Lots of conservative actions go against conservative principles.
If it was just one poll, or a couple, then I’d think you’d have a point. But almost all the polls are showing a Democratic “turnout advantage”, based on self-reported party ID. Most of the polls don’t correct for it- they just report what the respondents say. And this is what the polls say. Sure, it might be wrong, but it might be wrong in the other direction too- Obama could be ahead nationally by 5 instead of neck and neck.
We’ll see on Nov 6, but historically every losing side tries to find stuff wrong with the polls- and there’s always something that can be found that looks weird. And historically, the folks who bet against the polls (taken as a whole) have been wrong. I’d need evidence to believe the polls are wrong- and that evidence may come on Nov 6th. But pointing out stuff inside the polls (not just one, but most of the polls) that just looks weird to you isn’t enough.
And one more thing, that’s been repeated over and over again by “my side” (AKA the fans of Nate Silver)- both the pollsters themselves and the analysts/aggregators like Nate say that you can’t learn much by focusing on Party ID- it’s fluid, it’s not a demographic, and it just doesn’t tell you much about the poll.
OMG, what’s your source for that? Gallup has Democrats (including ‘leaners’) almost exactly where they were in October 2008.
Republicans have increased a few points, but Democrats still have a 7 point advantage.
This may be where we can stop talking at cross-purposes. I think your guiding axiom - that Democrats are over-sampled - is not supported by the data.
Well here is Dick Morris, perpetually wrong prognosticator, wiht his take: Here Comes the Landslide
And if that isn’t rich enough:
[Quote=Omg a Black Conservative]
That’s quite easy to do when you either:
(1) **Assume **Democrats will, at least, double their turnout from 2008 or
(2) **Assume **Republican turnout will be depressed in 2012 more than it was in 2008 [emphasis added]
[/quote]
It is indeed quite easy to achieve this result when you assume a certain party ID distribution–i.e., you weight the sample by party ID. That is very different from achieving the result by random sampling and it happens to break down along a certain party ID distribution.
I find it hard to believe that you still don’t understand the difference.
There’s a poll coming out in six days. Should shed some light on this campaign.
If 2000 is any indication, six days will still be too early to say whether Romney has lost.
Another PPP poll showing Obama +5 in Ohio along with a U Cincinnati poll +2.
There was also a VA poll showing Romney +5 in VA which muddies that state a bit.
However Obama doesn’t need VA. He now has a very solid path to 270 in states where he has consistently polled better for months: Nevada, Wisconsin and Ohio.
What he doesn’t yet have is a really solid plan B. If he somehow loses Ohio he has perfectly reasonable chances of winning through Colorado, Virginia or even Florida but he hasn’t nailed any of those yet and may not till election day. VA may well remain in a very confused state of polling because of Sandy and I suspect Florida will remain close till the end. However I could see him moving 3-4 ahead in CO though if loses OH he will need CO, Iowa and NH. At the moment that looks like his most likely plan B.
Whelp, that’s what I was waiting for.
To answer the OP - now that Dick Morris has predicted a Romney landslide: no. No, it is, as of right now, not too early to say Romney has lost.
Here’s a challenge: what’s the most recent significant prediction that Dick Morris was correct about?
Define significant however you like.
That Clinton could win in 1996?
That he’ll still be invited to prognosticate on FoxNews for years to come?
I’m not sure Dick Morris could predict the days of the week.
I thought he at least would have predicted a huge Romney win for the first debate, but as far as I can tell, he only did so for the second and third debates. If that doesn’t prove he is a reverse-truthteller, I don’t know what does.
I’ll say it:
Romney has lost.
Seriously, he needs a surge. If he hasn’t gotten it by Wednesday morning, he won’t get it.
Done.
Thanks for playing. Feel free to select from one of our fabulous consolation prizes.
And amending the U.S. Constitution is rarely an easy thing to do. If a serious movement got started to do this it would likely lose steam before the process was finished.
Well, there’s that too…
Did anybody see the meteor that fell out of the sky and smashed into Romney’s polling numbers today? It left a smoking crater and a giant debris field made up of little pieces of fake momentum.
Seriously, Obama up 1 in Florida, 2 in Virginia, and up five or more in Iowa, Ohio & Wisconsin. Nate Silver’s model spiked up big time. For Obama, that is.
Probably bounce from the storm. As far as I can tell, it was very well handled by Obama et al…and Romney didn’t distinguish himself at all (in any sort of positive light anyway). Probably the death knell for Romney this close to the election.
Plus a national poll with Obama up by 5. No one poll tells the whole story, of course, but the polling over the last few days have showed movement in Obama’s direction.