Some polls now have Romney ahead.

[OneOfTheseDays]

A lot of Ohioans have already voted.

As of October 14th, roughly 19% of Ohioans expected to vote have already done so. That number is no doubt higher by now. Of those that have voted, roughly 76% say they voted for Obama compared to 24% for Romney.

To make up for this Romney has to be up with a 4-5 pt lead to overtake Obama. The fact that he's still down a few points is why I believe he will not take Ohio from Obama. There simply isn't enough time left, nor enough swing voters left, for him to move into his camp.

 

[buckshot24]

A lot of Ohioans have already voted.

As of October 14th, roughly 19% of Ohioans expected to vote have already done so. That number is no doubt higher by now. Of those that have voted, roughly 76% say they voted for Obama compared to 24% for Romney.

To make up for this Romney has to be up with a 4-5 pt lead to overtake Obama. The fact that he's still down a few points is why I believe he will not take Ohio from Obama. There simply isn't enough time left, nor enough swing voters left, for him to move into his camp.

The problem is that the early voters are the ones that would vote for Obama anyway. Chuck Todd (and take it for what it is worth) said that Romney could be up 10 on day of voters in ohio.

 

[Farang]

The problem is that the early voters are the ones that would vote for Obama anyway. Chuck Todd (and take it for what it is worth) said that Romney could be up 10 on day of voters in ohio.

While I agree the early voting numbers overstate an Obama advantage, I think it is still an advantage. It speaks to turnout advantage in general when you talk about who is getting that 19% in the bank before election day.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

When you consider the fact that 30% of Ohioans voted early in 2008, the advantage Obama is racking up right now is very significant. If he's able to pull a 76-24 advantage in early voting, or anything remotely close to that, then Romney basically needs to pull 60% or higher of the remaining vote to win the state.

That's just not likely to happen under any realistic circumstances.

 

[buckshot24]

When you consider the fact that 30% of Ohioans voted early in 2008, the advantage Obama is racking up right now is very significant. If he's able to pull a 76-24 advantage in early voting, or anything remotely close to that, then Romney basically needs to pull 60% or higher of the remaining vote to win the state.

That's just not likely to happen under any realistic circumstances.

There are problems with that scenario. The early voting gap isn't that large.

According to the PPP poll of those who voted early 66% went to Obama and 34% for Romney.

So assuming the total number of voters is 100 and assuming 30% early vote and assuming that the early vote percentages don't change you get 19.8 "votes" for Obama from early voting and 10.2 for Romney.

So Romney would need 9.6% gap in day of voters to break even.

According to the poll 33% African Americans have voted already. While 21% of whites have. 27% of Democrats have voted while 16% Republicans have. I think a 9.6%+ advantage for Romney isn't out of the question considering who still has to vote.

The poll has Romney at an 8% gap on those who haven't voted yet with 4% who haven't decided. Those 4% are going to either not vote or lean towards Romney.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

There are problems with that scenario. The early voting gap isn't that large.

According to the PPP poll of those who voted early 66% went to Obama and 34% for Romney.

So assuming the total number of voters is 100 and assuming 30% early vote and assuming that the early vote percentages don't change you get 19.8 "votes" for Obama from early voting and 10.2 for Romney.

So Romney would need 9.6% gap in day of voters to break even.

According to the poll 33% African Americans have voted already. While 21% of whites have. 27% of Democrats have voted while 16% Republicans have. I think a 9.6%+ advantage for Romney isn't out of the question considering who still has to vote.

The poll has Romney at an 8% gap on those who haven't voted yet with 4% who haven't decided. Those 4% are going to either not vote or lean towards Romney.

Romney is not going to get a 9.6% gap on day of voters. Not gonna happen young buck.

I predict more Ohioans will vote early this year than wait till election day with all of this voter ID nonsense cropping up. It's scaring people into thinking their vote won't count, which is why they are voting early in record numbers.

 

[buckshot24]

Romney is not going to get a 9.6% gap on day of voters. Not gonna happen young buck.

What is your reasoning for this statement?

I predict more Ohioans will vote early this year than wait till election day with all of this voter ID nonsense cropping up. It's scaring people into thinking their vote won't count, which is why they are voting early in record numbers.

Even if this is the case these are votes Obama was going to get anyway. If people aren't sure they aren't going to vote early.

 

[buckshot24]

Rasmussen swing state poll has Romney up 4 points 50-46

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...dministration/daily_swing_state_tracking_poll

 

[TraumaRN]

Rasmussen swing state poll has Romney up 4 points 50-46

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...dministration/daily_swing_state_tracking_poll

Ok I've lurked this thread long enough. So you post that as proof that Romney is doing better in swing states? I can't see the demographics because it's behind a paywall?? Come on man. This is exactly why people look at Rasmussen with such caution and why people such as Nate Silver do entire articles about their Republican house effect, no cell phone calling etc etc.

I'll stick to looking at individual state polls instead of this.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

IIRC, polls include both those who have and have not voted. If so, it doesn't matter how many people have already voted in assessing the numbers from a specific poll -- this is only significant in assessing the size of the pool of voters who could yet be convinced to change their minds. And it's reasonable to believe that a disproportionate majority of those who vote early are those whose minds were never going to be changed.

As for Rasmussen.. Rasmussen is Rasmussen.

There's a new Quinn poll out today showing Obama up 5 in Ohio. I still don't see Romney taking the state, which will make it very hard for him to win.

 

[PokerGuy]

Obviously obummer still has a comfortable margin because of the leads he holds in the swing states, but it's a lot closer than I thought it would be.

Polling usually has a statistical margin of error of 3%-5%, and then you add in potential polling methodology discrepancies and I think we've pretty much reached the limits of polling data use. We can comfortably say that this race is now closer than anyone would have thought only a month or two ago.

 

[PokerGuy]

Anecdotal data is generally worthless, but it is encouraging to see all the Romney/Ryan signs here in PA. All I'd seen for a long time was obummer signs, but now that's completely changed, which tells me that the GOP has gotten some energy out of the idea that they have a chance.

 

[buckshot24]

Ok I've lurked this thread long enough. So you post that as proof that Romney is doing better in swing states? I can't see the demographics because it's behind a paywall?? Come on man. This is exactly why people look at Rasmussen with such caution and why people such as Nate Silver do entire articles about their Republican house effect, no cell phone calling etc etc.

I'll stick to looking at individual state polls instead of this.

Its just a data point. If you think its meaningless then thats your choice. Gallup does cell calling and they have romney up 7.

Ibd has obama up 6 now. There is a 13 point difference between them and gallup.

 

[chihlidog]

I'll add a bit of anecdotal evidence - was talking with my father in law yesterday. He's a fairly typical rural Republican. He will not be voting for Romney, nor will most of his friends, he says. I was shocked at this - but he's voting for Obama.

 

[randomrogue]

I'll add a bit of anecdotal evidence - was talking with my father in law yesterday. He's a fairly typical rural Republican. He will not be voting for Romney, nor will most of his friends, he says. I was shocked at this - but he's voting for Obama.

I'll add anecdotal evidence too then. I know people who are intelligent and really shouldn't be voting for Romney but they are. They simply want help for small businesses and are "hoping" Romney will cut them a break.

This election is much closer than expected considering the absurdity of Romney but I don't think he has a chance of winning regardless.

 

[TraumaRN]

Its just a data point. If you think its meaningless then thats your choice. Gallup does cell calling and they have romney up 7.

Ibd has obama up 6 now. There is a 13 point difference between them and gallup.

And I think both are outliers. I think the election will essentially 50-50. I also think that lots of polling data this year seems wonky and strange. I think you'll see some large changes in how polls are conducted after this election. Especially given the rise of cell phone only households.

I think its damn near criminal that polls without cell phone polling are taken seriously, when data point to 25-35% of the US population has no landline and are cellphone only. I'm sure you wouldn't take research seriously that had 35% of its data missing.

 

[ivwshane]

And I think both are outliers. I think the election will essentially 50-50. I also think that lots of polling data this year seems wonky and strange. I think you'll see some large changes in how polls are conducted after this election. Especially given the rise of cell phone only households.

I think its damn near criminal that polls without cell phone polling are taken seriously, when data point to 25-35% of the US population has no landline and are cellphone only. I'm sure you wouldn't take research seriously that had 35% of its data missing.

Are any of the big name pollsters not using cellphone polling?

 

[TraumaRN]

Are any of the big name pollsters not using cellphone polling?

Rasmussen, PPP, Gravis, Fox News, Purple strategies, WeAskAmerica, SurveyUSA.

Basically anyone who uses robocalling because of FCC rules.

 

[randomrogue]

Rasmussen, PPP, Gravis, Fox News, Purple strategies, WeAskAmerica, SurveyUSA.

Basically anyone who uses robocalling because of FCC rules.

What % of America is only using a cell phone? I haven't had a landline in over a dozen years. My Parents though since they don't get coverage where they live.

 

[TraumaRN]

What % of America is only using a cell phone? I haven't had a landline in over a dozen years. My Parents though since they don't get coverage where they live.

About 34% of the population as of this year according to the government is cell phone only. That's means a polling firm that robocalls is missing just over 1/3 of the population when they poll.

Consider in early 2008 it was 17.5% cell phone only and you can understand why I'm bringing this up.

 

[xBiffx]

What % of America is only using a cell phone? I haven't had a landline in over a dozen years. My Parents though since they don't get coverage where they live.

Good question. Also, how does calling cell phone users make your poll more accurate. I don't know one person who has been called on their cell phone but several who get multiple calls a day on their land lines at home. I don't have a land line, I only have a cell phone as do many.

So it seems to me that including cell phones doesn't change much as far as polls go. Perhaps I'm to old to understand.

 

[xBiffx]

About 34% of the population as of this year according to the government is cell phone only. That's means a polling firm that robocalls is missing just over 1/3 of the population when they poll.

Consider in early 2008 it was 17.5% cell phone only and you can understand why I'm bringing this up.

Hardly. That's assuming that they get feedback from every cell phone user they call. I imagine many, like me see the unknown number and don't answer.

 

[uclaLabrat]

Good question. Also, how does calling cell phone users make your poll more accurate. I don't know one person who has been called on their cell phone but several who get multiple calls a day on their land lines at home. I don't have a land line, I only have a cell phone as do many.

So it seems to me that including cell phones doesn't change much as far as polls go. Perhaps I'm to old to understand.

I haven't had a land line that I've used in about 8 years. It means that pollsters using land line only miss a huge chunk of the demographic, as pointed out above. Moreover, that demographic is likely to be much younger, and probably more democratic by a large margin, which means those pollsters are under-representing huge swaths of Obama's votes.

 

[TraumaRN]

Hardly. That's assuming that they get feedback from every cell phone user they call. I imagine many, like me see the unknown number and don't answer.

Yes, but the same is true with landline phones. Point is you can't exclude 30% of your sample size and call your research sound and accurate.

 

[buckshot24]

About 34% of the population as of this year according to the government is cell phone only. That's means a polling firm that robocalls is missing just over 1/3 of the population when they poll.

Consider in early 2008 it was 17.5% cell phone only and you can understand why I'm bringing this up.

As long as the demographics are correct it shouldn't matter if they are on cell phones or land lines. Unless there is something about cell phone only voters that makes them lean one way or the other.