SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jlallen who wrote (55532)9/10/2012 9:37:31 PM
From: greatplains_guy1 Recommendation  Respond to of 71588
 
Dem pollsters: Obama thrill is gone, turnout jeopardized
September 7, 2012 | 10:02 am

CHARLOTTE, N.C. - As buoyant Democratic delegates head home from their three-day convention here to nominate President Obama for a second term, party officials and advisors are sweating the reality that the 2008 hope and change thrill is gone--and so might be Obama's voting majority.

While Obama and Mitt Romney remain locked in public polls, several Democratic officials are worried that three groups that pushed Obama over the finish line in 2008--younger voters, seniors and "Walmart" white women--are as frustrated as other groups about the economy and Obama's failure to change Washington and might stay home.

In other words, they say, the polls lie. Yes, when called by pollsters, the nation is split, but the GOP appears more eager and willing to follow through and vote than the Democrats.

During an event hosted by National Journal/Atlantic her this week, Democratic pollster Celinda Lake cited an "enthusiasm gap" with younger voters and unmarried women and seniors. Former Clinton aide Maria Echaveste said that "too many [Obama supporters] are not engaged." And micro-targeting expert Laura Quinn said younger voters especially are "not motivated as they need be."

As a result, Team Obama has stepped up their get out the vote and registration efforts, but worry that a continued downturn in the economy could stall that effort.

And some think it could get worse. Highly-respected Democratic Pollster Stan Greenberg said that his data indicates that the "nagging economy" is "still weakening," and that might push any of Obama's must-have groups out of reach, maybe over to Romney. "There's some probability, in fact one-third, that some group could just go and say 'Enough,'" he said.

Naturally, all of that is music to the ears of the Romney campaign, which is clinging to similar data in polls that show Obama's magic has gone. They cite an August Washington Post/ABC News poll that only 78 percent of the president's 2008 supporters back him now. By comparison, 91 percent of Sen. John McCain's backers support Romney.

washingtonexaminer.com



To: jlallen who wrote (55532)9/11/2012 12:35:17 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 71588
 
The election remains difficult to read. It appears that the leftwing media are conducting polls to disappoint conservative voters intending to dampen their enthusiasm.

Message 28398574

Obama is such an abject failure that it would be unfathomable that he could get reelected. If he is more electable than James Earl Carter was when he ran for reelection I will be shocked.



To: jlallen who wrote (55532)9/11/2012 1:07:00 PM
From: Peter Dierks1 Recommendation  Respond to of 71588
 
The GOP mini-panic
A warning to Romney camp
John Podhoretz
Posted: 10:42 PM, September 10, 2012
Last Updated: 12:22 AM, September 11, 2012

So after President Obama’s small but measurable convention “bounce” in the polls — and a brilliant effort by his campaign to convince credulous and emotionally involved journalists that this four-point jump means Mitt Romney has already lost — there is considerable worry in the air among Republicans.

Not to mention a deep degree of condescending concern among those journalists, who are expressing brow-furrowed worry about the difficulty of Romney’s road ahead.

Romney has so many fewer paths to 270 electoral votes! There’s talk of private Romney polls that have Obama in the lead in all-important Ohio in the high single digits! How can he win without Ohio?!

Aw, poor Mitt — whatever can he do?

You can almost see the Cheshire cat grin on their faces as they type these things.

It’s astonishing that people who’ve covered politics for decades are trafficking in this nonsense.

In every battleground state, including Ohio, the nonpartisan polls separating the two candidates are within the margin of error — meaning that there is no statistical difference in support between Obama and Romney. Though the pollster Scott Rasmussen has Obama up 50-45 nationally, Obama is only up 1 point in Rasmussen’s poll of 12 swing states.

Did Obama’s convention go better than Romney’s? Probably. Will it make a difference? No.

The election is in eight weeks. Over the course of those eight weeks, there will be three Obama-Romney debates (plus a Biden-Ryan one), which will have larger audiences than the conventions did, closer to the election.

Obama has two advantages Romney doesn’t: a lapdog media and the presidential megaphone — and he’ll use both to his advantage.

On the other hand, Romney now has the advantage in campaign funds and in the most basic sense: Roughly two-thirds of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction or on the wrong track. No one has ever won re-election with such numbers.

Given all this, the rational way to view the race is as essentially a tie in which Obama may be, at this moment, a little bit ahead.

Nonetheless, the media onslaught has spooked people who wish to see Obama defeated and Romney elected.

This is understandable, and Romney headquarters in Boston better pay attention to it. Right now, one area in which Obama is leading by a mile is the one in which he bolsters and heartens his own existing support.

Boston and Romney himself are proving absolutely awful on this front.

The Romney campaign seems to have settled on an argument that Obama’s poll strength is just a post-convention “sugar high,” as its pollster Neil Newhouse said in a strikingly infelicitous memo released yesterday that offered no data-driven support for that view and mainly dwelled on how much money Romney has.

It’s interesting Newhouse hit on the dismissive description of a “sugar high” — because a sugar rush is what Romney’s side needs.

That’s what a day-to-day campaign is — it’s all a sugar high. It’s supposed to provide a boost, a pick-me-up, a rush to those who are following it closely with the hopes that it will succeed with a spirited speech, a potent soundbite, a lively crowd, a good interview.

That can be supplemented by more substantive nutrition in the form of substantive policy addresses, position papers, etc.

The Romney camp is doing neither. It’s too intent on winning over the small batch of uncommitted and independent voters by saying absolutely nothing that might possibly offend them.

The problem with that strategy is a) it means he doesn’t say much, and b) it does nothing to stimulate the enthusiasm of those already in his corner.

Those folks in his corner are now experiencing the opposite of a sugar high from the post-convention polls showing Obama in the lead.

Romney & Co. are wrong if they think negative feelings toward Obama are sufficient to motivate their voters. These people would like very much to believe in their candidate.

That’s not happening now. A CNN/ORC poll released yesterday shows that only 47 percent of Romney voters are on his side because they want to vote for him; 48 percent are casting a vote against Obama.

He has to give those voters more. He owes those voters more, because without more— and with a relentless press barrage designed to depress and worry them — their worry will deepen into panic, and possibly into despair.

At which point, all the votes of those soccer moms in Ohio who are disappointed in Obama won’t matter much.

jpodhoretz@gmail.com

Follow @NYPostOpinion

nypost.com



To: jlallen who wrote (55532)9/11/2012 5:50:48 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Respond to of 71588
 
Poll Reveals Dangers of Intensity Gap for Obama
By Chris Stirewalt
Power Play
Published September 11, 2012
FoxNews.com

“This is going to be a close election, what I need to make sure everybody understands is registration and turnout is critical.”

-- President Obama in an interview with WSOL-FM, an R&B station in Jacksonville, Fla.

President Obama got a bounce from the convention, but not one that seems likely to translate into victory on Election Day.

That’s the verdict of a new poll from the Washington Post and ABC News. The survey shows that while the president did indeed get a bounce among registered voters – swinging from a 1-point deficit to a 6-point lead over Republican nominee Mitt Romney. But among respondents who said they were likely to vote in the election: statistical bupkis.

In the race for likely voters, Obama now holds a 1-point lead over Romney. It’s the first time the poll has examined likely voters, so Obama may be better off with them too, but it’s no new trajectory for the race. With 56 days to go and the first nip of autumn in the air, this sucker is all tied up.

In most of their prime-time convention moments last week, the Obama Democrats offered a plea for patience to the moderate voters who voted for Obama last time around.


The year-long strategy from the president’s team has been to force a base-versus-base election in which the president’s power of incumbency, superior organization and disciplined message did for Obama what a similar scenario did for George W. Bush in 2004.
-

Former President Bill Clinton, First lady Michelle Obama and the president himself offered a congruent message of healing the divided and disappointed nation. Save Vice President Joe Biden’s jeremiad, the prime-time line up was about sounding practical and moderate.

The rest of the convention, though, was far from that. Democrats indulged their base on a host of prickly issues for the party: abortion, same-sex marriage, Israel, atheism and government worker unions.

Speeches by Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University law student most famous for her crusade for subsidized contraception, and former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, now a host on Al Gore’s Current network, were pure red meat for the Democratic base.

And the debacle over striking God and Jerusalem from the platform before reinserting over staunch opposition was clearly a botched effort to mollify some of the noisier elements of the party’s activist core.

Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who is more moderate than the base of his own party, had a far easier time keeping the lid on such subjects. The red team was long forecast to have a factious convention, but except for some outbursts from the supporters of Rep. Ron Paul, had a show of moderation and unity.

If you want to know why the difference, look no further than today’s new Post/ABC poll.

In the survey, 17 percent of those who said they were registered voters said they were less than certain to vote, 10 percent of whom said the chances of them voting were 50 percent or less.

One bias that’s built into every poll is self-flattery, so we can assume that anyone who’s willing to tell a stranger on the phone this week that they’re unlikely to exercise their privilege as an American on Nov. 6 is serious about sitting out the pageant of democracy.

And who is the preferred candidate of the moderate to mostly apathetic? President Obama, by a long shot.

The year-long strategy from the president’s team has been to force a base-versus-base election in which the president’s power of incumbency, superior organization and disciplined message did for Obama what a similar scenario did for George W. Bush in 2004.

While the blistering character attacks on Romney combined with careful cultivation of various Democratic blocs –immigration activists, same-sex marriage proponents, pro-choice crusaders, government workers – have helped the president to solid support within his own party. And yet these same folks appear to be neither fired up nor ready to go.

A bounce among unlikely voters, especially if those unlikely voters live in bright-blue Democratic states like California and New York, may make a good talking point, but doesn’t change the state of the race.

Republicans generally turn out at a higher rate than Democrats and need less coaxing to do so. That’s how a country with a seven-decade Democratic popular majority so often elects Republican presidents and even occasional Republican majorities in Congress.

But this time, Republican voters are even more determined. While the president keeps telling his party that this is a monumental election that will determine the course of the country for a generation, the GOP base needs no reminding.

Pundits asked Monday whether the fact that Romney reaffirmed his support for some patient-rights provisions of Obama’s 2010 health law would cost him with the Republican base. Nope. So strenuous and unified is the opposition to Obama on the right that as long as Romney repeats the “repeal and replace” mantra, he can be assured their support.

After many months of rancorous primary fights, Republicans swiftly swallowed their misgivings about moderate Romney. While some on the right readily bemoan his campaign operation and failure to hit Obama even harder, Republicans seemed very willing to accept the bargain that Romney offered: electability in exchange for moderation.

The Post/ABC poll shows Obama’s central challenge for the next eight weeks – get his people marching again. The question is whether his ground game can do the work or if the president himself will need to spend more time firing up his people, an always risky proposition when the real prize in this election are the votes of the moderate suburban moms put off by partisan excess.



And Now, A Word From Charles

“The teachers average $76,000 a year in the salary. That is the highest of any big city in the country. The average person who pays taxes in Chicago, their average salary is $47,000. Teachers are making 50 percent more than those supporting them, on average.

They have been offered a 16 percent hike in wages at a time of high unemployment, desperation. And they turn it down. Why? They don't want tampering with the health benefits, and they don't want any system of the teacher evaluation so you can get some idea of who is not a good teacher.”

-- Charles Krauthammer on “Special Report with Bret Baier.”



In Memoriam

“Jack, pick up sweetie, can you hear me? Okay. I just want to tell you, there's a little problem with the plane. I'm fine. I'm totally fine. I just want to tell you how much I love you.”

-- A voice message for her husband left by Lauren Grandcolas, one of the passengers aboard the doomed Flight 93 of United Airlines bound from Newark, N.J. to San Francisco on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.



Chris Stirewalt is digital politics editor for Fox News, and his POWER PLAY column appears Monday-Friday on FoxNews.com. Catch Chris Live online daily at 11:30 am ET at live.foxnews.com.

foxnews.com



To: jlallen who wrote (55532)9/12/2012 9:39:17 AM
From: Peter Dierks2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
University of Colorado prediction model points to big Romney win
By Geoffrey Malloy
Published: 3:54 PM 08/23/2012

A presidential election prediction model developed by two University of Colorado professors points to a big win for GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney in November.

The model, the only of its kind to use more than one state-level economic indicator, has correctly predicted the winner of every presidential election since 1980.

It predicts Romney winning the electoral college by a 320-218 margin and winning 52.9 percent of the popular vote when only the two major parties’ candidates are considered, the Associated Press reported Thursday.

Romney, it concluded, will win every state currently considered by pollsters to be a swing state, including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire and North Carolina.

The model even predicts Romney will win Minnesota and Maine’s Second Congressional District, the electoral votes of which most pollsters consider to be “safe” for President Obama. Nevada and Iowa are the only swing states it assigns to Obama.

“Based on our forecasting model, it becomes clear that the president is in electoral trouble,” explained Kenneth Bickers, a political science professor at the University of Colorado-Boulder who developed the prediction model with Michael Berry of University of Colorado-Denver.

“The apparent advantage of being a Democratic candidate and holding the White House disappears,” Berry noted, ”when the national unemployment rate hits 5.6 percent. The incumbency advantage enjoyed by President Obama, though statistically significant, is not great enough to offset high rates of unemployment currently experienced in many of the states.”

Bickers said large issues like the economy and the country’s overall direction tend to determine presidential elections. Computerized prediction models “suggest that presidential elections are about big things and the stewardship of the national economy,” he said. “It’s not about gaffes, political commercials or day-to-day campaign tactics. I find that heartening for our democracy.”

Bickers and Berry cautioned, however, that their model used economic data from June, 2012. They intend to update their calculations when new data become available in September.

And many swing states showed close enough to a 50-50 split that factors other than the economy could tilt them in the opposite direction. Bicker and Berry also did not factor in third party candidates, such as Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson, who Public Policy Polling, a Democratic-affiliated polling firm, has noted could significantly diminish Obama’s chances of winning New Mexico.

dailycaller.com