Skip to comments.How-Carter beat Reagan
Posted on 09/25/2012 9:12:17 PM PDT by Hojczyk
Texas: In a story datelined October 8 from Houston, the Times headlined:
Texas Looming as a Close Battle Between President and Reagan
The Reagan-Carter race in Texas, the paper claimed, had "suddenly tightened and now shapes up as a close, bruising battle to the finish." The paper said "a New York Times/CBS News Poll, the second of seven in crucial big states, showing the Reagan-Carter race now a virtual dead heat despite a string of earlier polls on both sides that had shown the state leaning toward Mr. Reagan."
The narrative? It was like the famous scene in the Wizard of Oz where Dorothy and her friends stare in astonishment as dog Toto pulls back the curtain in the wizard's lair to reveal merely a man bellowing through a microphone. Causing the startled "wizard" caught in the act to frantically start yelling, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" In the case of the Times in its look at Texas in October of 1980 the paper dismissed "a string of earlier polls on both sides" that repeatedly showed Texas going for Reagan. Instead, the Times presented this data:
A survey of 1,050 registered voters, weighted to form a probable electorate, gave Mr. Carter 40 percent support, Mr. Reagan 39 percent, John. B. Anderson, the independent candidate, 3 percent, and 18 percent were undecided. The survey, conducted by telephone from Oct. 1 to Oct. 6, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
In other words, the race in Texas is close, assures the Times, with Carter actually in the lead.
What happened? Reagan beat Carter by over 13 points. It wasn't even close to close.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
The day after, we’re either going to be very happy or very shocked.
The MSM polls are ALWAYS tilted to make it look like the democrats are winning. Always. And they are this year too. But there is a difference this time around.
When the polls are tilted and false how do we normally figure this out?
2004: Kerry was supposedly ahead of Bush but you met few people if any who liked John Kerry while at work, shopping or just outside your home doing whatever it is you do. That’s how we know the polls do not reflect reality.
It’s not so this time around. Even though the polling data is tilted as usual for the left the man on the street this time is more consistant with that polling than it normally is during election season. (not 100% consistant but more so than in 2002, 2004 and 2010 when we enjoyed some so called “surprising” victories.
Example: In 2004 and 2010: while the polling data from the MSM would claim that John Kerry was way ahead in the polls or the republicans were way ahead, the man on the street would show a different story and so much so that one asks, how can these polls be right, I have met no one who even likes John Kerry?
Just today I got a pack of cigarettes, the clerk caught himself over charging me and said oops, let me try that again. Those numbers are as fuzzy as Mitt Romneys tax returns
Just one example of several. This is NOT another 2004 or 2010 for Mitt Romney. The sooner the Rpmney supporters realize this the better it will be for him in November.
They need to fight much harder. If they do and do it the right way, they have a chance.
Obamas the worst President in my time and I remember the Carter years very well.
The paper said "a New York Times/CBS News Poll, the second of seven in crucial big states, showing the Reagan-Carter race now a virtual dead heat despite a string of earlier polls on both sides that had shown the state leaning toward Mr. Reagan." The narrative? It was like the famous scene in the Wizard of Oz where Dorothy and her friends stare in astonishment as dog Toto pulls back the curtain in the wizard's lair to reveal merely a man bellowing through a microphone. Causing the startled "wizard" caught in the act to frantically start yelling, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"
Polls have come a long way since 1980, as has the demographics of the electorate. Romney is in serious trouble. He needs to start outspending Obozo in Florida, Ohio, Virginia and Nevada, and take the gloves off already.
Kerry Lead Bush by 5 Points in the last Poll in Ohio in 2004 Why are most Polls hiding their internals?
I keep thinking about how HAPPY I will be when I look at Obama’s face as he leaves the White House. It puts a little extra bounce in my step ;)
You maybe. I already got the shaft.... no conservatives need apply this time around.
Reagan was great at criticizing his opponent very effectively in a civil manner, and with a smile. It was the amiability that really helped him win in a landslide. If Romney comes out as an attack dog, it could hurt him. He is being very smart in picking his shots, and delivering his message with dignity.
Regarding polls ‘having come a long way since 1980’, we had very good statisticians in 1980, and although we have much more advanced technology now, that technology can also complicate things (e.g. cell phones vs. land lines etc.). The variability between polls from different polling organizations has been astounding at times, and they can't all be right if they're so different. So why the variability?
I think the big unknown variable is how to account for turnout enthusiasm. The D+7 turnout we got wasn’t the expected turnout. Rasmussen and Pew were the most accurate, and they are split on results for this election. Without looking at crosstabs I expect a lot of it is assumptions about turnout and sampling. The only thing i’m really getting from these polls is that turnout will determine the winner.
I agree about turnout, and this is clearly recognized by both parties, which is why the big efforts to demoralize and suppress turnout.
What I wonder about sometimes is what would be the result if every legal voter in the US voted? I don’t know anymore what the ‘majority’ in the country think. What I do know is that, beyond this election, we can no longer afford to be complacent about demographic shifts.
We have not had what I consider normal demographic shifts in the past several decades. They have been driven, to a significant degree, by political decisions made by those who stand to benefit by these demographic shifts. Normal demographic change occurs more gradually, allowing bilateral cultural assimilation and avoiding the creation of homogeneous voting blocks. This is not what has been happening.
He will, the GOP does it’s spending in Oct, not Sept.
I can't ever imagine being very happy with a rino like Romney as president but I know for sure I would be terribly miserable if Obama and his monkeys rig the election and we have 4 more years of this horrid regime.
Oh I think this will be more like 2004. In 2004 (and 2010) dems deluded themselves with fake polls. The fact was that Kerry was never ahead, and never winning states like FL or OH. I have too many people who I know voted for Hopey Changey and now have buyers remorse.
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.