View Poll Results: 2 weeks out, who would you vote for?

Voters
507. You must be logged in to vote on this poll. Please login or register.
  • Obama (Democrat)

    395 77.91%
  • Romney (Republican)

    112 22.09%
Register to Comment
Page 107 of 675 FirstFirst ... 7 57 97105106107108109 117 157 207 607 ... LastLast
Results 1,061 to 1,070 of 6748
Like Tree2486Likes
  1. #1061
    TommyO'Brien TommyO'Brien is offline
    TommyO'Brien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    19,377

    Can Romney still win?

    It is the key question. The answer is yes. But then I could win €200m on the Euromillions, you could marry a billionaire and your local bishop could become pope. The question in reality is not whether something could theoretically happen but what are the odds of it happening?

    It is there that Romney's problem becomes obvious. Big swings do occur in elections sometimes. But usually they occur in elections where there have been dramatic swings already. This campaign is remarkable for the lack of swings. For months both candidates have been in the same ballpark. Even the conventions didn't produce major swings. The '47%' gaffe produced a moderate swing by campaign standards, but one which damaged Romney.

    If a campaign has no history of significant swings by now they rarely produce them later. Nixon led Humphrey by 15 points at this time in 1968. It dropped to 8, then 2, before he won by half a point. That was a race marked by major swings.

    In campaigns, where things stay steady for a long spell, experienced campaigners know it is very very hard to make even minimal headway. It pretty much indicates that most voters have made their minds up about the candidates and it would take an earthquake to shift them. (Numerous campaigns have the 'been there, done that' teeshirt re those campaigns. You try everything, absolutely everything, but the voters aren't biting. They stay stubbornly with the same numbers as before.)

    Even worse for Romney, the only real evidence of shifts where they have occurred have worked against him. He no longer has a whopping great lead in the category of who would do a better job on the economy. His lead among seniors is falling. That suggests that if any move occurred, it is more likely to go against Romney than for Romney, because some of his appeal is obviously waning but he is not increasingly noticeably in other categories to counteract the loss among seniors and on the economy.

    By now he should at least be ahead in half of the key swing states. In practice he is either tied or behind in almost all and has been consistently so.

    He hopes to achieve a killer blow in the debates. History there is against it. It is decades since debates delivered a killer blow. There was only 1 debate in 1980 at the very end of October. That won Reagan the election. Romney is no Reagan in terms of communication skills. Obama is a far better debater than Carter was, and there are three debates this time, all earlier in the campaign.

    Three debates tends to make debates less impactful. Even if someone does badly in one they can stage a comeback in the others. Plus by spreading the debate the effect of any one debate is minimised. In addition the debates are now earlier than they were in say 1980.

    Even many republican pollsters dismiss the Republican claims that the polls are biased. The sheer number of polls overwhelmingly agreeing on who is in the lead and what trends are. When some GOP members are reduced to accusing Fox of being part of a liberal conspiracy because its polls say Obama is leading you know they are clutching at straws.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #1062
    DDarcy DDarcy is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    135

    Quote Originally Posted by TommyO'Brien View Post
    There was only 1 debate in 1980 at the very end of October. That won Reagan the election. Romney is no Reagan in terms of communication skills.
    Don't really want to correct you, but a review of all polls in 1980 showed Reagan heading for a landslide from prior to the conventions. This is one of the political myths being forayed about to try and keep Romney and Republicans hopeful. There was only one poll that was showing Carter in the lead and completely made a balls of it in the election by giving Carter significantly more (bias of about +10 Carter) and this is all that Republicans point to now in hope.

    From what I can find, the only time a debate had a significant issue with the presidential election was back with Nixon-Kennedy. That was before 24 hour news media, internet etc. So, I don't think these debates are going to have much if any impact on the race unless if something really stupid is said on either side.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #1063
    DDarcy DDarcy is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    135



    I have added the chart showing the polls from 1980 above. Also to add, Carter had very poor numbers in approval, handling o the economy etc. So, as I said in the above post I really don't believe the comparison to 1980 is a correct one.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #1064
    Dame_Enda Dame_Enda is offline
    Dame_Enda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    13,897

    Historically, the president seeking re-election almost never polls higher than their approval rating in an election. The current RCP average for this is 49.3-47.3 so I think whatever about the Electoral College, the popular vote will be quite close. Perhaps a 2004 type result with an Obama win of Bush-proportions.

    Fivethirtyeight.com says that polls have no real history of consistent partisan bias - 1980 excepted. Graphs below:









    From what I'm seeing, the polls seem to become more reflective in years when more of them are taken. In 1980 only 4 national Likely-Voter polls were taken. 24 were taken in 2008. In fact the 2000 election overstated the GOP vote slightly and Gore actually won the popular vote. I think accusing Fox News (!) of rigging the polls against the GOP is a bit much.
    Last edited by Dame_Enda; 1st October 2012 at 12:13 AM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #1065
    Ribeye Ribeye is offline
    Ribeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    27,584

    Quote Originally Posted by Des Quirell View Post
    ??? Who was murdered by Clinton?

    I don't recall reading that on his CV.
    I'm not great with spelling Sudanese or Afgan names, but if ye want them I'll do my best!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #1066
    R3volution_R3ady R3volution_R3ady is offline
    R3volution_R3ady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,409

    Does anybody remember this gem? Romney is gunning for a war with Iran.

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #1067
    SideysGhost SideysGhost is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    14,658

    Latest Polls:

    Iowa, Selzer: Obama +4
    Ohio, PPP: Obama +4
    Ohio, Columbus Dispatch: Obama +9 (!)
    North Carolina, PPP: Tied at 48% each
    National, Gallup: Obama +5
    National, Rasmussen: Obama +2
    MA Senate Brown vs Warren, Boston Globe: Warren +5

    Plus unsurprising polls showing heavy Obama leads in safe blue states like Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland and Washington
    Last edited by SideysGhost; 1st October 2012 at 09:07 AM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #1068
    Dame_Enda Dame_Enda is offline
    Dame_Enda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    13,897

    Unemployment is expected to rise from 8.1% to 8.2%, spelling trouble for Obama's re-election hopes. Furthermore, business activity has shrunk for the first time since 2009, as some analysts predict the US will slide back into recession. I think that Obama is not out of the woods yet, despite recent polling. No president has been elected with unemployment above 8% since FDR. I think the odds are great for Romney on Paddy Power so you should snatch them up quick before they shorten. I know I will.

    As a peacenik I would prefer Obama to win. But I am not an American and Americans will decide based on their own perceived national interests.
    Last edited by Dame_Enda; 1st October 2012 at 06:15 AM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #1069
    NYCKY NYCKY is online now
    NYCKY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    6,682

    Quote Originally Posted by Dame_Enda View Post
    Unemployment is expected to rise from 8.1% to 8.2%, spelling trouble for Obama's re-election hopes. Furthermore, business activity has shrunk for the first time since 2009, as some analysts predict the US will slide back into recession. I think that Obama is not out of the woods yet, despite recent polling. No president has been elected with unemployment above 8% since FDR. I think the odds are great for Romney on Paddy Power so you should snatch them up quick before they shorten. I know I will.
    Not sure off hands what the odds are on Romney, but definitely worth a flutter. The unemployment numbers won't be out until later in the week but the October unemployment numbers will be out before the November 6th election.

    Reagan was reelected with unemployment numbers above 7% but to be fair to him, they had been improving all through 1984.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #1070
    NYCKY NYCKY is online now
    NYCKY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    6,682

    Quote Originally Posted by Des Quirell View Post
    ??? Who was murdered by Clinton?

    I don't recall reading that on his CV.

    Did you really read his CV?

    I look at CVs all the time and have never yet come across one that acknowledged murder. It is not something that any reasonable person would include on a cv.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment