Skip to comments.Polls Reflect Voter Reality, Not Pundits' Preoccupations
Posted on 10/12/2012 9:51:06 PM PDT by Arthurio
Friday, October 12, 2012
According to Political Class pundits, the race for the White House was turned upside down by a single debate. The reality, however, is that a very close race shifted ever so slightly from narrowly favoring President Obama to narrowly favoring Mitt Romney. Either way, it remains too close to call.
The difference is that voters base their decisions on the substantive issues in the world around them. The Political Class is distracted by superficial imagery, an obsession with the game of politics and the sound of their own voices.
While it might be boring to those in the Political Class, Election 2012 has been stable all year. Oh, sure, there have been occasional mini-surges where one candidate gained a little ground temporarily. But it's been close all along.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
There is only one poll that counts.
If this is true, Barry Soetoro should be toast in November.
It’s close, so subscribe to our service to track it! /marketing
This thing isn’t close to close...
Do you detect a distinct aroma of CYA?
This is absolute horseshit. Right now there are 60 million voters who can not find their asses with both hands and could not tell you what continent Libya is on or what percent of their income, if they have income, they actually pay in federal income tax.
He’s patting himself on the shoulder. He’s had this close even while MSM media pollsters have had Obama running away with it.
You are correct, the sad thing is they will be voting.
Polls reflect reality?
even when they spot the Democrats 8%???
I disagree. It was a significant win for Romney because over 70 million people watched and he reached them unfiltered. For Dem it's same #()$* different day. They always have media running interference for them but, for us it's huge to have that many people see our canidate and see him win decisively and come across well doing it.
People were needing a reason to throw their vote to Romney and he gave them that reason with the debate win. Not just a win he demolished Obama; a sitting President with a failed economy and unpopular healthcare policy.
Yes they will and they are rapidly approaching a majority. Scary, ain’t it?
It sure wasn't true in 2008. Voters based their decisions on demogoguery.
What’s below is not even a critique - I tried, but couldn’t. Something was lacking ... but there was nothing from which to lack.
This analysis says very little, about almost nothing.
What it says is by way of tautology, or a sentence’s inner logic, the conclusion of which is the support of the conclusion. The conclusion of the piece itself concludes nothing, except to argue that there is nothing to conclude.
If I were Scott I would have just left that page blank - same effect, fewer words.
This is not going to be a ‘narrow’ win.
I can’t stand listenign to the pundits who try to spin it positive when the reality is that is is anythign but positive for the GOP conciderign that
[[The reality, however, is that a very close race shifted ever so slightly from narrowly favoring President Obama to narrowly favoring Mitt Romney.]]
Narrowly Favoring’? Really? Because by all rights this coutnry should be ready to throw obama to the curb for his assaults on us all over hte past 4 years- He partied while peopel lost their homes, lost hteir jobs, lost everything- He bullied our supreme court, he attacked religion, he attacked the very values of most folsk in this coutnry- He spent wildly while familes went without- he denigraded this country abroad and made a mockery of everythign we stand for as a nation, and yet the polls are showing that folks only narrowly favor romney? Adn the pundits are cosntantly claiming victory for hte GOP? Tryign to spin it to look like obama is finished? Not accordign to what I am seeing and hearing- Folsk still do NOT get it- if htis had been any other president tryign to ruin this coutnry the way obama did, the public woudl be screamign for their removal, yet obama has gotten a free pass for 4 years now- and he’s still only narrowly behind romeny?
Unreal! He shoudl be so far behind romney that hte left had already ceeded the election to Romney- The gap between the two shoudl be huge- NOT narroW! There’s NO way to put a positive spin on the FACT that msot Americans still do not get it regardign this socialist in the white house- it’s sickening to see peopel still ‘unsure’ about how they’re goign to vote- after all he’s doen to this country and to them- it’s almsotl ike America has munchausen syndrome!
Want to know where we are going? Just watch a movie called Idiocracy.
The only modern debate that mattered was 1960 and the politicians were so terrified of that that they did not do another one for 16 years and then only after they had transformed it into a mutual press conference and then Ford even screwed that one up with his comment about Poland so they neutered them even further but Reagan showed a challenger can knock off a sitting President if a debate is held the weekend before the election in 1980 so they moved the last debate to a few weeks before the election capitalizing on the average Americans limited attention span..I expect in 20 years the last debate will be 3 months before the election and will be conducted by each candidates press secretary...
Well, the Republicans all know that Journalism favors the Democrats (tho they dont understand why). If Republicans were to gain control of the WH, House, and Senate - and somehow finesse the filibuster problem, a big if - they could and should institute a requirement that debates be broadcast as a condition of FCC license renewal. Specifically, the debates should be moderated only by a chess timer by which the candidates would mutually control whose microphone was live, and whose not. That would guarantee equality of time and would obviate the issue of the tendentious moderator. IOW, it would eliminate the influence of the tendentiousness of journalists, just for an hour our two, a few times during the campaign. Imagine what Ryan would have done to Biden in that format!!
In that format there would not need to be any physical meeting between the candidates, so the debates could be frequent. And there is no reason why the candidates should be restricted from using notes or putting on Power Point presentations - though not, perhaps, without showing them to the opposition in advance to allow research/rebuttal.And although live video has helped Romney and Ryan in these past two debates, I would have live video restricted during some of the debates so that the facts and logic could be brought to the fore. For the same reason that talk radio is more effective than talking head TV.