None of the polls are taking that into account.
The "Anybody but Obama" vote is going to show up, big-time.
Posted on 10/31/2012 12:07:49 AM PDT by emax
Ohio has 270 electoral votes who would have thunk?? Aint over till the fat lady sings.
question: on what basis do they know the results of early voting? is it an assumption based upon party affiliation? i’ll take that.
At 12:15pm CST today Marquette University will release their final poll for the State of Wisconsin.
I do think this MU poll is reasonably well done. Should tell us more about where the race stands in Wisconsin.
As you noted, WI, IA and NH equal Ohio and could be a very plausible pathway for Romney if he loses Ohio.
Let me also add this piece about Romney’s second path. NH is 1% black, Iowa 3% black and Wisconsin is 6% black. Ohio is 12% black.
It is a plausible scenario that a percentage of white people are telling pollsters that they will vote for Barry, but once in the voting both will judge on performance and vote Romney.
I think in 2008 we saw an affirmative action effect. In 2012 we might see that Bradley effect.
So we've only been analyzing the R/D differential, and assuming Is break 50/50 (not at all likely).
does “registrations” refer to the party affiliation of people who actually did vote early?
| Gallup | Final | 2000 | 48% | 46% | ||
| Rass | Final | 2000 | 40% | 49% | ||
|
|
||||||
| Natl | Bush | 2000 | 47.9% | 50,456,002 | 48.4% | 50,999,897 |
| Ohio | Bush | 2000 | 50% | 2,351,209 | 46.5% | 2,186,190 |
|
|
||||||
| Gallup | Final | 2004 | 49% | 49% | ||
| Rass | Final | 2004 | 50.2% | 48.5% | ||
|
|
||||||
| Natl | Bush | 2004 | 50.7% | 62,040,610 | 48.3% | 59,028,444 |
| Ohio | Bush | 2004 | 50.8% | 2,858,727 | 48.7% | 2,739,952 |
|
|
||||||
| Gallup | Final | 2008 | 55% | 44% | ||
| Rass | Final | 2008 | 52% | 46% | ||
|
|
||||||
| Natl | Bobo | 2008 | 52.9% | 69,456,897 | 45.7% | 59,934,814 |
| Ohio | Bobo | 2008 | 51.5% | 2,940,044 | 46.9% | 2,677,820 |
|
|
||||||
| Gallup | FnlWk | 2012 | 51% | 46% | ||
| Rass | FnlWk | 2012 | 49% | 47% |
Nice to see a Freetard go down swinging with Nate "Kos Kid" Silver. Nice.
Registrations refer to people who voted early or absentee who had an R or D next to their name.
You’re looking at the outdated, invalid Fordham “Initial Report” which was compiled in the hours following the 2008 election, before all ballots had been tallied. It’s based on an ESTIMATE of a 6.15 point Obama lead. That estimate turned out to be wrong. Obama, in fact, won by 7.28 percent.
Fordham later released a complete analysis based on the official popular vote outcome. Eight pollsters were more accurate than Rasmussen. This final report has been available since 2009, but conservatives keep trotting out the old, flawed “Initial Report.”
The FINAL Fordham report: http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/2008%20poll%20accuracy%20panagopoulos.pdf
Hurricane Sandy is a crippling blow for Romney. He is forced to stand down when he needs to be on a blistering attack in Ohio, shredding Obama and closing the deal. Now he is reduced to a stupid donation drive for a storm that no one will be even talking about a month from now, while the nation will be irrevocably damaged for generations if Obama wins. And what is most galling is how that fat gasbag Christie is showering Obama with praise merely for declaring a disaster area - something every president has done for decades. 6 days to go, and it looks like Mittmentum has been stopped cold.
None of the polls are taking that into account.
The "Anybody but Obama" vote is going to show up, big-time.
This final report has been available since 2009, but conservatives keep trotting out the old, flawed “Initial Report.”
It’s probably because most google searches will get you the preliminary report. It’s how I found it a few months ago.
Also, there are lots of “summaries” people can find without having to go to your unsearchable PDF link.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/analysis-most-accurate-polls-2008-presidential-election
Though that one is also a bit early.
And this one is later:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/67204268/TIPP_accuracy_2008.pdf
On a side note, the IBD article above says IBD had predicted 7.2. which matched the Obama win, but the PDF you linked puts IBD at 6. I’m not sure which is correct.
Without collumn headers, I’m not understanding your post.
As I watch this race, I am reminded of Secretariat.
Hopefully you are thinking of his most memorable victory, like I am.
Hopefully you are thinking of his most memorable victory, like I am.
In the others he was behind but exploded in the end.
As Romney is doing as I type this, and has been doing since the first debate.
Every analysis shown in that NowPublic article is invalid.
The “Report Card” which shows Rasmussen with an A- grade is based on a 6.5 margin, 52.6 to 46.1. That, like the Fordham Initial Report, is wrong.
The last summary is based on a 6.6% margin, 52.7% to 46.1%. Also wrong.
The article does link to the IBD/TIPP summary. That analysis IS based on the correct popular vote numbers and, like the final Fordham report, shows eight pollsters more accurate than Rasmussen.
Real Clear Politics, like the final Fordham report, shows IBD with an 8-point spread, 52/44. That would put them in 6th place. But if they actually had a 7.2 spread as claimed, then IBD would be most accurate.
And let me guess, all the polls more reliable than Rasmussen show Obama winning. Is that true ? Can anyone else here prove that Rasmussen still is the most reliable polling source ?
Is Romney still aggressivly campaigning and getting more votes in OH ? Please tell me he is still actively on the trail and still isn’t standing down and playing the role of humanitarian. he can’t afford to be doing that right now at all. He is in the most important election in US history. He has to win, everything else comes second.
It is interesting that I’ve been using that “old” one to beat up liberals for a month or so now, and it’s technically wrong, but nobody caught it. :-)
Also, it is almost impossible to find on the internet. Link after link points to the “early” report. But to be frank, what votes came in after the fact, can they even be trusted.
ON a side (and comical) note. Limbaugh, about an hour ago, was quoting the very figures we are discussing - from the early document.
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.