I’m getting a lot of political junk mail (both snail- and e-) but so far the phone calls have been minimal, and the TV ads are mostly about the upcoming ballot measures. (What little I see of them as I fast-forward past via Tivo.) I was concerned that the presidential ads would get overwhelming with Michigan being considered a swing state a few months back, but lately it seems that the Republicans have bigger fish to fry and haven’t really put on a full-court press up here in mitten-land.
In north central Florida here, and I have had no phone calls on either cellphone or landline, except one automated poll which I took and which appeared to be Democratic party oriented from the questions asked. There are a lot of political ads on what little tv I have watched lately, which seem to be more or less evenly divided between Romney and Obama with a sprinkling of local and state attack ads. I live in a mostly conservative county (Marion), the local tv stations are Orlando based. Obama’s 47% ad has run a few times in primetime.
WarrenM
1863
Ditch your land lines. Problem solved. :) I haven’t had one in over 10 years, almost entirely BECAUSE of robo calls, campaign centers and telemarketers.
Two new polls show a pretty tight race, and as has been said, that’s to be very much expected.
WashPo/ABC News poll shows Obama +2, 49-47. That’s actually a slight improvement for the incumbent over a September 9 poll that had it 48-47.
Politico Poll shows the same number–49-47.
The biggest effect of the good Democratic convention and then a couple of Romney mistakes seems so far to be what I expected: hardening of resolve for “their guy” among voters who had already decided or were leaning one way or the other.
I got 3 Romney ads over a course of 1.5 hour on Last.FM radio this weekend. So he is targeting the web-based indie music listener demographic fairly hard. But I can’t imagine those ads cost that much.
I like today’s Ezra Klein’s post: “Pro tip: If your strategy to turn the presidential election around relies on Romney’s sense of comic timing, you might want to prepare a Plan B, as well.”
ABC/WaPo poll gives Obama a 2-point lead. Ditto a new Politico poll.
The big question is how many undecideds are out there still.
Interesting post from one of the Washington Post’s more conservative bloggers:
In the Washington Post-ABC News poll and the Battleground Poll, both of which show a race within the margin of error nationally and with President Obama under 50 percent, Mitt Romney supporters will find confirmation that the contest’s dynamics have changed very little, if at all, since the summer. The dramatic ups and downs in August and September seem to be a wash.
[…]
So what do we really know? Obama is doing worse, much worse in some cases, in every swing state than he did in 2008. Consider that he won Colorado in 2008 by nine points, Wisconsin by almost 14 points and Nevada by 12.5 percent… So it’s not 2008. Obama is doing worse than four years ago. Romney is doing much better than Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
But that’s about all we know for certain. The race is close, the key states are still the key states. And despite the best efforts of the Obama team and its media spinners, the race is up for grabs. It’s not a compelling narrative for the partisans on each side, but it is accurate.
I’ve been hearing similar things from the right-leaning pundits for a few days now, and I think it’s either a lot of wishful thinking or the cries of people who just don’t understand the electoral college system.
It doesn’t matter if Obama is polling in the margin of error nationally. It should, but it doesn’t. The fact of the matter is that the GOP is a rural/regional party at this point, and most of their supporters are concentrated into geographically large but electorally small areas. The Democrats’ supporters are (with the exception of California) not as heavily concentrated on a state-by-state basis, and this gives the party an advantage due to the way the US apportions the electors.
In other words, if the country is equally-divided between the two candidates, then the victory goes to the side which has a nominal majority in a bunch of states rather than a super-majority in a few. 'Tis better to lead by 3% in New Hampshire and Nevada than it is to rule in Kentucky (by 14%).
MikeJ
1870
I just think it’s crazy to ignore a bunch of polls showing a 4-5 point race, seize upon one showing a 2-point race and then say “See, it’s within the margin of error!”.
To be fair, it was the poll conducted by the newspaper she was writing for.
CNN poll:
Obama +3, 50-47. Last poll was Obama 52-46 in mid-September.
If you’re Team Romney, that’s good news that the bounce is finally fading.
If you’re Team Obama, you take solace in the crosstabs showing no enthusiasm gaps between D and R.
Still, if anyone thought this was over, today’s polls should firmly establish that it most certainly isn’t.
Hugin
1873
At this point I’m less interested in the national polls and more interested in the swing state polls.
Me too but the margin of error in state polls is almost always larger than national polls, so they do have some meaning. In particular if several national polls show the race tightening but the state poll (and there often is just one) remains the same then you have to question the accuracy of the state poll.
ShivaX
1875
I thought this was a pretty good article by Friedman, that hints at why Romney would be an international, and not only national, disaster.
I’m over on the other side of the state (SW) and we’re more liberal though still mixed.
I’ve been getting a good amount of calls, all polls. The state Republicans seem to be dominating the local news, which is brutal, but Obama was killing Mitt during football this weekend. During half time alone they played the two minute Obama ad and both of the 47% percent ads. (The one posted up-thread and this one here.) No Romney ads at all.
Houngan
1879
Meanwhile, regarding taxes:
And yet, conservative think tanks are doing their best to help provide the candidate some cover. On Tuesday, the American Enterprise Institute produced another analysis arguing that Romney could have his 20 percent cut without raising taxes on the middle class. Past studies that the Romney campaign has cited as supportive have said that exemptions and deductions on income above $100,000 would have to be eliminated in order to make the math work.
. . . and now I get it. They’re going to lower the taxes on millionaires and screw the upper-middle class so that they can claim the middle class, which they will define at the $50,000 median income for their purposes, aren’t getting any tax increases. Now someone remind me, where have we been arguing the job-creating small businessman’s income resides?
Quinnipiac poll finds it Obama +4, 49-45. The difference maker in their poll, according to the crosstabs? Women. They favor the incumbent 60-40. That suggests that if the gender gap carries the President to reelection, Republicans needn’t blame Mitt Romney for failing to win. They can blame their own House and Senate leaders for acceding to the will of the far right Tea Party wing’s assault on birth control and abortion rights.
