OH, Ras: Romney in the lead

[BigSkyBob]

I see the left is in full bash Rasmussen mode. Rasmussen now shows, state by state,  Romney winning [McCain+IN,NC,FL,VA,OH, CO, and NH] with WI and IA in play. His swing state tracker, and national poll has implied this fact for some number of days.

For all the bluster about Rasmussen having a "house effect" for the Republicans, the reality is that it is the polling industry that shows a "house effect" for the Democrats. Obama came nowhere near his final RCP average. Given how heavily Ohio has been polled, it is converging to the industry consensus. Subtract the industry "house effect" for Democrats, and Ohio is lean Romney, or tied. So much for the Ohio firewall BS.

On the other hand, Rasmussen called Obama's final margin within one point. Go ahead and deny facts.

[BigSkyBob]

This latest poll by Rasmussen, showing Romney up + 2 in Ohio, gives credible evidence to the over arching narrative that Romney is leading and his momentum while it has slowed down, has not halted and Ohio is finally moving in Romney's direction; the uncertainty over the economy, will likely trump the auto bail-out narrative which had sustained Obama, it was only a question of time before Ohio budged and Rasmussen is the first of my polls; watch RCP and other polls and when you put Michigan into the toss-up category, well Obama's life has just gotten that more complicated, he now has to go on defense in another state, which had been considered safe - but watch this space, Friday will be the day where things begin to take shape and point to the final and actual outcome.

This is usually the point where I would bet some wild-eyed zealot's speculation (MI becoming a "toss-up" in this case) money or sig time on that state's outcome. But frankly, I'm just dearly hoping you'll go away after the election.

I hate to burst your bubble, but, the evidence seems to suggest that the Romney-is-winning meme is based more on rational analysis of the facts than "wild-eyed zealot's speculation." The election in Ohio, fundamentally, will be decided by the relative number of Democrats to Republicans, the differential between the margin Obama carries Democrats versus the margin Romney carries Republicans, and how independents vote. I don't see Obama doing better among Republicans than McCain. I don't see Romney doing worse among Democrats than Obama. None of the national polls show any such trend. In 2004, both Democrats and Republicans were enthusiastic. In 2008, Democrats were fired up, and Republicans weren't. In 2012, polls indicate that Republicans are more enthusiastic. Anything close to the 2004 partisan turnout means Romney wins unless he erodes among independents. The reality is that he is outperforming McCain among independents significantly.

You could argue about the early vote. The numbers I read indicate that 220,000 fewer Democrats, and 30,000 more Republicans have voted early compared to 2008. While that is still good for Obama, it isn't going to help him if continues to run more than 10 points behind his 2008 pace among independents.

There is Gallup polling. They are claiming that Romney is up 7 among those whom have already voted. The alleged massive lead Obama has among those whom have already voted isn't really congruent with the known partisan breakdown of early voters. Nor, it is consistent with the Gallup survey that indicates early voting is matching overall polling. The real outlier is not Rasmussen showing Romney ahead, but, rather the polls showing Obama holding a 2-1 advantage among early voters.

There is the uniform swing argument. What is being suggested is that Obama is going to run a few points ahead of overall support after carrying Ohio in 2008 by more than two points less than his overall percentage. The uniform swing argument suggests Romney wins easily. I haven't read any compelling analysis as to why Ohio is trending Democrat by four or more points.

Finally, Obama isn't going to have the massive financial advantage he had in 2008. In fact, he is at a disadvantage going down the stretch.

[BigSkyBob]

The early voting numbers are bad for Romney in Ohio.
Here's a tweet from Adrian Gray, Bush’s assistant in 2000 and 2004.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How is that bad for Romney? An 8% GOP shift, whether a gross increase of GOP vote share or even just PVI, from 2008 would translate to a Romney win (assuming that increase correlates to final statewide totals, of course).

I don't expect a general swing of 8% in GOP favor. That would be a Romney win for sure.

I’m saying if Romney matches Bush’s turnout on Election Day with an 8% swing of early votes in his favor compared to 2008, he still loses.

I see what you mean now. Still, I wouldn't categorize a near 8% GOP swing in bellweather county early voting to be "bad news" for Romney.

I also read somewhere (but haven't verified it) that early voting is down statewide from 2008 levels. This would seem to benefit Romney some since Obama did better among early voters than he did among those who voted on election day. Perhaps it just means more of them vote on election day and perhaps I'm grasping for straws, but I've been wondering about this.

With the exception of ME (well, that I know of), R's are doing better in early voting, compared to 2008.  In NC the numbers are higher, but the D's are doing about 8 point worse as a percentage.

One other thing to look at is registration, especially in states without same day registration.  In PA, for example, the D's have lost 1 point relative to the R's.

We've talked about the ground game.  In 2008, some of Obama's "ground game" was increasing registration.  This year, he has failed at it in PA, NV and NC.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158420/registered-voters-already-cast-ballots.aspx

The end of the article mentions how Romney is doing slightly better among early voters than overall.