That cursing sound you heard near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue yesterday? That was President Obama, reading a Gallup poll of EARLY VOTERS.
According to Gallup, 52% of Early Voters who have already cast their ballots have voted for Mitt Romney. 45% of Early Voters who have already voted cast their ballots for Barack Obama. (For those of you in Palm Beach County, FL, that means Romney is up 7%.)
Friends, the Democrat Party thinks of early voting as their bread and butter. Some might suggest it's because that makes voter fraud easier. According to this train of thought, fraud takes time, early voting gives time: Think Ryan Seacrest on American Idol with "Vote Early, Vote Often." (Except for the fact that on American Idol it's perfectly fine to vote as often as you like, in American Elections you cannot.)
So now here we find that Early Voters are favoring Romney, and we can expect that if Early Voting favors Mitt, so will Election Day voters.Combine that with states like Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon and Pennsylvania; previously considered deep blue states, are now tossups, the fact that the gender gap is gone, and the fact that Governor Romney is leading heavily with Independents, it's time for the President to panic. Big time.
My friends, I've said it over and over again: We're going to win in a week. Six more days. Game on.
Showing posts with label Gallup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gallup. Show all posts
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Obama's Class Warfare Has Failed
President Obama has spent quite a lot of this Presidential campaign attacking Mitt Romney as out of touch because he's so wealthy. (Apparently the President's $10 million personal net worth makes him the average citizen.) He's been playing the class warfare game as well...saying the phrase "pay their fair share" so many times that it makes me want to lose my lunch. There's no fiscal reason for this mentality, as some basic math shows that raising taxes 4-5% on the top tax bracket will be as useful to reducing the deficit as attempting to water your lawn using one cup of water.
The question one must ask is this: is it working? No, according to a Gallup Poll from early in the campaign. Of all voters polled, a full 75% said that Romney's wealth made absolutely no difference as to whether or not they intended to vote for him. None whatsoever. An additional 4% of voters said that Mitt's wealth made them MORE likely to vote for him. That was a few months ago, prior to the debates, prior to Governor Romney becoming likable and preferable to the electorate.
Depending on how you look at it, Romney's wealth, or rather how he obtained it (through his own hard work and rising in business) is a big plus. It means he actually has participated in the economy, run a business, and clearly has more of a clue when it comes to fiscal matters than President Obama, who believes that somehow you can take money out of the economy then put it back in and grow the economy.
Bottom line, the majority of the people who are going to complain about Mitt's wealth weren't going to vote for Romney anyway. They're part of Obama's base, specifically the whiney, self-indulgent people who believe society owes them everything their little hearts desire (no, that's not all of Obama's base, just some). The President has absolutely nothing new to say...so he's going right back to the same pages of the liberal playbook.
Unfortunately, the President's record is his own worst enemy. The problem is, as a famous politician said in 2008, "If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things." Who was that? Oh, right. President Obama, accepting the Democratic nomination in 2008.
Now that all the new metaphoric bullets in the political gun have been fired, the President is bringing back old ones. For example, did you know Mitt Romney worked at Bain Captial? (Shocking!) There's nothing left. The Election is six days away, and the President has absolutely nothing left. The class warfare has failed. Mitt Romney is about to be elected our nation's 45th President. Game on.
The question one must ask is this: is it working? No, according to a Gallup Poll from early in the campaign. Of all voters polled, a full 75% said that Romney's wealth made absolutely no difference as to whether or not they intended to vote for him. None whatsoever. An additional 4% of voters said that Mitt's wealth made them MORE likely to vote for him. That was a few months ago, prior to the debates, prior to Governor Romney becoming likable and preferable to the electorate.
Depending on how you look at it, Romney's wealth, or rather how he obtained it (through his own hard work and rising in business) is a big plus. It means he actually has participated in the economy, run a business, and clearly has more of a clue when it comes to fiscal matters than President Obama, who believes that somehow you can take money out of the economy then put it back in and grow the economy.
Bottom line, the majority of the people who are going to complain about Mitt's wealth weren't going to vote for Romney anyway. They're part of Obama's base, specifically the whiney, self-indulgent people who believe society owes them everything their little hearts desire (no, that's not all of Obama's base, just some). The President has absolutely nothing new to say...so he's going right back to the same pages of the liberal playbook.
Unfortunately, the President's record is his own worst enemy. The problem is, as a famous politician said in 2008, "If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things." Who was that? Oh, right. President Obama, accepting the Democratic nomination in 2008.
Now that all the new metaphoric bullets in the political gun have been fired, the President is bringing back old ones. For example, did you know Mitt Romney worked at Bain Captial? (Shocking!) There's nothing left. The Election is six days away, and the President has absolutely nothing left. The class warfare has failed. Mitt Romney is about to be elected our nation's 45th President. Game on.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Romney Nearly Tied with Women in Swing States
Barack Obama's leads are evaporating with key demographics, at least if you believe the polls. (I for one believe that the polls are now beginning to reflect reality after months of cooked polls.) According to a USA Today/Gallup Poll published earlier this week, Mitt Romney leads the President 50 to 46% in the Swing States. (Nationally, Gallup's 7-Day Tracking Poll has Romney leading the President by 7%).
But there are some further key demographic details where Romney is really setting himself up for victory.
- Romney maintains his solid lead with male voters in the Swing States, ahead of the President 52% to 44% (that's a 8% lead for those of you from Palm Beach County, FL).
- Romney is now within 1 point of the President with female voters, trailing the President by merely 49% to 48%.
- Romney is leading Obama 46% to 36% with Independents according to the other most recent swing state poll, POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll (since the USA Today/Gallup poll did not give this particular breakdown). Just to give you a rough idea, the President would need to win 83% of the undecided Independents to win Independents (and that by 1%). That's simply not going to happen. (Remember, historically undecided voters this late break hard for the challenger).
Remember when women were Obama's victory firewall? Yeah, about that. The President is ostensibly tied with Governor Romney. He's also losing men by 8% and Independents by 10%. This is bad, bad news for the President.
I will go on record right now: If the President only wins women by 1%, loses men by 8% and loses Independents by 10%, do you know what we'll be calling Mitt Romney come November 7th? Mr. President-Elect.
But there are some further key demographic details where Romney is really setting himself up for victory.
- Romney maintains his solid lead with male voters in the Swing States, ahead of the President 52% to 44% (that's a 8% lead for those of you from Palm Beach County, FL).
- Romney is now within 1 point of the President with female voters, trailing the President by merely 49% to 48%.
- Romney is leading Obama 46% to 36% with Independents according to the other most recent swing state poll, POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll (since the USA Today/Gallup poll did not give this particular breakdown). Just to give you a rough idea, the President would need to win 83% of the undecided Independents to win Independents (and that by 1%). That's simply not going to happen. (Remember, historically undecided voters this late break hard for the challenger).
Remember when women were Obama's victory firewall? Yeah, about that. The President is ostensibly tied with Governor Romney. He's also losing men by 8% and Independents by 10%. This is bad, bad news for the President.
I will go on record right now: If the President only wins women by 1%, loses men by 8% and loses Independents by 10%, do you know what we'll be calling Mitt Romney come November 7th? Mr. President-Elect.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Real Clear Politics Unrelable: Old Polls, Skewed Polls
Please note all polls quoted herein are from the morning of Wednesday, October 10th. The Internet has since trolled me yet again with RCP updating their polls to remove some old ones.
Something old, something new, something borrowed, something skewed. With the exception of the borrowed, that's the makeup of the Real Clear Politics average, aka the "poll of polls."
Before I continue, I'd like to say that I use Real Clear Politics (RCP) a lot. As a source for a blog, it's phenomenal. It compiles basically every poll published anywhere in America leading up to the election. Furthermore, I'd like to note that I am not directly accusing RCP of intentional deception. I'm not exonerating them, either. I will, however, give RCP the benefit of the doubt on this, and simply assume it for the sake of today's article that the problems with these averages is a case of "a chef is only as good as his ingredients."
But there remains a clear skew created by these polls by certain issues. The first is old polls. Let me give you a few examples. Let's start with the general election average:
Do you perchance see the issue with this CNN poll I've highlighted? It's nearly two weeks old, and dates to before the game-changing Presidential Debate on 10/4.The Politico poll isn't quite as old but all data was gathered ahead of the first Presidential Debate. So here we have two old polls, both with Obama winning (albeit marginally) that keep Mitt Romney's lead smaller. Take those two polls out of the average, you see Mitt Romney not with a 0.8% lead, but a 2.25% lead in the average of the four polls since the debate.
Here's an average from the swing state of Pennsylvania:
So let's compare. We've got two polls from 2-3 weeks ago showing Obama with an average lead of 9.5%. Then we have two polls from the last week with an average lead of 2.5% for Obama. Huge swing of 7%. Yet, due to RCP's average, they have Pennsylvania as "leaning Obama." In the last week, the two polls we have show Obama's lead as within the margin of error. It's a tossup, friends. Governor Romney can win Pennsylvania.
One more old before we go into skewed:
Here's another highly important swing-state. It's considered "Leaning Obama" based on the RCP average. However, except for last week's PPP Poll, the other four polls are 2-4 weeks old. Clearly, according to the Democrat Public Policy Polling, Obama's lead is down to 2% (within the poll's margin of error).
Now let's talk about what we've been discussing for months on Biblical Conservatism: Skewed polls.
Quick reminder: Ohio's voter identification is +1 Republican. We Ask America's sample was +4% Democrat (5% skew to Democrats). ARG oversampled Democrats by 9% (10% skew to Democrats). CNN/Opinion Research oversampled +2% (3% total skew to Democrats). Survey USA oversampled Democrats by 4% (5% total skew to Democrats).
These are simply snapshots, friends. But the point I am making is important. The RCP Average is packed often with outdated polls and skewed polls, treated as though they were up to date or as accurate as the other polls. It creates a false impression of the reality of the situation. While Real Clear Politics is a good site, please don't get me wrong, but the average is simply not an accurate reflection of the electorate.
To my regular readers: With the Vice Presidential Debate tonight, I will be writing my reaction to that event tomorrow and publishing tomorrow's blog by about 1 pm.
Something old, something new, something borrowed, something skewed. With the exception of the borrowed, that's the makeup of the Real Clear Politics average, aka the "poll of polls."
Before I continue, I'd like to say that I use Real Clear Politics (RCP) a lot. As a source for a blog, it's phenomenal. It compiles basically every poll published anywhere in America leading up to the election. Furthermore, I'd like to note that I am not directly accusing RCP of intentional deception. I'm not exonerating them, either. I will, however, give RCP the benefit of the doubt on this, and simply assume it for the sake of today's article that the problems with these averages is a case of "a chef is only as good as his ingredients."
But there remains a clear skew created by these polls by certain issues. The first is old polls. Let me give you a few examples. Let's start with the general election average:
Do you perchance see the issue with this CNN poll I've highlighted? It's nearly two weeks old, and dates to before the game-changing Presidential Debate on 10/4.The Politico poll isn't quite as old but all data was gathered ahead of the first Presidential Debate. So here we have two old polls, both with Obama winning (albeit marginally) that keep Mitt Romney's lead smaller. Take those two polls out of the average, you see Mitt Romney not with a 0.8% lead, but a 2.25% lead in the average of the four polls since the debate.
Here's an average from the swing state of Pennsylvania:
So let's compare. We've got two polls from 2-3 weeks ago showing Obama with an average lead of 9.5%. Then we have two polls from the last week with an average lead of 2.5% for Obama. Huge swing of 7%. Yet, due to RCP's average, they have Pennsylvania as "leaning Obama." In the last week, the two polls we have show Obama's lead as within the margin of error. It's a tossup, friends. Governor Romney can win Pennsylvania.
One more old before we go into skewed:
Here's another highly important swing-state. It's considered "Leaning Obama" based on the RCP average. However, except for last week's PPP Poll, the other four polls are 2-4 weeks old. Clearly, according to the Democrat Public Policy Polling, Obama's lead is down to 2% (within the poll's margin of error).
Now let's talk about what we've been discussing for months on Biblical Conservatism: Skewed polls.
Quick reminder: Ohio's voter identification is +1 Republican. We Ask America's sample was +4% Democrat (5% skew to Democrats). ARG oversampled Democrats by 9% (10% skew to Democrats). CNN/Opinion Research oversampled +2% (3% total skew to Democrats). Survey USA oversampled Democrats by 4% (5% total skew to Democrats).
These are simply snapshots, friends. But the point I am making is important. The RCP Average is packed often with outdated polls and skewed polls, treated as though they were up to date or as accurate as the other polls. It creates a false impression of the reality of the situation. While Real Clear Politics is a good site, please don't get me wrong, but the average is simply not an accurate reflection of the electorate.
To my regular readers: With the Vice Presidential Debate tonight, I will be writing my reaction to that event tomorrow and publishing tomorrow's blog by about 1 pm.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Liberals Panic After Pew Poll
In case you missed it, the liberal Pew Research Center published a poll showing Governor Mitt Romney taking a 4% lead over President Barack Obama. Combine that with ties in Rasmussen and Gallup's tracking polls on Monday, Obama's lead dropping to 1% in the Politico Battleground Poll, you've got a full on panic from the Left.
Do you remember when the Drive-By Media and liberal pundits were ridiculing those of us who questioned such polls as...oh, I don't know...Pew Research Center's September poll sample which had a +10% Democrat sample. Then, when the same Pew Research Center publishes a poll with a +5% Republican sample. Now, given the climate in this country, what's more likely, do you think? A +10% Democrat turnout or a +5% Republican turnout? (2004, for example, saw a +4% Republican turnout, and Republican engagement is at least as strong this election as 2004.)
(Dramatized Liberal) POLLS ARE COOKED! (All of a sudden!) HOW DARE THEY! No, don't remember how we trumpeted Pew's accuracy. That's not important! It's like Rasmussen now! (No, don't pay attention that Rasmussen and Pew were tied for most accurate polls in 2008.) It's not fair! Wah wah wah!
Friends, you who read Biblical Conservatism every day know I've been telling you for months upon months that Romney was going to win and these polls with oversampled Democrats were just hiding reality. Now, after Governor Romney went and hit a home run in the first debate, Pew can't hide the reality. So now, we're seeing the real electorate being predicted. And Obama's lead has disappeared. Now Romney is winning.
And now, the Left is in a pure panic. They don't know what to do with themselves! They're talking about Big Bird. That's what they're reduced to, friends. That and saying Governor Romney lied in the debate. That's what they are reduced to doing.
We are about to win, gang. Get ready for it. WE'RE GONNA WIN!
Do you remember when the Drive-By Media and liberal pundits were ridiculing those of us who questioned such polls as...oh, I don't know...Pew Research Center's September poll sample which had a +10% Democrat sample. Then, when the same Pew Research Center publishes a poll with a +5% Republican sample. Now, given the climate in this country, what's more likely, do you think? A +10% Democrat turnout or a +5% Republican turnout? (2004, for example, saw a +4% Republican turnout, and Republican engagement is at least as strong this election as 2004.)
(Dramatized Liberal) POLLS ARE COOKED! (All of a sudden!) HOW DARE THEY! No, don't remember how we trumpeted Pew's accuracy. That's not important! It's like Rasmussen now! (No, don't pay attention that Rasmussen and Pew were tied for most accurate polls in 2008.) It's not fair! Wah wah wah!
Friends, you who read Biblical Conservatism every day know I've been telling you for months upon months that Romney was going to win and these polls with oversampled Democrats were just hiding reality. Now, after Governor Romney went and hit a home run in the first debate, Pew can't hide the reality. So now, we're seeing the real electorate being predicted. And Obama's lead has disappeared. Now Romney is winning.
And now, the Left is in a pure panic. They don't know what to do with themselves! They're talking about Big Bird. That's what they're reduced to, friends. That and saying Governor Romney lied in the debate. That's what they are reduced to doing.
We are about to win, gang. Get ready for it. WE'RE GONNA WIN!
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Swing States Swing to Romney Post Debate
Mitt Romney's debate performance last week was one of the finest debate performances I've seen since I started watching debates twenty years ago. Many predicted he would perform well in the debates, but many also said that debates rarely change elections. Welcome to rarely.
Over the weekend, a lot of things started swinging to Mitt. In Gallup, for example, Governor Romney went from losing by 5% before the debate to tied with the President. This is huge, especially since Gallup polls Registered Voters not Likely Voters. In Rasmussen, Governor Romney went from 2% down on Friday to 2% ahead on Saturday.
But what about the swing states? What happened post debate there? Let's look at recent polls (regardless of organization) before and after the debate. (We'll use statewide party registration data as our baseline where appropriate.)
Colorado (Party Registration +2% Republican):
- Before the debate, We Ask America had Obama leading by +3%.
- After the debate, Gravis Marketing had Romney winning by 3%. (Using an accurate +2% Republican sample)
Florida (Party Registration +5% Democrat):
- Before the debate, Suffolk had Obama leading by 3% (Sample Democrat +6%) and Gravis had Obama +1%.
- After the debate, We Ask America had Romney leading by 3% and Rasmussen had Romney winning by 2%.
Nevada (Party Registration +5% Democrat)
- Before the debate, We Ask America had Obama leading by 11%.
- After the debate, Gravis Marketing had Obama's lead down to 1%.
Now I recognize we're using lots of polls here, but that's because we need to as these organizations are not being consistent in their polling during the campaign. However, one thing is clear. After the debate, Mitt Romney is making a huge comeback. Game on.
Ohio (Party Registration +1% Republican)
- Before the debate, Public Policy Polling had Obama leading by 4% (using a +5% Democrat sample) and NBC, using a tiny sample and a huge margin of error (using a +8% Democrat sample) had Obama leading by 8%.
- After the debate, We Ask America had Romney leading by 1% and Rasmussen had Obama leading by only 1%.
Virginia (Party Registration +3% Republican)
- Before the debate NBC, using a tiny sample and a huge margin of error (using a +2% Democrat sample) had Obama leading by 2%.
- After the Debate, We Ask America had Romney leading by +3% and Rasmussen had Romney leading by +1%.
Wisconsin (Party Registration +4% Democrat):
- Before the debate, the Marquette University claimed Obama had a lead of 11% over governor Romney. (Sample +7% Democrat).
- After the debate, Democrat Public Policy Polling
Over the weekend, a lot of things started swinging to Mitt. In Gallup, for example, Governor Romney went from losing by 5% before the debate to tied with the President. This is huge, especially since Gallup polls Registered Voters not Likely Voters. In Rasmussen, Governor Romney went from 2% down on Friday to 2% ahead on Saturday.
But what about the swing states? What happened post debate there? Let's look at recent polls (regardless of organization) before and after the debate. (We'll use statewide party registration data as our baseline where appropriate.)
Colorado (Party Registration +2% Republican):
- Before the debate, We Ask America had Obama leading by +3%.
- After the debate, Gravis Marketing had Romney winning by 3%. (Using an accurate +2% Republican sample)
Florida (Party Registration +5% Democrat):
- Before the debate, Suffolk had Obama leading by 3% (Sample Democrat +6%) and Gravis had Obama +1%.
- After the debate, We Ask America had Romney leading by 3% and Rasmussen had Romney winning by 2%.
Nevada (Party Registration +5% Democrat)
- Before the debate, We Ask America had Obama leading by 11%.
- After the debate, Gravis Marketing had Obama's lead down to 1%.
Now I recognize we're using lots of polls here, but that's because we need to as these organizations are not being consistent in their polling during the campaign. However, one thing is clear. After the debate, Mitt Romney is making a huge comeback. Game on.
Ohio (Party Registration +1% Republican)
- Before the debate, Public Policy Polling had Obama leading by 4% (using a +5% Democrat sample) and NBC, using a tiny sample and a huge margin of error (using a +8% Democrat sample) had Obama leading by 8%.
- After the debate, We Ask America had Romney leading by 1% and Rasmussen had Obama leading by only 1%.
Virginia (Party Registration +3% Republican)
- Before the debate NBC, using a tiny sample and a huge margin of error (using a +2% Democrat sample) had Obama leading by 2%.
- After the Debate, We Ask America had Romney leading by +3% and Rasmussen had Romney leading by +1%.
Wisconsin (Party Registration +4% Democrat):
- Before the debate, the Marquette University claimed Obama had a lead of 11% over governor Romney. (Sample +7% Democrat).
- After the debate, Democrat Public Policy Polling
Friday, September 14, 2012
Why are Polls Still Using 2008 as their Turnout Measure?
Liberal polls are continuing to use their bad polling samples to claim Obama is winning. It's officially ridiculous. They are continuing to use samples that show a Democrat turnout advantage that, by the way, didn't exist in 2010 and shouldn't be expected in 2012.
We've got Democracy Corps that used a polling sample of 41% Democrat, 30% Republican and 28% Independent (Democrat advantage +11%) to achieve an Obama lead of +5%.
Then we've got a Reuters poll that used a sample of Democrat 47%, Republican 38%, Independent 15% - the sample included Independent leaners. (Democrat advantage +9%) to arrive at an Obama lead of +3%
Earlier this week we had a Washington Post-ABC Poll which used a sample of Democrat 32%, Republican 26% and Independent 37% (Democrat advantage +6%) to achieve an Obama lead of +1%
Even a Fox News poll has Obama up +5%. I know liberals are out there saying "HA! EVEN FOX NEWS says Obama is winning!" Except one problem: In Fox News' latest poll is oversampling Democrats by +6% (which baffles me) in THEIR poll, using a sample of Democrats 42%, Republicans 36%, Independents 19%.
Rasmussen remains the only grownup in the room with their polling sample. They are predicting a turnout in 2012 of +1 in favor of Republicans (a conservative estimate). Now, and here's the shocking fact (sarcasm) this reflects the 2010 election turnout within 1%! (Source)
Gallup was using a similar polling sample to Rasmussen, and was showing Obama and Romney neck and neck. That was, until the Obama Administration began to pressure Gallup behind the scenes to change their sample to make it more favorable to Obama.
Fox, to be honest, I think is spending too much time trying to get the liberal media and liberals in general to stop making fun of their "lack of balance." (Which is the most hilarious example of the pot calling the kettle black I've ever seen!) which leads them to use samples that the Left would approve of this time around.
Now friends, I think the polls that will really matter will be within 1-2 weeks of the election. Because that's when the Media is going to have to worry about their reliability ratings and they'll stop using bad samples. Remember that in 1980 only a few weeks before the Election of 1980 Gallup had Carter beating Reagan (Reagan won in a landslide).
Friends, the only polling sample that is making a reasonable guess at the real election turnout for 2012 of +1 for the GOP is Rasmussen (the same poll that was rated most reliable in 2012). And that poll has Romney beating Obama by 3%.
Fact of the matter is the Drive-By Media isn't using polls to show public opinion. They are trying to shape it. We must not let them. We are headed for victory in November, both in Congress and the Presidency. Game on.
We've got Democracy Corps that used a polling sample of 41% Democrat, 30% Republican and 28% Independent (Democrat advantage +11%) to achieve an Obama lead of +5%.
Then we've got a Reuters poll that used a sample of Democrat 47%, Republican 38%, Independent 15% - the sample included Independent leaners. (Democrat advantage +9%) to arrive at an Obama lead of +3%
Earlier this week we had a Washington Post-ABC Poll which used a sample of Democrat 32%, Republican 26% and Independent 37% (Democrat advantage +6%) to achieve an Obama lead of +1%
Even a Fox News poll has Obama up +5%. I know liberals are out there saying "HA! EVEN FOX NEWS says Obama is winning!" Except one problem: In Fox News' latest poll is oversampling Democrats by +6% (which baffles me) in THEIR poll, using a sample of Democrats 42%, Republicans 36%, Independents 19%.
Rasmussen remains the only grownup in the room with their polling sample. They are predicting a turnout in 2012 of +1 in favor of Republicans (a conservative estimate). Now, and here's the shocking fact (sarcasm) this reflects the 2010 election turnout within 1%! (Source)
Gallup was using a similar polling sample to Rasmussen, and was showing Obama and Romney neck and neck. That was, until the Obama Administration began to pressure Gallup behind the scenes to change their sample to make it more favorable to Obama.
Fox, to be honest, I think is spending too much time trying to get the liberal media and liberals in general to stop making fun of their "lack of balance." (Which is the most hilarious example of the pot calling the kettle black I've ever seen!) which leads them to use samples that the Left would approve of this time around.
Now friends, I think the polls that will really matter will be within 1-2 weeks of the election. Because that's when the Media is going to have to worry about their reliability ratings and they'll stop using bad samples. Remember that in 1980 only a few weeks before the Election of 1980 Gallup had Carter beating Reagan (Reagan won in a landslide).
Friends, the only polling sample that is making a reasonable guess at the real election turnout for 2012 of +1 for the GOP is Rasmussen (the same poll that was rated most reliable in 2012). And that poll has Romney beating Obama by 3%.
Fact of the matter is the Drive-By Media isn't using polls to show public opinion. They are trying to shape it. We must not let them. We are headed for victory in November, both in Congress and the Presidency. Game on.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Reflections on Post-Convention Polls
A lot of conservatives are starting to squirm a little bit on the back of President Obama getting a measly few point polling bump after his convention. There are conservatives who genuinely believe this means Obama has this election in the bag. Friends, I'm here to tell you this is not true. I'm here to give you a big dose of reality.
Four polls have been published since the Democrat Convention (I'm counting the daily rolling averages of Rasmussen (3-day average) and Gallup (7-day average) each as one poll. Of the four, the voracity of three can be questioned. So let's start with Gallup.
Yes, I still consider Gallup one of the most reliable polls. However, I do find it funny that: The Obama Administration called in Gallup and read them the riot act about the polling samples they used, which uses a sample that reflects the actual 2010 electorate (and not the 2008 electorate or exit polls or some fantasy electorate dreamed up by Heaven knows who). When Gallup refused to change their methodology, the Department of Justice gets involved with a lawsuit against Gallup that has nothing to do with the election. (Sources*: Washington Times, Dick Morris)
Then we have two fine poll cookers: CNN and Tipp Online. First to CNN:
CNN published this poll of likely voters (supposedly likely voters anyway) on Monday claims President Obama leads Governor Romney 52% to 46%. A few red flags go up on this poll. For one, the polling sample is not implicitly published. That alone gives me reason to question it. Secondly, the polling sample was only about 700 voters, insufficient to get a good snapshot of the national population. Thirdly, and this is the big red flag that screams of a cooked polling sample, the poll says that of the individuals polled gave the Democrat Party a 51% favorability rating and Republicans only 42% favorability rating. Except that according to Gallup, who conducted a straight up poll of party favorability and found the GOP with 43% favorability and the Democratic Party 42% favorability. This data, in the absence of seeing the actual poll sample, makes me believe Democrats were oversampled.
Now to Tipp Online:
The Tipp Online poll of registered voters was at least honest enough to publish their sample. Their poll claims President Obama is beating Governor Romney 46% to 44%. Just the fact that polling registered voters is an advantage to Democrats of 2-4% so that means Romney with likely voters is either tied or winning by 1-2%. Then let's look at the poll sample, shall we? It was Democrats 36%, Republicans 31% Independents 30%. So friends there was a 5% oversample of Democrats.
Apparently, the fine folks at Tipp want you to believe that the Election 2010 didn't happen. You know, that massive landslide victory for conservatism two years ago? Yeah, that. Apparently President Obama has somehow gained popularity after that...because he...uhhh...well I'm not entirely sure what but he did something I guess. He cares...so I guess that's it?
Now I would be remiss if I didn't also give you a nice history lesson. In 1980, Jimmy Carter got a post-convention bump that put him 4% ahead of Ronald Reagan. Carter lost to Reagan by 9% that November. In 1988, Michael Dukakis was beating Vice President George H.W. Bush by 17% after his convention. Dukakis lost to Bush by 9% that November. Both Reagan and Bush won over 400 Electoral Votes in those elections by the way. (In 1980, Carter won only 6 states and Washington D.C. In 1988, Dukakis won only 10 states and Washington D.C.)
Friends, convention bumps don't mean much, even if we take the polls at face value. History proves it. When you add in the fact that the Drive-By Media is cooking polls and threatening pollsters to make the bump happen, well, I'd say Obama's still in trouble.
Quick after note: I wrote this post on Monday, 9/10/12. On that date, Rasmussen had Obama +5 over Romney. On Tuesday, 9/11/12, Rasmussen's poll shows Obama's lead down to +3. I predict it will continue to drop tomorrow and by Thursday it will be back to a dead heat.
A second poll posted on on Tuesday 9/11/12 from Washington Post-ABC Obama up +1, but the poll oversampled Democrats +6. As I told you, we're back to square one and Romney is winning with the real electorate.
Four polls have been published since the Democrat Convention (I'm counting the daily rolling averages of Rasmussen (3-day average) and Gallup (7-day average) each as one poll. Of the four, the voracity of three can be questioned. So let's start with Gallup.
Yes, I still consider Gallup one of the most reliable polls. However, I do find it funny that: The Obama Administration called in Gallup and read them the riot act about the polling samples they used, which uses a sample that reflects the actual 2010 electorate (and not the 2008 electorate or exit polls or some fantasy electorate dreamed up by Heaven knows who). When Gallup refused to change their methodology, the Department of Justice gets involved with a lawsuit against Gallup that has nothing to do with the election. (Sources*: Washington Times, Dick Morris)
Then we have two fine poll cookers: CNN and Tipp Online. First to CNN:
CNN published this poll of likely voters (supposedly likely voters anyway) on Monday claims President Obama leads Governor Romney 52% to 46%. A few red flags go up on this poll. For one, the polling sample is not implicitly published. That alone gives me reason to question it. Secondly, the polling sample was only about 700 voters, insufficient to get a good snapshot of the national population. Thirdly, and this is the big red flag that screams of a cooked polling sample, the poll says that of the individuals polled gave the Democrat Party a 51% favorability rating and Republicans only 42% favorability rating. Except that according to Gallup, who conducted a straight up poll of party favorability and found the GOP with 43% favorability and the Democratic Party 42% favorability. This data, in the absence of seeing the actual poll sample, makes me believe Democrats were oversampled.
Now to Tipp Online:
The Tipp Online poll of registered voters was at least honest enough to publish their sample. Their poll claims President Obama is beating Governor Romney 46% to 44%. Just the fact that polling registered voters is an advantage to Democrats of 2-4% so that means Romney with likely voters is either tied or winning by 1-2%. Then let's look at the poll sample, shall we? It was Democrats 36%, Republicans 31% Independents 30%. So friends there was a 5% oversample of Democrats.
Apparently, the fine folks at Tipp want you to believe that the Election 2010 didn't happen. You know, that massive landslide victory for conservatism two years ago? Yeah, that. Apparently President Obama has somehow gained popularity after that...because he...uhhh...well I'm not entirely sure what but he did something I guess. He cares...so I guess that's it?
Now I would be remiss if I didn't also give you a nice history lesson. In 1980, Jimmy Carter got a post-convention bump that put him 4% ahead of Ronald Reagan. Carter lost to Reagan by 9% that November. In 1988, Michael Dukakis was beating Vice President George H.W. Bush by 17% after his convention. Dukakis lost to Bush by 9% that November. Both Reagan and Bush won over 400 Electoral Votes in those elections by the way. (In 1980, Carter won only 6 states and Washington D.C. In 1988, Dukakis won only 10 states and Washington D.C.)
Friends, convention bumps don't mean much, even if we take the polls at face value. History proves it. When you add in the fact that the Drive-By Media is cooking polls and threatening pollsters to make the bump happen, well, I'd say Obama's still in trouble.
Quick after note: I wrote this post on Monday, 9/10/12. On that date, Rasmussen had Obama +5 over Romney. On Tuesday, 9/11/12, Rasmussen's poll shows Obama's lead down to +3. I predict it will continue to drop tomorrow and by Thursday it will be back to a dead heat.
A second poll posted on on Tuesday 9/11/12 from Washington Post-ABC Obama up +1, but the poll oversampled Democrats +6. As I told you, we're back to square one and Romney is winning with the real electorate.
*All denoted articles were linked recently on Biblical Conservatism's Facebook
Page...
which you should like to get such updates daily! Click here to like us on Facebook!
which you should like to get such updates daily! Click here to like us on Facebook!
This ad was not paid for by any political campaign or PAC. It has been included as part of this blogger's
personal endorsement of Governor Mitt Romney for President. It is not subject to equal time rights.
personal endorsement of Governor Mitt Romney for President. It is not subject to equal time rights.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Obama is losing, so the Drive-By Media Cooks Some Polls
It's happening, friends. The Drive-By Media is releasing cooked poll after cooked poll to show President Obama as stronger than he really is in head to head polls against Mitt Romney. We talked about it in late April when the offender was NBC. This time we have two offenders: Reuters/Ipsos and Tipp Online. Both have Obama beating Romney. Both have skewed poll samples to favor Obama.
Important to note is what these two polls do to the Real Clear Politics average. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, what Real Clear Politics (henceforce referred to as RCP) does is take all polls in a given election and give a straight average, whether the poll is of adults, registered voters, or likely voters.) What these two polls have done is given the President a slim lead in the RCP average of 46.2% to Romney's 46%. (So close it's a statistical tie.) However, this includes our two doctored polls. More on this later.
Before we go into the two polls, let's once again set the baseline in this country for conservatives, moderates, and liberals. As I've said so many times before, this is far more accurate than naming party affiliation, because so many people in the South especially are still registered as Democrats but vote conservative...holdovers from a past where a conservative Democrat was a real thing. However, it is reasonable to presume that conservatives will vote Republican and liberals will vote Democrat, leading the moderates as the group who may or may not vote down their party line or be a swing voter.
So, in 2011, Gallup did, as in past years, conduct a series of polls to establish the ideological demographics of this nation. In January 2012 Gallup published their National Ideology Poll. At that time, 40% of Americans self-identified as conservative, 35% self-identified as moderate and 21% self-identified as liberal. So a legitimate assumption would be to presume 40% of Americans to lean Republican and only 21% to lean Democrat. Even if we assume 20% of those moderates are true swing voters (as conventional wisdom proclaims) and split the remaining 15% with the two parties as moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans, that means 47.5% Republican leaners and 28.5% Democrat leaners. (Translation, they need ALL the true swing voters to win.)
The first offending poll is Tipp Online. Tipp shows the President beating Mitt Romney 46% to 43% amongst registered voters (not likely voters, registered voters). Even Tipp admits that "Race Tightens, Obama Lead Over Romney Narrows To 3 Points" in their headline. But there's a problem with their polling sample. They gave Democrats a 7% advantage! You have to look at the very bottom of this poll to find it, but when Tipp asked the individuals polled which way lean politically, 38% self-identified as Democrat, 31% self-identified as Republican, and 27% self-identified as independent.
That's a 7% advantage simply handed to the Democrats...one that does not exist in reality! The only way to justify this poll is to claim, erouneously, that 65% of all moderates lean Democrat while only 35% lean Republican.
The second offending poll is Reuters/Ipsos. The poll shows Obama with a mildly comfortable lead of 49% to 42% over Mitt Romney (not likely voters, registered voters). There's just one problem...they went and handed a 9% advantage to Democrats in this poll! Whooops! Their polling sample was 47% Democrat leaners to 38% Republican leaners! Holy cow! Once again, this does not match up with the real electorate and their political ideologies!
The only way to justify this poll is to eroneously claim that 74% of self-identified moderates lean Democrat. Nice try, but no dice. This does not add up to any reality.
So back to that RCP average that we talked about. Let's take the other polls involved, including two 3-day rolling average polls in Gallup and Rasmussen; as well as two polls of likely voters rather than registered voters in Rasmussen and Democracy Corps (ironically, these guys are a Democrat polling organization yet they're being more honest).
Rasmussen has Romney defeating Obama 49% to 44%, a 5% margin of victory (2% above the margin of error). Gallup has Romney defeating Obama 47% to 44%, a 3% margin of error (exactly the margin of error). Democracy Corps has a tie of 47% to 47% for both candidates.
These three polls have an average of Romey 47.75% to Obama 45.5%. This means Romney averaging a +2.25% margin of victory. Compare this to the RCP average including the cooked Tipp and Reuters polls, which shows Obama beating Romney 46.2% to 46%. So by publishing cooked polls, these two organizations push the RCP average from Obama losing to Obama winning.
Friends, the Drive-By Media likes to do this to dishearten conservatives, to make us give up on winning the White House. They want to make you believe that Obama will be re-elected so you won't work hard to defeat him. But what polls like this show is that they are very worried. They are trying to convince you (and themseleves) that Obama is a stronger candidate than reality shows. We must not let him. We will defeat Obama in 2012!
Important to note is what these two polls do to the Real Clear Politics average. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, what Real Clear Politics (henceforce referred to as RCP) does is take all polls in a given election and give a straight average, whether the poll is of adults, registered voters, or likely voters.) What these two polls have done is given the President a slim lead in the RCP average of 46.2% to Romney's 46%. (So close it's a statistical tie.) However, this includes our two doctored polls. More on this later.
Before we go into the two polls, let's once again set the baseline in this country for conservatives, moderates, and liberals. As I've said so many times before, this is far more accurate than naming party affiliation, because so many people in the South especially are still registered as Democrats but vote conservative...holdovers from a past where a conservative Democrat was a real thing. However, it is reasonable to presume that conservatives will vote Republican and liberals will vote Democrat, leading the moderates as the group who may or may not vote down their party line or be a swing voter.
So, in 2011, Gallup did, as in past years, conduct a series of polls to establish the ideological demographics of this nation. In January 2012 Gallup published their National Ideology Poll. At that time, 40% of Americans self-identified as conservative, 35% self-identified as moderate and 21% self-identified as liberal. So a legitimate assumption would be to presume 40% of Americans to lean Republican and only 21% to lean Democrat. Even if we assume 20% of those moderates are true swing voters (as conventional wisdom proclaims) and split the remaining 15% with the two parties as moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans, that means 47.5% Republican leaners and 28.5% Democrat leaners. (Translation, they need ALL the true swing voters to win.)
The first offending poll is Tipp Online. Tipp shows the President beating Mitt Romney 46% to 43% amongst registered voters (not likely voters, registered voters). Even Tipp admits that "Race Tightens, Obama Lead Over Romney Narrows To 3 Points" in their headline. But there's a problem with their polling sample. They gave Democrats a 7% advantage! You have to look at the very bottom of this poll to find it, but when Tipp asked the individuals polled which way lean politically, 38% self-identified as Democrat, 31% self-identified as Republican, and 27% self-identified as independent.
That's a 7% advantage simply handed to the Democrats...one that does not exist in reality! The only way to justify this poll is to claim, erouneously, that 65% of all moderates lean Democrat while only 35% lean Republican.
The second offending poll is Reuters/Ipsos. The poll shows Obama with a mildly comfortable lead of 49% to 42% over Mitt Romney (not likely voters, registered voters). There's just one problem...they went and handed a 9% advantage to Democrats in this poll! Whooops! Their polling sample was 47% Democrat leaners to 38% Republican leaners! Holy cow! Once again, this does not match up with the real electorate and their political ideologies!
The only way to justify this poll is to eroneously claim that 74% of self-identified moderates lean Democrat. Nice try, but no dice. This does not add up to any reality.
So back to that RCP average that we talked about. Let's take the other polls involved, including two 3-day rolling average polls in Gallup and Rasmussen; as well as two polls of likely voters rather than registered voters in Rasmussen and Democracy Corps (ironically, these guys are a Democrat polling organization yet they're being more honest).
Rasmussen has Romney defeating Obama 49% to 44%, a 5% margin of victory (2% above the margin of error). Gallup has Romney defeating Obama 47% to 44%, a 3% margin of error (exactly the margin of error). Democracy Corps has a tie of 47% to 47% for both candidates.
These three polls have an average of Romey 47.75% to Obama 45.5%. This means Romney averaging a +2.25% margin of victory. Compare this to the RCP average including the cooked Tipp and Reuters polls, which shows Obama beating Romney 46.2% to 46%. So by publishing cooked polls, these two organizations push the RCP average from Obama losing to Obama winning.
Friends, the Drive-By Media likes to do this to dishearten conservatives, to make us give up on winning the White House. They want to make you believe that Obama will be re-elected so you won't work hard to defeat him. But what polls like this show is that they are very worried. They are trying to convince you (and themseleves) that Obama is a stronger candidate than reality shows. We must not let him. We will defeat Obama in 2012!
Friday, February 10, 2012
In 2012, Conservatives are STILL the Center
In December of 2010, I launched this blog with a post entitled Conservatives are the Center. Earlier this year, In a new Gallup poll, the point has once again been demonstrated, conservatives are the most populous ideological group in the nation.
Need more proof of this? Let's look at registered Independents. Now, depending on your state, registering as an Independent ranges from a complete waste of party affiliation to a logical and reasonable choice. In some states, , Independents can vote in their choice of the Democratic or Republican primaries, which is very useful if your party has an incumbent running unopposed in that year's primary election. It can be used to moderate your opposing party's candidate (or to just cause trouble like some did in Operation Chaos). In states with closed primaries, however, being a registered Independent keeps you from ever voting in a primary election and having a choice as to whom you can vote for in the general election.
Independents are not synonymous with moderates but it's a fair comparision, so let's look at the conservative, moderate and liberal numbers within that group:
 |
| Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S. |
According to polls throughout 2011, 40% of Americans consider themselves to be conservative, while 35% call themselves moderate at 21% admit to being liberal. So once again, there are nearly twice as many conservatives as liberals.
Yet we as conservatives continue to try to pander to the so-called moderates. The reality, of course, is that the vast majority of moderates are either liberals who realize they are the minority and don't want that stigma; conservatives who don't realize that we are the majority and thus claim moderateness; and finally those who simply want to be thought of as intelligent and thoughtful, and have thus adapted a default position of sitting smack dab in the middle of the fence with a leg on each side so as to maintain their desired appearance.
There is, of course, an electoral spin on this mindset. Liberals, because they genuinely are a minority, have to move toward the center to have a snowball's chance in July of being elected (after all, you can't win an election on your actual beliefs when only 21% of Americans share your values). To win, they need to get close to 90% of the self-identified moderates to vote for them. That's staggering.
Conservatives, on the other hand, only need to sway just over 30% of the self-identified moderates to win, because we have a clear plurality of the population just with fellow conservatives! Why? Because we conservatives ARE the centrist position! We are the pulse of most Americans! We just need to get a relatively small piece of those moderates to join us, while the Left has to get the majority.
Independents are not synonymous with moderates but it's a fair comparision, so let's look at the conservative, moderate and liberal numbers within that group:
 |
| Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in US |
Well would you look at that? 35% of registered Independents consider themselves conservatives! So if we can get them with conservatism, it looks like conservatives can win elections with comfortable ease. The truth remains: Conservatives don't need to pander to moderates to get elected...we're already the majority! We're the center position! We're the group that embodies what the nation believes!
So, my message remains the same to conservatives, to Republicans: Be proud to be conservative. To be a conservative means standing for traditional American values, for rugged individualism, for a "Yes YOU Can (with hard work)!" mentality and not "Yes We Can (with other people's money)!" Let's just be conservatives, and let the chips fall where they predictably may...on our side.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Gallup: Obama in Trouble with Independents
Political elites on both sides of the aisle will tell you that a candidate in a national election needs to reach those "independents," the great unwashed middle who "makes their decisions on each issue at each election" to win. The conventional wisdom is, of course, that 40% of Americans will automatically vote Democrat at 40% will automatically vote Republican, so the election tips on that 20%.
I've never bought this, or the so-called moderate/independent self definition of wisdom beyond compare to decide their positions issue by issue, in the least. Most of these people somehow find a way to land with one leg on either side of the fence on every single issue then call themselves wise beyond compare. The truth is they are a) not willing to take time to consider issues b) want to be perceived as smart and c) are persuaded not by substance but by style. But I digress.
Gallup, recently, brought out some more very bad news for President Obama, in a new poll breakdown released on November 29th. According to the poll, of the 14% who self identify as "pure independents" (that is, neither lean Democrat or Republican), only 30% approve of the job President Obama is doing. This is compared to 43% that the President is receiving across all party lines. Once we add in those who lean slightly to the Democrat or Republican side, the President's approval rises only to 35%. Again, that's not good for Obama (but great for America).
I've been saying this for quite some time, my friends, Obama is in trouble. He's going to be defeated in 2012. I can hear you who buy into the whole moderate/independent baloney now telling me that we must nominate Mitt Romney or...gaaaaa...Jon Huntsman...to get those independents. Look, it does not matter. These proud independents/moderates are convinced not by ideas but by personalities. That's the reason they voted for Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama. They will be convinced by a conservative with great ideas just as easily as they bought into Hopey Change.
The President is headed for a big defeat in the 2012 Election. So let's make sure he loses to a real conservative. This is our time, friends. Let's go!
I've never bought this, or the so-called moderate/independent self definition of wisdom beyond compare to decide their positions issue by issue, in the least. Most of these people somehow find a way to land with one leg on either side of the fence on every single issue then call themselves wise beyond compare. The truth is they are a) not willing to take time to consider issues b) want to be perceived as smart and c) are persuaded not by substance but by style. But I digress.
Gallup, recently, brought out some more very bad news for President Obama, in a new poll breakdown released on November 29th. According to the poll, of the 14% who self identify as "pure independents" (that is, neither lean Democrat or Republican), only 30% approve of the job President Obama is doing. This is compared to 43% that the President is receiving across all party lines. Once we add in those who lean slightly to the Democrat or Republican side, the President's approval rises only to 35%. Again, that's not good for Obama (but great for America).
I've been saying this for quite some time, my friends, Obama is in trouble. He's going to be defeated in 2012. I can hear you who buy into the whole moderate/independent baloney now telling me that we must nominate Mitt Romney or...gaaaaa...Jon Huntsman...to get those independents. Look, it does not matter. These proud independents/moderates are convinced not by ideas but by personalities. That's the reason they voted for Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama. They will be convinced by a conservative with great ideas just as easily as they bought into Hopey Change.
The President is headed for a big defeat in the 2012 Election. So let's make sure he loses to a real conservative. This is our time, friends. Let's go!
Friday, August 19, 2011
Obama's Poll Numbers Have Been Bad for Months
A lot of sources have recently been talking about President Obama's recent low approval numbers, especially the 39% approval he was given by Gallup in the last week. (1) However, what hasn't been report as widely is the fact that the President's approval ratings have been rather lousy for some time now.
As usual, our sources will be the two most trustworthy polling organizations; Rasmussen Reports' daily tracking poll of likely voters (2) and Gallup's Daily poll of American adults. As usual, please remember that polls of likely voters are usually a better judge of how well a President will do in his re-election campaign than adults.
First, let's look at Gallup, whose poll of adults gave Obama approval as low as 39% (2) this week:
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% was 6/9/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for consecutive days was
6/1/11 - 6/2/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for a full week was 5/6/11-5/10/11
Now, let's look at Rasmussen, whose poll of likely voters gave Obama approval as low as 43% (3) this week:
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% was 6/9/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for consecutive days was
5/28/11 - 5/29/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for a full week was 5/6/11 - 5/10/11
That's just the last time President Obama hit 50% or higher. For the record, the highest he hit in those days was 52%. His poll ratings for this entire year, save for a relative handful of days, has been 49% or lower.
The Drive-By Media wants us to think that Obama's mediocre to low approval numbers are new, but they aren't. They've been mediocre to bad for over a year. Obama has been Jimmy Carter levels of unpopular pretty much since his honeymoon period ended in 2009. This is not new. The American people have disapproved of Obama's policies for quite some time now. The only change is the Drive-By Media has started to pay attention.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Obama's Approval Hits New Low
(2) Rasmussen: Obama Approval Index History
(3) Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
As usual, our sources will be the two most trustworthy polling organizations; Rasmussen Reports' daily tracking poll of likely voters (2) and Gallup's Daily poll of American adults. As usual, please remember that polls of likely voters are usually a better judge of how well a President will do in his re-election campaign than adults.
First, let's look at Gallup, whose poll of adults gave Obama approval as low as 39% (2) this week:
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% was 6/9/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for consecutive days was
6/1/11 - 6/2/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for a full week was 5/6/11-5/10/11
Now, let's look at Rasmussen, whose poll of likely voters gave Obama approval as low as 43% (3) this week:
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% was 6/9/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for consecutive days was
5/28/11 - 5/29/11
- The last time President Obama's approval was at/above 50% for a full week was 5/6/11 - 5/10/11
That's just the last time President Obama hit 50% or higher. For the record, the highest he hit in those days was 52%. His poll ratings for this entire year, save for a relative handful of days, has been 49% or lower.
The Drive-By Media wants us to think that Obama's mediocre to low approval numbers are new, but they aren't. They've been mediocre to bad for over a year. Obama has been Jimmy Carter levels of unpopular pretty much since his honeymoon period ended in 2009. This is not new. The American people have disapproved of Obama's policies for quite some time now. The only change is the Drive-By Media has started to pay attention.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Obama's Approval Hits New Low
(2) Rasmussen: Obama Approval Index History
(3) Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)