ABC News Tracking Poll Romney 50 (+1) Obama 47(-1)

[TexasCPA]

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/10/25/post-abc-tracking-poll-romney-50-percent-obama-47/

[WI_DEM]

1. These national polls are so vastly different than we see in state polls

All day today there has been good news out of state polls. Can it be that the south really is driving up Romney's numbers or are the pollsters putting too much stock in who they 'think' are likely voters?

[Robbins]

5. ABC

Total outliner.Seriously ABC national poll Is junk.They often overpolled Bush In 2000 and 2004.

It's the likely poll that's the problem where Obama voters that didn't vote In 2010 but are In 2012 and new voters aren't showing up
In Likely voter screens.

[WI_DEM]

8. That's the thing--they count it against the voter if they didn't vote in 2010

and there are millions of democrats who, for whatever reason, didn't vote in 2010 who are going to vote this time.

[blazeKing]

30. If that's true

Then these pollsters doing that will be dead wrong come November 6.

I know at least half a dozen people who voted for Obama in 2008 that didn't vote in 2010 who will be voting Obama in 2012. If they are canceled out of the likely voter screens of Gallup, Rass and ABC then those pollsters better be prepared to eat crow.

[krawhitham]

43. ABC is the best tracker according to Nate

and it is not a "Total outliner"

Associated Press/GfK - Romney +2
Gallup - Romney +3
Rasmussen Reports - Romney +3
ABC News/Wash Post - Romney +3
IBD/TIPP - Obama +2

Right now the "Total outliner" is IBD/TIPP

[Jennicut]

55. This gives you a better idea of the national polling:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-general-election-romney-vs-obama

Even RCP only had Romney ahead by .09%. Bush was ahead by 2 points against Gore in 2000 but the electoral map was more important in the end, even when Gore actually outperformed Bush in the national polling. State polls are more important right now because this election will be all about only a few states.

[dennis4868]

58. I agree with you

Anytime there's a bad poll, many on DU say its a BS poll. But this poll is in line with the national trend.

[Mass]

59. May not be a total outlier, but it is a tie poll as most.

IPSOS R +1
Rand O +5
PPP O +1
IDB O +2
ABC R +3
Rasmussen R +3
Gallup R +3
CVOTER O +2 (yesterday's results)

So, it is 50% 50% each way. In addition consider that these spreads come from rounded values, which means that the spread can really be +/- 1 %, and it is clear that all these polls are equal.

[Maximumnegro]

63. Thank you. These Wusses on this forum are

losing their shit again. My God what a bunch of weak-kneed p- er - poll watchers.

Seriously. Once again, the campaign made it clear a while ago that the national polls are not to be sweated over. Jesus Christ. Does ANYBODY actually listen to the campaign for you know, the PARTY they belong to? Absolutely EVERYTHING people are freaking out about has already been addressed by the campaign. NONE of this should be a surprise.

Even more disgusting is how quickly all the swing state polls go out the window at the drop of a hat. Some sorry bunch of people.

You know those 'sporadic' voters the campaign mentioned this week? The ones they've gone out of their way to lock in early? That's who's freaking out. That's why they're 'sporadic' as opposed to unlikely. The campaign smartly realized you have to get the handwringers as soon as possible because they wilt at the drop of a hat and are the ones who make the Dem enthusiasm consistently come up lower then Republican.

Every day I am reminded just how much smarter the campaign is than the base itself.

[mzmolly]

61. You forgot PPP, RAND and UPI. Also, some of the polling above started prior to the last debate.

PPP 10/22 - 10/24 1,200 LV 48 49 3 Obama +1
IBD/TIPP NEW! 10/19 - 10/24 948 LV 45 47 6 Obama +2
UPI/CVOTER 10/17 - 10/24 1,115 LV 47 49 - Obama +2

Not to mention, some of the tracking poll averages began pre-last debate.

"Daily Breakdown: Obama's Lead Persists In Ohio, Nevada, and Wisconsin Polls"

[obamanut2012]

20. Both -- major outlier

I can poll Utah, Arizona, and Idaho, and then the next day poll MA, NJ, and CA, then do NC, VA, and MD. All three polls would be vastly different.

[Impious]

2. Sorry to say it, but

half of Americans are utter idiots.

[rhett o rick]

56. Half of voting Americans are total idiots. If you add the idiots that dont vote,

then you have more than half of Americans are total idiots.

[woolldog]

3. ugh

[Cali_Democrat]

10. Don't bang your head against the wall over a single poll that essentially shows the race tied

...after accounting for the margin of error. It's such a slight change from their last poll. Essentially, nothing changed.

That's exactly what the media wants you to do. They will bombard you with poll after poll, especially useless national polls which oversampled the south, in an attempt to make you bang your head and feel discouraged!

[FLyellowdog]

4. Sooooooo.....is there something I'm supposed to do? Whine? Cry? Nah...I already voted. It'll be fine

[kansasobama]

6. Oh No What is going on?

I am so drained. That idiot glorifies rape and Romney pulls ahead..

This country is going down

[LisaL]

9. LOL.

National polls are completely irrelevant.
That's not how one wins elections in US.

[TroyD]

14. National polls are relevant in terms of narrative & momentum

They are talked about a lot in the media and affect the national averages that the public sees on t.v. every day.

Yes, the Electoral College determines the winner, but that won't stop the media from talking about the good National numbers for Romney.

And is it possible he could win the popular vote?

[fugop]

26. Sure! Let him!

As long as we win the electoral college, screw the red-state rednecks. Maybe then we can have a real discussion about direct democracy!

[TroyD]

28. I think it's important that Obama win the Electoral College AND the Popular Vote

Otherwise the importance of his win would be weakened and it would give the Republicans more justification to obstruct Obama in the 2nd Term.

[fugop]

37. Oh please. Like they need justification.

They had none in 2008 and they didn't care. Nothing will make them try to do what's right for our country. Obama could win 49 states and they'll say, "But what about Mississippi! He failed to win a mandate!"

So screw 'em. I mean, I'd love to win both ( and still think we will), but if we don't, that works for me too. A little sweet jstice for 2000, IMHO.

[Cali_Democrat]

40. +1

[Cali_Democrat]

39. "Otherwise the importance of his win would be weakened"

Bullshit.

The corporate media and the GOP will "weaken" and downplay an Obama win NO MATTER WHAT.

They will obstruct NO MATTER WHAT. In fact, they've already admitted they would try to block Obama's agenda if he wins.

I'm sorry to say this, but it appears you're living in a cave, sheltered from the real world.

[Cali_Democrat]

31. Narrative? Momentum? BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

The media has been talking Romney surge since the first debate, but it's fucking BULLSHIT.

http://election.princeton.edu/2012/10/25/do-you-understand-polls-as-well-as-david-brooks/

As you can see, Ro-mentum ended around October 11th, the date of the VP Biden-Ryan debate and reversed around October 16th, Debate #2. Now the median EV expectation is at a plateau around Obama 293 EV, Romney 245 EV. Viewed through the all-important Electoral College, Obama has a Popular Vote Meta-Margin lead of 1.5%. This measure is precise to within <0.5%, far better than any single poll. If anything, the race is starting to look a bit static.

Sam Wang nails it.

The media can scream about a Romney surge and momentum all they want, but IT'S FUCKING MEDIAWHORE BULLSHIT.

[Liberalynn]

51. +1

Thanks for sharing this! While I have nothing to base this on, just a gut feeling, I think the women's vote for the Democratic party is going to prove vastly underrated in the polls. I think more of us are going to come out and vote Democratic than they think.

Rock the Vote LADIES AND LADS

GOTV

[progressivebydesign]

41. The MSM will talk the republican up, regardless of polls either way.

That's what they do. It's what they did in 2008. They're all 1%ers basically, who live in Manhattan apartments and despise the 47% as much as Romney does.

[ProSense]

45. Tell that to

Mitt: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251176304

No amount of spin can erase reality.

[dennis4868]

62. They are irrelevant

Unless we are ahead. We are definitely behind in the popular vote now. So many fucking brain dead people.

[Cali_Democrat]

16. Are you concerned?

Is it disconcerting?

[BeyondGeography]

7. White people; men, of course

Obama’s current 21-percent-deficit — he trails Romney 59 to 38 percent — would be far harder to overcome, as this year may break a string of increasingly non-white electorates. In 2008, whites made up a record-low 74 percent of all voters; in the latest Post-ABC poll, they made up a similar 75 percent of likely 2012 voters.

[WI_DEM]

12. I've read that if Obama can get 39% of white vote with same strong

turnouts among Latinos (which may be up from 2008 according to polls) and African-Americans, then he wins.

[BeyondGeography]

17. Agreed; it's all GOTV

[LisaL]

13. Who cares by how much Obama loses TX?

I don't.
That's all national polls are good for.

[obamanut2012]

23. +1

[mzmolly]

11. This is a three day rolling

average. I'll wait for ABC to catch up to reality, post last debate.

[brush]

24. Right

These are non-credible numbers, totally Romney fantasy land stuff.

[blazeKing]

15. Let me guess

Northeast - Obama +5
Midwest - Obama +5
West - Obama +5
South - Romney +22

[obamanut2012]

27. The Midwest is much less blue than you think

[BigDemVoter]

18. NATIONAL polls mean n-o-t-h-i-n-g

The POTUS is ahead in the important states, and that is the ONLY thing that counts.

Hell, even if our President lost the popular vote & won the electoral college would be fine with me. It would even be fun to watch those RW ass wipes scream about legitimacy after the debacle with GWB who didn't even win the electoral college and yet squatted in the WH for 8 awful years.

All I care is that our president WINS.

[LisaL]

22. I didn't see republicans whine when Gore won the popular vote.

[IrishSean723]

19. National polls mean fuck all.

They're skewed by the sample size of certain areas. They're totally pointless and not indicative of who will win the election at all. Especially in this age of narrative manipulation.

[TroyD]

25. They do matter

Yes, the Electoral College is most important, but people should stop staying the National polls don't matter.

They influence the media narrative & momentum, and are keeping Romney Tied with, and sometimes ahead of, Obama in the National poll averages.

That matters.

[IrishSean723]

32. They only matter

if you actually believe in the media narrative and "momentum". I don't. I think they're little more than tools to help keep people glued to their tv screens and drive up hits on websites. If these polls, and the media coverage of them, are true, that would would mean that a strong portion of the American people are changing their mind on a daily basis. Sorry, but I don't believe that to be the case.

We're less than two weeks out from election day. Minds are made up whether people admit it or not. No amount of hand wringing over misleading polls is going to change how the election comes out at this point.

[LisaL]

35. Well, I have no clue as to what do you propose we do about it.

[fugop]

21. It's going to be awesome.

When this election is over, with Prez Obama reelected, we'll see pollsters finally realizing how freakin' outmoded they've become. None of the demographic that votes overwhelmingly D is as reachable, IMO, as the GOP demo - older white folks who still answer their phone even if caller ID indicates it's mo one they know.

Maybe that won't happen, but I love to daydream about them all exploding as the electoral votes go one after another to Obama.

[PsychProfessor]

29. What worries me

I am not that concerned with the national polls. Of course Obama appears to be dominating at the state level, in the EV where it counts. I think that the national polls show, though, the enormous antipathy toward the president in the red states. I think that that is where the national leads for Romney are coming from--a very big gap in favor of Romney in the South and not as big gaps in favor of Obama in the blue states.

What scares me is that most people in the country are not watching and thinking about this very carefully. So, if Romney should somehow win (e.g., through potentially fraudulent means, like, say vote flipping in states like Ohio) the outcome will not seem suspicious to most Americans--"We knew he was winning all along, why are you so shocked?" Again, I feel like there is a media narrative that the race is very close that provides cover for malicious tampering with the vote. I know. I need to go pull out my Reynolds Wrap and fashion a lovely chapeau!

[ProSense]

33. ABC tracking sucks, and it's

it's not the first time they've put Romney in the lead.

They've also stopped releasing the registered voter numbers.

The last time the RV numbers were reported was Oct 13, and the President was up 7 points.

Oct 13 RV Obama 50, Romney 43
Sep 29 RV Obama 49, Romney 44
Sep 9 RV Obama 50, Romney 44
Aug 25 RV Obama 46, Romney 49

http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1142a12012ElectionUpdate.pdf

Still, look at the likely voter tracking.

Oct 13 Obama 49, Romney 46
Sep 29 Obama 49, Romney 47
Sep 9 Obama 49, Romney 48
Aug 25 Obama 47, Romney 49

[Blaukraut]

44. No kidding. There is NOTHING that could have caused the sharp R uptick on the 21st

And some of the internals make no sense, either.

[progressivebydesign]

46. Thanks for that!! People need to start paying attention to the Likely Voter charade.

"Likely voter" doesn't mean that you told the pollster you were likely to vote, they base it on their OWN idea of who will vote. And it looks nothing like the people who have been standing in line to vote early in the Swing States. It's an outdated model that the MSM seems to love.. and your Grandma's pollsters still use (aka Gallup.)

Now if they said registered voters, with NO screens, and in swing states only, I'd be concerned.

[davidn3600]

34. Obama could very well lose the popular vote

The Univ of Colorado election forecast model, which has never been wrong, gives Romney a 77% chance of winning the popular vote.

Which will psychologically destroy any mandate or political capital Obama wanted in the 2nd term.

[LisaL]

36. Bush seemed to be just fine his first term.

Couldn't seem to care less about any mandate.

[woolldog]

47. I feel the same way.

If Obama wins the electoral college and doesn't get a thing done in his second term except to appoint some SC justices, I'll be ok with that.

As long as Romney and the neocons don't win.

[davidn3600]

48. That's because Bush had both houses of congress on his side

Chances of the Democrats taking the House is slim to none according to every forecast model. Every prediction shows a gain for Dems of 0 to 10 seats....well short of the 25 needed for majority control.

We are going to have a deadlocked government again, especially if Obama loses the popular vote. The GOP will shut everything down and punt the ball to 2016.

[progressivebydesign]

50. The President will NOT lose the popular vote. He didn't in 2008 and he won't now.

And in 2008 people said that same damn thing.. and he outperformed ALL polls and pollsters. They just do NOT know how to handle the NEW demographic of voters. They assume that the likely voters are white, female, upper middle class, and conservative.

[Mutiny In Heaven]

38. That's a shitty model

Really.

[fugop]

42. Oh good god. Not this bullcrap again.

You mean the retroactively "always right" UofC stupidity? You show your colors by pushing that crap here.

[progressivebydesign]

49. Oh THAT thing again. Been discussed to death here. It's not reliable.

It's based on financial data in the past. Does NOT take into account the extreme unlikability of the other candidate, nor the situation the Country is in right now, after climbing out of a HUGE recession.

Plus their data was done before much more promising economic data came out. They've been debunked.

[PsychProfessor]

53. Right!

The UC model is not a predictive model--it is fitted retroactively to data and, in this case, it is being used to make a prediction. That is simply not the same thing. We'll see what happens but I am not buying it. Everyone just needs to vote.

[Floyd_Gondolli]

52. It's never been wrong....until it is

And I'd bet you are misinterpreting the data in some way. Every other model has the percentage of an Obama EC win/popular vote loss well bellow 77 percent. That's just ludicrous.

[mzmolly]

65. I don't much care about the psychology.

Republicans didn't take that into consideration when Obama had a landslide, either.

[bayareamike]

54. The South is skewing the polls. Don't jump off the cliff, guys. The President is winning this race.

It's all about the swing states. We are in very good shape. Various polls from today showing that we are ahead in CO, NV, OH, etc.

[sadbear]

57. That website is called 'The Fix' for a reason.

[mac56]

60. They SHALL HAVE a horse race.

So has it been written, so shall it be done.

[naviman]

64. Gallup and Ras are also at 50-47

And they both have a Republican lean.

[Maximumnegro]

66. So if they have the same number

and they are leaning and ABC has the same number and they DON'T lean that means

it's noise. Otherwise Gallup and Ras would be a lot higher. They can't both be right.

[DCBob]

67. National polling is pointless besides its already stale..

in a few more days the O-mentum will show.

[geek tragedy]

68. EV/PV split seems likely now. I'd much rather have the EV side of that. nt

[Floyd_Gondolli]

69. Poll engineered to feed the horse race narrative