It's interesting to hear conservatives whine about how the polls are all biased and figuring Republican turnout to be too low and, conversely, Democratic turnout to be too high. The Democrats are not enthusiastic, they say, and won't turn out like they did in 2008. One has to wonder if they are trying to prey upon Democratic nerves and psych them out...nah, can't be.
Of course, the other way to look at this is more positive. By continuing to say (as many in the media are) that voter turnout is going to be lower on the Democratic side, doesn't that motivate more people to vote? Even out of nerves? I think it will.
Personally, I'd much rather be Barack Obama right now, leading by an average of 2.9 percentage points in Ohio right now, than Mitt Romney and his supporters whining about polling bias. I am, however, willing to admit that there is a 16 percent chance that I am wrong about Ohio:)
11 comments:
Damn, this is good; I'll quote a bit but read the whole thing!
Finding out whether (or when) Obama and his spokespeople started dissembling about the Benghazi attack is important, but it’s ultimately less important than confronting the mind-set that will lead to more half-baked interventions that then lead to more death and destruction of American lives.
You love you them interventions M - Arab Spring was going to turn out so glorious, right? You and the fucking Republican neo-Cons.
Obama right now, leading by an average of 2.9 percentage points in Ohio right now, than Mitt Romney and his supporters whining about polling bias.
What say you to the crowds each are attracting then?
Ohio crowd for Romney - 30,000
For Obama - 2,800
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/332413/obama-attracting-smaller-crowds-mccain-08-eliana-johnson#
So in order to believe the Marist poll, that Obama is up over the margin of error, you have to believe that the intensity level for Obama by party ID is higher now than it was in 2008. You have to believe that the swing from 2008 to 2010, where party ID went from D+8 to R+1, resulting in the election of a Republican governor, a Republican Senator, and control of the state house, all that has not only vanished, but recoiled even further in Obama’s direction. You have to believe that the crowd of 80,000 Obama drew in 2008 in Cleveland the closing days of the campaign demonstrates less energy and passion for their candidate than the 4,000 did this morning. You have to believe that the 30,000 people last night at the Romney/Ryan rally shows less enthusiasm for their candidate than the 4,200 did in 2008 for John McCain. You have to believe that Michael Barone, a man who you can introduce yourself to and tell him where you’re from, and he’ll tell you who won your Congressional district in 1966 from memory, is wrong when he reads that Cuyahoga County, long a Democratic stronghold in the Buckeye State, is way off in party registration. He’s also wrong when reports for early voting tend to favor Mitt Romney, and favor him big. You also have to believe that Ohio Catholics and values voters don’t care about the HHS regulations. You also have to believe that Ohio, an energy state, doesn’t care about energy production.
That's a great post rld.
If Obama was truly up by 6 points in Ohio, he would have gone there today and he would be going there tomorrow.
So it's Romney 315 and Obama 235 then, hmm... rld and last? I'll expect the same recrimantion, as you gave me, when Barone is wrong.
Obama will not win Ohio by 6, I agree. As I have said many times, you can't look at just one poll. The average tells the tale. I'd say by 2-3 points.
last, your comment makes no sense. He's going there Sunday and he was there Saturday. Romney, however, not there Saturday with Ryan in his place. Romney will be there Sunday, though. But one has to wonder why Romney is spending so much time in Iowa, Colorado and New Hampshire.
Oh, and it wasn't 30K, rld. Secret service said 15K. Nice try, though but it's not my first time with the momentum game.
From someone on the ground at the event:
I was at the rally, and I can explain the difference in figures.The lines to go through TSA security were extremely large because of the massive crowd. Some of us gave up on being able to get through security in time to hear all of the speeches and went to what they called an overflow area. It was behind some metal barriers, and guarded so we couldn’t get into the stadium, but we could still see everything. It was a large, bare field behind the Romney white flag. None of us over there went through security, and it was a really big crowd. We were surrounded on three sides by a line of trailers from big rigs that were end to end in a huge semi-circle.
Whether that hits 30,000 or 18,000 that local law enforcement reported, it is a heck of a lot bigger than anything Obama is drawing.
Obama had crows in Ohio of
2,800 supporters turned out to see Obama in Hilliard, Ohio
4,000 turned out to see Obama in Springfield, Ohio
3,800 supporters turned out to see Barack Obama at his final campaign stop in Lima, Ohio.
Never said I agreed with everything in the post, just said it was a good post. No need to make those giant leaps like that.
How many supporters turned out to see the president in Virginia yesterday?
. . . so, your saying Mitt will get at least 30K Ohio votes? Good for him. I'm guessing there would have been at least half of them looking for jobs about 4 years ago had Mitt's private bailout plan been optioned. I'm thinking at least half of the rest are upside-down on their mortgage. The rest must constitute darn-near every farmer in the state? . . . these rally numbers are interesting, but irrelevant - it is widely understood that the right's lunatic fringe treat politics like a Phish tour.
"it is widely understood"
I don't understand that. Can you provide a link? Or better yet, two?
Post a Comment