US 2012 Presidential Election Polls

Ozymandius2011

IBD/TIPP have Obama leading Romney 48-42 (Don't expect to hear about it on Fox) but Gallup has Romney leading 52-45!

Meanwhile IBD have the Jewish vote for Obama 56.9-39.5. Very poor for a Democrat. Meantime Bibi's swing state ads are having some effect.

Min

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

IBD/TIPP have Obama leading Romney 48-42 (Don't expect to hear about it on Fox) but Gallup has Romney leading 52-45!

Meanwhile IBD have the Jewish vote for Obama 56.9-39.5. Very poor for a Democrat. Meantime Bibi's swing state ads are having some effect.

To be fair not many would know of IBD/TIPP.

I think an average of the three polls today would be the most accurate which would be close to the tied poll of NBC/WSJ.

Manic Moran

I would much rather the polls be more along the lines of "Polling indicates the current EC vote tallies". If a candidate gets 100% of California and 49% of a dozen other midsized states, on a population basis that candidate could be seen to have the lead only to fall at the EC vote. The only polls I pay any attention to are the State-specific ones such as Florida and Ohio.

I like this one. It's actually practical. At time of writing, Obama 201, Romney 206, 131 still to play for.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

jank

Mjollnir wrote: »

No, not until one can actually quantify what 'more' is and to what degree.


A pure democratic country could vote to enslave the minority, in a constitutional republic that cannot happen. I would suggest to all to actually read what the difference is between a republic and a democracy.

http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demrep.html

Simple minded quips like "I want more democracy" means nothing.

A. Spare us the remedial civics lessons, please. The US is a democratic republic. No has has even remotely indicated that it's a 'pure democracy' or that they want it that way.

B. What's simple minded, and transparently so, is the attempt to equate the statement, "Yes, but I would like it to be more democratic." with "I WANT MOB RULE!!!!!!!" and actually citing a statement that wasn't made. Rather intellectually dishonest, that.

No one's buying what you selling, so I would suggest that you kindly dispense with that nonsense.

Well then perhaps Brian? can quantify what "more democracy" actually is then, after all he wrote the statement. I would also ask if and how getting rid of the EC be MORE democratic and I would also ask if he is then in favour of having a popular vote in the EU rather than the weighted system we have now.

Brian?

Well then perhaps Brian? can quantify what "more democracy" actually is then, after all he wrote the statement. I would also ask if and how getting rid of the EC be MORE democratic and I would also ask if he is then in favour of having a popular vote in the EU rather than the weighted system we have now.

I think I was quite clear in what I said. I believe the EC to be flawed because all voted are not weighted equally. Electing a president would be more democratic. That's not mob rule, that's direct democracy at work.

Manic Moran

Brian? wrote: »

I think I was quite clear in what I said. I believe the EC to be flawed because all voted are not weighted equally. Electing a president would be more democratic. That's not mob rule, that's direct democracy at work.

All votes are weighted equally. No EC vote counts more than any other EC vote.

You are making the fundamental mistake of thinking that people in the US are voting for the President. We are not. We are voting to tell our States which way we want our (independent and equal) State's EC votes to go.

cyberhog

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Meantime Bibi's swing state ads are having some effect.

Those ads should be pulled.

Foreign nationals -- may not contribute to any candidate or party in any Federal, state, or local election in the United States...


What constitutes a "contribution?"

Besides checks and currency, the FEC considers "...anything of value given to influence a Federal election" to be a contribution.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/contriblaws.htm

Ozymandius2011

Last pre-debate PPP poll has Obama-Romney at 48 each. This is a Dem-aligned pollster...

Black and young Republicans seem to be returning home somewhat. PPP has just twittered these figures:

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are dead even at 48% headed into tomorrow's debate, based on an average of PPP's national tracking between Friday and Sunday. Barack Obama had a small lead in Friday interviews, Mitt Romney had a slight advantage on Saturday, and the candidates were dead even on Sunday.

Our tracking isn't providing any real surprises along demographics lines. Obama is up 50/46 with women, 61/33 with Hispanics, 85/9 with African Americans, and 50/39 with young voters. Romney is up 51/44 with men, 57/39 with whites, and 51/47 with seniors. One key for Romney is that he's up 51/41 with independents, which helps him make up for the party identification advantage Democrats have nationally.

Obama's approval rating is 45% with 50% of voters disapproving of him, making it important that he make a compelling case for voters tomorrow night about why his first term has been a success. Romney's favorability rating is back on positive ground at 49/45, while Obama's is dead even at 48/48.

Here's the state of the race headed into the final debate: it's tied nationally, and the candidates are within 2 points of each other on the most recent PPP surveys in the critical swing states of Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin. It could not be a whole lot closer.

Before 2008 the GOP tended to get around 10% of Black votes (12% on a good day) and for Obama to only be 11% ahead with young (mostly loberal) voters is troubling for him as he won this group by around 30% in 2008.

Brian?

Manic Moran wrote: »

All votes are weighted equally. No EC vote counts more than any other EC vote.

You are making the fundamental mistake of thinking that people in the US are voting for the President. We are not. We are voting to tell our States which way we want our (independent and equal) State's EC votes to go.

I completely understand how the system works. I believe the system is flawed.

jank

Brian? wrote: »

I think I was quite clear in what I said. I believe the EC to be flawed because all voted are not weighted equally. Electing a president would be more democratic. That's not mob rule, that's direct democracy at work.

OK.... and would you favor such a system for the EU?

Brian?

jank wrote: »

OK.... and would you favor such a system for the EU?

I don't see why that matters. This a discussion on US politics

jank

Brian? wrote: »

I don't see why that matters. This a discussion on US politics

So that's a "No" then. Therefore you recognise the value of a weighted EC system.

Brian?

jank wrote: »

So that's a "No" then. Therefore you recognise the value of a weighted EC system.

Don't put words in my mouth. It's a completely different situation and nothing to do with a discussion in a forum on US politics.

Ozymandius2011

Nevada early voting by party-registration so far:



Washoe is a swing county and unlike Obama (who won it in 2008 but Clinton won the state in 1992 and 1996 without it) Romney HAS to win it to win the state by counterbalancing Dem-heavy cities like Reno. The 12.8% figure refers to the turnout so far while the remaining columns to the right refer to 2008 turnout.

Not a single poll has Romney leading or even tied in this state for a good while so I'm confident Obama takes it. The Hispanic vote here is 17%, and latest SurveyUSA poll had Obama getting 55% of them.

jank

Brian? wrote: »

Don't put words in my mouth. It's a completely different situation and nothing to do with a discussion in a forum on US politics.

Maybe but its more democratic....right?

Brian?

jank wrote: »

Maybe but its more democratic....right?

I think that's a joke, but I honestly have no idea what it means.

joseph brand

Bad News for Romney: Ohio Early Voting Turnout is Up for Obama, Down for GOP

The polling numbers for early voting in Ohio also back up what the Obama campaign is saying. A Survey USA poll found that Obama leads by 19 points (57/38) among those who have already. PPP found that Obama leads by 52 points (76%-24%) in Ohio early voting. The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found Obama leading Romney, 63%-37% with early voters. Even Republican pollster Rasmussen has Obama leading big in Ohio early voting, 63%-34%.

http://www.politicususa.com/bad-news-romney-ohio-early-voting-turnout-obama-gop.html

The Romney's owning the voting machines is a conflict of interest, surely? I'm probably overly suspicious.

Ozymandius2011

joseph brand wrote: »

Bad News for Romney: Ohio Early Voting Turnout is Up for Obama, Down for GOP



http://www.politicususa.com/bad-news-romney-ohio-early-voting-turnout-obama-gop.html

The Romney's owning the voting machines is a conflict of interest, surely? I'm probably overly suspicious.

Well to clarify: they don't own them but Solamere (set up by Tagg Romney - Mitt's son) partnered in projects with HIG which in turn has a controlling stake in Hart Intercivic which does own the machines.

Bad News for Romney: Ohio Early Voting Turnout is Up for Obama, Down for GOP

Yes but Romney leads 52-43 in Wisconsin early voting according to Rasmussen, but with Obama leading slightly among those who haven't voted. In Colorado just 1% have voted so far and the GOP-registered voters lead 43-34. Rasmussen also say that nationally, Romney leads 44-41 in early voting. Nevada and Iowa are looking good though. I am convinced the Electoral College and popular vote will split this year most likely in Obama's favour and it will be interesting to see how the GOP react after what happened in 2000.

Duck Soup

Here's something of a turnaround. Two new Washington Post surveys have Obama ahead amongst likely voters in Florida, 51 to 47 and up 52-44 in Ohio.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/09/25/polls_show_obama_ahead_in_florida_ohio.html

Ohio isn't a major surprise, as Obama's lead there seems relatively resilient. But in Florida - where even Nate Silver wondered aloud if Obama might be better off pulling resources out of there and concentrating on the mid-West - recent polls have been trending away from Romney to effective parity, and the momentum seems to have turned.

I still think Romney will win Florida, but if he doesn't, it's over.

Ozymandius2011

Duck Soup wrote: »

Here's something of a turnaround. Two new Washington Post surveys have Obama ahead amongst likely voters in Florida, 51 to 47 and up 52-44 in Ohio.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/09/25/polls_show_obama_ahead_in_florida_ohio.html

Ohio isn't a major surprise, as Obama's lead there seems relatively resilient. But in Florida - where even Nate Silver wondered aloud if Obama might be better off pulling resources out of there and concentrating on the mid-West - recent polls have been trending away from Romney to effective parity, and the momentum seems to have turned.

I still think Romney will win Florida, but if he doesn't, it's over.

That article is 25th September!

Fr Tod Umptious

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Well to clarify: they don't own them but Solamere (set up by Tagg Romney - Mitt's son) partnered in projects with HIG which in turn has a controlling stake in Hart Intercivic which does own the machines.Yes but Romney leads 52-43 in Wisconsin early voting according to Rasmussen, but with Obama leading slightly among those who haven't voted. In Colorado just 1% have voted so far and the GOP-registered voters lead 43-34. Rasmussen also say that nationally, Romney leads 44-41 in early voting. Nevada and Iowa are looking good though. I am convinced the Electoral College and popular vote will split this year most likely in Obama's favour and it will be interesting to see how the GOP react after what happened in 2000.

Well unless you have a state that is very close and a recount is required then I'd expect the GOP to concede defeat.

how do you expect them to react ?

Ozymandius2011

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well unless you have a state that is very close and a recount is required then I'd expect the GOP to concede defeat.

how do you expect them to react ?

I expect them to freakout and suddenly convert to supporting getting rid of the Electoral College. The Dems on the other hand will laud "the Constitution" and the wisdom of the "Founding Fathers". In other words a reversal of roles from 2000. I also expect a possible re-run of the legal wrangling of 2000 as many states will be razor-thin in victory margins, such as Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, New Hampshire and Nevada.

Expect a campaign by Fox and other conservatives to bully Dem electors to defect to Romney to recognise "the will of the people" (oh the irony!).

Ozymandius2011

Rasmussen Ohio poll says 48-48.

Frank Bullitt

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/10/24/at-5pm-irish-time/

Not sure if this is related to here, but popped up there on my twitter, anyone any ideas?

Knowing Trump, it's a load of balls.

Edit: Apparently it has to do with the Obama and his marriage.

ChoralClam

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

That article is 25th September!

ah but the table to the right keeps updated

brimal

Trump has announced if Obama makes his passport application/records and college applications/records public, he will donate $5 million to a charity of Obama's choice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgOq9pBkY0I

Trump makes my skin crawl.

Ozymandius2011

Yet another poll (Rasmussen) has Obama up 2% in Nevada (50:48 in this case). All the polls pretty much agree on this state. Obama has the Hispanics to thank as they are 17% of the electorate, compared to just 16% in Arizona and 13% in Colorado. Romney hasn't led in this state for months. The SoS there is also a Dem so vote-rigging is less likely.

Early voting in Colorado is very close. Registered Republicans lead registered Dems in the early vote by just 38.8-37.1 with a 13.5% turnout. 75% voted early last time. It's about 47-37 in Nevada with a 20% turnout. We won't have figures for Ohio because they don't have party-registration.

Duck Soup

brimal wrote: »

Trump has announced if Obama makes his passport application/records and college applications/records public, he will donate $5 million to a charity of Obama's choice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgOq9pBkY0I

Trump makes my skin crawl.

There are a few different attempts at October Surprises being tossed around.

From the Republican side, there's Trump offering big charity cash (he knows Obama won't rise to the bait, but that alone will convince the already crazy that he has something to hide). There were also rumours that Trump was going to produce divorce papers, drawn up by Michelle Obama but never proceeded with, from early on in the Obama marriage. But apparently Trump's big surprise is he has no surprise.

And on the Democrat side, fame-hungry attorney Maureen Allred went to court this morning to get a judge to unseal the records in a divorce case involving the owner of Staples, Tom Stemberg, (a good friend of Romney's) and Stemberg's ex-wife Maureen Stemberg.

Once again, there were two competing theories as to what was waiting to be revealed. The first apparently related to child custody and presumably Romney's testimony on that subject during the court case (no actual details emerged on that one, probably because there was no story there).

The second one is that Romney knowingly 'talked down' the value of Staples, so that Maureen Stemberg would get very little in the divorce settlement. To quote TMZ:

Mitt Romney gave a deposition and testified during the trial that Staples was worth virtually nothing. Romney testified that the company was worth very little and Tom was a dreamer and "the dream continues".

http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/24/mitt-romney-tom-stemberg-staples-lied-perjury-divorce-case-maureen/

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/10/allred-maureen-sullivan-stemberg-romney-divorce

I get the feeling that both sides are starting to run out of October Surprises.

Ozymandius2011

Time Magazine Ohio poll: Obama leads 49-44.

Texas AG Greg Abbott threatening to arrest international poll observers from the OSCE.

Mr.Micro

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Time Magazine Ohio poll: Obama leads 49-44.

Quick, get them voting machines ready:D

Is it coincidence that its Ohio, a swing state, that Tagg Romney has investments in voting machines?