Who’s up for a new NBC/WSJ poll based on a bad sample?

posted at 8:07 pm on July 24, 2012 by Allahpundit

Last month’s sample was questionable. This month’s sample is terrible:

The 2008 national exit poll sample, taken when Hopenchange fever was at its zenith, was 39D/32R/29I, or D+7. This one, after three years of Obamanomics dreck, is somehow D+11 if you include leaners and D+12(!) if you don’t. Anyone feel like taking these results seriously?

And yet we soldier on, my friends, reminding ourselves at every step that lame content is still content. One interesting takeaway: The attacks on Bain are driving Obama’s favorables down too, even with a very Democratic sample.

[T]he percentages signaling a less favorable impression about these candidates – especially at this point in the race – are greater than what the NBC/WSJ poll showed in the 2004 and 2008 presidential contests.

“This is not characteristic … for July,” says Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted this survey with Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart. “These are numbers you usually see in October.”…

The president’s favorable/unfavorable score in the poll is 49 percent to 43 percent, a slight change from June when it was 47 percent to 38 percent.

Moreover, 33 percent view Obama very positively, while 32 percent view him very negatively – which is his highest “very negative” number in poll.

By comparison, Romney’s overall favorable/unfavorable score is 35 percent to 40 percent, with 24 percent viewing him “very” negatively – also his highest mark here.

In fact, Romney would be the first GOP presumptive presidential nominee since 1996 to head into his nominating convention with a net-negative favorable/unfavorable score.

Only once before has Obama been as high as 30 percent when people were asked if they viewed him “very negatively.” This month he’s at 32 even though NBC’s respondents are heavily blue. He still leads overall, 49/43 among registered voters and 49/41 in battleground states, but Romney leads by two points among voters who are “high interest.” The Bain attacks haven’t done much to tilt people’s opinion about Bain either: In May, the favorable/unfavorable split for the firm was 9/19 whereas this month it’s 12/23. And yes, Obama’s earning himself a reputation as a negative campaigner:

Romney’s lead on the economy is increasing, too, as pessimism about a recovery deepens. The first column in the first table here is O, the second is Mitt:

So what explains Obama’s lead (besides the help he’s getting from the sample, natch)? Three things, I think. One: He still leads on likability, although some polls say he leads big and others say his lead is more modest. His favorable rating here is 49/43 compared to 35/40 for Romney, which is interesting insofar as his negatives are now actually higher than Mitt’s. See why he’s putting out those warm let’s-you-and-I-chat ads? Two: O leads on virtually every issue and leadership metric except the economy. Maybe that’s a simple function of voters not having sized Romney up yet, but it could be that by investing his entire campaign in building an economic edge, Mitt’s more or less abandoned the field on lesser issues. Three: Just because the Bain attacks aren’t doing much damage doesn’t mean all of O’s attacks are fizzling.

The fact that Obama’s now running positive ads makes me think he’s concluded that, for the moment, the attacks on Romney are hurting him more than they are Mitt. But I wonder if that’ll change if he can build up enough of a lead in likability. Obama won’t mind seeing his favorables turn negative, I assume, as long as Romney’s are turning at least as negative in the process. Something to look forward to in September and October!


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 3

Msdnc just giddy with their buddy’s polling

cmsinaz on July 24, 2012 at 9:09 PM

I will dvr their election night coverage so I can watch it over and over as it all slips away. Oh the humanity!

taternuggets on July 24, 2012 at 9:12 PM

taternuggets on July 24, 2012 at 9:12 PM

heh

will be watching live just to see tingles go bat$h!t crazy….

then the next day to see mika’s mug….

cmsinaz on July 24, 2012 at 9:16 PM

lol chuck todd-why isn’t romney leading in my poll?

ummm maybe cuz you skewed it big time in obama’s favor you idjit…

cmsinaz on July 24, 2012 at 7:25 PM

watched tingles this evening and this is what todd said…

cmsinaz on July 24, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Obama’s media propagandists are gearing up for the election and you can expect to see much more of this mathematical garbage. Media polls are designed to influence, nor inform.

rplat on July 24, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Who’s up for a new NBC/WSJ poll based on a bad sample?

You going to start asking this for most polls, AP? ;)

kim roy on July 24, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Rules of polling analysis:

Rule # 1: Any poll of adults should be thrown in trash and laughed at.

Rule # 2: Any poll in 2012 that oversample democrats by more than 3 points over Republicans should be thrown in trash and laughed at.

Rule # 3: In any poll of registered voters add 2 to 3 points Romney numbers.

Rule # 4: Best and most accurate poll is the one that uses likely voters and does not oversample democrats by more than 3 points over Republicans.

mnjg on July 24, 2012 at 9:26 PM

If we use the real world sampling i.e. democrats sampling no more than 3 points over Republicans and add 2 to 3 points for Romney to account for likely voters rather than registered voters then Romney is actually leading by 5 points and in a worst case scenario 2 points.

mnjg on July 24, 2012 at 9:27 PM

More from the poll’s demographics:

Only 35% in the sample said they voted for McCain; 44% for barack – a 9 point advantage for ’08 barack voters.

Sheesh.

Rational Thought on July 24, 2012 at 9:29 PM

I’m tired of all this Democrat poleing. Four years is enough… and it’s really starting to hurt. Can we just vote now?

Kenz on July 24, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Below is the party turnout for the last 5 Presidential elections, aswell as the last 2 mid term elections.

1992—-DEM-38—-REP-35
1996—-DEM-39—-REP-35
2000—-DEM-37—-REP-37
2004—-DEM-37—-REP-37
2006—-DEM-39—-REP-35
2008—-DEM-39—-REP-32
2010—-DEM-35—-REP-35

All years were between 0-7 DEM advantage. However, 3 of the last 5 were dead even. The other two elections the Dems were super motivated. I couldn’t find results from 1994-1998-2002 or I would have shown those results aswell. It would not shock me if the Republicans had more voters in 1994 and 2002. Those were very good years for the Republicans. My guess is that if we had those numbers it would look even tighter. I am guessing the last 10 elections it has been a DEM +1.5 average advantage with only 1 year greater then DEM +4. I repeat, only 1 time in the last 10 elections of more then a plus 4.

How can all these elections with the exception of 2008 have been within 4 points, yet we see crazy numbers like +10. I have seen differentials as great as +14 DEM in the past. And many, many times DEMs with double digit leads such as this poll. Yet, with the exception of maybe Rassmussen, I have never seen one single solitary poll of REP + anything! EVER! Thats about 15 years I have closely been watchiing polling. Its like a rule that this can never happen. If the norm is DEM +2 and you occassionally do a DEM +7 poll, thats cool. But then do an occasional REP +3 poll to even it out. NEVER! EVIL BASTARDS!

Based on these numbers, I think DEM +2 or +3 is the most likely result in 2012. Something like 37-35. Midway between 2008-2010. Who will turn out less this year? Hispanics, African Americans, Jews, and the young. All more Democratic. And who will turnout more? Mormons. More Republican.

A Dem plus 11 poll is a complete joke. These polsters must be taken to task for this propagandist bull crap.

KMav on July 24, 2012 at 9:35 PM

1992—-DEM-38—-REP-35
1996—-DEM-39—-REP-35
2000—-DEM-37—-REP-37
2004—-DEM-37—-REP-37
2006—-DEM-39—-REP-35
2008—-DEM-39—-REP-32
2010—-DEM-35—-REP-35

KMav on July 24, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Very interesting. Thanks.

taternuggets on July 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

And yet we soldier on, my friends, reminding ourselves at every step that lame content is still content.

LOL

Welcome back, AP! :D

RedNewEnglander on July 24, 2012 at 9:57 PM

This one, after three years of Obamanomics dreck, is somehow D+11 if you include leaners and D+12(!) if you don’t. Anyone feel like taking these results seriously?

Uppereastside
inthemiddle
libfreeordie (now back from exile)
ddrintn
Drywall

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 8:11 PM

What? I’m not the one who’s been living and dying on polls. You are.

Besides, what does it matter what the Dem sample is? I thought Romney was Da Man precisely because the Dems and indies loooooooove him.

This is so like 2008, it’s pathetic. Any poll not showing Romney in the lead is dismissed as bogus, or is at least suspect.

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

P.S. : With all the wailing about the dastardly MSM and their polls, reflect for a moment on the fact that Romney is the nominee pretty much on the strength of…the MSM and their polls. What irony.

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM

How bad must their (pole-stirs) #s be when they used an even split or even a D+2 sample?

Obviously Barry is in the sh!tter when the samples are borne in reality.

Mitt WILL be our next president, thank you Jebus!

Metal Head on July 24, 2012 at 10:07 PM

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Correct me if I’m wrong..But Romney is the nominee because he won the GOP primary..:)

Dire Straits on July 24, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Dire Straits on July 24, 2012 at 10:45 PM

i guess its safe to say the irony is lost on you.

renalin on July 24, 2012 at 10:52 PM

renalin on July 24, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Not quite..There is no irony in winning the GOP primary..:)

Dire Straits on July 24, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Besides, what does it matter what the Dem sample is? I thought Romney was Da Man precisely because the Dems and indies loooooooove him.

This is so like 2008, it’s pathetic. Any poll not showing Romney in the lead is dismissed as bogus, or is at least suspect.

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Actually, I never heard anyone say that Romney was the man because the Democrats and indies loved him…that is just something you are making up.

I think Obama will be hard to beat…but I think that would be the case no matter who he was running against. It would help if socalled pretend conservatives did not work with the Democrats to undermine him just because they are cry baby sore losers, but apparently that is too much to ask for.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Hear!..Hear!..:)

Dire Straits on July 24, 2012 at 11:02 PM

P.S. : With all the wailing about the dastardly MSM and their polls, reflect for a moment on the fact that Romney is the nominee pretty much on the strength of…the MSM and their polls. What irony.

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM

At least he ran…and Romney tried to win..unlike some people. So, no it was not the polls that won it for him..the fact that he put a lot of time and effort and resources into had something to do with it..he could have just gotten a gig on Fox and done some book tours and maybe a reality TV show or two instead.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:02 PM

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

I enjoy the polls.

I especially like when polls do things like show Scott Walker even with Tom Barrett and the talking heads are all bubbly reporting it, then watch as their faces fall when Walker spanks him by 7%.

Lots of fun.

itsspideyman on July 24, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Actually, I never heard anyone say that Romney was the man because the Democrats and indies loved him…that is just something you are making up.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 10:59 PM

It was all over this blog about how Romney would bring in the independents and how he could even appeal to the more conservative Democrats. He wasn’t the polarizing candidate, yadda, yadda, yadda…

sharrukin on July 24, 2012 at 11:08 PM

So if my math is right, it’s really a tie.

How long before the oversampling is +15 -20?

No, really.

It’s a tie, but wait, theres 4 more jobs reports coming.
And the fallout from us not building anything ever.

B Man on July 24, 2012 at 11:15 PM

It was all over this blog about how Romney would bring in the independents and how he could even appeal to the more conservative Democrats. He wasn’t the polarizing candidate, yadda, yadda, yadda…

sharrukin on July 24, 2012 at 11:08 PM

And it was all over this blog that the reason he was not a true conservatives was that independents liked him and he could appeal to Democrats…so I guess that means that if Democrats don’t like him, he must a conservative…right? I notice how some people like to have it both ways.

The truth is that a lot of people thought he was more electable than someone like Gingrich or Santorum or Perry or Cain and the truth is he probably is.

But that does not change the fact that we had to choose from the people who were willing to run.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM

This poll is about as useful to our understanding the mood of the electorate as a bike is to a fish.

holygoat on July 24, 2012 at 11:19 PM

“I enjoy the polls.

I especially like when polls do things like show Scott Walker even with Tom Barrett and the talking heads are all bubbly reporting it, then watch as their faces fall when Walker spanks him by 7%.

Lots of fun.”

Actually, all the polls (other than Barrett’s internals) showed Walker ahead, just be varying margins. And the Marquette University poll had walker winning by almost that exact margin of 7 pts. It’s hilarious to read people criticizing polls when they are almost always right on the winner. The vast, vast majority of polls have Obama winning and Romney losing. That goes for national polls and battleground state polls. If Mitt was going to win, he would be ahead in VA, OH, FL and one of NH, IA, NM, NV or CO.

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM

“It’s a tie, but wait, theres 4 more jobs reports coming.
And the fallout from us not building anything ever.”

We just had two pathetic jobs reports and Romney gained nothing from them. What will make the next four any different?

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Actually, all the polls (other than Barrett’s internals) showed Walker ahead, just be varying margins. And the Marquette University poll had walker winning by almost that exact margin of 7 pts. It’s hilarious to read people criticizing polls when they are almost always right on the winner. The vast, vast majority of polls have Obama winning and Romney losing. That goes for national polls and battleground state polls. If Mitt was going to win, he would be ahead in VA, OH, FL and one of NH, IA, NM, NV or CO.

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I think it is a little early to tell one way or the other.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Actually, I never heard anyone say that Romney was the man because the Democrats and indies loved him…that is just something you are making up.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 10:59 PM

And it was all over this blog that the reason he was not a true conservatives was that independents liked him and he could appeal to Democrats…so I guess that means that if Democrats don’t like him, he must a conservative…right? I notice how some people like to have it both ways.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM

I too have noticed how some people like to have it both ways.

sharrukin on July 24, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Why would people vote D +12?

wargamer6 on July 24, 2012 at 11:25 PM

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Dude, every poll when corrected for sampling is a tie.
Every one.

Tons of people don’t even know who the f Romney is right now.
Millions of people haven’t even seen the guy yet, really.

For Romney to be tied with Obama right now is pretty incredible.
Especially after the Bain attacks the last month.

All things considered Romney is in a great position right now.
You can go on thinking whatever feels good tho.

B Man on July 24, 2012 at 11:26 PM

We just had two pathetic jobs reports and Romney gained nothing from them. What will make the next four any different?

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:23 PM

To be honest, if you want to look at polling, Obama’s numbers on handling the economy have been declining steadily in recent months..
The Hill came out with a poll yesterday that actually showed the public blaming Obama for the bad economy more than they blame Bush and in spite of the money Obama has thrown at this race, the media bias that is obvious to 2/3rds of the country and the fact that he is the incumbent Obama has been within the margin of error in the vast majority of polls and he has failed to break 50% in any polls no matter how favorable the demographics.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:28 PM

What? I’m not the one who’s been living and dying on polls. You are.

How so?

Besides, what does it matter what the Dem sample is? I thought Romney was Da Man precisely because the Dems and indies loooooooove him.

Who said that?

This is so like 2008, it’s pathetic. Any poll not showing Romney in the lead is dismissed as bogus, or is at least suspect.

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Is a D+12 spread a good sample in your mind?

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Yes because they’re voting for obama

wargamer6 on July 24, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Actually, I never heard anyone say that Romney was the man because the Democrats and indies loved him…that is just something you are making up.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 10:59 PM

And it was all over this blog that the reason he was not a true conservatives was that independents liked him and he could appeal to Democrats…so I guess that means that if Democrats don’t like him, he must a conservative…right? I notice how some people like to have it both ways.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM

I too have noticed how some people like to have it both ways.

sharrukin on July 24, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Yes, indeed some people to want it both ways. And then again, some people are just obtuse. You see, some people seemed to think that we should nominate someone we knew could not win rather than nominating the man that most voters thought was both the most electable and the most qualified..believe it or not they are not mutually exclusive.

Romney did not just win because of polls, he won because he worked for it..he raised the money, he had the organization, he put out the effort..who else did that?

But now, Romney does not just have to worry about the Democrats who are not going to like any Republican, nor does he just have to win over Independents..he has to fight the primary over and over again.

If he loses, I am not just going to blame him..I am going to blame the people who claim to be conservatives but who never miss a chance to diss the man running against Obama..even on a conservative site like this..it is just piss moan whine.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:37 PM

We just had two pathetic jobs reports and Romney gained nothing from them. What will make the next four any different?

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Romney has been gaining in both RCP and HuffPo/Pollster averages for about 4 weeks and is within the MOE.

So doesn’t that make you a liar?

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:45 PM

If he loses, I am not just going to blame him..I am going to blame the people who claim to be conservatives but who never miss a chance to diss the man running against Obama..even on a conservative site like this..it is just piss moan whine.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Blaming conservatives for everything that goes wrong?

I think you guys call that…Thursday don’t you?

sharrukin on July 24, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:45 PM

There are so many polls,with so much conflicting data that I have just decided to pick a couple of polls, such as Rasmussen and Gallup and stick with them. They may not be accurate either, but I prefer them to the media polls.

One thing I have noticed, Obama is acting like a man who thinks he might lose.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:49 PM

TeeeeeeeaNammmmmmi 2 !!!

November 6th

And don’t think they don’t see it coming.

Hehehe.

PappyD61 on July 24, 2012 at 11:50 PM

Blaming conservatives for everything that goes wrong?

I think you guys call that…Thursday don’t you?

sharrukin on July 24, 2012 at 11:46 PM

I am not blaming conservatives for everything that goes wrong. I think most conservatives are dedicated to beating Obama..right now that is their goal..I am talking about the sore losers who consider themselves to be the true conservatives and who would rather diss Romney than Obama…the people who can not accept the fact that they failed to come up with a candidate who could win the nomination. If you notice..I did not say I blamed conservatives, I said I blamed the people who claimed to be conservatives but who never missed a chance to diss the man running against Obama.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Seeing just one poll where you’re losing indies by 12 points will do that you.

B Man on July 24, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Seeing just one poll where you’re losing indies by 12 points will do that you.

B Man on July 24, 2012 at 11:54 PM

That is what I mean by conflicting information..there will be one poll where Obama is losing Independents..and then there will be another where Romney is and then there will be one with Independents almost divided..I think the question is whether they are true Independents or leaners.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM

There are so many polls,with so much conflicting data that I have just decided to pick a couple of polls, such as Rasmussen and Gallup and stick with them. They may not be accurate either, but I prefer them to the media polls.

One thing I have noticed, Obama is acting like a man who thinks he might lose.

Terrye on July 24, 2012 at 11:49 PM

RCP’s final spread in 2008 was Obama +7.6. The actual election was +7.3.

Link

Of course that’s a composite of 15 polls – all likely voters. RCP today is 7 polls, only 2 are likely voter samples.

That’s what I look at.

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Of course that’s a composite of 15 polls – all likely voters. RCP today is 7 polls, only 2 are likely voter samples.

That’s what I look at.

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM

I have wondered about the averaging the polls, if that is really accurate..but I guess it is as good any measure.

Of course there are variables such as voter turn out.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:02 AM

I guess if you get the presidet=nt’s millions you can make the poll turn out any way he wants.

Bambi on July 25, 2012 at 12:07 AM

I have wondered about the averaging the polls, if that is really accurate..but I guess it is as good any measure.

Of course there are variables such as voter turn out.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:02 AM

It’s only as good as what they average. Summer polls are pretty much garbage. They’re still figuring out what the voter ID will ultimately be, so they can play around with it. I don’t think it’s so much bias as it is the need to generate multiple samples before they know what election day will look like.

But for the life of me I don’t know how anyone can say it will be D +12 with a straight face.

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 12:09 AM

+ Results shown reflect the responses among registered voters.

I guess someone asked or assumed that everyone who participated in the poll were registered. Were the registered voters asked to show IDs? Did Holder approve?

HHW on July 25, 2012 at 12:09 AM

RCP is a pretty bad indication of things, really. They don’t correct for bad sampling so Obama is ahead everywhere you look on that site.

I think the best indications show a total dead heat right now.
And really, most challengers would/should be very happy to be in that position in July.

Today we see a MI poll with O up 6. And PA he’s been up around 6 too.

If his lead creeps down in those two states to say 5, or 4, sirens will be going off at the white house.

And the trolls will say “HAHA he’s still leading!!11″ but we know.

B Man on July 25, 2012 at 12:10 AM

But for the life of me I don’t know how anyone can say it will be D +12 with a straight face.

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 12:09 AM

I have wondered if it is getting harder to get conservatives and Republicans to answer these questions. Maybe they just get a lot more response from Democrats…but if that is the case, shouldn’t they weight the poll or something?

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:12 AM

And the trolls will say “HAHA he’s still leading!!11″ but we know.

B Man on July 25, 2012 at 12:10 AM

Obama is still under 50% and that is good..But beating him won’t be easy. I know that is hard to believe, but I fear it is the truth.

That is why we need to stop the infighting..if someone other than Romney had won the nomination people would not want Romney supporters constantly slamming that candidate if he or she was in a fight with Barack Obama.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:12 AM

Polls aren’t made to show opinion; they’re made to shape it.
If a bunch of polls –not just one or two– come out showing Romney leading, that create the cascade and sheep like effect.

People go with the winner. Romney is up by 3-5 points and the snowball rolls down the hill…pollsters know this.

B Man on July 25, 2012 at 12:17 AM

That is why we need to stop the infighting..if someone other than Romney had won the nomination people would not want Romney supporters constantly slamming that candidate if he or she was in a fight with Barack Obama.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Yup. The ABRs need to get over it.

wargamer6 on July 25, 2012 at 12:23 AM

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 12:15 AM

That’s my point, it’s very hard to beat any incumbent. It’s extremely hard to beat a sitting president. That’s why Romney being tied with Obama right now is scaring the living *#*% out of the white house.

If Romney beats Obama, it will be a HUGE accomplishment. What with all the things helping Obama out in the media.

The infighting on this site is stupid and a waste of time. Romney is the nominee, GET OVER IT if you didn’t support him.

People talk about how squishy Romney is, well, I don’t really like him that much, but I gotta give him this:
Think about this for a second, people….everybody in DC KNOWS how screwed we are right now if nothing changes. Financially this country is in DEEP trouble.

Many republicans turned down running against Obama. Palin said no, Christie said no.

Well, give credit where it’s due, Romney is going against the Chicago machine. It would be a hellava lot easier for him to take the easier ‘not running’ road.

B Man on July 25, 2012 at 12:23 AM

Yup. The ABRs need to get over it.

wargamer6 on July 25, 2012 at 12:23 AM

Conservatives aren’t going to get over conservatism. They wouldn’t do it for Bush and they certainly won’t do it for Romney.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Conservatives aren’t going to get over conservatism. They wouldn’t do it for Bush and they certainly won’t do it for Romney.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Who’s asking you to get over your beliefs?

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Who’s asking you to get over your beliefs?

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 12:41 AM

The people who think conservatives should back a gun grabbing ‘severely’ conservative guy like Romney, who instituted Romneycare, called himself a progressive, and pushed greenie CO2 emissions limits on power plants.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:47 AM

The people who think conservatives should back a gun grabbing ‘severely’ conservative guy like Romney, who instituted Romneycare, called himself a progressive, and pushed greenie CO2 emissions limits on power plants.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:47 AM

As opposed to backing Obama. It’s Romney or Obama at this point.

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 12:57 AM

As opposed to backing Obama. It’s Romney or Obama at this point.

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Neither one of them are conservative and there is little reason to pretend otherwise.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:59 AM

Neither one of them are conservative and there is little reason to pretend otherwise.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:59 AM

Maybe not- but one of them will be your next president for certain. Do you think the next 4 years would really be the exact same no matter which man is elected?

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 1:05 AM

Do you think the next 4 years would really be the exact same no matter which man is elected?

Chuck Schick on July 25, 2012 at 1:05 AM

No, I think that Obama will be much worse though I think Romney will tweak Obamacare and make it a nice ‘severly’ conservative program. I think he will short circuit the Tea Party and will do less than nothing to shift course on spending.

He, like Boehner and McConnell will go along with the Democrats in a compromise that will give them 90% of what they want. The economy will tank, if it doesn’t do so before the election, it most certainly will afterwards. That will be called ‘conservatism’ and Romney will, along with the GOP get the boot after four years of pandering to the left. What comes after that might just scare the hell out of all of us and make Obama look like a member of the PTA.

It doesn’t strike me as a deal worth making, and it will do long term damage to conservatism when it becomes entangled in Romney’s love of big government solutions.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 1:13 AM

sharrukin… you are in no way conservative. You need to pick another term to describe yourself. I think nut works… but Romney is as conservative a person who has ever run for President.

You don’t know what it means to be conservative and you want some weird anarchy or something. You live in a fantasy that you share with a few, very few, others.

At any rate. I am conservative, so is Romney. You are not. This is not your party man. Get your own. The term Conservative has a meaning and you don’t even know what it is. Hypocrites need to move along. We live like conservatives and we govern as conservatives. Reality is not perfect and Liberals aren’t going to lose their rights because you disagree with them. It is conservative to respect the rights of others to disagree! You are not a conservtive in any way! Not even a little!

Making up your own rules doesn’t cut it. You don’t get to change the meaning of the word because you want to call yourself something you are not.

Anarchist nut… that describes you very nicely.

petunia on July 25, 2012 at 1:36 AM

It’s very difficult to predict “likely voters” this far from the election. Rasmussen screens his sample for that, so it may end up demographically closer to the eventual actual electorate, but it’s just way too early to predict results.

Very little support is yet firm among the mushy middle of swing voters who actually decide elections. Fully half of them will typically decide in the last 30 days, and as many as half of those in the last week. You just can’t screen down for likely voters with any accuracy three months out.

D+11 is total crap, and no responsible polling firm would deliver such a poll to a paying client.

Adjoran on July 25, 2012 at 2:11 AM

petunia on July 25, 2012 at 1:36 AM

Its been a while and I was trying to recall if you were the crazy one…

Yup, you went nuts about Palin.

And I think she is weird.

She hatespeople who know anything about anything.

You have not a shred of love for this country.

I don’t see Palin as all that honest either really. I don’t even like her well enough to track all the stuff.

But I remember she was pretty dishonest

I don’t know that I’d buy a car from her.

I can’t imagine how she seems so honest to you.

I think you all must feel sorry for her. Like she’s the ugly duckling running for homecomming queen.

She doesn’t even try to educate herself.

Having her in the Whitehouse would be such a circus.

And this about Romney…

That part of the Tea Party that opposed Romney has disintegrated into everything the left claimed. They are nothing but hypocrites and the whole country can see it clearly now.

The lies are exposed.

The good guy won, in spite of the lies.

Romney is the most conservative candidate we have ever had. And far more conservative than any one else in the party.

Then Hunstman and Daniels…

Look up Huntsman’s record for yourself.

Look up, Daniels for yourself, don’t let the Palin and their allies on the left, destroy the reputations of these very conservative people!

And conservatives…

“Conservative” is becoming a dirty word that only applies to closed-minded, unreasonable people.

Already leftists refuse to label anyone who is nice, as a conservative. Someone with a conservative record–but who is nice, is a moderate. Because in their view there are no nice conservatives.

I will let your own words be my rebuttal to you.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 2:27 AM

Holy crud, this poll is absolutely useless.

Sorry Allah, I know you’re looking for content, but +12 dems is going to skew things so radically that it becomes hard to take anything away from this poll.

Let me put it to you like this. Those 12% have to come at the expense of some other block of voters, and in this came it looks like its mostly coming at the expense of Republicans. So what looks like a 12% skew is really more like a 24% skew.

Okay, over simplification, and of course this exaggerates the problem EVER so slightly, but you see the problem. The only thing you can really take out of this is the fact that even with THIS kind of skew Romney is still more trusted on the economy, and Obama’s favorables are still dropping. This means that in actual reality, the numbers here have to be even worse.

WolvenOne on July 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM

Another worthless LSM poll… another self licking ice cream cone…

Khun Joe on July 25, 2012 at 4:55 AM

Take a poll near DC where the majority work for the government and guess what, you get a poll in favor of the government. Rocket science. Take a poll in the middle of the day about unemployment when the unemployed are at home and guess what, same thing. The poll takers have all this down to a science and they will take a poll and deliver it to you any way you want it, it’s business.

mixplix on July 25, 2012 at 6:56 AM

The overwhelming majority of this country wants to boot Obama our of the People’s House.

No, Mitt is not all that and a bag of chips, but he’s all we have.

This election is a referendum on Obama’s performance.

kingsjester on July 25, 2012 at 7:01 AM

It doesn’t strike me as a deal worth making, and it will do long term damage to conservatism when it becomes entangled in Romney’s love of big government solutions.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 1:13 AM

Oh come on…all of this is just whining because Sarah Palin did not get off her butt and run.

I do not think that Romney has love of big government solutions, I think that is just another talking point..not a lot different from the talking points of the left. In truth Romney cut government and taxes when he was in Mass…But you do not care about reality..you are too busy crying in your beer.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 7:42 AM

RCP’s final spread in 2008 was Obama +7.6. The actual election was +7.3.

Link

Of course that’s a composite of 15 polls – all likely voters. RCP today is 7 polls, only 2 are likely voter samples.

That’s what I look at.

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Good point, though today’s RCP average (which includes this absurd NBC D +12 poll) is Obama +1.8. There is a world of difference between +7.3 and +1.8. And if this NBC D +12 poll of registered voters weren’t included in it, that average would be even or Romney would be ahead, so, obviously, many of these polls are being used to DRIVE voters, not reflect in a scientific way what they are thinking. If Obama is averaging +7 in the final likely voter polls before election day, yeah, he’s gonna win, but if it’s in today’s +1 – +2 range, he won’t.

Rational Thought on July 25, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Conservatives aren’t going to get over conservatism. They wouldn’t do it for Bush and they certainly won’t do it for Romney.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Oh please..Yeah right…when the purity police eat their own they claim the moral high road and hide behind their sanctimonious posturing….They do not have to have workable solutions, they do not have to have reasonable alternatives…all they have to do is sit on their butts and join forces with the Democrats to rag on whatever Republican is running against him.

That is not conservatism. That is just being an ass…there is a difference.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 7:50 AM

Actually, all the polls (other than Barrett’s internals) showed Walker ahead, just be varying margins. And the Marquette University poll had walker winning by almost that exact margin of 7 pts. It’s hilarious to read people criticizing polls when they are almost always right on the winner. The vast, vast majority of polls have Obama winning and Romney losing. That goes for national polls and battleground state polls. If Mitt was going to win, he would be ahead in VA, OH, FL and one of NH, IA, NM, NV or CO.

These pollsters aren’t stupid. They know that all adults aren’t going to vote, that Rs voe more faithfully than Ds, and that the 2012 electorate isn’t really D+10. At this point in an election cycle, they have a story to drive, and that story is more important than accuracy. But a funny thing happens when the election gets closer. Pollsters that were polling adults and registered voters start applying some sort of likely voter model. The comically inflated single party advantages get pared down.

While pollsters might like to be driving a story or carry water for their favored candidate at this point of a race, in the end, they are more motivated by being right. No one keeps hiring a firm that gets things wrong in the end. A pollster that gives a wildly inaccurate poll in July but a good one in late October can claim that they predicted the outcome correctly, but that there was just “movement” from their earlier polling.

Polls with no voter screen or fanciful partisan advantages at this stage are just silly, and only serve to make one side or another feel good or drive web traffic. I could easily set up a poll showing Romney with a 40 point advantage by applying the right set of screens. But it wouldn’t be reality, so what’s the point?

FuzzyLogic on July 25, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Who’s up for a new NBC/WSJ poll based on a bad sample?

And then analyze it, take it seriously, act like it matters, evaluate candidates’ performance based on it and then use it to ponder who will win in November…STUPID MUCH???

winston on July 25, 2012 at 8:12 AM

Why would the WSJ associated itself with such drek?

MNHawk on July 25, 2012 at 8:24 AM

Why would the WSJ associated itself with such drek?

MNHawk on July 25, 2012 at 8:24 AM

Murdoch…that is why.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 8:33 AM

We just had two pathetic jobs reports and Romney gained nothing from them. What will make the next four any different?

gumbyandpokey on July 24, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Romney has been gaining in both RCP and HuffPo/Pollster averages for about 4 weeks and is within the MOE.

So doesn’t that make you a liar?

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:45 PM

That’s what I mean by “living and dying by polls”. Come on. Romney gains, then he loses. Gains then loses. But to this point he has remained pretty consistently behind Obama. Pointing that fact out doesn’t make one a “liar” and it doesn’t make on an “O-bot”. It makes one a realist who refuses to get out the GOP pom-poms.

Anyway, this I think is fairly close to what the electoral map will look like on the bitter morning of November 7.

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 8:34 AM

Anyway, this I think is fairly close to what the electoral map will look like on the bitter morning of November 7.

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 8:34 AM

I think I will wait until then to find out…the truth is we do not know,however, it is worth noting that a lot of people who call themselves conservative seem to be rooting for Obama. And this is in large part because their choice either lost in the nomination process or did not even bother to try.

We shall see. That much is obvious.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 8:42 AM

The truth is a lot of Palin’s supporters are bitter because she did not run and rather than blame her for that, they are blaming Romney and or the GOP. The idea is that if they had not been so mean to her, she could have lead us to the Promised Land. Well, sorry folks, I do know that the media was mean to Palin..but then the media is mean to most Republicans..however, she did not effectively push back on that and most importantly she made the decision to give up..not run..not even try. There is no point in blaming Romney for that.

Then of course there are the libertarians who will happily throw their vote away on some lunatic like Gary Johnson, the whole time whining about the growth of government.

None of this will matter in November.It will be Mitt Romney or four more years of Hope and Change with Barack Hussein Obama.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 8:46 AM

In nearly every poll I’ve seen, when you adjust for the same Republican turnout that occurred in 2004 or 2010, Romney win easily.

I really don’t think anyone can say with a straight face that Democrat turnout is going to be better in 2012 than it was in 2008, or that Republican turnout is going to be at some ridiculous 100 year low.

BradTank on July 24, 2012 at 8:19 PM

At the same time you can’t say with a straight face that GOP turnout is going to duplicate 2010. That’s just pure wishcasting. I think the Dem advantage on election day will probably be about +5 or +6. You see, that’s why it’s important to fire up the base with something more than anti-incumbent sentiment.

Bradley-Wilder. Every news article about a Republican contributor going onto little Bammie’s enemy list, and getting audited by the IRS adds to Bradley-Wilder.

People are afraid to tell the truth to a stranger on the phone, and they will lie.

slickwillie2001 on July 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM

More 2008-style self-delusion. All we need is to start talking about the PUMAs riding in to save the day.

1992—-DEM-38—-REP-35
1996—-DEM-39—-REP-35
2000—-DEM-37—-REP-37
2004—-DEM-37—-REP-37
2006—-DEM-39—-REP-35
2008—-DEM-39—-REP-32
2010—-DEM-35—-REP-35

KMav on July 24, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Very interesting. Thanks.

taternuggets on July 24, 2012 at 9:44 PM

It is interesting. If those figures are correct, they show that in 2000 and 2004, when turnout was equal, Bush won by the skin of his teeth (and actually lost the popular vote in 2000).

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 8:53 AM

The truth is a lot of Palin’s supporters are bitter because she did not run…

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 8:46 AM

The truth is a lot of ‘bots know that Romney’s weak but then have to hide that behind the constant Palin red herring.

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 8:56 AM

I think I will wait until then to find out…the truth is we do not know,however, it is worth noting that a lot of people who call themselves conservative seem to be rooting for Obama.

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 8:42 AM

By the way, pointing out that Romney’s weak isn’t “rooting for Obama”. It’s pointing out that Romney’s weak.

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Please tell me someone else just heard the disclaimer that if they weighted this month’s poll based on last month’s sample it would be an Obama by 2. (which probably means Romney by 2 or 3)

ourulz2000 on July 25, 2012 at 9:06 AM

*disclaimer by Chuck Todd on msnbc.

ourulz2000 on July 25, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Wait until Friday’s horrendously bad GDP report comes out. That should be good for some laughs.

eyedoc on July 25, 2012 at 9:11 AM

Please tell me someone else just heard the disclaimer that if they weighted this month’s poll based on last month’s sample it would be an Obama by 2. (which probably means Romney by 2 or 3)

ourulz2000 on July 25, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Yeah, and PA and MN are in play. Maybe even OR, WA and CA!

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM

I think I will wait until then to find out…the truth is we do not know…

Terrye on July 25, 2012 at 8:42 AM

But of course everyone “knew” that based on polls Romney was Da Man!!!!!

ddrintn on July 24, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Correct me if I’m wrong..But Romney is the nominee because he won the GOP primary..:)

Dire Straits on July 24, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Brilliant observation!! *facepalm*

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 9:17 AM

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 9:17 AM

It is an observation you failed to grasp..:)

Dire Straits on July 25, 2012 at 9:22 AM

all this will do is lay the groundwork for the (false) “narrative” that romney has come from behind out of nowhere (when the polls get honest in oct) ala reagan in 80. the useful idiots will never see it coming. lets just relax and watch the panic set in then. if they started to panic now they might (not really) do something that might help their cause. if the brainturst keeps pumping bain and the “he took me out of context, not fair not fair” on the “you didnt build it” meme, all the better. digs the hole deeper. this is actually quite amusing.

t8stlikchkn on July 25, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Romney has been gaining in both RCP and HuffPo/Pollster averages for about 4 weeks and is within the MOE.

So doesn’t that make you a liar?

Chuck Schick on July 24, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Sean Trende must also be a liar, by the way:

This all helps to explain why Romney hasn’t been able to move the polls. Obama has been president for almost four years now, and has kept a consistently high profile during that time. Unlike 2004, where the economy hit an upward inflection point shortly before the general election got under way, while the Iraq War hit a downward inflection point at roughly the same time, nothing has really changed in the past few years. The economy remains sluggish, the health care bill remains controversial, and the president remains a charismatic figure capable of delivering a heckuva speech. In this situation, what can Romney’s advertisements tell people that they haven’t already figured out for themselves?

Complicating matters for the Republican’s campaign, the president is at 46 percent in head-to-heads in the RCP average. In the past six presidential elections, this has represented the floor for the parties (in terms of two-party vote share). In other words, the low-to-medium hanging fruit for Republicans are already either voting for Romney or are undecided. Absent a major economic collapse, Obama’s poll numbers simply aren’t likely to drop any lower.

So voters are at Step 2 of the referendum model. They are evaluating Romney. In this situation, the Republicans are doing the exact wrong thing by making 90 percent of their ads attacks on Obama. Although voters always say this but rarely mean it, they really do want Romney to go positive. They are interested in learning about his accomplishments (or lack thereof), especially during his term as governor.

While the Obama camp has been trying to give voters what they want, albeit from a negative perspective (and perhaps part of why Obama hasn’t moved the polls with his blitz is that those voters who are interested in Bain and Romney’s taxes are waiting to hear Romney’s side of the story), the Romney camp and his super PAC supporters have been banging their collective heads against a wall essentially trying to re-convince voters that the president is not doing a good job. Simply put, this won’t do it.

It is a real question whether the Romney campaign gets this. Throughout the primary process, it focused relentlessly on tearing down its opponents. Thus far, it has done the same in the general election. Maybe Romney doesn’t have that much of a record of accomplishment as governor, outside of the radioactive health care law. Or maybe the campaign simply isn’t capable of telling a compelling, positive story about the nominee.

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 9:34 AM

all this will do is lay the groundwork for the (false) “narrative” that romney has come from behind out of nowhere (when the polls get honest in oct) ala reagan in 80.

t8stlikchkn on July 25, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Romney is completely different from Reagan, and this isn’t 1980.

ddrintn on July 25, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Conservatives aren’t going to get over conservatism. They wouldn’t do it for Bush and they certainly won’t do it for Romney.

sharrukin on July 25, 2012 at 12:29 AM

You really struck a nerve with that one. Well played.

I diss both of them. Neither is a conservative, and to state as a fact that Romney is the most conservative man to ever run for president shows a level of delusion I thought belonged solely to the leftists.

Go ahead, ask how many bets I won declaring Romney the 2012 nominee as early as 2009. Funny that you all think you had a choice here.

runawayyyy on July 25, 2012 at 10:21 AM

LIMBAUGH is right. Why is the WALL STREET JOURNAL destroying their credibility by being associated with NBC? They need to distance themselves from this corrupt organization now. How can the WSJ justify this laughable POLL. RUSH tore into them and rightfully so.

AmeriCuda on July 25, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3