Posted on 09/04/2012 8:34:22 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
As the Republican convention closed on Thursday night, a new poll pointed to the potential for a major surprise when Americans go to the voting booths in November.
Pollsters will tell you that they cannot always count on voters to level with them about which candidates they favor. For example, Gov. Scott Walker's victory in the Wisconsin recall election several months ago was predicted by the polls, but his margin was not. It was a larger margin than the surveys had forecast. Similarly in 2004, Sen. John Kerry went to bed on election night believing he would be the next president. He woke to a surprise, as did Democrats in 1994 and, to a lesser degree, in 1980. Note, in all these elections it was the Democratic who got the unwelcome surprise.
There are any number of hypotheses as to why. For example, on the 2004 election, one of the most knowledgeable men on political statistics in the United States, Michael Barone, has noted that when the media consortium that sponsored the exit polling delved in depth as to why their results were so far off the actual results, they found a remarkable coincidence. In many of the precincts where their samples diverged most markedly from the actual balloting, the interviewers—those who approached voters and asked for whom they had cast their ballots—were attractive, female graduate students. These exemplars of a heavily Democratic cohort may have telegraphed their personal preferences to respondents (particularly male respondents), who had fed them back the answer they so clearly wanted to hear. Makes you wonder whom the exit pollsters will hire for this year interviewing.
A less, shall we say, "exotic" explanation for the GOP polls-to-voting gap is that in big years when a lot of non-Republicans have planned to cast their ballots for the Republican ticket, a sizeable number of union members haven't wanted to take the chance of telling anyone that they planned to buck their leadership. Another explanation is that the distrust many conservatives harbor toward the mainstream media spills over to pollsters. They become less candid when elections are most fiercely contested.
In any event, whatever the cause of the gap, pollsters have asked, is there a question that gets around the candor deficits? And some believe they have an answer. People may not tell you their candidate preference directly. But in close races where there is no credible consensus about the likely outcome, they typically believe that their candidate will win. In other words, ask them which side is likely to prevail in the next election and their answer will tell you their real opinion.
Which brings us to this year. A quick glance at the presidential poll summary at RealClearPolitics.com shows an amazing confluence of the eight national polls the Web site tracks. As of this weekend, all but two find a 1-point difference between the president and Mitt Romney. The remaining two have a two-point spread. In other words, everyone is finding the national vote tied, that is, falling within the margin of statistical noise that goes hand-in-hand with all survey research.
This is new. Only a month ago, the spread between the most pro-Obama and the most pro-Romney poll on the RealClearPolitics list was 11 points. Both polls advertised a 3-point margin of error. Someone was wrong. Since then all the opinion samples have clustered around what the most pro-Romney polls of a month or so ago were reporting: a neck-and-neck race. But given the traditional GOP gap, is a dead heat the real story?
Maybe not. In a poll released on Friday, Rasmussen Reports found that "60 percent of likely U.S. voters believe the next president will be a Republican." Only a quarter thought it would be a Democrat.
Eighty-nine percent of Republicans said the president after Obama would be from their camp, and 55 percent of independents agreed. Surprisingly 38 percent of Democrats had the same view (versus 47 percent who said it would be a Democrat). The telephone survey was taken during the last two nights of the GOP convention and got answers from 1,000 voters, meaning it was a typical sample.
The Rasmussen team was quick to point out that they did not specify whether the "next president" would be elected in 2012 or 2016. But still, with Michigan, Wisconsin, and Colorado having moved from at least leaning Democrat to "in play" in recent assessments, something may be going on below the surface.
Here is one certainty: The Romney and Ryan presentations in Tampa put on display a pair of principled, compassionate, capable men, prepared to lead in a direction consistent with America's deepest values. Maybe, quietly, a much larger slice of the American people agreed than we have suspected.
November could be interesting.
Carter’s internal polling told him the truth. Way before the race was called he said to Jody Powell “We lost, didn’t we.”
To which Powell replied “Yes, Sorry Mr President.”
But what amazes me is what you hear from the speeches....obama has stopped lobbying and gotten rid of the DC insiders, he’s made illegals legal by going to college or joining the military, he’s made it okay for gays to serve openingly and has approved gay marriage. This stuff is either flat out lies or truths nobody agrees with. Yet they still vote for him. Everyone of those delegates should be auditioning for the WALKING DEAD.
NOWHERE in the article does it mention the blatant OVERSAMPLING of Dims that is going on in most polls (Rasmussen and Gallup seem to be avoiding this but they are still only sampling registered voters as opposed to likely voters).
Most prominent example of Dim over-sampling: the exit polls that said Scott Walker would win by a razor’s edge over-sampled Dims by around 4 points. Actual result: Walker win 52-48.
I ALWAYS look at the poll internals. ALL polls that give Zero a wide lead ALWAYS over-sample Dims.
And the latest trick? Some polls are now not even giving the breakdown of Dims, Repubs, and Indies. (This was the case in two recent polls that had Zero leading in NV by 2 points and leading in PA by 4 points).
I think support for Romney is FAR MORE than what the public polls are showing.
I think that the Dim operatives know the real story, which is why the campaign is so nasty. However, I don’t think anyone has told Zero what the real numbers are (too afraid of VJ).
"I see a blowout coming -- 59% to 39% -- not quite a record, but devastating enough to dismantle the Dem machine up and down the tickets."
Fairly optimistic. Even Reagan's second election (1984) never made your 59% popular vote victory hurdle; only Harding (1920), Nixon (1972), Roosevelt (1936), and Johnson (1964) exceeded said mark...
Presidential election results listed by Popular vote (for elections with Popular vote) sorted in decending order:
dvwjr td width=99123
I am embarking on this just to expose both sides. It is my contention that the GOPe uses them more to keep up and comers out by squashing them in the arena of public debate essentially calling them unelectable and shaping the public opinion accordingly.
It was Ted Cruz’s victory over the establishment that got me to thinking about how the GOE uses them to defeat dissent.
"Keeps pollsters gainfully employed"
Right. This is the same America that neutered Bill Clinton for far less of a Crap Sandwich than Obama has served up.
Me too, Wingy.
Sometimes I'm a 24 year old, black, lesbian that is going to vote for Romney, sometimes I'm a Latino that is going to vote for obama, but they never get a real answer from me.
If the Dem platform- government sponsored abortion, gay marriage, absence of God- is any indication, Obama realizes he’s in big trouble. He understands his only hope is to motivate his base to vote in numbers like they did for 2008 and just pray he can slime R/R enough to convince a good chunk of independents to stick with him. If he starts to play the race card, that’s a sure sign his numbers have tanked.
I tend to agree. What do you think their commentary will be the morning after Obama’s Debacle?
Here’s my uneducated take on things...
You can only look at the most recent election any where to try to get a reasonable idea of how things may go, especially if conditions economically, etc. haven’t changed or have gotten worse...here goes:
Wisconsin: recall of Walker a blow out
2010 elections: referendum on Obummer
NMex: conservatishy Latina gov
VA: very conservative state govt
NC: big no on gay marriage
FL: Rubio
I wouldn’t rely on the immediate past results as much if the economy wasn’t so bad, the tax axe wasn’t hanging over our heads, Obummer care wasn’t so unpopular, gay marriage wasn’t so unpopular, etc.
Just my read on things...hope I’m right.
Here’s my uneducated take on things...
You can only look at the most recent election any where to try to get a reasonable idea of how things may go, especially if conditions economically, etc. haven’t changed or have gotten worse...here goes:
Wisconsin: recall of Walker a blow out
2010 elections: referendum on Obummer
NMex: conservatishy Latina gov
VA: very conservative state govt
NC: big no on gay marriage
FL: Rubio
I wouldn’t rely on the immediate past results as much if the economy wasn’t so bad, the tax axe wasn’t hanging over our heads, Obummer care wasn’t so unpopular, gay marriage wasn’t so unpopular, etc.
Just my read on things...hope I’m right.
Isn’t there a new CNN poll showing Obama up by 7 (52-45)?
Would seem to show thatthe GOP convention backfired, which plays right into the Dem narrative that it was a disaster.
I think the important thing is to look at what the campaigns are actually doing, because they’ll have the best and most accurate polls. Particularly striking is the convention of Black ministers on how to motivate their congregations to get out and vote for Obama. That wouldn’t be happening if there weren’t numbers showing soft support.
You're probably right. Our demographics probably won't allow it, even if conditions justify it.
From the table you posted, Hoover came in with 58.21%, and went out with FDR taking 57.41%. It could happen. Right or wrong, the incumbent got the blame.
BTW..any chance that "Eastern Daylight Time" on the timestamps can appear as E.D.T?
“If Zero somehow wins in November, there is no way on God’s Green Earth he will be followed by a Democrat.”
He won’t be followed by anyone for decades. There will be no more elections.
Obama unexpectedly defeated at polls
Nope, latest CNN polls shows it a dead heat at 48-48
Thanks! But now I’m wondering where on CNN.com the story with that 52-45 poll was. I know I saw it this morning, can’t find it now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.