LMAO, Obama has given the 20% 3 1/2 years of abject failure to not vote for him. If youre relying on independents to get him re-elected youre already finished. His only chance is to energize the welfare vote with a scorched earth campaign that gets them to the polls in record numbers.

Nothing to tear up other than the methodology and the sample they chose. From the polls internals:

In politics as of today, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or independent? (If independent, ask Do you lean more toward the Republicans or more toward the Democrats, or are you totally independent?

Republican = 25%

Lean Republican = 8%

Totally independent = 26%

Lean Democrat = 7%

Democrat = 31%

Other (VOL) = 0%

Refused/ Not sure = 3%



Format came out ****ty, but their sample contained 25% republicans and 31% democrats with 8% and 7% leaners respectively and 26% totally independents.

Taking the last large election 2010 exit polls (sample =17,504 with every CD polled) the breakdown of thew electorate was:

35% = R

35%= D

29% =I

and those 29% "independents" voted 56% to 37% republican.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/res...s/#val=USH00p1


So if you sample a sample this biased against reality, you can get it to sing Suwanee River.

Also, even when Bloomberg asked this Democrat biased sample what the most important issue facing the country was:

Which of the following do you see as the most important issue facing the country right now? (Read list. Rotate.)

4 = Immigration

13 = Health care

18 = The federal deficit

3 = Terrorism

4 = Taxes

3 = Gay marriage

4 = Gas prices

45 = Unemployment and jobs

2 = Other (VOL) (specify

1 = None of these (VOL)

3 = Not sure

A whopping 4 whole percent chose immigration. 45% chose unemployment/jobs! Anyone care to speculate if that 4% that considers immigration the most important issue are either very pro or very anti Obama, likely unswayable by the executive order?

Just because a poll looks weird doesn't mean the poll sucked. Sometimes you just get weird samples. It's the nature of polling.

Assuming, at this point, that the electorate will mirror 2010 is also a problem.

And RCP misidentifies the sample as "Likely voters". only 70% or so of the sample were what Bloomberg would consider likely voters.

A couple more Michigan polls came out in the past week.

Rasmussen Reports (500 LV): Obama 50, Romney 42
WeAskAmerica (1,010 LV): Romney 45, Obama 43


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...bama-1811.html

I disagree in my experience people on the whole are almost always that stupid in every possible scenario

I dont know anything about "WeAskAmerica" but it appears their only threshold for a "likely voter" is that the person polled identifies himself that way. Rasmussen has a more rigorous screen that includes self identification, primary participation, and past voting frequency.

However as an automated poll they may be less likely to suffer from the Bradley effect.

The Bradley effect is a myth.

Can't ever trust those cheatin Rass polls!!!

Bradley, shmadley.....

Team BO can't be too happy that 2 states MI and WI that they won by 16% and 14% in 2008 are showing polls within the MOE @ +4.2% and +3.0%

Michigan hasn't gone Republican since '88. Are they really going to vote that way this year? Even if Mich does go red wouldn't Romney have already won via other swingier states.

I agree that Iowa, NC, CO, FL, OH, VA and WI are more likely to swing R, but Team O can't be too happy they are running 12 points behind where they were in 2008 in MI.

And of course, the lights weren't getting turned off in half of Detroit 4 years ago.

Detroit's been struggling for decades.

Obama is definitely is a weaker position now than he was on election day last year.

However he won the presidency by 193 electoral votes. McCain only got 173 electoral votes. He lost by more EVs than he got. Doing better than McCain isn't hard, and isn't anything to get excited about.