Gallup tracker: Romney expands lead among likely voters, now up by four

posted at 4:41 pm on October 16, 2012 by Allahpundit

Literally no one doubts at this point, I think, that Romney’s post-debate surge is for real and not a bounce, so I’m not giving you these numbers to (re-)prove that point. I’m giving them to you to suggest that The One’s now in enough trouble that another bad performance tonight could be fatal. His margin of error in this campaign was always small, but after the Denver debacle shattered his aura of invincibility and with Romney poised to hit him with an avalanche of ad spending, it’s now basically down to zero. In fact, as I said yesterday, I’m not so sure he controls his own destiny anymore. If Romney handles the inevitable “47 percent” attack well tonight and does a solid job of relating to the questioners — not his strong suit, but he’s spent dozens of hours practicing now — his lead might open further still, even if O has an error-free debate and post-debate. The left’s not quite in panic mode yet, but if Romney shines tonight then it shall indeed be panic time in the West Wing bright and early tomorrow morning.

And you know what that means. Soon we might get to see those Bin Laden death photos after all.

Half of likely voters now prefer Mitt Romney for president and 46% back President Barack Obama in Gallup interviewing through Monday.

While Romney’s four-percentage-point advantage is not statistically significant, he has consistently edged ahead of Obama each of the past several days in Gallup’s seven-day rolling averages conducted entirely after the Oct. 3 presidential debate. Prior to that debate — regarded as a decisive Romney win by political experts and Americans who watched it — Romney averaged less than a one-point lead over Obama among likely voters.

How strong is Romney’s surge? Strong enough to make even his net favorable rating slightly higher than The One’s in RCP’s poll of polls, thus shattering the “likeability gap” that Team O worked so hard to build over the summer. That’s why Obama’s guaranteed to throw plenty of “47 percent” and “war on women” crap at him tonight. Painting Romney as a bad guy is a far more effective way to reach low-information voters than wonking out with him in a battle over economic plans.

Speaking of which, the key data from Gallup. The first two columns show Obama vs. McCain in 2008, the next two show Obama vs. Romney now, and the last two capture O’s advantage or disadvantage over McCain and Romney, respectively:

He’s lost points since 2008 among every single major demographic, but he’s down especially sharply with voters aged 30-49, postgrads, and college grads — essentially, the educated middle class (and upper class) in its prime career years. They didn’t lose as much ground economically from the recession as less educated voters did, if this Pew survey from 2010 is accurate, but it may be that their expectations for an Obama-driven economic turnaround were higher than anyone else’s. It didn’t happen, and now you’re seeing the disappointment of thwarted ambition start to register as a newly viable Romney emerges as a plausible alternative.

One more quote, this time from Mark Halperin, just to help you get your game face on for tonight’s debate:

Here’s why some Democrats are worried tonight. If Romney wins the three Southern battlegrounds (FL, NC, and VA) and OH, he is at 266 electoral votes. Leaving the other five battlegrounds unallocated, that means Obama would be at 237 and Romney would only need to win one of the remaining five states to get to 270+…

One senior Democratic official expressed real concern tonight unlike I have heard before about Ohio potentially slipping away from Obama (the state has been trending Republican in statewide races, Rob Portman has become a force, religious and gun groups are flooding the state with voter contacts, two of Romney’s top strategists have recently won a statewide race there, etc).

Follow the last link to see Halperin’s map with Ohio in Romney’s column. If it plays out this way, Romney would need any one of Wisconsin, Nevada, Iowa, Colorado, or New Hampshire to clinch the presidency — and if you believe ARG, he’s already tied with O in New Hampshire. Via Breitbart TV, here’s Gibbs breaking with the usual pre-debate spin and promising an “exceptionally strong” performance tonight by Obama. And why not? If O doesn’t deliver precisely that, no post-game talking points will save him.


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

Been to many TEA party rallies, have you? Or are you merely engaging in rectal speak?

As usual…

JohnGalt23 on May 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM

As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.

hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?

mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM

MSNBC consensus: Obama’s speech was historic, amazing, “one of the best of his presidency”

Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?

parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM

They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.

They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.

A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.

Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM

MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.

rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Nobel Peace Prize that he totally earned a mere nine months into his presidency? Yeah, that one.

I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.

fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!

And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!

Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM

They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.

They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.

Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM

…bromides about what we’re told are President Foreign Policy’s miraculous yet still oddly unmaterialized abilities to move us drastically closer to world peace.

Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!

KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM

I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.

Do they even know or care that they are morons.

marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM

His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.

DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM

Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:

During his foreign policy speech Thursday afternoon, President Obama warned that domestic terrorism would increase in the modern age of the Internet.

“[T]his threat is not new,” Obama said. “But technology and the Internet increase its frequency and lethality.”

Obama warned Americans that materials on the Internet could influence people to commit terrorist acts.

“Today, a person can consume hateful propaganda, commit themselves to a violent agenda and learn how to kill without leaving their home,” he said.

To combat domestic terrorism, Obama reminded Americans that it was important to reach out to Muslim communities.

“The best way to prevent violent extremism is to work with the Muslim American community — which has consistently rejected terrorism — to identify signs of radicalization and partner with law enforcement when an individual is drifting towards violence,” he said. “And these partnerships can only work when we recognize that Muslims are a fundamental part of the American family.”

You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.

onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM

That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?

onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.

myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Didn’t take you that long to inject the man’s race into this didn’t it? And you wonder why blacks will never accept you tea billies hate the man simply because he’s a black man occupying the “people’s” house.

HotAirLib on May 24, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Nah. I’d detest the little pissant s.o.b. if he was white…or Asian…or any one of the myriad of made-up racial divisions.

Solaratov on May 24, 2013 at 11:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2