Bob Krumm says Romney is ahead

October 24, 2012

Bob Krumm analyzes the state of the polls and forecasts a Romney win.

We are now at the end of the third period and if past is prologue, Barack Obama is in deep trouble. That is because after the debates there is no further gain in support for the incumbent, while the challenger climbs two to three points.


Today, Mitt Romney sits at 48% in the RCP average of polls. Add 2 percent because of sample bias and add another 2 or 3 points for breaking last-minute undecideds, and I expect Mitt Romney to finish with between 52 and 53 percent to Barack Obama’s 46 or 47 percent.

He also discusses the problems with state by state polling. It’s worth a read.

25 Responses to Bob Krumm says Romney is ahead

  1. MikeN on October 24, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    Hmm, if that were Bob Shrum, should I be happy or worried?

  2. MikeN on October 24, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    So what will your election clock show at 11PM on Monday?

    • bobo on October 24, 2012 at 1:21 pm

      it looks 2 hours off (early) to me.

  3. Trent Telenko on October 24, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    This is more than a referendum election, it is a _Validation Election_.

    By “Validation Election” I mean that in 2012, like 1932 and 1980 before it, we have an incumbent with a horrible economy and the media “all in” supporting him.

    Since the economy tanked on the incumbent’s watch, all the challenger has/had to do is look Presidential and non-threatening to the other party’s base voters, waiting for the economy to make the argument for him through the media fog.

    The difference between now, 1932 and 1980 is that the Internet/Talk Radio Alternate Media is getting the word out of how badly the incumbent is doing _SOONER_.

    That will reduce the incumbent party’s turn out sooner, more than making up for the longer voting period the incumbent party has to get out the vote.

    It also allows more impulse voting for the challenger, since the Alternate Media and Challenger’s campaign can hit more “Vote now, it’s important” buttons with result.

  4. Tim on October 24, 2012 at 6:22 pm

    So whO is bob? I really do not know. In any event I still maintain thIs election can go either way. Best case is plus 3 for either guy in the popular vote.

    • bobo on October 24, 2012 at 10:40 pm

      That’s one of the worst analyses I’ve seen here for awhile. It would be like the weatherman saying well tomorrow could be mostly sunny or it could rain. Well duh of course it COULD… but there are data trends and models that show the probability is greater for one chance or the other. That’s what we have here. Data trends show Romney strength and Obama weakness in the so called swing states. The greater likelihood is a solid 3/4pt win atm the moment for Romney nationwide which would be enough to pull many of those states across. Of course that could change due to new data but unless theres a huge surprise coming the best Obama could hope for with current data and trends would be a tightening that MIGHT let him get a couple electoral pt win.

      • Tim on October 25, 2012 at 12:09 pm

        Well asshole–since you like your opinions unvarnished–I was replying to what Bob had to say which is that Mitt will win by 5 to 7 points. That is not going to happen. Max anybody wins by is 3. And not all the polls are in Mitt’s favor some do show O up by 2 or 3 points. And I might note that Gallup has gone from plus 7 to plus 3 in a matter of days. So where is your vaunred big mo. I am neither a defeatest or cocky–this is anybody’s ball game and we all stay up late on election night. So I don’t think that Silver is right when he says it is 70 percent the Messiah wins but I don’t think that the guy Poli cites to is right either.

        What matters is who shows up and who has the better GOTV machine.

        And my friend if Obama does win by a couple he is the canidate that is positioned to win big in the electoral college not Mitt.

        • bobo on October 25, 2012 at 8:59 pm

          Settle down there Timmy, got a little hot air under your skirt there did I eh? Well just pointing out that your commentary was completely inane. Next time try to analyze the data and come to a conclusion instead of taking the easy way out and saying well uh I guess it could go either way. No kidding really? How insightful. I’m humbled that you deigned to grace us with your remarkable conclusions. Tool.

  5. Arizona CJ on October 24, 2012 at 11:12 pm

    Michigan, anyone?

    0 46 R 46.

    This poll does not appear to display internals, and I was skeptical of such polls when Obama was ahead, so I have to be now as well.

    However, *IF* that’s true, and 0 is at 46 in Michigan, that’s bad news for him.
    Even if Romney only ties in MI (and the D’s get the EVs) if it’s that close there, I don’t see Romney losing Wisconsin or Pennsylvania.

    We know Obama is pouring people and money into Ohio at the moment, and they have to be coming from somewhere. My guess; PA, WI, and MI.

    The thing is, it might work. Obama could take Ohio, via sacrificing PA, WI, and MI. And I don’t think there’s anything Romney can do to stop him. Romney would then suffer the devastating loss of Ohio’s critical 18 EVs, picking up only the meager consolation prize of the other three states’ combined 46 EVs.


    • Cornfed on October 25, 2012 at 7:34 am

      MI ain’t going Republican. We go through this discussion every election and it never happens.

      BUT, Ohio is still very much a tossup. Interesting that Obama is still spending time in FL and VA. GOP better not let up in those states. If Romney loses either one, Ohio is a moot point.

      • bobo on October 25, 2012 at 11:41 am

        Merely for show, he can’t be seen as giving up on those states or it all unravels even faster. His campaign was built on inevitability, even though we know he doesn’t have it anymore he still needs to maintain the illusion and giving up in those states would show everyone else the reality.

  6. Freddie Sykes on October 25, 2012 at 5:04 am

    It has already been decided that Obama’s loss is all the fault of Bill and Hillary. My big question is how big Mitt’s coat tails will be?

  7. Trent J. Telenko on October 25, 2012 at 5:25 am

    Michael Barone says the break towards Romney is happening with affluent suburban voters and particularly college educated women.

    It looks like my thought of Romney’s last debate performance being a “intimate performance for women” was spot-on.

    His intended audience is responding —

    That tends to validate my alternative scenario that Mitt Romney would fare much better in affluent suburbs than Republican nominees since 1992, running more like George Bush did in 1988. The only way Pennsylvania and Michigan can be close is if Obama’s support in affluent Philadelphia and Detroit suburbs has melted away.

    This also helps explain why Romney still narrowly trails in Ohio polls. Affluent suburban counties cast about one-quarter of the votes in Pennsylvania and Michigan but only one-eighth in Ohio.

    A pro-Romney affluent swing is confirmed by the internals of some national polls. The 2008 exit poll showed Obama narrowly carrying voters with incomes over $75,000. Post-debate Pew Research and Battleground polls have shown affluent suburbanite Romney carrying them by statistically significant margins.

    In particular, college-educated women seem to have swung toward Romney since Oct. 3. He surely had them in mind in the foreign policy debate when he kept emphasizing his hopes for peace and pledged no more wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.

    At this point, my gut says that the Romney campaign bet it all on the debates to get past the Pro-Obama media filters to voters and prepared accordingly.

    Romney’s debate performances moved the focus groups so consistently I have to think his debate preparation firm was coaching him through debate preparation with multiple primary or general election focus groups. Focus groups that were providing video performance feed back to Romney through out both the Republican Primary and General Election campaigns.

    Romney just set a new and very high bar in American Presidential campaigning by founding a new “Presidential forensics” branch of debate. One that isn’t intended to “win” debates in the traditional forensics sense of “scoring points.”

    “Presidential forensics” Romney-style is intended to showcase the candidate’s ability to project a PRESIDENTIAL demeanor to a visual media audience past media gatekeepers, whatever the debate format or moderator bias.

    It worked. It will be copied.

    • MikeN on October 25, 2012 at 7:28 am

      But NOT in Ohio. This is actually ground zero of Obama’s destroy the suburbs campaign, but apparently they aren’t aware of it.

      • Robert on October 25, 2012 at 8:04 am

        True, but the thing I find most interesting is the focus on Ohio to the detriment of other electoral strategies – if what Barone is saying is true, the Romney camp should be pumping money and personnel into Pennsylvania and Michigan, and take three days to run Ann, Ryan, and then Romney through Michigan, Ohio, and Penn, focusing on the suburbs, the week before the election. It would bolster their chances in Ohio, but there’s also the fact that picking up either Michigan or Pennsylvania means Romney doesn’t NEED Ohio.

        Seriously, he’s got more options out there – he needs to play them.

        • MikeN on October 25, 2012 at 10:31 am

          Oh that’s silly talk. I suggested Romney do this during the primaries with his personal fortune, and everyone concluded I was an idiot. OK, I threw in $50 million for California and New York, but yea, I would have pushed in Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maine, Connecticut.

          • Spike on October 25, 2012 at 7:32 pm

            Please MikeN…you have been wrong every step of the way…….so after Romney spent the $100 million in Cal and NY that you suggested….you suggest he spend another…what $200 million in Oregon, Ill, Minnesota, PA and Washington?. You’re a dunce and the annoying part, is not that you were wrong….it’s that you were calling everyone else, with much more experience that you, assholes the whole time. AS for expanding a bit outside the swing states say, in PA and Mich, nobody would argue…but you were clearly unhinged talking Hawaii and Washington. Being provocative is one thing, but being obnoxiously stupid is another.

          • MikeN on October 26, 2012 at 8:17 am

            Nah, I think $200 million total would do it, and about what I think Romney could have spent. I think with $50 million I could have delivered California too. $2 gas or $8.

            Hawaii I would ignore if they didn’t have a Senate race and Charles Djou. Washington has a Senate race too that could flip if it were Obama +4 instead of +14, and Romney would win it. I even suspect it is more likely than Oregon. Illinois should have been a priority. Chances of winning are low, but it sends money into Wisconsin, plus helps in the House races there, plus it keeps the Chicago machine in Chicago.

          • MikeN on October 26, 2012 at 8:19 am

            Oh, and it’s Ore, Wash, Hawaii, New Mex, Mich, Minn, Wisc, Penn, NJ, Del, and New Eng. Ill is part of the bonus tier with Calif and NY.

  8. Arizona CJ on October 26, 2012 at 12:27 am

    One thing about going into previously uncontested states late; they haven’t been buried with ads, so you get more bang for your buck.

    I would not be at all surprised to see a move by Romney in PA and Michigan in the final week.

    I’m going to go way out on a limb here, and predict that Romney takes at least 2 of the following 3; Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. I’d give him 50-50 of getting all three.

    It’s Ohio I’m most worried about. My guess: 50-50 chance. Obama has been deluging the place with massive amounts of ads for months, plus they are doing better, economically, than average. It’s an uphill battle for Romney, compounded by the early-voter issue.

    The other swing state I’m very worried about is Nevada.

    • MikeN on October 26, 2012 at 8:17 am

      I’ll go 2 of 4 out of PA, Minn, Mich, and Wisc.

  9. Trent J. Telenko on October 26, 2012 at 4:26 am

    Romney is now advertising heavily in the Boston media market to reach parts of New Hampshire.

    This is a 3-for-one deal for Romney as it also helps move voter numbers in Connecticut and in Massachusetts for the Republican Senate candidates in both states.

    • MikeN on October 26, 2012 at 8:18 am

      What, but Spike said that’s a bad move!

  10. Spike on October 27, 2012 at 9:36 am

    You would do well to listen to people with more experience than you trollboy, rather than endlessly jabbering….

    Spike said on July, 17th -”

    Reading these liberal posts (Bizman, Man Coulter)is exactly like reading the Scott Brown posts of a few years back. They don’t even see it coming. This thing is over, 7-10% when Romney drops the money bomb. And given the fact that Obama is dropping money all over the place and not moving in the polls, I, too, would “keep the powder dry” until people are back from vacation and paying attention. Can’t wait for the predictable chorus of how mean Romney is and how money is influencing politics.”

    ps – Given Obama’s latest “you don’t earn it” comments, expect Romney to out raise Obama this month as well (Yeap, the chattering class missed another huge election turning point.)

  11. Spike on October 27, 2012 at 9:42 am

    But please….tell us again how Romney is behind in InTrade…….