Election 2012

And Now, Nate Silver to Settle Your Acid Stomach

Yeah, the Pew poll and today's PPP polls look good for Romney, but don't panic!

The most unfavorable numbers for Mr. Romney came in the national tracking polls published by Gallup and Rasmussen Reports. Both showed the race trending slightly toward President Obama, who increased his lead from 3 points to 5 points in the Gallup poll, and pulled into a tie after having trailed by 2 points in the Rasmussen survey.

In both cases, the numbers looked more like pre-debate data than the stronger numbers that Mr. Romney has been receiving since then. On average between the Democratic convention and the debate, the Rasmussen poll showed Mr. Obama with a 0.7-point lead (the Rasmussen poll is Republican-leaning relative to the consensus), while the Gallup poll had Mr. Obama ahead by an average of 3.4 points.

A third national tracking poll, an online tracking poll published by the RAND Corporation, showed essentially no change from Sunday. All of this seemed to be consistent with a story in which Mr. Romney’s debate bounce was receding some. (A fourth tracking poll, from Ipsos, had not been published as of the time we ran our forecast on Monday.)

The swing state polls published on Monday might best be described as being OK for Mr. Obama. He led in polls of Colorado, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Virginia, and in two polls of Michigan.

  • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

    From the beginning, the media outlets all wanted a close horse race and they certainly have created one.
    And by ‘created’, I mean invented a completely fabricated one.
    There is just no way on earth that one single debate could have the the impact these media shills would have us believe.
    They’re selling horseshit for network ratings and column inches. Period.

    • Victor_the_Crab

      Hear, hear! Hear, hear! They are a fucking shameful bunch to their profession. Cronkite and Murrow are rolling in their graves.

    • Lexamich

      If you’d have listened to the corporate media stooges prior to last week’s “debate,” you’d have heard the real reason they’re suddenly pretending The Phony’s surging: they’re afraid that the advertising dollars would dry up. They’re actually saying as much this week if you listen to them as they discuss new commercials for Romney showing up in areas that he supposedly abandoned.

      Not that the corporate media isn’t above fluffing a Republicon out of habit, but it is obvious where loyalties lie when they telegraph themselves so brazenly.

      Remember the whole “47%” debacle was centered around corporate bigwigs giving The Phony money to spend on ads. It’s easy to forget after listening to The Phony himself, but you must remember that the people in attendance at that dreaded cesspool of solopsistic self-aggrandizement and self-pity are influential in unspoken ways. The video put them on blast, too. Willard was just being the phony that he is i.e. doing as the Romans do, and all that. The buzzards espousing utter gibberish for Willard to respond to are the real enemy in that video.

      Did any of those random bigwigs paying exorbitant prices to listen to the empty suit that is Willard sound any different than the random teabagger whining about “Socialism” while gladly accepting Public Assistance?

      Seriously, who is enabling these people to act so goddamn stupid?!

      Answer: the corporate media that they have not only infiltrated, but have fully assimilated into superficial lickspittles that salivate over ad dollars and politicians bickering over stupid shit introduced primarily by Republicons.

  • Lexamich

    See, here’s the situation: the corporate media has it in its mind to temper enthusiasm on our part after The Phony’s RNC was a bust. The DNC was full of promise and the other was full of…you know. This followed many weeks of The Phony flailing away at ANYTHING that appeared worth attacking and looking the fool. The “47%” tape went on to define the bozo, and the media had to acknowledge it because Team Obama would be out there reminding people of the fact that Willard is a fraud that will say ANYTHING to seal a deal.

    As we stand here in the aftermath of a terrible debate in which President Obama meant to relay the accomplishments of his administration while the corporate media asked for a petty tit-for-tat similar to those that composed the GOPrick primary this year, of course The Phony was going to come out AHEAD since he’s an upstart looking to prove himself. This fact gives the duplicitous corporate media the opportunity it needed to switch on a dime like The Phony himself and pretend that 5 to 6 months of bullshitting never caught up to Willard. Yes, in less than a week everything is even again, and Democrats (or Obama supporters generally) need to be worried because…they should be, that’s all.


    I warned some of you last week right after that debate to ignore these fuckers trying to make this race more compelling. Willard the Phony is still bound to lose and there is nothing the corporate media can do about it. You put stock in the polls, that’s on you all. I, for one, observe what the campaigns are doing and how they’re being responded to for my gauge. In the last week I’ve observed individuals on television (including some of our most trusted allies) playing the so-called “concern troll” clearly stating that Willard lied throughout the debate, yet give him points on presentation, as if no one has actually watched their broadcasts and nows that Willard is capable of lying his way through a debate. Where do they think the “he’s a robot, lizardman etc.” meme came from? This is a man that has had his eye on the presidency arguably for the last twenty or so years, and he just got through a fresh round of debates earlier this year, where he pulled off similar performances. Here, the media people think he’d done something brand new, while the rest of us knew damned well he couldn’t help but let the callousness slip through, openly informing the moderator of the debate that he would be fired if he became president. That is what resonates more than some trumped up bullshit about “winning on style,” and if anyone wanted to go there, Willard fucked up there, too, taking the “PBS Defunding” and the “Tax Relief = Tax Cut” semantics.

    There were other lies that were considered by the wider audience whose intelligence the corporate media discounts. Yet it would have us all believe that because Willard dazzled a few media dorks who were searching for excuses to even out the proceedings before the debate even got started (after being cowed by Team Phony and its surrogates – per usual when dealing with Republiscum), and now the race is lost to the incumbent president against an individual no one can explain with clarity why they intend to vote for without regurgitating mumbo-jumbo about the “ruined economy” that they’ve heard someone else say after they themselves heard it somewhere.

    Please, do not allow the corporate media to fool you into thinking The Phony pulled a magic trick. If he had, there’d be ten dead bunnies at his feet, and woman with a broken back, and he’d have lost his nose in the process. In other words, what his campaign resembled prior to the media attempting to make us all forget what came prior to last week when they became fickle and began whining that President Obama let Willard steamroll him. Again, I believe our president is tired of the shenanigans, and it was obvious that Lehrer was letting The Phony define what they’d be debating.

    Don’t believe the hype, listen to the president, and get your asses out to vote. Tell your neighbors, friends, and of course, your families. As Samuel L. Jackson said, this Phony’s declared WAR on us because we’re standing in the way of his ego boost. You know Willard’s not running to help people, which he may or may not do just by being there. His intentions are clear: stay around, wait for something to happen – if it’s good, take full credit, and if it’s bad, blame Democrats. Oh, do nothing to “Obamacare,” wait for it to kick in fully, take credit for it. Cut government programs that actually help people, leave a few around that pay dividends to individuals seeking a profit by bilking the government, and preen like he’s Reagan resurfaced (whatever that means to the individual American).

    Stop this nonsense, and let’s talk up our efforts. We support a man that knows how to speak to us and has good intentions, but has to deal with the reality of corruption and selfishness on all sides, and his own inability to get everything he wants done right away. I’d rather have a man that means to do well than one that does so by accident, then says we aught to revere him for being a opportunist.

    Ehh, I’ve got to go now…

    Nothing left to say but “Obama/Biden 2012.”

    Later, Cescans.

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      damn, Lexaburn……i love it when you get all riled up. :)

      • Lexamich

        Stay away from the corporate media regarding everything but the debates, and even then, simply watch C-Span, as I’ve been doing since the blasted RNC (which I did watch – what little I could catch, anyway).

        Turning the coverage off and on, it is apparent that the punditry has nothing new to add, and it is much more illuminating listening to actual people, as opposed to performers and commentators on the “cable news shows,” on C-Span’s call-in programs.

        That’s my advice to EVERYONE.

        Cut out Ed, Rachel, Larry, and The Scatterbrained Drama Queen (you know who).

        CUT ‘EM OFF!

        You’ll feel better.

        Watch some scary movies or something.

        Go with your gut in terms of the debates, BTW.

        See, last week, I was focused on how Obama appeared to be tired of having to defend his record against a charlatan like Willard. It showed, and some people took offense at his demeanor. It took it to mean that people know where President Obama’s coming from. Notice that within all the commentary about how Willard The Phony “won the debate” they cannot find many clips where Obama actually looked bad or was made the fool. No, they tell us that it was his overall performance that looked poor, or they give hyperbole about how the president should have knocked The Phony’s around for things that have been discussed for weeks to months on end. Meanwhile, leading into the debate, I read and heard commentary about how Willard should have been more open to the public about his plans – more specific. As if he did ANY of that last week. No, he “shook the Etch-A-Sketch” as everyone predicted, and denied shit that everyone knows damned well he said. He perpetrated a massive fraud up their on stage, and all of the sudden the media dorks are showering him with praise as if he hadn’t done the same thing when he was confronted by his fellow Republscum.

        Yes, recall “Blind Trusts” being “a ruse” until he hid behind them. Yes, recall his not saying in at least two televised appearances and at least one written article where he said his “Massachusetts Health Plan” shold be a national model. The SCotUS says “Obamacare” is “constitutional,” and he pivots saying that he only meant the states that would accept the proposal, as if the states need his input on covering or denying their respective populations’ medical care. He ties himself into knots attempting to explain himself, but oh, he bullied his way through a single debate like a guilt-ridden piece of fluff, so he’s leading all the polls now, people, so he’s going to win. More importantly, the corporate media would rather not call out his bullshit post-debate, and the supposed surge gives them ample opportunity not to do so. This will also happen post-Biden/Ryan debate, as well. Recall their reactions after Ryan spoke at the RNC. Some were basically praising him for the lies he delivered with all the earnestness of a teen actor in a CW drama. BULL! SHIT!

        Look out for yourself, Nicky, and don’t trust the punditry.

        Oh, and GOTV, too.


  • bphoon

    (Sigh…) In my humble opinion, closely following specific daily tracking polls to try to determine the likely outcome of the election is much like relying on the daily DJIA numbers to try to determine the future health of the economy. Daily tracking polls necessarily include very small sample populations so therefore have larger error margins and can swing by relatively large amounts depending on events.

    For my money, the RCP national average of polls and Nate Silver’s Five Thirty-Eight show the clearest picture. First, as Nicole says above, Nate’s almost never wrong. And the RCP national average tends to smooth out the outliers. Now, while the RCP national average shows Obama up by only .5%, it shows Obama’s favorables up 6% with a rising trend. The only swing states they show Romney leading are Florida, North Carolina, Colorado and Missouri (out of 12 listed). The only one of these where Romney leads by more than a point is Missouri, where he leads by 5.2%. More importantly, their Electoral College map shows two things: first, when eight “toss-up” states are assigned to a candidate based on RCP’s average of polls, Obama is up 294-244 (with 270 needed to win, of course). When “toss-up” states are taken out of the equation, Obama leads by 251-181 with 106 “toss-up” votes. That means he only needs to win 19 of 106 “toss-up” Electoral College votes to win the presidency. He leads in 4 of 8 “toss-up” states with only one margin within the margin of error. In the four “toss-up”states where Romney leads, only one margin is outside the margin of error. In the other three states where Romney leads, his leads are within a point so those could swing tomorrow. If Obama only wins the “toss-up” states where he leads by more than the margin of error (Ohio, Nevada and Iowa), that gains him 40 electoral votes and gives him the presidency 291-247. RCP shows the InTrade odds of an Obama victory at 62.6-38.1 for.

    Given that, by most observers’ calculations, Romney’s “debate bounce” is starting to fade, I think Obama’s still in a pretty strong position in the Electoral College which is where, after all, presidents are elected.

    On the other hand, I think that since President and Vice-President are the only two truly national offices we vote on, the Electoral College (having outlived it’s purpose) should be eliminated. That way we can do away with all these bullshit state-by-state polls for these offices and we can have an election of real national scope.

  • i_a_c

    A day should never go by without a Hitchhiker’s Guide reference.

    • muselet

      You sass that hoopy Ford Prefect? There’s a frood who really knows where his towel is.


  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Norris/1597765442 Michael Norris

    Thanks…I needed that.

  • Ned F

    From what I’ve been reading, Obama’s support among women has almost evaporated. I don’t understand, but both Kos and Charles Pierce are confirming this. I can’t believe a single debate could cause these poll results.

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      It’s time to stop reading this crap unless you like feeling your blood pressure rise. :)

      Sit back and watch the next debate. I promise you, the president will bring it.

      And, despite popular opinion, I firmly believe that Joe Biden will kick Ryan’s ass.

      We will prevail. We will win.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      This can’t be true…I thought the Pres had a huge lead with women?!

    • http://www.dlancystreet.com reginahny

      I flat out don’t believe it either (not that polls are a “belief system” per se). There is no way that the President’s huge lead with women evaporated because of a muddy debate about taxes. To my dismay, they didn’t even speak about women’s issues for one single moment. Women are more than 50% of the electorate, they didn’t just suddenly say “wow, I love a bullying psychopath who has promised to shut down Planned Parenthood.” Just. don’t. think. so.

      • Victor_the_Crab

        Agreed. Something doesn’t sit right about this.

      • incredulous72

        “There is no way that the President’s huge lead with women evaporated because of a muddy debate about taxes.”

        I believe this is one of the reasons that the polls show a decline in the support of women for Obama; there was no mention of women’s issues in the debate last week.

        Ridiculous I know, but probable judging from all of the emails I’m getting from various women’s groups.

  • Not Sayin

    This is the information I trust about the latest Pew poll:

    National Pew Poll: Romney Leads 49% to 45%
    In a stunning reversal from a month ago, in Pew Research’s poll of likely voters, Mitt Romney now leads President Obama by 4 points. In September, Obama led by 9 points. Other polls have shown that Romney got a bump from the first debate, but most of them showed Obama still holding a narrow lead. The poll was conducted Oct. 4-7, entirely after the debate.

    However, a close look at the internals of the poll turns up something odd. In the October sample, 31% of the respondents self identified as Democrats (vs. 39% in September). Similar, there were 36% Republicans in October (vs. 29% in September). While many people believe Romney “won” the debate, it is extremely unlikely that 21% of the nation’s Democrats changed parties as a result of one debate. So there is a fair chance that the Pew poll is an outlier that undersampled Democrats and oversampled Republicans.

    This is why I LOVE THE VOTEMASTER! http://www.electoral-vote.com He’s better than Nate Silver, because he’s less of a media darling and he’s just a smart smart smart man.

    • Not Sayin

      The above post is MY OPINION only and not meant to offend any Nate Silver fans at all. :)

    • http://twitter.com/SugaRazor Razor

      Party identification is fluid… Republicans tried this line to dismiss the polls when Obama was kicking Romney’s ass.

      Obama’s in free fall, fair or not, his numbers are tanking – at least for now.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

    And yet, Nate Silver still gives the president a 74.8% chance of winning. Pretty good odds.

    And for those who don’t know why so many political junkies follow Nate Silver, it’s because Nate Silver is literally almost never wrong.

    In 2008, Silver called 49 of the 50 states correctly. The state he missed on was Indiana, which Obama won by only 1%. Silver also correctly predicted the winner of all of the Senate races (35) in 2008.


    • drsquid

      Actually, I believe he missed Missouri as well, which McCain won by something like 3000 votes. This plus Indiana resulted in a net difference in electoral votes of zero.

      • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

        Just double-checked it on Wikipedia, and they report only Indiana as a miss.

        However, Wikipedia is not infallible, as we all know very well.

  • JackDaniel07

    I’ve never once been polled.
    I’ve never once met one single person who has.