Lol -- no idea how much swing. It'll be interesting to see the spin machines crank it up for perhaps the last time.
i'm not an expert but i'd be surprised if most state polls are extrapolating results based simply on 2008 turnout demographics without any adjustments. my understanding is that there is a wide range of methods being used.
ask as part of the poll. again, no expertise claimed but i've read some polls do incorporate current demographic enthusiasm level.
I think you can ask, but you can't just accept the answer. Doesn't it sorta make sense to figure if 50% of democrats voted last time, that 50% of the democrats in the poll will be likely voters? It's not that simple, of course. But that is exactly where people are complaining about the 2008 vs. 2010 voter turnout figured distorting polls (who are likely voters?).
The outcome of this election was never in doubt. At least not since the GOP primary candidates were finalized. barfo
The author must have met barfo. "The president, on the other hand, is only up by 6 among the loony-left granola-crunchers of Oregon."
Agreed they factor it in, but as I said, you can't just accept the answer. I would ask who you voted for last time. If you DID vote last time, that would make you a tad more likely to vote this time. So it would be quite a bit more complex than just asking if they intend to vote. Heck, registering to vote would seem an intent to vote, but it is proven from the voting record that not all who register to vote, do vote. The point being they have to ask some questions and do some deduction to figure it out. The next question is what happens when they poll 645 people and 600 of them say they're for Romney? By luck of the draw, they polled 600 republicans and 45 democrats. The electorate will not look like that in November. So they have to weight the results so it's more like 323 republicans and 322 democrats, assuming a near 50-50 split among those who go out to vote. How do they come up with 50-50, or 40-40-20 (20 independent), or something else? Going back a step, they also figure out 90% of democrats are voting for Obama and 96% are voting for Romney. Apply that to the 323 & 322 numbers and you come up with their likely voter result (Romney 49, Obama 48 or whatever). So how do they figure out 90% of democrats are voting for Obama? (This isn't a partisan exercise, but one of understanding what the polls are telling us and what the complaints are)
Lol -- clearly I'm clueless and you are the expert. That said, I don't think the report is a game changer either way. Both have some things to point to, but I doubt it's enough to appreciably impact voting. So, I'd say no swing either way from the report. Barring some last minute surprise, it looks like all issues are on the table and the chips will fall where they may. Like they say, in a democracy, we get the candidate we deserve and we'll find out who that is soon. It's funny how much you like those words when your candidate wins and how bitter the words are when you lose.
I think 7.2 vs. 7.3 isn't much of a difference. It's really bad for Obama, either way. The only thing it could possibly do is change the view that things may be heading in the right direction (downward), since it's upward. But I think the polling and voters have already factored it in, that Obama's not particularly good for the economy. The phrase I like best is "elections have consequences." BTW, if I were Romney, I'd have focused almost entirely on the unemployment and debt/deficit data all along and I'd have said "we learned in law school that when the facts aren't on your side, bang the table - the president is banging the table." What do I know?
The money (literally) is being placed on Obama. http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=743474 70+% it says.
