Obama now leads Romney by 11 among independents in new CNN and Fox News polls

posted at 8:01 pm on August 9, 2012 by Allahpundit

Don’t focus on the topline numbers since it’s hard to gauge how reliable they are. The Fox poll has O leading 49/40 based on a sample of D+9; last month he led 45/41 with a sample of just D+4. As for CNN, they’ve got Obama up 52/45 but provide no partisan breakdown with which to judge the sample.

What to do, then? Let’s focus on the indies. CNN:

The margin of error increases for a subsample, as you can see, but that’s a lot of cushion for the Unicorn Prince. No mystery where it’s coming from, either: According to CNN, 52 percent of indies have an unfavorable view of Romney now compared to just 40 percent who had one in May. Fox sees a similar overall margin:

Lots of undecideds there, obviously, but the trendlines in Romney’s favorables aren’t encouraging after a solid month of Bain-mania. CNN’s and Fox’s numbers, respectively:

Amazingly, The One’s not paying much of a price yet for negativity. When asked if Romney has attacked Obama unfairly, the response is 44/50 between “has” and “has not.” Obama’s numbers are almost identical at 45/49, suggesting that perceptions on this question are still breaking along predictable party lines. Maybe that’ll change in the next week or two; this poll was conducted over the last few days, before the sleaze-tastic steelworker ad really started buzzing.

I don’t like the looks of either of these numbers, though:

Of the last four elections, only Clinton in 1996 had more lopsided numbers on that last question. (On the other hand, by a margin of 52/37, voters expected Gore to defeat Bush as of mid-September 2000.) Here’s the key question: Given that Romney and the constellation of conservative Super PACs have yet to really unload on O, there’s obviously going to be some movement in his numbers down the line just as there’s been movement in Romney’s numbers now after the Bain attacks. But how much? The two sides aren’t similarly situated; Romney’s an unknown quantity for most while Obama’s been the most famous man on the planet for four years. Not only does that make it harder for the GOP to define him than it was for him to define Mitt, but it gives O a much simpler task with regard to the shrinking pool of undecideds. Those people are already wary of reelecting him (that’s why they’re undecided), so they’re essentially Romney persuadables. Romney needs to persuade them, but all Obama needs to do is keep Romney on the defensive and keep the campaign dumb and nasty so that those persuadables stop caring and stay home. It’s incredibly cynical but it’s his best bet. If you believe these two polls, it’s working okay so far.


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 4 5 6

Also, maybe a lady out there could explain why women tend to vote for “American Idols” instead of someone to run the country instead of running it into the ground.

cajunpatriot on August 10, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Beats me. I’m a single woman and I am in no way enamored of Obama. I find him repulsive and malignant. I have come to the conclusion that single women are selfish; they care more about what goes on between their legs than they do the country and its citizens. They want the ability to play without the responsibility of possible consequences. They conflate freedom with license. Somehow, they believe that being “liberated” means they can do whatever men have done, or perceived to have done, with respect to unexpected pregnancies. True liberation means you have to be woman enough to own up to mistakes and to accept the outcomes of bad choices, some of which are actually be blessings.

It’s either the above and/or they are too stupid to be permitted to procreate.

That’s all I’ve got.

totherightofthem on August 10, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Obama is not only trying to kill Romney, he’s shooting bullets at Republicans too and the brand is deteriorating. That’s why more respondents in polls are identifying as D rather than R or even I.

That’s also why pollsters are giving the wide margins to D over I. In past elections that means more enthusiasm for voting D in the election and it usually turns out this way.

However, the voter intensity polling we’ve seen recently has R’s more enthusiastic about voting.

What does it mean then? I think a lot of conventional wisdom will be tossed aside when this is over. At least I hope so.

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Wow. That post was a garbled mess. Apologies. I need more caffeine. Or, maybe I should not try to multi-task.

totherightofthem on August 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

[My dailycaller comment:] This [bad staff picks] may explain Mitt’s inexplicable failure to stand with Chick Fil A. Not only has this puzzled and seriously dampened the motivation for much of the base, but it reinforces the notion that Mitt tends to run away from any controversial issue, that he won’t take a stand.. that he is Mr Mush. But also many Dem leaning independents and Dems had stood with Chick Fil A, and Romney stood to gain this possibly decisive segment of the electorate. Yet will these Dem leaning independents vote for Mr Mush despite their “technical” agreement with Mitt’s nominally stated position on gay marriage? Not likely. They will vote for O, as otherwise they lean Democratic, and they won’t see Romney as effectively any different on the gay issue.

anotherJoe on August 10, 2012 at 11:23 AM

What does it mean then? I think a lot of conventional wisdom will be tossed aside when this is over. At least I hope so.

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 11:18 AM

You said it yourself – fewer people identifying as “R”. Smaller pool of people – and the people who remain in it are those who are comfortable with Willard so yeah – enthusiasm high.

But it’s not a “big pool”.

I used to identify as “R” – I gave thousands of dollars to “R” campaigns in 2010 but I no longer identify as a Republican and I will not give a damn cent to the Republican party until the establishement is politically exterminated from it.

Am I “enthusiastic” to vote? You betcha. I can’t wait to vote for Obama and hopefully we can put an end to the establishment once and for all with the defeat of Willard McDole!

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 11:23 AM

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Yes, there are a lot of you foolish utopians, but you haven’t increased in numbers in the last few weeks. You’re not even as many as in 2008.

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Somebody once posted on Hot Air that when given the choice between 2 liberals the voters would select the real thing. HMM…

I’ll never understand why Americans remain blind to the few truths found within politics. This stuff isn’t bloody rocket science!

DannoJyd on August 10, 2012 at 11:49 AM

It’s absolutely stunning to me that the GOP has fielded a nominee who now seems to be going under water against Obama. Obama is the worst President in history; he’s presiding over the worst economy since the depression; and his campaign is slip-shod and incompetent.

This should be an “easy” win … a walk in the park for any COMPETENT REPUBLICAN nominee.

But then – Willard is not competent.

I mean – how ’bout you Mittbotts explain why Mittens can’t out race a tortoise here?

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Yes, there are a lot of you foolish utopians, but you haven’t increased in numbers in the last few weeks. You’re not even as many as in 2008.

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

You need to go back to the threads in 2008 – there are A LOT more of us now then there were back then. Many of still had a mouth full of kool-aide in ’08 that we’ve since spat out.

You’ll join us one day – you’ll all join us one day as soon as you realize the establishment GOP is no less a party of “big government” than the Dims are.

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Yes, there are a lot of you foolish utopians, but you haven’t increased in numbers in the last few weeks. You’re not even as many as in 2008.

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM

And another thing – why is it considered “utopian” now to insist on smaller government?

I’m not talking about eliminating government – but how about a 10 percent cut in ALL government? Is that “utopian”?

Well, one thing we know for sure – it’s too hard for the GOP Ayatollahs to get their Mittens around (pun intended) because they’ll never put a hard and fast number on exactly how much government they will cut.

And this is because – THEY HAVE NEVER CUT IT. Talk … talk … talk … talk – no action! Back down every time.

Yet you still vote for them? I’m not calling you “utopian” – I’m calling you a FOOL. Just like a fool who keeps going to the same used car salesman to replace the last lemon he bought from the guy!

LMFAO!!

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Seriously . . . this kind of thinking drives me up the wall. Gov. Romney will probably win, but you are ready to throw your vote to the one person who could literally throw this country away through his EO’s. You obviously want that to continue.

Voter from WA State on August 10, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Willard may win but he’s got an uphill struggle. And you have nothing to fear from Obe’s EO’s – once Mittens is put down the whole GOP establishment will crumble. You’ll get new leadership in the Senate and the house – leadership with BALLS.

And THOSE PEOPLE will hold the Obama administration accountable. Unlike the current crop that turns it’s blind eye to things like “fast and furious”…

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 12:06 PM

However, I take some relief in knowing that I know 2 people who are Dems who voted for Obama in 2008 who are now actively working to have him defeated.

Voter from WA State on August 10, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Are you working alongside them?

DannoJyd on August 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM

You have the wrong pic, you need to have Nelson Muntz, pointing and jeering, it’s like the most dangerous joke in that Python sketch.

narciso on August 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM

mittens sux more today than yesterday but not half as much as tomorrow!

Pragmatic on August 10, 2012 at 12:37 PM

I consider myself an “independent”, although I have consistently voted for most of the Republican candidates in Federal, State and local elections in my home state of Indiana. I strayed a few times when I honestly thought a Democratic candidate was a better choice for our country, my State and for my personal value system.

Looking back over the last 30 to 40 years or so, I am beginning to realize why the Republican Party is in danger of extinction and I seem to personally care less. I listened with my ears, but did not see with my eyes. I paid so little attention to the actions of Congress, but focused instead on the words and actions of the Republican presidents such as Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. That is where I made terrible judgment decisions during those years and I vow not to repeat them.

I, like so many other independents, gave the Republican Party decades to solve or lessen the impact of some of the most pressing problems confronting our nation today. However, the Republican Party then and today is the party that is excellent in identifying problematic issues, excellent in presenting data to back up the issues, but lack the fortitude and the will to address the issues with lasting and common sense solutions. I have come to believe that the core of the Republican Party really doesn’t care to develop solutions that are win/win for the majority of people in our country.

Large minority groups such as illegal immigrants, gays, disenfranchised blacks and others have been in this country for years with little or no recognition from the Republican Party as a whole. The only Republican President that really took a leap forward to improve the lives of the black population was George W., and he will never get the recognition for that he deserves. But by and large, the Republican Party has ignored the minorities problems and issues as if they would eventually correct on their own.

Then there is the healthcare issue that is tearing this county apart. Are we so cold as to throw people with life-threatening, pre-existing conditions to the curb without offering some kind of affordable care plan? Will we allow these people to suffer with sub-standard healthcare, live with the threat of losing jobs, homes and family all because they may have cancer or diabetes? Yes, for years there were “safety nets” in place for the most dire in need, However, the handwriting was on the wall all along. The “safety net” was not adequate nor designed to handle the huge increases in healthcare costs, or the rising number of diabetics and cancer patients in the middle-class strata. Crushing healthcare costs were affecting not just the indigent population, but were threatening the very existence of a middle-class society. Republicans were just too damn busy with other issues to care. Yes, the door was wide open for the Democratic Party to come in and deal with healthcare and other social issues that were of profound importance to the majority of U.S. citizens.

Now, the Republican focus is on nothing but jobs. That is a losing strategy and will ensure an Obama victory in November. If I am a cancer patient, I want life-saving drugs and healthcare first. I could care less about a job if I am going to die without healthcare. If I am a diabetic, I want life-saving insulin and assurance that I have an insurance plan that will cover potential complications later in life. Without that, I could care less about a job if I am destined to die a pre-mature death. The “jobs strategy” is a smokescreen. The majority of good people in this country that honestly want to work are either gainfully employed now or will find employment in the very near future. I’ve heard Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and others relate how they took low-level jobs early in life before finding success. That is the story of my life as well. The jobs are already out there, but maybe a willing and humble work force isn’t.

The poll numbers should be of no surprise. Republicans have turned their backs on the pressing social issues and are destined for the ash heap. Gays cannot and should not be ignored. Rising education and healthcare costs can’t and should not be ignored. Rampant white collar crime cannot and should not be ignored while thousands rot in prisons and jails due to low-level social crimes. Illegal immigration cannot and should not be ignored. Congress is too deadlocked to deal with these issues, while Obama is taking a “back door” approach to bring them into the social conscience of voters, particularly the independents. I will not vote for Obama for many reasons, but I am not surprised at his popularity in the polls and I am certain we will face four more years of Obama and his plan to take down the country he hates. For this, I can only blame the Republican Party. You had many opportunities over the years to address the issues and you blew it!

metroryder on August 10, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Don’t focus on the top line number? Really?….LOL…

DevilsPrinciple on August 10, 2012 at 1:01 PM

“The only poll that counts in the one in November.”

And the loser’s lament rears it’s pathetic head yet again here.

I shudder to think how disappointed everyone is going to be when the commonly expected outcome occurs and Obama wins easily.

Wanting Dole to win didn’t make it so, wanting McCain to win didn’t make it so and wanting Romney to win does not make it so.

gumbyandpokey on August 9, 2012 at 8:55 PM

So next time the GOP will run a blockbuster candidate–a retired accountant named McDoleney, who once wrote a college thesis on macro-economics?

Don L on August 10, 2012 at 1:10 PM

You can’t take a sample that even Nigel Tufnel, would find unserious,
and extrapolate from that, it’s like taking Noonan at face value, there’s no coin in it,

narciso on August 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

So next time the GOP will run a blockbuster candidate–a retired accountant named McDoleney, who once wrote a college thesis on macro-economics?

Don L on August 10, 2012 at 1:10 PM

.
Sounds like you need to feel tingly when you go to vote.
Well, your choice is pretty simple then.

Do not lose sight of the fact you are choosing between POLITICIANS- tell me when you choice of a politician was an appetizing one? (Besides Reagan, naturally)

FlaMurph on August 10, 2012 at 1:18 PM

And another thing – why is it considered “utopian” now to insist on smaller government?

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM

It’s not. It’s utopian to think that there will be a time when everyone will think and behave precisely the way you want them to. It leads to behavior that punishes an entire country for the imperfections of a few on ‘your’ side while actively supporting the side that most definitely will push us farther and farther away from what you desire.

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 1:19 PM

the only poll that matters is the one on November 6th …. the rest are simply white noise

JKotthoff on August 10, 2012 at 1:43 PM

This Nate Silver article does a good job of explaining why these 2 polls aren’t reason to start hitting the panic button.

Keep in mind that Mitt also has a $26M lead in fundraising over Obozo. It should be very soon now that Team Mitt unleashes a true barrage of ads in the battleground states.

The Libs ain’t seen nothing yet.

OneVision on August 10, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Here are some facts from the cross tabs.

24% of the respondents were only Somewhat Interested in voting.
5% were not interested at all, but responded to the survey anyway. (29%)

49% of the respondents support Obama.
And Gallup has that figure at 43%

If you can do the math help me out. 49 = 43.

I am hoping that the (29%) of the not very interested are included in that 49%.

Fleuries on August 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM

This Nate Silver article does a good job of explaining why these 2 polls aren’t reason to start hitting the panic button.

Keep in mind that Mitt also has a $26M lead in fundraising over Obozo. It should be very soon now that Team Mitt unleashes a true barrage of ads in the battleground states.

The Libs ain’t seen nothing yet.

OneVision on August 10, 2012 at 1:53 PM

I am not the biggest Nate Silver fan, because his numbers often look skewed to me, but he is 100% right here. There has literally been nothing to cause a 3 point shift when most people are still focusing on the beach, NFL training camps, and the Olympics.

I just wish Nate Silver would, for once, man up and say a lot of these polls are driven by skewed crosstabs. Instead of saying Pew consistently shows Obama doing better than everyone else, I wish that he would just say that their methodolgy is garbage.

So, while he is right, he still refuses to be honest about why polls like Fox News, CNN and Pew are outliers, and that by being junk that RCP includes in their average, weigh the average towards Obama, when Rasmussen and Gallup are correct that this is still a toss-up, at worst, for Romney.

milcus on August 10, 2012 at 2:51 PM

And the Conservative “whistling past the graveyard” continues. Just as usually happens here – if a poll shows Romney leading it’s a true one, if it shows Obama ahead it’s blatantly skewed and false.

Keep dreaming. We’ll have the real poll on NOV 6 and it won’t be close. Obama’s getting reelected easily. I’ll be here on NOV 7 to read all the wailing and gnashing of teeth.

independentvoice on August 10, 2012 at 3:14 PM

The Republican Party would have been fine, if they hadn’t gone along for 8 years while G.W. Bush spent like a drunken sailor, and even started a new entitlement program and two wars. What were you thinking?! I was disgusted by the rank hypocrisy of the Republican Party. Even Viguerie was complaining by Bush’s second term.

This is payback for your OWN profligacy. I opposed Bush for 8 LONG YEARS. Now I’ve opposed Obama for 4 LONG YEARS, and it will probably be 4 more.

THIS conservative couldn’t be more disgusted with all of you.

First you cheer on W as he spends like O; now you whine about Romney because he’s not more like O [a smiling psychopath] .

You people don’t know what you want. And, because of that, you won’t ever get what you want.

Erick Erickson at Redstate is one of the worst examples of your moral and intellectual bankruptcy. But his comrades on the right are equally pathetic. You want Chris Christie for VP because he’d “take it to Obama?” You want Gingrich because he’d “take it to Obama?” Honestly. You don’t deserve to win the Oval Office.

The only man here who is a true man of integrity and principle is Romney. You don’t deserve him, frankly. Because you won’t fight for him; you won’t support him; you deliberately CRIPPLE him from taking the Republican Party back, because all you really care about is your own narcissistic agenda.

Meanwhile, those of us who really love our country and are really conservatives? We have been wandering in the wilderness screaming for some sanity to come back to this party, so we can take this country back before we all go over the cliff.

mountainaires on August 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM

mountainaires on August 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM

I’m going to stick my neck out here and defend Bush and call you out for complaining about the wars. We needed Bush’s aggressive resolve. Much of the Arab world may have hated us for it (though obviously many already did) but there was also a grudging respect. As shown by protesters in Iran (Bush! Bush! Kush! Kush!) and Syria (‘We miss Bush’s audacity’). All of which has dissolved away under Obama.

Spending skyrocketed when the Dems took over and Bush signed the bills under threat of withholding of funds for Iraq.

Bush got us out of the recession he inherited plus the trillion dollar loss of a single day in September 2001 with his tax cuts and admonition for us to ‘Go shopping!’ which the stupid Democrats criticize him for even today. The mighty Keynesians threw their principles under the bus to mock Bush over that.

I was against the formation of the DHS. Wasn’t happy about the Prescription Drug thing. But leave the damn wars out of it.

(I do support Romney and truly believe he can turn our economy around–I don’t think he’s so good on a lot of other stuff but with our foot firmly planted in the door and the right Congress we can still accomplish a lot.)

MaggiePoo on August 10, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Mitt Romney: In Your Heart, You Know He’s A Loser

The leading candidate for the party’s nomination is a caricature of everything voters are sick and tired of: he’s a phony, a spoiled rich guy, an automaton whose words and actions convey, above all, an almost comical impression of inauthenticity.
[...]
Romney isn’t so much a serious candidate for the presidency as he is a national joke: his record as a “flip-flopper,” his inability to project anything remotely resembling sincerity, and his Richie Rich persona have all combined to turn him into a human piñata for both liberals and conservatives to pick apart. Which leads us back to the question I asked at the beginning: is the GOP deliberately throwing this election?

Obama will win. It’s for the best anyway. It’s going to get ugly, and the Amerikan people will blame whichever TEAM is in the WH.

Forget about Romney. Concentrate on ousting establishment career politicians (on both sides of the aisle) who got us into this fine mess, and help elect actual conservatives to Congress.

Rae on August 10, 2012 at 4:06 PM

This should be an “easy” win … a walk in the park for any COMPETENT REPUBLICAN nominee.

But then – Willard is not competent…

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Mitt was the “most electable” only in terms of all the other candidates, mostly marginal almost comical “book tour” candidates that were elevated because of the debate-centered primary (reform the system for 2016 to keep the book tourers out, and get serious candidates only).
Without going into details, though we’ve heard it before, Mitt had a horrible win-loss record in politics. Well I’ll note just 1 race that gives the dismal picture of a Mitt that has real trouble winning: it was the ’08 primary in FL against McCain. Despite Mitt having a -huge- financial advantage, and going up against an arguably doddering war-mongering McCain, Mitt lost.
We are in a bind with our less than exemplary candidate in terms of his ability to win elections. We need to help him. And if there is one thing that can help, it is a fundamental change in the wrong-headed philosophy of the campaign. CLEARLY Mitt is following the faulty but generally still revered “median voter theory” on how to conduct a campaign: hence the “etch a sketch” comment, Chickfila evasion, and Mitt’s running away from the immigration issue. Instead, to win Mitt must appeal to the base and independents with an unquestioning forceful embrace of conservative principles; he must, as Krauthammer says, “show some ideology.” Mitt needs something to stand on: the R base. He can’t stand on “the middle” because the middle does not exist. Start by walking back the Chickfila debacle: that would be easy to do!

anotherJoe on August 10, 2012 at 4:18 PM

And according to exit polling, Senator Kerry should cruise to an easy victory over President Bush.

/famous last words

Ward Cleaver on August 10, 2012 at 4:25 PM

This should be an “easy” win … a walk in the park for any COMPETENT REPUBLICAN nominee.

But then – Willard is not competent…

HondaV65 on August 10, 2012 at 11:58 AM

He was competent enough to beat the people he was running against…if he was so damn incompetent why is it that one of them did not manage to beat him? And if he was so incompetent why didn’t Sarah Palin have the guts to run against him for the nomination?

You are just a bitter little man..

Today Rasmussen has Romney ahead and Gallup has the two candidates tied..and in the Fox poll, the candidates were tied at 48% among the voters most interested in voting..

So don’t cocky, your hero Obama might not win this thing.

Terrye on August 10, 2012 at 6:39 PM

He will continue to live his fantasy of Palin 2016.

bayview on August 9, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Which is more viable than the fantasy of Mitt 2012. Of course, by 2016 the Mittler Youth will have moved on to pimping the next GOPe mannequin, probably Marco Bush or Jeb Rubio or something.

ddrintn on August 10, 2012 at 7:36 PM

And the Conservative supporters of Sketchy “whistling past the graveyard” continues. Just as usually happens here – if a poll shows Romney leading it’s a true one, if it shows Obama ahead it’s blatantly skewed and false.

independentvoice on August 10, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Real Conservatives don’t support Romney. At best they might hold their noses and vote for him IF there is a chance he might win.

DannoJyd on August 10, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Bullhockey!

notasheeple on August 11, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6