s/o Obama Convention Bounce

[Anonymous]

You do get that this thread is about the convention bounce, not about the jobs numbers.

[Anonymous]

And that the Rasmussen Reports is including the convention which is why that article discusses Obama's bounce.

Nate Silver also sees a bounce for Obama, and he points out that the fact Obama is ticking up before all the convention numbers are included is significant: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/sept-7-polls-find-hints-of-obama-convention-bounce/

The Princeton Election Consortium discusses the GOP negative bounce:
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/09/07/the-gop-convention-negative-bounce-a-final-look/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest verdict is in. Even Conservative Rasmussen shows a big bounce for Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Obama got his bounce. Romney got bupkis.

You do get that polls are lagging indicators, and today's numbers don't really reflect yesterday's horrific jobs numbers.

I realize that you will cling to every last shred of hope, until the bitter end.

Rasmussen is a daily poll. Today's numbers don't differ from yesterday's numbers.

[Anonymous]

Gallup gives Obama a 5 point lead today.

[Anonymous]

what is interesting is that this race feels like the Reagan vs carter 1980 race with candidates leaping ahead and tying. It's going to be a squeaker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:what is interesting is that this race feels like the Reagan vs carter 1980 race with candidates leaping ahead and tying. It's going to be a squeaker.

Except that at that time there was a third party candidate holding up to 24% of the vote but who faded PLUS another 10% undecided. (!!!). That is what made huge swings possible.


And of course Carter's special ops team failed to rescue the hostages in April. And he Russians had just invaded Afghanistan, we were treated to a summer with no athletes in the Olympics. And we were heading into a recession not out, more like mccains situation. So a ton of bad news in 2008 on all fronts.

No, this election is in the hands of a small undecided population. Swings will be smaller.

[Anonymous]

A squeaker? Not in a million years. All of the polls show that Obama is expected to win right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A squeaker? Not in a million years. All of the polls show that Obama is expected to win right now.

I hope so, but a small switch in a few states could flip it. A lot rides on the debates, and perhaps even more on the unforeseen. Think of how the financial crisis killed McCain.

[Anonymous]

Of course it's possible, and if something significant were to happen, that would increase the chances. But at the moment, the probability is very high that Obama will win.

[Anonymous]

Morning Joe had someone on today who said Obama is up 5 in Ohio and Romney's internals are saying it is as high as 8+.

[Anonymous]

what if all the fat cats started firing people

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Morning Joe had someone on today who said Obama is up 5 in Ohio and Romney's internals are saying it is as high as 8+.

If that's true, it's game over. He'll never claw his way back from 8, and that puts Obama at 255. He would only need another 15 out of the entire rest of the battleground states.

[Anonymous]

"Squeaker" is the new Republican code word for "2016".

[Anonymous]

No worries. Obama's recent rise in the polls are the result of "a bit of a sugar-high from the conventions".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No worries. Obama's recent rise in the polls are the result of "a bit of a sugar-high from the conventions".

Where was Romney's "sugar high"? He's practically Santa Claus these days: tax cuts but no commitment on how to pay for them, he'll keep the best parts of Obamacare but not the things that make it possible.

One would think all of those unfunded promises would attract some attention.