Democrats biggest losers since 2008 in swing states?

posted at 10:01 am on November 2, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

According to a new study by the liberal group Third Way, pollster assumptions in the swing states may be very, very wrong.  While many pollsters — like CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac and PPP, just to name two — assume that the electorate model for Tuesday will be similar to 2008, the Third Way study on partisan registration in eight states shows something very, very different.  In each of these states, Democratic registration has trailed that of independents and Republicans by significant amounts — and in six of the eight states, Democratic registration has declined, sometimes dramatically (via Politico’s Morning Report):

In total, since 2008 in these 8 states:

  • Independent registration has increased 969,589, or 14.4%, and now stands at 7,697,565;
  • Republican registration has increased by 158,037, or 1.3%, and now stands at 12,047,112; and,
  • Democratic registration has decreased by 372,827, or 2.5%, and now stands at 14,723,535.

Democratic registration was down over 800,000 in our August voter registration report. Since then, Democrats have added 427,502 to the voter rolls just in these 8 states.

In 6 states—Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania—Independent registration has grown faster than either Democratic or Republican registration. In Iowa, Republicans gained while Democrats and, to a lesser extent, Independents fell. In New Hampshire, voter registration fell across the board, but Republicans shed the fewest voters. And in 5 states—Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, and North Carolina—Independent registration increased by double digits, the largest a gain of 25.2% in Colorado and the smallest 19.5% in Nevada.

Their chart shows the problem for Democrats in stark relief:

Recall that the response to the fact that Romney has consistently led nationally among independents (although not always in each state) has been that independents are proto-Republicans that shed their party identification.  At least in these swing states, that appears to be more true of Democrats rather than Republicans.  Overall, Republican identification has slightly increased, while Democratic identification has declined over the last four years.  That corroborates Gallup findings that Republican and Democratic identification has equalized in the population.

This chart shows the folly of assuming that the 2012 electorate will look like 2008′s, especially in these swing states.  And I suspect that this same dynamic has taken place in most of the other 42 states, too.  If Romney’s winning independents and Republican registration has gained a net 3.8% over Democrats in the last four years, that looks dispositive.

Update: Babalublog has more on Florida’s numbers.


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

This chart shows the folly of assuming that the 2012 electorate will look like 2008′s, especially in these swing states.

Are you sayin’ that my bomber jacket ain’t got no coattails?
/BHO

ted c on November 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

I wish I had two TV sets for Tuesday night. So I could watch Fox News on one, and the MSDNC trainwreck on the other.

Instead I’ll have to switch back and forth.

aunursa on November 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Consequence of voting for the Biggest Loser.

hillsoftx on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Time to put Bronco Bama’s presidency out to pasture.

gatsbysgirlontheside on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

This chart shows the folly of assuming that the 2012 electorate will look like 2008′s, especially in these swing states. And I suspect that this same dynamic has taken place in most of the other 42 states, too. If Romney’s winning independents and Republican registration has gained a net 3.8% over Democrats in the last four years, that looks dispositive.

But…but…but Obama’s jacket and Chris Christie’s drool and Rasmussen.

/

Doughboy on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Could this be the first troll free thread of the day?

high hopes…high hopes!

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Virginia doesn’t register voters by parties but I can tell you that if the rat-eared wonder thinks that he is going to have the same results as 2008 he will be sorely disappointed.

Happy Nomad on November 2, 2012 at 10:07 AM

I have learned so much about poll sampling, etc. from the folks at HA. It has really helped me to keep from jumping off a building and also to explain to my peeps how this works. What we see and hear on TV, even on Fox, is so misleading until you look at sampling. This is one article that REALLY makes me feel good about our chances of removing the slime that is the present administration. Thanks to all.

HomeoftheBrave on November 2, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Could this be the first troll free thread of the day?

high hopes…high hopes!

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

The only troll-free threads involve Benghazi. For some reason, the trolls don’t want to talk about that.

Happy Nomad on November 2, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Interesting that OH isn’t in that report?

TXUS on November 2, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Gumby to post here after he returns from dumpster diving..

Electrongod on November 2, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Trolls don’t want to see this evidence of the shrinking Democrat voter base. But you could see this happening since 2008. In the Age of Obama, there are no moderates or conservatives left in the Democrat party.

TarheelBen on November 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Interesting that OH isn’t in that report?

TXUS on November 2, 2012 at 10:09 AM

They want to hide all real data about Ohio. Everything I am hearing on the ground here in Ohio flies in the face of what is being reported. It is all lies.

nitzsche on November 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

My guess is that the dramatic increase in registered independents are:

-Republicans disgruntled by the party’s shift to the left under Michael Steele

-Teapartiers

-Blue dog or moderate dem’s

None of which will cast a vote for O.

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Isn’t an independent just a former Democrat or a former RINO?

albill on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Gumby to post here after he returns from dumpster diving..

Electrongod on November 2, 2012 at 10:10 AM

And the funny thing about that is it just a normal Friday for the Gumbster and not hurricane-related.

Happy Nomad on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

They want to hide all real data about Ohio. Everything I am hearing on the ground here in Ohio flies in the face of what is being reported. It is all lies.

nitzsche on November 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Are you saying that the OH registration numbers would be just as bad for the Ds or perhaps worse?

TXUS on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Anybody know why New Hampshire’s total registration seems to have dropped around 15%???

BuzzCrutcher on November 2, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Could this be the first troll free thread of the day?

high hopes…high hopes!

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

An idiot like you is a troll magnet.

thuja on November 2, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Trolls don’t want to see this evidence of the shrinking Democrat voter base. But you could see this happening since 2008. In the Age of Obama, there are no moderates or conservatives left in the Democrat party.

TarheelBen on November 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

In 2008, the Dems were claiming that they would be the party in power for the next 40 years. In 2012, they are scrambling to even have some influence. My how the arrogant have fallen!

Happy Nomad on November 2, 2012 at 10:17 AM

In New Hampshire, voter registration fell across the board, but Republicans shed the fewest voters.

Told ya. heh.

Thanks for writing and posting this, Ed. Is there any data on Maine?

I will wager you will see a similar trend….

dogsoldier on November 2, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Nope, doesn’t matter. Dems got this with their 2008 turnout repeating. Just saw that apparently Romney is going to win the crossover battle and indies by 14 points but end narrowly ahead nationally and also win the crossover battler and indies by 6 in Ohio and lose. No way Romney wins with Dems so motivated and turning out in a historic tsunami again.

/sarc

Interesting that OH isn’t in that report?

TXUS on November 2, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Ohio doesn’t keep track of partisan registration and even if it did the registered votgers list here was recently cleaned eliminating 500k nonvoters. Every party would show large declines in that case.

jarodea on November 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

http://www.redstate.com/2012/10/31/on-polling-models-skewed-unskewed/
Along these same lines please read Dan Mclaughlin’s article on polling and how many of the media polls are skewed.

Ta111 on November 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Las Vegas Review Journal Endorses Romney and Pens One of the Most Scathing Denunciations of President Barack Obama EVER:

BENGHAZI BLUNDER: OBAMA UNWORTHY COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF

M2RB: Black Hawk Down Soundtrack- Leave No Man Behind

We’ll see if OldRoyilocks finds this to be:

A “too longy” bowl of porridge or a “too linky” bowl of porridge or, perhaps, he’ll find it “Just right!

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Are you saying that the OH registration numbers would be just as bad for the Ds or perhaps worse?

TXUS on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Not sure of the exact numbers, but HA had a thread on the OH registration changes that showed a net change of 200K (D- and R+) registered voters.

Anyone have the early voting tally for OH?

Turtle317 on November 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

An idiot like you is a troll magnet.

thuja on November 2, 2012 at 10:16 AM

I guess you just proved yourself correct.

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Gumby to post here after he returns from dumpster diving..

Electrongod on November 2, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Let’s not be negative about dumpster diving. At least people are putting real effort into obtaining stuff. Gumby certainly isn’t putting effort into what he says.

thuja on November 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM

They want to hide all real data about Ohio. Everything I am hearing on the ground here in Ohio flies in the face of what is being reported. It is all lies.

nitzsche on November 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Either that or the data doesn’t exist since Ohio doesn’t keep track of partisan affiliation of registered voters.

That’s why polls or various kinds of wizardy comparing McCain or Bush counties to Obama or Kerry counties and comparing partisan turnout in primaries (which is recorded) have to be used when figuring out what is going on in Ohio with early voting.

jarodea on November 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM

One could also interpret the rise in independents as an indication of disdain of both parties as possibly reflected in the basement level approval ratings for congress. Or a more hopeful interpretation is that it gives former democrats cover for not voting for Barack. Fingers crossed that the latter is true.

natasha333 on November 2, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Regardless, Obama will still win.

hatecraft on November 2, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Regarding Ohio, as a resident and somewhat knowledgeable about our politics, it is true that we purged over 400,000 names from the registered voter rolls. The interesting thing is that about half of that comes out of Cuyahoga county, the liberal bastion of Ohio. This is very bad new for obama as his base of voters has essentially shrunk. Add to that the increased intensity here of Republicans and if Mitt is up with Indies, he wins-period.

Ta111 on November 2, 2012 at 10:26 AM

In sum, there is considerable evidence from both polling of and actual early voting that the political landscape portrayed in a number of state polls showing an Obama lead in swing states doesn’t exist. If that improvement in early voting holds up, Democrats should wonder if those state polls in which they have been investing so much hope are even in the 2012 election ballpark. We’ll find out next week.

Jennifer Rubin – WaPo 11/1/2012

Turtle317 on November 2, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Told ya. heh.

Thanks for writing and posting this, Ed. Is there any data on Maine?

I will wager you will see a similar trend….

dogsoldier on November 2, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Doesn’t Romney have a good shot at that one district in Maine with its single EV? That won’t amount to anything other than padding of course.

Doughboy on November 2, 2012 at 10:28 AM

They want to hide all real data about Ohio. Everything I am hearing on the ground here in Ohio flies in the face of what is being reported. It is all lies.
nitzsche on November 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

What part of Ohio are you? My observations from the I-70/I-77 area of SE OH are the same as yours, but my worry has always been where you get out of oil/gas/coal country and into the Toledo area. Up until 2 weeks ago, I felt very confident; Romney signs outnumbered Obama 15:1 in my est. Obama signs were late blooming this election season. Romney signs are still winning about 3:1 now.

Glenn Jericho on November 2, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Ooopsie…even Rasmussen now thinks Romney’s lead in the national polls is gone too:-)

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

As for Mozza’s speculation about party ID trends … we will soon find out, I guess. Different assessments yield different results. Party REGISTRATION and what people tells pollsters are two different things. To me it makes little difference if a Tea Partier regards himself as a Republican or an independent despite the fact he is a registered Republican voter. He won’t vote for Obama in any case.

MARCU$

mlindroo on November 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Romney signs are still winning about 3:1 now.

Glenn Jericho on November 2, 2012 at 10:31 AM

I’m seeing some of this as well. Interesting caveat, though. One Obama sign was placed next to an abandoned building, another was placed at a residence that was on the market, yet the owner wasn’t at home. It makes me think the local Dems here are astroturfing other people’s property here to buoy up their own optimism.

With the road signs, of course, that’s where you see equal numbers of each.

Turtle317 on November 2, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Have you noticed the embarrassingly small “crowds” obama is drawing? Contrast that with the RR ones. No comparison!

Paddington on November 2, 2012 at 10:35 AM

An idiot like you is a troll magnet.

thuja on November 2, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Well, speak of the devil! How are ya little troll?

katy the mean old lady on November 2, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Since you all mentioned the clay figurine. Just thought I’d share this.

Benghazi, LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody cares about Benghazi.

gumbyandpokey on November 2, 2012 at 1:14 AM

Bmore on November 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Their chart shows the problem for Democrats in stark relief

That was a good one..

BTW… if there are anymore undecided folks… they are not going to vote.

antisocial on November 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Gumby to post here after he returns from dumpster diving..

Electrongod on November 2, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Bloomberg, the maitre d’dumpster refused him admittance. He didn’t want to co-mingle trash with recyclables.

DevilsPrinciple on November 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Republicans Have Won Every November 6th Presidential Election Since 1860…

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/30/The-Streak-Republicans-Have-Won-Every-November-6th-Presid

workingclass artist on November 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

This trend has been apparent for months, if not years. Obama is down 11% compared to 2008 in latest Hawaii poll. He’s still going to win Hawaii, but this is just another clear indicator that there has been a massive sea change in opinions concerning Obama. When we look at the national picture an 8% downward trend for Obama means an 8% upward trend for Romney. Which means Romney wins by 7 to 8%.

NotCoach on November 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Gumby to post here after he returns from dumpster diving..

diving in the dumpster behind Obama chicago headquarters.

LOL

gerrym51 on November 2, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Ed, What does your gut tell you about how this election is going to go? I was riding high a few days ago, but it appears that things have moved back towards Obama by just a bit.

This is making me nervous. I will have to start drinking if O is re-elected.

bopbottle on November 2, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Bmore on November 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

I won’t talk to him anymore because of that. I encourage everyone else to stop feeding his black soul.

NotCoach on November 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM

According to a new study by the liberal group Third Way, pollster assumptions in the swing states may be very, very wrong.

New lib talking point:

ZOMG!!! Third Way is RAAAAACIST and funded by the Koch brothers!!!”

crazy_legs on November 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Rasmussen–48&-48%, Romney down 2 from yesterday. Obama now up .3% in the RCP average and has been either tied or ahead in the last 6 or so national polls. Outside of Rasmussen, he has been ahead in all of the real battleground states too (OH, NH, CO, IA, NV, WI). Are the national polls finally reflecting the state polls? Almost in a big state of Eeyorism/panic.

Bravesbill on November 2, 2012 at 10:46 AM

I wish I had two TV sets for Tuesday night. So I could watch Fox News on one, and the MSDNC trainwreck on the other.

Instead I’ll have to switch back and forth.

aunursa on November 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

The Boy King would snarc: Television makers now offer ‘picture-in-picture’ as a feature…

socalcon on November 2, 2012 at 10:47 AM

I like the chart. It looks like Christmas!

29Victor on November 2, 2012 at 10:48 AM

President Obama tied with Romney in today’s Rasmussen Poll … the fatal blow to the Romney has momentum theory …

U2denver on November 2, 2012 at 10:49 AM

I keep telling my DVR to record “The Biggest Loser” and it keeps recording Obama campaign rallies.

weaselyone on November 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

I wish I had two TV sets for Tuesday night. So I could watch Fox News on one, and the MSDNC trainwreck on the other.

Instead I’ll have to switch back and forth.

aunursa on November 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Sweet & sour news. That would be awesome.

29Victor on November 2, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Goodness… Only 2,800 Come Out to See Obama at Ohio Rally

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/goodness-only-2800-come-out-to-see-obama-at-ohio-rally/

Wow Romney going to Pa will be rocking it

Conservative4ev on November 2, 2012 at 10:53 AM

I wish I had two TV sets for Tuesday night. So I could watch Fox News on one, and the MSDNC trainwreck on the other.

Instead I’ll have to switch back and forth.

Trust me, the meltdown on MSNBC is going to be LEGENDARY. It’s going to make their 2010 coverage look fair and balanced.

MSNBC: The place for Schadenfreude!

SaveFarris on November 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Saw on Twitter that Bart Starr is endorsing Romney. Is that a big deal in Wisconsin?

txmomof6 on November 2, 2012 at 11:03 AM

If we use the Third Way registration numbers and back-calculate the 2008 registrations, we get the following percentages:

2008 2012
D: 44.78% 42.72%
R: 35.27% 34.95%
I: 19.96% 22.33%

Even in the “Democrat Wave” election of 2008, Democrats had a 9.5% advantage over Republicans in registration, but only a 7% advantage in TURNOUT according to exit polls. Independents were less than 20% of the registered voters, but nearly 30% of the actual voters.

This year, Democrats still have a 7.8% advantage in registration, but will they turn out for Obama? Or are some of them registered Democrats from the JFK / LBJ days, or “Reagan Democrats” who might vote Romney because they’ve lost their jobs under Obama? After all, West Virginia has far more registered Democrats than Republicans, and repeatedly elects Democrat Senators, but voted Republican for President in 2000, 2004, and 2008.

Also, if the Independent turnout is nearly 30% of the electorate and Romney wins them, Democrat turnout will probably be in the mid-30′s, and a good turnout of the Republican base could overcome a Democrat registration advantage IF the Democrats don’t come to the polls.

Steve Z on November 2, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Judging by the crowds reaction I would say “yes”.

donkichi on November 2, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Anyone have the early voting tally for OH?

Turtle317 on November 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

2012 vs. 2008 Ohio Absentee Ballot requests / early voting

As you can see Democrats are under performing by a lot and Republicans have already beat their 2008 amount.

Ronaldusmax on November 2, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Gravis has Barry up 4 in IA. Really?

Barry 49 Romney 45 but MOE +/- 4
D 41/R 35/I 24 D +6
Among Indies
Romney 43 Barry 38 Romney +5

See you on Tuesday.

bayview on November 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM

I am getting the feeling that the pollsters are heading for a similar debacle to the 1992 UK election. Almost every poll, right up to election day, predicted that Neil Kinnock’s Labour Party were going to win comfortably against John Major’s Conservatives. After all, according to the media and pollsters didn’t everyone hate those nasty Conservatives? Unfortunately for the pollsters, Major actually won comfortably and with the highest ever popular vote for a politcal party in a UK general election. Cue several weeks of hand wringing and soul searching amongst pollsters about how the lumpen polulace failed to turn out the way they had so confidently predicted.
Actually turned out that their sampling was heavily flawed in favour of, you guessed it, the left wing Labour party! Still at least Joe Biden got to steal one of loser Kinnock’s speeches so that’s alright
Sound familiar?

Blindsummit on November 2, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Isn’t an independent just a former Democrat or a former RINO?

albill on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Nope.

My guess is that the dramatic increase in registered independents are:

-Republicans disgruntled by the party’s shift to the left under Michael Steele

-Teapartiers

-Blue dog or moderate dem’s

None of which will cast a vote for O.

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Yep. I was a registered Repub until 2006. Now an official Independent. I’m not silly enough to throw away my vote, though. And could never bring myself to vote Dem. R all the way down ticket.

Al Hall on November 2, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Are you sayin’ that my bomber jacket ain’t got no coattails?
/BHO

ted c on November 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

That’s exactly what I am saying :)

jimver on November 2, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Ohio, By The Numbers (Updated 01.02)

M2RB: Van Halen

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Make that (Updated 11.12)

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Oh my, Rasmussen now has the raced tied. A swing of two points for Obama.

Ric on November 2, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I like the chart. It looks like Christmas!

29Victor on November 2, 2012 at 10:48 AM

All I want for Christmas is a new president.

Jvette on November 2, 2012 at 11:53 AM

I won’t talk to him anymore because of that. I encourage everyone else to stop feeding his black soul.

NotCoach on November 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM

I have never talked with him. Wouldn’t waste one second on that.

Jvette on November 2, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Gravis has Barry up 4 in IA. Really?

Barry 49 Romney 45 but MOE +/- 4
D 41/R 35/I 24 D +6
Among Indies
Romney 43 Barry 38 Romney +5

See you on Tuesday.

bayview on November 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Kerry crushed Bush in some swing states with independents. Didn’t matter for Bush.

Ric on November 2, 2012 at 11:59 AM

diving in the dumpster behind that is Obama chicago headquarters.

LOL

gerrym51 on November 2, 2012 at 10:44 AM

FIFY

eyedoc on November 2, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Electrongod on November 2, 2012 at 10:10 AM

DevilsPrinciple on November 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

We found a picture of Gum-Me last night, he’s the one sleeping:

Gum-Me

slickwillie2001 on November 2, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Doesn’t Romney have a good shot at that one district in Maine with its single EV? That won’t amount to anything other than padding of course.

Doughboy on November 2, 2012 at 10:28 AM

The state flipped red in 2010.

dogsoldier on November 2, 2012 at 12:19 PM

I’ve been trying to tell people this for months. The Democrats are a physically smaller proportion of the electorate in 2012 than in 2008. In order to get a D+7 turnout like 2008, the Democrats would need an even larger percentage of their registered voter turnout than they had in 2008 because they are a smaller portion of the electorate. That is not going to happen.

Obama won the national popular vote in 2008 by 7 points with a D+7 turnout. If you take into account that he has lost more than 7 points of support among every one of his support demographics, Democrats are not fired up in 2012, independent voters are not leaning Obama as they were in 2008, and that the Democrats overall are a smaller proportion of the electorate in 2012, there is no path to victory for Obama in national popular vote.

crosspatch on November 2, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Obama won the national popular vote in 2008 by 7 points with a D+7 turnout. If you take into account that he has lost more than 7 points of support among every one of his support demographics, Democrats are not fired up in 2012, independent voters are not leaning Obama as they were in 2008, and that the Democrats overall are a smaller proportion of the electorate in 2012, there is no path to victory for Obama in national popular vote.

crosspatch on November 2, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Rasmussen, the only poll Republicans seem to trust have Obama tied with Romney right now. Also it has Obama’s approval ratings at exactly 50. Sure the election is going to be closer than it was in 2008. Nobody is disputing that. But right now Obama has the advantage. And I don’t see it changing between now and Tuesday.

Ric on November 2, 2012 at 12:31 PM

When I start seeing other democrat party members in good standing up there on the stage and college campuses, I will not believe 0bama has a chance.

jukin3 on November 2, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Oh my, Rasmussen now has the raced tied. A swing of two points for Obama.

Ric on November 2, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Ric perhaps you noticed that Obama didn’t go UP in support? That is what Obama needs as any incumbent does not want to be under 50 in an Presidential election.

Ronaldusmax on November 2, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM
Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM

I’m not sure why I bothered, but I clicked on your link. I’m from Hamilton County so I decided to scrutinize your numbers for it.

2008 Hamilton County final vote (all) tally:

Obama: 225,213 – 53.14%
McCain: 195,530 – 46.14%
Differential: 7.00%

2008:

Absentee ballots requested: 117,706
AB returned: 40,440 (34.4%)
Democrats returned: 16,763 (41.5%)
Republicans returned: 23,677 (58.5%)

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

2012:

Absentee ballots requested: 111,440
AB returned: 42,941 (35.8%)
Democrats returned: 17,061 (39.7%)
Republicans returned: 25,880 (60.3%)

In 2012, 15% of Democrats have returned their ballots, as a percentage of the absentee ballots requested. Thus far, 23% of Republicans have.

Obama had a 17%-point lead over McCain in 2008. Today, Romney has a 20.6%-point lead over Obama.

I see where you get the 2012 Romney lead of 20.6% (60.3% less 39.7%).

You want to explain where you get the 2008 Obama lead of 17%? According to your underlying information, I’d buy a 2008 McCain lead of 17%.

Sorry, cockroach theory applies: you see one mistake in numbers, it calls into question the accuracy of other numbers. I’ll pass.

BuckeyeSam on November 2, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Oh my, Rasmussen now has the raced tied. A swing of two points for Obama.

Ric on November 2, 2012 at 11:42 AM
Ric perhaps you noticed that Obama didn’t go UP in support? That is what Obama needs as any incumbent does not want to be under 50 in an Presidential election.

Ronaldusmax on November 2, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Obama has been polling ahead in the swing states all of October. For a long time there has been the argument that it was impossible for him to be down nationally by one or two points and be ahead in Oh, Nh, Ia, ect. Now there doesn’t need to be that arguments since in the poll of polls Obama is actually polling ahead now of Romney. So the swing state poll numbers now make sense. Obama is seeing a bump, and probably the last one of the election. He now has the momentum heading into Tuesday, not Romney.

Ric on November 2, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Trust me, the meltdown on MSNBC is going to be LEGENDARY. It’s going to make their 2010 coverage look fair and balanced.

MSNBC: The place for Schadenfreude!

SaveFarris on November 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

I will probably watch Fox and DVR MSNBC… that way I can go back and enjoy the gradual meltdown, with popcorn, while knowing the final result.

dominigan on November 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Isn’t an independent just a former Democrat or a former RINO?

albill on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Actually a lot of them are strong conservatives that got fed up with the RINO establishment in the GOP. Part of the idea is by switching from R to I, you’re reducing the set of people the establishment expects to vote for them, putting more pressure to actually perform instead of give lip service. I not sure how to evaluate the strategy other than to point out how much courting the independent vote has become as part of an election strategy… so maybe it is working…

dominigan on November 2, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Isn’t an independent just a former Democrat or a former RINO?

albill on November 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Actually a lot of them are strong conservatives that got fed up with the RINO establishment in the GOP. Part of the idea is by switching from R to I, you’re reducing the set of people the establishment expects to vote for them, putting more pressure to actually perform instead of give lip service. I not sure how to evaluate the strategy other than to point out how much courting the independent vote has become as part of an election strategy… so maybe it is working…

dominigan on November 2, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Yep.

Al Hall on November 2, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Could this be the first troll free thread of the day?

high hopes…high hopes!

HoustonRight on November 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM
An idiot like you is a troll magnet.

thuja on November 2, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Houston!…you have toilet paper stuck on your a$$!

KOOLAID2 on November 2, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Trust me, the meltdown on MSNBC is going to be LEGENDARY. It’s going to make their 2010 coverage look fair and balanced.

MSNBC: The place for Schadenfreude!

SaveFarris on November 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

I will probably watch Fox and DVR MSNBC… that way I can go back and enjoy the gradual meltdown, with popcorn, while knowing the final result.

dominigan on November 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM

I’ll have to check PBS as well to see Judy Woodruff break down.

slickwillie2001 on November 2, 2012 at 1:24 PM

From the New York Times:


In Shift, Romney Campaign Approaches Pennsylvania With a New Urgency

But there is a tangible sense — seen in Romney yard signs on the expansive lawns of homes in the well-heeled suburbs, and heard in the excited voices of Republican mothers who make phone calls to voters in their spare time — that the race is tilting toward Mr. Romney.

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 1:56 PM

BuckeyeSam on November 2, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Then, by all means, do your own math:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvEOdIaw0fPNdHVOZnFENDdDYVFTRi1UMlgxQ0F4OVE#gid=0

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM

You want to explain where you get the 2008 Obama lead of 17%? According to your underlying information, I’d buy a 2008 McCain lead of 17%.

Sorry, cockroach theory applies: you see one mistake in numbers, it calls into question the accuracy of other numbers. I’ll pass.

BuckeyeSam on November 2, 2012 at 12:38 PM

It was most likely a carryover from the previous entry above. The numbers come for the link that I above gave you.

So, do you know what that means???? You can do you own work!

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 2:08 PM

You want to explain where you get the 2008 Obama lead of 17%? According to your underlying information, I’d buy a 2008 McCain lead of 17%.

2008:

Absentee ballots requested: 117,706
AB returned: 40,440 (34.4%)
Democrats returned: 16,763 (41.5%)
Republicans returned: 23,677 (58.5%)

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

McCain had a 17%-point lead over Obama in 2008. Today, Romney has a 20.6%-point lead over Obama.

It was a mistake. The line “X had a %-point lead over Y in 2008. Today, X has a %-point lead over Y” is new, as of today. Evidently, I carried the line from above and didn’t catch the mistake before I made the changes in percentages. Sorry.

Resist We Much on November 2, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Resist – Ignore it. He wants to bitch, let ‘em.

In what way BS was scrutinizing the numbers, is beyond me.

Early totals show a 50% difference from ’08, with a 10-15% in Cuyahoga, and a 50-75% in other Northeast strongholds, like Akron/Canton. That’s huge, bcause it puts even more pressure on the big Dem counties, who’ve lost voters due to population shift and the voter roll purges.

I’m concerned with what Ken Blackwell pointed out with provision ballots; people asked for absebtee/early and then show up on voting day. Those ballots get put aside for ten days to make sure they’re not double-taps.

If Romney doesn’t win by 250K or more, Team Barry is going to drag this into Thanksgiving.

IMO, that’s the real reason for the map expansion; whether you carry those states or not, build a popular vote count that makes it hard to build a pro-Obama narrative in the media.

In other words, if Romney wins OH by 125K, and Team Barry goes bat-crap crazy pulling voters out of nowhere, Team Mitt wants to poeple able to point to PA or MN and say, “you barely won these states, are we going to recount everywhere until you win”?

budfox on November 2, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Ric – actually ROmney has been leading in the swing state recently as much as not.

Even Ras is using inaccurate early voting screens, and I haven’t been able to figure out why – and of course the Obama polls have been even worse.

As to the Iowa poll – There won’t be a D+6 electorate – no one believes that. Iowa will be close. But based upon early voting info it looks like Obama realizes he isn’t going to get there. I know he is hitting Ohio hard but hadn’t seen many Iowa stops on the schedule.

Zomcon JEM on November 2, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Ronaldusmax on November 2, 2012 at 12:35 PM

> Ric perhaps you noticed that Obama didn’t go UP in support?
> That is what Obama needs as any incumbent does not want to be
> under 50 in an Presidential election.

Gee, look’s like the One is at 50% right now.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

MARCU$

mlindroo on November 2, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Zomcon JEM on November 2, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Oiho concerns me because it has been a swing state for so long that the democratics have a huge well-oiled vote theft machine in place. Remember the Wikileaks on vote theft in Oiho in 2008 (and PA)? McCain decided not to fight.

The spread of early voting gives them more paths to steal votes too. With one day of voting, greedy union members had to get all their multiple county and state votes all done in the same day. With early voting they can leisurely bus them around for days.

slickwillie2001 on November 2, 2012 at 7:31 PM

What’s missing in your otherwise typically excellent analysis, Cap’n, is the continued growth of Floridians who have gone to their eternal reward since 2008. This group unfortunately forms a rather substantial ‘likely voter’ group for Obama.

Any Romney supporters considering not bothering to vote should keep this in mind

;-)

DaMav on November 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM