30 September 2012

Columbus Dispatch poll (OH): Obama +9

I usually don't dissect an individual poll, but this one has information in and around it worth looking at.


I will remind, the Columbus Dispatch poll showed the race in Ohio at 45/45 (tie) the last time around.

I have a problem with the Columbus Dispatch poll, because it is a mail-poll. That being said, The Columbus Dispatch, which has been polling issues and events in Ohio since 1916, picked the winner in 6 of the last 7 presidential cycles (2008, 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, 1984) and it showed a statistical tie in 2004. So, in this time frame, it has a 6 for 7 accuracy record.

In 1984, the Columbus Dispatch poll from September had Reagan up over Mondale by +16. I am still looking for the final poll results (they are behind an Elyria Chronicle paywall). Reagan won by +18.76 in Ohio (almost identical to his national margin, as is often the case with Ohio). If the +16 holds, then the final poll was off by 2.76 points, similar to 1996, 2004 and 2008

In 1988, the Columbus Dispatch poll from October has Bush 41 up over Dukakis by +4 (47 / 43). In the final Columbus Dispatch poll in November, Bush 41 was up over Dukakis by +6 (53 / 47). Bush 41 won Ohio by +10.85%. The poll was off by 5 points.

In 1992, the final Columbus Dispatch poll had Clinton up over Bush 41 by +1.5. Clinton won by +1.83%. The poll nailed the results in that year.

In 1996, the Columbus Dispatch poll from September had Clinton up +9 over Dole (just as the current one has of Obama over Romney), 52 / 43. I have yet to find the data for the end poll, but the NYT from Nov. 1 1996 reported that the margins for the last poll stayed at +9. Clinton won Ohio by +6.36% in 1996.  The final poll was therefore off by 2.6 points, very similar to 2004 and 2008.

In 2000, the Columbus Dispatch poll from the beginning of September had Bush up +6 over Gore.  At the beginning of October 2000, the Columbus Dispatch had Bush at +5 over Gore. The final Columbus Dispatch poll from 2000, at the beginning of November, had Bush at +10 over Gore. Bush won Ohio by +3.51%, so, though the poll called the winner, it overstated Bush's win by 6.5 points.

In 2004, the Dispatch's last poll was on 09/22, just a week before this one came out in 2012. It showed Bush up +7 over Kerry. Interestingly enough, the poll BEFORE that one in 2004 from the Columbus Dispatch, showed a 46/46 (tie). Sound familiar? The final poll from the Columbus Dispatch in 2004, shortly before election day, was a 50/50 tie. Bush won OHIO by +2.11%, so the poll was off by 2 points.

In 2008, around this time (10/05), the Columbus Dispatch had Obama up by +7 over McCain, but the poll before, from 08/22, had McCain up +1 over Obama. The Dispatch put out a later poll that it did not put out in '04, on 11/01/2008, showing Obama up +6 over McCain. Obama won Ohio by +4.58%, so the poll called the winner correctly, but was off by 2.4 points.

This means we have historical precedent of the Columbus Dispatch end-poll being off by around 2 points for 3 of the last 5 presidential cycles. But it correctly called the winner outright in four of them and had an absolute tie in 2004.


From the article, some important information to take away:

"A new Dispatch Poll shows him trailing President Barack Obama in bellwether Ohio by 9 points51 percent to 42 percent.

A surge of Democratic support for Obama has transformed the race since the first Dispatch Poll had the two dead-even at 45 percent just before the Republican National Convention in late August.

The survey is the fifth major poll — from The Washington Post to Fox News — of Ohio voters in a week to show the president ahead by 5 to 10 points. He also leads in surveys of most of the remaining swing states.

Obama’s rise comes at an especially fortuitous time for the Democrat: Ohioans begin casting early ballots in two days...

...Experts say as many as 40 percent of Ohio voters will cast an absentee ballot before Nov. 6.

For the first time in state history, most of the state’s 7.8 million registered voters have been mailed an absentee-ballot application, and they’ll get another in early October. As of last week, more than 723,000 already asked for an absentee ballot."

That is it in a nutshell: as in 2008 and 2004, when both Obama and Bush (respectively) reached the apex of their numbers in the Columbus Dispatch polling, Obama may have reached his apex her, with +9. But the kicker is that early voting has now started, which means those votes will be "locked-in" for the respective candidate. And it will be massive early voting this time - MORE than in 2008. This means that there could be no better time for the President to enjoy early voting in Ohio than right now. Believe me, the Romney is surely wishing that he was up at least +4 or +5 right now, for then they would enjoy the advantages of early voting. The other kicker is that Obama is over the 50% mark.

Here was the breakdown of the poll (more text afterward):

Now, before anyone screams about the partisan breakdown of this poll, listen to what the Dispatch says:

"In August, almost exactly the same number of Democrats and Republicans responded to the Dispatch Poll. But after the mail-poll ballots went out this time to registered Ohio voters chosen exactly the same way — at random by a computer — more Democrats returned the poll forms than did Republicans. The breakdown: 43 percent Democrat, 35percent Republican, 20 percent no party affiliation, about 2percent Libertarian and less than 1 percent combined for the other parties officially recognized in Ohio: Constitution, Green and Socialist.

Republicans have complained that, in recent Ohio history, Democrats have seldom if ever enjoyed such an advantage at the ballot box indicated by recent polls. They are correct.

If the 2010 Ohio governor’s race had seen the same partisan breakdown, Democrat Ted Strickland would have been narrowly re-elected instead of losing by 2 points to John Kasich, the new poll indicates.

In the final 2008 Dispatch Poll, a Democratic edge of just 4.5 percentage points among poll-takers helped Obama to a survey lead of 5.4 points; the actual result was Obama by 4.6 points.

But whether there’s a serious, across-the-board breakdown among several independent state and national polling organizations, or that simply more Democrats are planning to vote than Republicans, there’s no way to interpret the results as good for Romney."

Further muddying the waters is that Ohio does the most unique voter registration classification in the world. Voters who register for the first time and even give party identification are listed as "unafilliated" until they have actually voted in an election. From GE to GE, they must re-register. So, Ohio's VR stats look like this:

OH 06/201182734289453594656323520805486210,27%11,11%0,12%78,51%-67193-0,83%
OH 06/20071481985130632205146764793507118,68%16,46%0,00%64,86%1756632,21%
Info from OHIO SOS 06/15

OH 06/201182734289453594656323520805486210,27%11,11%0,12%78,51%-67193-0,83%
OH GE-20082324074145219804468660824493228,19%17,61%0,00%54,20%87187610,57%

I also discussed this in the voter registration thread from June, 2011, which you can read HERE or HERE.

So, whether you want to question the demographic / political make-up of this poll, it brings me to one of my beefs with mail-in polls. You mail them out and what comes back is what you get. Then again, when you do telephone interviews with people and 85% of them hang-up, you also get what you get...

It is however, telling that Republicans who were willing to respond in August were suddenly not so interested this time around. That is not exactly a ringing endorsement of Mitt Romney. And very untypical of the respondents to the Columbus Dispatch poll.

The main point is that this poll for Ohio has been far more on that it has been off. And to my knowledge, a +9 is the highest margin a Democrat has ever gotten in this poll since Bill Clinton in 1996. I have not yet researched farther back than 1984, but as time allows, I will add previous presidential cycles to this study.

Oh, my, context is everything. Really, it is.

Most of us know that Dan Savage did a pretty hard hit-job on Rick Santorum years back because of Santorum's virulent anti-gay stance(s). For those who need a definition of the word "Santorum" as Savage applied to it and placed way up the Google roster, HERE IT IS.

The media and the GOP campaigns themselves called this "Santorum's Google problem".

So, you would think that a media organization, especially one that is generally GOP-friendly, would think before writing headlines about Rick Santorum with possible sexual innuendo, right?


This was published today at THE HILL:


Now, one doesn't even need to be a gay guy to know that the word association here, in conjunction with "Santorum", is probably not very wise. Even I spotted it right away and my diet coke took a detour through my nose...



Now on to the actual content of the write-up:

Santorum plants seed for possible 2016 White House candidacy - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com

"Rick Santorum is positioning himself for a possible White House run in 2016.

The former Pennsylvania senator has thrown his support behind Mitt Romney, but it is clear he is mulling another White House bid down the road.

Unlike some other prominent conservatives that either ran against Romney or supported other candidates, Santorum has sought to amplify his brand in the conservative wing of the Republican Party while also serving as a surrogate for the 2012 Republican nominee.

Santorum, 54, has previously indicated that he might run in 2016 should Romney lose.

In an April interview with Greta Van Susteren on Fox News, Santorum said, “I feel like a young man, and hopefully I feel like a young man four years from now.”

That same month, a senior aide to Santorum told Chris Matthews on MSNBC that the ex-senator has engaged in discussions about a 2016 bid.

Hogan Gidley said, “I’m not going to say we haven’t talked about it, of course, you look and you say what are you going to do in the future…a lot of people said, ‘Prepare for 2016.’”

Republican history is on Santorum’s side as the party usually nominates the next guy in line, or the candidate that finished second in the primary four years earlier. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who posed a major threat to Romney in the 2012 primary, is 69 and unlikely to run again."...


No comment.

FL GOP: Obama is a "muslim"

Ahhh, that old horse and pony show.

The FL GOP, keepin' it classy!!!

"Pay attention to Fox news"...

chuckle, chuckle.


A friendly shout-out to all those DEM CON WATCH people who may just stop by!!!

Welcome to my one-stop, all you can eat electoral statistics blog!

Docjess of Pennsylvania fame was kind enough to direct you all over here.

There is tons of stuff here to read, lots of it quite current. But the sidebar format can be difficult to navigate now and then.

So, everything that is here, you can also find under my internet name of  "bonncaruso" at the electoral statistics subsection of the LIBRARY at politicalhotwire.com.

I post nightly battleground reports, the nightly national numbers, and in regular intervals, an "Electoral Landscape" Report, which I used to call the "Polling Convergence" at DCW in 2008.

If any of you have questions or comments, you can mail me HERE.

So, welcome to Rosenthalswelt!!!



2012-09-029 National Polling Outlook




511Gallup *29.09.123050 RV+/-3.0
510Rasmussen29.09.121500 LV+/-3.0
509UPI / CVOTER28.09.12779 LV+/-4.5
508Ipsos/Reuters28.09.121194 RV+/-3.6
505Fox News27.09.121092 LV+/-3.0
500YouGov26.09.121000 A+/-4.1
497Bloomberg25.09.12783 LV+/-3.5
493PPP (KOS / SEIU)25.09.121200 LV+/-2.8
491Politico / GWU / Battleground24.09.121000 LV+/-3.1
490Zogby (online)24.09.12860 LV+/-3.4

Here IS the polling outlook for 2012-09-029: Obama +4.73% (+0.20 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-028Obama +4.53% (-0.21 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-027Obama +4.74% (+0.36 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-026Obama +4.38% (+0.19 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-025Obama +4.19% (+0.23 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-024Obama +3.96% (+0.21 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-023Obama +3.75% (+0.06 shift)
Here was the polling outlook
 for 2012-09-022Obama +3.69% (+0.18 shift)
Here was the polling outlook
 for 2012-09-021Obama +3.87% (+0.49 shift)
Here was the polling outlook
 for 2012-09-020Obama +3.38% (-0.22 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-019Obama +3.60% (-0.40 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for
 2012-09-018: Obama +4.00% (+0.07 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-017Obama +3.93% (+0.12 shift)
Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-016Obama +3.81% (0.00 shift)Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-015Obama +3.81% (0.00 shift)Here was the polling outlook for 2012-09-014Obama +3.81% 

Net shift since 09/14Obama +0.92%
This number (Average shift since 09/14Obama +0.92%) reflects an almost 1% margin average improvement for the President over the last 16 days. 

September 29th, 2012, marked exactly 38 days until the General Election.

Also posted at Political Hotwire.