ARG polls for OH & CO: Very tight races in both

[Tender Branson]

OH:

48-47 Obama

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/OH12.html

CO:

49-47 Obama

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/CO12.html

[backtored]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

[Tender Branson]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

[mondale84]

Joke polls from a joke pollster.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

Ignore him, Tender. He's just another right-wing troll.

[Tender Branson]

Joke polls from a joke pollster.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four.  

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado).  

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

Ignore him, Tender. He's just another right-wing troll.

He reminds me of that Rawlings guy who still owes me a picture of a burning 50$ bill from the 2008 election.

[backtored]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

As far as I know, in modern history, Democrats have NEVER outnumbered Republicans in Colorado.  Even in 2008 the GOP had a +1 advantage.  But since then, they've picked up a lot more voters (much more than Democrats).  So how exactlly will Democrats gain 3% more voters in 2012--as less Democratic year--when Repubilcans have actually gained a registration advantage in four years?

Moreover, ARG has the Hispanic vote at 15%, which is almost double the projected 8% this year.

This is a bad poll for the president.  You just have to cut around the fat a bit.

[backtored]

Joke polls from a joke pollster.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

Ignore him, Tender. He's just another right-wing troll.

You can call names, or you can engage the argument.  You can only partially blame me for the GOP's registration advantage in Colorado.  But you cannot blame me for this poll.

[Tender Branson]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

As far as I know, in modern history, Democrats have NEVER outnumbered Republicans in Colorado.  Even in 2008 the GOP had a +1 advantage.  But since then, they've picked up a lot more voters (much more than Democrats).  So how exactlly will Democrats gain 3% more voters in 2012--as less Democratic year--when Repubilcans have actually gained a registration advantage in four years?

Moreover, ARG has the Hispanic vote at 15%, which is almost double the projected 8% this year.

This is a bad poll for the president.  You just have to cut around the fat a bit.

You realize that in 2010 the CNN exit poll was more Dem than GOP ?

And 8% Hispanics this year in CO ? Are you kidding ? It was 13% in 2008.

[mondale84]

Joke polls from a joke pollster.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

Ignore him, Tender. He's just another right-wing troll.

You can call names, or you can engage the argument.  You can only partially blame me for the GOP's registration advantage in Colorado.  But you cannot blame me for this poll.

Have you been intimidating minority voters? Not that I would put it past you, mind you...

...you might end up being someone who acts on Krazen's urges to "quarantine" the minority vote...

[backtored]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

As far as I know, in modern history, Democrats have NEVER outnumbered Republicans in Colorado.  Even in 2008 the GOP had a +1 advantage.  But since then, they've picked up a lot more voters (much more than Democrats).  So how exactlly will Democrats gain 3% more voters in 2012--as less Democratic year--when Repubilcans have actually gained a registration advantage in four years?

Moreover, ARG has the Hispanic vote at 15%, which is almost double the projected 8% this year.

This is a bad poll for the president.  You just have to cut around the fat a bit.

You realize that in 2010 the CNN exit poll was more Dem than GOP ?

And 8% Hispanics this year in CO ? Are you kidding ? It was 13% in 2008.

No, 8% it is:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21426353/hispanic-voters-projected-make-up-8-colorado-electorate

[pbrower2a]

President Obama won Colorado by about 8% in 2008, so the party registration that you suggest may reflect a now-obsolete reality. The state might be closer this time,  but it doesn't look like a Romney pick-up.

It is possible for Mitt Romney to lose Colorado yest still win -- but Romney would have to win every state reasonably in contention -- FL, IA, MO, NC, OH, and VA. It is practically impossible for Mitt Romney to lose Ohio and still win.

[Tender Branson]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

As far as I know, in modern history, Democrats have NEVER outnumbered Republicans in Colorado.  Even in 2008 the GOP had a +1 advantage.  But since then, they've picked up a lot more voters (much more than Democrats).  So how exactlly will Democrats gain 3% more voters in 2012--as less Democratic year--when Repubilcans have actually gained a registration advantage in four years?

Moreover, ARG has the Hispanic vote at 15%, which is almost double the projected 8% this year.

This is a bad poll for the president.  You just have to cut around the fat a bit.

You realize that in 2010 the CNN exit poll was more Dem than GOP ?

And 8% Hispanics this year in CO ? Are you kidding ? It was 13% in 2008.

No, 8% it is:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21426353/hispanic-voters-projected-make-up-8-colorado-electorate

The article says "Hispanics in all swing states". Not just CO. Colorado has more Hispanics voting.

[Rowan]

If I were to quibble about the party ID of either poll, it would be OH not CO.

[5280]

President Obama won Colorado by about 8% in 2008, so the party registration that you suggest may reflect a now-obsolete reality. The state might be closer this time,  but it doesn't look like a Romney pick-up.

It is possible for Mitt Romney to lose Colorado yest still win -- but Romney would have to win every state reasonably in contention -- FL, IA, MO, NC, OH, and VA. It is practically impossible for Mitt Romney to lose Ohio and still win.

The polls are too close for Romney to win presidency but lose CO. If Romney wins, he takes CO, and he takes the other states like FL, IA, MO, etc. Obama wins, he could take CO.

[cinyc]

No, 8% it is:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21426353/hispanic-voters-projected-make-up-8-colorado-electorate

As Tender Branson said, Hispanics made up 13% of the Colorado electorate in the 2008 exit poll.  Hispanics made up 12% of the Colorado electorate in the 2010 exit poll.

[5280]

Joke polls from a joke pollster.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four.  

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado).  

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

Ignore him, Tender. He's just another right-wing troll.

You can call names, or you can engage the argument.  You can only partially blame me for the GOP's registration advantage in Colorado.  But you cannot blame me for this poll.

Have you been intimidating minority voters? Not that I would put it past you, mind you...

...you might end up being someone who acts on Krazen's urges to "quarantine" the minority vote...

Mondale80, what's bad enough is when there's newer people on here trying to explain a different point of view and can't make an objective statement. You call them a troll, resort to name calling and immaturity. How much lower can you get?

[Eraserhead]

You guys are having a serious argument over ARG's "polling"? That's cute.

[mondale84]

You guys are having a serious argument over ARG's "polling"? That's cute.

My thoughts exactly...

[krazen1211]

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Active registration actually means sh*t in Colorado, because inactive voters can also vote in CO and they do. Counting inactive voters too, the Republicans in the state have only a slight 1% advantage in registration.

Besides, registration numbers don't tell us anything about likelyhood to vote and voter motivation. For example, if the Republicans hold a 1% lead, but 80% of Dems turn out and just 75% of Republicans then the composition changes to a Dem lead on election day. And so on.

http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder-county-news/ci_19303037

This year's return of ballots from voters labeled as inactive was about 7 percent, up from about 3 percent in 2009.



Most of the inactives are gone or dead.