When swing state polling consistently shows that Romney is up then, and only then, can we say that the sky is falling.
PoliGAF 2012 |OT4|: Your job is not to worry about 47% of these posts.
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
When swing state polling consistently shows that Romney is up then, and only then, can we say that the sky is falling.
Black Republican
Member
that gallup poll, huh?
maybe the 7.8% helped
50-45 Obama
51-44 approval
maybe the 7.8% helped
50-45 Obama
51-44 approval
Officerrob
Banned
Just got caught-up with Romney's "major" foreign policy speech, pretty weak speech
OH, VA, FL are tossups. Romney needs 2 of them to win. It's not that much of a stretch looking at the latest polling. Also, if national polls are tightening, they will in the states as well.
It's basically the exact FP speech you'd expect the Republican candidate to give. It won't do anything for him.
Officerrob
Banned
Romney can still lose winning Ohio, Florida, and Virginia
I totally forgot that you think Romney can win. As if I didn't need more arguments in my favor... Thanks!
Once we get the immediate post-debate days out of Gallup's five day spread I think we'll see a reversion to the mean.
It's true. I got laughed off the island time and time again for maintaining that Dems would lose the House, like I was completely out of my mind.
This coming from Dax01 who can never be wrong about anything.
I can still get laid if I cover myself in pig fat, cut off my eyebrows and go to the bar Friday night.
Romney can win all three and still lose.
http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=FnR
Black Republican
Member
Obama truely is Felix the Cat, Black and lucky
Forgot about Iowa. No wonder the media wants to keep this close
Aaron Strife
Banned
ARE WE DOOMED YET!?!?
Officerrob
Banned
If Romney loses any of Ohio, Florida, or Virginia, he's basically fucked
The Librarian
Banned
Yeah. I am never wrong about anything. Ever. I have always been right and will always be right about everything.
I am infallible!
OH NO
The approval move is because Thursday left the sample, and it was probably a terrible day for Obama approval. The horse race move is straightforward good news, because it means Obama's doing better this Sunday then he did last Sunday.
edit: I was amused to read Silver's article in which he does the same tracking projection that I've been doing with Gallup. GAF -> Internet -> Narrative.
Half and half
Member
Oh!
I should stop looking at these polls. It's starting to feel like a gambling addiction.
So this latest number is Sunday, Saturday, Friday, Thursday, Wednesday (debate day), Tuesday, Monday? That is 4 days post debate and it went from a 2pt spread to a 5 pt spread today. Am I right with the days?
How is approval calculated at Gallup? 3 day rolling average?
lolDax01 said:
I believe that's right.
Sirpopopop
Member
1. Sample Size - Look at the Gallup & CNN polls. I know Gallup certainly did their homework in picking a proper sample size. They are also a fair non-slanted site. You know this.
2. Just because there was no sound bite that could be used against Obama doesn't mean that it wasn't a loss in historic fashion. Losing in historic fashion could also mean losing by historic margin.
3. As for your point about sound bite gaffes? I think it's an interesting point, because while Obama didn't have a sound bite gaffe, one could argue that his entire debate performance is going to have the same effect as a sound bite gaffe (a negative effect until something new pushes it out of the cycle. Something to talk about years from now - "How Romney won a debate by lying his ass off"). It's given the Romney campaign a new talking point, and new life, during a moment when the knockout punch should have been delivered. It's given them a new narrative to push.
Yep. Good luck trying to get #2 and especially #3 across, you'll just get laughed off.
I'm not laughing. I'm just rolling my eyes.
Sure. Was trying to nap and caught bits and pieces. He actually came out of retirement for this! Shocking, as he did absolutely nothing to justify the reverence he holds for the format or the traditional role of the moderator in Presidential debates. His role is to allow the candidates to question each other, he didn't feel the need to bring up partisan topics like the '47%' question.
He believes they're important because they're the first 'uncanned' moment of the political season, either confirming or denying whatever preconceived notions we have of the candidates. The importance of this debate format is that even though it's become a glorified beauty pageant, the goal is ultimately to be able to sell your policies and gain the support of the American people. Without that, you can't be an effective leader.
That Romney stepped all over Lehrer's attempt to moderate the debate wasn't an issue at all. He says that viewers should use that, along with how both candidates performed, to judge the candidates for themselves.
---
I've actually lost some respect for him after the interview. I understand his position to a degree, but his hubris is getting in the way of rating his own performance. He said himself he doesn't handle criticism well, and he came into the interview sounding defensive.
The Librarian
Banned
Did I not make my sarcasm clear in that post? It was pretty clear, right? Did you not see this post from earlier?
But please. Continue linking that post as a deflection from your panic-induced posts. It's cute.
It's your "47%" comment! It's your downfall! Join us in dooooooooooooom!!!
They clearly just wanted more hits by getting media to run with a "GALLUP SAYS RACE IS TIGHTENING" story. It worked, because the first thing I did was rush to gallup's page, whereupon I saw this:
Holy shit was I surprised. That's a majority post-debate poll, folks (and Obama wasn't up +10 before the debate, so it's not the rolling average that's helping Obama). And the fact that gallup's "DEBATE GAMECHANGER" article doesn't once mention likely voters is pretty telling.
They clearly just wanted more hits by getting media to run with a "GALLUP SAYS RACE IS TIGHTENING" story. It worked, because the first thing I did was rush to gallup's page, whereupon I saw this:
Holy shit was I surprised. That's a majority post-debate poll, folks (and Obama wasn't up +10 before the debate, so it's not the rolling average that's helping Obama). And the fact that gallup's "DEBATE GAMECHANGER" article doesn't once mention likely voters is pretty telling.
Yep. The show I'm listening to had a segment on the Gallup story a few hours ago. They wanted to get some headlines right out of the gate this week and it worked very well for them.
Black Republican
Member
Sleep through your debate.
Increase your gallup ratings.
Increase your gallup ratings.
Remarkable. How are both the 50-45 and 47-47 mathematically possible? I presume both included polling through yesterday. Is one registered voters and one likely?
Kill big bird at your own demise.
That's not what I meant. You said "Obama lost by a historically large margin." But there have only been thirty Presidential debates! There are going to be a lot of "historic" victories in that space, because that's not enough data to outline the boundaries of the likely results. That's why the statisticians are being cautious even about suggesting that the consequences might be in line with historic norms, much less some sort of gamechanging shift that will be totally out of keeping with all past results.
It could. But does it? You haven't advanced an argument as to why other than "it was really big!" Well, size doesn't matter.* Why should that historic margin mean an ahistoric result?
There's more to life than winning a news cycle. What did Romney get out of the debate that he'll be able to use on November 5th? Because "47%" will still be around by then.
How is that going to help Romney at all?
This much is probably true and I agree with it. But I don't think it rises to the level that your presentation has suggested.
* Politifact: Mostly Fiction.
That's my suspicion. I get the impression they see Romney's bounce fading so they threw that out there
No they wouldn't do that, Gallup is solid. The best daily tracker out there. They've been doing daily tracking polls since the 1940's. I don't think they are trying to create a narrative. They aren't Rasmussen.
Yeah, I'm kinda baffled as to what they're doing here.
GALLUP IS SKEWING THE POLLZ
The Librarian
Banned
This debate was historical?
is PD hysterical?
47-47 is the average of 4th through 6th
50-45 is the average of 1st through 7th and it's one point up on the average of 30th-6th.
Is Gallup?
Trying to get some attention doesn't equate to creating a narrative.
what?
- Status