Ouch if you are Obama

Prior to the SCOTUS ruling on Obamacare, Obama was narrowly reading an average of the polls.  Now he is behind if you factor in that between 60-70% of undecideds break for the challenger.

Likely Voters:

____________Obama                      Romney                   Undecided

Prior                      46.2%                       45.6%                            8.2%

Since Ruling        45.2%                       45.0%                            9.8%

If one were to allocate only 60% of the undecided to Romney (they usually break about 67% to the challenger), prior to the ruling Romney would have won 50.5%-49.5%.  Now it is 50.9%- 49.1% in Romney’s advantage.

Don’t get me wrong.  I don’t predict the election as it is still unbelievably close, much can happen in the intervening months, the undecideds can go one direction or another reducing the “allocation” to the challenger.  All I am saying in a race where 45% have pretty much hardened on each side as there has been little (if any) change since March is that a 1% net swing may indicate problems are brewing.

And, here is my prediction:

If Obama gets to above 47.3% among likely voters (or challenger Romney is below 45.5%) as we come up on the election, Obama wins.  Otherwise, it will be President Romney.

14 Replies to “Ouch if you are Obama”

  1. duggersd

    Everyone is talking about the WaPost/ABC news poll showing the race tied at 47%. The numbers look close until you notice the breakdown of D/R/I. Also, this poll is interviewing registered voters as compared with likely voters.? Considering the breakdown has a 9% Democrat advantage, I suspect Romney even in this poll is up a couple. If you consider likely voters, I suspect Romney is up even more. But it is more important to have a story about a close election. So…..

    My problem with that poll (which I totally disregard even though it shows a tie among registered voters which tends to skew to Dem’s in actual results traditionally about 2.8%) is that it has a 4% MOE which means they only polled about 750 people. A decent poll (below 3% margin of error) has several thousand people polled.

    Baring something significant (but I can’t imagine something more significant than the Obamacare ruling), my gut is Obama has a floor of about 47% and ceiling of under 52%. Romney’s floor and ceiling is a bit more because the voters are less hardened for and against him. Ironically, Obama has a higher floor on the electoral college (200-180) and higher ceiling (350-310) and it is Obama this time who can win the electoral college and lose the popular vote (ala Bush-Gore).

  2. Lee Schoenbeck

    Here’s another significant scew in a national poll – the electoral college. The large population states – California and New York – can contribute significantly to the gross numbers – but everybody over 50% +1 doesn’t count — and that’s a lot of not counters in those big states.

    The only polls that provide useful information are the polls for the ten states where there is a race. Granted, a national trend can sweep from coast-to-coast, but I’d rather know about Virginia, Florida, Nevada, Ohio, Wisconsin, Missouri, New Hampshire, Iowa, Colorado and North Carolina.

    This is a great point for two reasons. First, national movement may not be concurrent with movement in these states. For instance, jobs is a more sensitive factor in OH than it is in Iowa. And, movement in CA or SD will not affect the Electoral College results. Second, some of these states have unique on the ground dynamics such as which party holds the Governor’s chair or the recent fires in CO.

  3. barney douglas

    what’s wrong with this story?

    » Plan to Bankrupt Coal Power Moving Along
    09/07/12 12:35 from Dakota Voice (Blog)
    On Jan. 17, 2008, President Obama revealed to the San Francisco Chronicle what is finally becoming reality for America?s main energy producers. He said, ?So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it?s just that it will b..

    you guessed it: Barry Obama was still a gleam in the eyes of Democrats in January of 2008!

    1. veldy

      Having cast my first presidential ballot for John Anderson(as if that matters), my guess would be that Gary Johnson won’t break 2% in any state, the hard core libertarians and a few young people.

  4. Job Creator

    You guys can spin this any way you want. It’s going to boil down to October in a few swing states.

    Really, after reading the papers this morning, it might be Ouch if you’re Gant. What the heck is going on there? Let’s talk about it.

    1. Ned the Head

      I don’t like to get off thread topic…but I hope we get a new entry about this Gant issue. I want to know what others think. I personally have not had a good experience with that office.

      1. Job Creator

        I hope they’ll talk about it, but usually they don’t want to open up the blog to any Republican controversy. It’s their blog. They can put whatever they want on it. I don’t think they’re even talking about it at Madville – over there it’s the ADA and the Madison thrift store. Both ends of the spectrum. Maybe it’s not an issue.

        1. Ned

          They should. Gant is doing a horrible job. Republicans need to make sure we keep putting the best candidates forward. It is a black eye to the party if it isn’t taken care of.

        2. Heidelberger CA

          Hey, I’ve been all over Gant all summer. Sure, my most recent post was to hammer Lori Stacey for trying to horn in on the scandal with her selfish fantasies and changing stories. But my covering some other stories this week doesn’t mean I’ve lost sight of the Gant follies.

          1. Job Creator

            Cory, I know you’ve been on it. I just couldn’t readily find it when I went over to the MT. This new thing about the DCI investigation is quite interesting – something I would not expect to find in here unless it was happening to a Democrat…