Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 10/12 (afternoon edition) (141 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This week felt like a flashback to 2004 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    And I don't mean the "2004-in-reverse" analogy that a lot of pundits and forecasters have described.

    What I'm reminded of (unpleasantly) was how in the closing weeks of '04, Kerry and Bush were close in the head-to-head polls but on average Bush held a narrow 1-2 point lead, and Democrats consoled themselves with swing state polls (esp. Ohio) which showed Kerry closer or leading.

    Still think Obama's favored - but if Romney really is at 48 or 49%, it's going to stay way too close for comfort till Election Day.

    •  As suggested above (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, EcosseNJ, sapelcovits

      I don't think he is at 48-49. Average looks more like 47 to me.

      "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

      by conspiracy on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 02:53:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I know what you are saying, but (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, LordMike, EcosseNJ

      I also think conspiracy's point is solid - Romney isn't really breaking out at this point.

    •  also (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Ohio actually turned out to be unrealistically close.  That is, people would not have thought that while Bush won so decisively overall, he would have lost so narrowly in Ohio.  And the election indeed would have turned on Ohio.  It may have been a case of divergence between national and swing polling, but also actual performance, in the end.

      Plus we are not looking just at Ohio. Obama is irrationally strong across most of the swing states, except Wisconsin.  And he's still sitting in a position like 2008, where his opponent must run the table on swing states, he only needs a few.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 03:05:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not really comparable (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Then, Bush had already had over 50% support in the recent past and Kerry's high had flirted briefly with 48% after the Edwards selection. So Kerry needed to steel away voters who had recently expressed a preference for Bush. That was a tall order.

      Now it's the other way around, though Obama hasn't quite hit 50. He basically just needs to re-energize or win back voters who supported him as recently as 2-3 weeks ago, and then persuade some undecideds. Romney needs to win and/or keep these recent Obama supporters. His task is a good deal more difficult than Obama's.

      (I guess in theory Romney could do it by hoovering up all the undecideds, but that would be highly, highly unlikely.)

    •  You're wrong about the 04 swing states (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MBishop1, askew

      Kerry didn't lead in the Ohio or Florida polling averages, and it was a must-have to win one of them.  Kerry trailed Bush in the final RCP averages in those states and also Wisconsin, which Kerry barely won anyway.

      Looking at the charts of polls in these states, Kerry led in only 3 of the final 13 Wisconsin polls, and for October forward Kerry trailed Bush in 10 of 19 Wisconsin polls and led in 7, with 2 ties.

      In Florida, Kerry led in only 11 of 35 October polls, with Bush leading in 19 and 5 ties.

      In Ohio, Kerry led in 11 of the first 19 October polls, with 2 ties and 6 Bush leads, but Bush then led in 9 of the final 10, all the final week before the election.

      What hurt Kerry was how tough he had it in states he won:  the RCP averages had him leading by less than 4 in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota.  Kerry also trailed in most polls in Iowa and split the 10 New Mexico polls 5-5 with Bush, both states he lost.

      I've gone into this before, the map is just so much more favorable for Obama than any Democrat in my lifetime that it's not even funny.  Everything Kerry won is secure except Wisconsin, and New Mexico is secure which Kerry lost.  Iowa and Wisconsin are the only competitive states that we won at least once in 2000 or 2004.  And those were elections where we came damn close to winning, any state in 2000 and either of two close big states in 2004.

      Meanwhile, tossups include Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, and Nevada, none of which were top battleground targets in 2000 or 2004 although Nevada was a secondary opportunity that became more serious toward the end in 2004.

      And we have a lead in Ohio that no Democrat has enjoyed in a long time; Obama's RCP average is skewed downward right now by several junk polls, but both NBC/Marist and this week's National Journal report on Obama's private polling reveal Obama in reality still has a decent lead there.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:57:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you forgot NH (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        we won that in 2004, and I'd still call it competitive.

        19, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
        Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
        UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

        by jncca on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:40:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not the first time (0+ / 0-)

          I've consistently overlooked NH in thinking about the map.  Partly it's geography, NH is an island far from any other competitive state and easy to forget when picturing the map.  And part of it is that it's the smallest swing state, only 4 electoral votes...hard to picture NH mattering in the outcome, even though there are plenty of scenarios where it could.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 07:28:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  That's true (0+ / 0-)

        And in hindsight, Democrats had rose-colored glasses on, getting exuberant at any polls that had Kerry ahead, even though Bush actually led most Ohio polls.

        All I was saying was, overall, Kerry's OH polls were a little more favorable than the national numbers - I remember lots of predictions going into Election Day that Kerry would win while losing the popular vote.

    •  I dunno about 2004... (0+ / 0-)

      There were individual state polls that gave us a ray of hope, but the totality of state polling still favored Bush, if barely, about now.

      (Man, trolling through Internet Archive took me back. I remember being all exicited when Kerry pulled out leads on -- I wonder if any of those leads were valid sans Zogby? Wonder what Nate's model would have said  about '04...)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site