When President Obama is re-elected!!

manton · Post by **manton** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:07 am

And McGovern (RIP) won Mass.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:43 am

Jim, can't remember the last time you forecasted an Obama win!

Today's polls of interest:
Florida: Romney vs. Obama NBC/WSJ/Marist Romney 47, Obama 49 Obama +2
Ohio: Romney vs. Obama NBC/WSJ/Marist Obama 51, Romney 45 Obama +6

manton · Post by **manton** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:24 pm

Great illustration of what I mean. The poll is predicated on a D+9 turnout advantage in a state where the D turnout advantage was +5 in 2008. So, really, it's going to DOUBLE in this cycle?

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 2:53 pm

So none of these pollsters who do this for a living know that, manton?
Only Rasmussen, Karl Rove and Dick Morris know that?
And all 19 of the 20 polls in the past two days that have Obama up are unaware of these supposed biases? Just Karl Rove "knows" that? The guy who was calling Ohio for McCain four years ago when Fox came on and called Ohio for Obama?
I mean, maybe you're right... Maybe all these polls are wrong, and Karl Rove, the head of the Crossroads Super PAC funding Romney, is right....
I guess we will see on Tuesday night, probably around 11pm or so, I'm guessing.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:15 pm

...And why were Rove and Co. complaining about the Democratic bias in Gallup when Obama was up by six, but not when he was down by six in the outlying Gallup figures before the hurricane?

manton · Post by **manton** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:09 pm

No, all you have to do is read the published numbers--that is THE POLLSTER'S own numbers--to see that. Anyone can see it.

So, we know what the turnout was in 2008 because it already happend, it's an established fact. And, in a wave year that was super-favorable to Democrats, the D turnout advantage in OH was +5.

The 2012 number is a prediction. I see no reason whatsoever to believe that the D turnout advantage in OH this time will be +9--nearly double what it was in a Democratic wave. That's basically a guess and I don't think it's an educated guess because I can't see what it's based on. If it happens, it will be like the guy who says every April that his team will win the world series and once in 30 years he was right. It's less a prediction than a wish.

I will just ignore the rest of the hyperpartisan stuff. I should probably limit myself only to talking about wine but I am starting to think my first assessment was correct, this is a Dem board and other views really are not welcome.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:42 pm

It's a thread where Dems state their views, and Republicans state theirs. I have no idea which polls are correct. It is like predicting the winner of the Super Bowl. I'm convinced I'm right... unless I'm wrong. Come Tuesday night we will know if all of these polls are right or wrong.

manton · Post by **manton** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:54 pm

The point is, there is a basis for suspecting a lot of these polls.

If you want an athletic analogy, it's like predicting that the team that won last time will win this time because you think they will score X runs based on their prior performance, even though batters 3-5 in the lineup signed with other teams in the off season and were replaced by weaker hitters.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 5:01 pm

Do you think that the Wall Street Journal is over-estimating Democrats on purpose in their poll that has Obama up by 6 points in Ohio or are they just naive? It would surprise me that they are tolerating the incorrect over-polling of Democrats, seeing that their editorial page has endorsed Romney.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 5:13 pm

But anyway, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. Enough commentary of polls. The Big Poll is all that matters on Tuesday night.

manton · Post by **manton** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 5:26 pm

The ed page and the news page of the WSJ not only do not collaborate, they actively hate each other.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 5:32 pm

That's true.

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:12 pm

[quote="JimHow"]Glenn, is it true that 2/3rds of Nevada has already voted?quote]

In today's newspaper it stated 58% of Washoe County has early voted, well ahead of 2008. I was at one polling location on Friday afternoon and there was a good sized line.

Paul Ryan is coming again tomorrow.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:52 am

My final prediction. I'm moving Virginia into the Obama column and keeping Colorado in the Romney column.
There are just too many Republican Secretaries of State suppressing the vote out there, otherwise I'd give Obama a bigger victory. I would move Florida in his column but for the obvious corruption down there.

So... The final tally:

Barack Hussein Obama: ME, NH, VT, MA, CT, RI, NY, NJ, MD, DE, DC, PA, OH, MI, WI, IA, IL, MN, NM, NV, WA, OR, CA, HI, VA. Total Electoral College Votes: 294.

Willard Mitt Romney: AK, ID, UT, AZ, MT, WY, CO, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, TX, MO, AR, LA, IN, KY, TN, MS, AL, WV, VA, NC, SC, GA, FL. Total Electoral College Votes: 244.

Final Obama JHEPI: 80.

I don't have it quite as high as Silver, I don't believe his model takes into account the corruption on the horizon in Ohio, Colorado, and Florida. I think that even if Ohio is stolen from Obama by that obviously partisan Secretary of State there, he will still have enough electoral college votes for reelection.

We shall see!

JScott · Post by **JScott** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:19 pm

This polling thing will be interesting to follow post-election. The issue Manton raises is curious; all theses polls are projecting a historically unprecedented Dem turnout, which seems unlikely to me. Last election, if anything, had that kind of historical enthusiasm. On the other hand, the idea that all these polls are conspiring to influence sentiment is also very hard to believe. If that we're the case, I would expect they would have, at the last minute, taken their best shot at precision. Obviously, accuracy is the life blood of any polling organization. The idea that they would all be willing to demonstrate their uselessness seems a bit far fetched. As Jim said, we will see.......

JScott · Post by **JScott** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:26 pm

Speaking of conspiracies, what I'm reading out of New York and New Jersey is sounding pretty horrific. The Red Cross and FEMA starting to take some heat. So far, Obama seems to be getting a pass on it. We were talking earlier about media bias. Maybe I'm remembering in accurately, but by this stage Bush was getting eviscerated for Katrina. I'd be hard pressed to identify exactly what Obama's done for Sandy that Bush didn't do for Katrina. My point here isn't that Obama deserves the heat; I'm not so sure there's that much a president can do for this kind of disaster other than appear concerned. By comparison, though, I think Bush got (and still gets) more heat for Katrina than he deserved. It was much more a failure of state and local government, in my view. Old issue, just an observation........

JScott · Post by **JScott** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:27 pm

An unprecedented JHEPI!! Have to say, I am wavering. There's so much bravado and confidence on both sides that I have no idea what to believe. Will be fascinating......

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:53 pm

Anyone on either side filled with bravado and confidence is either an idiot or putting on a show. I'm sure there are plenty of people in both categories.

Look, four things happened last time that gave Obama such a big margin:

1) Huge Dem enthusiasm which fueled high Dem turnout
2) Depressed Reps stayed home in far greater numbers than in 2000 or 2004
3) Obama won independents
4) Obama peeled off quite a few registered Republicans, it was under 20% but still that was a big advantage.

I look at those four and based on what the interals in all the polls are saying, I just don't see any of them being repeated. That's not to say that Obama will lose. I don't like to bet on anything, not even nickel slots, but if I had to bet I would bet that he wins, at least least in the EC though maybe not the PV. But if he does win I expect his margin to be razor thin--or, if it's a convincing EC win, he will have done it by winning three or four swing states by 0.1% or so.

And, yeah, life in much of New York and NJ is quite miserable right now but I detect zero anti-Obama sentiment as a result. Bloomberg on the other hand is massively unpopular right now.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:27 pm

I could be wrong, of course, but I honestly do not see this as a close race in the electoral college.
There is too much data out there from a wide range of sources that has Obama ahead by modest but statistically significant margins in the states that count.
I'm with Silver on this one.
The media has a vested interest in having this race treated as a "dead heat."
And there are always huge amounts of testosterone from the campaigns in the final days.
All the points you make are good ones, manton, except for one thing:
Despite all those differences from 2008, Obama is STILL 2-6 points ahead in places like Ohio and other key states.
As David Plouffe said this weekend: Yes Romney is doing better than McCain, as expected. But he's not running against McCain, he's running against Obama, and while he is doing better vis a vis McCain, he is not doing better vis a vis Obama.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:38 pm

O's lead is quite a bit narrower than 2-6 in most swing states, and I'm not talking about Rasmussen here.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:49 pm

You may be right, manton, but i just don't see it. It is fascinating how the narrative in the media has been that the race is "tightening," when just the opposite seems to have happened post Sandy. Obama has had an uptick of about 2 points in just about every national poll, including Rasmussen. Silver has a good summary of all of the state polls on his site. In virtually every one, including Florida, Obama is winning. Romney is going to have to run the table. Not impossible, of course, but not anywhere near probable in my humble opinion. I'll be glad when this is over!

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:59 pm

Obama is not winning Florida. Goodness, I mean this in the nicest possible way, but I think you are getting your information from biased sources--or, at least sources that leave a lot out.

Here's the way I see it now:

Florida and NC have solid Romney leads. VA, which Romney must win, is tied and too close to call. Without all three, Romney cannot win, or a victory requires divine intervention of some sort.

Ohio is close with a proabable slight edge to Obama. If I had to bet, I would bet that Obama wins OH.

MI, MN and PA all tightened up over the last few days. Probably chimerical but maybe not. If Romney has a shot at any of them, it is PA. He could in any case lose them all and still win, but not if he loses Ohio.

CO--very slight edge to Romney.

NV seems to be Obama's at this point as does NH.

Iowa, too close to call, or teensy lead for Obama.

WI: hard to call because all the most recent polls are flawed with oversampling but probably leaning Obama or else Romney or Ryan would be spending more time there.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:20 pm

I think you have it about right, although the supposed tightening in PA, MI, and MN is just Reince Prebius propaganda. Romney needs to get two out if every three independents in PA to win that state. Not gonna happen. If the Republicans truly had a shot at PA they would be spending like 18 gazillion dollars there. As we've said from the beginning, Romney basically cannot win without OH. Obama still has some good paths to victory if OH is stolen from him. I don't see Obama losing IA and WI.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:25 pm

it's not RNC propaganda, seriously, you must be watching too much MSNBC or something, several independent polls over the last few days have had those three states close although the most recent MN poll shows a big Obama lead but of the three MN was always the most distant.

I think what happened in PA for Romney is that they wrote it off a long time ago and Obama took for granted and so, sensing a potential weakness on a flank, Romney jumped in. He is spending a great deal there now.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:36 pm

Gallup went back on line today for the first time since before Sandy.
Obama is down 1 point in that poll.
More importantly, he gained 6 points in that poll in one week.
That's hardly sign of movement towards Romney.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:15 pm

From other national polls, it appeared the Romney was slightly up pre-sandy, stalled and even dropped a bit during and after Sandy, (to the point that the RCP average went from R+1 to O+1) and now after Sandy Romney appears to be ticking up again.

But that's national which really doesn't matter, Romney does not appear to have a lead in either OH or PA but is certainly within the margin of error. And he can actually will without either but that would be very hard.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:18 pm

Agreed. Romney basically needs to win Ohio to have a realistic chance.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:19 pm

No, OH or PA gives him a realistic chance. Without those, he has an unrealistic chance.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Well true, but he is not going to win PA.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:33 pm

We don't know that.

Look at this way. PA polls right now look a lot like OH polls. Except that in OH Romney has been spending and campaigning for months and hasn't moved the needle. The most he has been able to do is reach a tie. Only Rasmussen has ever shown him with a lead, and only 1 point at that, and not that frequently.

Meanwhile next door is a state where Romney has been spending and campaigning much less and all of the sudden, seemingly without any effor on his part, it tightens up at the last minute. Makes sense for him to pour into there and see what happens. Looks like a better prospect than Ohio at this point.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:42 pm

We shall see.
Of course I'm expecting voter lines 8 miles long in Philadelphia, so anything is possible I guess.
It seems every year the Republicans think they have a shot at PA and it turns out that realistically they did not.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:43 pm

But every year they get closer, and they swept the statewide offices in 2010 (admittedly, a wave year for Rs).

Harry C. · Post by **Harry C.** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:07 pm

Your assessment that Romney has not been doing anything in PA is false. I live in the Phila area and the word was the Koch Bros Superpac decided about 1 month ago that PA needed a nudge. The allegedly spent 1.5 million in ad time alone the past 2 weeks. My impression has been more Romney ads versus Obama ads on TV recently.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:10 pm

So what's your assessment, Harry, is PA going for Romey?
I'll give up whoopie pies for a year if Romney wins PA.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:13 pm

Here's a good article (written by a Republican) on the disgrace that is the American voting system:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/opinion/f ... ?hpt=hp_c1

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:18 pm

Your post answers your own question. Koch pac ≠ Romney. I'm talking about spending his own campaign money and, most importantly, time in the state. And the real point is in comparision to Ohio. Whatever Romney has spent in PA, it's a fraction of what he's spent in Ohio. For most of this cycle Ohio has been tied or close whereas PA has appeared out of reach for Romney, until the last few days.

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:19 pm

Frum is a Republican in the same sense that Dick Morris is a Democrat.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:33 pm

Pew Research poll just released shows a 3 point national lead for Obama, up 3 points from before Sandy:

http://www.boston.com/politicalintellig ... story.html

manton · Post by **manton** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:55 pm

A lengthy analysis, by a real Republican, arguing that Obama will win:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... olsen?pg=1

tmas · Post by **tmas** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:58 pm

JScott wrote:Speaking of conspiracies, what I'm reading out of New York and New Jersey is sounding pretty horrific. The Red Cross and FEMA starting to take some heat. So far, Obama seems to be getting a pass on it. We were talking earlier about media bias. Maybe I'm remembering in accurately, but by this stage Bush was getting eviscerated for Katrina. I'd be hard pressed to identify exactly what Obama's done for Sandy that Bush didn't do for Katrina. My point here isn't that Obama deserves the heat; I'm not so sure there's that much a president can do for this kind of disaster other than appear concerned. By comparison, though, I think Bush got (and still gets) more heat for Katrina than he deserved. It was much more a failure of state and local government, in my view. Old issue, just an observation........

No JScott, it's not your imagination. The mainstream media is basically an extension of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. I live in NY, very little has been done here or in Jersey, Staten Island is a complete disaster. Sean Penn has not to this point been spotted in his row boat, nor have all the other celebs who were involved in Katrina...the folks in Breezy Point where 108 houses burned down, in Staten Island where it looks like a tornado went through, and in Jersey where many people are in the same position as my nephew who lost everything he owned and got to watch his car float down the block as he watched from his attic window where he was trapped for 18 hours...we're talking largely about blue collar working folks whose plight dosen't seem to stir the concern or outrage of the major media.

If George Bush, or probably any other Republican were president, he'd be toast by now. For that matter, the same thing applies for the Benghazi mess which was glossed over by the mainstream media or actively misrepresented, as in the case of Chris "tingle up the leg" Matthews. Criminal disregard for the lives of brave Americans in Benghazi and all the lies and covering up. ...or Joe Biden making asinine racist comments, and on and on. Can you just imagine if a jackass like Biden were a Republican VP trying to get his ticket re-elected? The major media simply wouldn't know where to start!

I sense a lot of the same vibe that was present in Carter vs Regan. I hope it's not just wishful thinking on my part, because if it is, I feel the that 4 more years of Obama and his politics of division, deficit, weakness internationally, and neglect of the economy will really damage America.

I have to set aside something special to drink tomorrow evening in case reason prevails, if not, I think I'll have an O'Doules so I don't become too despondent.