Is the election already over?

posted at 5:01 pm on July 22, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Could it be true? Is all of this endless campaigning, a billion dollars in advertising and 24/7 blanket coverage of every word, gesture and sneeze by the candidates all a gigantic waste of time in an election which has essentially already been decided? That’s one possibility suggested by Dave Helling of McClatchy Newspapers who suggests that, “People’s minds are made up, unlikely to change.”

[A] growing number of political scientists and campaign consultants – backed by the latest polling data – think the daily campaign back-and-forth is having no significant effect on voters.

Most Americans have locked in their presidential decisions, polls released Thursday suggested, and the already small number of persuadable voters shrinks by the hour. Put another way: America could vote for president next week, and the outcome would probably be the same as it will be in November.

“That’s accurate, barring some really big, big event or change in the political environment,” said Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University in Atlanta, who has studied presidential voting patterns.

OK… so if the election is over, tell us who won so we can all get back to the important business of getting ready for the NFL pre-season games. Sadly, the analysis breaks down at that point, saying only that a rolling index of poll averages shows that the numbers are so tight that they’re within the margin of error. (And if you’ll pardon my saying, I think we already knew it was going to be close.)

Not for nothing, but telling us that the election is over but it’s going to come down to a handful of voters is pretty much akin to saying that the gun pointed at you is really close to being on target, so the bullet may or may not hit you. I think you’d want to have that information at hand in advance so you could still duck.

The author also goes on to point out that all of this depends on things staying pretty much as they are. A “big mistake” or a critical change in either domestic or foreign circumstances could still tilt the scale. I found that admission to be a rather blunt blow to the premise of the entire article.

But there is still a valid and interesting phenomenon being described in this study which is worth mulling over. Are Americans making up their minds much earlier than they did as little as fifteen years ago, and if so, why? It’s possible, at least for a percentage of the available voting pie. One reason cited by Helling is that campaigns and their well funded surrogates have the money to begin running saturation advertising much earlier in the cycle than in the old days, when candidates would jealously hoard much of their war chest for the critical final weeks and then launch an all out ad blitz.

If the voters are already living in a deeply divided nation (politically speaking) and begin seeing reinforcing messages on a daily basis as much as a year in advance, I’m guessing it can have an effect. If you’re already leaning one way or the other, the constant flood of “information” can serve to bolster those feelings. If you’re already leaning in Romney’s direction, all those ads from Obama about Mitt’s “shady” overseas dealings, investments and outsourcing will probably roll off your back as little more than poorly spun side effects of a successful, competent business career. If you’re pretty well leaning toward Obama, ads talking about massive spending, debt and unemployment will probably be interpreted as “just the way things are now” after the GOP broke the system before Obama took office and the way they “won’t work with him” to fix anything.

It’s easy to see how the “undecided vote” could be pared down to a far slimmer margin much earlier than it used to. And those unfortunate enough to live in the roughly ten or so swing states have doubtless grown accustomed to the constant presence of the candidates on their TV screens and in their public squares as little more than a bothersome fact of life.

Sure, the election may be over for a vast majority of Americans… possibly as much as 90 to 95 percent. But it’s that last little bit who will decide which side of the razor this election lands on. And with that in mind, the two sides are going to be fighting all the harder from now until election day morning.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The only mitt or Obama ads i see are on cnn or fox.

I feel sorry for those considered in the swing states

Hang in there

cmsinaz on July 22, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Non stop Dear Liar ads here in IA. All negative of course. There is no love for the Lyin kING here in my circles and when he comes here he does as he does everywhere, only goes to the universities and community collleges where he is guaranteed some turnout and even then its poor. Look for him to try to moblize the utes by fiddling with student loans and pot laws.

he’s gonna lose and lose big unless he cheats like they did in NV

ConcealedKerry on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Not yet. Sleazy Eric Holder says he hasn’t cooked any voting machines yet.

viking01 on July 22, 2012 at 7:11 PM

I don’t think an October surprise will be effective this time. It would not have changed things in the 1980 election. People know Obama has to go.

karenhasfreedom on July 22, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Jackass is in Colorado talking to victims’ families and about to address the nation. Think he will work in a couple of fundraisers?

slickwillie2001 on July 22, 2012 at 7:02 PM

He is stopping by in CO on way to fundraising in Oakland CA

burrata on July 22, 2012 at 7:13 PM

… although I hear sleazy Holder is making competitive bids to various federal judges and Just-Us Roberts just upped his legislation from the bench fee.

viking01 on July 22, 2012 at 7:14 PM

He is stopping by in CO on way to fundraising in Oakland CA

burrata on July 22, 2012 at 7:13 PM

..and, again, suspending his campaign ads this week (ending today?) is NOT a noble gesture; it’s a way to slow his burn rate and get the pity vote. the campaigning in CO and CA and other places is on our nickel.

The War Planner on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Key to being sure this is not close is to get a hold of voter registrations and absentee ballot applications and talk to any and all you know who are apathetic or non voters. Encourage them and offer to drive to polls or get them absentee ballots. grandma in the nursing home or aunt Alice living in the country must be voting R this time let there be no excuses for friends and family staying home.
I carry those forms in my car always and last time signed up 6 new registrants and ordered 3 absente ballots .

Too bad McDumbass suspended his campaign in an ignorant attempt at pandering to the reasonable.
reasonable loses, against a bloody tyrant!

ConcealedKerry on July 22, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I don’t see how the CO evil attack will translate into any votes in either direction in November. One evil, deranged dude is not a national issue. Everyone recognizes it for what it is and we have contempt for the a$$holes who want to politicize it.

Also, why do celebrities feel like they have to chime in. Ann Hathaway issued a very well worded statement, but really, the actors in the movie have nothing to do with an evil nutball.

The first batman movie bored me to tears, so I have never paid any attention to the other ones. I had no idea she had landed a role in this movie.

karenhasfreedom on July 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM

..and, again, suspending his campaign ads this week (ending today?) is NOT a noble gesture; it’s a way to slow his burn rate and get the pity vote. the campaigning in CO and CA and other places is on our nickel.

The War Planner on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Great point on burn rate.

slickwillie2001 on July 22, 2012 at 7:25 PM

the campaigning in CO and CA and other places is on our nickel.

The War Planner on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

He is not only campaigning in CO, he is doing PR and damage control for Hollywood.
Afterall, if there was ever a Hollywood caused massacre, this is it .

burrata on July 22, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Oblamo will just bring up the old Stalin mantra – votes don’t count, it’s the people who count the votes that matter. Liberal lawyers, ACORNs vermin offspring and Black Panthers posted at every polling booth – get ready for a bumpy ride.

LarryinLA on July 22, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I still have a ‘PALIN 2012!’ sticker on my truck – I just can’t bring myself to remove it.

Pork-Chop on July 22, 2012 at 5:34 PM

So, you’re one of those guys I see driving around here in East Texas. I see those things around all the time.

trigon on July 22, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I keep thinking about this piece Ace had a while ago, the three rules on presidential elections. Rule #3 is that if an incumbent wins (going back to 1864), the incumbent always picks up at least one state he didn’t win 4 years before. Reagan, in 1984, picked up 5 states he didn’t win in 1980. Clinton, in 1996, picked up two. GWB, in 2004, picked up 2 new states. Which state(s) is barack likely to pick up that he didn’t win in 2008? I can’t think of a single one. It’s a small data point, I suppose, but interesting.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Why does everyone say it is close. The only way the polls keep Obama in the moe is by making them D+6 or greater – and lets face it this is going to be a D+0 or R+1 race.

I have been around here since I left Drudge forever after his burn of Gingrich in January (not a Gingrich supporter – just don’t like my bias force fed under the guise of impartiality).

Can anyone tell me how to set up the comments so the most recent ones are at the top? So I don’t have to troll all the way to the bottom everytime I refresh the page for new comments.

ArthurMachado on July 22, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Which state(s) is barack likely to pick up that he didn’t win in 2008? I can’t think of a single one. It’s a small data point, I suppose, but interesting.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Hussein will pick up the 7 states he created for USA !

burrata on July 22, 2012 at 7:35 PM

ConcealedKerry on July 22, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I was just thinking about that. Most of the disaffected voters I know are young and voted for Obama last time, LOL. I have started messaging on Facebook my younger friends and relatives and asking them if they are registered to vote.

Most of the older folks are registered and wouldn’t miss this election for anything.

Philly on July 22, 2012 at 7:40 PM

And then there is also the issue of turning out the vote.

WannabeAnglican on July 22, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Heck, my mind was made up by the morning of November 5th, 2008. Not surprisingly, Obumbles hasn’t done a darn thing to change it!!!

dddave on July 22, 2012 at 7:47 PM

But he got Omama Ben Ladin!
We need him for another 4 years so he can tell stories….

/

Electrongod on July 22, 2012 at 7:54 PM

He’s stopping in CO on the way to his fundraiser in Oakland so he can count it as official govt business and we get to pay for the trip.

Kissmygrits on July 22, 2012 at 7:54 PM

tomshup on July 22, 2012 at 6:48 PM

From the point of view of results –Yes and yes.

Now, I do not think that there will be as many “undecided” voters going into that final week as there were back in ’80. But while the one and only debate in ’80 was the final tipping point, there were a lot of people who were leaning away from Carter, and inching toward Reagan even before that debate in the final week.

Reagan had been portrayed by the establishment press for years as an unthinking, simplistic right wing ideologue who could not be trusted with something as critical as the Presidency. But Carter, who had obviously sold the country a bill of goods in ’76, had repeatedly proven that he was an abject failure as President. And, he was seen as such in many of the same ways that Obama is being viewed as a failure today. His policies were failures, the economy was sputtering, and he was blaming everyone and everything other that himself.

So, for some people back then, it was the devil you know versus the devil you don’t know. That meant they might reluctantly vote for Carter. During that one debate in late October of ’80, however, Reagan came off as a reasonable, intelligent and responsive. In short, people across the board realized he was a leader.

Suddenly people felt as if they knew him, and even if they thought he was still a “devil” (such as on policy grounds), it was still a 50/50 toss up. Carter had proved was incapable of getting the country out of the ditch.

Others, however, did connect with Reagan, and were willing to give his new approach a try. Those “undecideds” they voted for Reagan overwhelmingly.

So all of the “leaners” quickly took that final small leap, and Jimmy Carter went down in flames. Polls showed the two candidates to be very close before that final debate. One poll taken during the final week even showed Carter leading by a few points.

Reagan won in a landslide.

This year there will be more debates, spread over more time, and Romney is a very steady and good debater. So the swing to him will take likely place before the final week. But even those who are only “slightly leaning” toward Romney now, will be much more likely to solidify their support to him as we get closer to the election, simply because they’ll get to know him better.

With Obama, however, the exact opposite is true.

So even if there are fewer “undecideds” at this point, Romney will likely shake loose more of the weak or currently tepid Obama voters — and there have to be a slew of those — than the other way around.

Romney wins going away.

Trochilus on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Can anyone tell me how to set up the comments so the most recent ones are at the top? So I don’t have to troll all the way to the bottom everytime I refresh the page for new comments.

ArthurMachado on July 22, 2012 at 7:34 PM

First, you’ll have to acquire and post a picture of Allahpundit for all of us.

I’m not sure what the other steps would be, but begging is probably involved.

trigon on July 22, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Er.. Obama is at 29% with uncomitted voters and 66% disapprove of him

Obama in a landslide!

/*snicker

Key West Reader on July 22, 2012 at 8:00 PM

This article wouldn’t be written if Barack was safely home.

SouthernGent on July 22, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Afterall, if there was ever a Hollywood caused massacre, this is it .

burrata on July 22, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Hollywood is only the propaganda arm…

… I think the Left in total has some explaining to do.

Seven Percent Solution on July 22, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Trochilus on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

its insulting to Reagans memory for you to mention him in the same breath as romney.

renalin on July 22, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Independents are highly likely to break for Romney this time around. They may not make the difference in places like California, Illinois, New York, and other deep blue states, but if they fall the same way, then most of the battleground states could push Romney’s total electoral count around 330 to 340. More likely it will be around 300 to 310

Jurisprudence on July 22, 2012 at 8:08 PM

One executive order suspending elections coming right up!

-B. Soetero

Kataklysmic on July 22, 2012 at 5:16 PM

And, one Supreme Court decision à la Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) returning fire.

If Truman couldn’t seize the steel mills to prevent the unions from striking and closing them down, DURING THE KOREAN WAR WHEN MATERIALS FOR THE WAR EFFORT WERE A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE (according to Truman, DOD, and many others, than Obama’s Executive Order suspending the election would get slapped down faster than he could say, “Let me be clear.” Also, keep in mind that he would have an insurmountable hurdle to climb considering Abraham Lincoln didn’t suspend the 1864 election…when the country was in the midst of fighting the CIVIL WAR.

Of course, he could attempt to pull an Andrew Jackson, who famously said:

“John Marshall [Chief Justice of the Supreme Court] has made his decision; let him enforce it now….if he can.”"

Jackson was referring to the obvious benefits of being Commander-in-Chief; however, I have serious doubts as to whether the military would enforce Obama’s EO should it be declared unconstitutional by the Court. I can’t see the military opening fire on their fellow Americans to protect a President, who would deprive citizens of their right to vote in a constitutionally-scheduled election.

Further, Obama would no longer be President after 01.20.13 even if he suspended the elections. Article II, Sec I:

“The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows…”

Resist We Much on July 22, 2012 at 8:15 PM

I think the way everyone — the Obamamedia, the White house, all the usual suspects — are walking on eggshells over this Obama visit to CO tells me he is in real serious electoral trouble. THEY all seem to know, just as WE do, that no one believes this guy is sincere about anything he says or does, and they are more than a little wary that this “visit” could blow up in their faces. It seems like the public, collectively, when they heard he was going, all said “OK. But you had better behave yourself. This isn’t a campaign stop.” The assumption on virtually everyone’s part was that he would be exploiting this tragedy as he and his party usually do. There was a time when barack would have sailed in there like he did in Tuscon, exploited it for all he could, and told those of us who didn’t like it to shove it, because “he won.” Well, now, those of us who don’t like his act numbers more than 50% of voters, and his campaign knows that. They’re scared. Very scared.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Screw these so-called independents. Given the state of this country and the perhaps irreversible damage being done to it by dear leader, where do these people get off sitting by the sidelines waiting to make up their minds? Do they get off on the delusion that they’re special because they’re “above” ideology? Do they feel powerful because the media keep saying that the election will come down to them? Or are they just willfully ignorant?, I almost —almost— have more respect for the Obamabots who at the least have picked their horse and are sticking with him.

natasha333 on July 22, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Nothing is over until WE say it is !

John Blutarsky

teacherman on July 22, 2012 at 8:24 PM

SouthernGent on July 22, 2012 at 8:05 PM

I agree. If the writers thought Ochoomba had it sewn up, they’d have said so outright.

He’s got to go or it’s 4 more years of malaise and depression. This country cannot afford any more of Barry on so many levels.

Philly on July 22, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Philly on July 22, 2012 at 7:40 PM

A friend of ours (college kid) was on national TV standing immediately behind Obama. I saw him and immediately recognized him. This summer he was home and I asked him what the hell he was doing and he said he hated Oblahblah. He and his brother and GF went at last minute as something to do. They were to go at 9:30 -10:00 for 11:00 lie fest. They walked in at 10:45 almost no line and were grabbed by SS and put on the stage. He said because he is so brown as to look hispanic. All minorities in auditorium were on stage and the not nearly fullauditorium audience was all white and most don’t care for the lyin king. The yutes are not enthralled with the king and are easily influenced. Be sure to tell them their profs are liberal theorists who have only taught or been students and are poor role models for voter advice.They have never had real jobs like the yutes are trying for and not finding. He will not get out the yutes like last time they are not locked into the liar, talk to them!

Every one we switch is minus two for the liar!

ConcealedKerry on July 22, 2012 at 8:27 PM

While I agree with the premise that most people have already made up their minds at this point, I still think there’s the possibility of a major news event by November that could change the calculus quite unpredictably– a flash double dip recession (precipitated by Europe), surge in gas prices, domestic terror attack, all out conflict in the Middle East with Israel involved (Syria or Iran), etc.

I just don’t see things limping along economically and politically like this until November without the dynamics changing significantly

You would think most of these can’t do anything but hurt Obummer but anything that gives the corrupt media a chance to fawn over his leadership and him give 24/7 speeches might help him in the end with the low information moron voters who still are undecided

However, I think that the 47% of people who are determined to vote against Obozo no matter what are set in stone.

I think Romney has a chance still to define himself nicely and steal a lot of votes at the end– I actually think the debates will matter more this year than I thought, and Romney was pretty impressive in all the primary debates (even though I was rooting for others the whole time)

thurman on July 22, 2012 at 8:34 PM

Judging by talking to some, Obama’s in trouble. In 2008, it was split between McCain and Obama at this point July 2008.

jjnco73 on July 22, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Which state(s) is barack likely to pick up that he didn’t win in 2008? I can’t think of a single one. It’s a small data point, I suppose, but interesting.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Very logical. I can’t see him picking up any more states than the ones he got in 2008. The key will be to knock off enough of the swings so he can’t get to the magical 270.

The most likely to fall?

IMO

North Carolina
Ohio
Florida

That still leaves Obama with 303 votes. Others possible:
Indiana
New Mexico
Nevada

That leaves Obama with still 281 votes.
How bout Wisconsin?

That’s still 271.

Could sure use Colorado or Iowa….

itsspideyman on July 22, 2012 at 8:44 PM

[A] growing number of political scientists and campaign consultants – backed by the latest polling data – think the daily campaign back-and-forth is having no significant effect on voters.

I think this idea is mostly true. There is little swing in the polling when in other elections there would be. I’ll go further to suggest that the election isn’t as close as the polls imply.

Not to say that Romney is the winner in July but, an incumbent voted in by an overwhelming majority should not be in this position four years later if he/she/it did a halfway decent job.

Happy Nomad on July 22, 2012 at 8:47 PM

This election is about the future of America. Either we will get back to sane economic policies or we’ll go full-bore collectivist.

It’s a stark choice – do voters want free market capitalism or full-on communism?

Ogabe on July 22, 2012 at 8:55 PM

This election was over with last year when Barry failed to learn from the massive defeat he was handed in the midterms and didn’t “pivot” like Bill Clinton did when he was handed a similar defeat after two years of trying to shove Marxism down our throats.

That is why Clinton was a successful (in terms of the economy) two term President and Obama is doomed to be a one term disaster.

wildcat72 on July 22, 2012 at 9:10 PM

My mind is definitely made up. Ron Paul 2012!!

air_up_there on July 22, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Translation: I am hoping Obama wins!

The Notorious G.O.P on July 22, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Big mistakes and critical changes? That’s all Obama has done. But you don’t know it if you are plugged into the MSM.

And most aren’t even plugged into the MSM.

And the same effing losers that voted for him the last time will do so again.

Now that is a big effing deal!

We conservatives keep up with this stuff (including the MSM) but not the others who elected Bummer.

The others are ignorant folk who don’t read a book if it’s glued to their faces.

Nope. This does not look good….

Sherman1864 on July 22, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Maybe this is part of the reason why people have their minds made up. It’s the economy, Ochoomba.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/22/us-poverty-level-1960s_n_1692744.html

Philly on July 22, 2012 at 9:26 PM

The Notorious G.O.P on July 22, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Exactly. A vote for Ron Paul or Gary Johnson is a vote for Obama. Stay home if you’re not voting for Romney because your vote is not just worthless, it is catastrophic for this country.

Philly on July 22, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Very logical. I can’t see him picking up any more states than the ones he got in 2008. The key will be to knock off enough of the swings so he can’t get to the magical 270.

The most likely to fall?

IMO

North Carolina
Ohio
Florida

That still leaves Obama with 303 votes. Others possible:
Indiana
New Mexico
Nevada

That leaves Obama with still 281 votes.
How bout Wisconsin?

That’s still 271.

Could sure use Colorado or Iowa….

itsspideyman on July 22, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Hmmmm. I don’t think it’s as bad as that. Looking at this map from 270towin, barack starts out with 217; Romney with 191. If Romney takes FL, OH, VA, NC, and either NH, NV, or IA, he wins. And I really think Michigan is in the mix for some wiggle room.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Just got a robo-poll in VA going after that same thing: level of commitment not just for the top slot but for Senator and Representative as well.

Don’t be surprised to see a few polls on this stuff over the next week.

ajacksonian on July 22, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Very logical. I can’t see him picking up any more states than the ones he got in 2008. The key will be to knock off enough of the swings so he can’t get to the magical 270.
The most likely to fall?
IMO
North Carolina
Ohio
Florida
That still leaves Obama with 303 votes. Others possible:
Indiana
New Mexico
Nevada
That leaves Obama with still 281 votes.
How bout Wisconsin?
That’s still 271.
Could sure use Colorado or Iowa….
itsspideyman on July 22, 2012 at 8:44 PM

I am in Indiana. *No way* does the Hoosier State go back to Obama.

Lord of the Wings on July 22, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Hmmmm. I don’t think it’s as bad as that. Looking at this map from 270towin, barack starts out with 217; Romney with 191. If Romney takes FL, OH, VA, NC, and either NH, NV, or IA, he wins. And I really think Michigan is in the mix for some wiggle room.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Agree with your thoughts. Some places deserve the reset button.

I am in Indiana. *No way* does the Hoosier State go back to Obama.

Lord of the Wings on July 22, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Thumbs up to the Hoosiers then!

Virginia, with so much D.C. influence, will be a very close race. If they flip though, then the dynanics of the race means Michigan probably does too.

itsspideyman on July 22, 2012 at 10:14 PM

The election was over in 2010 and it is not close.

A president seeking reelection only gets the votes of those who appove of him and not always all of those.

Obama’ approval has been between 46% and 47% for years and that will be his final vote in November – unless our current slde into recession drives it down further.

Bart DePalma on July 22, 2012 at 11:16 PM

Like Carter in 1976, Obama presented an image of himself in 2008 that was completely false. And just like Carter in 1980, Obama can’t overcome the complete disconnect between his election image and the reality of his presidency.
Every President creates an image that’s different to some extent from the real man when they run. But that image still has to be based to some extent on the real person for it to get them reelected (or to even have success in their first term). Obama’s image was a complete opposite of the real man and he’s paying the price for that.

LenSp1 on July 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

This is a great story, the kind the Obamamedia are terrified of because it highlights hard-core democrats who will NOT be voting for barack in November. Well worth a read!

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

There are some assumptions about the current crop of stagnant polls that need to be challenged.
1) Assumption: people are not lying to pollsters. It’s politically incorrect to speak badly of Obama. There’s a high probability that we will see a delayed Bradley/Wilder effect. People who voted for Obama and have changed their stance may be very reluctant to be open about that until they are in the voting booth. Voters in union-heavy states may be particularly unwilling to say anything and may even have an Obama bumper sticker or yard sign even though they have no intention of voting for him.
2) Assumption: the D/R/I mix of the polls is correct. There are some impossibly Dem-skewed mixes. Pollsters and the MSM operation that hire them have no reason to be correct until the weekend before the election.
3) Assumption: the undecideds are likely to be just as evenly split as those who indicated their choice. This has never been true when an incumbent is involved. Undecideds break at least 2-1 against the incumbent, if not 3-1 or 4-1. Dick Morris says virtually all the undecided go to the challenger.

Bottom line: it’s far more likely Obama’s goose is cooked than Romney’s.

vamoose on July 22, 2012 at 11:51 PM

I think the author of the editorial under discussion is trying to discourage voting by the more enthusiastic Republican electorate, leaning on the perception that the Presidential polls reflect “razor-thin” margins, but failing to mention that those polls are taken among “registered”, rather than “likely” voters, are more often than not “push” polls commissioned by Democrat-leaning media organs, and almost universally employ samples hopelessly skewed to favor Democrats.

I don’t believe the actual margins are “razor-thin” at all, but are favoring Romney, and growing by the day. The Obama political machine, the Democrat Party, and the mainstream media, (Pardon the redundancy), damn well know it, and it scares the hell out of them.

Those of us who object to our great nation being co-opted by increasingly-less shameless socialists need to realize we are winning, embrace holding the upper hand, and use it to smash the living crap out of the opposition, until they’re just a greasy little spot on history’s floor.

Solly on July 22, 2012 at 11:52 PM

More tea leaves: Apparently the sales of a presidential candidate’s merchandise can be predictive about how elections will go. At CafePress, anti-barack merchandise is outselling pro-barack 55 to 45, while pro-Romney merchandise is outselling anti-Romney 95-5.

Rational Thought on July 22, 2012 at 11:55 PM

Some groups who have made up their mind and will not be swayed:

The Dead
Romney 0%
Obama 100%

Fictional
Romney 0%
Obama 100%

Incarcerated
Romney 1%
Obama 99%

Indigent (Homeless ACORN proxies)
Romney 0%
Obama 100%

jaydee_007 on July 23, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Very logical. I can’t see him picking up any more states than the ones he got in 2008. The key will be to knock off enough of the swings so he can’t get to the magical 270.

The most likely to fall?

IMO

North Carolina
Ohio
Florida

That still leaves Obama with 303 votes. Others possible:
Indiana
New Mexico
Nevada

That leaves Obama with still 281 votes.
How bout Wisconsin?

That’s still 271.

Could sure use Colorado or Iowa….

itsspideyman on July 22, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Obama will win, California, New York, Illinois, Vermont and the District of Columbia.
Obama May win Washington, Oregon, Maine, and Hawaii.

All other states will vote Romney.

The republicans will gain 12 in the Senate and hold the House with 7 to 11 seats gained.

And Gary Johnson will be a footnote next to John Anderson in the History Books

jaydee_007 on July 23, 2012 at 12:21 AM

You had me at NFL

John Kettlewell on July 23, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Put another way: America could vote for president next week, and the outcome would probably be the same as it will be in November.

As if he or we can ever know he is right or wrong.

It is impossible to prove this statement right or wrong. Therefore, it is meaningless.

farsighted on July 23, 2012 at 12:41 AM

And Gary Johnson will be a footnote next to John Anderson in the History Books

jaydee_007 on July 23, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Gary Toiletson should get mentioned as the candidate who couldn’t even muster as much support as Ron Paul, AKA The Neocon Flamebait.

MelonCollie on July 23, 2012 at 12:45 AM

I would like to believe that Obama will lose in a landslide and I think most of my friends are voting against him, but I have seen a lot of Facebook stuff in the last week of Obama supporters coming out, saying the most ridiculous things to defend his bad leadership. He still gets a lot of passionate support no matter what crazy things he’s done.

redeye on July 23, 2012 at 2:55 AM

We have to allow for the existence of reality in this election. It often doesn’t play a role, especially with libtards, but this time things are different. SO many people are out of work and have lost half of their wealth, due to our fascist dear leader and his facilitators, that reality just might win the day this time. I say Romney with over 300 electoral votes.

BTW Nevada will be an easy win for Romney.

Mojave Mark on July 23, 2012 at 4:31 AM

I can’t connect the dots but my (considerable) gut tells me this story line has something to do with the meme that nothing will change so we might as well stick with Obama. Or…is this story an indicator that the tactic is working and the solidly pro-Obama vote is actually fearful of the uncertainty of change?

swinia sutki on July 23, 2012 at 6:26 AM

Is the election already over?

Some sure do act like it is:

Romney: Obama did the ‘right thing’ by going to Colorado

Is that the way to excite the republican base?

DannoJyd on July 23, 2012 at 6:31 AM

Yeah, well the Reagan Carter polls were close until a couple of weeks before the 1980 election and then people broke hard for Reagan.

Unfortunately, Romney is no Reagan, so it may not turn out the same this time around.

Nevertheless, I am amazed how many people still support Obama when he has been such a dismal failure in just about every respect.

I would have thought his popularity would have plummented if only because he is the most arrogant, self-aggrandizing, elitist ever to hold the office.

The American culture is fading. Enter the European culture of victimhood, entitlement, and nanny governments.

BMF on July 23, 2012 at 7:06 AM

Malkin To Romney: Stop Saying Obama Is A Nice Guy, He Is Not

I guess there are still a few that want to see 0bama lose. If Mitt would get the message…

DannoJyd on July 23, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Romney: Obama did the ‘right thing’ by going to Colorado

Is that the way to excite the republican base?

DannoJyd on July 23, 2012 at 6:31 AM

You’d rather Romney was out there attacking Obama for going to Colorado?

That being said, 12 people including children (probably illegals) were also killed this weekend in an auto accident in Texas. I’ve got to wonder why we fly the flag at half staff and have presidential visits for a horrific shooting in one state but simply ignore the same body count in another incident that could clearly have been prevented if the administration would start taking border security as seriously as providing free condoms to sluts at Georgetown law.

Happy Nomad on July 23, 2012 at 8:06 AM

I’m in a swing state and I saw the best.ad.ever and it came from the RNC.

Some might call it squishy because it wasn’t red meat. It was smart.

Showing Obama promises.
Showing today’s reality.
Showing Obama looking tired and disappointed.

End words:

He tried.
You’ve tried.
It’s okay to make a change.

This is for those in the middle who like Obama, who know things are bad, and aren’t sure what to do.

A very powerful message.

MaggiePoo on July 23, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Exactly. A vote for Ron Paul or Gary Johnson is a vote for Obama. Stay home if you’re not voting for Romney because your vote is not just worthless, it is catastrophic for this country.

Philly on July 22, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Thank you for spreading the liberal propaganda, but I will NOT stay home on election day, I will NOT stay home during the conventions, nor will I stay home during the grass roots efforts to get Conservatives elected this year.

You’d rather Romney was out there attacking Obama for going to Colorado?

Happy Nomad on July 23, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Great question! I would have liked to see Romney add in his hopes that 0bama would stop obstructing the Fast and Furious investigations in which HUNDREDS were MURDERED since that would also be the right thing to to.

Nomad, this stuff isn’t as difficult as the politicians want us to believe. Every opportunity to keep the pressure on 0bama should be taken instead of spending those only agreeing with what 0bama does. That is the job of the DNC, not the GOP.

0bama is a nice guy. 0bama did the right thing. /channeling Romney

DannoJyd on July 23, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Uh-oh, barack. The dominoes are falling.

Rational Thought on July 23, 2012 at 8:08 AM

We can expect occurances like that to keep happening, but it still does nothing to energize the TEA Partys, the Republican base, or the Ron Paul supporters. Only a vibrant campaign agsinst 0bama that includes a positive vision for America can do that.

DannoJyd on July 23, 2012 at 8:25 AM

I am older than probably a lot of you. Where I stand, I see absolutely no way that Obama can win re-election. The country is in rough shape, there have been too many missteps. Having lived through Carter’s term I can say with certainty that things are far worse today. I personally know individuals that voted for Obama and will not be voting for him in November. These individuals made their mind up early in his term. They stated they would vote for whoever the candidate was and stand by that today. There are probably millions that feel the same.

It would be safe to say that the difference between 1978 and today in regard to the electorate is people were still very closed mouth about politics and who they voted for. There was a time in this country when your own parents did not share their political views with you. The American people have made up their mind, they will keep their thoughts to themselves, walk into the booth, and pull the lever for Romney. IF Obama were to win re-election, then the country is in far worse shape electorally than we even realized. The people never choose bigger government, they have not done that in the past. Most were mesmerized with Obama, viewed him as one of the people. The information is there to show them that is not the case.

shar61 on July 23, 2012 at 8:27 AM

I am older than probably a lot of you.

shar61 on July 23, 2012 at 8:27 AM

My father-in-law, a WWII vet who lives with us since his bypass surgery, is constantly mad about the lousy campaign Romney is running. The same is true about voters in my area. They all want a reason to vote for Romney, but he has yet to give them one.

What do voters do when they feel disenfranchised? We both know the answer to that.

0bama is right. 0bama is a nice guy. /channeling Romney

DannoJyd on July 23, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Close race, I don’t think so. The attack last Friday on who was responsible for starting your own business has my friends burning. And the fear of being called a racist for turning on Obama has been so misused that it is now almost fashionable to be against him, although I do wonder if people being polled are being honest. Anyway, unless it is a poll of likely voters with a factual split on who is being polled as to past turnout, I ignore it.

The social phenomena that once people are not “afraid” to go against a powerful person with many perceived allies because they see others unafraid, causes a cascading change in public opinion and what seemed improbable becomes reality. While not in anyway a fear of Carter, the late October debate between Carter and Reagan with Reagan coming across so well instead of the right wing nut case he was pictured as by the media and the Democrats, shifted the voting pattern greatly. Obama’s vile attacks on Romney demean the presidency and opens him up to a dislike that emboldens people.

But, hey, I’m just an ordinary citizen talking to many people as I travel around the region I live in; not some media expert.

amr on July 23, 2012 at 9:23 AM

I hear you DannoJyd. I am not a Romney fan by any stretch of the imagination. I have no reason to vote for him other than to remove Obama from office. I guess my point is that although Romney is no Reagan by any stretch of the imagination, Romney is the other one. The other one will win the election. We can fight Romney after, but our chances are much greater with Romney. Thank your father in law for his service. !

shar61 on July 23, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Trochilus on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

its insulting to Reagans memory for you to mention him in the same breath as romney.

renalin on July 22, 2012 at 8:06 PM

I’m sure that your complete lack of capacity to understand a rational argument will serve you “well” as you continue to stumble your way through life.

Trochilus on July 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2