This reflects Romney’s turnout advantage over Obama, which could loom larger as Election Day approaches....ADDED: There will be fewer polls done and less accuracy in the polling while the hurricane is going on.
[S]urveys over the past month have found Republicans becoming much more upbeat about the race and about Mitt Romney himself....
২৯ অক্টোবর, ২০১২
New Pew poll: Obama 47%, Romney 47%
"When the sample is narrowed to likely voters, the balance of opinion shifts slightly in Romney’s direction, as it did in early October."
এতে সদস্যতা:
মন্তব্যগুলি পোস্ট করুন (Atom)
পোস্টগুলি
১৬৭টি মন্তব্য:
The PEW organization is run by bigtime libs and leans far left- so consider the validity of their polls and surveys and studies with that in mind.
On election day we will find out how accurate the polls were. I'm not betting on them. I would say Romney is about 3-5% above the poll numbers. This is going to be another 1980, not 2000.
Also Ras has Romney +2 in Ohio. You know that'll wreck Nate's secret sauce '74.6%'- hence the storm excuse, now cover...
Nate Silver, pick up the white courtesy phone
more room for Althouse to make shit up, cite fringe right-wing websites as reliable sources, and fantasize that the hurricane keeps Americans from voting.
PLEASE, God, let Obama get 47%.
That would be sooo funny..
The last Pew poll had Romney up by 4, IIRC.
I think the polls are showing it even to give Obama and his corruptocrat machine some wiggle room w/ the cheat machine.
Waiter, this tacotaco tastes really bitter, bland and stale!
I just don't see Obama winning in OH. The last 6 OH polls at RCP that have Obama ahead: Gravis, PPP, Purple Strategies, CNN, ARG and Time are based on samples that are D+8, D+8, D+7, D+3, D+9 and D+10. The partisan split in OH in 2008 was In 2008 with a charged Democratic electorate and a depressed Republican electorate it was D+8. But in 2004 it was R+5 and in 2010 it was R+1. There is no way the partisan split will be anywhere near D+7.
Am I missing something here or is the media trying to suppress Republican turnout in OH by creating the illusion that Obama is going to win?
"cite fringe right-wing websites as reliable sources"
When the legacy media is the enemy of information, the public has to rely on other sources. In the old USSR, they called them "Samizdat."
Obama is seen as the candidate with more moderate positions on issues and as more willing to work with members of the other party.
Ugh. Pres. Obama is not willing to work with Republicans, and has done nothing but play hard-ball from day one. He has refused to concede anything, except when absolutely forced. He now says he's willing to accept the results of sequestration and expiring tax cuts rather than give up his "tax-the-rich" policy. His so-called compromises are either illusionary (counting billions from the Iraq and Afghanisatn wars as "savings") or outright deceptive (taking credit for greater deficit reduction in a 12-year plan rather than the standard 10-year).
Give him (and his buddies in the media) credit for selling the American people a great big load of nonsense.
ADDED: There will be fewer polls done and less accuracy in the polling while the hurricane is going on.
We need more hurricanes then, to suppress polling.
Come on Nate Silver, time to debunk this! We all know Obama is gonna win HUGE. That's what I read on Huffington Post. Based on the "models", Obama wins 300-320.
I just don't see Obama winning in OH. The last 6 OH polls at RCP that have Obama ahead: Gravis, PPP, Purple Strategies, CNN, ARG and Time are based on samples that are D+8, D+8, D+7, D+3, D+9 and D+10. The partisan split in OH in 2008 was In 2008 with a charged Democratic electorate and a depressed Republican electorate it was D+8. But in 2004 it was R+5 and in 2010 it was R+1. There is no way the partisan split will be anywhere near D+7.
Ras and Gallup 2012 party ID polling also destroys the D+7 turnout model. That's what is so strange.
The hurricane will suppress Democrat voters, heh heh.
In terms of the D+x samples, I don't think pollsters are going out of their way to skew anything (which would be incredibly dumb to their integrity), but I have to ask if Democrats are just more responsive to polls?
"I have to ask if Democrats are just more responsive to polls? "
That is a good question! I think that by nature conservatives are... more conservative and less likely to think their opinion was anyones business but their own.
Pollsters decide how to weight their polls based on what they expect the electorate to look like. I guess that most pollsters expect the electorate to mirror 2008. If it does, then Obama will probably win a very close election. If the electorate looks like 2010, which is more likely, then Romney wins 300+ electoral votes. Somewhere in between and it is probably a close Romney win.
As the storm of the election approaches Romney's lies increase, but it seems to have backfired in Ohio with his claim that Jeep was shipping jobs to China. Turns out Jeep will be adding jobs in Ohio-- no wonder the Blade endorsed Obama as the reliable candidate.
The Pew Poll also Shows Romney leacing +8 among independants. Of course the big key in these polls is that Obama is no where near 50% and in fact seems to be stuck at 47% (that famous number).
IN 2004, Bush was at 49% in the RCP polls on Oct 29, Obama was at 50% in 2008. Today Obama is at 46.7% and has been there for 30 days. That is pretty devestating. Obama should be getting more than 47% if he has any chance for winning. in a race with no third candidate.
was In 2008 with a charged Democratic electorate and a depressed Republican electorate it was D+8. But in 2004 it was R+5 and in 2010 it was R+1. There is no way the partisan split will be anywhere near D+7.
Am I missing something here or is the media trying to suppress Republican turnout in OH by creating the illusion that Obama is going to win?
In 2004, up until the weekend before the election, Kerry was leading in Ohio. But, then everything suddenly changed in the last few days. Hmmm....
I saw someone theorizing on a different site that the "moron youth vote" may be suppressed because the Halo4 video game is being released Nov. 6th. Hopes are that the dopey video-game demographic will stay up all night with their x-boxes and be too tired to bother voting.
If polls consistently show significantly more D's than R's, and consistently show that the R candidate is winning handily among independents, is it more likely that (1) all the polls are skewed toward Ds or (2) many R-leaning voters are identifying themselves as independents?
Supposedly, the correct skew is R +1, but we can't show that.
Pew and Q-Pac have become legendary for their dishonesty.
Tom L said...
I just don't see Obama winning in OH.
Neither can anybody actually here.
Does the info that 1 of 3 Ohio voters have altready cast votes overwhelmingly for Obama mean any Ohio poll is moot?
Does the info that 1 of 3 Ohio voters have altready cast votes overwhelmingly for Obama mean any Ohio poll is moot?
no, because the poll includes those voters.... But I doubt that the 1 out of 3 is accurate.
AF: "If polls consistently show significantly more D's than R's, and consistently show that the R candidate is winning handily among independents, is it more likely that (1) all the polls are skewed toward Ds or (2) many R-leaning voters are identifying themselves as independents?"
The polls are not showing consistently more D's than R's.
The polls are actually showing more R's than D's (R+1).
What's happening is that the pollsters (for whatever reason, although we all know a couple of those reasons!) keep assigning D+x and "correcting" their polling results to reflect that D+x advantage.
This is the only thing keeping obama "afloat" in the polls.
Further, in an R+x year, you can count on more people identifying themselves as R's while more dems would be moving to identifying themselves as independents.
The reverse happened (big time) in 2008.
If the electorate turns out to be anywhere near R+1, even or D+1 or 2 Romney will win handily.
And thats assuming the demographics )Age groups/ ethinicity/ geographic disbursement) hold constant or near constant from 2008.
Only 9% of people who pick up the phone respond to polls.
Infer what you may, but I can't imagine it increases accuracy, especially considering all the Big Brother stuff people are worried about.
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
As the storm of the election approaches Romney's lies increase,
Yes, those Romney "lies" are frustrating for you. If he said that, he may have had in mind GM shipping jobs to China and misspoke.
Is this what you think is a big deal ?
A new Mitt Romney campaign ad seeks to undercut President Obama’s claim to be a champion of the auto industry by suggesting a Detroit automaker that received government bailout money plans to ship American jobs to China.
But the car company, Chrysler, says it is merely considering an expansion of Jeep production to China and has no plan to reduce its US workforce. In fact, the company has announced its intent to hire 1,100 additional workers in Detroit.
“Obama took GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy and sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China,” a narrator states in the ad. “Mitt Romney will fight for every American job.”
The ad ran over the weekend in Ohio, a crucial swing state where Chrysler employs about 2,000 people. The Romney campaign did not announce the spot in a press release, as is its custom.
Campaigning in Defiance, Ohio last week, Romney launched the auto-oriented attack: “One of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by the Italians, is thinking of moving all production to China.”
How about this ?
We need to look no further than General Motors’ own figures to learn that GM outsources almost two thirds of its jobs overseas. Less than one in five GM vehicles are manufactured in the United States.
To be exact: GM’s December 31, 2011 annual report shows General Motors of North America accounting for 98,000 of the 207,000 GM jobs worldwide. But 12,000 of these jobs are in Canada and 11,500 are in Mexico. Accordingly, GM has 74,500 jobs in the United States and 122,500 abroad, even after Obama’s touted surge in Detroit jobs. Almost two thirds of GM’s jobs are in other countries.
The Boston Globe is not a reliable source when Democrats are running for office.
"no, because the poll includes those voters.... But I doubt that the 1 out of 3 is accurate."
That stat has been debunked for a while now so, no, it's not accurate.
Let me add to my previous comment (who's gonna stop me?!): The major pollsters made the assumption early on (even Rasmussen and Gallup) that the electorate would "look" more like 2008 than any other year.
The difference with Rasmussen and Gallup is that, over time, when the poll respondents consistently showed that the R's were ascendent in party ID, Rasmussen and Gallup accepted that "reality" and have adjusted their poll %'s (D's/R's/I's) accordingly.
The other polling outfits did not.
In fact, the other polling outfits continue to use "samples" that simply assume 2008 level (AND MORE!) democrat turnout.
So, the realy question is: what does the electorate look like this time around?
If you believe that obama has just as much support today (and perhaps much more!) than he did in 2008, go ahead and believe the non-Rasmussen and Gallup polls.
If you don't, then you accept the Rasmussen and Gallup polls as being more accurate since they, in the opinion of many, are clearly more representative of how many of us perceive the electorate this time around.
No incumbent president polling under 50% has ever won reelection.
This isn't determinative, of course, but Obama has been polling under 50% for nineteen months now.
History strongly suggests he is a loser.
Does the info that 1 of 3 Ohio voters have altready cast votes overwhelmingly for Obama mean any Ohio poll is moot?
The votes aren't counted until November 6th. How can you say which way the voting is tending?
There is no formal party registration in Ohio (the affiliation is assumed by which ballot is requested at the last primary). Even if Dem-identified voters are voting early in Ohio at a very high rate, the stats of Gallup and Rasmussen both suggest that Romney is attracting Dem votes ate a much higher rate than Obama is attracting Republican votes. Couple that with the 12 or 18 point lead Romney has with Indies in Ohio, and the trend gets really iffy.
Remember, in 1980 Reagan only garnered about 51% of the vote.
Carter + Anderson garnered 47.6%.
Hmmmmmmm, 47.6%........
Rasmussen and Gallup are the best pollsters because they report pleasing poll results for my preferred candidate.
"...no wonder the Blade endorsed Obama as the reliable candidate."
Heh, indeed.
Reliable failure.
No prospect of success.
And, of course, a known and confirmed liar.
#DoubleDownonFailure
#MoronsforObama
Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh...
You people are pathetic.
Obama is polling incredibly bad with independents. That, and an enthusiasm gap that strongly favors Republicans, means this is much more likely 1988 than 2004.
Romney has all the McCain states plus IN, NC, FL, VA, CO, IA, and NH. So he's at 267.
All Romney needs is OH, WI, or NV. Based on the independent and enthusiasm gap, Romney will win at least two of these states and might also win MI and PA.
garage mahal said...
"Rasmussen and Gallup are the best pollsters because they report pleasing poll results for my preferred candidate."
Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-Bah-Muh, Oh-For-Four, Oh-Four-Four, Oh-For-Four...
Rasmussen and Gallup are the best pollsters because they report pleasing poll results for my preferred candidate.
Rasmussen and Gallup both have excellent records.
Just keep whistling past the graveyard...
Christy: "Does the info that 1 of 3 Ohio voters have altready cast votes overwhelmingly for Obama mean any Ohio poll is moot?"
1 of 3 Ohio voters has not already voted.
As of 29Oct, a little over 17% have voted early.
What many keep mistaking is the # of absentee ballots mailed out/requested. That # may well be over 33%, but if so they haven't been received or tabulated yet.
What's even more interesting is that a really high % (I'll have to look up the #) of those Dems voting early have voted in at least 3 of the last 4 elections.
What does that mean?
It means that the early voting for Dems simply represents a significant portion of the # of votes the dems would receive regardless since those voters are very likely voters.
Those likely dem voters do not represent an expansion of the dems core voting groups, which has become the default fallback argument by axelrod and crew that they say shows obama "winning".
The dems are fighting tooth and nail not to lose the image of "winning" in ohio since that represents that last sandbag holding back the Romney floodwaters.
garage: Rasmussen and Gallup are the worst pollsters because they report displeasing poll results for my preferred candidate.
FIFY
For garage, like obama, math is hard.
Maybe garage's experiences vicarious thinking deficiencies brought about by obama's altitude fluctuations.
It's just a working theory.
If you subscribe to the conventional wisdom, this gives a slight edge to Obama. He has narrowed Romney's early October lead. The CW says that the candidate with the best momentum coming to the end of a close election is usually the winner.
Another way to look at it is that despite all the Benghazi stuff, Obama has improved his standing. Benghazi is not hurting him badly.
Additionally, Gallup reports party affiliation is now Democrats 35%, Independents 29%, and Republicans 36%.
Interesting trend, especially since Obama is offending socially conservative Democrats and independents. Maybe Romney can pick up a few percent of Reagan Democrats?
David: "The CW says that the candidate with the best momentum coming to the end of a close election is usually the winner."
LOL
Many losing challengers/incumbents have "closed the gap" only to fall short at the end of a campaign.
The only consistent CW is that an incumbent who is underwater (below 50%) in Oct (and obama has been the entire month) has never won reelection.
Evah.
Dream on. By all means.
Has any candidate had Romney's polling numbers with independents and not won?
No. For Romney to lose, the D-R-I breakdown would have to be skewed more heavily to Dems than in 2008. Given Romney's numbers with independents, it is nearly impossible that this would be the case.
Gerry: "Interesting trend, especially since Obama is offending socially conservative Democrats and independents. Maybe Romney can pick up a few percent of Reagan Democrats?"
This is the crux of the matter.
If in fact the electorate "looks like" R's=36%, D's=35% and Indies = 29%, then what can we estimate?
We know Romney is holding more R's and obama is holding D's.
We know that more D's have moved to "independent" and we know that Romney has led independents from 5% to 15% since forever.
Do I really have to do the math for you?.......
"you" rhetorically, not "you, Gerry".
In 2004, up until the weekend before the election, Kerry was leading in Ohio. But, then everything suddenly changed in the last few days. Hmmm....
I remember watching Michael Barone on TV as the voting in Ohio played out. And why it made perfect sense that Bush would eek out a victory. The Dems swore it was a conspiracy by the Ohio SOS, but the polls had set up a false expectation and I expect the cries will return on Nov 7.
Keep hope alive garage.
I understand that with the Justice Dept "investigation" into the Gallup organization, indictments and perp walks for Gallup's leaders are going to happen any day now!!
Any. Day. Now.
@Drago
I don't discount Ras/Gallup out of hand. Put them all together and average them all out.
You ready for a EC prediction?
Senior adviser Valerie Jarrett said that in a second term, President Obama would change Washington by spending even more time away from D.C.
“I think everybody grows. Everybody matures. Everybody develops their, you know, their confidence,” Jarrett said of the first term in an interview airing this morning on MSNBC.
“As I think one of the things that he has said upon reflection is that he’s going to spend a lot more time traveling around the country,” she said after a New Hampshire rally. “A day like today is energizing, and the American people are hungry to be engaged and he wants to be able to spend more time doing it. And that will hold Congress accountable.”
“As you know, what we said in the last campaign was ‘yes, we can,’ not ‘yes, I can,’ for the president. He cannot take on these challenges alone. We need to keep the kind of crowd we had in New Hampshire, what we’ve seen all over the country. Going past the election, we need to win the election and then we need to move into a second term. And we need to bring our country forward together,” Jarrett added.....
So many golf courses, so little time.......
Garage: "I don't discount Ras/Gallup out of hand. Put them all together and average them all out."
garage, seriously, the entire concept of "averages" of polls is so mathematically illiterate that it's difficult for me to take seriously.
Further, there are clearly polls (particularly by some partisan players) that are so "out to lunch" that they should be ignored.
Polls with D+11/14/15/17 samples?
Further, polls taken over what period of time?
LOL
I don't think so.
Polling is "bad enough" that we shouldn't arbitrarily add nonsense into it.
"The CW says that the candidate with the best momentum coming to the end of a close election is usually the winner"
You believe Obama currently has momentum? You may want to check polls in MI, OH, WI et al.
And your CW runs counter to the historical reference brought up earlier by Tim.
One of the posters at Vodkapundit specc'd if Eugene votes for Gary Johnson, the republican turnout could tip Oregon to Mitt. The main paper didnt endorse anyone cos they weren't feeling the love.
C'mon Drago, what's yet prediction? You seem pretty sure about everything.
From Jennifer Ruben at WAPO: "Republican operatives and pollsters outside the Romney campaign see Ohio as a dead heat, showing movement from a few weeks ago. They are encouraged by early-voting numbers for Democrats that are lower than 2008. As one Republican insider put it, “It’s not 2010, but it’s not 2008 either.” [Emphasis added]
Heh.
“I think everybody grows. Everybody matures. Everybody develops their, you know, their confidence,” Jarrett said of the first term in an interview airing this morning on MSNBC.
Hmmm. One would think that if you’re POTUS that you already have maturity and confidence, to, you know, lead. This isn’t an apprenticeship.
Via Insty:
There are all kinds of reputable pollsters whose results never seem to get anyone at the corrupt Politico excited enough to launch a headline -- this includes Scott Rasmussen. But man alive, the corrupt Politico sure does love them some left-wing pollsters, especially PPP, which is associated with the Daily Kos and SEIU. You would think that would be bad enough, but the corrupt Politico just hit a new low by disguising as serious news an affirmation of strategically leaked internal polling from the pro-Obama Super PAC Priorities USA.
Even though Scott Rasmussen has a brand new poll today showing Romney up 50-48 in Ohio, you won’t read about that at Politico's Burns and Haberman blog. You will find this propaganda, though:....
jrberg3: "You believe Obama currently has momentum? You may want to check polls in MI, OH, WI et al"
Exactly.
As an analogy, lets say that Romney is the Denver Broncos and obama is the NO Saints.
Saints: past Super Bowl winners!! Lots of talent. One of the best QB's in the game.
Broncos: New QB, need time to gel; got beat up a bit early on. However, the innate skill of the QB and the overall quality of their team was sharpened by the early struggles.
Last night they played.
Broncos go up 34-7.
Saints score last ("momentum") to make it 34-14.
So yeah, Saints momentum........
ADDED: There will be fewer polls done and less accuracy in the polling while the hurricane is going on.
Thankfully Silver is now preemptively responding to your requests for concern allieving material.
I'm in Denver. Did you really think I wouldn't work in a Broncos analogy?
Get real.
I voted today. Fred Risser was on the ballot. I was 2 when he was first elected.
If I lived in a swing state I would crawl over ground glass to vote against Obama.
"The only consistent CW is that an incumbent who is underwater (below 50%) in Oct (and obama has been the entire month) has never won reelection.
Evah.
Dream on. By all means."
Actually, Obama has been underwater nationally for nineteen months now.
He'd have to be the first incumbent below 50% to climb above that in the remaining eight days to win.
The gap (2-6%, depending, with the average about 4%) is probably too big to close short of a major 'eff up by Romney.
Which seems highly unlikely.
In a hurricane.
So do we wager when OH is called? FLA? CO?
With Seven Days to go, Minnesota is in play. and Pennsylvania is too. Wisconsin is Romney's thanks to Ryan.
Romney is already selected.
Maybe General Ham will get his command given back to him by President Romney. That would win over the military support big time.
garage: "C'mon Drago, what's yet prediction? You seem pretty sure about everything."
LOL
Thats the thing about mathematical illiterates, you don't understand probability/stats.
I'm confident within a particular interval.
That's all.
And with the assumption that some past human behavior can be modeled to some extent at a macro level.
Having said that it appears clear that the range of outcomes include Romney big (well over 300 EV's) all the way down to obama eke's out (by 1 state) a win.
That's the range.
Based on the #'s alone I'd give Romney a 90% chance for victory, giving where all the polls are (even the lefty polls which show Romney leading obama on all the primary issues).
Seeing Red: "So do we wager when OH is called? FLA? CO?"
OH will not be called until late into the night, even if obama is behind significantly.
Further, you can expect "strange delays" on obvious calls for the Republican (like SC/GA etc).
Thats an old network trick. Call quickly for the Dem, drag out the calls for the Repub.
Remember, the networks will want to sow as much discouragement amongst midwest and mountain states republicans as they can.
Of course, in this particular political environment that tactic will be useless.
That won't mean they won't try though.
"wyo sis said...
If I lived in a swing state I would crawl over ground glass to vote against Obama."
That's the requirement for blacks, students, and the elderly here in Wisconsin. Well, according to garage and R/v anyway.
I created this Facebook community page for those that like this blog:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Althouse/301895663258554.
I did not see another fan page, so feel free to "like" it if you are a fan.
I created this Facebook fan page for Althouse becuase I did not see another similar one:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Althouse/301895663258554
Feel free to like it if you are a fan.
"I created this Facebook community page for those that like this blog:"
Why?
For what purpose?
“As I think one of the things that he has said upon reflection is that he’s going to spend a lot more time traveling around the country,” she said after a New Hampshire rally. “A day like today is energizing, and the American people are hungry to be engaged and he wants to be able to spend more time doing it. And that will hold Congress accountable.”
“As you know, what we said in the last campaign was ‘yes, we can,’ not ‘yes, I can,’ for the president. He cannot take on these challenges alone. We need to keep the kind of crowd we had in New Hampshire, what we’ve seen all over the country. Going past the election, we need to win the election and then we need to move into a second term. And we need to bring our country forward together,” Jarrett added.....
OMG, WTF, LOL.
So Obama's plan for a second term is to keep the campaign/ vacation/ "energizing" pep rallies going, vote "present" (or rather "absent") in Washington, and leave Congress holding the bag. Valerie can (continue to) run the White House.
Astonishing. I gotta say to the Democrats here: come on. Some of you appear to be intelligent people. How, how can you vote for such a POTUS?
There was no shame in being a "Reagan Democrat." On the contrary, I consider that something to be proud of.
There's no shame in being a "Romney Democrat," either.
Or vote Gary Johnson, or Jill Stein. But how can anyone who takes our country seriously vote for such a dangerously unserious POTUS? I don't get it.
A cautiously optimistic look at the polls by Ace of Spades here.
Well over 300 EV's for Romney from Drago. Bold!
For the record, I'll go bold and predict 305 EV's for Obama/Biden.
garage: "Well over 300 EV's for Romney from Drago. Bold!"
LOL
Look, I know that math concepts kind of throw you for a loop, so I want you to repeat a single word (it would be unfair to ask more of you): "Range"
I trust Ras. And Ras has the polls really tight.
Gallup is next in trust.
Whatever happened to Zogby? oh that's right he was so off he lost all credibility.
Pew could be headed that way.
We shall see!
Drago: you are mistaken. The only major pollster that adjusts for party affiliation is Rasmussen.
I wonder if the residents/voters of Wisconsin care about this?
Andy R?
Ras has Romney at 279 EV.
More importantly than the Pew, Rasmussen published Ohio with Romney leading.
No Chicago Police will be able to take time on election day. Unusual. Why might Rahm be worried about post election rioting?
AprilApple said...
I wonder if the residents/voters of Wisconsin care about this?
Andy R?
There's a better chance of AndyR being Phillip Frank than of his caring about Frank's threats. Except to the extent the backlash will hurt Pocan of course.
Re: Update...
The national polls will be confused by the lack of responses from the east coast.
If I were in charge of a big polling outfit, I'd be focusing all those spare phone banks on interesting states -- a thousand responses in Wisconsin could be fascinating. Or Minnesota. Or Iowa. Or New Mexico -- it's been three weeks since anyone's polled there, and there are no weather interruptions in the southwest.
"In 2004, up until the weekend before the election, Kerry was leading in Ohio. But, then everything suddenly changed in the last few days. Hmmm...."
Remember that silly campaign by the Guardian (UK) to influence the voters in Clark County, OH? If I remember correctly it was an open letter to the voters signed by a bunch of prominent British lefties.
Clark County went for Bush. Apparently, the residents weren't much bothered by what Harold Pinter and Antonia Fraser might think of them.
I sent an email to the editor the day after the election heartily thanking for them for helping Bush carry Ohio.
I was really hoping the Guardianistas would try it again this year, but alas..
“I think everybody grows. Everybody matures. Everybody develops their, you know, their confidence,” Jarrett said of the first term in an interview airing this morning on MSNBC.
...and everybody gets a participation trophy.
The Presidency as Journey of Self-Discovery, per Sarah Palin. Jeebus.
"As I think one of the things that he has said upon reflection is that he’s going to spend a lot more time traveling around the country," she said after a New Hampshire rally.
i.e. leading from behind. The work of the country (at least for his job) is in Washington. His desire to be "anywhere but" means he's fundamentally unserious about being the chief "executive" of the country. We're not electing a marketing chief. We're electing a chief executive. Or at least we're trying to.
But I guess all that hard work and attention to detail and real negotiating and all the substantive parts of managing an entire country are just a drag. So he'll go gallivanting about and stick to the funs stuff. As if he spent too much time in Washington on the first go round. Didn't he revert to campaign mode immediately after the 2010 elections already?
"Remember that silly campaign by the Guardian (UK) to influence the voters in Clark County, OH? If I remember correctly it was an open letter to the voters signed by a bunch of prominent British lefties."
Actually, it was more than, and more intrusive than, that. Guardian readers were supposed to sign up with the paper to get the name and address of an actual voter in Clark county, Ohio and then write them a personal letter telling them to vote for John Kerry. Like American voters want a foreign newspaper handing out their name and address so they can receive in their mailbox an unsolicited letter from someone they don't know a whit about, and who probably doesn't know squat about the particulars of an American election, instructing them how to vote.
No Chicago Police will be able to take time on election day. Unusual. Why might Rahm be worried about post election rioting?
Here are some black Chicago community activists that aren't voting for Obama (probably not Romney either, but maybe they will vote for his reelection if he does things right):
EXODUS: INNER CITY BLACKS FLEEING OBAMA, DEMOCRATS
I went through the RCP and Rasmussen individual state polls to get the latest and most accurate poll information I could from each state. Then I took each state's results and rolled them up into a single national average result.
According to that analysis, the individual state polls, when totaled up to a single national result gives Obama a 47% to 46% edge nationally compared to Romney.
The latest "national polls" give Romney about a 50% to 47% edge nationally.
So which is it? Are the national polls wrong or are the state polls wrong? They can't both be right, they give two completely different results.
Right now Romney is betting on the national polls and Obama is betting on the state polls.
Will be interesting to see which ends up being right.
Of course Sandy is likely to botch the whole thing up...
Wow, that Valerie Jarrett is one platitudinous gal.
roesch/voltaire said...
As the storm of the election approaches Romney's lies increase, but it seems to have backfired in Ohio with his claim that Jeep was shipping jobs to China. Turns out Jeep will be adding jobs in Ohio-- no wonder the Blade endorsed Obama as the reliable candidate.
Report: FIAT now says Jeep may move to Italy...
I swear you're as childishly partisan as that garage fellow.
Cosmic Conservative...
The State polls have a WAY bigger margin of error.
CC: sample sizes are smaller in the state polls, so they are more prone to error. I also believe there's a lot of "noise" in many of the state polls, mostly to prop up a failing incumbent whose national numbers can't crack 47%. Those outliers still get averaged into most sites, like RCP and 538, and give the left the narrative they want.
Bottom line: Zero loses unless Dem turnout matches or exceeds 2008.
Report: FIAT now says Jeep may move to Italy
Bloomberg News:
Marchionne Seen Missing Fiat Sales Target by $19 Billion
Its plants in Italy, where car sales are on pace to plunge this year to the lowest level in more than three decades, are running at 50 percent of capacity, far below the 80 percent threshold typically considered profitable.
To counter the severe slump in European sales, Marchionne is considering building Chrysler models in Italy, including Jeeps, for export to North America. The Italian government is evaluating tax rebates on export goods to help Fiat. Marchionne may announce details of his plan as soon as Oct. 30, the people said.
So, Chrysler got gov't bailout to move some production overseas? Obama the outsourcer!
Prediction?
EC: Romney 296 / Obama 242
Including: OH, IA, CO, NH, ME2, WI
Without Ohio Romney = 278
Popular: Romney 52% / Obama 47% / Other 1%
Drago I just want to say that I love your screen name.
It is the name of my time favortie character in Gunsmoke as played by Buddy Ebsen.
Alan-
That report was from October 12.
Newer reports indicate that it's in addition to domestic production. Could still change, though.
Rage Against the Democrat Machine.
Well, I wouldn't call it rage. More like a quiet awakening.
Sad and sorry folks. The Chicago cheat machine trumps.
Via Insty:
AFRICOM CHIEF GENERAL HAM IS LEAVING: But the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, General Martin Dempsey, claims Ham’s departure is “part of a routine succession” planned since July. This is in contrast to rumors that General Ham had recommended (and was prepared to use) military force to help rescue Ambassador Stevens and his colleagues at the consulate in Benghazi.
Via Madison.com
The Chad Lee/Media Trackers story was made up.
Shocka!
I'm still hoping for Obama's victory but I've made peace with a Romney win.
I'm with Bagoh20 except a tad more optimistic. Add a point here and a state there. . .not bothering to work out the details. Suffice it to say I predict a substantial Romney victory. I will say I think these guys are a tad TOO optimistic. I think Romney with 359 EV is within the realm of possibility but unlikely. Bahoh's 278 is at the lower bound of the range.
HA. To both new revelations.
I'm still hoping for an Obama victory but I'm at peace with a Romney win if that happens.
Sandy's not a hurricane anymore.
It's a "superstore."
So far it's super hype.
They are getting 90 mph gusts.
FDR Drive under water.
That;s a very low spot.
Way overhyped imho.
Is it too soon to begin celebrations?
Hit the road Barack
and don't ya come back no more
Hit the road Barack
and don't ya come back no more no more
Hit the road Barack
and don't ya come back no more no more no more
Well, you get the idea.
I'm still hoping for an Obama victory but I'm at peace with a Romney win if that happens.
I've never let who is president really affect my life. I'll keep doing what I do. That said, I just don't think Obama's handled the office well after 4 years, and I think someone else might do a better job.
EMD I've spent some time thinking about it that way - that's between you and me though, keep it to yourself. After thinking it out, and rethinking it, I'm still going with Obama. I'll probably be rethinking it up until Tuesday next.
Honestly who the President is doesn't effect me personally one way or another.
You probably know I completely respect your sentiment.
Weather Channel is interviewing Joseph Bruno, NYC director of emergency management. He is cool as a cucumber, while the newsies are semi hysterical. They just can't get him to act like this is some huge out of control crisis. Looks like New York had this planned well, and is foiling the newsies' lust for another Katrine.
Nice joh Joseph Bruno, you magnificent son of a bitch.
New York seems exceedingly well-prepared this time around.
My old Brooklyn building is currently swaying and rocking in the buffeting wind.
"Sandy's not a hurricane anymore.
It's a "superstore."'
I'm picturing an enormous WalMart crashing into the East Coast.
Good luck Palladian, stay safe. Best to everyone on the east coast.
Rusty you believe the malarkey in Romney's ad? This from Jeep: Let’s set the record straight: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. It’s simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world’s largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation. A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.
Thanks Patrick.
RV, Did you really only find that part of the story? You didn't find the news that they are considering a move to Italy since their plant there is only running at 50% capacity, and they already got their bailout money? Your source for news left that out?
Silver appears to be freaking out on twitter. He'd best hope he's right, otherwise his tweets will be the majority of the responses he receives in the future.
"I've never let who is president really affect my life."
I wish that was true. I don't want it to affect my life, I wish they didn't want to affect my life. Unfortunately, they think that either I need their help to run my business and my life, or they think I need to pay for people who don't want to run their own.
I wish I could say it didn't matter. I would vote for the guy who wants that every time.
Palladian said...
My old Brooklyn building is currently swaying and rocking in the buffeting wind.
I hope you building is made of brick and not straw or wood.
Keep a flashlight and a bottle of gin close in case the pewer goes out.
David: "Way overhyped imho."
lol
Shepherd Smith: "I am insulted suh. I demand satisfaction! What will it be? Weight Watchers calendars at 20 paces?"
r/v: "Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China."
I am not the least bit concerned with what Jeep leadership has to say about this.
I'm much, much more interested in what FIAT OWNERSHIP has to say about this.
Go figure. Obama gave taxpayer money to his union pals and to an Italian car company, all the while taking Chrysler into a Federal bankruptcy which did nothing to restructure Chryslers non-competitive pension/org structure.
Mission accomplished.
chickelit: "Keep a flashlight and a bottle of gin close in case the pewer goes out."
Good thing you are in NY, a gun free zone, where no one is in any danger whatsoever.
Rusty you believe the malarkey in Romney's ad?
Probably not. That won't stop him from lying about it though.
Yes, you disagree with a Romney ad which had no falsehoods in it. How very very serious compared to the actual duplicity, stonewalling, and deflection that our President is currently involved with concerning major geopolitical issues and murder of American heroes. You are both very serious men. Great job!
Rusty you believe the malarkey in Romney's ad?
Romney ad says "they are going to build Jeeps in China"
What is not right about that statement? I read the other day that Chrysler was going to build Jeeps in China to be sold in China. No one is saying that all Jeeps will be built in China, including those sold in the US.
For a typical political ad, it would get a true rating on Politifact - indeed, Chrysler will build Jeeps in China.
"Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China."
That's funny, because Obama gave over a half-bil in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees to another company to build electric cars in Finland. With US gov't approval. Retails for list of $97K.
Hint -- VC backer John Doerr is an Obama bundler in Silicon Valley.
Bag, interesting that your source for the claim did not link it to Bloomberg New, I suspect because as noted on Nov. 16th all Marchionne indicated was "instability in Italy may affect the decision on where the combined company will be located. This was after he announced a $1.7 million investment to update a Jeep sport-utility vehicle. It seems you Romney supports are as good as Romney in spinning malarkey. Link:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-16/chrysler-plans-more-fiat-dealerships-as-500-misses-sales-goals.html
The Bloomberg link:
"To counter the severe slump in European sales, (Fiat CEO Sergio) Marchionne is considering building Chrysler models in Italy, including Jeeps, for export to North America. The Italian government is evaluating tax rebates on export goods to help Fiat. Marchionne may announce details of his plan as soon as Oct. 30, the people said."
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-28/marchionne-seen-missing-fiat-sales-target-by-19-billion#p1
You got to stay up to date, RV. Your link is almost a year old. In business things change fast. Too fast for governments or their toadies to keep up.
Okay I found the most recent link, but point out this In a blog item on its corporate website, Chrysler said that “despite clear and accurate reporting,” some misinterpreted the article to mean that Chrysler would end production of Jeeps in the U.S. and move operations to China. “It is a leap that would be difficult even for professional circus acrobats,” Chrysler spokesman Gualberto Ranieri wrote in his blog.Now let us see what Oct 30 besides Sandy.
roesch/voltaire said...
Rusty you believe the malarkey in Romney's ad? This from Jeep: Let’s set the record straight: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China.
I didn't see the ad. Which wasn't your point anyway. Your point was that Jeep manufacturing will stay in the US. It won't.
It’s simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world’s largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation.
Of course it will. jep is Chryslers best selling line outside of its pickup truck. manufacturing will go offshore because it's cheaper and increases Chryslers bottom line.
A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.
You're incapable of being unbiased. Jeep will soon become like the Renault "LeCar" essentially Jeeps will be built in Italy with just enough parts left off so that Chrysler can claim it's assembled in the United States.
Like GM it would have been better all the way around if Chrysler had been allowed to file for bankruptcy and trim down their manufacturing and renegotiate their contracts including union contracts. it's most profitable lines would be healthier.
You have a reputation for misrepresenting the facts.
Roesch is shocked, shocked, I tell you, that campaign ads are mostly bullshit.
They're a little slow on the uptake in south Madison.
Maybe this will clear up or confuse us more, from last year:
..Fiat to make Jeep SUV in Italy
AP – Mon, Oct 3, 2011..
ROME (AP) — Fiat said Monday it will produce Jeep SUVs at its Mirafiori factory in Turin from 2013 as it takes advantage of flexible work rules approved earlier this year by union rank-and-file.
The Italian automaker, which controls Chrysler, said the Turin plant will start being fitted with updated infrastructure next year to pave the way for the start of Jeep production in the second half of 2013.
Regardless of what Fiat actually does, it's clear that they didn't need money from me or my small business that does all it's manufacturing right here and will never move it offshore. Rich Italians and investors should not have gotten money that Americans could have used to educate themselves, invest, or give to charity for their own dreams. The government should not be picking which car companies win, paying for it with our money, and then telling us how lucky we are that they did it to get elected. Just stay out of it. I'll invest in Fiat if I want to.
Nate Silver's method is so simplistic as to be laughable. For the most part he takes averages. He takes averages in the belief that the mean removes idiosyncratic error in individual polls. He's right, but only to an extent. The last 10 OH polls listed at RCP Rasmussen, Gravis, PPP, Purple Strategies, CNN, ARG, Cincinnati Enquirer, SurveyUSA, Suffolk and Time are based on samples that are R+1, D+8, D+8, D+7, D+3, D+9, D+3, D+7, D+4 and D+10. The average of the polls has Obama up 1.9%.
The average of the partisan splits is 5.8% more Democrats in the average sample. In 2008 with a charged Democratic electorate and a depressed Republican electorate it was D+8. But in 2004 it was R+5 and in 2010 it was R+1. The average sample on a partisan basis is more like the 2008 electorate than the 2004 or 2010 electorate. So if you believe the electorate will approximate 2008 and that 5.8% is a reasonable partisan split then Nate's averaging method removed the partisan skew of the polls and 1.9% is probably a reasonable reflection of where the vote stands now. On the other hand, if you believe the electorate will look more like 2010 then Nate's method of averaging did not remove all the idiosyncratic error in the polls. In that case, the percentage of the vote that Obama is up is overstated for every percentage the partisan split toward Democrats exceeds the real split. I don't know what it will be in OH. But I suspect that 2008 was a very unique year that will not be replicated; thus, my guess is the D+3 is closer to reality. A D+3 average would turn that 1.9 Obama lead into a 1 point Romney lead.
Another problem with Nate's method is he weights certain polls more than others which creates two problems. It not only gives greater weight to the percentage in poll it also gives greater weight to that poll's partisan split. Now I know one of the polls he places greater weight on relies on a 2008 turnout model. Gallup and Rasmussen both have turnout model polls and both of these polls suggest an electorate that is even or slightly skewed to Republicans. If their turnout models are correct, then Nate's acceptance of polls all with systemic error biased toward Obama leads to fundamentally flawed conclusions.
At the end of the day. we will know on Nov 6th if Nate is right. If I were a betting man, I would not bet on Nate. 2008 was a very easy election to handicap. On the other hand, this is a very different election. Obama got 53% of the vote with a fired up Democrat electorate, Independents overwhelmingly for him and a depressed Republican base more likely to vote Democrat. This year Obama has a record that a lot of people believe is bad, he is facing a very fired up Republican electorate and, if you believe the overwhelming majority of polls, Romney is going to win the Independents by double digits.
Even if the partisan splits are the same as 2008, a 10-15% advantage with Independents for Romney will yield a 5% point swing in the final vote total for Obama. He had an 8% advantage in 2008 add to that 10% advantage for Romney this year, then multiply the 18% times 33% that are INDs in the electorate yields a drop of 5.4% in Obama's share of the vote and a pick up of 5.4% from the vote for McCain...or 52-48 Romney. With a 4 point popular vote win no way Obama wins the electoral college. NONE.
Romney himself said at a rally in Defiance, Ohio, last week that he had "seen a story" that "one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by Italians, is thinking of moving all production to China."
Althouse commenters to the rescue:
"Well...! Fiat said they are thinking of building some cars somewhere, or something, so it's all true!"
That's appalling, garage.
But it was totally cool for Obama to run ads saying that Romney caused some guy's wife to get cancer, amirite? Politics ain't beanbag, know what I mean?
Hey, I saw Ed somebody on MSNBC going apoplectic about how Romney is just a big fat LIAR!!!! Huffpo and Media Matters, so pretty much everyone in the whole world, agrees that Romney's pants are like totally on fire.
I wonder if Sandy will dampen Althouse's East Coast troll contingent.
This is a great strategy for locking up Michigan and Ohio, Democrats.
Let's spend the next few days (after the storm dies down) arguing about whether Mitt Romney is a liar because he said your jobs were going to China, when really they're going to Italy.
That will really prove to all those auto workers that Obama's stewardship of the economy has really helped keep their jobs safe.
And even with all these treasonous lies we see stories like 15% of Registered Voters Have Already Cast Ballots. . .Romney currently leads Obama 52% to 45% among voters who say they have already cast their ballots! How can the American people be so stupid!! Romney lies and stuff!
FWIW, on Hannity tonight a long interview with Ty Woods' father, no Althouse Hillbilly, as our trolls would like to believe but a lawyer, and very compelling.
He made a point of veering away from political issues, but kept hammering home the desire to find out what happened. You could look at the father and understand how the son made it through BUD/S.
Mr Woods is not going to let this go away.
See, even blogger is lying now. Here is the right link.
Garage, This may be over your head, or not important to the goal of Romney hatred, but just like China, Italy is not in the U.S., and does not employee American workers. As an American taxpayer, I just don't see your point.
Can anyone answer this:
I understand 1/3 of the voters in Ohio already have voted.
Do these polls include those who already have voted
or just those who will be voting???
It makes a big difference!!!
I believe it's the latter, but I also think that 1/3 is off.
YMMV
Maybe China and Italy are thought of by Obama as part of the 57 states, 'cept he's about 5 short. ;)
Italy is far worse. At least we can see why jobs would go to China since they pay a fraction of our wages and have few benefits, so the costs would be much lower, but how bad is our business friendliness that we lose jobs to a western nation with relatively high wages and regulatory costs. Do we really suck that bad? And you'll notice what Italy is offering them to get those jobs: lower taxes. What a novel idea. I wonder where they got it.
enderud: "
I understand 1/3 of the voters in Ohio already have voted."
False. As I answered earlier today.
See below:
Christy: "Does the info that 1 of 3 Ohio voters have altready cast votes overwhelmingly for Obama mean any Ohio poll is moot?"
1 of 3 Ohio voters has not already voted.
As of 29Oct, a little over 17% have voted early.
What many keep mistaking is the # of absentee ballots mailed out/requested. That # may well be over 33%, but if so they haven't been received or tabulated yet.
What's even more interesting is that a really high % (I'll have to look up the #) of those Dems voting early have voted in at least 3 of the last 4 elections.
What does that mean?
It means that the early voting for Dems simply represents a significant portion of the # of votes the dems would receive regardless since those voters are very likely voters.
Those likely dem voters do not represent an expansion of the dems core voting groups, which has become the default fallback argument by axelrod and crew that they say shows obama "winning".
The dems are fighting tooth and nail not to lose the image of "winning" in ohio since that represents that last sandbag holding back the Romney floodwaters.
10/29/12 3:40 PM
Nate Silver isn't even plated; he's aluminum.
I've seen a couple of analyses of the early voting in Ohio and other states.
It appears to be true that as of this moment Ohio has seen more Democrats who have early voted than Republicans. This is being touted big time by Obama's team, including Axelrod on a conf call today, as major evidence that Obama is going to win Ohio.
Romney's camp responded by pointing out that while more Democrats had so far voted than Republicans, they had only a slight advantage while in 2008 it was more like 2-1 in favor of Democrats. In fact in 2008 had they only counted voters who voted on election day, McCain would have won Ohio pretty handily. But the early voting edge for Obama gave him the easy victory.
In addition to that the Romney team is saying that while Democrats have been beating the bushes for early voters, Republicans have deliberately focused only on voters who have voted only once or zero times in the past four elections. These are considered low-likelihood voters. Romney's team believes that the voters who have voted regularly will get off their butts and vote on Tuesday, so they don't need to bus them to the polls and point to the buttons to push. Romney's team believes Obama's team is cannibalizing their Tuesday vote, while Romney's team is not. So if they can keep it close in the early voting (and so far they are) they feel confident that they will overwhelm Democrats on Tuesday.
Sure, both sides are spinning, but I guess we'll find out on Tuesday. Of course Romney's team is counting on only live voters who vote only once. That's not necessarily a great strategy against Democrats these days.
But we can hope.
Tom L.
A brilliant analysis by you @9:03 PM.
I have nothing of substance to add, but at the risk of being accused of being non substantive & a partisan, I would add:
As KC put it in a previous Althouse post: "Silver is the most dangerous of partisans - a smart guy in the high visibility perch with a subject matter that is too complicated for the typical reader or other media person to understand."
I wouls akso note Silver's use of "the Ever-Impressive Decimal (see, How to Lie With Statistics): it's Obama by
"72.6%, +2.9%" not "about 72%", or "+3%". The point being that if Silver was foolish enough to say "about" or round off the decimals it would sound like what it really is: an approximation based on assumptions.
This is also what has been referred to in another instance as "a splendid example of sham science and spurious specificity” (I would’ve changed the word “example” in that phrase to “sample” in order to complete the alliteration!), along with “a penchant for pompous mystification”.
IMHO, it is really guesswork from unmeasured, un-measurable, nay unfathomable observations of Silver & his buddy.
OOPS type first on Word!
Should've written:
"I would also note"
Are you cheeseheads getting any of Sandy's abuse?
OT: About prepping for natural disasters.
This is off topic, but a few months after I started to visit here at Althouse the subject of preppers and prepping arose. I and a few others, being totally for prepping for a disaster, and doing so extensively because an unknown disaster is by definition unknowable. We few were called reactionary, paranoid, and generally just dumb asses by others. Look at the empty shelves in New England and tell me again how were dumbasses.
I know it's not nice to use other peoples suffering to make a point but this is a point worth making...Prepare for disasters. Have backups, don't rely on others to save your bacon. It's never too late to start, and it just might save you, or a loved ones life.
Ps.
Include your animals in your disaster planning. They are your responsibility.
These polls are meaningless until voters hear Stevie Wonder's rapturous Obama song: a middle-eastern rap riff; the only thing missing is a belly-dancer's midriff (which would've been a nice touch considering Wonder mentions women only once).
http://touch.vibe.com/vibe/#!/entry/stevie-wonder-release-proobama-song-keep-moving-forward,508eebb294f4be716928e783/1/media/2
(Yes, I thought it was a hoax, too, until I saw it tweeted approvingly by Donna Brazile)
garage mahal said...
Romney himself said at a rally in Defiance, Ohio, last week that he had "seen a story" that "one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by Italians, is thinking of moving all production to China."
Althouse commenters to the rescue:
"Well...! Fiat said they are thinking of building some cars somewhere, or something, so it's all true!"
The point, garage, which may or may not be the point that Romney was pursuing, was that the much vaunted bailout has failed.
GM and Chrysler have simply exchanged one set of bondholders for another. Bondholders that must be paid. Since it is next to impossible to remain profitable with the UAW contracts that they have, the management of both companies have looked elsewhere for profits. Profits that they need to pay the bondholders. GM and Chrysler in this country are still primarily in the pension business and only peripherally in the automobile business.
I don't know how financially sound Fiat is, but somewhere down the road there must be an accounting. GM isn't trading anywhere near what we paid for it. When that day comes, instead of a rearrangement of assets there is a very real possibility that GM will simply be liquidated.
Finally. no matter who is elected. No matter what their policies. No matter how many laws are passed to prevent it. Money will ALWAYS go where it is best treated.
"bagoh20 said...Are you cheeseheads getting any of Sandy's abuse?"
Just very windy. 25-30 mph.
Momentum:
Aug 22nd, Romney held a ralley in Bettendorf IA. Around 1000 attended the event, at the entrance were about 20 or Obama supports holding up signs for the president.
Oct 29th, Romney held a ralley in Davenport IA (same metro area as Bettendorf). Arround 3000 attended the event, at the entrance were 2 Obama supports holding up signs for the president.
Huh. In the middle of the storm, I got a robopoll call. Not a push-poll, either, but straight-vanilla presidential horserace.
Didn't lose power at home, and only at work because they had to bring down the park to fix a dropped wire out on the Benner Pike. For future reference: don't run generator power through desk UPS units, it wrecks the UPSes. Something about the generator having its own UPS, and daisy-chaining UPSes causing some sort of destructive wave sync effect.
Predictions? I'm guessing somewhere between 274 and 312 Romney, depending on how Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania break. Colorado and Iowa "feel" like they're breaking solid R, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida *are* solid, and Nevada and New Hampshire feel like they were more flirting with D than actually planning on going home with them.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন