Dick Morris believes that at this point, Romney has the advantage

[SNR]

http://www.dickmorris.com/romney-pulls-ahead/

Romney Pulls Ahead
By Dick Morris on September 25, 2012

The published polling in this year’s presidential race is unusually inaccurate because this is the first election in which who votes determines how they vote. Obama’s massive leads among blacks, Latinos, young people, and single women vie with Romney’s margin among the elderly, married white women, and white men. Tell me your demographic and I’ll tell you who you’re voting for and I’ll be right at least two times out of three!

Most pollsters are weighting their data on the assumption that the 2012 electorate will turn out in the same proportion as the 2008 voters did. But polling indicates a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the president among his core constituency. He’ll still carry them by heavy margins, but the turnout will likely lag behind the 2008 stats. (The 2008 turnout was totally unlike that in other years with all-time historic high turnouts among Obama’s main demographic groups).

Specifically, most pollsters are using 2008 party preferences to weight their 2012 survey samples, reflecting a much larger Democratic preference than is now really the case.

In my own polling, I found a lurch to the Democrats right after their convention, but subsequent research indicates that it has since petered out. Indeed, when one compares party identification in the August and September polls of this year in swing states, the Democratic Party identification is flat while the ranks of Republicans rose by an average of two points per state.
Pollster Scott Rasmussen has the best solution to the party id problem. He weights his polls to reflect the unweighted party identification of the previous three weeks, so he has a dynamic model which adjusts for sampling error but still takes account of gradual changes in the electorate’s partisan preferences.

Finally, with Obama below 50% of the vote in most swing states, he is hitting up against a glass ceiling in the high 40s. He can’t get past it except in heavily Democratic states like New York or California. The first time Obama breaks 50 will not be on Election Day. Either he consistently polls above 50% of the vote or he won’t ever get there in the actual vote.

So here’s where the race really stands today based on Rasmussen’s polling:

• Romney leads decisively in all states McCain carried (173 electoral votes).

• Romney is more than ten points ahead in Indiana – which Obama carried. (11 electoral votes)

• Romney leads Obama in the following states the president carried in 2008: Iowa (44-47) North Carolina (45-51), Colorado (45-47), and New Hampshire (45-48). He’ll probably win them all. (34 electoral votes).

This comes to 218 of the 270 Romney needs. But…

• Obama is below 50% of the vote in a handful of key swing states and leads Romney by razor thin margins in each one. All these states will go for Romney unless and until Obama can show polling support of 50% of the vote:

• Obama leads in Ohio (47-46) and Virginia (49-48) by only 1 point (31 electoral votes)

• Obama leads in Florida (48-460) and Nevada (47-45) by only 2 points (35 electoral votes)

If Romney carries Ohio, Virginia, and Florida, he wins. And other states are in play.

• Obama leads in Wisconsin (49-46) by only 3 points (10 electoral votes)

• Obama’s lead in Michigan is down to four points according to a recent statewide poll

• Obama is only getting 51% of the vote in Pennsylvania and 53% in New Jersey. And don’t count out New Mexico.
It would be accurate to describe the race now as tied. But Romney has the edge because:

• The incumbent is under 50% in key states and nationally. He will probably lose any state where he is below 50% of the vote.

• The Republican enthusiasm and likelihood of voting is higher

• The GOP field organization is better.

That’s the real state of play today.

[Direckshun]

Dick Morris.

[RubberSponge]

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Special ed strikes again.

[RubberSponge]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Dick Morris.

aka patteeu

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by RubberSponge

Life advice: If at any moment you find Sean Hannity is being more reasonable than you, you should retire from public light.

[Donger]

Are the Obama people here under the impression that the Democrat turn-out in November will be the same as it was in 2008? That seems to be the question at hand.

[RubberSponge]

Originally Posted by Donger

Are the Obama people here under the impression that the Democrat turn-out in November will be the same as it was in 2008? That seems to be the question at hand.

I'm not an Obama person. I think both parties suffer from lower than expected turnouts. Shitty candidates will do it.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Donger

Are the Obama people here under the impression that the Democrat turn-out in November will be the same as it was in 2008? That seems to be the question at hand.

Possibly because every 4 years turnout increases or at has the last few elections

Year	Voting-age population	Voter registration	Voter turnout	Turnout of voting-age population (percent)
2010**	235,809,266	NA	90,682,968	37.8%
2008*	231,229,580	NA	132,618,580*	56.8
2006	220,600,000	135,889,600	80,588,000	37.1
2004	221,256,931	174,800,000	122,294,978	55.3
2002	215,473,000	150,990,598	79,830,119	37.0
2000	205,815,000	156,421,311	105,586,274	51.3

[SNR]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Dick Morris.

Hey, that's why I said Dick Morris believes it. I could have used an HCF/sportsshrink/pete title like "OOOOOOOPS, looks like Obama will lose afterall!" but I didn't.

I report, you decide.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Possibly because every 4 years turnout increases or at has the last few elections

You think there's the same amount of enthusiasm for Obama in 2012 as there was in 2008?

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Donger

Are the Obama people here under the impression that the Democrat turn-out in November will be the same as it was in 2008? That seems to be the question at hand.

It is often repeated by right-wing pundits that all these polls are using 2008 turnout models. I hate to nitpick, but is that even true?

A lot of factors go into these polls and I don't think any of them release their complete formula. They may (or may not) start with 2008 as a base then make adjustments--but no one ever mentions the adjustments. Really, who the **** actually knows? But it doesn't stop the right wing pundits and their sheep from simply repeating that every poll is incorrect because of this alleged 2008 turnout issue.

I would think the pollsters would want to be accurate. But then again, maybe they are all involved in a conspiracy together to trick the public.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

It is often repeated by right-wing pundits that all these polls are using 2008 turnout models. I hate to nitpick, but is that even true?

A lot of factors go into these polls and I don't think any of them release their complete formula. They may (or may not) start with 2008 as a base then make adjustments--but no one ever mentions the adjustments. Really, who the **** actually knows? But it doesn't stop the right wing pundits and their sheep from simply repeating that every poll is incorrect because of this alleged 2008 turnout issue.

I would think the pollsters would want to be accurate. But then again, maybe they are all involved in a conspiracy together to trick the public.

Daily Beast says it's true.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Donger

You think there's the same amount of enthusiasm for Obama in 2012 as there was in 2008?

Probably not but Dems only increased by a small margin

“A downturn in the number and percentage of Republican voters going to the polls seemed to be the primary explanation for the lower than predicted turnout,” the report said. Compared to 2004, Republican turnout declined by 1.3 percentage points to 28.7 percent, while Democratic turnout increased by 2.6 points from 28.7 percent in 2004 to 31.3 percent in 2008.

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by Literature

Life advice: If at any moment you find Sean Hannity is being more reasonable than you, you should retire from public light.

Well said.