Current polling, Obama vs. Romney

[pbrower2a]

Nevada, PPP -- Obama up 3.
Connecticut, PPP -- Obama up 13. (even averaging it with Q from this week that is Obama +10).
Ipsos Illinois -- 55-29... may be an exaggeration, but in that area I don't distinguish between +10 and +25 in a winner-take-all vote.

Outside perhaps the Deep South and Mormon country, Likely-Voters polls are floors for the President. At this point the President wins re-election at a minimum 333 electoral votes. Assume that the bumps from the conventions will wash, and no sudden scandals or economic collapse for which time is running out.

[pbrower2a]

West Virginia...52-38 for Romney. Almost certainly out of reach for the President. Could be closer than in 2008 if the undecided split 50-50. President Obama looks like a poor cultural match for the state.

[pbrower2a]

PPP, post-convention, Florida and North Carolina, likely voters. No change for PPP in either state, which is the real story.

The GOP love-fest has little effect. If there were a bounce, then both states would be clearly R at this point. Guess who gets the attention now!

[5280]

pbrower's election prediction thread looking through a blury spectacle and a touch of fairy dust...

[krazen1211]

You ignored the poll which shows Romney leading by 4. Your prior ruleset would have that averaged with PPP.

[pbrower2a]

pbrower's election prediction thread looking through a blurry spectacle and a touch of fairy dust...

Isn't that true of every prediction of this point?

We all assume something unprovable. We can't all prove that Vermont isn't slipping away from the President or that Utah Mormons aren't converting to Judaism en masse and becoming hostile to Mitt Romney.  But either is absurd. Cast off the absurd and the crystal ball gets much less murky.

We have electoral history of recent year as a precedent, but we must use polls as checks. I had my expectation that president Obama would lose a little from his near-max-out numbers in some states and gain some (but far from enough) in states in which he got clobbered in 2008, and usual swing states will remain swing states. We can also predict that President Obama, whose personality is much the same as it was in 2008, will have much the same ability to campaign as needed for a win.

Much defies prediction. I think that we can all predict that President Obama loses his re-election bid if we have a 1929-style or 2008-style crash or has a sex scandal, if figures in his administration are fingered in bribery, or if an nuke-possessing Iranian missile incinerates a large American city.  Does anyone think that any of those events will happen?

We have seen that Mitt Romney had his chance to offer himself as an alternative to a President that highly-partisan Republicans loathe. It's not definitive yet, but his best opportunity to establish himself has not gone well enough to put him ahead of the President. Add to that, President Obama gets to show anew what sort of politician he is at the Democratic National Convention. He seems as good at that as he was in 2008.

I am predicting nothing about how well he will do at the Democratic National Convention. We shall see soon enough. He may use a teleprompter,  but he certainly has editorial control over what goes on the teleprompter.

[pbrower2a]

You ignored the poll which shows Romney leading by 4. Your prior ruleset would have that averaged with PPP.

It came out later or under the radar.  The rule remains for an incontrovertible poll.

PPP, post-convention, Florida and North Carolina, likely voters. No change for PPP in either state, which is the real story.

Are you satisfied? Polls for Florida and North Carolina are still bad news for Mitt Romney on the whole. Let's see what attention President Obama gets this week. President Obama wins the election if he wins either -- and can win without either of them.  Colorado, Ohio, and Virginia at this point all clinch for the President -- as do Missouri (if you believe some of the polls of the last two weeks), Florida, and North Carolina. Those six states are different enough that Mitt Romney cannot quickly develop a pitch that wins them all without reshaping the electoral reality nationwide.  

Even five of the six as 50% chances implies that the President has 31 chances in 32 by random chance alone of winning -- more than 96%.  

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

You know, I think we can start accepting MO polls now. The Akin controversy seems to have died down for now.

[pbrower2a]

I'd still have to average Missouri, probably about Romney +8.

CO. PPP, likely voters, Obama up 3
MI, likewise, Obama up 7.

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old.

[pbrower2a]

Quinnipiac, New Jersey. Obama up 7 this weekend. Probable nadir.

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

[pbrower2a]

PPP, Ohio, after the Democratic Convention. No change in the shade for Ohio...  but Obama leads 50-45 in Ohio among likely voters. But for PPP, this is a gain of 2%. That might not look big, but in a state like Ohio that is a huge difference.


Ohio Survey Results

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note well: it is impossible to beat 50% without cutting into the 50% of the Other Guy. Romney gained a little, but not as much as did President Obama. A 5% margin is out of the margin of error in most states (Alaska and Texas are the most obvious exceptions).

Arguably the real star of the Democratic Convention is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_OH_9912.pdf

If President Obama is getting his gains in southeastern Ohio, then such bodes ill for Romney's chances in a raft of states in which the last Democratic nominee to win was Bill Clinton sixteen years ago. 

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

[krazen1211]

You are missing this New Mexico poll.

http://www.nmtelegram.com/2012/09/09/abq-journal-obama-leads-by-5-heinrich-by-7/

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You are missing this New Mexico poll.

http://www.nmtelegram.com/2012/09/09/abq-journal-obama-leads-by-5-heinrich-by-7/

More like rightfully ignoring it.  Not much of a track record to judge the firm by, and what little there is suggests a hefty pro-R bias in their numbers.  This poll would seem to indicate that at best Obama has only a high single digit lead, with about a 50-50 chance of a double digit lead.  And that assumes Johnson actually gets 7% of the vote, which is dubious in the extreme (tho not his currently polling that high, as that is t be expected).

[pbrower2a]

You are missing this New Mexico poll.

http://www.nmtelegram.com/2012/09/09/abq-journal-obama-leads-by-5-heinrich-by-7/

More like rightfully ignoring it.  Not much of a track record to judge the firm by, and what little there is suggests a hefty pro-R bias in their numbers.  This poll would seem to indicate that at best Obama has only a high single digit lead, with about a 50-50 chance of a double digit lead.  And that assumes Johnson actually gets 7% of the vote, which is dubious in the extreme (tho not his currently polling that high, as that is t be expected).

You have it right there. I do not post the polls of advocacy groups, special interests, or partisan think tanks.

PPP gives a likely-voter poll of North Carolina after the Democratic Convention.

PPP, Ohio, after the Democratic Convention. No change in the shade for Ohio...  but Obama leads 50-45 in Ohio among likely voters. But for PPP, this is a gain of 2%. That might not look big, but in a state like Ohio that is a huge difference.

North Carolina Survey Results

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Arguably the real star of the Democratic Convention is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NC_910.pdf

Quite good for someone who never won the state!

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

Any bounce in either North Carolina or Ohio for President Obama is either slight or not well developed.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You have it right there. I do not post the polls of advocacy groups, special interests, or partisan think tanks.

No reason to think that poll is any of those.  All the available evidence indicates that they aren't very good at political polling, and the groups most likely to be missed in New Mexico polling are also ones that tilt Democratic.

[pbrower2a]

Three polls, all of them with Obama up 10 or more in states that he is not going to lose:

Washington SUSA
Minnesota SUSA
Massachusetts, Kimball (R)

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

No new map needed for these.

[pbrower2a]

PPP, AZ -- Romney up 9%. I didn't realize that the Arizona electorate was that elderly and white. Possible D pickup -- if it is a Dodge or very old Datsun vehicle. Otherwise, it does have a close Senate race.

SUSA, FL -- Obama up 4%.  Just on the margin of error.

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

[pbrower2a]

At this point the safest bet on the 2012 election is a near replay of the 2008 election. President Obama would win everything that he won in 2008 except Indiana and the Second Congressional District of Nebraska without making any other gains.     

[Vosem]

At this point the safest bet on the 2012 election is a near replay of the 2008 election. President Obama would win everything that he won in 2008 except Indiana and the Second Congressional District of Nebraska without making any other gains.     

I would quibble on North Carolina

And on the downballot. Unlike 2008, where Democrats did well everywhere, this is going to be a victory for Obama personally, and only that. Republicans seem set to pickup 5 seats (Democrats will gain Maine; Republicans will gain MT, ND, NE, WI, and then take your pick of CT or VA), and run about even in the House, with perhaps minor Democratic gains.

[pbrower2a]

Close in the Big Sky State (MT, PPP)

Q3 The candidates for President are Democrat
Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney. If
the election was today, who would you vote
for?
Barack Obama................................................ 45%
Mitt Romney.................................................... 50%
Undecided....................................................... 5%

Q5 If the candidates for President this year were
Democrat Barack Obama, Republican Mitt
Romney, and Libertarian Gary Johnson, who
would you vote for?

Barack Obama................................................ 43%
Mitt Romney.................................................... 46%
Gary Johnson ................................................. 7%
Undecided....................................................... 5%

I'm going with the three-way contest... Montana is close also in the Senate and House races. President Obama does not need the three electoral votes; the Senate race is more important, and the at-large House seat would be worth grabbing.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MT_91212.pdf

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

[pbrower2a]

At this point the safest bet on the 2012 election is a near replay of the 2008 election. President Obama would win everything that he won in 2008 except Indiana and the Second Congressional District of Nebraska without making any other gains.    

I would quibble on North Carolina

And on the downballot. Unlike 2008, where Democrats did well everywhere, this is going to be a victory for Obama personally, and only that. Republicans seem set to pickup 5 seats (Democrats will gain Maine; Republicans will gain MT, ND, NE, WI, and then take your pick of CT or VA), and run about even in the House, with perhaps minor Democratic gains.

I wouldn't be so sure on MT:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are lots of close Senate races, including those in AZ and IN, states that few think that President Obama has a chance to win.  Tester (MT) should be extremely vulnerable having barely won in 2006 against one of the most corrupt members of the Senate.  That is down from a 3% lead in April -- but that is five months after a barrage of negative ads.  First PPP poll since April, so we have been in the dark.

[Mehmentum]

I think Republicans will probably win the Senate, but does that really change much?  Sure, it provides Republicans with good talking points, but without a supermajority nothing is possible.   

[morgieb]

I think Republicans will probably win the Senate, but does that really change much?  Sure, it provides Republicans with good talking points, but without a supermajority nothing is possible.   

If Romney wins I can see them passing a few things through budget reconciliation.

[pbrower2a]

EPIC-MRA, a very R pollster operating only in Michigan. Obama up 10. These fellows have had had President Obama behind early. No wonder the Republicans have abandoned Michigan. I have frequently argued with this pollster, but when it goes Obama +10 in Michigan,  the R nominee for President is ... in troubled waters.

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

It's beginning to look much like a replay of 2008.

[pbrower2a]

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/2012-presidential-election/white-voters-giving-romney-huge-texas-lead/ (Romney 55, Obama 40)

Qualitatively right, probably a quantitative exaggeration. Nobody can poll Texas effectively, so we beggars can't be choosers.

Likely voters -- the Obama floor.  Such voters tend to be old and R-leaning.

It's beginning to look much like a replay of 2008.