Obama leads Romney 49-42 percent in latest Reuters/Ipsos survey

[ProSense]

Obama leads Romney 49-42 percent in latest Reuters/Ipsos survey

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama maintains a lead over Republican challenger Mitt Romney with 40 days left until the November 6 election, the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll said on Thursday.

The daily tracking poll said Obama had 49 percent support to 42 percent for Romney among likely voters. Ipsos interviewed 1,194 registered voters online for the survey.

<...>

Obama got a bump in support from his Democratic National Convention earlier this month and Romney was hurt by the leak of a video from a private fundraiser he held in May in which he said 47 percent of Americans were dependent on government and unlikely to support him.

The Romney campaign argues that its internal data shows that the race is much closer than most polls are showing.

- more -

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/27/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSBRE88Q1JB20120927

Great, now the poll reports include Mitt's whining.



Mitt: “Frankly at this early stage, polls go up, polls go down”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021421450

"Mitt's campaign has a 'no whining rule'"? (LOL!)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021421362

[B2G]

1. Rasmussen has them even

I honestly don't see how so many of the polls can report such different results.

Which ones to believe?

[JoePhilly]

2. That's why you average them.

[B2G]

4. There are a gazillion polls out there...I haven't seen one

that averages the majors. Do you have a link?

[JaneyVee]

9. They don't use a gazillion polls. Only the major polls.

It is then run through software and averaged. It is very specific. Only about 10 National polls are used.

[JoePhilly]

16. Go here ... and your work is done.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

[Walk away]

3. Rasmussen had the worst record 2008 and 2010. They are the least reliable poll.

[B2G]

5. I thought Rasmussen had the best record in 2008.

[ProSense]

7. Nate Silver Nugget: "Rasmussen was the worst of the lot"

Nate Silver Nugget: "Rasmussen was the worst of the lot"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/27/1137007/-Nate-Silver-Nugget-Rasmussen-was-the-worst-of-the-lot

Still, why on earth are you tied to Rasmussen?

[B2G]

10. I'm not 'tied' to anything

I want real data, not sunshine and rainbows blown up my ass.

Are you aware that Rasmussen & Pew were the 2 top rated pollsters in 2008 based on their predictions vs actual results? Are you equally aware that both Clinton & Carter have been singing their praises for years?

[JaneyVee]

12. Rasmussen was closest in 2008. Blew it in 2000, 2004, and 2010.

[B2G]

17. They didn't 'blow it' in 2004

They were within 1 percentage point of the actual vote totals.

[ProSense]

21. They blew it in 2008.

2008

According to Politico, "Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome."[38] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there."[39] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.[40] Obama's actual margin was 7.2%, and a complete analysis published in 2009 by the same author, Costas Panagopoulos, revealed Rasmussen to be tied for 9th most accurate. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#2008

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/2008%20poll%20accuracy%20panagopoulos.pdf

Rasmussen is a tool! He manipulates polls.

Just confirming that Rasmussen really sucks
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021051189

[JaneyVee]

27. Oops. 2000 & 2010. In 2010 they were the least accurate polling.

EDIT: Btw, Poll averages DO include Rasmussen polls so it's kind of a moot point when all the other polls lean the other way.

[yellowcanine]

13. Do you have a source for "Clinton and Carter have been singing their praises for years"?

[ProSense]

14. So

"I want real data, not sunshine and rainbows blown up my ass. "

....you're saying that ignoring all the polls except Rasmussen is "real data"?

No, it sounds like unless Mitt is ahead or the race is close, as Rasmussen shows, you consider the rest of the data "rainbows blown up" your "ass."

You seem to be doing just what the Republicans are doing, which is taking issue with the polls now that they're showing Obama ahead.

Why were there no complaints when Mitt was catching up?

[B2G]

20. Where did I say I was ignoring the other polls?

I'm not. But I'm certainly not going to ignore the poll that called the last 2 presidential elections within one percentage point.

[ProSense]

22. BS! n/t

[yellowcanine]

15. So they got it right once in a year that was a cakewalk for pollsters.

But have been way off most other years. Not that impressive.

[Walk away]

34. only the very last Pres poll. Every thing else was stinky!

[yellowcanine]

11. Rasmussen is automated and uses a different likely voter model.

That is why they are different. Rasmussen is not as reliable and tends to fluctuate more.

[DCBob]

32. Good grief.. dont you even realize how deceptive Rasmussen is??

He is a charlatan and a fraud. He only reports accurate data when it doesnt matter.

[Zambero]

6. Mitt: "At this stage, polls go up, polls go down"

Spot-on Mitt. More specifically, Obama's polls are going up while yours are going down.

[yardwork]

8. lol!

[ProSense]

24. Damn,

the panic that ensues when Mitt loses ground is EPIC!

[lpbk2713]

18. They will still come out with a last ditch October surprise (dirty trick) or two

But it won't do them any good. I think it will be seen as a desperate act by desperate losers.

[leftstreet]

19. There's no way it should be this close

What's going on?

Obama came into office 4 years ago with overwhelming support from the people, media rock star status, and more political capital than any Prez in our lifetimes.

How can a no-name loser like Romney even get this close?

[ProSense]

23. A 7-point national lead is "close"?

Really?

[leftstreet]

25. Yes

If it was Obama v Jeb Bush or Whats her face Palin, I could see it

Romney's a weak candidate that no one's even bothering to market. Yet it's this close?

I don't buy it

[ProSense]

26. "If it was Obama v Jeb Bush or Whats her face Palin, I could see it"

OK, now Romney is lower than Palin?

I'm not going to counter that point.

[leftstreet]

28. Yes, Palin has more brand recognition than Romney

But you already know that

[ProSense]

30. I agree, Romney sucks. n/t

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. The economy has been really bad through all of Obama's administration

I get it that he prevented a Great Depression instead of a tepid recovery, and so do most Americans. But still usually an economy like this is hard for a sitting President seeking reelection. You can't compare the circumstances of Obama's first campaign to the country now.

Sure I wish Obama was ahead 70/30, but in the real world for him to hold a 7% lead over Romney now is remarkable. Our nation is bitterly divided over politics. 40% would literally vote for a Dead Rat over any Democrat. If a 7% lead over Romney holds up the results will literally be a landslide for Obama of rare proportions. Obama is doing great..

[ProSense]

31. It's the trend.

"I get it that he prevented a Great Depression instead of a tepid recovery, and so do most Americans. But still usually an economy like this is hard for a sitting President seeking reelection. You can't compare the circumstances of Obama's first campaign to the country now. "

That is why Romney/Republicans kept harping on the "better off" question, which still didn't work out for them. The trend is positive and people know that.

Jared Bernstein on Ohio's uemployment trend: Electoral Calculus
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021424631

Jobless claims show sharp improvement
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021424044

New jobs numbers under cut major Romney talking point
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1425621

[leftstreet]

35. The nation is NOT bitterly divided over politics

FFS half the eligible people in the US don't vote

The M$M and politicians and lobbyists and capital bloodsuckers want you to think we're divided. We're not. Most people want jobs, livable wages, healthcare, food, shelter and energy, education for their kids, a clean environment, and a decent vacation now and then.

If 40% of half the eligible voters would vote for a Dead Rat, that only tells us something about less than 20% of the voting population. Which tells us nothing.

[Tom Rinaldo]

36. OK that's a valid point

But yes it does still tell us a lot. It tells us that voters are bitterly divided, and those are the people who take part in elections, and we are talking about an election.

[DCBob]

33. Looks like a solid 5-7 point lead.

Thats more than enough to win big in the EC.