Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Live Digest banner
Want the scoop on hot races around the country? Get the digest emailed to you each weekday morning. Sign up here.

12:19 PM PT: ME-02: We have dueling internals out of Maine's 2nd Congressional District, but at least they both agree that Dem Rep. Mike Michaud is leading. Republican hopeful Kevin Raye says that Michaud is "only" up 47-40, in a survey from never-heard-of-`em Eaton River (with "results... processed by Scientific Marketing," whatever that means). Michaud responded with numbers from his usual pollster, Normington Petts, that instead have him dominating 58-33. (That's actually "down" from a 62-30 lead in Michaud's last internal.) Neither side offers presidential toplines, but as the linked article notes, several independent surveys have shown Michaud up 15-20 points.

12:33 PM PT: IN-Sen: This headline describing Monday night's debate between Democrat Joe Donnelly and Republican Richard Mourdock sure sounds like a win for Donnelly: "Mourdock tries to distance self from tea party." More amazingly, Mourdock was asked again to name a Democrat in the Senate he could work with—a question he previously flubbed badly—and he still couldn't come up with a single name. I mean, seriously? His campaign staff couldn't prep him on this one? And how hard would it be to give a shout-out to, say, Joe Manchin? Mourdock must be a real idiot if he can't figure out how to answer that one, and the people working for him can't be much better.

12:54 PM PT: NH-Gov (Suffolk): Maggie Hassan (D): 41, Ovide Lamontagne (R): 38

1:03 PM PT: By the way, this is totally hilarious. After Tommy's son 38-year-old son Jason decided to engage in some birther "humor," his campaign put out a statement claiming, "The Governor has addressed this with his son, just like any father would do." I thought that was some bollocks, but New York Magazine's Dan Amira has really done this justice with a piece titled: "How to Talk to Your 38-Year-Old Son About Birtherism." Sample:

Be firm, but don't shame or chastise your 38-year-old son. Remember, he may very well determine whether or not you end up in a shitty nursing home.

1:13 PM PT: And here's another good reason not to believe Mary Bono Mack's polling: DFA just came out with a third survey (again from PPP), and Ruiz is ahead 47-46. The presidential toplines are very reasonable, too: Obama's up 49-48 (he won 50-47 four years ago). If I were MBM, I would not like the trajectory of this race, not one bit.

1:27 PM PT: MN-06: We have a pair of polls out on MN-06, one independent and one internal. SurveyUSA (for KSTP-TV) finds GOP queen of crazy Michele Bachmann leading Democrat Jim Graves 50-41, a pretty daunting margin—if you believe it. They also have Romney beating Obama 53-36, which is a fair bit worse for the president than McCain's 55-43 margin here in 2008. But Graves has responded with his own survey from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, the third such poll he's released. Taken at the start of the month, GQR has Bachmann leading just 47-45, little changed from her 48-46 edge in August. Graves says he's ahead with independents 53-36, a very different picture from SUSA, which has Bachman on top 43-31 with that group.

2:03 PM PT: HI-Sen: This is so weird. Alaska Rep. Don Young is now endorsing fellow Republican Linda Lingle—after he made headlines when he crossed the aisle to cut an ad for Democrat Mazie Hirono. Apparently, Young's support for Hirono was limited to the primary only. Amusingly, though, when Young backed Hirono, Lingle called him "one of the House of Representative's most controversial members"—something Hirono's people were all too happy to point out after Young's latest switcheroo.

2:27 PM PT: Passings: Democrat John Durkin, who served in the Senate for one term and was party to possibly the craziest-ever recount battle following the 1974 election, has died at the age of 76. If you aren't familiar with it, the entire story is worth a read—eventually, a do-over special election was declared! According to the AP, Durkin once said "that he wouldn't wish the experience on his worst enemy" and added ''I'd much rather have read about it than have lived it."

3:01 PM PT: IL-10: Three new Illinois House polls came out on Tuesday, two Dem and one GOP. First up is a DCCC in-house one-day robopoll in the 10th, which features Democrat Brad Schneider edging GOP Rep. Bob Dold! by a 44-43 margin. Making life tough for Schneider, though, is something we've seen in almost all Illinois House polling to date: Obama sharply underperfoming his 2008 margins. He's beating Romney 54-42, but that's a steep drop from his 63-36 win over McCain under the redrawn lines. (It makes you wonder whether Illinois Dems perhaps got too greedy and should have drawn one more Republican vote sink instead.) Notably, Dold and the D-Trip basically agree about where he stands: A month-old Dold poll had him up 44-37, not the happiest of places for an incumbent.

3:11 PM PT: IL-13: The D-Trip also has a robo special in the 13th, with some nice numbers for David Gill. He's beating Republican Rodney Davis 43-37, once again in spite of a steep Obama decline. (The POTUS leads Romney just 48-43, as opposed to 55-44 in 2008.) That 43% mark is the highest score Gill's ever gotten in any known poll, and the spread is decidedly better than what his own 40-39 internal at the start of October found.

4:12 PM PT: IL-17: The final Illinois survey comes from the campaign of GOP Rep. Bobby Schilling and the NRCC, courtesy Public Opinion Strategies. Schilling is up 51-44 over Democrat Cheri Bustos, which actually represents more of an improvement for his opponent than for him. Back in an August POS poll, Schilling was up 50-37. Since that poll came out, two Democratic surveys painted the race as a tossup, so obviously we're at a bit of a loggerheads here. This new Republican poll has some really dismal numbers for Obama, who's at just 50-44 over Romney. That would be an epic plummet from the POTUS's 60-38 mark here in 2008. Believable? Well, not inconceivable.

4:16 PM PT: SEIU/AFSCME: The two big Dem-supporting unions are pumping a bunch of dough into several different races all over the map: $600K in WI-Sen, $1.3 mil in NH-Gov, $650K in CA-52, and $160K on radio in FL-26. Links to all the ads and more details on the buys are at the link.

4:22 PM PT: Crossroads: Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS is launching a $5 million ad spree in seven Senate races. Roll Call has breakdowns on the buys and copies of six of the ads. Most notable are continued purchases in Indiana (almost $1 mil) and Maine (around $300K).

4:23 PM PT: OH-Sen: Sherrod Brown (D-inc): $5.4 mil raised

5:38 PM PT: Fundraising: In case you missed it, we posted our gigantic third quarter House fundraising chart on Tuesday. Click through to find out how much every candidate in every competitive House race—all 94 of them—raised and spent during the last fundraising period, and how much cash they have left for the stretch run.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  WA-Gov - Rasmussen - Inslee 47-45 (7+ / 0-)

    Scotty has a new poll out like every five minutes.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...

    White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

    by spiderdem on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:08:11 PM PDT

  •  Does anyone have any good projects (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atdnext, dufffbeer, bumiputera, wu ming

    they've been working on for DRA that aren't ridiculously out there?  I mean, as interesting as it would be to limit CDs to 50,000 people, there's just not a whole lot of creative map drawing you can do with that few people plus the VRA. :P

    I've been tinkering around with Alabama and came to the conclusion that AL Democrats in 2000 drew a big dummymander.  I know they didn't want to draw a second black majority seat, which was possible then, is possible now, and should have been required both times, but they did a piss poor job of trying to flip the 3rd district (Mike Rogers).  I was able to draw it (with 2000's pop numbers) 5% more Dem just as cleanly and in a way that a Blue Dog still would have won the primary, but Obama narrowly won it in 2008.  Still though, there was nothing Republicans could do to stop Dems from drawing a solid 3-4 map in 2000 but we just didn't... fail.

    Other than that I've just been trying to draw relatively clean Dem Gerrymanders of the south rather than the finding the limits crazy maps I've done in the past.  2-2 in Arkansas and Mississippi was relatively easy, as was a 3-3 in Louisiana.  I also had a 2-2-2 Kentucky, 2-1 West Virginia, and a 3-5-1 in Tennessee.  Anyone got a good 3-4 or better for South Carolina?  I'll probably do it or Georgia next.

    Deep South Dems don't have the best record when it comes to trying to gerrymander though (ahem Georgia).

    NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

    by sawolf on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:12:03 PM PDT

    •  Democratic South (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera, wu ming, sawolf

      I'd like to see what it looks like to draw a contiguous streak of Democratic districts along the Southern Black Belt, from Louisiana to Virginia.  Not too gerrymandered, good government-ish.  I drew an Alabama with an actual rural black district and I might diary it.

    •  Merced County, CA sec 5 VRA bail out (0+ / 0-)

      I have been playing with the various ramifications of the "bail out" of section 5 of the voting rights act granted to Merced County a few months back. I haven't got anything written yet though.

      Terry Phillips for Congress in 23rd District of California.

      by hankmeister on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:30:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  that's one of the reasons I find it interesting (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera

      I mean I can do a few interesting districts, but with the limitations of the VRA and district size, there are a lot fewer flagrant gerrymanders.

      Seeing how those limitations can affect representation, though, is enjoyable.  For example, without drawing grotesque districts (which most second VRA districts for Deep South states would be) I've increased the portion of African American majority districts in the Deep South from about 20% to 29.77% of districts.  If you add in the white majority or mixed districts where African Americans compose a significant enough of the electorate that they could reasonably elect one of their own (say 35% in a 58-60% Obama district) you're probably at 1/3 or so.

      Of course it also means creating a lot of Republican districts in deep blue states, but that's the trade off.

      ...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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:41:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I have a 3 Obama districts South Carolina map (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, sawolf, bear83, dufffbeer, jncca

      Photobucket

      The blue district is just barely Obama. This could probably be fixed by adding Hilton Head into the VRA district. Gonna try that now.

      Tan is 55%.

      28, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

      by bumiputera on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:53:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  1000 member house (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wu ming, bumiputera, BeloitDem

      I've been drawing some maps for a 1000 member house.  It works out so that the districts are the size of NY Senate districts and/or Michigan's Upper Peninsula.  

      Republican, MI-11, Member of the DKE Engineering Caucus, SSP: Bort

      by Bart Ender on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:19:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I've got what should be a safe 3-4 South Carolina (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, jncca, bumiputera

      Both the cyan and yellow districts are 55% Obama, with considerable African-American populations.  The brown district remains majority Black by VAP and will continue to elect Jim Clyburn.  All others packed Republican, and complete havoc played with the incumbents.

      SC-01 (Cyan): Tim Scott (R).  Drops Horry County, as the new GOP map does, but instead grabs only the Dem-leaning parts of Charleston, as well as friendly counties to the west.  Scott would be doomed here, and may even attempt to move to SC-07.  Obama/McCain 55%/44% (2012 map 43/56, 2002 map 42/57).  Racial stats: 55% White (59% VAP), 34% Black (32% VAP).

      SC-02 (Green): Joe Wilson (R) and Jeff Duncan (R).  Also follows the new GOP map in retreating from the coast, but I pack this district even more and send it up into Jeff Duncan's district, drawing in his home and a lot of his district, but the edge is clearly to Wilson.  Hate to give the controversial Wilson such a safe seat when we ran well even in 2010.  Obama/McCain 35/64 (2012 map 39/60, 2002 map 45/54).

      SC-03 (Purple): Open but I assume Jeff Duncan would move here.  His home and a lot of territory is lost to SC-02, and he now has to contend with the addition of Greenville which brings a lot of ambitious Republicans.  Obama/McCain 37/62 (2012 map 35/63, 2002 map 35/64).

      SC-04 (Red): I assume Trey Gowdy (R) would run here, but his home in Spartanburg has been drawn into SC-05, and there's a lot of new territory to contend with.  Mick Mulvaney's home is also narrowly drawn into this district.  Mulvaney might actually primary Gowdy here considering how blue SC-05 shifts.  Obama/McCain 31/68, the reddest in the state. (2012 map 38/61, 2002 map 38/60).

      SC-05 (Yellow): Mostly Mulvaney's (R) seat, but his home is drawn out.  Unlike the GOP map, which moves this district into more conservative territory up north, I shift it away to friendlier counties, while also grabbing the Dem cores of Spartanburg and Rock Hill.  Mulvaney might not even run here since it's Obama/McCain 55/44 (2012 map 44/55, 2002 map 46/53).  Racial stats: 52% White (55% VAP), 41% Black (39% VAP).

      SC-06 (Brown): Jim Clyburn (D).  The last Dem in South Carolina gets a similar district, with more diversifying Columbia precincts taking the place of North Charleston.  This Dem map works without even diluting the majority-minority district much, showing that it's GOP gerrymanders that are destroying us in the South, not the VRA.  Obama/McCain 67/32 (2012 map 70/29, 2002 map 64/35).  Racial stats: 54% Black (52% VAP), 40% White (43% VAP).

      SC-07 (Blue): Open, but Tom Rice (R) would want to run here.  As in the new map, Horry County finally anchors its own district, but rather than eat up Dem-friendly counties from SC-05, I have this one continue in to Charleston and absorb the reddest suburbs it can.  Maintains such a similarity to the old SC-01 that Tim Scott might even run here.  Obama/McCain 35/64 (2012 map 45/54, new seat).

  •  The national polls, a macro view (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atdnext, MBishop1

    Just stepping back and taking a wider view of this, everyone keeps analyzing the day-to-day changes in the national "trackers", but almost all the changes are within the MOE.

    Even today's update from Gallup (a live interviewer poll, and the most respected brand name in polling) was within the MOE. The LV version had Romney rising by 1 and Obama falling by 1, and the MOE is 2.

    All the talk of a split between state and national polls may be premature. If today was Election Day, I could see Obama winning the popular vote by 1 percentage point or less when all margins of error are taken into account and then winning the Electoral College by winning Ohio, and likely Colorado and Nevada.

    •  i think the national polling is right around (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone, Delilah

      Gallup's RV numbers (I think the LV model is shit).  I actually think Obama is stronger in the electoral college than in the popular vote.

    •  Pet peeve of mine (2+ / 0-)

      Yes in the days after the debate, when we were all panicking, I too was obsessively analyzing the daily trackers and trying to guess which day went which way.
      But after a few days and with hindsight I remembered what we have been repeated non-stop: daily trackers daily moves mean very little and are most often statistical noise.
      They are relevant to observe trends over a longer period of time but obsessing about which day went which way is complete nonsense, counter-productive and says very little about the race.

      The bigger picture is this: the race has considerably tightened to Romney's benefit after the debate (or rather after the debate coverage) to the point he may have a national lead within the Moe.
      Evidence is confusing as to which extent this has translated in swing states but Obama still seems to have a slight advantage there.
      And the evidence of the past few days is that the race has stabilized to that weird equilibirum. I doubt this will last and I will be watching the trend over the next two weeks. But it would be silly to try and divine anything more specific time-wise.

      •  The trackers in the days after the debate (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DownstateDemocrat

        Suggested very little movement. It was only on the Monday night when Markos announced the PPP weekly would have Romney ahead and then about half an hour late Pew hit the fan. I make it 17 pollsters have post-debate numbers and in the most recent iteration of each we have 9 Romney leads, 7 Obama leads and 1 exact tie.

        "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:31:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The more recent or shorter-tailed polls (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32

      are generally better for Obama than the polls with older data.

  •  Is this David's analysis (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MBishop1, Icarus27K, jj32

    of the number of ways today's polls make sense?

  •  Today is just going to be lousy... (7+ / 0-)

    Until the debate. And if the debate is lousy, it's going to be really lousy.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:21:50 PM PDT

    •  I've been nervous all day. (10+ / 0-)

      Lasting the next 5 1/2 hours is gonna be a killer.  I prayed like all night until I went to sleep that Obama does better than Romney tonight.  Today I prayed that Romney accidentally let loose a loud fart during the debate for all to hear.  Hopefully God doesn't count that against me.

      •  I'm not watching (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paleo, LordMike, EcosseNJ, sapelcovits

        I'll log onto Political Wire in the morning. Taegan is usually a good judge.

        "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:27:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  i wish i could do that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LordMike

          but there's no way I could sleep without knowing. i'm probably not going to be able to sleep regardless of how the debate does though

        •  I'll be half watching. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades

          The TV isn't in the same room as my computer, so I'll be running back and forth from the TV to DK.  If it starts going badly, though... I'm turning the TV off, and taking out my secret bottle of vodka from my closet.  (My parents are evangelical conservative teetotalers, so I have to hide it.)

        •  I'm not, either. (0+ / 0-)

          But that's mostly because I feel like I have a reverse Midas touch with all of these things. That's one reason why I haven't given much of anything to our congressional candidates and probably won't give a lot to Obama for the rest of the campaign.

          "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

          by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:41:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'll definitely watch (0+ / 0-)

          But I will probably watch the Yankees-Tigers game live and watch the debate later on c-span.org, like I did with the first debate.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:06:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Passing gas wouldn't change much (6+ / 0-)

        In fact, it might help him seem like a real person.

        The thing to hope for is the he freezes up like Judy Biggert did in her debate. Better yet, like Jason Plummer or Jan Brewer.

        26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

        by DrPhillips on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:32:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I hear you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MBishop1

        For me, mostly brought on by the general reaction to the Kos/PPP national number. I felt quite good last night, the numbers had been upticking, but this was a bit of an initial mental kicking, but a bit of time studying the internals calmed me down... 44-16 Con/Lib Id? But yeah generally, just a strange flat feeling all round today. That and the drawn out, slowest month ever sensation...

        I was checking out Florida at RCP and jeez look... taking out the dipshit from the R leaners that make up six of the eight polls since debate #1 we are left with PPP and NBC/Marist and they have it R+1 and O+1 respectively... Has there ever been an election where so many of the national pollsters swing so obviously for one team? Like many I'd imagine, I just want to see some better quality polling in IA, NH & NV than the so-so crap we are getting from the usual suspects.

        Funny now, how OH may have replaced CO as a part of "the midwest firewall"

        "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

        by EcosseNJ on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:51:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Not really terrible or great news on balance today (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DownstateDemocrat

      but yeah this sucks.  I'm not going to have any fingernails left...

      White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

      by spiderdem on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:28:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I would put it this way (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DownstateDemocrat

      If Obama is lousy, tonight will be lousyindeed.
      But if Obama is good and the pundits still try and manage to make it a draw (see last week's debate) then it is going to be REALLY lousy. Much worse for me.
      Because I can take my candidate losing because he is making mistakes (because he can always un-make them, as Republicans have learned with Romney).
      But if the media are so wedded to the new narrative that even when he is good, it can't get through, then I am gonna despair.

      •  i hate to say it (3+ / 0-)

        but I think your REALLY lousy scenario is the most likely one. The media will acknowledge that Obama did better but then say that Romney won because he "appeared credible."

        •  The MSM is in the tank for Romney (0+ / 0-)

          Let's face it...we saw this during the Wisconsin Recalls with the Wisconsin MSM being in the tank for Scott Walker, and it's happening again with the National MSM being in the tank for Mitt Romney.

          "Rahm Emaunel is the leader of the Scott Walker Wing of the Democratic Party!" -Me

          by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:39:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Indeed (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Caped Composer

          Hence my comment.
          I have been preaching for several days that it won't be enough for Obama to simply be better because frankly, considering the way ppl remember the first debate (a bit unfairly but too late to kvetch about that now), it is pretty much baked in the cake in terms of media expectations that he will be better tonight.
          We actually need Romney to either suck (I doubt it) or say something really callous. Since part of his move in the polls seems to be because ppl "realized" he was not the caricature from the Obama campaign ads, we actually need him to say something that will bring all that back to the fore.
          I would be surprised if he was bad. He is too disciplined for that. He never has been bad at a debate. But he has made plenty of gaffes. That's the only way the media will treat this as a clear Obama win and, let's face it, it is highly unlikely unless Obama has been prepped to rattle him and trap him. And the format does not lend itself to that.
          I don't think tonight will be the circuit-breaker we need. But at least it should get some Democrats back in the LV screen. That's my positive spin.

          •  Wouldn't the logical thing be the other way round? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            madmojo, MichaelNY
            because frankly, considering the way ppl remember the first debate (a bit unfairly but too late to kvetch about that now), it is pretty much baked in the cake in terms of media expectations that he will be better tonight.
            That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Wouldn't the other way round be more logical? Part of why he was seen to have failed so badly last time was because people were expecting him to do pretty well, and weren't expecting much from Romney. So there was a big surprise factor at work.

            But this time round, Obama set the bar pretty low for himself. People think he really sucked last time, so it should be easy for him to outdo expectations this time. Vice versa, people now think Romney's pretty good at this kind of thing, so anything less than a clear win will be seen as meh.

        •  yeah, I've said before, for all the talk of (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LordMike

          liberal media, the media loves moderate Republicans. The only reason Jon Huntsman was in the race or the short time he was, was because of the media.

          And now the GOP base seems okay with a moderate Republican too.

    •  And if the debate is great (10+ / 0-)

      then it's going to be really great.

      I just thought I would throw in the optimistic option. :)

      •  Me, too! (8+ / 0-)

        So Obama fucked up the first debate. As Rachel Maddow pointed out a couple days later, incumbent Presidents usually do. And while that gave Romney a political life preserver, it hasn't caused him to overpower Obama on the Electoral College Map.

        IMHO Biden stopped the bleeding last Thursday, and perhaps the good economic data flowing in recently have also helped Obama recover in the last few days. So all Obama needs to do tonight is hold his own and point out Romney's two-faced mendacity.

        At least Axelrod & Co. realized Obama fucked up last week, and it looks like they've prepped him to do better tonight.

        •  I hope Obama kicks Romney's teeth in tonight! (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          atdnext, JBraden

          "Rahm Emaunel is the leader of the Scott Walker Wing of the Democratic Party!" -Me

          by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:36:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Sorry (6+ / 0-)

          But I will die repeating Obama did not fuck up at the first debate.
          He was listless and crucially Romney was very good. But watching this myth take hold so fast has been infuriating.
          There was nothing terrible about his performance. It just was not very interesting or memorable but it particularly looked bad next to Romney's engaging one. But by all objective criteria it was not anywhere near the catastrophe everybody now says it is.
          And btw if you reread Twitter and blogs during the debate, NOONE - including the pundits that went hysterical once it was done - identified the debate as going badly for Obama. It was once it was all done that the snowball effect started.

          •  It was totally expectations (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, BeloitDem

            Romney was better than people thought he would be and Obama worse but neither was amazing or amazingly bad. I do wonder if it was the CNN snap poll that did it. The extent I mean. Because I thought Romney edged it but not by that margin.

            "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:51:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think it was (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tk421, LordMike, askew

              I actually it was the MSNBC crew that emboldened the MSM to go apeshit in turn.
              Because as you said, it was expectations that made people - including Obama supporters - tell CNN Romney had won. Heck I probably would said so myself (and notice how Dems have a structural disadvantage here since even when they lose Republicans says their candidate won, while Dems are more willing to admit they lost which means the choice is between instant polls showing a partisan draw or a Republican landslide).
              But then it snowballed into OBAMA SUCKED SO MUCH !!!!!CATASTROPHE!!!!!
              And THAT is what I think had the impact on the polls. Not Obama's performance that had nothing memorably about it (neither positive, nor negative) but the coverage of it as Obama had been crushed, ROmney was fantastic and not what the ads said,and so on

          •  debate (9+ / 0-)

            Obama didn't do anything especially bad, but he came off as unenthusiastic and he missed a bunch of opportunities to nail Romney on his BS. The first problem is easily fixed and will probably get his poll numbers back up some, but the second is harder to address in a town hall format than in a conventional debate.

            SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

            by sacman701 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:58:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Seconded (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LordMike

              "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:00:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  There's some thinking that says (0+ / 0-)

              it's essentially impossible to call one side out effectively on this stuff, and particularly during any debate, because voters don't like when you call your opponent a liar and they are easily confused by the almost guaranteed push back of more faulty numbers and misdirection. I think there's a lot to that, although I don't think it's impossible. I suspect it requires a lot of unification around a theme about a candidate.

              "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

              by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:04:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Biden called out the other side (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                calvinshobbes

                And do you remember what I said the president could have said?

                "It's really interesting debating Mitt Romney's body double here tonight, because for the entire campaign, Mitt Romney has advocated cutting taxes for the wealthiest [etc., etc. - short list], and the man standing here tonight denies supporting any of this. So either this man is Mitt Romney's body double, or the real Mitt Romney says one thing in private to his wealthy contributors, another to partisan crowds in the Republican primaries and at campaign events, and a completely different thing to all of you watching us on TV tonight."

                He could have said it with a smile, and it would have completely changed the reaction to the debate.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:20:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  There are any number of ways Obama could (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, LordMike

                  fight back against Romney's nonsense. He's not a dumb guy in any way and he is certainly eloquent. He also has the facts on his side.

                  The problem is that it's not clear whether it would be effective. Romney's claim that six studies have backed him up should be in the running for the lie of the year, if only because some of the "studies" are op/eds and blog posts. And of course, the numbers don't come close to adding up.

                  Romney does not have any leg to stand on here intellectually or factually, yet it's quite likely that he say something that is shady or even downright dishonest, even something with numbers, and say it all with a smile, while all of the people watching don't develop a firm opinion one way or the other. If they instead assume it's too confusing or that all politicians lie, what good does that do us? Where do we end up?

                  "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

                  by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:48:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  The problem is that he didn't try hard enough (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BeloitDem

                    You can't fight lies with nothing. And the thing is, he tried to debunk some lies but didn't address Romney's chameleon-like aspect of negating core campaign planks suddenly.

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:57:25 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I guess that's true. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY

                      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

                      by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:44:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

        •  I hope Obama takes that SOB head off! (0+ / 0-)

          and I could care less if some ppl on here think what I said is way to much.

          Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

          by BKGyptian89 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:38:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  US World Cup qualifier they have to win (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      uclabruin18, wu ming

      Isnt helping my anxiety level either.

    •  I'm watching The Descendents (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, bumiputera, The Caped Composer

      Haven't seen that one.

      People who want to watch Dancing With the Candidates, you're on your own.

      And for people who vote based on who they think won DWTC, you have my contempt.

      “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

      by Paleo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:34:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  NV-Pres/NV-Sen: Almost Complete Voter Registration (21+ / 0-)

    ... Numbers point to...

     http://www.ralstonreports.com/...

    A HUGE statewide Democratic lead. Already, it's over 7.1% and nearing 90k raw votes. By the time they're finished counting registration forms, the statewide Democratic registration advantage should be over 90k.

    BTW, this is one reason why I'm NOT worried about Obama here.

  •  I think I figured out why the election is going (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, nonsensoleum

    to be so close.  I really think it comes down to what Bill Maher was alluding to in his last show.  People want a bubble.  This is where the epithet 'socialist' is grounded with respect to President Obama.  All his regulations are preventing a bubble which a great part of the country actually wants.  This is a big problem for us.  I happen to be Canadian by birth so I accept the idea of universal health care, that government should regulate the banks and bubbles are inherently bad things.  But the longer I look at these numbers the more I come to the conclusion it comes down to those who want a bubble and those who don't.  That's why it is tied.  Everything else is window dressing.    

  •  If we win the EC vote, but lose the PV... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JGibson, DownstateDemocrat

    it's good for us in the short term, as at least Obama's president still.  However, I'd be worried about the long term.

    Remember how pissed we were in 2000 when the same thing happened with Bush?  I mean, I know there were other circumstances there (Florida, SCOTUS), but let's face it, if it had been a proven EC win by Bush, we still would have been pissed.  

    Now, imagine the other side getting pissed.  They get pissed much easier and more vocally than we do.  I'm thinking they'll do recounts, try to do away with the EC (which in most cases, would give us the advantage, wouldn't it?), I wouldn't even put violence past them.

    Congress would continue to see Obama as an illegitimate president, and they'd have more ammo after a PV loss.  They'd use this excuse to continue to stymie everything the president tries to do.

    No.  We need to win the PV too, or I think things could get bad.  I'm pretty confident in the EC, though.

  •  Delusions of Grandeur from Real Clear Politics (0+ / 0-)

    The entire article here from Mark Salter is amusing, but these parts in particular struck out:

    But I think Gov. Romney does have an advantage tonight irrespective of the format, because he doesn’t need to improve on his last performance. A town-hall format necessitates a more animated performance than a debate behind lecterns, and the bar the president set for himself in his curiously lethargic first debate is a very easy one to clear. The press will award Obama the most improved player award no matter how Romney performs.
    Stacking the deck much, Mr. Salter?
    The president will certainly challenge Romney more than he did the last time out. But somewhat underappreciated in the reviews of their Denver face-off was just how exceptionally Romney performed -- even without benefit of comparison to Obama’s lackluster showing. He managed to prosecute his case against the president not just vigorously but graciously, a difficult thing to do in the stressful and urgent circumstances of a debate, which, had it gone poorly for him, would have probably decided the race for Obama.
    Romney’s answers and demeanor were exquisitely pitched to the sensitivities of genuine independents and that small, but hardy, band of undecided voters. Ask Joe Biden, whose vigorous assault in last week’s vice presidential debate evoked Jack Nicholson in “The Shining,” how hard it is to attack an opponent without appearing obnoxious to people for whom politics isn’t a passion. If the president mimics his running mate’s style, he will lose tonight’s debate, and probably the election.
    It's quite easy to appeal to a wide swathe of people if you simply lie and reverse your positions as Romney did. If you are able to be anything to anyone, how can you not excel?

    Now, I have to give Biden credit, because had I been there, I might have tried to take a swing at Ryan. He's that repulsive to me--and probably to most Democrats, too. That aside, The Shining? Give me a fucking break!

    But anyway, you've gotta love how these guys are slowly stripping Obama of any options. He can't be like he was last time (no shit!). He can't be like Clinton, because Clinton is more talented at this stuff than he is. He can't be too eloquent or florid while speaking, because those qualities only work in a speech. He can't be spontaneous, because he's just not good like that. He can't be like Biden, despite that Biden was effective, for a few different reasons.

    Just what the hell is Obama supposed to do?

    Romney doesn’t need to elevate his game. He just needs to be as assertive, gracious and unflappable as he was the last time -- not an easy task but one we now know he’s capable of achieving. No matter how improved the president is tonight, he’s unlikely to reverse Romney’s momentum. I believe the last debate changed the race fundamentally. It’s now trending in Romney’s favor. If he can find that sweet spot again, he’ll further reduce the likability gap with his opponent, and I think he’ll be the favorite to be our next president.
    HA! I guess if Romney continues his quasi-mythical climb, it will change the race...until the third debate? Mobilization efforts and everything else apparently don't matter.

    Is it just me, or is this article as out there as I think it is?

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:40:11 PM PDT

    •  Salter is a hack (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone

      I wouldn't trust him if my life depended on it!

      "Rahm Emaunel is the leader of the Scott Walker Wing of the Democratic Party!" -Me

      by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:42:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Par for the course for Real Conservative Politics (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      EcosseNJ, DCCyclone

      “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

      by Paleo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:44:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wishful thinking (6+ / 0-)

      I saw the debate and Romney really wasn't that good; nowhere near as good as Kerry, for instance. He was good enough to rebound from record poor favorability levels to rather average favorability levels, and to pull the race about as close as it probably would have been all along if the Republicans had a strong candidate.

      But please do carry on building him up...

      •  I still don't quite understand it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jj32, bjssp

        Considering the president's approval rating. Notwithstanding his approval numbers according to PPP which I understand even less.

        "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:48:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I know I'm thought of as (0+ / 0-)

          a relentless, almost hopeless naive optimist, but at the same time, I just don't think the debate changed all that much. If things continue to go badly for Obama, if they get worse after a possible weak debate performance tonight, then there might be a case for a Romney surge. Other than that, not so much.

          "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

          by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:54:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Someone suggested (0+ / 0-)

          That it does not matter if his approval improves at the margin if in parallel Romney becomes a more acceptable alternative.

          •  Someone also said (6+ / 0-)

            There is no need for an alternative if the incumbent is acceptable.

            "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:03:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Except that (0+ / 0-)

              in this economy, the incumbent being acceptable does not completely negate being tempted to vote for someone you might be open to thinking will do better.

              Not arguing the approval isn't a good fundamental to have in the pocket as we approach the election. Just trying to explain the discrepancy.

              •  There's no history of that (5+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                LordMike, itskevin, sacman701, wu ming, jncca

                Your argument has never been borne out in history.  No President with positive job approval has ever been turned out.

                It's happened before downballot, but only because a state or district is heavily partisan against the incumbent's party, plus there's a wave election against that incumbent's party.  That was Lincoln Chafee's problem.  And it's looking like it'll happen to Scott Brown even without a wave.

                But the country is evenly-divided, neither side has a partisan advantage in the electorate.

                If Obama's job approval is net positive with voters in reality, he will win.  Of that I'm sure.

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

                by DCCyclone on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:20:58 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  My optimistic expectation is (6+ / 0-)

          that if Obama can get a win tonight, things could shift very quickly in his direction. The fundmentals of the race, job approval and economy, are good for him. He has held up well in Ohio, NV, IA, and some of the national polls.

          He'd get the momentum and the comeback kid narrative,
          and, especially if he answers the Libya question well, it could set him to do well in next week's foreign policy debate.

    •  Some people would argue (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, nimh, MichaelNY

      That "being as good as your previous performance" is a higher bar than "being better than your previous performance".
      I doubt Romney will do anything bad tonight but let's face it the upside of the way the media has mythologized the first debate is that they seem to have lionized him as a great debater.
      He was good last week but that's a higher bar for him to clear now.

      •  He was good, but not great. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike, MichaelNY

        Let's remember that it looked awful for him before the first debate. Like, really, really bad.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:51:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You mean it wasn't the greatest debate (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin, LordMike, bumiputera, MichaelNY

          Performance of the television age? Shocked I say, shocked!

          "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:53:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, it wasn't. Not by a long shot. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike

            I think the overreaction to his good but not great performance is more a reflection of relief than anything else--the sort of relief that comes from any sign of hope that things just aren't as bad as you thought they were. Now, can one debate change that? Partly, I guess. At the same time, I'd say it makes more sense to argue that things were never that good for us to begin with and/or that they will come back to earth, assuming it wasn't the first domino to drop in a strong of errors, something we'll know about only after the election.

            I don't mean to sound like I am living in denial, but more to that point, did the debate force Obama to give up on his ground game? Of course it didn't. The only difference between now and then--and what will turn into more of a difference/problem if and only if things get worse for us with some bad errors on Obama's part--is that Romney's side is more pumped up. But that might not last and, even if it does, it's not something we could control in any event. We had and still do have a tremendous amount working in our favor. We shouldn't forget that.

            "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

            by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:59:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Milwaukee voting history (6+ / 0-)

    Just some information for looking at Wisconsin this year.  In 2000 the city of Milwaukee net Gore 96,000 votes (68%/28%), in 2004 the city net Kerry 123,000 votes (72%/27%), and in 2008 the city net Obama 156,000 votes(78%/21%).  In the June recall the city was still basically 78/21 in favor of Barrett.  I believe that Obama will net at least 150,000 from the city again this year.  The city makes up around 9% of total votes. Gore won Wisconsin by 5,000 votes out of 2.6 million cast, and Kerry beat Bush by 11,000 with 3 million votes cast.  I know that 2008 was a long time ago but June wasn't and I think it will be hard for Romney to make up 150,000 from Milwaukee and at least 100,000 from Dane County.  Just my thinking.

  •  Today's Gallup is interesting ... (6+ / 0-)

    Topline is Romney 50 -Obama 46 ..... BUT
    the internal info. is interesting:

    "... This shows that compared with 2008, Obama's support is down the most among voters in the South, 30- to 49-year-olds, those with four-year college degrees, postgraduates, men, and Protestants. He has also slipped modestly among whites, Easterners, women, and Catholics.

    Obama's support is roughly the same now as in 2008 among 18- to 29-year-olds, seniors, nonwhites, and voters in the West and Midwest..."

    http://www.gallup.com/...

    •  That may explain the state/national polling... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, MBishop1, EcosseNJ, MichaelNY, Delilah

      ...disconnect that has baffled Nate Silver, as well as every political junkie out there.

      "Rahm Emaunel is the leader of the Scott Walker Wing of the Democratic Party!" -Me

      by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:51:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Seems to support the theory that Romney (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      EcosseNJ, bear83, MichaelNY, Delilah

      is running up the score where it doesn't count.

    •  Well, I'm a (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nimh

      southern (VA, born in NC), 27 year old, college graduate, male, white, protestant that will gladly be voting for Obama again.  So will my 25 year old sister, and probably my 55 year old dad.  My mom would never vote for Obama.  She thinks he's the anti-christ, a muslim, and will desolve congress to become supreme ruler on the day the Mayans said the world would end (which they didn't).

    •  The only thing interesting about Gallup (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MBishop1, KingTag, Delilah

      is how they can keep their reputation in tact after being the worst pollster in 2010--8 points off on the generic.  Any other pollster, save for partisan RAss, would have been totally discredited.

      “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

      by Paleo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:00:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Compared to 2008 when their polling was shit? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BennyToothpick

      Are they honestly comparing their 2012 numbers to their objectively inaccurate 2008 numbers?

      Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

      by tommypaine on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:13:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Gallup 2008 polling "was shit"? (0+ / 0-)

        I think you misremember: http://www.pollingreport.com/...

        •  Did you read your own link? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LordMike

          On this day in 2008, they had Obama with a 2 point lead.

          Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

          by tommypaine on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:15:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  4 points actually, in their expanded model. (0+ / 0-)

            50 for Obama to 46 for McCain. Two points only in their "traditional model" - why did you scroll down to cite that one instead?

            Of course, we will never know what the "real" numbers for October 17, 2008 were, because there weren't any elections that day. But we do know what the other polls that were in the field around the same time were showing.

            From among the polls out in the field between 13-19 October, CNN, Democracy Corps and Franklin & Marshall polls all had a 5-point Obama lead; GWU had a 4-point lead; and Reuters/Zogby had 3-6 point leads. So all of that fell right in line with where Gallup's new model had the race. On the flipside, IBD/TIPP (5-7), Diageo (5-10), ABC (9) and Pew (14) had the margin significantly higher.

            Were those more accurate? Obama ended up winning by 7, so taking its outlierness into account as well, it was likely Pew's poll that was "shit".

            In the end, Gallup ended up with final polls and a  projection showing an 11-point Obama lead. You can take that to be reassuring by reasoning it was 4 points off on the margin - not "shit," but not the best either. Or you can take that to not be very reassuring, since Gallup turned out to be too Obama-friendly in the end.

    •  That's what I've been saying! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike

      Romney is starting to overperform in heavily blue states like Connecticut that he won't win, and exciting voters in states like Kentucky, where he won't likely lose. The electoral college is not his friend!

  •  WI Redistricting (6+ / 0-)

    Looks like the WI GOP withheld 34 e-mails in regards to Wisconsin's controversial redistricting process!

    "Rahm Emaunel is the leader of the Scott Walker Wing of the Democratic Party!" -Me

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:50:00 PM PDT

  •  Hysterical PPP Voicemail re Honey Boo Boo (7+ / 0-)

    Apparently, PPP's inclusion of a Honey Boo Boo question in its recent polling offended some Gary Johnson supporter. LOL.

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:50:06 PM PDT

  •  And they undervalue many of those categories (0+ / 0-)

    youth, seniors, nonwhites etc.  No mention of losing women which was the meme of the day on Drudge yesterday from USA Today.  

  •  What time is the debate tonight? (0+ / 0-)
  •  I know this sounds conspiracy minded (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EcosseNJ

    but I am beginning to see Gallup as an outlier.  How much of this is being fueled beneath the surface by the Justice Department joining in a false claim suit against the company.  

    http://www.foxnews.com/...

    We've seen so much bullshit going on with polling in this cycle.  I just have a hard time believing the numbers Gallup is giving us.  It's too bad NBC/Marist isn't doing a national poll.  It is really coming down to the major networks.  Only they can afford to actually do accurate polling any more.  

    And sorry PPP.  That sample was a joke.  

    •  Yeah (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      markhanna

      Always on my mind.

      "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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:57:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Conspiracy minding (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone, nimh

      It is not a conspiracy to suggest Gallup may be an outlier because their LV screen is too tight. It is plausible and fair game.
      It would be if you implied they were doing this for nefarious reasons and intentionally (which would be silly).
      But there are fair debates to be had over the LV screen and I am sure they themselves would defend it but admit it is a fair topic for debate. They have their methodology. Other pollsters have theirs. Not a conspiracy. Polling isn't an exact science.

  •  Not sure it's it's been mentioned in the ELD (6+ / 0-)

    from the Reuters Poll re; early voting 59-39 Obama so far.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

    by EcosseNJ on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:02:55 PM PDT

  •  Polling Perspective from Kevin Drum (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marieperoy

    I doubt it would surprise anyone to think I still believe will win (and win big, I should add), but I think what he says makes a lot of sense.

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:08:58 PM PDT

  •  IL-13 - Reference on teh Twitters (11+ / 0-)

    to a DCCC poll showing Gill up 6.  Link was broken.  BOLO.

    White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

    by spiderdem on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:10:41 PM PDT

    •  Is BOLO the pollster? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nimh

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:13:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Barack Only Lives Once (0+ / 0-)

        19, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
        politicohen.com
        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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 08:58:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Obama wins Cheetos poll (11+ / 0-)

    http://www.prnewswire.com/...

    In a narrow margin of victory, President Barack Obama 's 3 feet by 4 feet one-of-a-kind Cheetos portrait claimed 57 percent of the nationwide vote vs. former Gov. Mitt Romney 's 3 feet by 4 Cheetos portrait in Chester's entirely unscientific cheesy election poll.
    Stop worrying, Obama's got this one in the bag.

    If that bag is filled with Cheetos.

  •  CA-36: That poll looks on the money. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, marieperoy, MichaelNY, askew

    No wonder Ms. Mary Mack is flailing lately.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:18:47 PM PDT

  •  WA-Sen (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Until Rachel pointed it out recently, I hadn't realized Baumgartner was a solid anti-abortion'er like Ryan.

    •  WA-Gov (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      this is looking to be the least close election for governor in Washington in a long time.  Gregoire had 2 nailbiters.  Too bad we didn't have a better candidate in WA-03.  We could've swept the state.

      ...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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:28:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was surprised to see an ad (5+ / 0-)

        by the R in CD-06, Bill Driscoll, featuring several self-identified Democrats, including young women, supporting him; Derek Kilmer, on the other hand, is running openly as a progressive in his spots.
        Suzan DelBene's ads blast Koster as a neanderthal on social issues.
        What I find puzzling is that Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark, who's a shoo-in this year, is running TV ads. Ambition for higher office?

        •  Peter Goldmark (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          newdem1960

          If Goldmark's political ambitions are reviving, I think that may be a good thing. I thought he looked like a very intriguing Democrat when he ran for Congress in 2006. A potential leader (obviously) on environmental issues.

          Keep us posted if you spot more evidence?  

          A Republican is a person who says we need to rebuild Iraq but not New Orleans. - Temple Stark

          by Christopher Walker on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:28:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  IN-Sen: New DSCC ad. (12+ / 0-)

    20, Dude, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus! (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren for Senate!

    by ndrwmls10 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:34:38 PM PDT

  •  Any thoughts on Virginia? (0+ / 0-)

    I live in VA.  I see plenty of Obama signs here (I live near the city of Franklin, which is southeast VA, about an hour from Hampton Roads), but Romney signs popped up like daisies after the first debate.  I'd say the amount of houses with signs are pretty equal, though the Republican houses tend to cheat by putting 2 or 3 Romney signs in one yard.  Allen signs sadly outnumber Kaine signs down here.  It's not his area, so I'm not surprised.

    Looks like my congressman, Randy Forbes, though safe, will have less of a blowout than he did the last two elections.  The Democratic candidate seems to be trying this time.  

    I think the state will go to Romney, but only very slightly.  Kaine will win, though.  All house districts remain the same as they are now.  No changes.

    Anyone else?

    •  Same thing in Northern Virginia re Romney signs (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      madmojo, Delilah

      I live in McLean.  Romney signs popped up this fall and bumper stickers proliferated on cars, but I would say it was through the fall and I didn't pay attention to pre-or-post-debate as far as the timing goes.

      Obama bumper stickers still dominate here, but I see at least one Romney bumper sticker every time on my work commute.  Of course I'll be one of several cars packed together with Obama stickers, often.

      Yard signs, in McLean the Democrats don't show them much, the GOP does more.  And it doesn't correlate to outcomes at all.  Democrats usually win here, at all levels, although there are notable exceptions like Frank Wolf and, more recently, and sadly, Barbara Comstock.

      The state overall looks like it deserves the tossup label that analysts have given it all year.  We just have to keep working hard.

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

      by DCCyclone on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:45:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  comic relief, about yard signs (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone

        I live in central Pennsylvania. There aren't many Casey signs, but there are a few.

        The only sign I've seen locally for Tom Smith, the Republican Senate candidate, was at the side of the highway. It had been run down and dented, but put back up, crumpled.

        My neighbors here don't do a lot of yard signs or bumper stickers. They put them out late if they put them up at all. However, there are 4 Obama signs in the back yards of my neighbors whose back yards face the local park, where more dog walkers will see them. They live on a cul de sac where few drivers would see them, at the front of the house.

        A Republican is a person who says we need to rebuild Iraq but not New Orleans. - Temple Stark

        by Christopher Walker on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:36:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That's exactly what I have happening in VA (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      madmojo

      Although the pres race is a 1-point affair, could go either way.

    •  I think Obama will have a Goode result (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      madmojo, MichaelNY, itskevin, Delilah

      He won the state by over 6% last time.  Goode may take another 1%.  Obama would probably have to fail to win the popular vote in order to lose the state.

      “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

      by Paleo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:17:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There's a house down the street from my apartment (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      madmojo, itskevin, KingofSpades

      with a Gary Johnson yard sign.

      I'm actually still seeing very few Romney bumper stickers, but Virginia Beach is flooded with Republican signs as usual. Plenty of Obama signs in Norfolk.

      I would make a random guess that Obama wins VA narrowly and Kaine outperforms him by 2-3%.

  •  Bringing order out of polling chaos? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BennyToothpick

    Markos on the front page:

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    Especially note the last few paragraphs.

    37, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

    by Mike in MD on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:42:11 PM PDT

  •  IN-SEN: I kind of give Mourdock a pass on the (0+ / 0-)

    question about which Democrat you would work with. Elizabeth Warren was asked the same question about the GOP, and she sort of flubbed it by saying(ironically), Richard Lugar, who wont be in office next year.

    I guess since he was already asked it, he should have been ready with a name. But I dont really think the question is fair. You can just say, "I am willing to work with any senator from the party, especially when their interests line up with the people of this state" or something.  Just because you cant name a specific senator doesnt mean you wont be bipartisan(although given Mourdock's commnets on bipartisanship, we already know he wont be bipartisan).

    The question seems to be a bit "gotcha".  

  •  CA-21 - Valadao Internal (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Christopher Walker

    reported on Twitter.  53-33 Valadao.

    White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

    by spiderdem on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:06:36 PM PDT

    •  same issue as in CA36 (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera, MichaelNY, sawolf

      No presidential topline? Again, it's easy to get a red sample with a quick and dirty robopoll in a district where the GOP base is old and white and the Dem base is young and Hispanic. Valadao is not going to win by 20 under any circumstances: the GOP won the primary 57-43 (no indies) and the Dems in that district tend to show up only for presidential elections. He might win by 10 since Hernandez hasn't spent much, but not 20. Hernandez could also win, it comes down entirely to Hispanic turnout.

      SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

      by sacman701 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:12:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  bummer. (0+ / 0-)

      but thanks for reporting it

      A Republican is a person who says we need to rebuild Iraq but not New Orleans. - Temple Stark

      by Christopher Walker on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:39:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  NM-01, 02, & 03 Polls & COH (5+ / 0-)

    As expected, Dems Michelle Lujan Grisham and Ben Ray Lujan are cleaning up in northern NM's CDs 01 and 03. MLG has a 14 pt lead in the ABQ journal released today, very similar to the 15 point lead in MLG's private GQR poll with MLG over the 50% mark.

    Unfortunately we are also woefully underwater in southern NM's CD-02 where Rep. Steve Pearce is making Evelyn Madrid Erhard less than irrelevant (granted, after Teague lost in '10 it was a long shot here anyway).

    Alamogordo News link

    Born, raised, and currently resides in CA-52. Worked/studied/have also lived in: CA-45, DC, MD-06, MD-07, NM-01, VA-08

    by uci4equality on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:08:39 PM PDT

  •  I'll give Mourdock (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, WisJohn

    A bit of a pass on not mentioning Joe Manchin. Manchin is running for re-election so I suppose mentioning him is a tacit endorsement of his candidacy. Having said that, plenty of others to mention. Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Max Baucus, Tim Johnson and I'm sure others I can't remember right now.

  •  Here's a positive thought (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    madmojo, MichaelNY, bythesea

    I think only twice in history has an incumbent president won, and seen his party gain seats in both the House and Senate. Bush in 2004, and FDR in 1936.

    While it's an uphill climb, it's certainly possible it will happen this year too.

    Despite all the anxiety, I think Obama is in good position to win re-election.

    Dems will probably make a net gain in the House. Likely not enough to retake the chamber, but still a net gain.

    Senate might be the most difficult for a net gain, but over the last year it has become plausible. There are five potential Dem pickups(ME, MA, NV, AZ, and IN). King and Warren seem to be the likeliest winners, with Carmona in third(Flake leads by 0.8 in the RCP avg). But Berkley and Donnelly certainly have a strong chance.

    Dems technically have a lot of competitive seats to hold(I'd say, CT, PA, VA, FL, OH, MO, WI, NE, ND, MT). But of those 10, only one(NE) is definitely gone. And All but MT and ND probably lean our way right now. And MT and ND seem like pure tossups: Rehberg with a 0.3 lead in RCP, and the last independent poll in ND exactly tied.

  •  When did Maggie Hassan's numbers turn around? (5+ / 0-)

    Were there NH governor debates that went against Lamontagne?  We can always use more Dem governors, so this is good news!

  •  McCaskill has an internal showing her up 52-38 (4+ / 0-)

    Can't link to it now.  52% I could see, but a 14 point margin is hard to buy.

    “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

    by Paleo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:42:23 PM PDT

    •  How do you allocate the remaining 10 percent? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      My rule of thumb is to split of 70/30 or 75/25, which would translate into McCaskill leading by about 10 points.

      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

      by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:51:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tierney for Ruiz? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bumiputera, MichaelNY

    It looks like that just might happen. Where does this bring everyone's projections to?

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:43:06 PM PDT

    •  I have 199D, 220R, 16Tossup (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bjssp, MichaelNY

      28, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

      by bumiputera on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:48:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I still have the Ruiz-Mack race as tossup (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bjssp, MichaelNY

        but tilt blue.

        28, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

        by bumiputera on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:49:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bumiputera

          I was badly burned by this thinking in 2010, but given the actual results from that year, the headwinds Republicans will be facing in blue states, and the fact that I still expect Obama to win big, I am expecting a few surprises on election night.

          "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

          by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:54:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're still expecting Obama to win big? (0+ / 0-)

            That's very optimistic at this point. It could happen, but I think it would be advisable to wait at least until the polling results from tonight's debate come in. Which probably means next week.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:33:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  I'm at about 204D, 13 tossups. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera, MichaelNY, redrelic17

        Just out of reach.

        ...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 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:50:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  If you had to pick (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        any sort of races that look secure for Republicans but wouldn't be earth shatteringly shocking to us if we won, which would they be? I'd guess I'd start with Tierney and include people like Graves, Yoder, and a few in Wisconsin.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:53:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The races seen as "lean R" or better (4+ / 0-)

          That I would be least surprised flipping are.

          FL-02 (Southerland) - Lawson seems to be running stronger than expected.

          FL-10 (Webster) - Val Demmings is a great candidate and has been a workhorse.  It's still going to be hard to overcome the tough GOP-lean of the district.  

          CA-21 (Open) and CA-36 (Bono-Mack) - I'm starting to get the feeling California will end up being a goldmine for Dems in the house.

          MI-03 (Amash) - The GOP-lean of the district is VERY hard to overcome, but Amash seems to be a guy nobody likes.

          MT-AL (Open) - We seem to be down by mid-high single-digits but with a lot of undecides.  Could be a surprise here.

          IN-08 (Bucshon)

          IA-04 (King) - Good recruit, redrawn district, nutty incumbant, who knows.

          GA-12 - It's actually Dem-held but pretty much everyone has it at Leans R.  Wouldn't shock me if Barrow eeked out another tight win.

    •  I have 223 GOP, 189 Dem, 23 tossups (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      ... I think.

      If we assume Bono Mack loses, that would change it to 223 GOP, 190 Dem, 22 tossups.

      (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

      by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:01:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  HI-Sen (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bumiputera

    Does anyone think the endorsement of the Representative from Alaska would really have more than an extremely marginal effect on a race in Hawaii? I mean, I know about the special relationship between the states, but come on, now. Really?

    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

    by MichaelNY on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:46:27 PM PDT

  •  Just to build on the Red State Score theory (7+ / 0-)

    Only one deep red state, Idaho, has been polled since the debate and comapre that to MJ's final numbers;.

    Idaho 2008;
    Final; 61.5    36.1    McCain +25.4
    Latest; 63    27    Romney +36

    Plus...

    Montana 2008;
    Final; 49.5    47.3    McCain +2.2
    Latest: 52    41    Romney +11

    Missouri 2008:
    Final: 49.4    49.3    McCain +0.1
    Latest: 55    41    Romney +14

    West Virginia 2008:
    Final: 55.7    42.6    McCain +13.1
    Last; 54    33    Romney +21

    Texas 2008:
    Final: 55.5    43.7    McCain +11.8
    Last: 58    39    Romney +19

    and yes I know it's Utah but...

    Utah 2008:
    Final: 62.6    34.4    McCain +28.2
    Last; 68    26    Romney +42

    All but Idaho are pre debate. Granted CO & VA are much tighter just now than they were in 2008 plus there is very little quality polling out of IA. However Romney does currently seem to be running about +5 to 10pts over McCain in places like MO and the dep red mountain states yet Obama doing better in Arizona obviously it being McCain's base state back then.

    "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

    by EcosseNJ on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:47:22 PM PDT

  •  MO-Sen - McCaskill up 52-38 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, jj32, KingofSpades

    in internal.  Another one from Twitter with no link.

    White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

    by spiderdem on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 02:50:32 PM PDT

  •  Interesting rule (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, DCCyclone

    Greg Sargent just tweeted this interesting "rule of thumb":

     ---- A campaign that has good internal polling has no incentive to release it. ----

    What do we think? Is he right?

    •  Depends (0+ / 0-)

      It's all a matter of strategy.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:35:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Which is why this seems odd. Its not like there's been some deluge of polling showing Akin winning. The only poll showing Akin leading since his comments was a Gravis poll from a few weeks ago.

        I could see perhaps some disappointed that she hasn't opened the double digit lead that many expected and she is perhaps allaying those fears. But I've seen no reason to believe Akin will win for the last 2 months.

    •  No, that's a ridiculous overgeneralization. (0+ / 0-)

      I take it he's taking a veiled jab at McCaskill? If it's believed to be a competitive race but you're leading you have no incentive to release it, that's true, (why mess with the status quo when you're ahead?) but MO-Sen was abandoned by the COC and NRSC as uncompetitive. Recently Akin gotten two good polls from obscure "local" pollsters for news outlets (Michigan-flavored deja vu anyone?) so McCaskill is essentially doing what any incumbent in a race at the fringe of competitiveness does and is saying "don't bother." Sometimes you'll release them, sometimes you won't, but if you're ahead you want to keep the status quo and that's what McCaskill is trying to do.

      Obviously you also would want to release good polling if you're in a race no one thinks is competitive but find yourself surprisingly close (CA-36, for example) and need to let those outside groups know you're a good investment; which is why it's such a ridiculously overly-broad generalization.

      (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

      by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:33:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  tl;dr version (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        If a candidate is widely believed to be up, or widely believed to be down releasing good internals makes sound sense. It's only when it's a race that everyone is already paying attention to and believes is competitive that you should be alarmed by your candidate leaking internals ([cough] WI-Gov-Recall [cough])

        (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

        by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:38:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  He didn't overgeneralize (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, bumiputera

        He's right.

        It's a rule of thumb.

        But there are exceptions, I don't think a rule of thumb can't have them.

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

        by DCCyclone on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 06:02:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The Obama campaign questions Gallup methodology (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EcosseNJ, itskevin, MichaelNY

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/...

    After Gallup/USA Today released a poll showing Mitt Romney tied with Obama among likely female voters in swing states, Obama pollster Joel Benenson pointed to “deep flaws in Gallup’s likely voter screen” and dismissed the survey as an “extreme outlier.”
  •  YouGov CO: Obama 48-45 (5+ / 0-)

    I'm not sure if this has been reported, or if anyone cares about YouGov.

    •  and FL +1 Obama (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, LordMike

      http://today.yougov.com/...

      Democratic President Barack Obama holds a marginal, 1-point lead over Republican challenger Mitt Romney in Florida, 48% Obama to 47% Romney, in a YouGov poll of 1,244 likely voters statewide (recontacted from an initial September poll).
      Just to add to the Romney gaining in the respective "safe states" we can possibly add WA to the list too.

      SurveyUSA    10/12 - 10/14    543 LV    4.3    54    40    Obama +14
      SurveyUSA    09/28 - 09/30    540 LV    4.3    56    36    Obama +20

      "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

      by EcosseNJ on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:16:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  YouGov FL Obama 48 Romney 47 (4+ / 0-)

    Yet another sign that the M-D poll was whack.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

  •  CA-30: Brad Sherman internal shows him ahead 25 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, MichaelNY

    and over 50%:
    http://atr.rollcall.com/...
    Not surprised he's ahead, but am surprised if he runs away with it.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:21:09 PM PDT

  •  Illinois polls (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, bumiputera

    I'm simply not understanding these numbers.  The House polls point towards Illinois being a 10 point race between Obama and Romney this year, when he won it by 25 in 2008.  10 points in fact is what Kerry won the state by...when he lost the election.  Are we really meant to believe that Romney might match Bush's numbers in Illinois, while running against a former Illinois senator?

    •  Does home state advantage decay? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, nimh, bumiputera

      With incumbent presidents being a national figure?

      Either that or Quinn's dragging the whole Democratic brand down in Illinois. Or the polls are squirrely.

    •  1-day robopoll (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32

      If you can't do callbacks you'll probably get the people who are most likely to be home and to pick up the phone, and your sample will skew old, white, and GOP. I can see Obama doing 5-10 points worse in some of the Chicago burb districts where he got the biggest boost in 2008, but not 15. Assuming he wins nationally I'd be surprised if there are even any precincts outside of Mormon areas where he does 15 points worse than in 2008.

      SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

      by sacman701 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:44:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A recent statewide poll in Illinois (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      by Chicago Tribune and WGN TV had Obama leading by 55-36. Not as much as 2008, but certainly not near Kerry territory.

      I wonder if the issue is measuring presidential numbers in House polls.

      link.

  •  YouGov State Poll Flood (10+ / 0-)

    AZ: Romney 52-43
    CA: Obama 58-39
    CT: Obama 53-39
    CO: Obama 48-45
    FL: Obama 48-47
    GA: Romney 52-44
    MI: Obama 52-42
    NV: Obama 50-45
    TX: Romney 55-41

  •  Regarding the IL-10 post, I think the Dems (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, sulthernao, sawolf

    weren't too greedy. I think that they could have made some of the minority districts 1-2 pts less minority to shore up some of the Chicagoland seats they drew. Wasn't JJJ, or Danny Davis complaining that the Afro. American numbers were not enough to their liking?

    Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -6.00, -3.54, I finally got a chance to do something my parents have done for years- vote against Tommy Thompson!!!! Tammy Baldwin for US Senate!!!!!

    by WisJohn on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:26:57 PM PDT

  •  YG: Iowa; Obama 50 Romney 46 ?? (7+ / 0-)

    Virginia
    Obama  46
    Romney 45

    Ohio
    Obama 50
    Romney 46

    Wisconsin;
    Obama 51
    Romney 47

    North Carolina
    Romney 49
    Obama 48

    Pennsylvania
    Obama 51
    Romney 44

    These seem to be the latest, Oct 16th numbers.

    http://today.yougov.com/...

    "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

    by EcosseNJ on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 03:49:11 PM PDT

  •  YouGov Flood - Part II (8+ / 0-)

    Whoops, there were more polls than that:

    IN: Romney 53-41
    IA: Obama 50-46
    NC: Romney 49-48
    TN: Romney 52-43
    VA: Obama 46-45
    WI: Obama 51-47
    OH: Obama 50-46
    PA: Obama 51-44
    MN: Obama 52-44
    NJ: Obama 54-41
    WA: Obama 56-39
    IL: Obama 58-38
    MD: Obama 58-37
    NY: Obama 59-35
    MA: Obama 55-36
    MO: Romney 52-42

    Whew

  •  Some reason no NH or NM (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    Oh well.

    These are internet re-connect polls, does that make them bad?

    I don't know, honestly.  I am not worried about internet, but does re-connect somehow hurt or help credibility?

    •  Yeah they didn't reconnect (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY
      * New Hampshire and New Mexico were not included in the re-contact of voters October 4-11
      last time;
      New Hampshire; Obama  47 Obama Romney 40
      New Mexico; Obama  53 Obama Romney 41

      "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

      by EcosseNJ on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:11:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oct. 4-11 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    It would be nice to know more about internet reconnect.  Basically, for each poll they managed to reconnect with some percentage of people identified as likely voters in September.  The polling was done from Oct. 4-11--so, pretty old, but nothing has happened since the 11th to shake things up.  Some pretty big MOEs on some of them.  (Was NV over 6?  Some state was.  But OH was something like 4.)

    Anyway, these are broadly consistent with the post debate message from reputable pollsters, no?

  •  Romney $12 million ad buy. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, itskevin, MBishop1, MichaelNY

    Same 9 states as ever (yes, NC too!  No, not MI or PA).

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...

    White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

    by spiderdem on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:17:33 PM PDT

  •  YouGov Senate (7+ / 0-)

    MA: Warren 46 - Brown 39
    MO: McCaskill 47 - Akin 42
    PA: Casey 48 - Smith 41
    OH: Brown 48 - Mandel 43
    VA: Kaine 42 - Brown 42
    WI: Baldwin 48 - Thompson 43
    MD: Cardin (D) 54 - Bongino (R) 30
    NV: Heller 42 - Berkley 36
    AZ: Flake 44 - Carmona 38
    FL: Nelson 47 - Mack 42
    IN: Mourdock 45 - Donnelly 41
    CT: Murphy 42 - McMahon 40
    TX: Cruz 51 - Sadler 36

  •  So let's consider my conspiracy theory (0+ / 0-)

    if - hypothetically speaking - a polling company was sued by the DOJ, we'd have to assume it was for a lot of money.  There are several government agencies involved and the DOJ is said to have 'joined' the original suit.  There is a whistle blower involved.  So they have inside information which apparently is going to help convict said polling firm for presumably a lot of money.  I don't know how much said polling firm makes but even if they were a rich company it would stand to reason that the government will not hire them again and thus they see less revenues in the future and a large loss as a result of a lawsuit started by a whistle-blower.

    Now, if all of this was true it would stand to reason that the same polling firm if someone other than the current president was elected in November would (a) expect the DOJ to dismiss the original lawsuit and (b) restore their lucrative government contracts.  

    Of course all of this is entirely hypothetical.  But if there were a polling firm in this situation - and given the sleazy, manipulation of polling firms in this election so far - wouldn't it stand to reason that if said firm had polling anomalies related to the election which will determine its financial future at least some of these might be explained by its vested interest in the outcome of that election?

  •  IL17 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    IL has not been polled much, but Obama was up 19 in the Tribune/WGN poll and 20 in the YouGov poll. That sounds plausible, and there is no reason to think that he's dropped off more in IL17 than statewide. Assuming a 5-6 point dropoff, he's up 16-17 in IL17 so Bustos is probably up about 3-4 if she's running 13 points behind him. I think this one is still tilt D.

    SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

    by sacman701 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 04:31:43 PM PDT

  •  Somebody get these to Sam Wang - post haste! (0+ / 0-)
  •  So to grossly generalize (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BennyToothpick

    Obama seems to be doing fairly well in live caller and internet polls, and badly in robopolls?

    I can't imagine why. Guess just random.

  •  Felt an earthquake here in CT (4+ / 0-)

    a short while ago. Google says it was centered in Maine? 4.5.

  •  In spite of the bizarre IL House polls (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, sawolf

    Where nearly all the polls have been near certain inaccurate internal numbers I think we win at least 4 of the 5 competitive races.  The gerrymander could have been a bit better, but it should work as intended this election.

    IL-08 - Walsh closed the gap a bit but I still think he loses by high-single to low double-digits.

    IL-11 - Biggert has done herself no favors lately.  I'd guess Foster ends up winning by 5-10 points.

    IL-17 - I never bought the earlier polls that showed Schilling winning big.  My guess is Bustos by something like a 4-8 point margin.

    IL-10 - Dold seems to be running a solid campaign but it's hard to see him overcoming the partisan makeup of the new 10th.  I'd say Dold gets the boot by something like 3-6 points.

    IL-12 and IL-13 - These are the two I'm less sure of.  Both should be very close but I'd be surprised if Dems don;t win at least one of them and probably both.

  •  Not saying the internet polls are accurate (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MBishop1, bythesea, MichaelNY

    but one difference between this year's YouGOV and Reuters polls and 2004 Zogby, seems to be this year's polls look more plausible and more in line with some of the other polls.

    If that continues to end of the campaign, it will certainly improve the credibility of internet polling, and specifically those pollsters that were correct.

  •  Sully's hair isn't on fire so far... n/t (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site