The new Rasmussen daily presidential tracking poll, an average of the last 3 days, 2 of which were post-debate.
Heading into Wednesday’s showdown, it was the president who enjoyed a two-point advantage. Today is the first time Romney has been ahead by even a single point since mid-September. See daily tracking history....
Both men have solidified their partisan base. Romney is supported by 89% of Republicans and Obama by 88% of Democrats.
Romney has more support with Republicans than Obama has with Democrats.
Among those not affiliated with either major party, Romney leads by 16.
One might speculate that Obama has more of a problem reaching the middle group. His base will punish him. Romney has more ability to appeal to the middle, because core conservatives will stick with him, since they want Obama out so badly. If Romney can show — and he did at the debate — that he's not the heartless plutocrat in the Democrats' caricatures, people in the middle can feel free to vote for him (especially if they feel — as the debate made them feel — that Obama is worn out and doesn't really want to keep working at the job).
पोस्ट्स
७२ टिप्पण्या:
What about Big Bird!!!????
Polling is not precise enough to say who is ahead -- it's all within or at the limit of the margin of error. That makes the election mostly a turn-out exercise -- which side is more motivated to show up, particularly if there is any inconvenience in doing so. Perhaps one side or the other will open up a real lead, but there is no indication that it's happened yet in the states where the election will be decided.
Lots of wishful thinking going on.
Obama wants it. He's done little else but work on reelection for a year. He may indeed be tired but he wants it.
I expect him to finish strong. If Romney wants to win he must finish stronger. He can do that, now that the sense of Obama's inevitability is gone. But will he?
Absent an October surprise, the final outcome isn't going to be close. There is a preference cascade coming. I fully expect Gov. Romney to beat Pres. Obama at least as badly as Sen. Obama beat Sen. McCain.
There is a quiet, determined groundswell of Romney voters out there that are being ignored because they are not loud, rowdy and disruptive. These were the people quietly standing in line for hours at Chick-Fil-A. These were the people who sought out and watched D'Souza's movie despite the fact that the MSM totally ignored it.
Hell, even Aiken is going to win after shoving his whole leg into his mouth.
"...people in the middle can feel free to vote for him (especially if they feel — as the debate made them feel..."
Enough with feelings already.
We see, well, many of us do, anyway, where that got us.
Let's try thinking.
Just this once?
Please?
Even if Romney manages to win, it will be stolen from him.
God help us, I hope this is true.
Four more years of slogging through Obama's incompetence is a hell of a price to pay to atone for racism.
Yowsah!
I like this:
Lots of wishful thinking going on.
Then:
I expect him to finish strong.
Too funny.
PS: N.C. Vote Tracker reports that 25,263 North Carolinians have already cast their votes. Among those, 13,459 were Republicans, 7,130 were Democrats and 4,630 were unaffiliated.
If I had any idea how to remove my first comment, I would do so, since the typo has been corrected. But I still don't understand how or why Obama's base will punish him. You think they will punish him if he makes an effort to appeal to the middle? Because they will think he is abandoning their socialist ideals or something?
From Rasmussen:
"The generation gap remains wide. Obama leads by double digits among those under 40. Romney leads by double digits among those over 40."
Those under 40 have no idea the bill for Obama's $1 trillion plus annual deficits is coming to them.
Fools.
Tim,
in other words, Romney leads by double digits by those far more likely to vote.
Obama is incompetent. He works 4 hours a day. He's a miserable failure. How stupid do you have to be to support this con man?
Jay, I would be delighted if Obama did not finish strong. But I do not expect it.
I was pretty confident of a Romney victory prior to the debate, but Wednesday night sealed the deal.
With his terrible record Obama could only run a character assassination campaign against Romney, and that could only work until Romney had a chance to bypass the media filter in the debate.
There is no way for the electorate to un-remember the debate performance of the two men, and Romney is clearly the better man. That coupled with the terrible economy, the ME in flames, and pretty much everything spiraling rapidly downward ensures a Romney win.
Tuesday October 2: Obama 49 Romney 45 O+4
Thursday, October 4: Obama 46 Romney 47 R+1
Both polls conducted by Clarus Research amongst 590 Likely Voters with a 4% MOE.
Jay,
Yes.
Good news.
Still dispiriting those under 40 do not understand the risk Obama's deficit spending poses to them.
I'm surprised Obama hasn't thought of balancing the budget by placing large intrade bets on himself to win.
Mathematically, to have a swing this dramatic in the three-day average, the difference between the new day added and the old day dropped had to be at least 5 points in Romney's favor.
Tim,
interestingly enough, I am in PA and they are running this commercial constantly showing young people talking about their share of the debt, and about how they are getting ripped off by Social Security. In the commercial one ~25 y/o is outside of his parents house with a suitcase and says "I"m so glad my mom and dad have room for me" and such.
Someone is trying to get the message out.
Oh nos!
"Obama wants it. He's done little else but work on reelection for a year. He may indeed be tired but he wants it.
I expect him to finish strong."
-- He skipped out on his own debate prep and publicly complained about being forced to do his homework. He... really didn't work that hard on reelection either (at least, not the actual "work" parts.)
He won't finish "strong." He'll finish strong compared to his abysmal recent performance, in other words, he'll regress towards his mean (slightly below average-ish off-the-cuff presentation with a decent scripted closing.)
Donald, there should be a little trash can next to any comment you make. I think next to the time stamp.
Click that and you will be asked if you want to delete the comment.
As far as why the base would punish him, it's a bit like GWB. They're already dissatisfied with his performance in a lot of ways, so you start seeing people arguing against him because he's not partisan enough. Obama is vulnerable because he hasn't kept a lot of his promises--especially related to war issues--that would charge up his base. So, he needs to reassure them that he's waiting until his second term.
The base will never become Romney voters, but every disappointed liberal will be much less likely to get involved in the campaign and much more likely to stay home on election day.
"Obama is vulnerable because he hasn't kept a lot of his promises--especially related to war issues--that would charge up his base."
-- You assume most of them meant what they said about their anti-war positions and that they weren't merely thinly disguised anti-Bush positions. There is a very small group of people who were -actually- against the wars, drone strikes, etc. Most of the people just saw a chance to bludgeon a politician they disliked and took it.
Fools.
Oh great, now I'm compelled to riot because of this insult against me and my generation. Who's with me?! Freeman? Simon? Vbspurs still around?
Which does raise the question about who else is under 40 around here.
Matthew, that might be true.
Among the people I know, and I know a lot of Obama supporters, there's a genuine aversion to war. Yes, most of the people I know are Christian Left sorts, so that might make them a bit more sincere about that issue.
Obama's base will punish him because like the Own Wall Street crowd they don't really know what they want - except for someone else to carry their burden. You know them. We call them democrats.
Not me, Paddy. Proudly over 50 and this evangelical is proudly supporting Mitt Romney,
rhhardin said...
"I'm surprised Obama hasn't thought of balancing the budget by placing large intrade bets on himself to win."
Because, pace Romney, even Obama knows he picks losers.
"Which does raise the question about who else is under 40 around here."
Oh.
You thought I meant *everyone* under 40, NOT *those under 40 voting for Obama*."
Hmmm.
Don't know what to tell you about that, except that based upon your comments, I think it safe to say you aren't amongst the fools.
FWIW, that is.
Obama loves being President but he shirks the real responsibilities that come with the office.
The debate last Wednesday pitted a smirking choom gang member against a clean-living, hardworking
accomplished, knowledgeable, serious energetic contender.
Romney was even likeable Wednesday night.
Obama-- not so much.
According to Ras, the real impact comes tomorrow.
If the Romster has the over 40 side of the generation gap, that's where you want to be. Those are the people who will be out on Election Day.
PS Off Insta, Rs leading Ds 2 to 1 in NC in early voting.
Brent said...
"Not me, Paddy. Proudly over 50 and this evangelical is proudly supporting Mitt Romney."
As is this over 50 Catholic.
Donde esta "Crack?"
3..., 2..., 1...
Jay: "...interestingly enough, I am in PA and they are running this commercial constantly showing young people..."
I hope the *they* you write of is the Romney Campaign; wouldn't be surprised at all if it was the Obama Campaign, lying about Obama's concern for deficits and debt.
Worn out. What a joke. He's been carried his whole life by the guilt of white liberals. No doubt he came to believe that "I'm some punkins." The debate was deflation day. Not for him. For the millions that bought into the narrative.
Which does raise the question about who else is under 40 around here.
10/6/12 9:56 AM
Taking my cue from Jack Benny, (a fellow you young whippersnappers have probably never heard of)I have been 39 for the past 11 years.
I was once a silly young liberal myself. That does not make silly young liberals (such as the Madison geniuses who thought it unfair that Obama could not use his teleprompter during the debate) easier to take. I also have an extremely low tolerance vel when it comes to mouthy teenagers, despite the fact that I was once a mouthy teenager too.
I find it difficult to feel sorry for people who are enthusiastically voting themselves into poverty, especially when they will drag the rest of us down with them.
If Romney can show — and he did at the debate...
That he has no principles or consistency and will say anything to get elected - as long as he does it quickly, surreptitously enough? Yeah, good luck with that. And good luck believing that NOW he cares about anything other than getting you to cut his taxes.
The official Republican strategy is: Have no principles. Change your positions quickly and with the advantage of surprise. Save apologies for when you're looking good - sure, it's less credible that way but it helps your image.
Romney has the personality and sincerity of a hydra. What an interesting way for a faction that hates change to cope with life in an era of instant information. Disingenuous and devilish, but you're all pretty amoral anyway.
Keep in mind, estimates are at least 67M people saw that debate, and some think it may be as high as 70+.
So these results reflect a sizeable portion of the American electorate.
PS According to Ras, about a third of likely voters are Tea Partiers.
Which does raise the question about who else is under 40 around here.
Me, but I think my age group is pretty aware of the budget implications. No one I know thinks SS will be there, at least not as it is now.
It's all those 18-24 year olds skewing the polls towards Obama, most likely. They haven't quite figured it out yet and they haven't had 10 or 15 years of paying in SS knowing its going to hell to piss them off.
THE WH POLLS, which are run by the Hollywood computer, show that we are 55% to Romney's 45%.
WE ARE NOT AFRAID of the GOP.
Next Thursday, VP Biden will dismember Ryan on Live TV.
On 10/16, the great POTUS Obama will dismember (and make him wet in pants) Romney on Live TV with 100 million viewers.
The election will be over. Romney funeral is 10/16. Bring flowers.
I note that the comments sections here have been pleasantly free of shilol's bird droppings since the debate.
The silence is nice although it won't last.
blessings.
I don't have trouble believing that Romney helped himself in the debate, or even that he's neck and neck with the President generally. Who is ahead by a point or has one point more from his party seems to fine to accurately measure. With a terrible response rate, I continue to have little faith in the polls.
Here's an amusing article from a pundit claiming that Obama threw this week's debate because "he was bored." The writer, Jeremy Lott, is even vaguely conservative.
This is more of the Obama Superman nonsense. I can't think of anyone in public life as over-rated as Obama.
Heh, its funny to hear the liberal meme "Romney lied!" as if it were gospel. You may not agree with Romney's interpretations of the facts or approach but its not a "lie" if you don't agree with him. And please, hold the phony "fact checkers" who have no problem with Obama's "lies". Face it, obama's not that smart and needs a body guard of MSM and idealogues to function, much less compete in a debate.
Mitt to Obama before the debate, "the first time I debate you, I might scare you a little, because I’m a man, and I know how to do things."
Shorter gk1:
Obama's success depends upon an honest press!
http://instagram.com/p/QYGWYpP9Pd/
Why is Drudge fanning these flames?
What is wrong with Matt Drudge for raising these issues in the manner he does?
Is it...
That's pretty creepy, dbp. Is that what your first boyfriend said to you before your first passionate interlude? It sounds pretty firmly ingrained in your memory.
Obama now has to unquestionably beat Romney in the next debate. If Obama is close or ties Romney gains even more in terms of being a creditable, acceptable choice, meaning Obama loses ground.
Obama will be hard pressed to make up lost ground, attack and not lose his cool in the second debate. Romney needs to be prepared for Obama to call him a liar to his face, repeatedly, as Obama tries to win the last debate and the second one.
I think it safe to say you aren't amongst the fools.
Thanks Tim.
I know what you meant, I just thought a little artificial outrage would spice up a Saturday morning.
Even still, the moment is gone, I should probably go outside and turn that car right side up. And what am I going to do with this balaclava now?
And if it were Obama 49% and Romney 47%, I'd say the same thing: It's a statistical tie.
Shanna,
I think you're totally right. There's a big difference between the working young and the idealist young.
Yes, it is firmly ingrained in my Memory.
"Obama now has to unquestionably beat Romney in the next debate."
How in the hell is he going to do that? Romney's smarter, faster, more articulate and knowledgeable, and a true alpha.
It's the last attribute that so completely rattles Obama. He has to invest so much energy to try and project dominance in this situation that it drains him and keeps him off balance. Whereas Romney, being the naturally dominant man, gains energy from the exchange. Energy that inspires and focuses him.
The best Obama can hope for is a corrupt moderator and a stacked Town Hall audience. I'm not sure even that can help him much now.
GOP LOSERS:
WE HAVE THE BRAIN TRUST IN ATTENDANCE.
We will dismember Romney. WE will get help from every news media org. EVERY ONE.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82091.html
47%
Romney was right.
People under 40 are still shaking off the intoxication of public school education. At the age of 55, I recall well the trope peddled by mid-1960s school teachers that Franklin Delano Roosevelt "saved America" with the New Deal. Nothing could have been further from the truth. The New Deal era took us a long way down the road to the socialism we were fighting around the planet in the Cold War. Even Social Security is utter bullshit as it killed the family and started the death of the work ethic.
One of the things I'm enjoying the most post debate are the attacks from the left regarding Romney "saying anything to get elected".
We lived 8 years with a guy like that and his name was Bill Clinton. Whatever was pragmatic at the moment, Clinton would support. And to be honest, it wasn't necessarily such a bad way to govern and was effective politically.
Over the last four months the left only knows straw man Romney, the arch conservative wife killer from the $300 million in negative ads.
The reality is that he's a complete middle of the road pragmatist. Heck, he signed his name onto a massive health plan when Governor.
Romney is EXACTLY what the middle in this country say they want. A get something done moderate.
The problem is that Obama's only chance of re-election is to keep painting him as something much different.
Kerry also took a lead over Bush in 2004 after beating him in the first debate. Although the difference then is that the beating wasn't as bad, and no one really expected Bush to win any debate. With Obama, it really was the emperor has no clothes.
In 2004, however, swing voters in the end did not trust Kerry to fight the War on Terror which is why Kerry lost.
This election is different because there is no doubt that swing voters trust Romney with the economy... and foreign policy is not really the issue in this election.
Obama can only win if he brings his base to the polls in big numbers. After the first debate there is no way Obama can win swing voters.
Obama has never really debated anyone good other than ROmney. Obama got to debate Alan Keyes, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John McCain. These are not good debaters.
In contrast, Romney got to practice against Newt Gingrich a dozen times and beat Gingrich on several occasions.
Obama is no Gingrich.
Romnwy will pound home in the debates that he is the only one with a record of working accross the aisle.
I always imagined that Romney care would be a detriment to Romney. But the mere fact that Romney passed it in his state will full Republican support, where Obama jammed Obamacare, the stimulus, and Dodd Frank down our throats on partisan lines highlights a huge quality difference between the two candidates.
We are going to have to make a bipartisan deal to solve problems. Obama has never done this. Why would we think he will do it in a second term?
Independents are mostly attracted to those who can make compromises. When you compare Romney to Obama, Romney is the much bigger and better leader in this area.
I'm 41, so right on the hilly border from where I can see both demographics.
I'd say that a lot of people over 40 don't understand how freaking impossible it will be to get anyone under 35 (or even 45-50) to vote for Romney, no matter what. It just won't happen. And I'm not just talking liberal arts majors who went into sociology. I'm talking 20-something defense engineers (a solidly rational republican demographic in my parents' day and in my youth).
Entire belief systems would have to be overturned and that won't happen in 4 years. It is simply out of the question. Maybe... *maybe* if he had been able to win the nomination using his Boston Mitt persona. Actually, no. That wouldn't have helped.
It's the entire Republican image as backwards, frothing at the mouth religious and/or freeper asshole types. Young, intelligent, atheist males who consider themselves rational beings just won't do it. And the females? Forget it, unless they have adopted a contrarian stance for reasons of their own - not always good ones, btw.
So it'll probably be turnout in swing states and those independents again. I can see a lot of disappointed types just not bothering to get out there - passive aggressive voting.
There are two more debates. There is now interest. Romney will have to do very well in both of them.
America Politico! The next time I'm in DC after the election, I'm coming for some of your vegan cupcakes. Fire up your oven, cuz you're going to be out of a job! (You're probably unemployed now, but you seem to be having fun pretending to be a super whiz-bang K-street consultant. How do you say Walter Mitty in your home country?)
"Young, intelligent, atheist males who consider themselves rational beings just won't do it."
Just how big is the "young, intelligent, atheist male" demographic? (I question the equation of "atheist" with "intelligent" by the way - see hatman.) My sister's suburban church has many under-40 members, and most of them are professionals.
Just as the baby boomer demographic includes many many people who did not protest the war in Vietnam or get high at Jefferson Airplane concerts, so too does the "under 40" crowd include many people who don't fall under your rather narrow description.
Nitpick alert...Obama never has worked at the job...
It's the entire Republican image as backwards, frothing at the mouth religious and/or freeper asshole types.
Exxagerate much?
sleepless nights said...
I'm 41, so right on the hilly border from where I can see both demographics.
I'd say that a lot of people over 40 don't understand how freaking impossible it will be to get anyone under 35 (or even 45-50) to vote for Romney, no matter what. It just won't happen. And I'm not just talking liberal arts majors who went into sociology. I'm talking 20-something defense engineers (a solidly rational republican demographic in my parents' day and in my youth).
Entire belief systems would have to be overturned and that won't happen in 4 years. It is simply out of the question. Maybe... *maybe* if he had been able to win the nomination using his Boston Mitt persona. Actually, no. That wouldn't have helped.
Interesting point. Every other creature on earth sees what it sees and hears what it hears but only humans can see and hear what they want to see see and hear.Young and willfully dumb is no way to go through life. Enjoy your life paying for other people's child support, Obamaphones, EBT cards and public service drones better than yours salaries, benefits and pensions among other things.
sleepless nights said...
I'm 41, so right on the hilly border from where I can see both demographics.
I'd say that a lot of people over 40 don't understand how freaking impossible it will be to get anyone under 35 (or even 45-50) to vote for Romney, no matter what. It just won't happen.
Bullshit.
That's it, I'm now convinced that the only thing the polls are measuring is the enthusiasm quotient of people willing to talk to pollsters.
I spent my Saturday knocking on doors in two neighborhoods - a nice trailer park, and a new shake-and-bake McMansion park. It wasn't the trailer park where I found a condemned house, plastered with sheriff's notices about the building being abandoned etc etc - and it was the McMansion neighborhood where a threatening shirtless gentleman came storming out on his porch to menace me.
Anyways, I talked to a number of registered Republicans who hate, hate hate Obama, but said they refused to vote for Romney. Including one elderly fellow in the trailer park who was wearing a gimme t-shirt advertising our local, Republican state representative.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा