OH-PPP: Obama 51%, Romney 46%

[Milton Friedman]

Milton Friedman is spending his afterlife trolling the Atlas forum? How the mighty have fallen.
[/quote
Oh good grief. A new article in the Columbus paper was talking about how big Romney's crowds are and about how he has momentum. I know Jennifer Rubin probably means nothing to you but PPP asking questions about Drudge, Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and whether Obama hates white people is bullsh**t and speaks to their credibility. PPP is sh**t quit cherry picking polls and throwing Rasmussen (closest poller in 2010) out the window and propping up PPP with blatant disregard of their prior results or methods.

[Cliffy]

Like after the debate how PPP was asking about PBS and Big Bird questions? They consistently ask questions that are liberally biased, go back and read their polls.  They are a liberal ragster.

here's another where PPP goes on and on about his 47 remark explaining it in detail, they've also consistently pushed about his taxes.  They are a joke.


Q10 Mitt Romney recently said, “There are 47
percent of the people who will vote for the
president no matter what. All right? There are
47 percent who are with him, who are
dependent upon government, who believe that
they are victims, who believe the government
has a responsibility to care for them, who
believe that they are entitled to health care, to
food, to housing, to you-name-it, that that's an
entitlement. And the government should give it
to them. And they will vote for this president no
matter what.... These are people who pay no
income tax." Do you think Romney’s

[Yank2133]

Rasmussen was the worst pollster in 2010

[pa2011]

Rassmussen shows Obama up 1 in Ohio. PPP shows 5. Split the difference and you get Obama +3. I thnk that makes sense.

[Cliffy]

No you got me wrong, this poll isn't nearly as egregious as some they've done this cycle, I'm not that worked up about just this one.  What I'm saying is PPP is a liberal partisan propaganda pushing pollster.  The fact that you guys laud polls like this over and over cracks me up.  All PPP is doing is trying to give deranged libs some meat so you don't get completely depressed and keep the RCP from going red quicker.

Biden didn't get a bump or it would have shown up in the national polls and Romney's became a trend.  Speaking of, we're expected to believe PPP that in Ohio Biden won the debate by 11, when SUSA had Biden winning by 7 in California???  CNN and others had him losing nationally, highly doubt he won in ohio by 11 if at all.

It wouldn't necessarily show up much yet in the multi day trackers yet, since those results released today would have only included post- Debate responses on Friday night. And the Reuters poll showed Biden had a 7 point edge nationally on who won the debate, so not completely unbelievable Ohio this year edges a bit more than D than rest of country. Regardless, we get your point. You think this poll is bunk. No need to beat a dead horse. There will be plenty more polls to get be happy or worked up about.

[ElectionAtlas]

New Poll: Ohio President by Public Policy Polling on 2012-10-13

Summary: D: 51%, R: 46%, I: 0%, U: 3%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

[Cliffy]

Rassmussen shows Obama up 1 in Ohio. PPP shows 5. Split the difference and you get Obama +3. I thnk that makes sense.

If it makes you feel better, whatever but it's not at O+3.  It's prob tied at best +1-2 for O and that's without enthusiasm taken into account.

PPP admits that all over the nation even they see a Romney surge but wait, wait OHIO is completely different and there's no movement.  Right.  Naive much?

And whoever said the early absentee numbers don't suggest dem enthusiam is down, youre not comparing them to last election.  My understanding is Dems are down in requests compared to same time over 2008. 

[dspNY]

PPP is not a push poll...push polls ask inflammatory questions about one candidate or another BEFORE or WITHIN the "who are you going to vote for question". PPP's messaging questions are asked near the end of the poll, after the horserace, favorability, and demographics info.

[Yank2133]

Rassmussen shows Obama up 1 in Ohio. PPP shows 5. Split the difference and you get Obama +3. I thnk that makes sense.

If it makes you feel better, whatever but it's not at O+3.  It's prob tied at best +1-2 for O and that's without enthusiasm taken into account.

PPP admits that all over the nation even they see a Romney surge but wait, wait OHIO is completely different and there's no movement.  Right.  Naive much?

And whoever said the early absentee numbers don't suggest dem enthusiam is down, youre not comparing them to last election.  My understanding is Dems are down in requests compared to same time over 2008.  

Ohio has been the hardest nut to crack for Romney. This is due to the amount of spending there Team Obama did the past 3-5 months. PPP isn't the only one finding this trend, even Rasmussen showed no bounce for Mitt after the debate.

[Cliffy]

@JayCostTWS 1 hr
In last 3 elections, GOP partisans have been more loyal than their Dem counterparts in OH.

Mccain won the difference in Rs and Ds in 08 in Ohio.  This poll is a joke.


I really have a hard time believing that people in Ohio trust Obama on Libya more than Romney?  That's incredulous, you know an ambassador got murdered right, the middle east is on fire, there is a congressional investigation going on on the cover up and lack of security especially after requests.... and they trust O more.  lol  I swear some of this stuff is like twilight zone material....

[Cliffy]

Rassmussen shows Obama up 1 in Ohio. PPP shows 5. Split the difference and you get Obama +3. I thnk that makes sense.

If it makes you feel better, whatever but it's not at O+3.  It's prob tied at best +1-2 for O and that's without enthusiasm taken into account.

PPP admits that all over the nation even they see a Romney surge but wait, wait OHIO is completely different and there's no movement.  Right.  Naive much?

And whoever said the early absentee numbers don't suggest dem enthusiam is down, youre not comparing them to last election.  My understanding is Dems are down in requests compared to same time over 2008.  

Ohio has been the hardest nut to crack for Romney. This is due to the amount of spending there Team Obama did the past 3-5 months. PPP isn't the only one finding this trend, even Rasmussen showed no bounce for Mitt after the debate.

I understand it's the most difficult swing state, I study all of this crap too.   Well the RCP showed a bounce, it's at 1.7.  there's currently 8 polls and 3 are +4,5,6 and the 5 others are obama +1 or Romney +1.

Like I said before the data on the ground doesn't add up and romney's crowds are at least 2-3x as big this last week there. 

[Yank2133]

Rassmussen shows Obama up 1 in Ohio. PPP shows 5. Split the difference and you get Obama +3. I thnk that makes sense.

If it makes you feel better, whatever but it's not at O+3.  It's prob tied at best +1-2 for O and that's without enthusiasm taken into account.

PPP admits that all over the nation even they see a Romney surge but wait, wait OHIO is completely different and there's no movement.  Right.  Naive much?

And whoever said the early absentee numbers don't suggest dem enthusiam is down, youre not comparing them to last election.  My understanding is Dems are down in requests compared to same time over 2008.  

Ohio has been the hardest nut to crack for Romney. This is due to the amount of spending there Team Obama did the past 3-5 months. PPP isn't the only one finding this trend, even Rasmussen showed no bounce for Mitt after the debate.

I understand it's the most difficult swing state, I study all of this crap too.   Well the RCP showed a bounce, it's at 1.7.  there's currently 8 polls and 3 are +4,5,6 and the 5 others are obama +1 or Romney +1.

Like I said before the data on the ground doesn't add up and romney's crowds are at least 2-3x as big this last week there. 

Did you look at the pollsters?

Gravis, WeAskAmerica, and especially ARG are pretty bad. Only Rasmussen and SurveyUSA are the  only two pollsters out of the group that have any credibility.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

@JayCostTWS 1 hr
In last 3 elections, GOP partisans have been more loyal than their Dem counterparts in OH.

Mccain won the difference in Rs and Ds in 08 in Ohio.  This poll is a joke.


I really have a hard time believing that people in Ohio trust Obama on Libya more than Romney?  That's incredulous, you know an ambassador got murdered right, the middle east is on fire, there is a congressional investigation going on on the cover up and lack of security especially after requests.... and they trust O more.  lol  I swear some of this stuff is like twilight zone material....

Maybe (and I'm just going out on a limb and guessing here) it's because before he knew what was going on at all, he called a press conference and attacked the President for it for political expedience. Or maybe it's because Americans trust Obama more on national security as a whole, seeing as he ended the Iraq War and ending the Afghanistan War, killed Osama Bin Laden, captured Moamar Qhadaffi, and freed Libya.

[Yank2133]

Yeah, there really no reason for voters to trust Romney on Libya or anything that really has to do with Foreign Policy.

Now if this were John McCain running, then yeah Cliffy may of had a point.

[Speed of Sound]

Yeah, there really no reason for voters to trust Romney on Libya or anything that really has to do with Foreign Policy.

Now if this were John McCain running, then yeah Cliffy may of had a point.

Yeah, I mean, Romney has never once in his entire life done anything related to any sort of foreign policy, and his tiny endeavors into it (Trip to England, Libya Press Conference) have been really awful, while Obama has done all of the things listed  by Clinton1996. Cliffy's point makes negative sense.

[Cliffy]

let me dissect this rotten fish some more:  Pretty sure there's more women than men in this poll in a weird way and the early voting numbers are way off.

On Biden winning debate, women say Biden 50-37 and close with men 42-37, that's the opposite of what you see in most polls.  Typically women have had a problem with the way Biden acted way more than men.  $ says most females in this poll were democrats which would explain the severe difference of opinion for women in this poll.  Convenient way to get the result that Biden won.  


Another note is I think 3% have voted in early voting compared to total voters in 08 (175k of 5.5 mil) yet their sample is 19%???  So as far as early voting their #s are off a lot and you can't read a whole lot into any advantage in this.    Marist had the same 20%, both are bad #s and polls.  To get that high of a number I think would throw off other metrics in this poll too.

[Cliffy]

Rassmussen shows Obama up 1 in Ohio. PPP shows 5. Split the difference and you get Obama +3. I thnk that makes sense.

If it makes you feel better, whatever but it's not at O+3.  It's prob tied at best +1-2 for O and that's without enthusiasm taken into account.

PPP admits that all over the nation even they see a Romney surge but wait, wait OHIO is completely different and there's no movement.  Right.  Naive much?

And whoever said the early absentee numbers don't suggest dem enthusiam is down, youre not comparing them to last election.  My understanding is Dems are down in requests compared to same time over 2008.  

Ohio has been the hardest nut to crack for Romney. This is due to the amount of spending there Team Obama did the past 3-5 months. PPP isn't the only one finding this trend, even Rasmussen showed no bounce for Mitt after the debate.

I understand it's the most difficult swing state, I study all of this crap too.   Well the RCP showed a bounce, it's at 1.7.  there's currently 8 polls and 3 are +4,5,6 and the 5 others are obama +1 or Romney +1.

Like I said before the data on the ground doesn't add up and romney's crowds are at least 2-3x as big this last week there. 

Did you look at the pollsters?

Gravis, WeAskAmerica, and especially ARG are pretty bad. Only Rasmussen and SurveyUSA are the  only two pollsters out of the group that have any credibility.

Bad??? If they were bad and Rasmussen and Survey USA are good then they would be way out of line with them like PPP and Marist are.....    They are not, they are way closer to Ras than your guys.  I would agree they probably have republican biase but not huge, Ras certainly doesn't or he'd use his party ID poll #s as his sample. PPP continues to be laughable.  It's funny you guys used PPP in your dataset but discount others.   

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

You're new here aren't you Cliffy?

[Cliffy]

Of note as well PPP is saying Obama wins by 5 which is what he won by in 08.  Yet this poll shows him down 10% in the black vote and Romney losing 2% of Mccain's white vote, convenient balance as well as undecideds for Romney at 5.  Hard to believe...... yet this is a good pollster.  There stuff is like this everytime.

[Cliffy]

You're new here aren't you Cliffy?

Only in posting.  I've been reading for quite awhile this year and last election, just sick of the incredible biase in some of these lib polls.  Yes there are conservative polls and *Gasp* there are liberal polls.  You guys act like the liberal polls are less skewed or biased than the conservatives this time around and they most certainly are not.  I've read all your arguments and most of them don't hold water.  You guys poo poo anyone who questions samples or points out incredible biase and then if a poll comes out that contradicts these heavily enriched ones you say their not credible blah blah blah....

Before the debate you guys thought the election was over, when in reality it was probably obama +1 at best  not counting for enthusiasm.  How on earth you libs can think 2010 turnout doesn't matter and 2008 turnout will be closer to 2012 turnout fries my brain.  It's like you guys are living in an alternate universe where the economy is great, the majority of american actually wants obamacare, the middle east isn't on fire and the president doesn't have multiple scandals going on (F&F, Benghazi)...... I mean you really can't see what's going on.  Amazing.     

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

You're new here aren't you Cliffy?

Only in posting.  I've been reading for quite awhile this year and last election, just sick of the incredible biase in some of these lib polls.  Yes there are conservative polls and *Gasp* there are liberal polls.  You guys act like the liberal polls are less skewed or biased than the conservatives this time around and they most certainly are not.  I've read all your arguments and most of them don't hold water.  You guys poo poo anyone who questions samples or points out incredible biase and then if a poll comes out that contradicts these heavily enriched ones you say their not credible blah blah blah....

Before the debate you guys thought the election was over, when in reality it was probably obama +1 at best  not counting for enthusiasm.  How on earth you libs can think 2010 turnout doesn't matter and 2008 turnout will be closer to 2012 turnout fries my brain.  It's like you guys are living in an alternate universe where the economy is great, the majority of american actually wants obamacare, the middle east isn't on fire and the president doesn't have multiple scandals going on (F&F, Benghazi)...... I mean you really can't see what's going on.  Amazing.     

Politico, stop playing and come outta there. We all know its you. You almost got me with the new screen name.

[Tender Branson]

Nice.

[Tender Branson]

Saturday, they said, was a strong day for Obama in their polling ...

[Cliffy]

Not even.  I cruised this board last election because it was easy to pick up poll links (I have a hobby message board mostly Arkansas sports, with a political forum on it) because you guys do a decent job of posting most of the polls.  2008 was pretty easy to see Obama was going to win, Mccain was a weak candidate, the banking collapse and Obama had Lightning in a bottle being first black president, republicans were depressed, etc, etc. I post on a couple of comment sections on blogs but for the most part stick to my own board, it's pretty busy and I don't have time for much else because I spend a lot of my little free time studying polls and reading.  

This time around the Razorbacks suck because petrino was banging a 20 something employee and we have a terrible interim coach now so I'm down on my hogs at the moment but more active on my political board and other blogs. This election has way more excitement than the last one and I've been predicting a romney landslide since January on my own site, i can see it as clearly as I saw Obama winning last time.

Last election I could see some biase in each sides polls but not that much, it was harder to see what was going on too because of the whole history in the making thing.  This time it's pretty clear.  It's not 2008, the question is will it be 2010 or 2004 or better?  Don't want to be mean but liberals can't see it right now but it'll be a wave election at a minimum similar to 08 but R wise.

So anyway I've been reading more this time around on your board for a few months now, really hard to bite my tongue but I haven't had time to engage so I haven't, I had for the most part quit posting PPP polls on my site unless I was bored and wanted to dissect the ridiculousness of them (which generally I didn't have time).  I figured it would be out of line but it's just so blatantly off if they had been +3, I wouldn't have believed it but heh not way out of wack.  Anyway its riled me up and alot of things that I've read on here have just ticked me off and the republicans on here seem to just roll over most of the time because theyre so outnumbered I guess.

[Cliffy]

Saturday, they said, was a strong day for Obama in their polling ...

Who?  

and it seems from history Obama typically polls better on weekends in ras and gallup...