Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 07, 2016, 07:26:37 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections
| | |-+  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
| | | |-+  NM-Rasmussen: Obama with a huge 14-point lead
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: NM-Rasmussen: Obama with a huge 14-point lead  (Read 648 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 41129
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

View Profile
« on: August 22, 2012, 01:32:25 pm »
Ignore

52-38 Obama

9% would vote for "others" (Gary Johnson most likely) and just 1% is undecided.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/new_mexico/election_2012_new_mexico_president
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 41129
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2012, 01:34:12 pm »
Ignore

Good for the downballot Senate and House races.
Logged
MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 780
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2012, 01:37:38 pm »
Ignore

Interesting. So PPP and Rasmussen are swtiching sides here.

PPP had the race 49-44% in July.
Last Rasmussen poll of New Mexico showed Obama with a wider 16 point lead, 52-36%. And then an even earlier Rasmussen poll from back in February showed Obama enjoying a 19 point lead, 55-36%.
Logged

"...the media helped tip the scales. I didn't think the coverage in 2008 was especially fair..."

- Jake Tapper, Senior White House Correspondent for ABC News

"The media is very susceptible to doing what the Obama campaign wants."

 - Mark Halperin, author of 2008's 'Game Change.'
Eraserhead
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 42232
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2012, 01:39:28 pm »
Ignore

So basically as big as his '08 margin.

Remember when New Mexico was actually a swing state? Good times.
Logged

Update lives again on Atlas After Dark. PM me for info.
5280
MagneticFree
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3353
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.39, S: -2.64

P

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2012, 01:39:32 pm »
Ignore

I think Romney is not wasting his time in that state.
Logged

Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 41129
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: August 22, 2012, 01:40:06 pm »
Ignore

Interesting. So PPP and Rasmussen are swtiching sides here.

PPP had the race 49-44% in July.
Last Rasmussen poll of New Mexico showed Obama with a wider 16 point lead, 52-36%. And then an even earlier Rasmussen poll from back in February showed Obama enjoying a 19 point lead, 55-36%.

So, if current trends continue, Romney is tied with Obama in a NM Rasmussen poll in November 2013 ?
Logged
Spicy Purrito
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15343
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 22, 2012, 01:41:08 pm »
Ignore

Interesting. So PPP and Rasmussen are swtiching sides here.

PPP had the race 49-44% in July.
Last Rasmussen poll of New Mexico showed Obama with a wider 16 point lead, 52-36%. And then an even earlier Rasmussen poll from back in February showed Obama enjoying a 19 point lead, 55-36%.

So, if current trends continue, Romney is tied with Obama in a NM Rasmussen poll in November 2013 ?

lol. Well, looks like NM is safe?
Logged

MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 780
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 22, 2012, 01:47:20 pm »
Ignore

Interesting. So PPP and Rasmussen are swtiching sides here.
PPP had the race 49-44% in July.
Last Rasmussen poll of New Mexico showed Obama with a wider 16 point lead, 52-36%. And then an even earlier Rasmussen poll from back in February showed Obama enjoying a 19 point lead, 55-36%.

So, if current trends continue, Romney is tied with Obama in a NM Rasmussen poll in November 2013 ?

Ha Smiley I'm betting it takes longer than that. Took him 6 months to go from -19 to -14 in the state!

Edited cause I noticed you said November 2013, not 2012. On that, we agree.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 03:17:29 pm by MorningInAmerica »Logged

"...the media helped tip the scales. I didn't think the coverage in 2008 was especially fair..."

- Jake Tapper, Senior White House Correspondent for ABC News

"The media is very susceptible to doing what the Obama campaign wants."

 - Mark Halperin, author of 2008's 'Game Change.'
Likely Voter
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8378


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: August 22, 2012, 03:25:09 pm »
Ignore

Does anyone think of NM as a swing or battleground state anymore. I dont think much is being spent there by either side.
Logged
MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 780
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: August 22, 2012, 04:47:16 pm »
Ignore

Does anyone think of NM as a swing or battleground state anymore. I dont think much is being spent there by either side.

There is really just that one carrot stick PPP dangled back in July showing it a 49-44% race. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NM_071812.pdf. And the Washington Post ad tracker has picked up on very minimal ad spending in NM from either campaign since the primary season. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/track-presidential-campaign-ads-2012/
Logged

"...the media helped tip the scales. I didn't think the coverage in 2008 was especially fair..."

- Jake Tapper, Senior White House Correspondent for ABC News

"The media is very susceptible to doing what the Obama campaign wants."

 - Mark Halperin, author of 2008's 'Game Change.'
HokeyDood
HockeyDude
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10580
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: August 22, 2012, 07:35:16 pm »
Ignore

Now that any doubt about NM is out of the way, do you think we can say that Obama has 247 in the bag, and Romney has 181 in the bag?



I don't think I've ever seen an election like this.  The polls in the red states are showing substanial leads for Obama (don't give me the NH and PA bs, Romney's not winning there).  The polls in the blue states are showing substanial leads for Romney.  The polls in nearly every one of the grey states is basically showing a dead heat (note that I don't buy MO, but polls there HAVE shown a close race, and the Akin thing is at the VERY least a little bit of a wild card). 

Very strange. 
Logged

Help Intervention beloved poster Little Big Trumpista so he stops boofing drugs.  Click here!  http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=profile;u=14196 
This is life or death. 



Registering for Atlas After Dark is a can of corn!
http://atlasafterdark.freeforums.net/
Supersonic
SupersonicVenue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5198
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: 0.35

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: August 22, 2012, 07:43:06 pm »
Ignore

Now that any doubt about NM is out of the way, do you think we can say that Obama has 247 in the bag, and Romney has 181 in the bag?



I don't think I've ever seen an election like this.  The polls in the red states are showing substanial leads for Obama (don't give me the NH and PA bs, Romney's not winning there).  The polls in the blue states are showing substanial leads for Romney.  The polls in nearly every one of the grey states is basically showing a dead heat (note that I don't buy MO, but polls there HAVE shown a close race, and the Akin thing is at the VERY least a little bit of a wild card). 

Very strange. 

I wouldn't say it is 'BS' to assume that New Hampshire is a tossup, Obama has only been leading by around 3-5 points there. Nevada, too, shouldn't really be classed as leaning Obama. It's also very difficult to class Missouri as a tossup, the President isn't winning anything McCain won. Period.
Logged

Being a Libertarian is like having a fever, either you sweat it out or you die from it.
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10633


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: August 22, 2012, 07:47:49 pm »
Ignore

Now that any doubt about NM is out of the way, do you think we can say that Obama has 247 in the bag, and Romney has 181 in the bag?

Something bizarre is up in Minnesota.  Biden was just there and the campaigns spent six-figures advertising there last week.   Plus, Michigan may be closer than you think.  So, no.
Logged
HokeyDood
HockeyDude
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10580
United States


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: August 22, 2012, 07:53:05 pm »
Ignore

Now that any doubt about NM is out of the way, do you think we can say that Obama has 247 in the bag, and Romney has 181 in the bag?



I don't think I've ever seen an election like this.  The polls in the red states are showing substanial leads for Obama (don't give me the NH and PA bs, Romney's not winning there).  The polls in the blue states are showing substanial leads for Romney.  The polls in nearly every one of the grey states is basically showing a dead heat (note that I don't buy MO, but polls there HAVE shown a close race, and the Akin thing is at the VERY least a little bit of a wild card). 

Very strange. 

I wouldn't say it is 'BS' to assume that New Hampshire is a tossup, Obama has only been leading by around 3-5 points there. Nevada, too, shouldn't really be classed as leaning Obama. It's also very difficult to class Missouri as a tossup, the President isn't winning anything McCain won. Period.

NH has been going the way of the rest of New England for years, or should I say, the GOP has been moving away from NH politics.  Gore probably wins there in 2000 without Nader.  Kerry picks it up in a national loss.  Obama cruises in 2008.  Last 8 polls, O+6, O+4, O+3, tie, O+8, O+5, O+13, O+9.  Should I have called it BS?  Maybe not, but only because it sounds harsh and hackish.  How is Romney going to buck the trend AND overcome an inherent disadvantage by the simple fact that, now, NH is a Democratic state nationally.  

Nevada is clearly leaning toward Obama and Democrats underpoll there EVERY SINGLE TIME.  C'mon now.  

read by post again... I said I don't buy Missouri being that close.  However, recent polls have showed it tight and the recent thing with Akin could be a bit of a wild card in terms of motivating liberal-leaning women to vote.  So, I reluctantly keep it grey for right now.
Logged

Help Intervention beloved poster Little Big Trumpista so he stops boofing drugs.  Click here!  http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=profile;u=14196 
This is life or death. 



Registering for Atlas After Dark is a can of corn!
http://atlasafterdark.freeforums.net/
HokeyDood
HockeyDude
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10580
United States


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: August 22, 2012, 07:55:12 pm »
Ignore

Now that any doubt about NM is out of the way, do you think we can say that Obama has 247 in the bag, and Romney has 181 in the bag?

Something bizarre is up in Minnesota.  Biden was just there and the campaigns spent six-figures advertising there last week.   Plus, Michigan may be closer than you think.  So, no.

You're not winning Michigan.  You're not winning Minnesota.  I'm looking at this election realistically, not in GOP fairytale land. 
Logged

Help Intervention beloved poster Little Big Trumpista so he stops boofing drugs.  Click here!  http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=profile;u=14196 
This is life or death. 



Registering for Atlas After Dark is a can of corn!
http://atlasafterdark.freeforums.net/
Invisible Obama
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6213
United States



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: August 22, 2012, 07:59:57 pm »
Ignore

Agreed, Romney's path to a win doesn't run through Minnesota or Michigan. They aren't states Democrats can totally ignore, but they aren't going to be toss-ups.
Logged

LOCK TRUMP UP!
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10633


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2012, 08:01:55 pm »
Ignore

Now that any doubt about NM is out of the way, do you think we can say that Obama has 247 in the bag, and Romney has 181 in the bag?

Something bizarre is up in Minnesota.  Biden was just there and the campaigns spent six-figures advertising there last week.   Plus, Michigan may be closer than you think.  So, no.

You're not winning Michigan.  You're not winning Minnesota.  I'm looking at this election realistically, not in GOP fairytale land. 

Campaign ad spending and travel itineraries would dictate that one or both of the parties think Minnesota, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania are close enough to spend at least six-figures per week advertising there.  

Follow the money.  Follow the candidates.  That tells you even more than the polling.  Call those states "in the bag" for Obama at your own peril.
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8378


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: August 22, 2012, 08:14:24 pm »
Ignore

I would agree with that map except NH which may be lean Obama but could go either way in the end. It is hard to tell if MO should be added to the battlegrounds yet. I think with the NRSC and Crossroads pulling out of the senate race Romney and the GOP may have to play some defense but it isn't a swing state yet.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10633


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2012, 08:25:36 pm »
Ignore

I would agree with that map except NH which may be lean Obama but could go either way in the end. It is hard to tell if MO should be added to the battlegrounds yet. I think with the NRSC and Crossroads pulling out of the senate race Romney and the GOP may have to play some defense but it isn't a swing state yet.

There hasn't been any significant ad spending in Missouri in many months, suggesting the campaigns don't think it is a battleground.  It will be interesting to see if that changes in the near future after the Akin debacle.
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8378


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2012, 08:39:56 pm »
Ignore

I would agree with that map except NH which may be lean Obama but could go either way in the end. It is hard to tell if MO should be added to the battlegrounds yet. I think with the NRSC and Crossroads pulling out of the senate race Romney and the GOP may have to play some defense but it isn't a swing state yet.

There hasn't been any significant ad spending in Missouri in many months, suggesting the campaigns don't think it is a battleground.  It will be interesting to see if that changes in the near future after the Akin debacle.

That is what I was saying, MO was like NM, MN, MI and PA...as in states where there was maybe some flirting with spending and swing but not anymore. However, Akin may have changed it. If the GOP side has really pulled out of spending for the senate race (and likely with the Dems now putting more in), the republicans could have a turnout problem
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines