Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 20, 2019, 05:46:32 am
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  CO-Project New America/Keating Research (D): Obama up 4
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: CO-Project New America/Keating Research (D): Obama up 4  (Read 6089 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,414
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 29, 2012, 09:25:41 am »

48-44 Obama

Project New America, formerly Project New West, is a private company that provides cutting edge tools to understand and communicate with a rapidly changing America. Through our unique model, PNA develops, conducts aggregates, and disseminates research, messaging and on-going strategic guidance with the nationís leading progressive stakeholders. Since 2007, Project New America has conducted over 20 statewide surveys in Colorado.

Keating Research surveyed 601 Likely 2012 Colorado voters from May 21-24 on behalf of Project New America. The margin of error for the survey is +/-4.0%. Live interviews were conducted. Keating Research is a leading CO polling firm whose previous clients include Hickenlooper for Colorado and Michael Hancock for Denver Mayor.

http://www.projectnewamerica.com/PNACOPresidentialMemo5-29-12.pdf
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,414
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2012, 09:31:47 am »

Keating was Hickenloopers internal pollster in 2010 and got his double-digit victory right, while many other pollsters incl. Rasmussen, PPP, Marist and Magellan showed a close race:

http://www.chieftain.com/news/local/article_8e7685e8-ea2a-11df-b62d-001cc4c03286.html

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/GOVERNOR/2010/polls.php?fips=8
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,872
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -3.21, S: -1.91


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 29, 2012, 11:23:13 am »

Hmm. Maybe Colorado will be The state that puts Romney over 270...
Logged
Miles
MilesC56
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,379
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2012, 11:29:24 am »

Hmm. Maybe Colorado will be The state that puts Romney over 270...

It'll be hard for him to overcome his 2-1 deficit with Independents.
Logged
Invisible Obama
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,070
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2012, 11:35:32 am »

Hmm. Maybe Colorado will be The state that puts Romney over 270...

Considering he's at 44% in this poll, which is the same percentage McCain got, that's not likely.
Logged
backtored
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 503
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2012, 11:49:09 am »

Hmm. Maybe Colorado will be The state that puts Romney over 270...

It seems like, finally, the national media and a few pollsters are coming around to that idea.  I've believed it from the start, but I live here.  It evidently takes longer for political trends to reach Washington than it does for cars, bikes, buses or planes.  Or really anything else.  The fact that Romney may do quite well in Colorado--despite real concerns in VA and OH--has been clear to me for a while.
Logged
backtored
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 503
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2012, 11:50:36 am »

Hmm. Maybe Colorado will be The state that puts Romney over 270...

It'll be hard for him to overcome his 2-1 deficit with Independents.

Despite the fact that Romney and Obama are quite close nationally among independents, you really believe that unaffiliated voters in Colorado are really that in the tank for Obama?  I  can almost guarantee that Chicago doesn't think so, and is therefore probably not exactly cheered by this poll.
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,872
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -3.21, S: -1.91


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2012, 12:08:13 pm »

If Obama has a 2:1 advantage with independents and Romney is already this close, that should be good news for team Mitt. It means he has to sway a smaller percentage of the most swayable demographic there is. And I tend to believe that when election day comes and people are actually at the ballot box, people will have enough doubt in Obama that they'll vote against him.
Logged
NVGonzalez
antwnzrr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,689
Mexico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2012, 12:21:58 pm »

Just for consideration. The CO GOP is just a little better organized than the NV GOP but not by much.
Logged
backtored
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 503
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2012, 01:16:06 pm »

Just for consideration. The CO GOP is just a little better organized than the NV GOP but not by much.

I've heard that the Nevada GOP has effectively been taken over by Ron Paul supporters, and that Romney is creating a shadow party to run his campaign there.  http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralstons-flash/2012/may/16/rnc-romney-campaigns-will-erect-new-organization-b/ 

In Colorado, the GOP is in probably the best shape it's been in for eight years.  It's hard for Democrats to win in Colorado when the GOP doesn't fissure itself into electoral tizzies like 2010 (or 2006).  Comparing the Colorado GOP with the Nevada GOP is apples and oranges.  In fact, the states aren't really similar, either, and it's why Romney may do much better in Colorado than he will in Nevada.
Logged
NVGonzalez
antwnzrr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,689
Mexico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2012, 01:56:58 pm »

Just for consideration. The CO GOP is just a little better organized than the NV GOP but not by much.

I've heard that the Nevada GOP has effectively been taken over by Ron Paul supporters, and that Romney is creating a shadow party to run his campaign there.  http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralstons-flash/2012/may/16/rnc-romney-campaigns-will-erect-new-organization-b/  

In Colorado, the GOP is in probably the best shape it's been in for eight years.  It's hard for Democrats to win in Colorado when the GOP doesn't fissure itself into electoral tizzies like 2010 (or 2006).  Comparing the Colorado GOP with the Nevada GOP is apples and oranges.  In fact, the states aren't really similar, either, and it's why Romney may do much better in Colorado than he will in Nevada.

Yeah the state convention here was taken over by the Pauls and not just that, the whole caucus process was the mess. The counting, the voting, everything. It literally took 2 days to count the votes in Clark County. This whole mess also goes back to 2010 when the Angle campaign at one point had racked in 14 million dollars in funds and when she reported it 11 million of those were already thrown away. Also what was supposed to be a GOP year when state legislatures were going red all over the place here in NV they only gained 1 assembly seat and 1 state senate seat. Losing to a very weak Harry Reid with a less than 40% approval rate was the biggest embarrassment of them all.

I don't know about CO but if I had it understood right they were also getting a similar demographic change similar to NV though it was somewhat being negated by the large military presence around the Colorado Springs area. If they fizzle out again like in 2010 though they would have no shot at taking the state. If however you are right about the CO GOP being strong again perhaps we have a race there that will come down to who is better organized and who can turn out their supporters best.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,414
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 29, 2012, 02:01:18 pm »

I'm pretty sure that Obama has around 85% to 90% of Democrats in Colorado, because it's not a crap state like Oklahoma, Arkansas or West Virginia.

And Romney also has around 85-90% I guess.

Which means, if Obama leads by 20 among Independents, then this poll has to be made up of quite a lot more Republicans than Democrats to get an overall 4% Obama advantage.

Probably 5-10% more Republicans in that sample than Democrats.
Logged
NVGonzalez
antwnzrr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,689
Mexico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2012, 02:03:04 pm »

I'm pretty sure that Obama has around 85% to 90% of Democrats in Colorado, because it's not a crap state like Oklahoma, Arkansas or West Virginia.

And Romney also has around 85-90% I guess.

Which means, if Obama leads by 20 among Independents, then this poll has to be made up of quite a lot more Republicans than Democrats to get an overall 4% Obama advantage.

Probably 5-10% more Republicans in that sample than Democrats.

Could someone call Bawlexus? Wink
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,414
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2012, 02:15:26 pm »

I'm pretty sure that Obama has around 85% to 90% of Democrats in Colorado, because it's not a crap state like Oklahoma, Arkansas or West Virginia.

And Romney also has around 85-90% I guess.

Which means, if Obama leads by 20 among Independents, then this poll has to be made up of quite a lot more Republicans than Democrats to get an overall 4% Obama advantage.

Probably 5-10% more Republicans in that sample than Democrats.

Could someone call Bawlexus? Wink

We don't need Bawlexus for this, it's pretty obvious:

If the sample would look like the PPP sample a month ago, Obama would be up by double digits in this poll too.

No Democrat in Colorado has gotten less than 90% among Democrats since at least 2004.

Even John Kerry got more than 90%. Obama got 92%. Bennet got 94% in 2010, Hickenlooper got even 96%. PPP had Obama at 90% too a month ago.

With these numbers it's hard to imagine how Obama would lose the state right now.

Unless 10% more Republicans turn out in November ...
Logged
old timey villain
cope1989
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,741


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 29, 2012, 03:05:45 pm »

Obama trended away from the Republicans in 2004 as well as 2008. Romney can pick it up, but it's become increasingly difficult for Republicans to win it. I still say Obama has the advantage.
Logged
backtored
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 503
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 29, 2012, 04:57:11 pm »

I emailed Ethan Axelrod (Ethan@ProjectAmericanCentury.com) http://www.projectnewamerica.com/PNACOPresidentialMemo5-29-12.pdf to ask about the partisan sample of the poll. Here is the email I received back:

"Hi Brandon,
Can't provide crosstabs, but 37% of respondents were registered Republicans. 33% registered Democrats., and 30% unaffiliated. That's registered, not self-ID."


If anyone wants to verify the email is from who I say it is, email me at ballenwhite@gmail.com and I'll be glad to forward it to you.

So, the poll sample Project American Century is using is R+4 (37R, 33% D, 30% I). It's not hard to envision Colorado turnout looking like this in November, considering that it was R+1 in huge Dem turnout year of 2008, and was R+9 in 2004. So as you can see, the sample of this poll isnt necessarily overly GOP friendly. Seems almost spot on.


Active voter registration in Colorado has about a five-point GOP advantage, so, yes, the voter screen seems quite reasonable.

Which leads me to conclude that Obama can't win Colorado.  Does anybody really believe that he'll win unaffiliated voters by 27 points--in California, let alone Colorado?  In other words, if Obama needs a 27-point independent advantage to lead within the margin of error in Colorado, he can't win the state.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,410
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 29, 2012, 06:18:44 pm »

Two counties in Colorado will decide the state which way it'll sway, Jefferson and Arapahoe counties.  They are going to be nail bitters on election night.
Logged
Edgar Suit Larry
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 29, 2012, 06:49:12 pm »

Though, the GOP curently has like a 1% advantage in voter Registration and the "active" label  can probably be attributed to the Caucuses, right?

What were the 2010 exit polls like for Colorado? Would there be any reason why Democrats would do worse in Colorado than they did in 2010?
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,137
Liechtenstein


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 29, 2012, 06:56:02 pm »
« Edited: May 29, 2012, 06:57:50 pm by red's wet dream »

What were the 2010 exit polls like for Colorado? Would there be any reason why Democrats would do worse in Colorado than they did in 2010?

CO-Gov was D-33, R-27, and I-40, although indies voted 59% for Tancredo and Maes to 39% for Hickenlooper so we can assume many of them were disgruntled Rs.

The divisive Senate primary and non-competitive governor's race might've depressed Republican turnout, if one is making the case it'll be relatively higher in 2012 than 2010 (I'd personally doubt that, though).
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,410
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 29, 2012, 06:57:33 pm »
« Edited: May 29, 2012, 07:00:06 pm by RockyIce »

CO had a crappy scandal against Ken Buck running for senate on his remarks with women which got rid of his lead before the final days of election. He was neck and neck with Michael Bennet.

Scott McInnis plagerized an article from a 20 year old Hasan Family Foundation which made him drop out of the race for the GOP.  He was ahead in the polls running as governor in 2010 before dropping out.  Also Tom Tancredo was running as a 3rd party candidate against Hickenlooper and Dan Maes with a couple months too late.  He didn't get enough recognition and votes.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,414
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 29, 2012, 11:29:27 pm »

I emailed Ethan Axelrod (Ethan@ProjectAmericanCentury.com) http://www.projectnewamerica.com/PNACOPresidentialMemo5-29-12.pdf to ask about the partisan sample of the poll. Here is the email I received back:

"Hi Brandon,
Can't provide crosstabs, but 37% of respondents were registered Republicans. 33% registered Democrats., and 30% unaffiliated. That's registered, not self-ID."


If anyone wants to verify the email is from who I say it is, email me at ballenwhite@gmail.com and I'll be glad to forward it to you.

So, the poll sample Project American Century is using is R+4 (37R, 33% D, 30% I). It's not hard to envision Colorado turnout looking like this in November, considering that it was R+1 in huge Dem turnout year of 2008, and was R+9 in 2004. So as you can see, the sample of this poll isnt necessarily overly GOP friendly. Seems almost spot on.


If the sample was R+4 and we assume that both Obama and Romney got 90% among their own parties, then Obama lost about 5% of Democrats to Romney and Romney lost about 3% of Republicans to Obama, while Independents went 57-30 for Obama (just like the release said).
Logged
backtored
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 503
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: May 30, 2012, 03:04:55 pm »

Though, the GOP curently has like a 1% advantage in voter Registration and the "active" label  can probably be attributed to the Caucuses, right?

What were the 2010 exit polls like for Colorado? Would there be any reason why Democrats would do worse in Colorado than they did in 2010?

The problem with the whole "Colorado Democrats win in 2010" narrative is that it's false.  Republicans took every single statewide office with the exception of the Senate and gubernatorial races, where the Senate Democratic candidate got maybe 48% and the supposedly "popular" Denver Democratic mayor running for governor got 51%.  Not remarkable.  But it's even less remarkable when you consider the fact that there was essentially no credible Republican candidate, other than a really unpopular one who ran on the Constitution Party ticket.  And the "popular" Denver mayor only got 51%.

The GOP took two Congressional seats to pick up a majority for the delegation.  The GOP picked up the state House and one seat in the state Senate.  It was actually a very good year for Republicans in Colorado, but they totally blew easily winnable Senate and gubernatorial races (that may have had major downticket implications that keps other GOP candidates from winning their races).

If Marco Rubio (or even Jane Norton) would have been running for Senate, or certainly if a strong GOP gubernatorial candidate had emerged, the GOP would have swept Colorado quite easily in 2010.

It didn't happen, but there's a real chance that it will in 2012.  So much of the Democrats' success in the state is a result of GOP incompetence, and has very little to do with any supposed "ideological shift" among voters in Colorado.

Obama has a chance to win Colorado.  But it's a R-leaning state, perhaps like Virginia, that will be an enormous challenge for Obama.  I think that it certainly favors Romney.  But I still think that Obama can easily win Ohio and Virginia, and thus the whole election.  I'm not predicting the Romney landslide tha some conservatives think will happen.  I just happen to think that landslide or loss, Colorado goes red again.
Logged
backtored
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 503
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: May 30, 2012, 03:07:36 pm »

Though, the GOP curently has like a 1% advantage in voter Registration and the "active" label  can probably be attributed to the Caucuses, right?

What were the 2010 exit polls like for Colorado? Would there be any reason why Democrats would do worse in Colorado than they did in 2010?

Also, I believe that your registration is only activated by general election voting, because caucuses are run by the party, and not the state.  I don't think that SoS Gessler knows that I voted in the GOP caucuses here, so I think the "active" advantage for Republicans in Colorado has more to do with new registrations more than anything else.  The GOP is truly resurgent in Colorado, and it may take a while for people outside of the state to begin to really understand what has and is happening.
Logged
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,457
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: May 30, 2012, 04:53:40 pm »

The GOP is doing good in Colorado? Nice to hear that.

Anyway, I think Obama will win CO. The state has a big Hispanic Population which the Republicans have made mad.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 41,667
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: May 30, 2012, 06:03:21 pm »

Though, the GOP curently has like a 1% advantage in voter Registration and the "active" label  can probably be attributed to the Caucuses, right?

What were the 2010 exit polls like for Colorado? Would there be any reason why Democrats would do worse in Colorado than they did in 2010?

Also, I believe that your registration is only activated by general election voting, because caucuses are run by the party, and not the state.  I don't think that SoS Gessler knows that I voted in the GOP caucuses here, so I think the "active" advantage for Republicans in Colorado has more to do with new registrations more than anything else.  The GOP is truly resurgent in Colorado, and it may take a while for people outside of the state to begin to really understand what has and is happening.

Can you give us some examples of the improvements in the state party organization that would cause such an improvement in registration and other changes?

I do agree that Democrats over emphasize the the results in 2010. For one, Colorado has a history of rejecting midterm landslides like 1994 when the reelected a Democratic Governor. Second of all, the chaos in the Governors race and the vote split depressed the Republican performance in the State Legislative races where the GOP could have done much better. Buck lost on the 1990's phone call recording. If Norton was Senate candidate and maybe Schaffer or Suthers was the Guernatorial nominee then things would have been very different.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines