Are you for Obama?

No polling, from any source, is a good indicator for who is in the lead. I saw a poll a few days ago that had Obama up by 14 points here in Wisconsin. I know for a FACT that isn't even remotely close. This election will be decided by the small percentage of people who are still undecided. The basis for their decision should be the debates, and for the first debate, there is a clear cut winner.

 

Rasmussen was right on in 2008, and their numbers have matched most polls this election. Here's another link to a poll that shows Romney is now up in Colorado, too: Romney leads in 1st post-debate poll in Colorado - Denver Business Journal

And, yes, the polls are within the sampling error. I posted those to show just how close the race is.

 

It's funny how, before the first presidential debate, there were a bunch of Republican conspiracy theories about how all the polls showing Obama with a significant lead were clearly rigged by the "evil liberal media."

Now Obama gives a lackluster performance and you get a rather similar message from the Democratic side. :lol:


Here's the RCP averages to date. Romney has a bump but it's not like it's tide-turning.

 

Ha ha, yeah.

I am ashamed to say certain people in my party do believe that every poll is skewed. It's a little embarrassing, tough some definitely are (Huffington Post being one).

 

Most polls are skewed though. It all depends on the phrasing of the question.

 

Which is why people take all the "typically presumed as credible" polls and average them out. Fact: the race much closer now than it was before that debate, as per polling numbers.

Will that last for Mitt Romney? Who knows. In any case Obama still has the advantage in the electoral college (ex: if Romney fails to attain Ohio, he'll need every other swing state to win the election, and the same goes for Florida; etc. etc.).

 

Excellent point.

I'm not a big fan of the electoral college system, but Obama certainly has an advantage right now, albeit small. I think Romney barely edges out a win in Florida, but he's going to have to work his ass off in Ohio. I'd have Romney/Ryan in Ohio at least twice a week until the election, and spending a ton of money there.

 

No it isn't.

WeAskAmerica is a not a real pollster. It's a Republican front posing as a neutral polling company. It's polls are complete garbage.

Rasmussen is a pollster, but it has an acknowledged Republican bias. None of the polls Mike92 are indicative of any real change going on now. It's no surprise though that Republican-leaning pollsters would rush to get as many polls out as possible, as soon as possible, after Romney's debate bounce. It will likely evaporate soon, especially with the next debates coming up. John Kerry got a big bounce from winning the first debate against George W. Bush in 2004, but that obviously didn't help him ultimately win the election.

If even Rasmussen is still showing Obama +1 in Ohio, that shows how especially crappy WeAskAmerica's ridiculous polls are to put Mitt in the lead in OH.

 

What?

Romney certainly has gotten a boost. And Rasmussen is pretty damn accurate. Look at their numbers compared to others, and take a look back at how accurate they were in 2008.

Also, Kerry just barely lost. If he would have won Ohio (which was very close in 2004), he would have been president. Debates matter.

 

Rasmussen was right on in 2008?

The last Rasmussen polls in 2008 had:
Obama and McCain tied in Ohio (Obama won by 5)
McCain winning Florida by 1 (Obama won by 3)
McCain winning Indiana by 3 (Obama won by 1)
McCain winning NC by 1 (Obama won by 0.4)
Obama winning CO by 4 (Obama won by 9)
Obama winning NV by 4 (Obama won by 13)

Just a few examples of how Rasmussen's polls are nearly always more favorable to the Republican candidate than is the reality.

---------- Post added 6th Oct 2012 at 04:07 PM ----------

The first debate doesn't matter against an incumbent president. The incumbent nearly always loses the first debate. Bush 2004, Bush 1992, Reagan 1984, Carter 1980...all of these incumbent presidents lost their first debate.

And debates alone can't turn around the the situation when you are in as deep a hole as Rmoney is.

 

.

They sure were. Nationally, their final poll had Obama up by about six points. Obama won by around seven. Here are two actual links that prove that:
RealClearPolitics - Election 2008 National Head-to-Head Polls

http://www.fordham.edu/images/acade...ccuracy in the 2008 presidential election.pdf

Nice try.

I don't think anyone disputed that. The point was debates can without question boost a candidate. Obviously, Romney needs to continue it. It nearly worked for Kerry.

And what rock are you living under? Romney is in a deep hole? He's down by two/four percentage points (Washington Post has Obama up 48-46) nationally. Talk about living in a bubble.

 

People say that debates only reaffirm what you already believe. But this isn't true, at leastin my case. Having watched the debate this past week, I definitely know who I'm voting for now.

Lex

 

Nice try? I gave you multiple examples of how Rasmussen's polling is Republican-biased. In just about every state, Rasmussen's polling in 2008 overestimated McCain's strength and underestimated Obama's.

One debate can't.

And in the long run, Romney's bounce will probably fade considering the fact that Mitt won the debate primarily by lying non-stop about his own policies and pretending he was much more moderate than he really is.

Romney is in very, very deep hole. Trailing in every swing state is not a strong position to be in. Losing Ohio alone would be enough to sink Romney's chances, and the state clearly is strong for Obama regardless of what a crappy pollster like "WeAskAmerica" wants you to believe.

 

No, you just copied and pasted numbers and provided zero links. I could have done that, too. The two links that I provided (which are both legit), clearly show that Rasmussen's final poll was very accurate. McCain lost pretty badly, but a lot of pollsters "overestimated" Obama, as one of the links said.

Another example of utilizing opinion rather than facts to come to a conclusion. Did Romney twist and distort some? Absolutely. But Obama also distorted and twisted facts at about the same rate, and CNN proved that after the debate. Obama's body language and condescending attitude hurt him, and he couldn't even look at Romney. He almost seemed shocked that someone actually challenged him in an intelligent way. It's only one debate, but Romney had to do well and he did. If he can do well in the next two, he's going to be in good shape. Ryan and Biden debating should be pretty comical, although probably not for Democrats. The guy's a loud mouth blow hard, in my opinion.

Also, Romney is a moderate. That's a fact. Why do you think the rest of the contenders in the Republican primaries were attacking Romney for being moderate? But he had to shift more to the right in the Republican primaries to appeal to the base because Santorum was so far right he was almost in a mental institution. Obama did the same thing when he was competing against Clinton. Every politician shifts when changing to the primaries to the general election. It's always been that way and it will continue to be.

Romney is not in a deep hole -- saying it 40 times won't make it any more true than the first time you said it. Yes, trailing in some swing states isn't the most ideal position to be in. But he is barely behind in many of the swing states he is trailing. This race is very competitive and many polls reflect that.

 

Dude, the numbers are accurate. Rasmussen has a Republican tilt to its polls. Scotty Rasmussen IS a partisan Republican. Rasmussen is the only major pollster that weights its polls and skews its data, nearly always in favor of the GOP.

Romney FLAT-OUT LIED about many of his own positions. Obama brought up Romney's own policies he's been running on for months, and rather than defend his policies, Mitt just pretended that they weren't actually his policies. He is trying to play moderate now, because his far-right agenda was not appealing to the American people.

LOL, on what planet is Romney a moderate? Compared to Mussolini and Hitler maybe he's a moderate. But now to any normal politician. The man is extremely far to the right, on both social and economic issues.

And let me remind you, Romney is actually even further to the extreme right than was John McCain in 2008. McCain opposed a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage everywhere. While the rest of the country has moved forward in that time, and President Obama even now publicly supports marriage equality, Mitt Romney has moved the Republican Party backwards on gay rights and supports a federal constitutional amendment to forever prevent gay couples from marrying anywhere in the U.S.

Prior to the debate, Romney was trailing in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, even North Carolina. That's basically every single swing state on the map. While his situation might have improved a bit since then, losing by a smaller margin doesn't change the outcome of the election than losing by a bigger margin.

And Ohio is a must-win for Romney, and he clearly is in a deep hole there. These 2 Republican outlier polls don't change the fact that Obama has led consistently there for months, and recently multiple polls showing his margin of victory as high as 8, 9, and even 10 points. No Republican has ever won the presidency without Ohio.

All of the swing states on the map ARE Republican-must-win states; states that George W. Bush had won in his narrow victories. Romney and the GOP are on the defensive. Romney needs to sweep nearly all of the swing states, whereas Obama has a lot more options available to him to reach 270.

 

Where's your links to back it up? I made a claim that Rasmussen was very accurate in 2008 and backed it up with proof. You should give it a try. Just because the owner is Republican doesn't make it bias. That's opinion.

Care to share specifics, or are you just going to tell me he did without backing it up? You know, similar to what you're doing about Rasmussen's polling. I'm not disputing that he didn't distort some because he does, but so did Obama. For you to not acknowledge that Obama distorted facts about as bad as Romney speaks volumes about your credibility. Obama had absolutely no logical answer on some of Romney's factual statistics, like the enormous deficit, 50% of college graduates under 25 underemployed or unemployed, 1/6 of Americans in poverty and family incomes dropping. None.

Instead of just spewing something that isn't true, which apparently you're good at, go look at Romney's record. The guy is a moderate, and that's why so many Republicans were lukewarm about him. Let me ask you this: Do you believe his healthcare bill (whether it's good or bad) that he crafted in Massachusetts is far right wing? Because if it is, Obama must be a righty as well. Same with gun control - take a look at his record on that, and abortion before he changed to appeal to the far right. And that's probably my biggest issue with Romney; he's definitely a moderate Republican trying to cast himself as a hardcore conservative. But, again, every politician does this and I hate it.

Gay marriage is one issue Romney hasn't changed on. But does one thing make him far more right than McCain? Not at all.

Well, for one, Pennsylvania is not a swing state. No Republican has won here in over 20 years. The media just labels Pennsylvania as a "swing" state to add intrigue. Michigan also isn't a swing state. But in the rest of those states, Obama was up by about 2-3.5 points (within the margin of error) and other polls had them tied. As for North Carolina, most analysts believe Romney will ultimately win that state. Again, not an ideal position, but not a nail in Romney's political coffin. Far from it.

Ohio is a must win, but he is not in a deep hole there. Some polls have him behind more than others, but they all are relatively close.

False.

Romney can afford to lose a couple of the swing states. Obama does have more paths to 270, but the leads that he does have are very narrow. He's vulnerable.

 

Romney will very likely lose, and i will be thrilled when he does and has to slink back to oblivion, where he belongs.

 

And if he wins?

 

Then i fear for the planet. Shit he has said out of office could start wars while in it.