. We went from about a dozen down to three. This began in 2006.

      So while the timeframe of early voting has diminished, the turnout hasn’t really. The GOP is just showing up right now much more strongly and will probably win by 10 in election day turnout. Expect Ohio to be the same.

    • damien
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

      romney is a lot closer to winning florida by 6 than obama is by 2

    • Bob San Diego
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      @cbr “No I mean Governor Scott cut early voting by a week this year.”

      Sorry, I’m just slow.

  4. Tom
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:31 am | Permalink | Reply

    Since the early voting has already erased the obama 2008 winning margin, the election day turnout will put Romney up HUGE in FL. Get your champagne on ice, or your favorite adult bevarge stocked up. Gonna be fun on Tuesday. Mitt-Mentum

  5. John
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:31 am | Permalink | Reply

    I am probably being way too simplistic but have been struggling as to why the off-cycle elections seem to play little/no role in constructing the voter turnout projections used in these polls. Looking at recent off-cycle elections – In 2002 Republicans gained some seats going against the norm of party in power typically loosing seats (9/11 likely helped) and the republican momentum carried forward to 2004 with a higher than projected turnout giving G.W. Bush his second term. In 2006 Dems gained 31 seats in a mini-wave and that momentum clearly carried forward into the 2008 presidential (enhance by a weak republican candidate). But then along comes 2010 with one of the greatest wave elections (a tsunami) ever and there seems to be no expectation for that momentum to carry into the 2012 presidential. I don’t get it. Seems like the off-cycle elections are an indicator that should not/cannot be ignored.

    • petep
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:36 am | Permalink | Reply

      Somebody (it might have been Rove) found a direct relationship between the previous off year election and the next presidential race. The Dems did very well in 06, it was even in 02 & 98. Given that, 2010 should predict a huge Rep victory.

      • Loach
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

        I believe it was Michael Barone, not Rove.

      • Ron
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

        Yes, it was Barone:

        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 52-45%. What should that tell us?

    • Jim S.
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:48 am | Permalink | Reply

      Gallup has it at R+1, Ras Party ID tracker has it at R+2.6(over 4 points higher then in Sept of 2010), Pew has it even electorate. The electorate tends to be similar it seems to the preceding midterm. Hard to believe this won’t ring true again given the enthusiasm gap and a bad economy for an incumbent president who made no real policy shifts after being trounced in the mid-terms. Barone picked up on this too.

    • Evan3457
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:54 am | Permalink | Reply

      Nearest analagous case was 1994-96, when the Republicans won a landslide in ’94, taking control of both houses of Congress for the 1st time since the 50’s, I think. A sitting Democrat who ran from the center governed from the left, and took a beating for it.

      The bad news: Clinton easily defeat Bob Dole in his re-election campaign.

      Now, for the good news: Clinton learned from ’94 and tacked hard to the middle, agreeing to hold spending in check so the deficit started shrinking. He even signed welfare reform. The economy picked up steam, and the nation was feeling it by the 1996 election. Dole was the presumptive nominee, so Dick Morris told Clinton to spend $20 million in the winter of 1995-6 dirtying up Newt Gingrich and the Republican majority, then turned his guys on Dole. Republicans were depressed, as with McCain in 2008. It was a rout.

      On the other hand, the only one of those things that’s the same this time around is the that Obama spent a couple hundred million dirtying up Romney this summer, only to have the air on that balloon popped in the 1st debate. He HASN’T moved to the middle. He’s stuck his metaphorical thumb in the eye of those who voted in the Republcan Tsunami of 2010. Obamacare, thanks to Thomas, is still the law of the land. Republican intensity is higher than at any point going back to 2004. Democrat intensity is lower than 2008. There is nothing that angers a voting populace that has repudiated you once: “Screw you, I’m not going backward; instead, I’m doubling down.” Essentially, this is what Obama has done in this campaign. He is violating one of the few postulates of incumbent survival, long-term. Which is: when the voters tell you to “cut it out”, you better cut it out, or you’re doomed. There is nothing the voting public likes more than taking it out on a politician that doubles down against their will, as George W. Bush found out in 2006. (Plus, the Democrats, as they always do, took advantage of a crisis, namely, Katrina to take down his positive approval numbers in 2005.)

      ==================================

      Yet, 90$ of the media-operated state polls show Democrat turnout will be higher in the battleground states than 2008.

      One of these things is not like the others; one of these things just doesn’t belong.

      On Tuesday, we’ll find out which one it is.

      • Fred S
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

        It was Roberts, not Thomas.

      • Evan3457
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, you’re right. Duhhhhh….

    • Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yes. That is almost always the case. Maybe they have projected their amnesia.

  6. MikeInSaus
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:32 am | Permalink | Reply

    A good metaphor for what I see is poker. There is a “mathy” way to play. Look at the math, look at the odds, make a call. The state polls, in this case, tell me we are looking at a Obama win – narrowly. The other way to play is more instinctual, call it “gut”. My gut tells me there is no way Democratic enthusiasm will match ’08, nor will Rep be as depressed. If the state polls are just a little off then we are looking at Romney win.

    I look at the comments are your Lefty sites, FDL, DU, DKos, Politico etc. There is no enthusiasm for their guy. Nothing like ’08. Just your usual snark – which they are really good at by the way.

    I did go to Intrade and try to wager a cool $1000 on Romney but the process for registering was quite convoluted.

    BTW – My mother, a lifelong Rep voter, voted for Obama in ’08. I asked her why. She explained it was the emotional wave of electing a black president – plain and simple. Will she do so this year? No.

    MiS

  7. Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:33 am | Permalink | Reply

    Fox reporting early voting line in FL 3 hrs long

    • M. White
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:52 am | Permalink | Reply

      In some places in Fl the ballot is 7 or 8 pages long due to legislation on the ballot. Some of the wording is over 500 words long. That accounts for the long lines. All of the Florida newspapers and local channels have been talking about it. My dad lives in FL and he says the ballot is so long it takes about 20 minutes to vote the ballot.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:57 am | Permalink

        Mine was two pages, front and back. We have 11 state amendments on the ballot.

      • kenberthiaume
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

        i hope republicans on election day don’t fall into the trap of taking 20 minutes to vote. If you’re not familiar with something, don’t read through a page of description, just skip it. Or better yet, get a ballot from the RNC which will teell you how to vote and if they don’t have a vote for that question, skip it.

  8. Freddie
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:38 am | Permalink | Reply

    +6 looks about right but i would guess Romney wins Florida by +7 to +8 on election day. Something like 53-46. I am not sure how Romney can lose Ohio when he will pound Obama in Florida. I am not saying RR will lose Ohio. I think the only way O wins Ohio is rampant cheating.

  9. Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:40 am | Permalink | Reply

    Off topic: why is Krauthammer not offered umpteen positions in a possible Romney administration. The man is close to political genius.

    • Svigor
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I go the other way, I hope Romney purges all the neocons after he’s elected.

  10. Beef
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:42 am | Permalink | Reply

    According the roundup of polls on RCP, this is going to be an Obama landslide. Why do so many polls show such a strong momentum for Obama in the last week? I understand the criticism of the underlying assumptions of voter turnout that may be skewing these polls toward overestimating Obama’s support, but can they almost all be so wrong? I mean, either Obama wins most of these swing states, or a majority of the polling agencies in this country lose all credibility. If Romney wins this election, Marist should go out of business, and no one should ever give a second thought to a poll sponsored by a media company. If Romney loses, there is no hope for a country in the midst of an economic recession that selects an unworthy, lying, leftist, incompetent demogogue over a plausible and competent opponent. None. I sure hope it is the end of the polling industry as we have known it and not the end of America as we have known it.

    • Tom
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:44 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think the polls have already lost credibility with critical thinkers (many of us). Tuesday is going to be fun.

    • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:47 am | Permalink | Reply

      This is what completely befuddles me. It can’t be that all of those averages are wrong. Three of the eight or so he leads in are about 2 pt leads, but still, it would be odd if he loses all of those States. Each day I waver but I always had the national average to clutch at… but now that’s gone to.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink

        There’s nothing to be befuddled about. Obama is ahead in the polls. The only way Romney wins is if the polls are systematically wrong. That can happen but it’s a pretty rare event, particularly across so many state polls.

      • Medicine Man
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:53 am | Permalink

        Happens when modeling for turnout is incorrect. We shall see soon enough.

      • Medicine Man
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:56 am | Permalink

        Check this out Peter. Will be the template for this election for many of the state polls. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:59 am | Permalink

        MM, you are right on that primary. I think 2010’s NV Senate race had similar outcome. But these types of events are few and far in between. For R to win it will now hae to happen in all states at the same time. Possible? Yes. Likely? I don’t think so.

      • Bob San Diego
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

        It’s not *really* all states, though.

        In other words, while the reps percentage will be more than 2008, the reps still aren’t going to win California or New York

        But the percentage increase will be similar across all states.

        That’s what most of us here think the pollsters are missing.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

        This is simply about GIGO. Team OFA have worked the refs (media and their pollsters) well enough to buy the meme that turnout will be equivalent to 2008. In almost every poll you see turnout assumptions are approaching 2008 %s while EV suggests that won’t come close. Nevertheless, the media and their pollsters continue to trust Team Obama.

        This is the very nucleus of how you can have systematic problems with the polls. Can’t wait for “When Good Polls Go Bad” is released next year. I’m sure Chuck Todd will enjoy writing it.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

        well, practically all battleground states though. Take OH. If Romeny wins it will be despite the fact that he is not ahead in a single poll of the last 10 or so listed in RCP’s page. Similar story for WI and PA. So what are the chances that ALL these polls are wrong?

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

        Good point Bob. Latest PPP MI poll has O only up 6 when he won by 17 in 2008, latest OR poll has him up 6 when he won by 14. It’s funny how you see the % shift in non-battleground states cycle-over-cycle, but somehow we’re supposed to believe that battleground states are going to run as blue as marginally uncontested blue states will. But to Peter this all makes perfect sense and is reasonable…well, to Pete.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

        Peter, except Romney has lead in polls in all three states you mention.

      • Evan3457
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Permalink

        And again…if the turnout were really near 2008 levels for D/R/I, you’d expect to be reading stories about how the Dems are poised to pickup at least 10 House seats in the battleground states, like PA, OH, VA, FLA. They’re not.

        Therefore, I am dubious of state head-to-head polls for President.

        I could be wrong. We’ll see on Tuesday.

      • Svigor
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

        Pete, I hate to burst your bubble, but elections are what tell us how accurate polls are.

    • Medicine Man
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      RCP will have to make some type of adjustment after this election. I remember when they started out and it was a great way to analyze an election. Sadly, I haven’t clicked on them for a coupe of weeks now. I used this site for that.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:52 am | Permalink

        I use it for article links. If it weren’t for them I’d never read those shameless columnists, Blow and Robinson.

      • cbr66
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

        Respectfully, is turning to one source of information really the answer? I go to Huffington Post, TCP, Here, The Hill. Even though I support Obama I have never thought that a Romney win would be ask big a disaster as many on the left, but when I look at the numbers I can’t come to any conclusion other than a narrow Obama win.

      • Svigor
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

        At least you’re in the ball park cbr. I see a narrow one as within the range of (most) likely outcomes. I see Romney victory occupying most of that range, too, but narrow 0bama victory is included.

      • Porchlight
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

        RCP flew mostly below the radar through 2008. Since then it has become clear that by throwing out an outlier or two every now and then the averages could be gamed. Not every pollster strives for accuracy. Some strive to please their clients, some to get clicks (news media polls), some to enhance a university’s reputation (Quinnipiac). It has also become fantastically expensive to poll because of historically low response rates. RCP was always GIGO, but now there’s just a lot more G.

    • Freddie
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink | Reply

      Every TV network except Fox has been protecting Obama for 4+ years along with Hollywood. Sadly, normal people do not cut out TV and Hollywood. They keep watching their lies. The more conservative public, to their credit, pretty much cut out newspapers and magazines post 2008 which has hurt their business. Newsweak is dead, hopefully the NY times and WA Post will die soon. Until the public cuts off being customers to cable/sat TV, Disneys parks, Universal, Comcast, Direct TV et al – they will keep lying.

      Fox is only marginally better. So the pollsters lying through their teeth will not matter.

      Watch them readjust their polls on Tuesday afternoon. They have no credibility.

      • Evan3457
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:59 am | Permalink

        On Tuesday, watch out for the exit polls. They will project an Obama landslide, showing him comfortably ahead in most, if not all, of the battleground states. It’s the last psy-op the Left can run against Republican turnout before the votes get counted.

        Gird your loins, so to speak, and carry on.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

        That can work against the Dems too. Lazy Dems who hear that their guy is up big may decide to stay home.

      • damien
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

        the obama states will be called early…romney states will wait and wait and i expect a massive mistake with a call for obama that gets taken back

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

        That’s one reason to not watch t.v. and to pound SoS websites for the latest vote totals for each county…and, of course, to have historical data handy for comparison.

    • Bob San Diego
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink | Reply

      “underlying assumptions of voter turnout that may be skewing these polls toward overestimating Obama’s support, but can they almost all be so wrong?”

      if they are all wrong, they are all wrong for the same reason – Rep/Dem turnout. The reps killed the dems in turnout in 2010 – do you think anything has changed since 2010 to make Reps les likely to come to the polls?

      But the polls we are seeing are showing a Dem turnout more like 2008.

      The only think that gives me pause s there are a lot more latino (presumably Obama voters) registered this year, so the total electorate is more democratic than 2008.

      But it can’t be all that much more democratic than 2010.

      I also don’t think Obama would be sending Bill Clinton to Pennsylvania four times if he thought he was winning there by 6 points.

      So – none of what I offer is “proof.”

      But I think it’s reasonable.

      • Beef
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

        Well, the only “proof” will be how things turn out on Tuesday. That this election is so close is enough to cast doubt on the future of this country. Romney is not perfect, but he is cleaner from an ethical standpoint and has a better record of personal accomplishments than any candidate from any party in decades. If ever a challenger fit the bill for specifically addressing the key issue of an eleciton, it is Mitt Romney. He is running against a cipher of an incumbent whose term has been a failure, rife with corruption and defined by inaction on the profound economic problems facing the country. The issues of this campaign strike to the very ideals that America was founded on. Why is this choice even a question? The answer must be is that this is no longer the same country. If traditional America cannot defeat Barack Obama in 2012, then traditional America can likely never win another election. It’s that simple. It’s that important. I hope these pollsters are wrong, and if they are, they are held accountable for their malpractice.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

        The extra Hispanics can easily be overcome by shifting of white votes and all newly registered Hispanics are not going to vote Obama.

    • TheTorch
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:53 am | Permalink | Reply

      Because these pollsters have an agenda, there sole purpose is to imply Obama is inevitable (that by the way was the whole thrust of the Obama Campaign at the start and what they were banking on), to depress GOP turnout, and improve DEM. No surprise at all that the last few days, PPP, Marist, NBC etc. would do this. They are in the tank for Obama, and they simply cannot allow reality to change that.

      It is possible however, that 1-2 days before election, Nate Silver will tweak his model, so Obama and Romney are even, or Romney with an edge and some of these pollsters change the DRI to be more reasonable to save some credibility.
      Then again I may be being to generous to them and they might just decide to go down with the ship and all that entails.

      • Svigor
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

        I don’t think Silver really can change his model at this point. I may have misunderstood his position, but it seems to be that his model is locked in and changing it now would be “cheating.”

      • Porchlight
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

        Silver changed his model the day before the Brown-Coakley election when it became obvious Brown would win. He had Coakley winning overwhelmingly and then changed overnight to giving Brown a 75% chance, just in time for the election. However, this year he really might be locked in. He’s certain to look ridiculous if he changes the model at the last minute. But if he leaves it as is, he might get lucky. So many eyes are on him now that I think he knows he’s got to roll the dice.

    • Ron
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

      They do this every presidential cycle. Nobody ever goes out of business. The networks use the polls to influence the public. Some argue it’s not intentional, just mistaken assumptions. I don’t buy this. They keep changing the weighting from poll to poll so it’s impossible to detect a trend.

  11. Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:48 am | Permalink | Reply

    ahh, Mason Dixon. Aren’t they the ones that predicted McCain would win Ohio?

    • Medicine Man
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:52 am | Permalink | Reply

      Good morning Peter. Did you happen to see the 30k at the Romney rally yesterday. May cause a little problem with Ohio polling done Friday night.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:57 am | Permalink

        Good morning MM, how’s life treating you? The good news is that this election will be over soon enough. What will we obsess about afterwards?

    • Bob San Diego
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:52 am | Permalink | Reply

      Ah, Peter.

      Do you care to tell us what you think the turnout nationwide will look like, Dems/Reps/Indy, and why?

    • Evan3457
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, they did. But they were the only major polling outfit who didn’t put up a poll at the last second before the election.

    • Loach
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Mason Dixon had 0bama winning FL by 2 in 2008. He won by 2.5. You conveniently ignore that fact.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

        True. But so did PPP. You conveniently ignore that fact. And as far as I know PPP did not make as big a mistake as MD did in OH in other states.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

        So when the two pollsters diverge we should trust PPP? Is that it Peter?

      • Loach
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

        Yep, you should definitely trust an older PPP poll over a newer Mason-Dixon poll in FL because PPP did better with an Ohio poll closer to the election date in 2008 than Mason-Dixon did with an older poll. Perfectly logical.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

        Loach…correction a 2008 Wave election where just about everyone underestimated Dem support. 🙂

    • Medicine Man
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Funny..that is what my wife asked me….life is good. Sun will come up either way.

      • cbr66
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

        I agree with you on that Medicine man. Life will go on either way. The economy will improve and hoepfully some of the divisions in our country can be repaired. I grew up in a Republican house (albeit an MA republican house) My first vote was for Reagan. My parents best freinds we hardcore Kennedy Dems. They would argue and argue and then laugh and laugh at eachother. That is where I wish this country would go.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

        I’m laughing at you now cbr66…feel better? 🙂

    • Aaron S.
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Peter, I’d just like to say that I’ve enjoyed reading your posts here. I’m deep in Romney’s camp, but it’s refreshing to have a (relatively) civilized discourse with someone from the other side. So thanks for your contributions.

  12. John
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:50 am | Permalink | Reply

    Colorado early voting update (11/2) shows Rep with 38,000 lead in ballots cast. Out of 1,462,163 early ballots it is Rep 547,150 (37%) Dem 509,091 (35%) Ind 390,875 (27%) Other 2%. I still believe Romney will win the cross-over vote gaining more Dem than Obama gains Rep. If these trends are representative of election day (normally higher Rep turnout) Romney wins Colorady even if indepenents split 50-50 which they probably won’t based on the polls.

    http://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/COSOS/2012/11/02/file_attachments/172876/Gen%2BTurnout%2B11%2B02%2B2012.pdf

    • Brad
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Good analysis, John. RR wins by at least 5 with these numbers.

      • cbr66
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

        No better or worse Brad. I can play that game too. Will you be back on Wednesday if you lose? I have a busy week at work but I can come back and laugh at you then if you like. Is the world going to end if Obama wins?

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

        cbr66, you won’t be around if your goal is to come back and taunt. Know that.

    • edtitan77
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      So CO and FL are looking good. Just need 2 out of VA,OH and PA. Feeling good folks just gotta stay away from NBC networks until Tuesday.

  13. jm
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:57 am | Permalink | Reply

    Keith – on a different topic, are you planning on doing an all up Nevada EV+AB stats, now that early voting (I think) is closed?

  14. Brad
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/local/30000-turn-out-for-romney-in-west-chester/nSwcd/

  15. Tedley
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Nate Silver’s article this morning is interesting.

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/

    Sounds like he knows something and needs to leave an escape hatch for Wednesday. “Not my fault – it was all those rescally biased polsters. My MODEL is perfect – those bastards gave me bad data”

    • TheTorch
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yes right on queue! I just noticed this myself, here we go…

      • Tedley
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

        And you’d think he’s at least acknowlege all the work Keith has done – if for no other reaason than to counter it. The concept is pretty simple – not that many Dems are gonna vote – and more Reps are. I think they ignore it cause they have no rational basis for the D+ whatever they’re using. If they tried to defend, they’d get roasted.

    • Shane kovac
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Actually, he is stating facts here. Romney is LOSING in nearly every poll out there nationally and state. We all hope the polls are wrong and bias.

      He is stating that mathematically Obama wins otherwise the only reason is all of the polls are statistically bias. Which is essentially what we have been saying all along.

      I’m voting, and I’m supporting and I’m hoping and praying but my natural cynic side says looking at 99.9% of the data showing Obama winning and the odds everyone is either wrong or in a giant scam together are near zero… I have resigned myself to Obama winning. Election day can obviously change this data because action at the polls means more than polls.

      • TheTorch
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

        He is going on headline figures, and not bothering with the internals. He is also weighting pollsters. It may make him sleep at night, but it is missing the big picture.

      • Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

        Except the early voting numbers and the Gallup, Rad, and Pew id numbers all say differently. The models are built on the meme that Obama enthusiasm has not diminished. That administration has probably sold it heavy too.

      • kenberthiaume
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

        national polls don’t show him losing.

    • bks
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

      He’s saying *exactly the same thing as you folks*: The only way Romney wins is if the pollsters are wrong across the board.

      –bks

      • Bob San Diego
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

        Right – except he basically says that’s almost impossible because, well, just because.

      • TheTorch
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

        bks the problem is, my contention is he knows the pollsters are wrong. He is not stupid, he is a smart guy. He knows exactly what is happening and what he is doing. He now has to figure out, how to bail. Does he tweak the model / weightings day before election or whatever, to show it even or romney winning, or does he start blaming the polls more openly (like the article is opening the door for), or does he go down with the ship and take his credibility with it.

        Decisions, Decisions for Mr Silver.

      • Dave
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

        bks–see post in nv thread to respond to your comment about why poll numbers are being skewed.

        The idea that Cutting taxes favors the rich is a crock when your economic polcies are to spend whatever it takes to jack the stock market which also favors the rich but descriminates against many tax payers that aren’t benefitting from the stock market (including seniors on fixed incomes) much more so than cutting taxes ever will. That’s why the distance between the haves and have nots has grow to historic proportions. If you’re a senior on a fixed income I don’t know how you could vote for 4 more years of the same.

        Ryan was right “watch out middle class, the tax man if coming”.

      • bks
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

        I think you need to explain why suddenly in 2012 the pollsters are all in the bag for Obama. Why not in 2008? It’s possible, but improbable.

      • Bob San Diego
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

        It’s good question, and I don’t know the answer.

        Explain this: Early voting as per the Sec State of Colorado shows a 37-35 Rep advantage over democrats.

        Yet early *polling* shows a 3-7% lead for Obama in early polling.

        Independents you say?

        The same pollsters say independents are breaking about even.

        So, at the very least you would have to concede something is wrong with the pollsters methodology.

        Why that is you’d have to ask them.

    • Tom
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is why silver is a charlatan. Even if obama has a 99.9% chance in his precious “model”, when Romney wins he can say, “see that one in 50,000 chance. My model wasn’t wrong, Romney had a 0.1% chance and it happened.” What a clown! Mitt-Mentum

    • Svigor
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “The polls fed me bad data, my model is perfect” is nonsense. Whichever election it was where Reagan won handily while being predicted to lose by the polls has been just sitting there for Silver to study since the 80s.

      • TheTorch
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

        I think the 1980 analogy is good. Pollsters were wrong and they are wrong now. One thing in common with 1980. Left wing incumbent and a media that were trying to destroy Reagan. Some things don’t change!

  16. Kent Ostby
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

    If Romney wins Florida by +5 or +6, then he will win Ohio by 3 or 4 and all of our hand wringing (though not the campaign’s focus) will have been for nothing.

    • Tedley
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well – Dems say OH is different becasue all of the negative ads here for months. That was true a while ago, but in the last few weeks, Mitt has been on the air 10 times more than Bamster – I’ve been counting radio spots on politically neutral stations (ESPN and the like) and it’s been 9.7 to 1 in the last 10 days.

      • Bob San Diego
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

        But a made up mind is a lot harder to change than an undecided.

        You have to first convince the person that it was OK to be wrong, and then make your case.

        Very hard to do.

  17. rjth2012
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Mitt Romney will win Pennsylvania and Ohio and Florida!

    • Brad
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Sub WI for OH and I’m with ya.

    • Brad
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Actually, I feel better about PA than OH.

  18. Bob San Diego
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Everything I read here and everything that intuitively makes sense says Romney should win at least Ohio, and maybe PA and WI.

    Barone sticking his neck out helps too.

    The other thing is in spite of everything,even all the pllls that show Obama “winning” is very few have him even at 50%.

    But Rasmussen is now polling 1000 people a day and he keeps moving his Dem margin up – away from his original call of Reps +1.

    That I don’t understand.

    One straw to grasp is polls that show Obama winning Colorado.

    I have no earthly idea how that can be.

  19. John
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I posted actual Colorado early voting results (valid 11/2) in comment #12 above showing ballots submitted at R 37% D 35% I 27%. Comparing them to the CNN and Denver Post (SurveyUSA) polls released Thursday which both show Obama winning the early vote by 3 & 7% (Indys about evenly split) provides concrete evidence they are sampling way too many democrats. Both polls show Romeny winning among those who say they will vote on election day by 5-7% so given the actual ballots cast combined with the demonstrable bias in these polls a 5 point Romney win in Colorado seems very possible if not likely.

    • John
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Incidently, the current RCP average for Colorado shows Obama +1.0. If the Colorado bias is indicative of other states (might or might not be) Barone could easily be right and we’re talking 300+ electoral votes for Romney and a massive crash and burn for almost all of the polling community. We’ll know in less than 96 hours tick-tock-tick-tock.

  20. M. White
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here’s what you need to know about Nate Silver…he is a mathematical expert, very high degrees in mathematics, so what he is doing is understandable on the face of it but here’s the problem…he takes the top line numbers of all the polls and puts them into a computer analysis system to predict results. The problem with that is he is only going by what the top line numbers shows. He is right at the bottom of his column, if turnout does not equal what the pollsters are showing then all the polls are wrong. There is no way he can account for that. That is why Keith on this website and Barone, Rove and others are digging deeper into the numbers rather than using just the top line numbers. I would say most these pollsters are using the turnout model presenting to them by the Obama campaign in hopes they have this huge Democrat turnout model, of course in early voting we know it has not been proven true. Democrats almost always win the early vote, in 2008 it was huge, this year not so much, way down compared to 2008. Republicans always win on election day with turnout, it happened with McCain but the early vote edge was huge for Obama so he won, not this year. So the models are going to be proven wrong. There is not going to be a D+ much of anything on election day so that means Romney will win. I know we are the naysayers here on this website and a few others but I think we are right. The Obama campaign convinced these pollsters to use their voter model so just like right now it causes GOP voter suppression. They knew that on the weekend before the election the news cycle would playing all these polls showing Obama is going to win, no need for Republicans to vote on Tuesday (like they will in huge numbers) because Obama has already won. Republicans tend to be traditionalists, like to vote on Election Day and Democrats know this. Obama’s campaign is very skillful, I will give them that, by what I just wrote about above, they want to suppress and depress Republicans. I think people have started to see through this, turning off the liberal media and making up their own mind. Republican turnout will be huge on Tuesday, there are many rural voters in this country and they will be out in force, you know in the places Obama doesn’t go and never will, too conservative for him. They came out on election day in 2004. Kerry was leading by 4 or 5 points in Ohio before election day but guess what happened, Republicans showed up and Bush won by enough.
    Also, an earlier idiot posted about the event at Red Rocks and the event last night in Ohio being just a photo-up, made up enthusiam, but let me tell you, nobody is going to stand in 40 degree weather, wait in long line to get in and drive many miles to get to an event if they don’t want to vote someone. Just ain’t going to happen. I don’t remember Bush getting these crowds and doubt he would have in 2004 like the poster was saying. I really believe the huge enthusiam on the Republican side will push Romney over the top. In 2004 Democrats were depressed and didn’t care for Kerry so Bush won, 2012 enthusiam way down for Obama, huge enthusiam for Romney even if the media wants you to think otherwise. The media narrative…no enthusiam for Romney, no momentum for Romney, Obama’s ahead in most polls…yeah right! I keep an eye on Mark Halperin of Time Magazine, he is on Morning Joe (MSNBC) every morning. I keep up with his tweets and he ain’t saying Obama is defintely going to win, he has started to change his tune because he has been attending some of Romney and Obama campaign events, he is tweeting out pictures of the huge crowds at Romney’s events but not of Obama’s events, get the picture. He is the leading voice in liberal circle news cycles. Also, Obama has a events planned this weekend with Springstien, JZ, Katy Perry and so on, big stupid celebrities that liberals suck up to, but even with the all-star cast, Ed Henry with Fox traveling with Obama campaign said there were only a few thousand at the Ohio event earlier today, even with all of those celebrities, also heard Obama press sec. Jen Psaki trying to explain away the reason for depressed crowds at Obama events, pathetic!
    Those 30,000 plus people last night came to see Romney!

    • Tedley
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think you are giving Mr. Silver too much credit. You’re right, he’s a math wizard. So, you’d think he could look at all the samples of the polls he’s using and cypher out that D+7 doesn’t make statistical sense in the face of avaialble data. He mus know it’s bunk, but he works for the Ne York (All The News That’s Fit For The Left) Times, so he just lies like crazy. And all of this is before we ask why Nate doesn’t use all of the polls. He hasn’t used the polls from the Ohio based firm that say Mitt by 3 – or the PA based firm that says Mitt by 5 – just the ones that he knows are full of ……… bias.

    • Brad
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

      His model doesn’t factor in any EV voting.

      • Brad
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

        i.e. he should be re-weighting his assumptions based on actual voting, rather than just stubbornly sticking to 2008 turnout assumptions. He didn’t do this in 2008, so why now?

    • Freddie
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The guys the campaigns use are more like Barone. They know states down to the streets. They know the ethnic background, they know how often they vote, they know the history and the trends. They charge the campaigns big bucks because they know the states so well.

      The only guys who used advanced modeling and statistics that have any credibility are the U of Colorado guys who factor in economic data by state. We have no idea what there inputs are but my guess is the unemployment rate by counties is one of the factors. Their last Romney pickup was New Mexico which will be interesting to see. I know old time Mexican-Americans who have lived in the state 100+ years and who worked in the Dem Party elections loathe Obama. It will be interesting to see how NM goes.

      As far as Nate Silver and advanced mathematics. I know or have known people who could run circles are Nate in math. He has an AB in Economics from University of Chicago? Good school but “it ain’t” Cal Tech. Michael Barone is not a statistician but he has a AB from Harvard and a law degree from Yale. He is a bright guy and knows the data very well.

      • M. White
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

        Please don’t think I was expressing in validity to his predictions, to the contrary, I was stating even though he has these high degrees all he is doing is putting numbers into a computer system based on top line numbers which will be PROVEN WRONG!

      • Freddie
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

        M White – got it.

        A great example of poorly constructed models was LTCM hedge fund run by John Meriwheter also a a U of Chicago grad but with an MBA. He was the top bond trader at Salomon Brothers. He took a bunch of his people to Greenwich, CT to start LTCM. They had PhDs and Nobel Prize winners (not the fake Nobel prizes like Gore, Obama and that fake Dem economist Paul Krugman). I think it was Myron Scholes and Robert Merton among others. Really smart guys.

        Their model was the real deal. The only problem was the data sample was too small and they ignored long tail/black swans or the ends of probability bell curves. They were very sloppy and lazy to ignore that.

        They were all on the golf course or enjoying life as the model was breaking down, people started figuring out what they were doing and there was a long tail event which I think was Russia. Well they got destroyed. They brought in a street smart high school dropout Italian guy who was a trader. He went through their portfolio and positions and told them it was over. He was right. Really smart people constructing flawed models is a blueprint for failure. The model “works” until it stops working.

  21. Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

    No offense to Kid Rock, but I don’t think 30K people showed up to see him. Obama is dragging celebusluts from one end of the country to the other and still can’t get more than a few thousand people out.

    He’s like a has been rock star whose excuse for playing the smaller venues is that it is a more “intimate” setting.

    • Dave
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “whose excuse for playing the smaller venues is that it is a more “intimate” setting”

      Exactly. He’s never played to 30K people on his own.

      • Dave
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

        I didn’t see 30K people come out to see Springsteen play for Obama. And Springsteen is a hall of fame rocker who probably has attracted 30+K people on his own when politics aren’t on the agenda.

      • John
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

        By himself Bruce could fill a football stadium at $100 per ticket. With Obama in tow they can’t fill a high school gym and its free.

      • JGS
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

        Really good point here. The Boss is a great musician and despite his politics, I’ll pay (and have paid) to see him perform live. But if he’s shilling for Obama, I’m staying home, even if it’s free.

      • Freddie
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

        It is pretty hilarious that Bruce could not fill a high school gym with obama. His lyrics and music are lame. Same sing songy crap with these inane simple choruses.

        I used to like Chris Christie but the guy is a RINO and a huge Springsteen fan. He goes to almost every concert (no joke). He said he has seen him probably hundreds of times.

        Christie should spend his time on a treadmill instead of going to see Bruce because he is dangerously overweight. I am not saying that to be mean.

    • AC
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I don’t think that Kid Rock was at the West Chester, Ohio, rally. I watched the event on Cspan, and I didn’t see him. Maybe he played before Cspan began its coverage.

      • Dave
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

        He’s supposed to be the last one in NH

  22. mr Dave
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’ve lived near Philly since 2000. I’ve never seen this little energy on the democrat side. Philly wins them the state. I don’t see it this year. I don’t think the turn out is there this time. Hardly any signs in the area for either side. But I see that as more of negative for the Democrats, because this area is their strong hold. Tom Smith ads out number Casey by at least 3 to 1. Presidential ads recently increased in frequency, Obama’s going negative big time…. abortion abortion abortion. I think the Democrats took it for granted they would win here. Tom Smith and Romney might have good night on Tuesday. Low turn in Philly and a swing in the burbs Pa goes red.

  23. Dave
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I have a feeling the establishment will do whatever it takes to get the dem turnout equal/near to 2008. That could very well be the surprise story of this election. No one is expecting it yet these guys know it’s their path to winning. For the last 4 years they have grown accustomed to manipulating just ablut everything with the flip of a swtich and money printing. Votes can be printed the way money can esp when you’re the incumbant with your vast connections and resources.

    • Ron
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      They lost in 2010. Toomey’s in the Senate, Corbett’s in the governorship. And Obama’s losing on the issues–coal and gas and religious freedom. The Dems in western PA have turned against him on the coal issue and the northeastern part of the state knows he’s against fracking. Besides, PA is loaded with angry Catholics. Add to this Barone’s observation that Romney is winning the upscale suburbs–especially the swing districts surrounding Philly, and you maybe will understand why Susquehanna Polling and Research has Romney up 4pts. No poll shows Obama at 50% here btw.

    • TheTorch
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Dave the problem with that is this. The media and establishment think they are more powerful than they actually are. They are in a bubble. It just does not work out like that. People have to to feel energised, that they something to vote for. That is the key thing. with Romney Ryan, they have something to vote for, Romney is giving people reasons to vote. It is not just about voting against someone.

    • mr Dave
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The democrats and union machine will do what it can. I just don’t think the energy is there. Anything could happen, I agree with that. But I don’t even think the rank and file union guys are that thrilled to vote this year. If Obama can’t win in the suburbs, he can’t win.

    • Dave
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 4:05 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I hope all of you are right and that the arrogance and cronyism of the past 4 years and in this election will have a minimal effect. I am in CA and WA and all around me I see RR signs and maybe 1 or 2 O signs. So many around the country report the same thing. No matter what kind of neighborhood I am in (poorer or affleunt), I see very few if any Obama signs and when there are signs out, mostly RR signs. I just don’t get this guy’s silent popularity.

  24. Tom
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Romney winning by as many as 10% nationally!

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332386/parsing-polls-michael-g-franc

  25. cbr66
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

    No Keith my goal is not to come back and taunt. I had been trying to make a serious point on a previous post and was responding to a taunt. It works both ways. Thanks for hosting this blog. I will keep it civil.

  26. John
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Romney just arriving Dubuque Iowa airport. Hanger is jam packed shoulder to shoulder. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/cvplive/cvpstream1

    At the same time Biden at a high school gym in Colorado and the bleachers are half full. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/cvplive/cvpstream3

    Pictures tell the story folks…

    • John
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Obama attracting smaller crowds in Ohio than McCain did – Yikes! http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/332413/obama-attracting-smaller-crowds-mccain-eliana-johnson

      • Shane kovac
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

        Well you guys do well in keeping me at least pulling my head up and still keeping hope. I will admit in 04 I worked in the legislative branch and election night I called Kerry was going to win because of polls and exits. The only way I could top that happiness of being wrong is for Romney to defy the polls

        It’s funny media just quietly mentions Romney crowds and only mentions Obama’s if get huge like the Wisconsin campus concert. Also as many have pointed out IF you Obama was leading as Comfortably as polls show why is he sending peeps to PA, AND WI.. And almost none of his media pals are outright calling it for Obama.

        Read an article today where the writer basically said Obama doesn’t need overt enthusiasm like Romney with crowds and signs.. His support is under the surface the youth are fired up but are still voting huge for him and in bug numbers. That Obama’s social media ads on Pandora twitter etc are reaching them without crowds. That Obama supporters are not as fired up but will never vote for Romney so he is winning behind the scenes.

      • TheTorch
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

        LOL. The reason for an article like that is because that is all they have left. It is spin, pure and simple. What else can they say?

    • JGS
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Both links seem to be to Biden the Boor.

  27. Jon
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Tampa Bay Times/Miami Herald Florida: R 51% O 45%

    http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/article1259531.ece

  28. M. White
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    This should tell us something big is coming on Tuesday! Please follow the link!
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/03/Obama-Cleveland-80k-compared-to-4k

  29. M. White
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/03/Obama-Cleveland-80k-compared-to-4k

  30. M. White
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here something I found on s blog post about a voter in Ohio:
    TICKED OFF IN OHIO
    SHORT LIST OF OUTRIGHT LIES BY BARACK OBAMA
    Increase the capital gains and dividends taxes for higher-income taxpayers
    Increase capital gains and dividends taxes from 15 to 20 percent for those making more than $250,000 (couples) or $200,000 (single)
    Expand the child and dependent care credit
    Expand and make refundable the child and dependent care credit.
    Create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners
    Create a $10 billion fund to help homeowners refinance or sell their homes. “The Fund will not help speculators, people who bought vacation homes or people who falsely represented their incomes.”
    Provide option for a pre-filled-out tax form
    Will direct the Internal Revenue Service to “give taxpayers the option of a pre-filled tax form to verify, sign and return to the IRS or online. This will eliminate the need for Americans to hire expensive tax preparers and to gather information that the federal government already has on file.”
    Create a mortgage interest tax credit for non-itemizers
    Create a refundable tax credit equal to 10 percent of mortgage interest for nonitemizers, up to a maximum credit of $800.
    Require automatic enrollment in 401(k) plans
    Automatic enrollment in 401(k) plans for workers whose employers offer retirement plans.
    Require automatic enrollment in IRA plans
    Require employers who do not offer retirement plans to offer their workers access to automatic IRAs and contribute via payroll deduction.
    Create a retirement savings tax credit for low incomes
    A tax credit for retirement savings up to $500 (couples) or $250 (singles). Phases out when incomes exceed $65,000 (couples) or $32,500 (single). Indexed for inflation.
    End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000
    “Will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This will eliminate taxes for 7 million seniors — saving them an average of $1,400 a year– and will also mean that 27 million seniors will not need to file an income tax return at all.”
    End no-bid contracts above $25,000
    Create a $60 billion bank to fund roads and bridges
    Repeal the Bush tax cuts for higher incomes
    Repeal the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 (couples) or $200,000 (single)
    Phase out exemptions and deductions for higher earners
    Restore the phaseouts of personal exemptions and itemized deductions for those making more than $250,000 (couples) or $200,000 (single), with threshholds indexed for inflation.
    Sign the Employee Free Choice Act, making it easier for workers to unionize
    Lift the payroll tax cap on earnings above $250,000
    Forbid companies in bankruptcy from giving executives bonuses
    Allow workers to claim more in unpaid wages and benefits in bankruptcy court
    Allow imported prescription drugs
    Prevent drug companies from blocking generic drugs
    Allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper drug prices
    Appoint federal-level coordinator to oversee all federal autism efforts
    Double federal funding for cancer research
    Direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a comprehensive study of federal cancer initiatives
    Provide the CDC $50 million in new funding to determine the most effective approaches for cancer patient care
    Fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
    Create a National Commission on People with Disabilities, Employment, and Social Security
    Change federal rules so small businesses owned by people with disabilities can get preferential treatment for federal contracts.
    Reduce the threshhold for the Family and Medical Leave Act from companies with 50 employees to companies with 25 employees
    Provide a $1.5 billion fund to help states launch programs for paid family and medical leave
    Require employers to provide seven paid sick days per year
    Expand the Family Medical Leave Act to include leave for domestic violence or sexual assault
    Form international group to help Iraq refugees
    Work with Russia to move nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert
    Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center
    Develop an alternative to President Bush’s Military Commissions Act on handling detainees
    Strengthen the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and double its budget in the next four years
    Secure ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
    Seek to negotiate a political agreement on Cyprus
    Reinstate special envoy for the Americas
    Double the Peace Corps
    Seek independent watchdog agency to investigate congressional ethics violations
    Create a public “Contracts and Influence” database
    Expose Special Interest Tax Breaks to Public Scrutiny
    Allow five days of public comment before signing bills
    Tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyists and former officials
    Double funding for Federal Charter School Program and require more accountability
    Double funding for afterschool programs
    Expand the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity
    Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws
    Support repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
    Sign the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act into law
    Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage
    Increase the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour
    Restore Superfund program so that polluters pay for clean-ups
    Support tax deduction for artists
    Re-establish the National Aeronautics and Space Council
    Support human mission to moon by 2020
    Pay for the national service plan without increasing the deficit
    Reduce the number of middle managers in the federal workforce
    Strengthen the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
    Limit term of director of national intelligence
    Give annual “State of the World” address
    Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels
    Work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers
    Establish a low carbon fuel standard
    Enact windfall profits tax for oil companies
    Create cap and trade system with interim goals to reduce global warming
    Use revenue from cap and trade to support clean energy and environmental restoration
    Require plug-in fleet at the White House
    Require new federal fleet purchases to be half plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles
    Require more flex-fuel cars for the federal government
    Mandate flexible fuel vehicles by 2012
    Double federal program to help “reverse” commuters who go from city to suburbs
    Require energy conservation in use of transportation dollars
    Provide an annual report on “state of our energy future”
    Devote federal resources to promote cellulosic ethanol
    Sign the Freedom of Choice Act
    Allow penalty-free hardship withdrawals from retirement accounts in 2008 and 2009
    Give the White House’s Privacy and Civil Liberties Board subpoena power
    Recognize the Armenian genocide
    No family making less than $250,000 will see “any form of tax increase.”
    Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN
    Create a public option health plan for a new National Health Insurance Exchange.
    Cut the cost of a typical family’s health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year
    Bring Democrats and Republicans together to pass an agenda
    Introduce a comprehensive immigration bill in the first year

  31. Paul8148
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    @edhenryTV
    I remember covering a McCain rally in this very gym in Mentor, OH late in ’08 & D’s said it was b/c could not draw large outdoor crowds ..

    • Tedley
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

      As predicited by many – the MSM had to start fessing up eventually, and I guess it’s begun. Mittmentum is the real deal.

      • Paul8148
        Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

        you know it interesting. We have John King reporting on the cnn +3 poll taking about the night and day difference in the republicans GOTV in ohio this year and Romney can still win. Chuck todd has a number of times hinted that he does not by the marist polls.

  32. Mass liberty
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I do analysis for a living. I am dam good at it. Everything I’ve observed these past four years and this past year of campaigning, all the deep analysis of poll internals on my own and by sites like this, everything, everything points to a Romney big win. Yet, here I am. Spending my weekend chained to my iphone, grasping at any straw of positive news I can find that help confirm what I should be confident about. Questining my own sanity and unbiased analytical skills.

    I want to thank this site for being my lifeline. I am truly pathetic right now! Lol

    Thanks all for posting the news that you receive!

  33. ScooterBoy
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Something, I think a lot of people are missing. Repubs are doing quite well in congressional races. They may break even or lose only a few seats. You would assume if it was 2008 again, as so many pollsters are assuming, that Repubs would be getting wiped out at the congressional level. I think Romney wins by 3.

    • Harun
      Posted November 4, 2012 at 3:41 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, unless the electorate wants to elect Obama purely for gridlock’s sake.

  34. Dean
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Although this poll looks strange, and a bit of an outlier, I’d trust it more than any poll that shows O up in FL.

    The state polls are a crapshoot. In 2004, the RCP average for FL was Bush by 0.9. He won by 5.

    In 2012, there is little chance (in my opinion) that the state polls in VA and FL, and especially NC (there are actually some polls showing NC leading by O believe it or not) that show O leading Romney are completely wrong.

  35. Alex
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    TCJ Research also has Romney up 6 in Florida.
    http://tcjresearch.wordpress.com/2012/11/02/tcj-research-florida-poll-mitt-romney-52-barack-obama-46/

    My guess is that Romney is stopping there and in Virginia to try and get Mack and Allen over the top respectively.

  36. C-Bus GOP
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I can’t stand guys like Nate Silver. He lives in the “bubble” of Manhattan, surrounded by a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals like him who think like him….thus in his mind, the whole world thinks like him and thus supports Obama. I bet he hasn’t even been to Ohio once. He certainly hasn’t spent any signficant time here or he would certainly know better.

    So he puts these crap polls in his “model” and voila – Obama has an 84% chance of winning Ohio.
    ….assuming of course a D+9 turnout.

    Folks, I am a physician here in the Columbus, Ohio area. I have lived in Columbus all my life. My main office is in a middle class suburb. I am bordered on one side by an upper middle to upper class suburb and on the other side a lower middle class suburb. I have another office in Columbus proper, a more urban setting – I spend about 30% of my time there.

    I see people from all walks of life. Although I don’t push politics in my office people do ask me stuff all the time, about health care, Obamacare, etc. So I can see where people are coming from.

    Bottom line: Romney will win Ohio and it won’t be close.

    I will laugh so hard at Silver come Wednesday when he will have some ‘splainin to do…..
    To know politics, you have to know the areas. You have to know the cities, the counties, the neighborhoods. Listen to Rove he clearly gets this. Adrian Gray gets this. Barone gets this.

    Nate, you obviously DONT get this. And you will soon be exposed for the fraud you are.

    • Posted November 3, 2012 at 2:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It’s people like you that often get the real scoop on you area of the states that the pollsters miss. Good info.

    • Fred S
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

      C-bus – your insights on the ground in Ohio are invaluable and gives us all comfort.
      I live in NYC and can tell you that Nate Silver and his ilk are viewing this election from his world. He probably lives on the UWS of Manhattan which will probably go 80% Obama. In this insular world, people like him have deluded themselves into thinking that it is inevitable and would be a travesty if BO loses this election. If you suggest to these people that you are voting for Romney they look at you with emotions which range from indignation to contempt.
      It is quite obvious that 30,000 people would not wait 4 hours in the cold for a candidate unless they were truly energized. Obama gets 2,800 and I am sure many are union people who get bussed in to beef up the attendees.
      I can’t believe that this enthusiasm gap will not propel Romney to a convincing victory.

    • Mass liberty
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is exactly why the authoritative polling outfit to believe in Pennsylvania is Susquehanna. Pennsylvania down to the town level is all that they do.

    • TheTorch
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Spot on C-Bus and that is also why I see Barone’s analysis as far more credible, because he knows the states inside out. He looks at the internals of the states.

    • Freddy
      Posted November 3, 2012 at 4:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks for the update Doc C-Bus. Silver is a NY Times stooge was a BA or AB from U of Chicago. He is no quant expert and I have known a few mathematicians who are very smart. .

      Barone has an AB from Harvard and a law degree from Yale when those schools were very tough academically. He was not a C or D student special exemption like Obama or some rich kids like the Kennedys. Barine is a bright guy with very Midwest values and he is objective. His dad was a surgeon.

      A person I know in Florida went to see their doc, who I think is a specialist. He is very good and calm. She said nothing about politics but is for Romney. He said he was quitting medicine if Obama won and said that he was literally Satan. She almost fell of the chair.

  37. AC
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Todays’ Larry Kudlow Show featured an interesting interview with Robert Costa, political reporter for the National Review. Interview starts at minute 18:45.
    http://www.wabcradio.com/FlashPlayer/default.asp?SPID=33448&ID=2566556
    http://www.wabcradio.com/sectional.asp?id=33448

  38. Chris A.
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 3:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Serious question. Why are people taking a poll from Mason-Dixon seriously? That pollster has never been anything close to accurate. The only consistency they have is being wrong. Their polls are off by such wide margins I don’t even know why they’re even recognized anymore. 2008 should have cast them to the depths of polling hell along with Zogby.

  39. lost democrat
    Posted November 3, 2012 at 11:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

    http://datechguyblog.com/2012/10/18/demoralized-as-hell-the-85-solution/
    Here is some information about African-American support for Obama . it is not as strong as the MSM leads you to believe.

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: