Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To anyone who doesn't click, they were the top pollster (most accurate) in the 2004 and 2008 election. Most likely this comes from them using a more "modern" polling method versus some of the older traditional one that have trouble coping with cell phone usage.
EDIT: I don't think Obama is up +6 however. +2 to +3 at max is the most likely answer.
Went to an IBD conference a few years back. I hope to heck they are right. All other polls seem to be trending Romney. Nate Silver does not emanate much optimism, either on TV this past Thursday, or in his blogs. More like his gut is telling him, in spite of the current projection, in the end we could very easily be looking at a Romney win. He's not actually saying that, but it is a vibe I pick up from his demeanor and his writings.
Went to an IBD conference a few years back. I hope to heck they are right. All other polls seem to be trending Romney. Nate Silver does not emanate much optimism, either on TV this past Thursday, or in his blogs. More like his gut is telling him, in spite of the current projection, in the end we could very easily be looking at a Romney win. He's not actually saying that, but it is a vibe I pick up from his demeanor and his writings.
I don't think either candidate has "momentum" and it will honestly come down to the ground game in the electoral college. This graph pretty much shows that the momentum is evening out around a tie.
For example why the "ground game" matters, Just listened to a CNN interview with a politial analyst who answered the question "Why is Neveda still favoring the President with such a lousy economy" and the answer is the state GOP party in Neveda is completely dysfunctional. So much that Mitt Romney's staffers have set up a "shadow 2nd party" to try and fix this problem but it may be to late.
And why does this dysfunction matter? The state GOP party dysfunction has led to the democrats registering massive numbers of new voters when compared to the republicans. Can Mitt's "shadow party" fix this? We shall see.
I don't think either candidate has "momentum" and it will honestly come down to the ground game in the electoral college. This graph pretty much shows that the momentum is evening out around a tie.
In your previous post, you said you thought Obama was up 2-3. I agree with what you say in this post - they are likely just about exactly tied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maabus1999
For example why the "ground game" matters, Just listened to a CNN interview with a politial analyst who answered the question "Why is Neveda still favoring the President with such a lousy economy" and the answer is the state GOP party in Neveda is completely dysfunctional. So much that Mitt Romney's staffers have set up a "shadow 2nd party" to try and fix this problem but it may be to late.
And why does this dysfunction matter? The state GOP party dysfunction has led to the democrats registering massive numbers of new voters when compared to the republicans. Can Mitt's "shadow party" fix this? We shall see.
Despite this, things actually look decent for Romney in Nevada when looking at early voting and comparing the situation to 2008. Decent, not wonderful.
Regardless, Romney doesn't need Nevada. He only needs NV as one of many states to put together to make up for Ohio if he loses it. Ohio is the key state.
And Gallup has traditionally actually leaned a bit left of the actual results (though I certainly am not suggesting that it should be inferred that Romney is up more than 7....I don't think he is even up anywhere close to 7).
And Gallup has traditionally actually leaned a bit left of the actual results (though I certainly am not suggesting that it should be inferred that Romney is up more than 7....I don't think he is even up anywhere close to 7).
Then, why is IBD #15 on your Texas (excuse me while I laugh) list, and yet it was more or less tied with Rasmussen for #1, here:
It was according to a study done by a professor at Fordhman University. IBD is #12 on the list.
Why would you laugh about Texas?
Haha - because Texas is a r-wing as it comes. That aside, the real question is why do the two lists differ? This is a serious question. Prof from Fordham says one thing, chart of accuracy says another. IBD focuses on investors, so I would suspect that would have a r-wing slant, as well.
Eh. It seems to be clearly pretty much tied. You can maybe tease out a slight advantage for either side depending on how you want to read the tea leaves. But honesty it's anyone's game right now IMO. Y'all can bicker the details all y'all want but I don't think it changes anything. LOL
In your previous post, you said you thought Obama was up 2-3. I agree with what you say in this post - they are likely just about exactly tied.
Despite this, things actually look decent for Romney in Nevada when looking at early voting and comparing the situation to 2008. Decent, not wonderful.
Regardless, Romney doesn't need Nevada. He only needs NV as one of many states to put together to make up for Ohio if he loses it. Ohio is the key state.
I said 2 to 3 max Not 2 to 3 currently. I think it is close but I think Obama 100% has the electoral college advantage. Romney needs almost double the victories in swing states then compared to Obama.
Haha - because Texas is a r-wing as it comes. That aside, the real question is why do the two lists differ? This is a serious question. Prof from Fordham says one thing, chart of accuracy says another. IBD focuses on investors, so I would suspect that would have a r-wing slant, as well.
No, TX is not as right-wing as it comes. There are more conservative states. That being said, where the paper is shouldn't matter. The Houston Chronicle isn't some right-wing paper.
As far as why the two lists differ, it actually appears that the prof did the rankings based on a time in which the vote was not entirely counted, so it may be a little off. However, it looks like the chart on the IBD/TIPP site was simply composed by IBD/TIPP.
Nate Silver tweeted earlier that IBD/TIPP is prone to wild swings.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not 2 to 3 currently. I think it is close but I think Obama 100% has the electoral college advantage. Romney needs almost double the victories in swing states then compared to Obama.