Despite Media Hype, No Bounce for Obama in Swing States
Electoral Map for the 2012 Presidential Race:
Politico’s “Unnamed Sources” say Ohio is lost for Mitt Romney. Like hell it is. They say Obama got a serious bounce from the DNC. Like hell he did.
Whatever bounce Obama got was in the blue states. In the swing states, it’s still way too close to call. Today’s Rasmussen poll results show that in the eleven swing states, including Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, which total 145 electoral votes, it’s Obama 46% and Romney 45%. In 2008, Obama won these states 53% to 46%.
So how does the MSM try to spin the evidence so Obama looks like he’s unbeatable? Let’s look at Ohio, for example. Politico reported (using uncredited sources, of course), that Ohio is lost for Romney:
“Two officials intimately involved in the GOP campaign said Ohio leans clearly in Obama’s favor now.”
I didn’t know Axelrod and Plouffe were working for Romney, but hey, they’ll go where the money is.
But, as usual, Politico was relying on Obama-leaning polls to support their narrative; yesterday the PPP poll (which is always weighted toward Obama because of PPP’s affiliation with the SEIU) showed Obama up by five in Ohio. Hmmm. According to the Gravis marketing poll taken last Tuesday, Romney was up three in Ohio. Who’s telling the truth?
Example #1. On August 14, the PPP poll showed Obama up three in Ohio, while the same day Rasmussen Reports showed Romney and Obama tied.
Example #2: Last Monday PPP showed Obama tied with Romney in North Carolina, while the Elon University/Charlotte Observer poll, a local state poll, showed Romney up by four.
But Politico won’t be denied their mission to say whatever they can to disillusion Romney’s base, and they make no bones about using uncredited sources; as Politico reporter Jonathan Martin said last month when Politico quoted unnamed sources in a story about Republicans unhappy about the selection of Paul Ryan (what?????):
We were candid about the sourcing on that, as you mentioned, Howie, and basically say to our readers, ‘Look, folks don’t want to put their names [on] the charges. If you don’t want to read Politico, that’s fine.’
Every race in the swing states is close right now, and the unconscionable skewing of the polls by the MSM shouldn’t discourage Republicans. The MSM has lied before, they are lying now, and they will lie in the future. The Obama campaign has thrown everything but the kitchen sink at Romney, they have the power of incumbency, and Romney simply is not going away. And all of this is before Romney has even attacked Obama in ads and the debates.
Hey, Dems, this show ain’t even close to over; we’re just getting warmed up.
Did CNN Rig Its Own Poll?
CNN is grabbing political headlines tonight with the release of its latest poll. It shows Obama surging to a 6-point lead over Romney, 52-46, among likely. Before the start of the Democrat convention, the candidates had been tied in the poll. Since it purportedly confirms a narrative the media is trying to build, i.e. that Obama is starting to pull away with the race, it is getting wide coverage. However, there are a couple of strange things within the poll that cast doubt on its veracity. And, at least one concern warrants a response from CNN.
First, this being a media poll, it has an obvious skew towards Democrats. The partisan breakdown is (D/R/I) 50/45/5. It perhaps isn’t surprising that Obama is leading a D+5 poll by 6 points. Throughout the campaign season, Obama’s margin usually is very close to the partisan skew in the sample. It is surprising, though, that Independents make up only 5% of the sample. Tellingly, Romney leads this group by 14 points.
I’ve seen others suggest that CNN pushes voters to identify with one party or the other, which may account for this. Although, CNN identifies the breakdown of sample numbers as X “registered Democrats” and Y “registered Republicans.” Other polls that push Independents to identify show their work. CNN should as well.
There is another, more serious concern, however, The second question of the poll asks Obama and Romney voters whether their vote is “for” their candidate or “against” the other candidate. The sample size for this question is reported to be (top of page 3):
BASED ON 351 LIKELY VOTERS WHO PLAN TO VOTE FOR OBAMA — SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 5 PERCENTAGE PT
BASED ON 340 LIKELY VOTERS WHO PLAN TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY — SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 5.5 PERCENTAGE PTS
Those numbers didn’t look right to me, considering the headline number reported in the poll. There were 709 Likely Voters in the sample. The 351 votes for Obama is 49.5%. The 340 votes for Romney is 47.9%. In other words, a 50-48 match-up. That’s a lot different than the 52-46 reported in the headlines. Consider: the question to Romney supporters samples more Likely Voters than he received in the head-to-head result.
What could be happening here is that these are the raw counts from the poll interviews, which CNN then “weighted” to reflect certain demographics, etc. Pollster do this often, but it usually results in very minor changes to the overall numbers. If this discrepancy is the result of CNN “weighting” their poll, it would reflect a 4 point swing in the overall results. That’s a very significant change in the outcome. Their weighting added 2 points to Obama’s support and erased 2 points from Romney’s. Combined with a D+5 sample, this is a 9-point edge for Obama, simply from the composition of the poll.
Again, it isn’t unusual to weight a poll, for very legitimate reasons. But if the weighting produces this big of a swing in the final results, you really ought to show your work. CNN doesn’t release its internal demos, but it absolutely needs to in this case. If they don’t, then they’ve just been caught with their thumb on the scale.