A Romney landslide?

May 10, 2012

Quite possibly:

If the election were held today, Mitt Romney would win by a landslide.

The published polls reflect a close race for two reasons:

1. They poll only registered voters, not likely voters. Rasmussen is the only pollster who tests likely voters, and his latest tracking poll has Romney ahead by 48-43.

2. As discussed in previous columns, a study of the undecided voters in the past eight elections in which incumbents sought a second term as president reveals that only Bush-43 gained any of the undecided vote. Johnson in ’64, Nixon in ’72, Ford in ’76, Carter in ’80, Reagan in ’84, Bush in ’92 and Clinton in ’96 all failed to pick up a single undecided vote.

So when polls show President Obama at 45 percent of the vote, they are really reflecting a likely 55-45 Romney victory, at the very least.

4 Responses to A Romney landslide?

  1. anonymous un-RINO on May 10, 2012 at 7:59 am

    Morris is jabbering about matchup polling, which as we all know is worthless right now. As they say, historically the campaign doesn’t start ’til Labor Day, in September. That’s when the matchup polls will start to take on a firm significance.

    For an incumbent, it’s all about Gallup approval. Obambi’s been bouncing around between Gallup 46-50 approval numbers for quite some time now. That puts him within striking distance of locking Willard out completely, because if he goes into the election at Gallup 50+, it’s over.

    It’s sad to think about the time just 7-8 months ago, when Obambi was down at Gallup 38 and plunging, and was a certain loser. But then Willard came along, and look what happened. Barry Hussein Mugabe got new life.

  2. […] of that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. The President’s approval is in the low 40′s among likely voters. Undecideds aren’t really undecided, they’re anti-incumbent. The […]

  3. unclefred on May 10, 2012 at 9:45 am

    I generally hold Gallup and Rasmussen as the two premium polling agencies. Gallup because of their overall long term record and Ras because they publish complete demographic assumption and the polling data that support those assumptions. Unfortunately Gallup does not make their demographic assumption available in their public polling.

    You statement that at this point in the election cycle the presidential approval is the most predictive. However, now that the public perceives the Republican’s as having selected a nominee, the head to head polling rapidly becomes predictive.

    It is useful to compare the Gallup’s and Rasmussen’s head to head poling with their respective presidential approval polling. This is made a bit difficult because the head to head polls use a different moving average than the approval polls.

    At this point we see a reoccurring pattern. While Obama presidential approval polling does float from 44% to 50%+, his head to head polling lags those numbers by 3%-6%. In fact when the “I killed Osama memory tour” was playing an Obama’s approval numbers briefly hit 51% his head to head numbers stayed stuck at 46%.

    Compared to the overall electorate, Obama “enjoys” greater disapproval among independents/unaffiliateds underperforming his overall numbers by 5%+ percent. My interpretation of this polling numbers is that, at least for now, even when transitory event improve Obama job perception with voters, they are not willing to reelect him. This is true whether he is at 51% or 44%.

    Finally I’ve been looking at the various swing state polls. Those that show Obama ahead use demographic assumptions that mirror or are more favorable than 2008. I assume that Obama wins Pa and Wisc because of the demonstrated ability of the unions to get the dead to the polls. Otherwise this would be a blow out.

  4. anonymous un-RINO on May 10, 2012 at 11:52 am

    You statement that at this point in the election cycle the presidential approval is the most predictive. However, now that the public perceives the Republican’s as having selected a nominee, the head to head polling rapidly becomes predictive.


    No, that is simply a false assertion, and your assertion is not supported by history. At this point in a campaign involving an incumbent president, the public always perceives the challenging party to have selected a nominee, so your statement that this matters somehow is a non-sequitur.

    Matchup polling right now is not predictive, and will seesaw throughout the Summer, as always, because the campaign hasn’t even started yet. Matchup polling is merely an interesting bit of trending, but it doesn’t “rapidly become predictive”. It becomes predictive when the campaign becomes hot and heavy, which historically isn’t until late Summer. Why? Because there are probably 10M people who will vote in this election who barely know who’s running, and another 10M or so who are truly on the fence. Until those people become engaged, matchup polling will be transient, as history tells us.

    You build upon your first false assertion, that national matchup polls are currently predictive, by also asserting that fine grain analysis of state by state matchup polling is also currently predictive. Sorry, no, it isn’t. I’d refer you to the incumbent’s state by state presidential approval rating in each state, as well. Those individual ratings won’t be as predictive as the overall national rating has historically proven, but they’ll be closer than your matchup poll flounderings.

    No need for RINO fantasies here. Obambi has been 46-50 in Gallup since forever. If he goes to 50+ come election day, he gets 4 more years. That’s what historical hard data tells us. Willard’s rise has pushed this guy Obambi onto the cusp of historical reelection territory, where he is statistically tied with the challenger. This guy. Obambi Mugabe. Willard is tied with THIS guy, and has helped force up his approval rating.

    Somebody needs to explain again this RINO theory of Willard’s “electability”.