Poll: Obama leads grow in Ohio, Fla

  • Thread starter Thread starter oldcelt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
meltzerboy said:
A lot of course still hinges on the debates, especially the first one. However, early voting has already begun in Iowa, where it appears quite heavy, and, I believe soon (tomorrow?) in Ohio, and later in Florida. So a significant number of people are most likely not even waiting for the debates. I think that because of the recent gaffes by Romney, and their continuous repetition by the MSM, as well as his generally inept campaign and Obama’s more-than-competent one, and the several constituencies that have appeared to turn against Romney, notably Latinos and women, these polls are not so surprising. But this is politics, and October surprises are par for the course, so I wouldn’t bet the farm just yet (if I had a farm).
Click to expand...
No way Meltzer am I either betting the farm if I had one and were a betting man. I wouldn’t even offer to bet Rick Perry $10,000 if I was Mitt Romney and just had that kind of pocket change sitting around to spare on a bet. 😃

Seriously though I’m really surprised at how inept of a candidate Romney has been thus far. I expected something different I guess. I think also having to keep his eye on the Tea Party has kept him up until now at least from moving much to the middle. It will be ironic if Americans reject him partly because of his catering to the Tea Party as he has, that it could be the Tea Party’s insistence that he walk their line that will have helped reelect Barack Obama if that happens. The first debate is extremely important for him. I wonder if he has to nearly knock Obama out in the first one? The 47% victims that keeps getting replayed I think has really hurt him in places like OH. You’re right though it isn’t over yet.
 
Marie5890 said:
I would be curious to know how many people are not answering their phones and how that is effecting results…And so they end up re-calling those who will take the poll.

I know that I dont get calls from pollsters, but I have been getting a ton of calls from the Romney campaign for donations…
Click to expand...
So many things can effect polls, auto methodology is not seen as so accurate. If polls are done on cell phones that can effect the polling because more younger will probably answer and that can skew polls. Polls do not have scientific accuracy
 
Marie5890 said:
I would be curious to know how many people are not answering their phones and how that is effecting results…And so they end up re-calling those who will take the poll.

I know that I dont get calls from pollsters, but I have been getting a ton of calls from the Romney campaign for donations…
Click to expand...
So many things can effect polls, auto methodology is not seen as so accurate. If polls are done on cell phones that can effect the polling because more younger people will probably answer and that can direct the poll in to an unrealistic age group of people who vote. Polls on registered voters are not as accurate as polls done on likely voter. Polls do not have scientific accuracy
 
meltzerboy said:
A lot of course still hinges on the debates, especially the first one. However, early voting has already begun in Iowa, where it appears quite heavy, and, I believe soon (tomorrow?) in Ohio, and later in Florida. So a significant number of people are most likely not even waiting for the debates. I think that because of the recent gaffes by Romney, and their continuous repetition by the MSM, as well as his generally inept campaign and Obama’s more-than-competent one, and the several constituencies that Romney has alienated, notably Latinos and women, these polls are not so surprising. But this is politics, and October surprises are par for the course, so I wouldn’t bet the farm just yet (if I had a farm).
Click to expand...
If you vote 6 weeks before the election it not likely you are persuadable voter. You have made your desicion and it likely you are a strict partisan

Debates will be the decider. Gallup showed Carter up 8 points over Reagan before the debates

La times eludes Obama is at a disadvantage
“President Obama has blocked out three days to prepare for the October debates, but with the constant pressures that come with one of the world’s most important jobs, aides worry he may not get enough practice at the podium,” Parsons writes
Click to expand...
I think they are doing it because if Romney has a better performance they can blame Obama’s presidential obligations
 
Here’s another point that hasn’t been mentioned yet in this thread. Why, if Obama is ahead by 10-12 points in these battleground states, are both men still campaigning there? If Romney is so far behind, why doesn’t he try to shore up other states where the margin is less? Why isn’t Obama campaigning in states where he has a narrow lead, or even has a slight disadvantage?

Because Ohio isn’t nearly as decided as the media is claiming. Obama is campaigning in Ohio and IOWA lately. Democrats rarely need to show up in Iowa after the Iowa cauci, since they have owned the state in the past few elections. If Obama has this so completely in the bag, then why is he still fighting so hard for states he supposedly has wrapped up?

Whatever the media tells you, it’s obvious Obama’s campaign doesn’t believe their numbers. So why should we?
 
Borealis said:
Here’s another point that hasn’t been mentioned yet in this thread. Why, if Obama is ahead by 10-12 points in these battleground states, are both men still campaigning there? If Romney is so far behind, why doesn’t he try to shore up other states where the margin is less? Why isn’t Obama campaigning in states where he has a narrow lead, or even has a slight disadvantage?

Because Ohio isn’t nearly as decided as the media is claiming. Obama is campaigning in Ohio and IOWA lately. Democrats rarely need to show up in Iowa after the Iowa cauci, since they have owned the state in the past few elections. If Obama has this so completely in the bag, then why is he still fighting so hard for states he supposedly has wrapped up?

Whatever the media tells you, it’s obvious Obama’s campaign doesn’t believe their numbers. So why should we?
Click to expand...
Excellent point
 
Borealis said:
Here’s another point that hasn’t been mentioned yet in this thread. Why, if Obama is ahead by 10-12 points in these battleground states, are both men still campaigning there? If Romney is so far behind, why doesn’t he try to shore up other states where the margin is less? Why isn’t Obama campaigning in states where he has a narrow lead, or even has a slight disadvantage?

Because Ohio isn’t nearly as decided as the media is claiming. Obama is campaigning in Ohio and IOWA lately. Democrats rarely need to show up in Iowa after the Iowa cauci, since they have owned the state in the past few elections. If Obama has this so completely in the bag, then why is he still fighting so hard for states he supposedly has wrapped up?

Whatever the media tells you, it’s obvious Obama’s campaign doesn’t believe their numbers. So why should we?
Click to expand...
Obama is still campaigning in these battleground states because he doesn’t want his lead to slip away. That’s why they’re called battleground states: they are volatile. These are the states that determine the outcome of the election because of their electoral votes. Where else should Obama campaign: Utah or Texas, where he cannot win; New York or California, where he is comfortably ahead? Unfortunately this is our political system: the electoral college decides the winner rather than the popular vote.
 
CMatt25 said:
No way Meltzer am I either betting the farm if I had one and were a betting man. I wouldn’t even offer to bet Rick Perry $10,000 if I was Mitt Romney and just had that kind of pocket change sitting around to spare on a bet. 😃

Seriously though I’m really surprised at how inept of a candidate Romney has been thus far. I expected something different I guess. I think also having to keep his eye on the Tea Party has kept him up until now at least from moving much to the middle. It will be ironic if Americans reject him partly because of his catering to the Tea Party as he has, that it could be the Tea Party’s insistence that he walk their line that will have helped reelect Barack Obama if that happens. The first debate is extremely important for him. I wonder if he has to nearly knock Obama out in the first one? The 47% victims that keeps getting replayed I think has really hurt him in places like OH. You’re right though it isn’t over yet.
Click to expand...
What are you even talking about? You always go on with vagaries about Mitt catering to the Tea party, and not moving to the middle (the implication being Obama has somehow run as a moderate). but no one ever knows what you even mean.

How in the last few months of the campaign has Mitt tried to placate the Tea Party? You just repeat things from democratic websites, but without any context.
 
Borealis said:
Here’s another point that hasn’t been mentioned yet in this thread. Why, if Obama is ahead by 10-12 points in these battleground states, are both men still campaigning there? I
Click to expand...
I havent heard that Obama is up by 10-12 points in the swing states. :confused:

What I have heard is he is up but it’s within the margin?
 
He_Man said:
How in the last few months of the campaign has Mitt tried to placate the Tea Party?
Click to expand...
  1. when he defended his 47% comment
  2. every time he promises to abolish Obamacare
  3. when he accused Obama of taking the work requirement out of welfare (still waiting for the evidence on that one)
  4. in his selection of Paul Ryan for VP
    …If I think harder, I’ll likely find more examples. 🤷
 
CMatt25 said:
I was just polled again. Live person on the other end. Not a press 1, 2 type of poll. Lots of questions. I enjoy it actually. My 3rd time this election season I’ve been polled by 3 different organizations. Put me down I told her for very likely to vote for Barack Obama. (Well definitely if that had been a choice.) .
Click to expand...
Now how on earth does that happen? Random polls? I think not? This makes the results more suspect than before.
 
There is always this argument that you should trust Rasmussen the most because they were most accurate in 2008. Well, Rasmussen was initially deemed to be tied in accuracy with Pew (which now in 2012 has the President up by 8 points) and in a later analysis to be 9th in accuracy. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#2008

Also, in 2010 Rasmussen performed poorly:

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/
 
By the end of this month, 30 states will be engaged in early voting…

So how important will exit polling be?
 
Al_Moritz said:
There is always this argument that you should trust Rasmussen the most because they were most accurate in 2008. Well, Rasmussen was initially deemed to be tied in accuracy with Pew (which now in 2012 has the President up by 8 points) and in a later analysis to be 9th in accuracy. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#2008

Also, in 2010 Rasmussen performed poorly:

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/
Click to expand...
2004 Rasmussen were the most accurate pollster so it can change every election

Rasmussen seems to have been off by 1.25% in the 2008 presidential election, that does not seem to me to be a huge number
 
Al_Moritz said:
There is always this argument that you should trust Rasmussen the most because they were most accurate in 2008. Well, Rasmussen was initially deemed to be tied in accuracy with Pew (which now in 2012 has the President up by 8 points) and in a later analysis to be 9th in accuracy. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#2008

Also, in 2010 Rasmussen performed poorly:

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/
Click to expand...
2004 Rasmussen was the most presidential accurate pollster so it can change every election

Rasmussen seems to have been off by 1.25% in the 2008 presidential election, that does not seem to me to be a huge number, so while it was tied for 9th, that number sounds worse that the number Rasmussen was off
 
You can’t believe the MSM. Why should their polls be deserving of any more trust? 🙂
 
New poll: Romney overtakes Obama on terrorism
The foreign-policy results of the new Bloomberg National Poll
Click to expand...
haven’t gotten much attention yet, but the survey contains some bad news for the Obama campaign. According to the poll, Mitt Romney has a 48-42 advantage over Barack Obama on the question of which candidate would be tougher on terrorism. Romney, in other words, has encroached on one of Obama’s signature strengths.

What makes this result so surprising is that the president has consistently trounced Romney when it comes to counterterrorism. A Fox News poll earlier this month found that 49 percent of respondents trusted Obama to do a better job than Romney in protecting the United States from terrorist attacks, compared with 41 percent who put their faith in the Republican candidate. The president had a 51-40 advantage on handling terrorism in an ABC News/Washington Post poll around the same time, and a 50-35 edge on carrying out the war on terror in an Ipsos/Reuters poll in August. The Democrats’ rare national-security muscle was on full display at their convention, where speakers boasted about the administration’s successful raid against Osama bin Laden and targeted killings of al Qaeda leaders.

blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/09/27/new_poll_romney_overtakes_obama_on_terrorism
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top