Posted on 11/05/2012 9:22:53 AM PST by nhwingut
and yet the media have ignored in their polls these numbers, they have ingored Libya, the economy, the negative name calling and immaturity and they HAVE IGNORED SANDY.
If obama wins then the media have done this to the country again and we should march on the media HQ’s and demand they admit their bias and ten do their job.
Oh and Christie praising obama only helped obama and yet people still have no power, no food, houses destroyed, no water etc.
WHERE ARE THE SPLIT SCREENS OF OBAMA ON THIS CAMPAIGN TOUR AND THE DESTRUCTION BY SANDY?
and yet the media have ignored in their polls these numbers, they have ingored Libya, the economy, the negative name calling and immaturity and they HAVE IGNORED SANDY.
If obama wins then the media have done this to the country again and we should march on the media HQ’s and demand they admit their bias and ten do their job.
Oh and Christie praising obama only helped obama and yet people still have no power, no food, houses destroyed, no water etc.
WHERE ARE THE SPLIT SCREENS OF OBAMA ON THIS CAMPAIGN TOUR AND THE DESTRUCTION BY SANDY?
Don’t say “oops”! It’s more accurate if half of the Ds are missing.
I bet 1/2 of them are Democrats and liberal indie Obuggery sympathizers who lied that they were GOP voters.
No doubt, but that would still leave 6% of Republican voters committed to voting for Obama. That's still an outlandishly high cross-over vote for this _resident. My gut tells me that the real Republican cross-over vote is somewhere around .5% to 1%.
It just seems soooooo obvious. Even you were doing some hyperventilating yesterday. Sheesh. See we’re both on top of this (although I don’t know nearly as much about the polling as some here do).
I do not get it. Why does he not use his own weighting on his polls? Instead he uses D+5.
More good news....in review of Rasmussen historical data, Democrat voter ID is within .5% of its lowest level in the past 9 years. In each Presidential cycle, there is an increase of voters identifying with one party or the other, and a corresponding reduction in self identified independents to approximately 24.5%. This cycle, Republican voter SELF IDENTIFICATION is at an ALL TIME HIGH, while firming amongst Dems HAS NOT taken place. Thus, indies are identifying 27.9% of the electorate. I would read that 3.5% increase as Dem base voters who are disaffected and will simply not vote. This is crazy good!!
A 13.4% swing correlates to Michigan, Penn., Minnesota, being neck and neck. It means Obama CANNOT WIN, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Colorado, Florida. He cannot win those states period. All conversation in that regard is pointless.
If these numbers are even half-way true, Romney wins comfortably.
What else would Priebus say???
“I think his base is either Dem+3 or Dem+5, depending on which freeper you’re talking to”
Rasmussen released his “D +” numbers for June 2012, which ranged from D+3 to D+14 over the 30 days, with zero days on which the sample was “R +”. Rasmussen stated on TV on Fox that he DOES NOT weight the samples — instead, that number is the way the party affiliation shook out after looking at the 1,200 responses(total number varied, but usually over a thousand). Why were there no days with R+ numbers? I personally believe that Republicans are not answering the phone—almost all of us have Caller-ID. Plus, we’re at work and the ‘Rats are not!!!
“... he points out that Rasmussen says 12% of Republicans claim they are voting for Obama.
So, if you take 88% of 39% you get 34% of these republicans actually voting for Romney. On Romney’s side, however, is that independents favor him over Obama.”
Don’t overlook the fact that there are still some conservative-leaning Democrats who will vote against the fiscal irresponsibility of Obama (or not vote at all).
“... he points out that Rasmussen says 12% of Republicans claim they are voting for Obama.
So, if you take 88% of 39% you get 34% of these republicans actually voting for Romney. On Romney’s side, however, is that independents favor him over Obama.”
Don’t overlook the fact that there are still some conservative-leaning Democrats who will vote against the fiscal irresponsibility of Obama (or not vote at all).
So there are more Republicans than Democrats, but the pollsters say more Democrats are going to show up at the polls. Please.
To paraphrase John McClane...”Chik-fil-A, mother*******!”
I’m 1000% Romney BUT to try to explain the R+5.8% with 12% not voting for Romney yielding only a 1% lead.....I recall, particularly in some Red states Democrats switching Party affiliation in 2010 such that they could vote for bad Tea Party candidates to enable their Dem candidate in the general election.
Also, some Democrats register Republican in Red states so they can vote in primaries that matter.
Don’t know if thats the case but just saying.........how else to you explain 12% Republicans voting for Obama?
“Ras follows the herd like the rest of them and he thinks Republican voters won’t turn out like that.”
Option B is, a close race is much better for ratings (website hits, etc.) After all, he’s still picking Romney, and can lean back on that when it’s all done and Romney wins handily...all others will look like the greater fools...
Holy crap!!! a 13.4% swing toward GOP since 2008!!!
How, then, can this be CLOSE? Dems must be super motivated and Republicans staying home in numbers bigger than 2008? SOMETHING is way off, here.
Good link, thanks.
This explains a lot as to why Rasmussen is using a D+ model. You have to go with what has been historically accurate....now, if by some miracle the exit polls show R+ this year, it’ll be a more difficult job for pollsters in 2016.
Of course, it makes sense that more Ds show up in exit polls if it is true that Ds are more prone to talking to people...while Rs won’t.
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.