Skip to comments.Rasmussen: Yes, Dems likely have 2-4 point advantage in November
Posted on 09/29/2012 8:21:34 PM PDT by smoothsailing
click here to read article
“Of course, some major, unexpected event might move things more.”
In a rational world, Benghazi would have already been such an event if the economy had not already buried Obama. We are apparently living in a world where people live in their own cocoons, untouched by any reality that doesn’t come through their iPhone, TV-DWTS, managed news world.
That doesn’t jibe with current registration figures at all. Are they suing him, too?
Do not forget there are independents beyond the repubs and democrats. If maximum dems (39%) and maximum repubs (37%) turn out, there is still 24% still to vote. Those are the block of voters who always decide who wins.
No pollster is always accurate. I recall Ras was a darling around here during Bush vs. Gore and he was off by about 5% in that race.
Good points Jedi. Mitt knows he is behind so I expect him to be tough. We shall see. I am praying Mitt really brings it, but I just don’t know if he has it in him. At this point the man has a tough task. His campaign has meandered about and stood for little more than “we’re not Obama” so far. That obviously isn’t working and I am just not sure Romney is ideological enough to both call out Obama on his failed liberal policies AND spell out why conservatism is a superior governing philosophy (with some short sound bites people can remember).
At this point, I think we have to hang our hat on whether or not the people being polled are representative of a larger sample or not.
Don’t try and sniff a victory out in the polls. Be patient, and JUST TURN OUT.
I think that Scott Rasmussen is correct in his projection of voting by ‘party affiliation’. He hedges down as low as +2 democrat advantage. What the polling is not revealing clearly yet is the number of crossover democrats who will vote Romney. I have seen recent projections of 90%+ republican affiliated who are a firm vote for Romney. I have seen the democrat affiliated lower, in the mid-80’s for Obama.
How many Reagan democrats will there be? I believe the debates will turn this to us. Romney has very wisely spent a lot of time preparing his message. My gut tells me the first debate will be hard facts and straight talk vs. unicorns, rainbows, blame and assorted nonsense. I believe we start to see the turn after Wednesday. With these polls so close in spite of the illogical partisan samples (all but Rasmussen), Romney doesn’t have to persuade that many democrats.
Is it conceivable that he can convince 1 out of every 20 or 40 democrats to change their vote? Is it conceivable that he will take at least 3 of every 5 undecided? Is it conceivable that Ryan is going to make Biden look like such a boob in their debate that it only adds more anxiety to the fringes of Obama’s support? I don’t think it’s only conceivable, I think it’s likely. This race is Romney / Ryan’s to lose and I don’t think they are going to lose.
Thanks for posting the chart!
O 48% R 47% with leaners and a D+2-4.
Per Rasmussen “In the last three elections, he notes, the polls moved against the incumbent party in the final weeks of the race”.
It’s a virtual tie right now and Romney hasn’t even unloaded the massive ad buy or faced off in the debates.
Plus Obama is facing a load of heavy bad coming down on him in the coming days in terms of his failed economy and foreign policy blunders.
What you say is true but:
1) historically the independents have broken for the challenger
2) across the swing states it looks like large numbers of these independents have actually changed their registration from Democrat to Independent since 2008 (and not from Republican to Independent). Kind of shows you about the way they lean politically.
3) poll after poll show Romney having a lead with independents
In 2004 the turnout was E with what Ras had as a D+1.5 party id.
How is it that Ras thinks it will be D+2-4 in 2012 - after what happened in 2010 and what his partisan split shows now (R+4)? Makes no sense unless he’s playing along with crowd to look fair and hedge his bets.
I have never seem the Rs with more amp and angst. They will walk barefoot through a snow storm. Much more excited than 2004. Just look at any poll thread here at FR. People are freaking out. That is a sign of enthusiasm. Look at the base and blogs, the polling samples have never been an issue like this year.
That's just silly. Democrats have had an advantage in party ID for some time, as Rasmussen says in the article. That has nothing to do with enthusiasm or the rate at which voters head to the polls; it simply reflects self identification when pollsters ask.
Reagan had Reagan democrats. We were only 6 years removed from Nixon, and the democrats had a huge bulge in affiliation. There were many Kennedy democrats then. Today the demographic is different.
I think there are Reagan democrats out there who haven’t moved over yet. The debates will turn this in our favor.
Republican victories have never been delivered without votes from democrats. It’s just that many of those democrats are now called Independents.
I thought Rasmussen was saying this will break for Romney, if history is any judge, by a few more points.
THAT is all we need.
This election will be decided in the first 15 minutes of the first debate.
Unfortunately, all the Media Stories about Obama brilliance, and overwhelming debate win have already been written, as they had to be submitted to Media Matters for approval by 6PM tonite.
Check out post #7, it’s the most detail I’ve ever seen from a Rasmussen poll. It must be what you see if you’re a subscriber.
Remember gang polls are not prognostications they operate on current data manipulated by past realities. If the voter turnout is like that in 2008 Obama wins, if like 2010 (not a national election) then Romney has a very good shot. Right now 2008 turnout models are the norm, but this may change.
1. I say it’s BS
2. What fraction of Democrats are going to vote for Obama this time around?
So even if this is true, it’s great news for Romney.
That's the black community's mindset and 0bama knows that. The bottom line here is that the PRESIDENT has no ethics, morals, scruples, and no shame. THAT is the problem. Our President is a foreigner with a foreign ideology and in direct conflict with American ideals.
I agree. I think what Raz is doing is playing it safe and not upsetting the partisan left.
In 2004 the party id was D+1.5 and the turnout was Even with a far less enthusiasm gap than today.
Today the party id is R+4.5 and the turnout will be D+4 with a stronger enthusiasm gap? I don’t think so. Makes no sense.