US 2012 Presidential Election Polls

Ponster

> If Romney says he can create 12 millions new jobs, and get the economy going again well that's good enough for me.

I'm pretty sure that analysts have already predicted that the US is set to create 12 million new jobs over the next 5 years no matter who becomes president. It's a safe bet to make it would seem.

Conas

Ponster wrote: »

> If Romney says he can create 12 millions new jobs, and get the economy going again well that's good enough for me.

I'm pretty sure that analysts have already predicted that the US is set to create 12 million new jobs over the next 5 years no matter who becomes president. It's a safe bet to make it would seem.

Well there is another good reason to vote for Romney then, because at least he's telling the truth. I didn't hear Obama saying he would create that many jobs, actually Obama has said nothing to make me think he deserves another 4 years.

Corkfeen

Conas wrote: »

Well there is another good reason to vote for Romney then, because at least he's telling the truth. I didn't hear Obama saying he would create that many jobs, actually Obama has said nothing to make me think he deserves another 4 years.

But neither of them can really claim credit for the creation of the jobs. It is supposed to happen no matter who is in office so it would be intellectually dishonest to claim any credit.

DonnaMarieAva

Conas wrote: »

Well there is another good reason to vote for Romney then, because at least he's telling the truth. I didn't hear Obama saying he would create that many jobs, actually Obama has said nothing to make me think he deserves another 4 years.

Actually, if you click on the link I have provided it will show you how much the American economy has grown since Obama took office.

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_adj_nnty_kd_zg&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:USA&ifdim=country&tstart=57366000000&tend=1288134000000&hl=en_US&dl=en_US&ind=false

Remember, he had a lot on his shoulders before he was even sworn into office. He had to clean up the Republicans mess ie Bush. If I was an American citizen, I would vote for Obama in the election. But I'm not. I'm Irish. I just hope that the Americans make the right decision when it comes to the future of their country. If Romney takes office, one of the first things he would do is start a war. And that of course will cost the tax payers millions. Watch this space ...

Ponster

Conas wrote: »

Well there is another good reason to vote for Romney then, because at least he's telling the truth. I didn't hear Obama saying he would create that many jobs, actually Obama has said nothing to make me think he deserves another 4 years.

My guess is that Obama knows that this will/should happen no matter who is president and is keeping quiet about it now so that in 4 years time the Democrats will take credit for it resulting in their candidate defeating Jeb Bush in the 2016 election

Conas

DonnaMarieAva wrote: »

Actually, if you click on the link I have provided it will show you how much the American economy has grown since Obama took office.

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_adj_nnty_kd_zg&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=region:NAC&ifdim=region&tstart=57366000000&tend=1288134000000&hl=en_US&dl=en_US&ind=false

Remember, he had a lot on his shoulders before he was even sworn into office. He had to clean up the Republicans mess ie Bush. If I was an American citizen, I would vote for Obama in the election. But I'm not. I'm Irish. I just hope that the Americans make the right decision when it comes to the future of their country. If Romney takes office, one of the first things he would do is start a war. And that of course will cost the tax payers millions. Watch this space ...

I know what you mean, but I just hope the Republicans have learned from their mistakes over the last decade. They did a good thing by not having Bush/Cheney involved in their convention at all, so maybe their wiping the whole slate clean and starting fresh. I disagree with you that he'll start a war, everyone seems to be afraid he'll do that. It doesn't just cost the tax payer millions, it costs them billions more like.

Romney is all about the economy though, and getting people back to work I like that about him. He seems to me like a guy who will get stuck in and work really hard.

DonnaMarieAva

Conas wrote: »

I know what you mean, but I just hope the Republicans have learned from their mistakes over the last decade. They did a good thing by not having Bush/Cheney involved in their convention at all, so maybe their wiping the whole slate clean and starting fresh. I disagree with you that he'll start a war, everyone seems to be afraid he'll do that. It doesn't just cost the tax payer millions, it costs them billions more like.

Romney is all about the economy though, and getting people back to work I like that about him. He seems to me like a guy who will get stuck in and work really hard.

Maybe be so. But his stance on the economy won't take away from what he thinks of abortion. How he's going to get away with that one I do not know.

Mjollnir

Conas wrote: »

I know what you mean, but I just hope the Republicans have learned from their mistakes over the last decade.

** intergalactic facepalm **

WHY on earth would you ever 'hope' that when there is absolutely zero data or evidence to indicate that they've done any other than get even more radical and irrational than they were in the past decade?

Have you been paying attention at all to who they're running and what's in their platform?

They did a good thing by not having Bush/Cheney involved in their convention at all, so maybe their wiping the whole slate clean and starting fresh.

So the pure and transparent charade of keeping those two away from the convention brings you to the belief that they're wiping the slate clean and starting over? That's strains all credulity to the breaking point and well past.

I disagree with you that he'll start a war, everyone seems to be afraid he'll do that. It doesn't just cost the tax payer millions, it costs them billions more like. Romney is all about the economy though, and getting people back to work I like that about him. He seems to me like a guy who will get stuck in and work really hard.

Since when have republican POTUSes ever cared about what wars and foreign adventurism costs, and given that he's been utterly obtuse about how he'll achieve his goals, what are you talking about?

southsiderosie

MOD NOTE -

I'd like to remind folks that this thread is about polling - if you'd like to debate jobs, etc., please take it to an existing thread or start a new one.

Ozymandius2011

Nate Silver on Fivethirtyeight.com has made this table showing how accurate the state as opposed to national) polls were in past elections. He found that when the average lead was 2%+, the leading candidate always won that state, whereas under that it was touch and go sometimes.

Ozymandius2011

Obama-Romney tied on 49% in Ohio newspaper poll.


Unfortunately for Obama, Hurricane Sandy will hit Eastern Ohio and not the Western part of the state. But Obama is well ahead among early voters (one in five have already voted).

It remains the case that Romney has not led in a SINGLE poll in Ohio ever.

Meanwhile Obama leads just 3% in Minnesota, which hasn't voted GOP for President since 1972.

Ponster

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

But Obama is well ahead among early voters (one in five have already voted).

Latest news is that 1/3 of people have already voted in Ohio.

The poll you link too is interesting but it's almost the only one that hasn't Obama leading.

This is a summery of the most recent polls. You can see that Obama has lost a lot of ground since September but is is still on average 2 points ahead.

Ozymandius2011

Ponster wrote: »

Latest news is that 1/3 of people have already voted in Ohio

Source? The American Elections Project says its 17.8%.

Ponster

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Source?

Thanks! Turns out I had misread the New York Times this morning

It in fact said that by election day 30% of Ohioans will have already voted.

Ozymandius2011

PPP poll just out has Obama leading 49-48 in Florida. Dem-aligned pollster mind. Gravis poll has Obama leading in Ohio 50-49.

Duck Soup

A new Politico/George Washington University Battleground Tracking Poll [conducted October 22nd to 25th] has Obama re-taking the lead in the Presidential race 49 to 48. Despite the 'Battleground' name, it's actually a nationwide poll, jointly conducted by Republican pollster Ed Goeas of The Tarrance Group and Democratic pollster Celinda Lake of Lake Research Partners.

That's a 3 point swing from the previous week's Battleground poll, which had Romney at 49 and Obama 47. It fits in with the growing consensus that the national 'mittmentum' is spent and it might also suggest that the effects of the final debate are now feeding into the polls.

http://mediarelations.gwu.edu/politico-george-washington-university-battleground-tracking-poll

seligehgit

Appears to be getting tight
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html

Duck Soup

New Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News battleground states poll out today [conducted October 23rd to 28th] has Obama up in Ohio, Virginia and Florida.

Ohio
Obama 50
Romney 45

Virginia
Obama 49
Romney 47

Florida
Obama 48
Romney 47

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/presidential-swing-states-(fl-oh-and-pa)/release-detail?ReleaseID=1812

Brian?

Duck Soup wrote: »

New Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News battleground states poll out today [conducted October 23rd to 28th] has Obama up in Ohio, Virginia and Florida.

Ohio
Obama 50
Romney 45

Virginia
Obama 49
Romney 47

Florida
Obama 48
Romney 47

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/presidential-swing-states-(fl-oh-and-pa)/release-detail?ReleaseID=1812

If Obama takes Florida and Ohio, it's done. No way back for Romney.

If Obama takes Ohio it's pretty much over anyway as far as I can see. There is a slim chance. Romney needs to take PA, VA, NC and IA. A stretch.

Ozymandius2011

Is the stealing of Ohio for the GOP underway as allegedly happened in 2004?

The Ohio Secretary of State report dated Oct. 30 states:

With one week to go before Election Day, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted today released the latest absentee voting data for Ohio based upon an informal survey of Ohio’s 88 boards of elections.

As of Friday, October 26th, more than 1.2 million Ohioans had already cast their ballots. Of the 1.3 million absentee ballots that have been mailed to voters during the absentee voting period, more than 950,000 have already been returned or 71.9 percent. In addition, more than 306,000 voters had voted in person at their board of elections or designated vote center.

The report links to a graphic which indicates 950,544 mail ballots had been returned and 306,776 in-person votes had been cast, for a total of 1,257,320, which I report above.

As of Tuesday evening, I compiled the current reports from counties that are publicly providing statistics. These are also reported above. Note, that these county reports are not entirely comparable as some were generated Tuesday morning and others were generated Tuesday evening. Presumably, the evening reports include the ballots cast on Tuesday. There are some counties with dated reports, and Lake county's system is disturbingly reporting clearly erroneous numbers. Perhaps these problems are related to the weather (I have since updated this report).

The Ohio Secretary of State's office Sent me their county level spreadsheet, current as of Oct. 2t6. I do not know what to make of it. There are 17 counties reporting fewer early votes as of Tuesday, Oct. 30 than were reported to the Secretary of State's office on Friday, Oct. 26. I will continue to explore these data before updating the Ohio overall number.

I spoke with Cuyahoga's media officer and confirmed that their report includes in-person votes even if it says "vote by mail." Generally, Ohio calls all ballots -- regardless if they are voted by mail or in-person -- absentee ballots. In-person votes are often identified in the county absentee reports as "IN OFFICE" or "OVER THE COUNTER".

Manic Moran

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Is the stealing of Ohio for the GOP underway as allegedly happened in 2004?

I am intrigued that you are attributing the beneficiary of this to the GOP. The only county named in that quote, Lake County, has more registered Democrats than Republicans.

That said, it is also arguably the most bell-weather county in the Union. The county is run by three commissioners, one Rep, one Dem, and one who doesn't seem to state an affiliation at all, so it's pretty neutral.

Ozymandius2011

Is it possible the GOP is editing Dem-county election returns though? Also you say the county has more Dems. But does the GOP control the county election authorities? Remember that in 2004, 58 Ohio counties destroyed their election records in defiance of as court order.

Below is a report of the alleged stealing of Ohio for Bush in 2004:

Details on the alleged hacking of the voting machines by the GOP in 2004 to hand the state to Bush.

New court filing reveals how the 2004 Ohio presidential election was hacked
by Bob Fitrakis
July 20, 2011
A new filing in the King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell case includes a copy of the Ohio Secretary of State election production system configuration that was in use in Ohio's 2004 presidential election when there was a sudden and unexpected shift in votes for George W. Bush.

The filing also includes the revealing deposition of the late Michael Connell. Connell served as the IT guru for the Bush family and Karl Rove. Connell ran the private IT firm GovTech that created the controversial system that transferred Ohio's vote count late on election night 2004 to a partisan Republican server site in Chattanooga, Tennessee owned by SmarTech. That is when the vote shift happened, not predicted by the exit polls, that led to Bush's unexpected victory. Connell died a month and a half after giving this deposition in a suspicious small plane crash.

Additionally, the filing contains the contract signed between then-Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell and Connell's company, GovTech Solutions. Also included that contract a graphic architectural map of the Secretary of State's election night server layout system.

Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney in the King Lincoln case, exchanged emails with IT security expert Stephen Spoonamore. Arnebeck asked Spoonamore whether or not SmarTech had the capability to "input data" and thus alter the results of Ohio's 2004 election. Spoonamore responded: "Yes. They would have had data input capacities. The system might have been set up to log which source generated the data but probably did not."

Spoonamore explained that "they [SmarTech] have full access and could change things when and if they want."

Arnebeck specifically asked "Could this be done using whatever bypass techniques Connell developed for the web hosting function." Spoonamore replied "Yes."

Spoonamore concluded from the architectural maps of the Ohio 2004 election reporting system that, "SmarTech was a man in the middle. In my opinion they were not designed as a mirror, they were designed specifically to be a man in the middle."

A "man in the middle" is a deliberate computer hacking setup, which allows a third party to sit in between computer transmissions and illegally alter the data. A mirror site, by contrast, is designed as a backup site in case the main computer configuration fails.

Spoonamore claims that he confronted then-Secretary of State Blackwell at a secretary of state IT conference in Boston where he was giving a seminar in data security. "Blackwell freaked and refused to speak to me when I confronted him about it long before I met you," he wrote to Arnebeck.

Read the email correspondence here [pdf]

On December 14, 2007, then-Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, who replaced Blackwell, released her evaluation and validation of election-related equipment, standards and testing (Everest study) which found that touchscreen voting machines were vulnerable to hacking with relative ease.

Until now, the architectural maps and contracts from the Ohio 2004 election were never made public, which may indicate that the entire system was designed for fraud. In a previous sworn affidavit to the court, Spoonamore declared: "The SmarTech system was set up precisely as a King Pin computer used in criminal acts against banking or credit card processes and had the needed level of access to both county tabulators and Secretary of State computers to allow whoever was running SmarTech computers to decide the output of the county tabulators under its control."

Spoonamore also swore that "...the architecture further confirms how this election was stolen. The computer system and SmarTech had the correct placement, connectivity, and computer experts necessary to change the election in any manner desired by the controllers of the SmarTech computers."

Project Censored named the outsourcing of Ohio's 2004 election votes to SmarTech in Chattanooga, Tennessee to a company owned by Republican partisans as one of the most censored stories in the world.

In the Connell deposition, plaintiffs' attorneys questioned Connell regarding gwb43, a website that was live on election night operating out of the White House and tied directly into SmarTech's server stacks in Chattanooga, Tennessee which contained Ohio's 2004 presidential election results.

The transfer of the vote count to SmarTech in Chattanooga, Tennessee remains a mystery. This would have only happened if there was a complete failure of the Ohio computer election system. Connell swore under oath that, "To the best of my knowledge, it was not a fail-over case scenario – or it was not a failover situation."

Bob Magnan, a state IT specialist for the secretary of state during the 2004 election, agreed that there was no failover scenario. Magnan said he was unexpectedly sent home at 9 p.m. on election night and private contractors ran the system for Blackwell.

The architectural maps, contracts, and Spoonamore emails, along with the history of Connell's partisan activities, shed new light on how easy it was to hack the 2004 Ohio presidential election.

Now the GOP are threatening to arrest OSCE election observers in Iowa.

nagilum2

More trouble in Ohio. This time a voting machine initially replacing an intended vote for Romney with one for Obama:

http://www.marionstar.com/article/20121031/NEWS03/310310009/Problem-found-board-elections?nclick_check=1

Upon selecting “Mitt Romney” on the electronic touch screen, Barack Obama’s name lit up.

It took Stevens three tries before her selection was accurately recorded.

“You want to vote for who you want to vote for, and when you can’t it’s irritating,” Stevens said.

Stevens said she alerted Jackie Smith, a board of elections member who was present. Smith declined to comment, but Stevens says she mentioned that the machine had been having problems all day.

It's my belief that both sides are likely doing everything they can to get every advantage, legal or not. It's certainly not confined to any one party.

Ozymandius2011

Drudge claiming the campaign is about to be rocked by a sex-scandal. However they have a record of hoax sex scandals - and some that are true...

Manic Moran

I can't imagine a sex scandal rocking the election, true or not.

Ozymandius2011

Manic Moran wrote: »

I can't imagine a sex scandal rocking the election, true or not.

It could very well in a race this close, especially in the South.

Mr.Micro

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

It could very well in a race this close, especially in the South.

Is that not the irony of many Americans? They will see stuff on the tv and news killings, invasions by the US, rightly or wrongly, but when it comes to a bit of sex, well that's the limit. Lol. Don't they have sex in the South?

brimal

Today was a good day for the Obama campaign.

Obama looked every bit presidential in his response to the Sandy aftermath and the high praise he received from GOP Gov. Christie was a nice bonus.

Obama has had some nice poll results today and personally I think he will take OH, WI and NV - that's all he needs. Romney will take FL but it will be in vain.

There is talk in Ohio that the public are fuming over Romney's Jeeps-to-China lies.

Ozymandius2011

Reports the scandal involves a prominent NJ Dem Senator using prostitutes on taxpayer funded trips to the Dominican Republic. More seriously they may or may not have been underage...

Agent Smith

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Reports the scandal involves a prominent NJ Dem Senator using prostitutes on taxpayer funded trips to the Dominican Republic. More seriously they may or may not have been underage...

Source for this?

Manic Moran

Don't see that affecting the Presidential race much.

Ozymandius2011

NBC/WSJ Wisconsin, Iowa and NH polls just out:

NBC/WSJ/Marist polls: Obama leads in Iowa, running neck and neck in N.H, Wis.
By Mark Murray, NBC News Senior Political Editor

Less than a week before Election Day, President Barack Obama holds a statistically significant lead over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the battleground of Iowa, while the two candidates are locked in tight races in New Hampshire and Wisconsin, according to new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist polls.

In Iowa, Obama is ahead by six points among likely voters, 50 percent to 44 percent, which is down from his eight-point lead earlier this month.

In Wisconsin, the president edges Romney by three points, 49 percent to 46 percent, which is within the survey’s margin of error. That’s also down from Obama’s six-point lead earlier this month.

Read the Wisconsin poll here (.pdf)
Advertise | AdChoices

And in New Hampshire, Obama gets support from 49 percent of likely voters, while Romney gets 47 percent. In September, before the debates began, Obama held a seven-point advantage in the state, 51 percent to 44 percent.

As the storm cleanup begins, the Republican presidential candidate is facing questions about his position on the federal government's role in disaster relief. NBC's Peter Alexander reports.

“To be at 49 or 50 [percent] is a good number this close to Election Day,” Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, says of the president.

“But he doesn’t have to look far over his shoulder to see that half of the electorate isn’t with him and Romney is close.”

Yet Miringoff adds, “It is always better to be ahead than behind.”

Gender gap, early voting helping Obama
The surveys were conducted Oct. 28-29 – almost all of the interviews were conducted before Hurricane Sandy hit the East Coast, including New Hampshire – and they show a gender gap that’s benefitting Obama.

In all three states, he enjoys a double-digit lead among women (by 16 points in Iowa and New Hampshire, and by 14 points in Wisconsin).

Read the New Hampshire poll here (.pdf)

Meanwhile, Romney leads among men (by four points in Iowa, eight in Wisconsin, and 11 points in New Hampshire).

What’s also helping Obama is early voting.

In Iowa, according to the poll, 45 percent of respondents say they have already voted early or plan to do so, and Obama is winning those voters by nearly 30 points, 62 percent to 35 percent.

But Romney is winning Iowa voters who plan to vote on Election Day by 20 points, 55 percent to 35 percent.

New York is planning to put up tents that will act as polling places, but in the end the NBC's Chuck Todd says the burden of finding a place to vote remains with the voter.

(Iowa’s Secretary of State’s office says that nearly 532,000 early and absentee votes have been received as of Oct. 30, and that’s about 35 percent of the 2008 electorate in the state. But it also says that a total of 660,000 absentee ballots have been requested, and that’s 43 percent of Iowa’s 2008 electorate.)

In Wisconsin, 25 percent say they have already voted or will do so before Election Day, and those voters are breaking to Obama by a 59 percent to 39 percent clip.

Read the Iowa poll here (.pdf)
Advertise | AdChoices

And in New Hampshire, just 10 percent say they will be voting early, and Obama wins that small segment, 56 percent to 42 percent. Among Election Day voters in the state, 48 percent back Romney and 47 percent support Obama.

Higher favorable ratings benefitting Romney
However, what has helped Romney close the gap in these three states has been his rising favorable ratings since September.

The former Massachusetts governor’s favorable/unfavorable rating among likely voters in New Hampshire is 49 percent/46 percent – which is up from 43 percent/52 percent a month ago.
Slideshow: On the campaign trail

Reuters, Getty Images

In the final push in the 2012 presidential election, candidates Mitt Romney and Barack Obama make their last appeals to voters.

Launch slideshow

His score in Wisconsin is 47 percent/47 percent, which is improved from 43 percent/46 percent in September.

But in Iowa, Romney’s favorable/unfavorable rating remains upside down at 43 percent/49 percent.

Also, Romney leads Obama by three points in New Hampshire on which candidate would do a better job handling the economy (49 percent to 46 percent). But the two men are tied on this question in Iowa (at 45 percent each) and in Wisconsin (47 percent apiece).

Other findings

• Obama’s job-approval rating among likely voters is at 49 percent in Wisconsin and 48 percent in New Hampshire and Iowa.

• In Wisconsin’s competitive Senate contest, Democrat Tammy Baldwin gets the support of 48 percent of likely voters and Republican Tommy Thompson gets 47 percent.

• And in New Hampshire’s race for governor, Democrat Maggie Hassan leads Republican Ovide Lamontagne by five points, 49 percent to 44 percent.

The NBC/WSJ/Marist polls were conducted Oct. 28-29 of 1,142 likely voters in Iowa (which has a margin of error of plus-minus 2.9 percentage points), 1,013 likely voters in New Hampshire (plus-minus 3.1 percentage points) and 1,065 likely voters in Wisconsin (plus-minus 3.0 percentage points).

Is Rove up to his old tricks again in Ohio?

Already, a number of interesting developments have begun to take place. This time, SmarTech does not have a clearly defined role as it did four years ago. But three days ago, I reported that votes in several counties in Ohio were being counted by Hart Intercivic, a voting machine company linked to the Romney camp, even though a study by the state of Ohio had labeled its voting system a “failure” when it comes to protecting the integrity of elections.

That is not the only questionable happenstance in Ohio. According to a recent report by Reuters, billboards have begun to appear in low-income neighborhoods in Cleveland and elsewhere in Ohio asserting that “Voter Fraud Is a Felony!” punishable by up to three and a half years in prison and a $10,000 fine. According to a Cleveland city councilor, the purpose of the billboard campaign was likely to confuse and intimidate ex-criminals from voting — even though it is perfectly legal for them to do so once they have served their time. “I’m worried they will actually scare some of the ex-offenders, people with felony records who can vote,” said Phyllis Cleveland, whose district includes several of the billboards. She added that there is confusion about felons voting because it is illegal in some states — but not in Ohio, 12 other states and Washington, D.C. The billboards, which are paid for by an anonymous group, have been put up mostly in black and low-income communities that tend to vote heavily Democratic.

Meanwhile, when it comes to restricting absentee voting, which historically has favored Democrats, Secretary of State Jon Husted has been doing his part for the GOP cause. First, in early October, he issued directive 2012-48, ruling that if voters made errors on their absentee ballots, “Notification may not be made via telephone, email, facsimile or any other means.” In other words, because the error will stand uncorrected, their vote may be disqualified — a ruling that is likely to hurt Democrats since, historically, more absentee voters are Democrats.

Perhaps even more important, Husted, on his own initiative, had absentee ballot applications sent to nearly 7 million registered voters in Ohio, and, as a result, more than 800,000 people have so far requested absentee ballots but not completed and returned them. According to state law, if any of those 800,000 people who have requested absentee ballots show up to the voting booth, they will be required to cast a provisional ballot so that officials can make sure they are not voting twice.

However, state law also says that those ballots may not be counted until November 17, meaning that the outcome of the entire election might be delayed. “That would be called my nightmare scenario,” said Amy Searcy, director of the Hamilton County Board of Elections.

Agent Smith wrote: »

Source for this?

Here, here and here.

Update: Menendez's spokeswoman calls allegations false. Perhaps it's just a rightwing smear of the kind Drudge is notorious for but we shall see.

Manic Moran

According to a Cleveland city councilor, the purpose of the billboard campaign was likely to confuse and intimidate ex-criminals from voting — even though it is perfectly legal for them to do so once they have served their time. “I’m worried they will actually scare some of the ex-offenders, people with felony records who can vote,”

If they can't figure out the difference between the two, I wonder if they should be voting to begin with. It's like saying "Driving without insurance is a felony"* and having convicted felons worried that they'll be put in jail for going to an insurance company. I think that article-writer is just looking for an excuse.

NTM

*Actually, I think it's a misdemeanour, but the root point stands.

Ozymandius2011

Reuters Ipsos poll on how the national demographics are voting. Interestingly Romney does nearly 3 times better with bisexuals than gay voters and gets 59% of White Catholics. Since 1972, the Catholic vote has always gone to the winner.

Lennonist

So what's the story now, is Obama or Romney most likely to win?

Ozymandius2011

Obama leads in the Electoral College averages on RCP 290-248. But most of the swing states are razor thin (1-2%) so it could go either way and fraud and third parties could easily tip the balance.

Ponster

Lennonist wrote: »

So what's the story now, is Obama or Romney most likely to win?

As of today the polls (and PaddyPower) suggest Obama.

LuckyLloyd

Lennonist wrote: »

So what's the story now, is Obama or Romney most likely to win?

Obama is quite likely to win at this point.

brimal

Over the past 48 hours the polls have been slowly going back in Obama's favour.
CNN's 'Poll of Polls' for the first time in 30 days has Obama leading.

The swing states are still very close but the important one - Ohio, looks to be Obama's.
Despite all the bluster from GOP and it's supporters, it will take a big upset now for Romney to win.

Lennonist

Ponster wrote: »

As of today the polls (and PaddyPower) suggest Obama.

Good. Obama hasn't been perfect, but for the American people to return a Republican candidate only 4 years after a Republican President presided over the collapse of the American and international economic system would be farcical. Hopefully the latest predictions and polls are right and Obama will win.

Ozymandius2011

brimal wrote: »

Over the past 48 hours the polls have been slowly going back in Obama's favour.
CNN's 'Poll of Polls' for the first time in 30 days has Obama leading.

The swing states are still very close but the important one - Ohio, looks to be Obama's.
Despite all the bluster from GOP and it's supporters, it will take a big upset now for Romney to win.

As Lenin said: it's who counts the vote that matters. Ohio has a Republican Secretary of State and his figures on early voting are inconsistent with those of some of the counties according to the US Elections Project. In 2004 a different GOP SoS turned out to have a stake in an e-voting machine company providing them in Ohio. Also 58 counties destroyed their election records in violation of a court order after 300,000 votes mysteriously flipped from Kerry to Bush. I doubt that the repukes will allow Obama take Ohio again. In 2008 the SoS was a Democrat you see.

Duck Soup

The shift is slow but distinctly back towards Obama. If you look at the poll aggregators, which all had Romney ahead by a point or so for the last month, they've now got it pretty much evens. As of today:

Real Clear Politics
Obama 47.4
Romney 47.3

Five Thirty Eight
Obama 50.5
Romney 48.6

Poll Tracker [Talking Points Memo]
Obama 47.0
Romney 45.6

Pollster [Huffingon Post]
Obama 47.2
Romney 47.4

CNN Poll of Polls
Obama 48
Romney 47

Sam Wang over at the Princeton Election Consortium is another well-respected poll statistician, but his blog is only partially back up after an outage because of Superstorm Sandy. Well worth a look when it's fully back up and running.

http://election.princeton.edu/

brimal

The CNN poll of polls actually has Obama ahead by a point

Duck Soup

brimal wrote: »

The CNN poll of polls actually has Obama ahead by a point

Apologies Brimal - you're right. CNN Poll of Polls for October 30th had Romney up 48-47; CNN Poll of Polls for October 31st has Obama up 48-47. I've corrected it in the list.

It does reinforce the point that the polls are trending Obama. That's the first RCP average that's had Obama in the lead in a month.

Ozymandius2011

I think the polling averages are skewed by the fact that Gallup was forced to stop polling by Sandy. They are resuming it today though.

Gallup have also today announced another huge drop in unemployment from 7.8% to 7%. However it is unadjusted. The govt figures are tomorrow.

brimal

Duck Soup wrote: »

Apologies Brimal - you're right. CNN Poll of Polls for October 30th had Romney up 48-47; CNN Poll of Polls for October 31st has Obama up 48-47. I've corrected it in the list.

It does reinforce the point that the polls are trending Obama. That's the first RCP average that's had Obama in the lead in a month.

I agree that the polls are leaning to Obama now. It's the first CNN PoP that has Obama leading in over a month too. I would definitely trust RCP average more though.

The only polling company who consistently have Romney leading national and most swing states this week are Rasmussen. I'm not surprised given their Republican dealings.

Ozymandius2011

Rasmussen Iowa poll just out: Romney leads 49-48. Last poll said a tie. In Colorado Romney leads 50-47. Their national poll remains 49-47 for Romney. But they use party-weighting with 37% being GOP. Rasmussen and Gallup have consistently trended GOP since the 1st debate. Some pollsters are going to have egg on their faces on Wednesday.

Wisconsin in danger according to a Dem mayor.

National Review wrote:

“If the election was held today, President Barack Obama would lose the state of Wisconsin because where his base is, we have not turned out the vote early,” Mayor Michael Hancock told a Democratic rally. “The suburbs and rural parts of Wisconsin – the Republican base – are voting. President Obama’s base has yet to go vote.

“We’ve got to get our people to go vote,” Hancock said.

Later Hancock talks to the Washington Examiner and explains,

“This is a very close race, and the point we’re trying to make is make sure the base shows up, turns out and begins to vote early,” Hancock said. “I saw where the votes were rolling in, and I said we’ve got to make sure that where the president’s base is, they get out and vote.”

Disappointing turnout in Dem areas of VA:

Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report notes that the early vote in Virginia is not going the way the Obama campaign hoped: “Today’s new 10/31 numbers even more troubling for Obama. His best counties way off 2008 pace.” He elaborates that as of yesterday, 185,489 ballots had been cast in Obama localities, compared to 214,783 by this point in 2008, while 115,908 in McCain, compared to 117,224 in 2008.

He adds, “Obama strongholds Arlington -20.0%, Fairfax – 20.9%, Richmond -13.7% (vs. just -9.2% statewide). Hmm…” and “In Romney strongholds, enthusiasm up. Hanover (33.1% Obama) turnout up 6.2%, Buchanan (coal country) up 14.5% vs. 2008.”

Duck Soup

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

I think the polling averages are skewed by the fact that Gallup was forced to stop polling by Sandy. They are resuming it today though.

Gallup have also today announced another huge drop in unemployment from 7.8% to 7%. However it is unadjusted. The govt figures are tomorrow.

If those unemployment figures are correct - and remember the only number that matters politically is that headline percentage - then it's just going to increase the Obama momentum.

I was watching Morning Joe and I think it was Mark Halperin who said that privately some Republican pollsters are saying they think Obama has the election "in the bag".

I think that's way overstating it, but certainly Team Romney is feeling the tide is against them. Some - off the record of course - have already started talking about Superstorm Sandy as being a tipping point in the race, giving President Obama the opportunity to look presidential, competent and compassionate. They're suggesting it as the point at which the momentum swung decisively back to Obama.

There are a good few on the right who are currently apoplectic at the Obama-Christie bromance. If Romney loses, I don't think Chris Christie is going to be on too many Christmas card lists at Fox News or the Heritage Foundation.

Duck Soup

The turn-out in Wisconsin may be patchy, but the only polling I've seen on Wisconsin early voting - and obviously this can be superceded by more recent ones I haven't seen - has Obama leading in the state.

A Marquette University Law School poll released Wednesday indicated that Democrats were outperforming Republicans in early voting.

Of the 10 percent of survey respondents who said they had already voted, 56 percent said they voted for Obama and 36 percent said they voted for Romney.

It's going to be tight and I think the Democrat Mayor quite rightly is firing up some of the counties to get into action, but the typical early Democrat lead is holding true.

http://www.wivb.com/dpp/onpolitix/barack_obama/Wisconsin-early-voting-ends-Friday_62302317

Midlife Crashes

Sorry I wasn't sure where else to ask this and I didn't want to make a thread as your forum seemingly has such high standards but anyway.
Which network will be best to watch for coverage on Tuesday. Usually I get my news from Al Jazeera as it is unbiased. I'm conservative but don't want to watch Fox News.
Any suggestions?