Some polls now have Romney ahead.

[Charles Kozierok]

This is also a pollster that showed Obama's approval going from +11 to -3 in three days, and then from -3 to +7 in the next two days. And that's with a rolling sample!

Gallup is really off this year.

 

[zinfamous]

Obama losing MI would be a shocker.

Didn't he save their jobs when the rest of the country wanted to take a big steaming dump on them?

yeah...

 

[Charles Kozierok]

There were a ton of polls released today. All but one or two were quite positive for Obama.

If the polling continues like this for the next couple of days, Tuesday is not going to be the "nail-biter" many are making it out to be.

 

[zinfamous]

That's your October Surprise right there.

 

[First]

^ Perhaps not, though the hurricane might have significant impact on polling in some places. Where exactly, though, I'm still not sure yet, since some of the battleground states wouldn't have had early polling places open now anyway.

 

[buckshot24]

Sampling isn't done based on party ID. Party ID is one of the questions asked during the sample.

Do you think the turnout will be at 2008 levels? There isn't any chance of that happening, zero chance. If that is the case any poll showing these spreads is based upon faulty data.

I took a look at the polls that list party identification numbers at the top of the RCP Ohio page.

There are 9 polls and the averages work out to be

Democrat 39.3%
Republican 33.1%
Independent 26.3%

The CNN exit poll has the following

D 39%
R 31%
I 30%

So they have .3% more Democrats, on average, in their samples. 2.1% more Republicans and 3.7% fewer independents.

As points of references....

2010 CBS exit poll out of Ohio had

D 36%
R 37%
I 27%

2004 CNN exit poll had

D 35%
R 40%
I 25%

I think one of the main reasons that these polls are still favoring Democrats is because of lax likely voter screens. One poll had 603 likely voters taken from 611 registered voters for instance.

In any case for these polls to be accurate you have to assume that 2012 turnout is going to be real close to 2008.

 

[jpeyton]

RCP's national average is now a tie. Fox News (yes, you read that right) conducted a poll and found it to be a tie.

Romney's lead in the national polls evaporated just as Silver said they would. And Romney's lead in CO has turned into a slim Obama lead.

What's Obama going to win with? 300EV? 330EV?

 

[buckshot24]

RCP's national average is now a tie. Fox News (yes, you read that right) conducted a poll and found it to be a tie.

Fox polls usually lean to the Democrats.

Romney's lead in the national polls evaporated just as Silver said they would. And Romney's lead in CO has turned into a slim Obama lead.

What's Obama going to win with? 300EV? 330EV?

He'll get around 230 or so which isn't enough.

 

[jpeyton]

Oh Romney, even the $5000 worth of supplies you bought for your photo op (that the Red Cross doesn't want) can't save you now.

 

[buckshot24]

That National Journal poll that has Obama up 5 has very little data to look at but they did a write up on it and I found this to be funny.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/anger-aside-voters-favor-d-c-status-quo-20121031

"In its likely-voter model, the Congressional Connection Poll projected that the 2012 electorate will be virtually unchanged from 2008, with Democrats holding an 8 percentage-point advantage among voters (compared with 7 points last time) and whites representing 73 percent of voters (compared to 74 percent last time)."

They are actually saying that there will be more Democrats showing up to vote than in 2008! Poll is bullshit and it is the only reason that the RCP average is even. Well that and the last two polls to drop out of the average had Romney up 2 and 3.

 

[jpeyton]

Silver aggregated all the prediction sites, including his own, in an ultimate poll of polls.

Mr. Obama’s lead in the Electoral College is modest, but also quite consistent across the different methods. The states in which every site has Mr. Obama leading make up 271 electoral votes — one more than the president needs to clinch victory. The states in which everyone has Mr. Romney ahead represent 206 electoral votes. That leaves five states, and 61 electoral votes, unaccounted for — but Mr. Obama would not need them if he prevails in the states where he is leading in the polls.

Not only do the individual polls have Obama winning the electoral college by consensus, but all the polling prediction sites (which input a variety of polls and other data into models to make a more scientific prediction) also have Obama winning the electoral college by consensus.

 

[buckshot24]

The polls aren't measuring reality. Turnout will not mirror 2008. All the prediction sites have the same data. So I grant you that if turnout mirrors 2008 then Obama will most likely win, but it won't.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Do you think the turnout will be at 2008 levels?

You keep assuming that party ID remains static and so the only variable to potentially account for discrepancies in party ID among voters is turnout.

You're mistaken. Various pollsters have explained this over and over. I've even linked some of them here.

Party identification changes. And in particular, over the last few years, we've seen a shift from R to I among conservatives, especially the very conservative. This can easily account both for the D/R split numbers remaining roughly static, and also the R lean among so-called "independents".

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

That's your October Surprise right there.

These two look like the number 10!

As of this morning Nate Silver has the President at 79% likely to be re-elected. We shall see, but based on trends over the past week I expect this race will get less close between now and election day, rather than the other way around, and President will win, among others, PA, OH, IA and WI with margins large enough not to require recounts, and thus win the election. At this point I see him winning CO but losing VA and FL. We shall see . . .

 

[umbrella39]

Ahhh yes the Detroit News...which happened to endorse Romney for president. Yeah I'm sure an unbiased sample. Makes them sell a lot more papers when the race for Michigan looks tight.

Yes indeed. Time for a dose of reality again from an EPIC MRA poll:

http://www.freep.com/article/20121101/NEWS15/311010223/?odyssey=tab|mostpopular|text|FRONTPAGE

Obama up 6. Hell freezes over when Romney takes Michigan.

 

[Todd33]

The polls aren't measuring reality.

Great. I'm glad you have reality all figured out. :thumbsup:

 

[buckshot24]

You keep assuming that party ID remains static and so the only variable to potentially account for discrepancies in party ID among voters is turnout.

I don't assume that at all.

Party identification changes. And in particular, over the last few years, we've seen a shift from R to I among conservatives,

And yet there are less independents in the polling.

especially the very conservative. This can easily account both for the D/R split numbers remaining roughly static, and also the R lean among so-called "independents".

Then they must not be getting polled since the independents are actually down according to the Ohio polls I analyzed. Your idea doesn't line up with the facts.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Fox polls usually lean to the Democrats.

He'll get around 230 or so which isn't enough.

I don't see this as a realistic projection.

At this point it appears very likely that Obama will take WI, PA, NV, NH, MI and IA, giving him, minimally, 263 electoral votes. If Romney takes FL and NC (which is likely) AND VA (which is much less likely), he will be at 248 and need both OH and CO to win. Obama would win if he wins either of these states, both of which he is polling ahead in. If he wins both he will win with 290 electoral votes. If he wins VA too (which is likelier than not), he wins with 303 electoral votes.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

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.

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.

PS If you want to bet that Obama gets 230 or fewer EV, name the amount and the charity.

 

[xBiffx]

Yes indeed. Time for a dose of reality again from an EPIC MRA poll:

http://www.freep.com/article/20121101/NEWS15/311010223/?odyssey=tab|mostpopular|text|FRONTPAGE

Obama up 6. Hell freezes over when Romney takes Michigan.

A "poll" with no mention of criteria to back it up. There ins't even a link to the raw data.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

A "poll" with no mention of criteria to back it up. There ins't even a link to the raw data.

http://www.epicmra.com/press/Stwd_Survey_Oct26_2012_Media_Freq.pdf

These folks have a very good reputation in Michigan, from what I understand.

 

[xBiffx]

http://www.epicmra.com/press/Stwd_Survey_Oct26_2012_Media_Freq.pdf

These folks have a very good reputation in Michigan, from what I understand.

Gotta love this section.

(IF DEM) Do you consider yourself a strong Democrat or a not very strong Democrat?
(IF INDEP) Do you consider yourself closer to the Republican or Democratic Party?
(IF REP) Do you consider yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican?
30% Strong Democrat
4% Not Strong Democrat
9% Independent-Lean Democrat
17% Independent
9% Independent-Lean Republican
5% Not Strong Republican
23% Strong Republican
1% Other
2% Undecided/Refused

43% Total Democrat

37% Total Republican

20% Total Independent/Other

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.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Huh? I don't understand what you are objecting to with that question.

 

[xBiffx]

Huh? I don't understand what you are objecting to with that question.

I object to the question because they used the answers to subjectively assign party ID thereby muddying the waters. Which was the point. Otherwise, why not just ask the traditional D/R/I question.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

All the pollsters do it that way.

How would you suggest they assign party ID?