Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wisconsin-sized polling error could mask Romney sweep of battleground states
The Daily Caller ^ | 06/07/2012 | Meagan Clark and Gage Smith

Posted on 06/08/2012 3:16:08 AM PDT by Publius804

Former Gov. Mitt Romney would collect at least 72 of the 110 electoral votes available in eight battleground states if President Barack Obama’s current polling numbers, as reported by The Huffington Post, are overstated by a mere one percent.

Romney would win that electoral majority in Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and Wisconsin if there is a one percent undercount and if undecided voters there split evenly between Romney and Obama.

That would give the former Massachusetts Gov. at least 253 — just a few votes shy of the 270 he will need to claim the White House.

But if the undecided voters break for Romney by two-thirds, Romney would win all those states’ 110 votes, pushing him well above the 270 margin and earning Obama a helicopter ride home to Illinois.

“It’s a good reminder that small shifts in votes can play a big role in electoral votes,” Trey Grayson, director of Harvard’s Institute of Politics, told The Daily Caller.

Grayson predicted that the battleground states are “likely to break together,” resulting in a strong showing for one candidate or the other. “A lot of these states have things in common,” he said, including Midwestern geography and higher than average populations of white voters.

Some Democratic-leaning organizations are concerned that the polls may overstate Obama’s support. “This is going to be a very tough year to poll,” MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Wednesday.

Tuesday’s recall vote in Wisconsin, in which incumbent Gov. Scott Walker prevailed by 6.8 percentage points, was a good indicator of how badly some pre-election polling can perform.

A June 3 poll by the Democratic-aligned Public Policy Polling firm underestimated Walker’s support by nearly 4 points. It showed Walker at 50 percent, only three points ahead of his Democratic challenger, Tom Barrett.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012polls; 2012swingstates; blunders; election; romney2012; romneyobama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: muawiyah; Diogenesis

1) He can too beat him. He’s practically a lame duck already.
2) Agree on the supermajority—but think that with the SM, the congress won’t be sending him any liberal bills to sign.
3) You don’t have the numbers to overcome the GOP-e regarding who the candidate will be. One day we may, but not today. As a modern sage said, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had, nor the army you hope to have one day.
4) I wish you guys wouldn’t bash him here. Please adopt Jim Robinson’s policy and if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all. We’re at a tipping point like in 1942, though thankfully it hasn’t come to blood yet, and what we do now is crucial for winning the war. It’s like weathering the storm - then we mount the counterattack.

Thank you


41 posted on 06/08/2012 7:26:30 AM PDT by ichabod1 (Cheney/Rumsfeld 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

I need to save your posts to keep me sane when the inevitable ups and downs come before November..
The Senate is SO important..I agree.


42 posted on 06/08/2012 7:37:20 AM PDT by MEG33 (O Lord, Guide Our Nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Awgie

Mr. RomneyCARE DEFENDS Obama.

On RomneyCARE.

On TARP.

On Obama’s ineligibility.

ROmney is a coward who ONLY defends Obama’s
sick policies (and will continue them).


43 posted on 06/08/2012 7:42:03 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

You have to admit, Romney is the best fighting candidate since Reagan. Not that he is in any way otherwise comparable to Reagan, but I am tired of wussy Republican candidates.


44 posted on 06/08/2012 7:45:14 AM PDT by zeebee (Where would I be right now if all my dreams had come true? -Mason Jennings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Why don’t you go post your crap over at DU. Unlike here, they would actually enjoy and appreciate it.


45 posted on 06/08/2012 8:35:06 AM PDT by Lucas McCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ichabod1
You know this is one puke we will need to be bashing from Day 1. The man is not trustworthy.

I'm simply practicing ~ telling the truth ~ and you feel like that's bashing.

Dude's a loser and his presence on the ticket endangers the second greatest landslide Congressional and State victory we've had in the last 72 years!

46 posted on 06/08/2012 8:40:22 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
Do not be fooled by early polling. It's almost always wrong ~ disastrously wrong if you believe it.

Here's the problem ~ the polls we are looking at EVERESTIMATE the number of Democrats, OVERESTIMATE the number of Independents, and UNDERESTIMATE the number of Republicans.

Obviously that's a problem and ordinarily the double counting of Democrats would serve to tell you that the Democrat is way ahead of the Republican.

However, in a Race to the Bottom where both major candidates are actually shedding voters ~ and the news is 0bama is actually getting some large percentage of Liberals to say they won't bother showing up to vote ~ the fact that the Republican is ahead of the Democrat may reflect something other than what you think.

Let's go back to basics. The first rule in winning an election is to HOLD YOUR PARTY BASE. If Obama is losing control of the base, all those Democrats and Independents (both words mean "Probably a Democrat") are going somewhere ~ at least on the poll.

That would be to ROMNEY!

Bingo, Romney is getting Democrats to tell us he's their favorite.

By now that ought to give him about a 75% popularity rating, but that's not where he's at. He's also down there below 50%, above Obama (in these polls biased toward Democrats), but still not winning territory ~ you gotta' get 50% + to win in most races.

So, why isn't he getting the big numbers in the polls? Could it be that a large percent of his apparent polling strength is nothing more than Democrats, with just a smidgen of Republicans saying 'Hey, yeah, he's my boy'?

We need to watch these polls carefully to see what the folks call themselves who opt for Romney. If they're Democrats and not Republicans, he's got more trouble than you can believe (and 0bama and his people know that).

If otherwise that would mean entirely too many Republicans for the safety of the Republic are willing to bow down under the yoke of the GOP-e and be serfs.

47 posted on 06/08/2012 8:53:43 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: CMAC51
Your response is IGNANT in the extreme. With a super majority the Congress can select anyone they need as President.

What do you imagine they might do to the Supreme Court?

48 posted on 06/08/2012 8:57:12 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Awgie
Give me a break ~ you are so full of it. My concern with Romney is very simple ~ he's a baby killer and he participated in electoral cheating in Virginia where I live.

I Suppose others have their reasons, but in my book you only get to ill one baby and you're off the ticket!

49 posted on 06/08/2012 8:59:54 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dutch Boy
The problem with "czars" is the name ~ the concept has been around a very long time and has been used by every President even if what it was called was a "kitchen cabinet'. They are simply part of the level of government where you have appointed officers ~

Historically the biggest problem has been where a President used a special advisor to beat in the head of a Cabinet officer to do something just a tad stretch beyond what the law (passed by Congress) allowed.

0bama is probably well into that practice.

Later on, after this regime moves on, we can probably go back and prosecute some of these guys for their excesses.

50 posted on 06/08/2012 9:04:56 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: trebb
You are calling honest debate "hate", like the typical commie in the 0bama brigade. You are questioning the patriotism of real patriots here while attempting to get them prohibited from posting. You are also impugning our religious virtue by saying we'd campaign for Satan against Romney.

Let me say this about that ~ you are on the wrong board.

51 posted on 06/08/2012 9:08:00 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lucas McCain
What crap is that, RomneyBOT?

That Romney cheats and backstabs CONSERVATIVES?

That Romney and his Team THREW the Election in 2008
by attacking Gov. Palin on the EVE of the election?

That Romney created BOTH RomneyCARE and imposed gay marriage
by SHREDDING the Mass. Constitution?

That Romney DEFENDS Obama's ineligibility?

What crap, RomneyBOT?

52 posted on 06/08/2012 9:15:40 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with much of your analysis.

The Wisconsin polling isn’t just phone polls,its exit polls of a real election, every single person who was interviewed was a legitimate voter of some sort.. so to say, that poll means nothing, is flat out wrong, it tells you way more than any other poll we will see for a long time.

I agree that polling 5 months out is not indicative of the final outcome, however, to say it holds no meaning is also untrue.

You are correct that right now Romney doesn’t have the base as rock solid as folks would like because some conservatives are still bitter, and probably will only get grudging support ever from many. However, to extrapolate that anger over the bitter primary season, and the fact romney is not a hard core conservative will equate to votes for his oponent in the fall is lunancy.

Going to HOLD your base argument, lets look at that for a minute... Your proposition that because Romney isn’t as ideologicall conservative as many would like (myself included) that the republican voters by far are going to no show the election, well, that’s just not reality. Hell even here on FR, where you are finding the right of the right congregating, you have a few folks screaming they’ll never vote for him, but the overwhelming majority, are saying the same things the polling has been showing for months.... crawl over broken glass, and then through salt flats to vote Obama gone. While the enthusiam for the candidate may not be what Palin could do for crowds in ‘08, dont confuse enthusiams for your candidate, with enthusiams to get the guy whos currently there gone. All of Palin’s enthusiams didn’t do jack on election day.. Republican turnout was supressed. The “enthusiam” for Obama had nothing to do with Obama, he had nothing.. he was elected on the simple fundamentals of folks were tired of Bush.

‘08 was a referendum on Bush.. 12 is a referendum on Obama. A referendum he is destined to lose and lose big. The republican candidate, really is irrellevant, so long as it wasn’t a complete neophite who clearly would not be able to handle the pressure, or someone who could be painted as a scarier alternative to Obama. Like it or not Romney can’t be painted as scarier than OBama to the swing voter, and he’s not going to collapse under the pressure of the campaign. Now any candidate who met those qualifications would beat Obama in the fall, regardless of their name, and is Romney my choice for who I would have liked to have faced off? Nope, but he’s the guy whos going to do it, and he’s going to win.

Furthermore, the idea there is somewhere for Obama to grow his support is laughable, he’s LOST support in nearly every part of his base in every poll conducted, and most importantly the single biggest group he must carry to have any shot of winning. The blue dog democrat, Obama has utterly austracised this group. While this group is largely portrayed as elected democrats from souther states, where Obama has no chance of winning, the reality is, its a very sizeable group of the party across the midwest. Most of the democratic voters in the rust belt are blue dogs. They are socially conservative working class whites, and Obama has disenfranchised this group horrifically.

He’s lost support in the sub 30 crowd, can’t get support when 50% of them can’t find jobs. He’s lost massive support in working class white democratic voter, etc etc etc.. You can’t win elections by that.

The data has been there for months, Obama cannot win, its not even going to be close. If at this stage of the game, a sitting democratic president is polling under 50% in places like Michigan and WI, the game is over.

I agree the numbers will move around between now and November, but its not going to be nearly enough to save this disaster.

Can you name anyone who voted for McCain who is saying, okay I’m going to give Obama a chance this time? I know I can’t... Hell I’ve had a hard enough time finding swing voters I know that voted for Obama last time who are even willing to admit they did it these days, let alone say they plan on doing it again.

Every major group of the democratic coalition, Obama has lost support in, and isn’t going to get it back.. youth, done, blue dogs, done, Catholics, done... He can’t make up the support he’s lost by getting a little more out of gays or blacks.

Obama lost the base a long time ago of his party, and he’s losing the Swing vote by 3-5 to 2-1... he’s toast.

End of the day, On election day, fewer people will be employed than the day Obama took office... that’s cold hard reality, that he can’t overcome.


53 posted on 06/08/2012 10:52:09 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
i totally ignore exit polls

As should you.

Let's say the Electricians union shows up between 9 and 10 AM. Those early reports will be that 100% of the voters say they're voting for old doufous, the local Mafia union boss. Then, later on that day 10 times that number of people from the Peace and Bombs movement show up ~ but the pollster is already downtown writing his report.

My references to polls are always to expressed preference, and that's whether they are saying registered voters, cats and dogs, probable voters, or people from another country.

54 posted on 06/08/2012 12:20:59 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

“What crap, RomneyBOT?”

Well, first of all, spouting stuff like RomneyBOT is crap. Childish, schoolyard crap. I have never voted for Romney and he was far from my first choice.

Using your logic, you are an ObamaBOT. Romney is the only person that stands between Obama and a second term. If you can’t see that you have a shoe size IQ.

So, all your crap tearing down Romney is just building up Obama. That crap.


55 posted on 06/08/2012 2:37:30 PM PDT by Lucas McCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Your response is IGNANT in the extreme. With a super majority the Congress can select anyone they need as President. What do you imagine they might do to the Supreme Court?

My apologies, I didn't realize that I was speaking with someeone that thought Congress selects the president and appoints the Supreme Court. In your world, a super majority would be more important. My mistake.

56 posted on 06/08/2012 3:03:19 PM PDT by CMAC51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Lucas McCain

You are soooooooooooooo mistaken.

We are ANTI-RomneyBOT and ANTI-ObamaBOT.

RomneyCARE = ObamaCARE

RomneyFEES = ObamaTAXES

RomneyTARP = ObamaTARP.

You are not big on logic, but it goes with your bended
knees before Mr. RomneyCARE.


57 posted on 06/08/2012 3:06:17 PM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: CMAC51
Just read the Constitution. A super majority would give Congress carte blanche to literally take over the rest of the government through the twin powers of impeachment and conviction (in a trial in the Senate).

They could pass Constitutional Amendments (and with a similar majority among the states, pass them within weeks).

Justices could be easily removed ~

This was early recognized by the folks who demanded a Bill of Rights ~ to protect individuals against the federal government.

There's really nothing new in what i said ~ just that you imagined there's something more important (in terms of organizing a government) than a Super Majority, and there isn't.

I'd much rather have a top to bottom Republican supermajority than simply another run of the mill, mealy mouthed, reach around President.

58 posted on 06/08/2012 3:10:43 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Let me add “rabidly touchy” to my list - amazing how you say your piece then can’t stand it when someone criticizes (namelessly) and one of the cohorts comes back with the psycho sounding response. GET SOME HELP


59 posted on 06/09/2012 2:28:10 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You are calling honest debate "hate", like the typical commie in the 0bama brigade. You are questioning the patriotism of real patriots here while attempting to get them prohibited from posting. You are also impugning our religious virtue by saying we'd campaign for Satan against Romney. Let me say this about that ~ you are on the wrong board.

One last bit - along with "rabidly touchy" you also misrepresent. I didn't say you would campaign for Satan over Romney, I said you would campaign against Romney - since you can't make the distinction between A Romney or an Obama in the WH next term I guess I should expect you to make other distinctions either. At least I hope you merely didn't see the distinction, else I have to assume one of two things:
Your religious virtue isn't all that virtuous.
My assessment that you really need to seek help is on the money.

I'm on the right board - I want the best for my country, and if I can't have that, I want to mitigate the damage being done. I understand and accept that folks have different opinions and don't whine that someone is impugning my virtues because they disagree with me or offer arguments against my own. What really torques me off is that I generally try to not get in the dirt, but some folks can't seem to wipe the foam from their lips as they flail about and consider the flailing to be a cogent argument. I had easrlier claimed I made my last comments to you and your ilk, but you brought me back for one more round - it shames me (great openeing for your next screed). I now declare myself officially done wasting my breath on you and your pals.

60 posted on 06/09/2012 3:59:19 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson