Why I Think Obama Is Toast
--Dan McLaughlin
...Two things stand out:
One, Mitt Romney has a consistent, significant lead among independent voters, which increasingly looks like a double-digit lead. This is especially clear in national polls, but can also be seen in the key swing state polls. It’s been a hard enough number for the past few weeks now, even as the last of the debates gets baked into the polls, that there’s little chance that Obama can turn it around in the [8] days remaining in this race. In fact, Obama has been underwater with independents almost continuously since the middle of 2009.
Two, to overcome losing independents by more than a few points, Obama needs to have a decisive advantage in Democratic turnout, roughly on the order of – or in some places exceeding – the advantage he enjoyed in 2008, when Democrats nationally had a 7-point advantage (39-32). Yet nearly every indicator we have of turnout suggests that, relative to Republicans, the Democrats are behind where they were in 2008. Surveys by the two largest professional pollsters, Rasmussen and Gallup, actually suggest that Republicans will have a turnout advantage, which has happened only once (in the 2002 midterms) in the history of exit polling and probably hasn’t happened in a presidential election year since the 1920s.
Those two facts alone caused me to conclude at the end of last week that Obama will lose – perhaps lose a very close race, but lose just the same. That conclusion is only underscored by the fact that, historically, there is little reason to believe that the remaining undecided voters will break for an incumbent in tough economic times. He will lose the national popular vote, and the fact that he has remained competitive to the end in the two key swing states he needs to win (Ohio and Wisconsin) will not save him.
There is much more analysis-- including beaucoups of charts -- at this opinions' link; there's simply too much of it to post here. As to whether or not McLaughlin is right, only November 7th knows for certain. But I'm content to wait.
The Obama Ground Game Myth
--Jonathan S. Tobin
In the last week, there have been two consistent themes being sounded by the Democrats. One is the assertion that Mitt Romney’s momentum has been halted and even reversed. The other is that their ground game is so good that the president is bound to win the election no matter what the polls say. These two talking points are closely related, since the polls that liberal analysts cite in order to assert that the president is edging back into the lead are based on assumptions about the composition of the electorate that are only possible if the Democrats match or even exceed the massive turnout they achieved in 2008.
Why pollsters would assume that a correct sample for the 2012 election would mirror the 2008 results when Obama rode a wave of disgust for the Bush administration and belief in his promise of hope and change is a mystery that demands an explanation that has yet to be forthcoming. Yet Democrats say the question is irrelevant since their ability to generate turnout is so expert and so superior to that of the Republicans they believe there is little doubt that once again the number of their voters will outnumber those of the GOP.
I see little to no evidence of democratic voter enthusiasm. I believe Democratic pollsters are touting Obama's inevitability because they have no choice (just as their Republican's had no choice last election) unless they seed fear into their party's rank and file.
But again, only November 7th knows for certain how this is all going to pan out.
Election 2012: Ohio President
Ohio: Romney 50%, Obama 48%
The race for Ohio’s Electoral College votes remains very close, but now Mitt Romney now has a two-point advantage.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Ohio Voters shows Romney with 50% support to President Obama’s 48%. One percent (1%) likes some other candidate, while another one percent (1%) remains undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Ohio remains a Toss-Up in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections. Based on the current projections, Romney would have to win Wisconsin if he loses Ohio in order to move into the White House.
The most accurate pollster in 2008 has Romney up by 2. Not much, really, to crow about, but it does put to lie (or "wishful thinking" status) the Democratic line that the Mittmentum is over, that the Obama camp has halted the surge toward and for Mitt Romney.
I'll be up all night next Tuesday, or until one or the other candidates makes his concession speech. Personally, I believe that candidate will be out going President Barack H. Obama.
The thing about Rasmussen Polls is that they are automated phone polls. That means that they are barred from calling cell phone numbers. Consequently Rasmussen under-counts many of the constituencies that are more likely to only have a call phone.
ReplyDeleteThese are the groups more likely to vote democratic, so Rasmussen polls have a baked in bias towards republicans. They use statistical modelling to try to correct, but historical comparisons show their polls are consistently off 3-5%.
Of all the pollsters last time around, Rassmussen was the most accurate. No bias is "cooked" into their polling, unless, and especially if it's technology trends were talking about; ie, certain demographics trending more to mobile than land-line. This would imply a deliberate attempt to mislead, and if we wanted to talk about pollsters deliberate misleading the public with "cooked" polls there are plenty to choose from from among more mainstream media outlets; they've been doing it for months-- up until last month, at least. After all pollsters HAVE to be right the last 4 to 6 six weeks of a campaign if they want any credibility in future races.
ReplyDeleteBut I can understand the "logic" behind your argument. For the first time in this campaign polls are showing Romney ahead, albeit slightly, and within the margin of error. Many on the left (and I'm not necessarily talking about you) need to find "plausible" explanations for Obama's slippage in what was once considered an easy win for him. Republicans weren't any different last time around.
Now, if it's plausible explanations we're looking for, the Benghazi Scandal is the biggest October Surprise I've ever seen. It can't help Obama one bit that the father of a Navy SEAL is out there both forgiving AND asking the president to come clean on why his son was ordered to 'stand down' (an order ignored by Tyrone Woods). Especially since this is one person, Charles Woods, that Obama CAN'T publicly criticize. Mr. Woods' statements cannot be attacked by the president if he expects to win a second term.
And then there's this, from Newsmax:
ReplyDeleteGallup: Romney, GOP Lead in Early Voting
With "Frankenstorm" threatening the final days of the presidential race, Gallup released a new poll today showing that GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney is leading President Barack Obama in early voting, something that had been a key part of the Obama campaign strategy.
Meanwhile, Gallup also reported that more Republicans than Democrats have already voted by a margin of 19 to 15 percent. "When those who intend to vote before Election Day are factored in, the gap is similar: 37 percent of Republicans vs. 33 percent of Democrats," according to the polling organization.
"Romney currently leads Obama 52 percent to 45 percent among voters who say they have already cast their ballots," Gallup reported. "However, that is comparable to Romney's 51 percent to 46 percent lead among all likely voters in Gallup's Oct. 22-28 tracking polling."
--------------
I'm sure you can find the source info at Gallup, but just taking this information at face value, it bears up my previous statement that even the more biased, or "cooked", polls have to be right toward the end or they loose all credibility in future races.
Furthermore, on a side note, Jay Carney, White House Press Guy, was asked yesterday, or the day before, if Obama had considered postponing the election because of Sandy. Naturally, he had no answer to this question. I reckon many in the press worry that this storm will depress voter turnout among democrat voters specifically, never mind the fact that it'll depress republican turnout in the very same areas; some areas are expected to be without power for up to ten days, days past the November 6th date. But Obama doesn't have the power to postpone a Federally/Constitutionally mandated election. In fact, the only time an election was ever postponed in this country-- that I know of --was during 9/11, in New York City. But these weren't Federally/Constitutionally mandated elections. They were local. Not even during the Civil War, or World Wars 1 & 2 did we ever suspend or postpone a national Constitutionally mandated election. And Hurricane Sandy won't stop this one, unless the president trods all over his oath of office to do so.
With Republicans early voting numbers currently higher than Democrats, if this "act of God" storm (some are calling it this, none of them Democrats), Sandy, causes some Democratic electorate bastions find themselves without power, and unable to open for voting, this could very well hurt Obama.
But it would hurt Romney too. Perhaps more so than Obama. If Romney is going to win, and I believe he will, I much prefer it to happen without that cloud of controversy many on the left will accuse a president Romney. I'd rather everyone got a chance to vote.
Lastly. It is my personal opinion that, if Obama COULD change the date of the election, he'd rather have moved up the date to LAST Tuesday, because he's loosing this race the longer he stays in it.
A Headline in red at Drudge (9:49am) states:
ReplyDeleteGALLUP: OBAMA'S EARLY VOTE LEAD DROPS 22-POINTS FROM 2008...
A 22% drop? This doesn't bode well for President Obama. It would appear the democratic electorate is seriously depressed. And with only 5 early voting days left (including today) before November 6th, there just isn't enough time to make up the difference.
New:
ReplyDeleteNew Projection of Election Results: Romney 52, Obama 47
--Fred Barnes, The Weekly Standard
"The bipartisan Battleground Poll, in its 'vote election model,' is projecting that Mitt Romney will defeat President Obama 52 percent to 47 percent. The poll also found that Romney has an even greater advantage among middle class voters, 52 percent to 45 percent.
"While Obama can close the gap with a strong voter turnout effort, 'reports from the field would indicate that not to be the case, and Mitt Romney may well be heading to a decisive victory,' says pollster Ed Goeas.
"Should Romney win by 5 percentage points, it would increase Republican chances of gaining control of the Senate. His coattails would help elect GOP Senate candidates in Virginia, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. 'Republicans are now certain to hold the House,' Goeas said, 'regardless of how the presidential race turns out.'
"The poll’s election model takes into account variables including voter intensity, age, and education, and voters who are certain in their vote. The race 'remains very close in the surface,' Goeas said, 'but the political environment and the composition of the likely electorate favor Governor Romney.'
"The projected outcome by the Battleground Poll is close to that of the Gallup Poll. Last week, Gallup said Romney leads Obama 49 percent to 46 percent in its model of the electorate’s composition on November 6."
My opinion? The only poll that matters is the one taken on November 6th. Other points:
ReplyDeleteI've read that typically, Democrats tend to stay at home during bad weather than Republicans. I don't know if that's true. I guess it depends on how passionate the voters are.
The Benghazi incident may have little or no effect on Democrat voters due to the simple fact that they don't pay attention to any media resources other than Liberal ones, like MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS. Those Liberal, Obama lapdog media are still burying the story right now, although there have been a little nit of it mentioned on CBS and MSNBC, but so far, they haven't fully reported it, and especially not the really damning parts of the story.
Plus, I wouldn't be so optimistic that Romney will win. There have been more reported incidents of voter fraud this election than in any time in our history. And, it's the Democrats that are perpetrating it, not the Republicans. Democrats are also trying to suppress votes with intimidation. Look at all the letters that were sent out to Central Florida residents (all Republicans and mostly elderly) telling them that they can't vote this year because their citizenship has been called into question.
ReplyDeleteAnd, don't forget there are millions of voters who don't have a clue what the issues are, or even who's running for President. All they know is what other clueless Liberals have told them, and that is "Vote for Obama!~" They don't even know why they should. And, remember, 96% of black voters voted for Obama simply because he is black, and there is little indication that number will fall by more than a few percentage points.
Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
You say Romeny will be elected -- ?
ReplyDeleteI BELIEVE that completely.
BZ
A lot of people are believing that BZ. And I further believe the Senate will be Republican.
ReplyDeleteI guess it comes down to who you believe. Statisticians whose future income is based on the accuracy of their polls and predictions or pundits whose future renumeration will be based on their fealty to the party line.
ReplyDeleteWhat it comes down to is credibility. And the internals of most of these polls are inordinately weighted toward an enthusiastic democratic turnout.... which isn't really there.
ReplyDeleteGallup and Rassmussen... all these two organizations do is poll. They are the most credible. The rest are all attached, primarily to colleges or news organizations (Gallup is also quite often attached to news organizations), which are, by and large, overwhelmingly, devoted to Obama's reelection. That, I'm afraid, is hardly the bright shining picture of objectivity/non-partisanship.