Some polls now have Romney ahead.

[TraumaRN]

Gotta love this section.



Don't try and ask a straight up question. Rather, muddy the waters so that we can assign party identification subjectively. What a joke.

Looks more like:

43% Total Democrat

37% Total Republican

38% Total Independent/Other

Or something in between this number and their number. Who knows though.

I'm not sure your objection either. Michigan has been a democratic state for a long long time. If you were to just look at the tri-county Metro Detroit area which makes up the vast majority of Michigan's voters, they are strongly for Obama and very much Democratic. The tri-county area had about 39% of all votes cast in 08. That's not even including Washtenaw county which has the University of Michigan and is ridiculously Democratic as well.

 

[mchammer187]

That's your October Surprise right there.

Honestly I'm pretty sure your Christies and Rubio types are secretly rooting for Obama anyway. They are looking forward to 2016 which isn't going to happen in a Romney presidency.

 

[buckshot24]

Some conservatives have moved back from I to R in the last month or so, as we got closer to the election. This has been documented by Gallup and others.

Gallup says there are more Republicans than Democrats as well, do you buy that? But you're contradicting yourself, first you say Republicans moved to independent but when I say that this isn't being shown with the samples in the polls you say they are switching back to Republican.

Anyway, I still don't see any argument in your favor here. According to your own numbers, the exit poll was D+8 for OH in 2008 and the poll average now is D+6. So, slightly lower margin. Seems about right to me.

D+6 is fantasy land. (It was D+6.2 btw)

Historically 2008 was way out of proportion but for some reason 2012 will be just about the same, even after 2010? At the end of the day it doesn't matter how convinced you are, we'll know soon enough.

 

[xBiffx]

I'm not sure your objection either. Michigan has been a democratic state for a long long time. If you were to just look at the tri-county Metro Detroit area which makes up the vast majority of Michigan's voters, they are strongly for Obama and very much Democratic. The tri-county area had about 39% of all votes cast in 08. That's not even including Washtenaw county which has the University of Michigan and is ridiculously Democratic as well.

Seems from the poll they are much more independent than anything. But then again, how can anyone conclude much from that data.

 

[xBiffx]

All the pollsters do it that way.

How would you suggest they assign party ID?

No they don't. Many ask straight Democrat, Republican, or Independent to eliminate ambiguity. The ones that add degrees of such aren't going to take someone who answers Independent - leans left or Independent - leans right and automatically assign them to Democrat or Republican either. They answered Independent, because that is how they identify themselves.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

But you're contradicting yourself, first you say Republicans moved to independent but when I say that this isn't being shown with the samples in the polls you say they are switching back to Republican.

Well, the trend I was speaking of was national. It may not be the case in every state.

D+6 is fantasy land. (It was D+6.2 btw)

Why? Because you want it to be?

Sorry, but if it's you against a large number of independently-operating professional pollsters, I'll go with the pollsters.

Historically 2008 was way out of proportion but for some reason 2012 will be just about the same, even after 2010? At the end of the day it doesn't matter how convinced you are, we'll know soon enough.

2008 was different largely because Obama was running. Hey, look! He's running again. And against a rather similar opponent.

Comparing a mid-term year to a presidential year is utterly nonsensical. Do you think the ad campaigns and registration campaigns and GOTV operations that were running in 2010 are anything like what is going on this year?

 

[umbrella39]

Gotta love this section.



Don't try and ask a straight up question. Rather, muddy the waters so that we can assign party identification subjectively. What a joke.

Looks more like:

34% Total Democrat

28% Total Republican

38% Total Independent/Other

Or something in between this number and their number. Who knows though.

You either don't understand polls or are putting your fingers in your ears and chating LA LA LA LA LA every time you read one that doesn't fit your bias.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

No they don't. Many ask straight Democrat, Republican, or Independent to eliminate ambiguity. The ones that add degrees of such aren't going to take someone who answers Independent - leans left or Independent - leans right and automatically assign them to Democrat or Republican either. They answered Independent, because that is how they identify themselves.

Those questions are asked *after* they ask an initial "D/R/I" question. That's why there are three questions prefaced with "(IF DEM) / (IF INDEP) / (IF REP)".

 

[xBiffx]

Those questions are asked *after* they ask an initial "D/R/I" question. That's why there are three questions prefaced with "(IF DEM) / (IF INDEP) / (IF REP)".

Look at the answers used to formulate the party breakdown. "Indpendent - " indicates they answered Independent (IF INDEP).

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Look at the answers used to formulate the party breakdown. "Indpendent - " indicates they answered Independent (IF INDEP).

Yes. So what? What difference does it make?

 

[xBiffx]

Yes. So what? What difference does it make?

Are you that slow? They then subjectively assigned those Independents to be Democrat or Republican in their final party ID breakdown. I showed those numbers several posts back. Keep up.

They are Independents, not D, not R.

 

[Todd33]

Historically 2008 was way out of proportion but for some reason 2012 will be just about the same, even after 2010?

Especially after 2010. The Tea party part of the GOP has embarrassed themselves and the GOP. I'm sure lots of centrist are running from that party of the party.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/148940/tea-party-sparks-antipathy-passion.aspx

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Are you that slow? They then subjectively assigned those Independents to be Democrat or Republican in their final party ID breakdown. I showed those numbers several posts back. Keep up.

They are Independents, not D, not R.

You can argue about whether or not "leaners" should be included in the D and R totals. Pollsters generally do this because it provides more of an indication of how likely those independents are to vote R or D.

But again, what difference does that make in terms of the poll?

 

[xBiffx]

You can argue about whether or not "leaners" should be included in the D and R totals. Pollsters generally do this because it provides more of an indication of how likely those independents are to vote R or D.

But again, what difference does that make in terms of the poll?

In a state where independents make up perhaps a low-mid 20ish% of the electorate, we have a poll that samples them at rate that is double digits over that. Meanwhile it under samples both other parties.

We already have seen data that shows independents breaking for Romney. This poll, given the above criteria, would have you believe that Michigan is breaking that trend in a big way.

Not saying any of this isn't possible, its just suspect given the data in the poll. That's a lot of what if's for next Tuesday. I am sure its a D favored state but I can't put much validity in this +6 figure of this poll. We shall see.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

In a state where independents make up perhaps a low-mid 20ish% of the electorate, we have a poll that samples them at rate that is double digits over that. Meanwhile it under samples both other parties.

LOL.

Honestly, I don't get some people.

You've just seen that measuring "independents" can be done in multiple ways. Now you're getting all wigged out because this poll is "oversampling" independents, when that only happens because you reject the methodology used by all pollsters to assess independents. Which is the methodology that leads to the "low-mid 20ish%" figure in the first place.

We already have seen data that shows independents breaking for Romney.

In Michigan? Let's see it. They were +11 for Obama in that poll.

This poll, given the above criteria, would have you believe that Michigan is breaking that trend in a big way.

The criteria make no sense, and you're wrong anyway.

 

[TraumaRN]

Seems from the poll they are much more independent than anything. But then again, how can anyone conclude much from that data.

Yeah OK, I've lived in this part of Michigan my whole life, this area is exceedingly blue. Just check the polling data for presidential races, the entire Metro Detroit/Flint/Ann Arbor area tends to be blue and usually by a fair margin, and because of that Michigan is a blue state and will continue to remain as such for the foreseeable future.

Not to mention if you get away from Metro Detroit you'll find havens of blue sprinkled throughout the state, from Marquette in the far north UP to the state capitol in Lansing. Even Grand Rapids which used to be reliably Republican is turning more and more blue due to an increased amount of young educated urban voters and Hispanics

 

[xBiffx]

Yeah OK, I've lived in this part of Michigan my whole life, this area is exceedingly blue. Just check the polling data for presidential races, the entire Metro Detroit/Flint/Ann Arbor area tends to be blue and usually by a fair margin, and because of that Michigan is a blue state and will continue to remain as such for the foreseeable future.

Not to mention if you get away from Metro Detroit you'll find havens of blue sprinkled throughout the state, from Marquette in the far north UP to the state capitol in Lansing. Even Grand Rapids which used to be reliably Republican is turning more and more blue due to an increased amount of young educated urban voters and Hispanics

I'm not saying you are wrong. This poll is the one disagreeing with you. It is polling as if MI is more Independent that either D or R. I hear what you are saying. I heard you fine last time. But this poll doesn't agree with you. The number could be double the +6 for all we know given the polling data. That is why its a junk poll. Unless people believe MI is more I than D this go around.

 

[Todd33]

Independent does not mean undecided. Most independents vote mostly along party lines. Pollsters understand this and are trying to ferret this out. If you have the delusion that 25% of the RV are just perplexed and don't know who to vote for and then you couple that delusion with independents "breaking" to Romney, then you have constructed a biased reality - Romney wins. The truth is Republicans are hiding with the independent label and the questions expose this.

 

[shira]

FiveThirtyEight.com now has Obama a 79-to-21 favorite to win the election, with a projected total of 300 electoral votes.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Obama has pretty steadily recovered ground since he bottomed out about a week after the first debate.

The other aggregators all have Obama well ahead (except RealClearPolitics, where he's just "ahead"), too:

http://electoral-vote.com/ (299 Electoral College votes for Obama, not counting 33 votes in "tied" category)

http://votamatic.org/ (332)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/pollster/ (277, with 53 votes in
"tied" states not counted)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html (201, with 146 votes in the toss-up category)

http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/us-president-12 (303)

http://election.princeton.edu/ (312). Princeton gives Obama a 96% chance of being re-elected.

 

[randomrogue]

RCP's no toss up map has Obama at (290)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ctions_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html

 

[buckshot24]

Well, the trend I was speaking of was national. It may not be the case in every state.

Based on what polls? Gallup?

Why? Because you want it to be?

No because it won't be. Putting arguments forward isn't a productive use of my time. You'll see next tuesday.

2008 was different largely because Obama was running. Hey, look! He's running again. And against a rather similar opponent.

I'm sorry but Obama 2012 is not Obama 2008.

Comparing a mid-term year to a presidential year is utterly nonsensical. Do you think the ad campaigns and registration campaigns and GOTV operations that were running in 2010 are anything like what is going on this year?

2010 was a historic blow out and acting like it doesn't exist is nonsensical.

 

[xBiffx]

Independent does not mean undecided. Most independents vote mostly along party lines. Pollsters understand this and are trying to ferret this out. If you have the delusion that 25% of the RV are just perplexed and don't know who to vote for and then you couple that delusion with independents "breaking" to Romney, then you have constructed a biased reality - Romney wins. The truth is Republicans are hiding with the independent label and the questions expose this.

Indeed but we seeing a lot of places where Romney has an 8-10 lead with independents. This poll shows the same only the other way with Obama +11. That's a near 20 point swing for MI.

So either MI is completely opposite or this poll did a piss poor job of "ferreting" this out.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I'm sorry but Obama 2012 is not Obama 2008.

And 6 isn't 8, the last I checked.

2010 was a historic blow out and acting like it doesn't exist is nonsensical.

It wasn't a presidential election year. And this isn't 2010.

The turnout will be significantly closer to 2008 than 2010. Pretty much all of the polling is consistent on that score.

 

[xBiffx]

he turnout will be significantly closer to 2008 than 2010. Pretty much all of the polling is consistent on that score.

Up until Sandy decided to show up. Who knows what is going to do to effect turnout but its logical to think that is will have some effect. How much that changes the final results is anyone's guess.

 

[jackstar7]

Up until Sandy decided to show up. Who knows what is going to do to effect turnout but its logical to think that is will have some effect. How much that changes the final results is anyone's guess.

Christie 2016.