• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Navy Pride said:
This is great news for Romney..He is slowly pulling away..............

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports™


Friday, June 22, 2012

The president picks up support from just 35% of white voters overall. That’s eight points below the 43% of the white vote he won in 2008. Among white Democrats, 17% currently plan to vote for Romney.
Just 33% now believe the president is doing a good or excellent job when it comes to the economy. That’s down from 41% at the beginning of May

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting 48% of the vote, while President Obama earns 43%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate, and another three percent (3%) are undecided.
Click to expand...


:roll: There will be about 300 polls out between now and the election; 150 will have results that ring in NPs ears and we must hear about them (of course, he will never comment on the other 150 polls). Why not wait until September when they actually have meaning? Most of the truly independent voters (most independents are not really independents) aren't paying any attention to the race, so polling them now is silly, yet this group will determine the outcome.... as will turnout, which is also very hard to measure at this stage.

Remember also that general election polls are also very meaningless given we have an electoral college. It will be very easy for Romney to win the popular vote and lose the election because the margin of win is expected to be much higher in red states than blue states. Until then, ponder the poll that really matters.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map

Obama has 221 electoral votes that are pretty solid.... throw in CO, NV, WI, MI and NH, which have consistently polled his way, and he has 266 EC votes....... he needs only one of the remaining OH, FL, IA or VA to go over..... while Romney needs every remaining toss-up states. This is hard sledding for Romney, even if Rasmussen is right and holds.
 
Last edited:
There is a definite trend in the polls, obama is losing ground to Romney, that is why obama is doing these things like amnesty and gay marriage. Expect more of these tactics as he sinks further in polls. Next will be some big enviro thing I suspect, maybe turn half of SD into a national park.
 

I doubt that he's only leasing, he probably bought the whole damn thing. :lamo:lamo:lamo :peace
Navy Pride said:
You lefties will never like a poll with Romney leasing.....Get use to it.:applaud
Click to expand...
 
disneydude said:
I know that it is probably going to be hard for you to believe, but brace yourself NP.....It will take a lot more than the white male vote to get elected....good luck there Navy. In today's changing demographic, the white male vote is become less and less important. I know you don't like it, but the world is changing....
Click to expand...

You are forgetting the Con trump card: Romney will nominate Rubio as running mate and sew up the Hispanic vote....
 
lpast said:
Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Click to expand...


Reasonably indisputable fact, but hardly prima facie to the argument. No question Obama's job approval ratings make him vulnerable to a good candidate from the Republicans,

The issue, however, is how vulnerable and how good a candidate did the Republicans put up? People will vote out the incumbent only if the replacement is credible. The key element of credible is the new candidate actually has a vision for the country and well articulates that vision, which to this point has not happened.

Unless Romney actually says something (ideally on his own) and starts articulating his vision for America (other than the vague things today that sound similar to the party platform in 2000) , he will end up as the $400 selection in category "Losing Presidential Candidates" on Jeopardy in 2030.
 
Navy Pride said:
You lefties will never like a poll with Romney leasing.....Get use to it.:applaud
Click to expand...

....and you warmly embraced the Bloomberg Poll released just days ago, which had Obama up by 13? Don't blast the other guy for your sins.

sawyerloggingon said:
There is a definite trend in the polls, obama is losing ground to Romney, that is why obama is doing these things like amnesty and gay marriage. Expect more of these tactics as he sinks further in polls. Next will be some big enviro thing I suspect, maybe turn half of SD into a national park.
Click to expand...

Exactly where is this "definite trend"????.... I think its in your heart, as I sure can't find this trend anywhere on the Internet.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...eral_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html#polls

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...rate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
You lefties will never like a poll with Romney leasing.....Get use to it.:applaud
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with the poll because it is still too early to care about the poll. I was just pointing out to you that the pollster's lean has nothing to do with why people think it is bias. It is his method.
 
upsideguy said:
....and you warmly embraced the Bloomberg Poll released just days ago, which had Obama up by 13? Don't blast the other guy for your sins.



Exactly where is this "definite trend"????.... I think its in your heart, as I sure can't find this trend anywhere on the Internet.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...

For your cosideration:

Poll Analysis: Daily Polls are Trending Towards Romney | Race 4 2012
 
upsideguy said:
Reasonably indisputable fact, but hardly prima facie to the argument. No question Obama's job approval ratings make him vulnerable to a good candidate from the Republicans,

The issue, however, is how vulnerable and how good a candidate did the Republicans put up? People will vote out the incumbent only if the replacement is credible. The key element of credible is the new candidate actually has a vision for the country and well articulates that vision, which to this point has not happened.

Unless Romney actually says something (ideally on his own) and starts articulating his vision for America (other than the vague things today that sound similar to the party platform in 2000) , he will end up as the $400 selection in category "Losing Presidential Candidates" on Jeopardy in 2030.
Click to expand...


Towards the end of the campaign people start jumpin in to one side..undecideds...all the people the polls say arent for obama now that were...when push comes to shove they have two choices...
Lets not forget something here EVERYONE...there hasnt even been any debates yet...one bad debate can turn it around for either one of them....two bads ones in a row and your most likely toast...so you cant take any polls yet as gospel
 
lpast said:
Towards the end of the campaign people start jumpin in to one side..undecideds...all the people the polls say arent for obama now that were...when push comes to shove they have two choices...
Lets not forget something here EVERYONE...there hasnt even been any debates yet...one bad debate can turn it around for either one of them....two bads ones in a row and your most likely toast...so you cant take any polls yet as gospel
Click to expand...

I am not certain if your are trying to affirm my points, as I said this very thing within the last couple of posts on this thread or debate me. If you are trying to debate me on this, I agree with you.... the polls mean nothing and especially the national poll given its a 50 state race (and really a 10-15 state race) until the conventions are held and the general electorate begins to pay attention. Much can and will happen between now and November, including political and economic events, presidential debates, billions spent on persuasive half-truths and lies and bad/good political decisions..... until September this day by day poll analysis is nothing but political masturbation,
 
upsideguy said:
Thank you. You should have posted that in the first place. I would have some retorts to that, but they are not necessary in the circumstance. I just appreciate people backing up their statements.
Click to expand...

You know what the problem is here, I just assumed everyone knew the polling trend because I do but I have to remember that liberals get their news from liberal sources which shy away from reporting uncomfortable things like this. I was listening to Thom Hartman the day after obama declared executive privilege in fast and furious and Thom opened his show with something like, "If you don't watch Fox news or listen to right wing radio you probably think fast and furious is a new movie or something", then he went on to explain what it was about albeit in a very left wing fashion. He didn't realize it but he was admitting that the left wing media ignores any story that may make obama look bad and I have to keep this in mind when I talk to libs in here, you are not really too well informed so I need to source what I assume is common knowledge.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
You know what the problem is here, I just assumed everyone knew the polling trend because I do but I have to remember that liberals get their news from liberal sources which shy away from reporting uncomfortable things like this. I was listening to Thom Hartman the day after obama declared executive privilege in fast and furious and Thom opened his show with something like, "If you don't watch Fox news or listen to right wing radio you probably think fast and furious is a new movie or something", then he went on to explain what it was about albeit in a very left wing fashion. He didn't realize it but he was admitting that the left wing media ignores any story that may make obama look bad and I have to keep this in mind when I talk to libs in here, you are not really too well informed so I need to source what I assume is common knowledge.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we got it... "Lamestream media" and liberals are dumb. Of course, any liberal with sense knows what F&F is while most Fox News watchers think there is a war on Christmas. I like my side better.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
You know what the problem is here, I just assumed everyone knew the polling trend because I do but I have to remember that liberals get their news from liberal sources which shy away from reporting uncomfortable things like this. I was listening to Thom Hartman the day after obama declared executive privilege in fast and furious and Thom opened his show with something like, "If you don't watch Fox news or listen to right wing radio you probably think fast and furious is a new movie or something", then he went on to explain what it was about albeit in a very left wing fashion. He didn't realize it but he was admitting that the left wing media ignores any story that may make obama look bad and I have to keep this in mind when I talk to libs in here, you are not really too well informed so I need to source what I assume is common knowledge.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, sweeping, wildly incorrect generalizations certainly are a superb indicator of being well informed, objective, and intelligent.
 
whysoserious said:
Yeah, we got it... "Lamestream media" and liberals are dumb. Of course, any liberal with sense knows what F&F is while most Fox News watchers think there is a war on Christmas. I like my side better.
Click to expand...

I never said libs are dumb, I said uninformed, big difference. When you limit yourself to news sources that only lean one direction you choose not to be fully informed, theres cons that do this too. I listen to Rush, Thom, eddy and Hannity and NPR. I watch FOX and the network nightly news. You need all the pieces of the puzzle to see the whole picture.
 
I think the polls show that this is going to be a very close election and the presidency is up for grabs unlike 2008 when everyone pretty much Knew that Hussein Obama would win.
 
Hare said:
Ah yes, sweeping, wildly incorrect generalizations certainly are a superb indicator of being well informed, objective, and intelligent.
Click to expand...

Hey it was Thom himself that said his audience probably never heard of fast and furious, dont shoot the messenger, namely ME!:lol: And for Christ sake don't ask me for a site, I know many of you in here listen to Thom.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Hey it was Thom himself that said his audience probably never heard of fast and furious, dont shoot the messenger, namely ME!:lol: And for Christ sake don't ask me for a site, I know many of you in here listen to Thom.
Click to expand...
I haven't the slightest clue who Thom is, I was demeaning your own false generalizations and subsequent claim of somehow being more knowledgeable than the average liberal by default.

sawyerloggingon said:
You know what the problem is here, I just assumed everyone knew the polling trend because I do but I have to remember that liberals get their news from liberal sources which shy away from reporting uncomfortable things like this. the left wing media ignores any story that may make obama look bad and I have to keep this in mind when I talk to libs in here, you are not really too well informed so I need to source what I assume is common knowledge.
Click to expand...
 
Hare said:
I haven't the slightest clue who Thom is, I was demeaning your own false generalizations and subsequent claim of somehow being more knowledgeable than the average liberal by default.
Click to expand...

You never heard of Thom hartman? He is the lefts answer to Limbaugh and I got kicked out of his forum by his lovely and gracious wife Louise. :lol: She was offended when I called thom out for claiming Hannity was stealing money from his concerts to help Iraq and Afghan vets without having a better source than some left wing blog.

The average lib only listens to lib news sources so yes I am more informed than the average lib, hands down!
 
Last edited:
sawyerloggingon said:
You never heard of Thom hartman? He is the lefts answer to Limbaugh and I got kicked out of his forum by his lovely and gracious wife Louise. :lol: She was offended when I called thom out for claiming Hannity was stealing money from his concerts to help Iraq and Afghan vets without having a better source than some left wing blog.

The average lib only listens to lib news sources so yes I am more informed than the average lib, hands down!
Click to expand...

Do you have some backing for your claim about what "the average lib" listens to?
 

Oh come now, everybody knows Hannity wasn't stealing the money, he was just spending 80+% on himself & staff. Who do you expect to break the story, The Fox? :peace
sawyerloggingon said:
You never heard of Thom hartman? He is the lefts answer to Limbaugh and I got kicked out of his forum by his lovely and gracious wife Louise. :lol: She was offended when I called thom out for claiming Hannity was stealing money from his concerts to help Iraq and Afghan vets without having a better source than some left wing blog.

The average lib only listens to lib news sources so yes I am more informed than the average lib, hands down!
Click to expand...
 
AdamT said:
Do you have some backing for your claim about what "the average lib" listens to?
Click to expand...

I told you what Hartman said to his audience, sounds about right to me. "If you don't listen to FOX news or right wing radio you probably think Fast and Furious is some new movie or video game". Since the average lib listens to him or fat Eddie and not Rush or FOX , there ya go. Every lib in here bashes both of them and I assume the libs in here are representative of the group as a whole.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I told you what Hartman said to his audience, sounds about right to me. "If you don't listen to FOX news or right wing radio you probably think Fast and Furious is some new movie or video game". Since the average lib listens to him or fat Eddie and not Rush or FOX , there ya go. Every lib in here bashes both of them and I assume the libs in here are representative of the group as a whole.
Click to expand...

I couldn't find the exact quote from his show but he repeated part of it here.


"But for those who don’t watch Fox News and don’t know what Fast and Furious is – here are the facts."

The Republican Witchhunt Against Attorney General Eric Holder « Sky Dancing
 
disneydude said:
I know that it is probably going to be hard for you to believe, but brace yourself NP.....It will take a lot more than the white male vote to get elected....good luck there Navy. In today's changing demographic, the white male vote is become less and less important. I know you don't like it, but the world is changing....
Click to expand...

And that scares the hell out of John Gibson:


​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom