For Whom the Bell Polls

It occurs to me that we have more information to chew on this time round than ever before and less idea of what is really going on. Polling organizations has proliferated, if not metastasized, without pointing in any coherent direction.

It seems pretty clear that Mitt Romney has enjoyed a significant shift in national polls since the first presidential debate. He leads by just shy of a point in the RCP average. Of the last six polls in the RCP count, only one shows an Obama lead. The most recent three show a Romney lead of 1, 3 and 5 points. The last is the Gallup poll of likely voters. Gallup vigorously defends their likely voter formula, and if they are right then Romney looks to win a popular vote majority.

Unfortunately for Romney, the popular vote has not constitutional significance. The RCP electoral map with no toss-ups gives Obama 290 electoral votes, twenty more than he needs to win. That means that Romney has to win several of the states where polls show him consistently behind, including Ohio.

When we look at the demographics in the various national and state polls, things look better for Romney. He has apparently cut the gender gap down to a small margin or even to fifty/fifty. He seems to be winning the independent vote by substantial margins. Many of the polls showing an Obama lead nationally or in key states show an atypical advantage in Democratic turnout. Meanwhile the Pew poll finds that Republican enthusiasm is the highest it has ever recorded. Gallup finds that Republicans outnumber Democrats by two points (39/37%) among likely voters nationally.

What does all this add up to? I suggest that you read what you want to read. I don't know. If someone gave me a big pile of cash to bet on the outcome, I would place it on Romney; but I wouldn't bet my own money. The awful truth is that I am probably not going to get much sleep the Tuesday after next.

ps.  I have been suffering from a terrible cold. 

Comments

[larry kurtz]

Obama-295, Willard-242: turnout, the lights...your party's over, KB.

[Bill Fleming]

Here's to your improved health, KB. It's more important than the election results. Take your vitamins, brother.

[Donald Pay]

"I don't know." The truth, finally.

The Republicans/Tea Party racists have already started voter suppression efforts to depress voting in minority and student precincts. We've seen billboards and bully boy tactics already in Wisconsin with our Government Accountability Board having to warn the Tea Party racists not to interfere with election workers. Chicanery with voting equipment is another possibility with Republicans. So where Obama has less than a 2-3 percent lead in any state the Republicans will try to steal the election. That's why pre-election Republican yammering about the unreliability of polls is telling. They, of course, use polls to determine where to put voter suppression efforts. Uh, no, the smart people here don't buy your explanation, KB. Each poll has some standard error associated with it, but when you have poll after poll validating the results, you get close to 100 percent certainty about the result. Anything less than an Obama victory will be seen as a stolen election.

[Bree S.]

I didn't even read your post Donald, because you started it with a judgmental blanket accusation of half the country based on your own delusions. Because of that I have no respect for your intelligence, and so no interest in your opinions.

[larry kurtz]

Right, BS. Pot: meet crack.

[Stan Gibilisco]

I think Larry has the electoral count just about spot on. But that's just my hunch.

Polls, schmolls.

[Ken Blanchard]

Thanks, Bill. I am following your directions.

Donald, I don't know about the smart people here but you and Kurtz don't seem to buy my explanations either.