For Whom the Bell Polls

Well, the good news is that President Obama is leading in the Washington Post/ABC News poll. In the first place he is leading himself. He has a job approval/disapproval of 50/45%. That's not far off the Gallup, which has it at 45/45%. Not horrible, but not good for an incumbent.

Less important at this stage is that Obama is leading Mitt Romney 51/43%. Eight points is a healthy lead, if the President can maintain it. Of course, it still shows him barely above 50%.

Jay Cost points out that the poll is not nearly as good as it looks for Obama. Here is the partisan breakdown:

Democrat	Republican	Independent	Other (vol.)	No opinion
34	23	34	5	3

That shows an eleven point lead in party identification for Democrats over Republicans. Is that credible? No.

As a point of historical comparison, the party spread in four of the last five elections since 2002 has basically been an even split between the two sides. In 2008, a "perfect storm" of bad news for the GOP, the party ID advantage was "only" +7. So, a Democratic advantage of +11 is an unjustifiable number, at least in terms of what the electorate is thinking.

But consider for a moment what the poll is saying if it's accurate. Even with a sample that's less than 25% Republican, Barack Obama can barely break 50% against Romney or 50% in overall approval. And consider the results on other questions. Romney beats Obama on the economy, the budget (by a mile), and energy.

Cost points something that might be much more important. The best single question for predicting the outcome of presidential elections is the "do you think the country is headed in the right direction?" question. In the ABC poll, the wrong direction/right direction results are 64%/33%. Those are terrible numbers for an incumbent.

Rasmussen gives Romney a 4 point lead over Obama. That's without the pro-Democratic slant and sampling likely rather than registered voters. I think the WaPo/ABC poll is in fact worse news.

Comments

[Donald Pay]

The Democratic Party number is in line with numbers over the last couple decades. They aren't overrepresented. My guess is there is greater hesitation on the part of Republicans to identify as Republicans given the disasterous primary fight, the war on women, etc. I'm guessing about 5 percent are representing themselves as Tea Party or Libertarian and 5 percent are representing themselves as Independent.

[duggersd]

FOX had a poll showing Romney 2 points ahead, but I never saw the breakdown. The Post/ABC has a history of skewing things with the breakdown. I think I heard this was the 17th most accurate poll in the last election cycle. That would tell us something.

[Bill Fleming]

Well, as long as we're reading old tea leaves... Romney should be doing a lot better than he is if what we're seeing right now is his primary bump. Check out 2004 Kerry v. Bush #s here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/bush_vs_kerry_historical.html

[larry kurtz]

See this, Bill? They cited the same report: http://www.people-press.org/2004/03/03/three-in-ten-voters-open-to-persuasion/

NPR
2/26-29,3./1
47%
45%
-
Bush +2
Pew Research
2/24-2/29
44%
48%
-
Kerry +4

[Stan Gibilisco]

Obama will win. He will portray Romney as a spoiled, rich preppie with the silver spoon still in his mouth, a faker, a skeleton-stasher. An easy job, that!

[duggersd]

Yeah, just like the way Dukkakis did to George Bush in 1988. I am not saying Romney is going to win, but if I were Obama, I would not want to be defending my record. Already the Obama people are doing their best to make this not a referendum on Obama.

[Jon S.]

Donald, let me give you the CNN exit poll numbers for the past decade (with 2002 excluded because of problems with the poll). For 2000 it is a Roper poll (couldn't find CNN). I'll but the Democrat # first. 2000: 39-35; 2004: 37-37; 2006: 38-36; 2008: 39-32; 2010: 35-35.

So the numbers for a decade show that you are absolutely 100% right. The eleven point spread in the poll is exactly in line with the historical average. Sure, the numbers here indicate the the average is actually just shy of +3 for Dems, but because Donald says it's +11 it must be true. I mean, we wouldn't want to counter our talking points with evidence.

[Jon S.]

BTW, Gallup today has Romney +2 and CNN has Obama +9. Both polls are of registered, not likely voters. I cannot find the partisan breakdown of either poll. So that's three recent polls that have Romney up narrowly and one poll that has Obama up big. So solace for both candidates. Personally, I think Romney has a tougher time getting to 270, which is why I give Obama a slight but decided edge.

[Bill Fleming]

Jon S. Smart of you. Romney needs a strategy to close the gender gap to be sure, but even more he needs to close the Latino gap.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/16/11225309-first-thoughts-romneys-own-hot-mic-moment?lite

Excerpt:

"Here’s a final bit of news from last night’s Romney’s fundraiser: He said the GOP must offer its own policies to woo Hispanics, including a "Republican DREAM Act," to give Hispanic voters a real choice between the two political parties. So Romney here is admitting the obvious: He and his party have A LOT of work to do with Latinos. Why? Consider this: Obama can get to 270 electoral votes (275 to be specific) by winning the following battleground states: Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia. Under the scenario of this Hispanic path (CO, NM, NV, and VA), Obama doesn’t need to win Florida, Ohio, Iowa, or New Hampshire. That’s right -- this is a viable path to 270 that does not include EITHER Florida or Ohio. It’s pretty stunning."

[Ken Blanchard]

It's good to be back. Contrary to what Donald says, I don't believe that the turnout in November will favor the Democrats by more than the difference in 2008. Unless Romney screws the pooch, it will be rather less than that.

If Romney is ahead in polls of registered voters then he is probably well ahead among likely voters; however, I am not particularly impressed by the horse race numbers at this point. What is more important are things like Obama's approval rating. It is about 48/48 approval disapproval in the Gallup poll. The fluctuation is noise. That is a pretty good middle between doom and confidence.

Another thing that usually matters is the approval rating on the issue that most interests the electorate. That is the economy, and there Obama's ratings are in the toilet. Pollster has Obama a clean ten points down.

Finally, the polling question that has been most reliable over time when it comes to a President's reelection is whether the nation is on the right track or the wrong track. Here, Pollster has 59% wrong track, 32% right track. I think it is true that no President has been reelected with those kind of numbers.

If Obama can make the election a referendum on Mitt Romney, he probably wins. That is pretty much what George W. did in 2004. If the election becomes a referendum on Obama, then Obama loses.