New Hampshire: Romney 50, Obama 48

posted at 4:41 pm on October 24, 2012 by Allahpundit

New from Rasmussen, it’s the second poll in as many days showing Romney up two points in NH. Of the last eight polls taken in the state, he leads in four, is tied in two more, trails by a single point in another, and the last is an outlier. (Rasmussen’s last poll of NH, taken eight days ago, had Obama up by a point.) Why should you care about that? Simple: If Ohio doesn’t pan out for Mitt, his lone remaining path to the presidency may well be hitting an exacta with New Hampshire and Wisconsin. If he wins Florida, Virginia, and Colorado, all of which are big but necessary ifs, that’ll put him at 257 in RCP’s electoral vote model. He can then get to 270 either with Ohio (18) or with NH + WI (14). I’m thinking those two states are a bit likelier to turn red than, say, Iowa or Nevada, not only because of the current RCP poll averages but because of the GOP ticket’s regional ties to them. (Romney not only governed the state next door, he has a vacation home in New Hampshire.) Besides, Iowa and Nevada each have only six EVs, so the most they can do for him without winning Wisconsin, New Hampshire, or Ohio is clinch a dreaded 269-269 tie. But then, the odds of Mitt winning IA and NV (or PA or MI) while losing the other three seem astronomical. So Ohio remains Plan A, but Wisconsin and New Hampshire are Plan B. He’s on track, narrowly, in the latter state, but there hasn’t been a new poll of Wisconsin since Sunday. Maybe tomorrow? Until then, this intriguing tidbit will have to do:

Priorities USA is, of course, Obama’s Super PAC. Team O is talking verrrry tough to Mark Halperin (“I was struck by the expression of near certainty that their candidate would be re-elected”), but Josh Kraushaar makes a nice point about the battleground states. One thing they have in common is that they’re not in O’s demographic sweet spot:

The one hole in that argument is their own acknowledgment of where they’re running strongest — the five-state firewall of OH, IA, NH, NV and WI. With the notable exception of NV, these are heavily-white states and skew older. These aren’t the states where their base coalition; it’s where they’re running competitively enough with white voters (particularly working-class women). And implicity, they acknowledge they’re not ahead (they’re tied, presumably) in the states with the highest youth/minority vote combo: VA, NC and CO.

So if the GOTV operation is firing on all cylinders in a state like VA but the race is even, one would imagine he’s struggling with white voters. And in order to win those firewall states, he has to overperform his natl average with those same white voters.

Via John McCormack of the Standard, the early voting totals among O’s base in Virginia are apparently lagging:

Per RCP’s EV projections, if Obama holds on in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, and Nevada, he’s at 249 and needs to find 21 votes between Ohio, Virginia, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Colorado. Virginia has the second-most EVs in that list behind Ohio, so if he loses them both, he’ll have to win all three of the others to clinch. Not impossible, but if the bigger battleground states are tilting away from him, it’d be some trick if he figured out a way to reverse that momentum in the smaller ones and pile up enough of them to eke over the finish line.

Update: Just as I’m writing this, Time is out with a new poll of Ohio showing Obama up by five. However:


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

I think some are getting delusional with Ohio and other states. Romney is not going to win Ohio. I’d love for that not to be the case but it’s the truth. All polls can’t be wrong. Obama is ahead in all of them for a reason.

And while id love to buy into some polling conspiracy, sorry but that’s bogus. I’m sure many said the same thing in 2008, saying the polling was rigged, how’d that turn out?

We need to be a bit more honest with ourselves and realize its going to be a close race but without Ohio, its going to be very difficult to win. Not impossible, but too many things have to go right without Ohio, and I just don’t see us being that lucky. And I never underestimate the amount of dumb people in the country who vote.

bucsox79 on October 24, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Can I borrow your crystal ball sometime? It can’t possibly be the “truth” that Romney isn’t winning OH when the poll average is within the MOE.

Is it difficult terrain for him? Yes, and that polls have stubbornly showed that. But look how it’s trending…Romney has a nominal lead nationally, other states have moved his way, and OH has tightened. I think he has the wind at his back, so it’s certainly possible he takes the state. Lucky for him, though, he has other routes to 270…WI is also very close, and he seems to have a tiny lead in NH. If he grabs those two (as well as CO, VA, and FL), he doesn’t need OH.

changer1701 on October 24, 2012 at 8:48 PM

That the Times would publish a piece on October 24 that takes as its starting point the very real possibility that the president will lose, and that blame for that loss needs to be allocated, is astonishing enough. But that their nominee for scapegoat is the man who is almost certainly the most popular living Democrat is the sort of thing that is not only shocking, but might be regarded as a foretaste of the coming battle to control the party in 2016.

Good luck with that Obama and Obama Firsters. Lesser mortals have taken on the Clintons in an attempt to rewrite history. They’ve almost always won and don’t for one second think that Bill & Hillary won’t dump ALL of the goodies on Obama’s deceit and/or incompetence over Benghazi. There is not one doubt in my mind that Hillary has copies of the cables and everything else. I believe that she will be able to prove that it was the WH that refused to increase security and the WH that declined to move on Benghazi when there was a chance to save some of our people. She asked for clearance from the Libyan government and it was granted. Why didn’t we move then?

Also, I bet Hillary knows how the Syrian rebels came to possess American-made stinger missiles.

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 8:48 PM

Can anyone tell me where a pollster gets its phone numbers from.

if they are polling what turns out to be mostly urban areas they will get more democrats.

I think

gerrym51 on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

They can look a lot of it up for free, but Buy a lot of the info.

Del Dolemonte on October 24, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 8:43 PM

We’re the Men in the Wilderness.

What sucks, is after it goes down, everyone will be jumping on baord about they “always knew”.

People have to realize Obama overperformed in ’08. That’s not the same as outperforming.

Outperforming is when you have a range, expect the middle, and hit the high mark.

Overperforming is when you hit beyond that high mark.

Something crazy-dramatic will have to occur on election day for Barry to win OH. Like every single college student voting for him.

Because the absentee-voter/turtle theory is not holding.

budfox on October 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM

jimver on October 24, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Speaking of which, whatever happened to the uppereastbasement?

riddick on October 24, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Atomic Bomb Jobs Report?

Del Dolemonte on October 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM

if they are polling what turns out to be mostly urban areas they will get more democrats.

I think

gerrym51 on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Yep. If you hit the three main codes in Ohio, you’re deep in Dem land.

budfox on October 24, 2012 at 8:51 PM

I think some are getting delusional with Ohio and other states. Romney is not going to win Ohio. I’d love for that not to be the case but it’s the truth. All polls can’t be wrong. Obama is ahead in all of them for a reason.

bucsox79

If all the polls are using bogus democrat turnout projections(and many are), they absolutely can all be wrong.

The reality is it’s going to be close in Ohio, and polls using turnout projections based in reality show that. It could go either way at this point. That’s a scary thought, because without Ohio, Romney will likely lose. If that happens, America as we know it is officially finished.

xblade on October 24, 2012 at 8:52 PM

bucsox79 on October 24, 2012 at 8:36 PM

I’d rather read Gumby than this. So in your “I wont Romney to win, but it won’t happen” world, a cheating D+9 plus add early votes to get Obama plus 5, and ties in other polls of D+3 mean Obama will win? So tie means a win for the incumbent 2 weeks out? Talk about low information voters….

oldroy on October 24, 2012 at 8:54 PM

bucsox79 on October 24, 2012 at 8:45 PM

Relax. All of the early voting in Ohio causes polls to skew towards the Democrats – because more Dems tend to vote early. If somebody has already voted, they automatically pass a likely voter screen, which skews polls towards the Dems.

But if you look at actual early voting numbers and absentee ballot requests, Dems are lagging far behind where they were in 2008. Romney has all the momentum in Ohio – and we will win it with turnout on November 6th.

TarheelBen on October 24, 2012 at 8:55 PM

All polls can’t be wrong. Obama is ahead in all of them for a reason.

bucsox79 on October 24, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Obama is NOT ahead in all of them.

He’s tied in 3, including PPP, which is a Democratic poll.

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 8:56 PM

New shift of “I’m really rooting for Romney but it won’t happen” just got started?

oldroy on October 24, 2012 at 8:56 PM

:) dang, I should have known :)…

jimver

I’ll try to include a sarc tag next time. Gumby knew what I was talking about though. :)

xblade on October 24, 2012 at 8:57 PM

bucsox79 on October 24, 2012 at 8:36 PM

gumby?

Del Dolemonte on October 24, 2012 at 8:58 PM

jimver on October 24, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Speaking of which, whatever happened to the uppereastbasement?

riddick on October 24, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Got fumed :)…all kind of disgusting microorganisms and germs were accummulating in there :)…I think it self-banned first, then came back like any self-respecting troll, then was banned, then made a short come back in the green room I think, and then…dunno, probably came back again reincarnated as gumbey, or typhoidfestra or one of them :)…they have multiple lives/avatars, you know, these ones :)…and a prolific karma I might ad :)..

jimver on October 24, 2012 at 8:58 PM

gumby?

Del Dolemonte on October 24, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Nope, just another fern. They have been showing up like cockroaches in a New York restaurant.

cozmo on October 24, 2012 at 9:01 PM

budfox on October 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Dude step off the ledge. In 2008, RCP average for IN was 1.5% for McCain. Obama won it. It was 0.5% for McCain in NC. Obama won it.

Don’t be surprised if more polls show this as a tie. Polls that don’t have idiotic DRI models will.

wargamer6 on October 24, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Could you do an IP check on addresses and find which IPs match which members Ed? While I don’t agree with banning anyone just for disagreeing or supporting other sides or views, there should be a “no multiple logins from same IP” policy, and it should get you banned for life.

oldroy on October 24, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Is This Why Obama Wanted that Des Moines Register Interview Off the Record?

Recall that in the third debate, President Obama claimed that he did not come up with the sequesters and that “it will not happen.” It has already been reported that his administration did come up with the sequester. Now, in that Des Moines Register interview that was briefly off the record, he touts the sequester as a means by which he will achieve spending cuts.

OBAMA: “So when you combine the Bush tax cuts expiring, the sequester in place, the commitment of both myself and my opponent — at least Governor Romney claims that he wants to reduce the deficit — but we’re going to be in a position where I believe in the first six months we are going to solve that big piece of business.” [emphasis added]

He made this statement the day after he said that the sequester “will not happen,” while he was mocking his own defense secretary’s warning that the cuts would dangerously shrink the military. Is this what the president has taken to calling “Romnesia?” Or just plain old dishonesty?

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Can anyone tell me where a pollster gets its phone numbers from.

if they are polling what turns out to be mostly urban areas they will get more democrats.

I think

gerrym51 on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Buy them form data mining pros…I would definitely think they are mostly urban population….

jimver on October 24, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Seriously though did anyone see how Time included the reported 30% claimed to have voted already and of those it was 60-30 Obama? Seems they mixed that and their other results to come up with the +5 Obama.

ROFLMAO uh huh……

Check actual early voting in Ohio here:
2012 vs. 2008 Ohio Absentee/early Ballot spread sheet.

Ronaldusmax on October 24, 2012 at 7:37 PM

That is why this poll is garbage and many other polls similar to it. Not only they insanely over sampled democrats by 9 points but also because of these very ridiculous and totally unrealistic numbers of people who claimed that they have voted and that Obama is winning them by 30 points… According to the Ohio absentee ballot requests, democrats are down 130,000 in this category in 2012 compared to 2008… More than half of the absentee ballots requests are coming from independents and Romney is winning independents in Ohio by an average of 8 points even in the most biased polls… So how can Obama be winning early voters by 30 points when the same stupid poll is showing that Obama is losing them by 8 points to Romney… The answer for that is very simple almost 75% of those who are selected in the polls as early voters in Ohio are democrats and the Republicans and Independents in this poll category are no more than 25%… Also those who actually have voted are less than 15% of the total voters in Ohio… Another reason why these polls should be thrown in the trash…

mnjg on October 24, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Something crazy-dramatic will have to occur on election day for Barry to win OH. Like every single college student voting for him.

Because the absentee-voter/turtle theory is not holding.

budfox on October 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM

I agree and it is not going to happen… Obama is going to lose Ohio by 2 to 3 points… The math is simply against him… According to my calculations if only 3% of Obama voters from 2008 in Ohio stay home in 2012 combined with only 7% of Obama “White Voters” from 2008 in Ohio switch to Romney in 2012 then Obama is certain to lose Ohio…

I am certain that at least 3% of 3% of Obama voters from 2008 in Ohio will stay home in 2012 and at least 7% of Obama “White Voters” from 2008 in Ohio will switch to Romney in 2012 and hence I am certain that Obama is going to lose Ohio…

Add to that even in the most biased polls Romney is winning the independents in Ohio by an average of 8 points… There is no way Romney would lose Ohio if he wins independents by 8 points…

mnjg on October 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM

All polls can’t be wrong. Obama is ahead in all of them for a reason.

bucsox79 on October 24, 2012 at 8:36 PM

He is not ahead of all of them in Ohio in fact he is tied in most of them and only outside the margin of error in couple of them but for certain all Ohio polls except one (Rasmussen) are insanely over sampling democrats in Ohio much more than there actual numbers in the real vote…

mnjg on October 24, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Salon: Can Obama hold on in Ohio?

“To do so, he’ll have to win over Lake County, which has been besieged by ads and campaign canvassers for months…”

2008 Lake County final vote tallies:

Obama: 60,155 – 49.58%

McCain: 59,142 – 48.74%

Differential: 0.84%

Lake County:

2008:

Absentee ballots requested: 51,266

AB returned: 17,618 (34.4%)

Democrats returned: 7,343 (41.7%)

Republicans returned: 10,275 (58.3%)

In 2008, 14% of Democrats returned their ballots, as a percentage of the absentee ballots requested. 20% of Republicans did.

2012:

Absentee ballots requested: 35,897

AB returned: 14,341 (40%)

Democrats returned: 6,097 (42.5%)

Republicans returned: 8,244 (57.5%)

In 2012 so far, 17% of Democrats have returned their ballots, as a percentage of the absentee ballots requested. 23% of Republicans have.

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 9:37 PM

I would rather look at the total absentee ballots request in Ohio… So far in 2012 the democrats are down by 135,000 absentees ballots compared to 2008 and in 2012 Republicans are down by only 20,000 in this category compared to 2012… With this rate of absentee ballots request the democrats would have a net lose of 90,000 absentee ballots in 2012 compared to 2012… In other word just in absentee ballot they would be down by 20% in 2012 compared to 2008… If you use similar loss ratio or even half of this loss ratio of democrat votes for the overall votes then Obama is certain to lose Ohio…

mnjg on October 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I would rather look at the total absentee ballots request in Ohio… So far in 2012 the democrats are down by 135,000 absentees ballots compared to 2008 and in 2012 Republicans are down by only 20,000 in this category compared to 2012… With this rate of absentee ballots request the democrats would have a net lose of 90,000 absentee ballots in 2012 compared to 2012… In other word just in absentee ballot they would be down by 20% in 2012 compared to 2008… If you use similar loss ratio or even half of this loss ratio of democrat votes for the overall votes then Obama is certain to lose Ohio…

mnjg on October 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I’m not sure either measure is real. Absentee used to be for, well, voters that weren’t around on election day. Then it became just for convenience. Now there are two choices for convenience voting. I don’t think anything at all can be gleaned whether Romney or Obama from either number as they are so very different from what they were in the past.

The only interesting thing will be to see home many “Time MagRag” type polls lump “already voteds” into their polls.

I thought our Constitution said we were supposed to all vote on election day….

oldroy on October 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Slightly OT, but in the last week, driving through DE, NJ and PA, essentially all the Obama signs and bumper stickers have disappeared and Romney/Ryan ones have taken their place. Even in Delaware. Commercial signs and hand made signs. (My favorite-Obama’s economy sucks.)I’m not saying Romney will win Delaware, but the only Obama logo I’ve seen in the last week was on the T-shirt of a woman who could have been the Obama phone woman. It has been a significant change in just the last week or so. Very impressive. It certainly looks like Romney can get PA based on what I’m seeing in southeastern PA.

talkingpoints on October 24, 2012 at 10:07 PM

I’m in Texas. We’re just Cruzing….

KCB on October 24, 2012 at 5:25 PM

I just saw the first Sadler sign today. I probably won’t see another one all year!

jazzuscounty on October 24, 2012 at 10:18 PM

They’ve almost always won and don’t for one second think that Bill & Hillary won’t dump ALL of the goodies on Obama’s deceit and/or incompetence over Benghazi.

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 8:48 PM

You lost me there.

Copies of cables to HER department? The attack was taking place as HER department people were watching? While HER department head in chrage of security for HER employees was watching and did nothing?

I will rephrase that last one. While SHE WAS NOTIFIED by HER department employees and decided to do NOTHING. I would actually bet money he was not only notified but watched as well, but so far there is no proof as HER department people were talked into taking blame.

She is done. No way in hell either of these two communist cancer sores are coming back into politics. And Chelsea is beynf stupid if NBC dumped her after 2 months, so just as Kennedy cancer I think we are rid of Clinton cancer now.

riddick on October 24, 2012 at 10:19 PM

I

would rather look at the total absentee ballots request in Ohio… So far in 2012 the democrats are down by

I thought our Constitution said we were supposed to all vote on election day….

oldroy on October 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

This early voting thing is a sham and opens the gates to wide-spread fraud, roght up the Dims alley. Only a handful of European countries allow it, France abandoned early voting (by post) long time ago. Germany, Switzerland and Netherlands still allow it, but then they have there probaly the most correct citizens on the planet, hardly imaginable/unconceivable that they woud rig the vote there :) In the UK absentee voting is allowed too, but it’s just that they had a tiny little vote rigging scandal there not long ago, in Birmingham local elections I think, and they aren’t too kin on the idea of postal voting anymore. Oh, yeah, and Ireland, but it’s restricted to certain categories of citizens only…

jimver on October 24, 2012 at 10:24 PM

The majority of early voters are African Americans and Hispanics and thus Dems by definition. They do that so they can vote again on Nov 6. These early voters are all part of the 47% and are in sheer panic mode because they are afraid Romney, if elected, might just tell them to look harder for jobs.

Birdseye on October 24, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Ohio, By The Numbers

M2RB: Van Halen

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 10:51 PM

For those questioning what Resist, mnjg and I are saying about the Barry strtegy, Byron York lays it out straight from Jim Messina’s mouth.

washingtonexaminer.com/obama-in-ohio-magic-gone-the-president-grinds-it-out/article/2511690?custom_click=rss&utm_campaign=Weekly+Standard+Story+Box&utm_source=weeklystandard.com&utm_medium=referral#.UIinYFGOJws

Messina is particularly focused on what are called low-propensity or sporadic voters — that is, voters who can’t be relied on to show up at the polls regularly, who might or might not make it to vote on Election Day. If Obama can bank their votes early, he won’t have to worry about them on November 6. “Sporadic voters matter,” Messina explained. “It can’t just be about getting your traditional Democrats to vote early. If that were the case, then we’d be wasting our time and money. This is about increasing the overall share of people who may be drop-off voters…”

So far, there are indications the Obama/Messina plan is making progress. In the latest Rasmussen poll, released Wednesday, which showed the race in Ohio locked in a 48-48 tie, Obama led among early voters by ten percentage points. The problem is, that’s less of a lead than Obama had among early voters in 2008. So now, the president is frantically pursuing all those sporadic voters out there, begging them to cast a ballot early.

It goes on and on….

As Rush said last November, Team Barry gave up on adult white males and have been trying to find a way to replace them since. They settled on women and minorities and college students.

As someone pointed out here or on Twitter, is whereever Barry shows in OH, the early voting has surged for the Republicans.

While that sounds funny, we actually have a history of that occurring:

Scott Brown, Chris Christie and Bob McDonald.

budfox on October 24, 2012 at 10:55 PM

would rather look at the total absentee ballots request in Ohio… So far in 2012 the democrats are down by

I thought our Constitution said we were supposed to all vote on election day….

oldroy on October 24, 2012 at 9:59 PM

With the exception of military, there should be no early voting. Period. Any excuse is based on fraud.

riddick on October 24, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Resist – Nice breakdown.

I’m hoping the implosion of two of those counties holds through next week. That will guarantee the end.

budfox on October 24, 2012 at 11:01 PM

All Reet, 500+ posts on our “tiny” state of New Hampshire! Let’s push it over a thou!

Brick-a-Baracka, Firecracker, Sis-Boom-Bah….

Del Dolemonte on October 24, 2012 at 11:11 PM

riddick on October 24, 2012 at 10:19 PM

I have been told that it was the White House’s decision not to beef up security. Further, I have been told that she asked for permission to use Libya’s airspace and it was granted. It was the WH that decided not to go, which is why Jay Carney refused to answer the question today. It doesn’t look good to say that you had a chance to do something and didn’t.

Why do you think Hillary went before the cameras and took the fall? It made her look big…”The buck stops with me.” Now, all she has to do is let the docs come out proving that she was overruled and she’s golden. Bill has already had his team go over this.

Resist We Much on October 24, 2012 at 11:12 PM

NumbersMuncher ‏@NumbersMuncher
PPP national tracking has Obama up 1, 49-48 (tied yesterday). Sample moved from D+4 to D+5. Romney up 2 w/ indys. 2 days post debate.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite

gumbyandpokey on October 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM

D+9 in Ohio??..

Nope. Not possible. That is some serious wishful thinking.

Al Hall on October 25, 2012 at 5:26 AM

Time to pour some cold water on your dreams, folks.

Let’s look at the latest state polls over at Pollster.com since approx. mid-October to see if the “Romney surge” is for real.

1) Romney is undoubtedly surging in NC (although one of the most recent four polls is an outlier predicting he isn’t in the lead).

2) Romney has PROBABLY gained in Florida as well, although it is worth noting that Obama still is in the lead in 4 out of 10 polls. Overall, Romney is probably in the lead but not by much according to the majority of pollsters. If Romney loses FL, he is doomed.

3) Rasmussen thinks Obama is narrowly trailing in CO, VA and NH. Other pollsters disagree. In the most recent polls, Obama is tied or winning 4 times out of six in Colorado, 6 times out of 10 in Virginia and 3 times out of 6 in New Hampshire. So these are toss-ups but NO pollster has detected a Romney surge here since the second debate. Not even Rasmussen. Yet Romney probably has to win all three states.

4) In IA, Obama is tied or winning in 5 recent polls out of 6. In WI it’s 7 out of 7, In OH it’s 10 out of 10, in WI it’s 7 out of 7.
And Romney hasn’t lead in a state poll in Michigan or Pennsylvania.

The bottom line: Obama is currently winning even if Rasmussen is your baseline. Apart from NC and FL there has been no movement towards Romney in Rasmussen’s polls since Oct.10 (and not in other polls for that matter). And Rasmussen probably represents an unrealistic best-case scenario for Republicans: Ras underestimated the Democratic share of the vote both in 2008 and 2010. In 2008, Rasmussen predicted McCain would win IN, NC, FL and that OH was a pure toss-up. Obama won all four states and gained 2-3% more votes in every state than predicted by the final Rasmussen state poll.

You guys badly need an “October surprise” if you want to win this thing.

MARCU$

mlindroo on October 25, 2012 at 9:32 AM

NumbersMuncher ‏@NumbersMuncher
PPP national tracking has Obama up 1, 49-48 (tied yesterday). Sample moved from D+4 to D+5. Romney up 2 w/ indys. 2 days post debate.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite

gumbyandpokey on October 24, 2012 at 11:17 PM

As always, take away the PPP bias (which, lets be real, even the D+5 is probably a lie), and PPP is telling you the same thing as Rasmussen and Gallup, Romney is up by 3-4.

milcus on October 25, 2012 at 10:11 AM

A lot of former MA voters who voted with their feet for no income taxes, and lower cost of living, many who lived/worked in MA when Romney restructured the state government live in NH, not in MA. Don’t look for them here in MA, even Fidelity has opted for NH these days.

When people can’t take it any longer, they flee over the border.

MA has about 12% Republican registration.

It looks like the Duval Patrick/Warrenites will be away from their government jobs on election day insuring that their voters get to the polls, but you know Duval himself, Mini Me, Axelrods first experiment, only got 47% of the vote for gov in 2010.

Fleuries on October 25, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Slow and steady wins the race!

scalleywag on October 25, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6