Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2014, 12:30:28 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections
| | |-+  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Tender Branson, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | | |-+  Quinnipiac/NYT/CBS - WI: Obama +6, VA: Obama +4, CO: Romney +5
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: Quinnipiac/NYT/CBS - WI: Obama +6, VA: Obama +4, CO: Romney +5  (Read 1438 times)
ajb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 872
United States


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: August 08, 2012, 05:57:28 pm »
Ignore

Any particular reason why Colorado is about the only swing state that is (or appears to be) swinging towards Romney?

One reason may be the very same reason that Ohio and Michigan are actually swinging back towards the president: Bain.  The whole class warfare business works well against a wealthy, moderate, northeastern Republican among blue-collar independents and even Republicans in the working class burghs of the Midwest.  It's a completely different electorate in Colorado, where the president is extremely unpopular and Romney's suburban politics hit a sweet spot in and around Denver.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Romney win Colorado, and lose most of the other so-called "swing states."

And, I'll add, Colorado has always been more of a right-leaning swing state, anyway.  So perhaps it shouldn't be that surprising after all.

Except that Ohio and Michigan aren't actually swinging toward Romney. They've both moved noticeably towards Obama in the past month or so:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/mi/michigan_romney_vs_obama-1811.html

No, you misunderstand, he's admitting that it's working in Ohio and Michigan but saying that it's a different story out in Colorado.

Whoops, misread that. Sorry!

Anyway, I don't think there's any evidence that Colorado is moving towards Romney, either.
If you compare like polls with like, there's been very little change in the last few months in Colorado -- Rasmussen has had the race tied, PPP has had Obama up by 6 or 7, Purple Strategies has had Obama up by 1 or 2, or the race tied. We haven't had one of these CBS/NYT/Q-Pac polls of CO before, so it's hard to know how to read it, but given that the simultaneously-released PPP and Rasmussen polls show no change, I think it's unlikely that there's been much of a shift at all in CO.
Logged
asexual trans victimologist
Nathan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11242


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: August 08, 2012, 06:10:20 pm »
Ignore

I also can't get past that bizarre two-fifths senior citizens sampling error.
Logged

A shameless agrarian collectivist with no respect for private property or individual rights.

His idea of freedom is - it is a bad thing and should be stopped at all costs.

Nathan-land.  As much fun as watching paint dry... literally.
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9342
United States


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: August 08, 2012, 10:23:59 pm »
Ignore

The metric I like to look at when they include it is the "who did you vote for last time" question.

Colorado:
Poll: O+2
Actual: O+9

Virginia:
Poll: O+9
Actual: O+7

Wisconsin:
Poll:O+13
Actual: O+14

Granted, people can move between states, forget who they voted for, or simply lie to the pollster,  But those numbers are another indication that the Colorado result is skewed towards the Republicans since the difference is beyond the MoE for the poll.

If one were to adjust the toplines to have the poll samples conform to actual 2008 results, you'd end up with: CO: O+2, VA: O+2, WI: O+7.

You can't do that.  Poll samples on the "who did you vote for in the last election" question often don't match the previous results for various reasons - people who voted in the previous election fail the likely voter screen because they aren't as enthusiastic about voting this time or moved in or out of the state or died or have buyer's remorse about who they voted for the last time and lie to pollsters or whatever.  The 2008 electorate isn't the same as the 2012 electorate.

That said, the CO poll seems a bit off.  But I wouldn't doubt a small Romney lead.  Obama is campaigning there today for a reason.   The state is at least close, not some Democratic blowout.

Transposition errors are rare, but they happen. I would have been more likely to believe that Quinnipiac would have Obama up 5 in Colorado than down 5 when Rasmussen shows a tie and PPP shows a small Obama lead.  If it is a transposition error, then Quinnipiac will correct it fast. 

Checking it against the previous election is valid.  If a state went  53-46 for Republican A against Democrat B in 2004 and a representative sample of those voters now goes 46-53 for Democrat A' against Republican B' in 2008 then something is very different.

Polls can do one thing reliably: show whether candidates are poaching what was recent and necessary (if perhaps flimsy) support of what might have been a winning campaign in recent years. One would have expected statewide polls to show such between 1976 and 1980 for reasons that should have been obvious. Carter was a disappointment as President who beat an incumbent who had been appointed to the Vice-Presidency after never having won a statewide election and Reagan had smoothed out his reputation as a hard-liner while becoming a slick politician.

In 2008 John McCain had a better life story.... but he faced a Democratic nominee far stronger than John Kerry in scary economic times. Barack Obama is as slick a politician as he was in 2008; he is a good strategist. If the economy is worse than it was in 2007, then expectations are also lower. Could it be that an effective leader successfully gets people to lower their expectations instead of promising the impossible?  FDR did that; Jimmy Carter didn't.   

All in all I can state that the Presidential election of 2008 will, barring unforeseen and unpredictable events or (now) unquantifiable effects of recent behaviors, look much like the Presidential election of 2008. In essence Barack Obama is in roughly the same position that he was in in August 2008  with far fewer ways in which to lose than in which to win.     

 
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5070
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: August 09, 2012, 03:13:08 am »
Ignore

Any particular reason why Colorado is about the only swing state that is (or appears to be) swinging towards Romney?

Romney probably has better appeal to independents there than 08 McCain did.
Logged
Night Man
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11771
United States


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: August 12, 2012, 04:29:41 pm »
Ignore

Any particular reason why Colorado is about the only swing state that is (or appears to be) swinging towards Romney?

Romney probably has better appeal to independents there than 08 McCain did.

but McCain was a "Maverick". Even liberal college professors in 2004 were upset they didn't get a chance to vote for him against Gore...and McCain lurched to the right slower than Romney did and they both picked young  radicals to be their running mate.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines