• 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.

Florida poll on effectiveness of speeches at Republican convention, very positive

Grim17

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
34,478
Reaction score
17,282
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The SurveyUSA poll of the state of Florida conducted for WFLA-TV in Tampa the day adter the convention, asked 1,211 adults (1,100 were registered to vote in Florida) about the speeches given and their effectiveness. Of the registered voters, 754 heard the convention speeches and here are some of the results I found interesting:


Of the "Undecided" voters:
16% switched to Romney (19% of Blacks, 21% of Hispanics)
10% switched to Obama (18% of Blacks, 14% of Hispanics)
Romney +6% (Blacks +1% , Hispanics +7%)


Voters who switched candidates:
6% switched from Obama to Romney (19% of Blacks, 4% of Hispanics)
2% switched from Romney to Obama (1% of Blacks, 3% of Hispanics)
Romney +4% (Blacks +18% , Hispanics +1%)


Did Romney's speech help/hurt his chances to be elected?
52/19 Blacks
62/20 Hispanics
54/18 Independents
57/12 Moderates


Did Rubio's speech help/hurt Romney's chances to be elected?
55/26 Blacks
72/08 Hispanics
53/13 Independents
60/13 Moderates


Did Eastwood's speech help/hurt Romney's chances to be elected?
41/37 Blacks
40/20 Hispanics
41/24 Independents
36/27 Moderates


I found it very interesting how the reaction to Eastwood's speech in that survey, doesn't seem to mesh with the outspoken chorus of negative views expressed by democrats, liberal bloggers and so many in the main stream media... Can anyone say "manufactured outrage?"

Anyway, there's no avoiding the fact that those numbers look pretty damned good for team Romney... And keep in mind that Florida isn't just any state, it's one of the key battleground states that will help decide who's sworn in as president next January.

BTW, The margin of error was between 3.4% and 3.6% for that survey.
 
Last edited:
I'm kind of surprised that none of the Obama supporters around here have anything to say about this survey... Especially about the Clint Eastwood speech and how minority voters answered the poll questions.
 
Sept. 1: Romney's Convention Bounce Appears Middling So Far - NYTimes.com

However, the trend so far in the Gallup poll is a bit disappointing for Mr. Romney; the survey still shows Mr. Obama one point ahead. By comparison, the Gallup poll has had a 46-46 tie on average over the past 60 days.


We’ll need to wait another day or two before we can make a more confident judgement on the size of Mr. Romney’s bounce, but the information we have so far points toward its being a little underwhelming.
...
One way to interpret the trend in the “now-cast” is that, so far, Mr. Romney’s bounce is hard to distinguish from the statistical noise that we ordinarily see in polls. Based on the data that they published on Saturday, Mr. Romney’s standing in the Rasmussen poll was two points better than its 60-day average, but it was one point worse than average in the Gallup poll.
Click to expand...

Too early to say for sure, but any concrete gain looks to be small and temporary.
 
Grim17 said:
I'm kind of surprised that none of the Obama supporters around here have anything to say about this survey... Especially about the Clint Eastwood speech and how minority voters answered the poll questions.
Click to expand...

Even Bill Maher complimented it. I think what threw everyone off about Clint's spiel was that everyone expected him to come and give a serious speech. He did a comedy bit instead.
 
I tend to agree with Nate Silver's analysis of political conventions: Virtually all presidential candidates get a bounce coming out of their convention; it should be expected. However, they generally fade (at least partially) by Election Day. The average convention bounce is about four points, so if Romney's bounce is larger than that it's a good sign for him. If it's smaller than that, it's a bad sign. What will be interesting is how much Romney's numbers move in the next couple days (before the Democratic convention starts). It appears that so far Romney has recovered about a 2-point deficit in the polls and is now in a virtual tie with Obama, according to the RCP average.

Regarding the speeches...IMO no one is going to remember anything that Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney said in two weeks. Clint Eastwood's speech was a bit more...memorable, but I doubt that it will have any impact whatsoever on the election because, well, it's Clint Eastwood.
 
Grim17 said:
I'm kind of surprised that none of the Obama supporters around here have anything to say about this survey... Especially about the Clint Eastwood speech and how minority voters answered the poll questions.
Click to expand...

So, your poll is mostly made up of republicans.... See disclaimer below.... Not much to discuss... 25 percent of independents thought Eastwood hurt Romney... That is substantial.

Caution: As expected, those who watched the speeches at the Republican National Convention were disproportionately Republican. This poll does not attempt to measure how all likely voters in the state of Florida would vote if filling out a ballot today. It attempts to measure early movement among speech-watchers only.
 
avusbluem5 said:
So, your poll is mostly made up of republicans.... See disclaimer below.... Not much to discuss... 25 percent of independents thought Eastwood hurt Romney... That is substantial.

Caution: As expected, those who watched the speeches at the Republican National Convention were disproportionately Republican. This poll does not attempt to measure how all likely voters in the state of Florida would vote if filling out a ballot today. It attempts to measure early movement among speech-watchers only.
Click to expand...

It was 24% and nearly twice as many said it helped him...

I understand that there were more republicans in that survey than democrats, that's why (other than the minorities) I posted the results from the Independent, Moderate and undecided voters surveyed, rather than posting the over-all findings.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
I tend to agree with Nate Silver's analysis of political conventions: Virtually all presidential candidates get a bounce coming out of their convention; it should be expected. However, they generally fade (at least partially) by Election Day. The average convention bounce is about four points, so if Romney's bounce is larger than that it's a good sign for him. If it's smaller than that, it's a bad sign. What will be interesting is how much Romney's numbers move in the next couple days (before the Democratic convention starts). It appears that so far Romney has recovered about a 2-point deficit in the polls and is now in a virtual tie with Obama, according to the RCP average.

Regarding the speeches...IMO no one is going to remember anything that Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney said in two weeks. Clint Eastwood's speech was a bit more...memorable, but I doubt that it will have any impact whatsoever on the election because, well, it's Clint Eastwood.
Click to expand...

He did a great analysis of convention bounces with projections(about 4 points) and duration, and graphs with both candidates and how the bounces should all zero out by the end of the month. Measuring a Convention Bounce - NYTimes.com. Strongly recommended reading.
 
Grim17 said:
I understand that there were more republicans in that survey than democrats, that's why (other than the minorities) I posted the results from the Independent, Moderate and undecided voters surveyed, rather than posting the over-all findings.
Click to expand...

This was a pro Romney speech, and 59 percent said it hurt or did not help. You call that a success? Lol. I would call it a smaller disaster than I initially thought, but still a disaster.
 
Grim17 said:
The SurveyUSA poll of the state of Florida conducted for WFLA-TV in Tampa the day adter the convention, asked 1,211 adults (1,100 were registered to vote in Florida) about the speeches given and their effectiveness. Of the registered voters, 754 heard the convention speeches and here are some of the results I found interesting:


Of the "Undecided" voters:
16% switched to Romney (19% of Blacks, 21% of Hispanics)
10% switched to Obama (18% of Blacks, 14% of Hispanics)
Romney +6% (Blacks +1% , Hispanics +7%)


Voters who switched candidates:
6% switched from Obama to Romney (19% of Blacks, 4% of Hispanics)
2% switched from Romney to Obama (1% of Blacks, 3% of Hispanics)
Romney +4% (Blacks +18% , Hispanics +1%)


Did Romney's speech help/hurt his chances to be elected?
52/19 Blacks
62/20 Hispanics
54/18 Independents
57/12 Moderates


Did Rubio's speech help/hurt Romney's chances to be elected?
55/26 Blacks
72/08 Hispanics
53/13 Independents
60/13 Moderates


Did Eastwood's speech help/hurt Romney's chances to be elected?
41/37 Blacks
40/20 Hispanics
41/24 Independents
36/27 Moderates


I found it very interesting how the reaction to Eastwood's speech in that survey, doesn't seem to mesh with the outspoken chorus of negative views expressed by democrats, liberal bloggers and so many in the main stream media... Can anyone say "manufactured outrage?"

Anyway, there's no avoiding the fact that those numbers look pretty damned good for team Romney... And keep in mind that Florida isn't just any state, it's one of the key battleground states that will help decide who's sworn in as president next January.

BTW, The margin of error was between 3.4% and 3.6% for that survey.
Click to expand...

The poll was taken of registered voters, not likely voters.
 
pbrauer said:
The poll was taken of registered voters, not likely voters.
Click to expand...

Since by all indications, supporters of Obama in 2008 are far less enthusiastic this election cycle, than those who opposed him, it stands to reason that if only likely voters were polled, the results would be even more positive for Romney.
 
avusbluem5 said:
This was a pro Romney speech, and 59 percent said it hurt or did not help. You call that a success? Lol. I would call it a smaller disaster than I initially thought, but still a disaster.
Click to expand...

Two points... First, where did you come up with that number? Second, I couldn't find the "did not help" multiple choice answers anywhere in that survey.
 
Grim17 said:
Since by all indications, supporters of Obama in 2008 are far less enthusiastic this election cycle, than those who opposed him, it stands to reason that if only likely voters were polled, the results would be even more positive for Romney.
Click to expand...

Gee, I thought the reason for the poll was to determine how people felt about the effectiveness of the speeches given, not whether they supported the candidate in the election.:roll:
 
pbrauer said:
Gee, I thought the reason for the poll was to determine how people felt about the effectiveness of the speeches given, not whether they supported the candidate in the election.:roll:
Click to expand...

So Pete, do you have anything to say about the poll numbers I posted or not?
 
Kandahar said:
I tend to agree with Nate Silver's analysis of political conventions: Virtually all presidential candidates get a bounce coming out of their convention; it should be expected. However, they generally fade (at least partially) by Election Day. The average convention bounce is about four points, so if Romney's bounce is larger than that it's a good sign for him. If it's smaller than that, it's a bad sign. What will be interesting is how much Romney's numbers move in the next couple days (before the Democratic convention starts). It appears that so far Romney has recovered about a 2-point deficit in the polls and is now in a virtual tie with Obama, according to the RCP average.

Regarding the speeches...IMO no one is going to remember anything that Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney said in two weeks. Clint Eastwood's speech was a bit more...memorable, but I doubt that it will have any impact whatsoever on the election because, well, it's Clint Eastwood.
Click to expand...
This. The first convention gets the "easily swayed". The second convention steals them away. A month later it didn't matter either way.
 
radcen said:
This. The first convention gets the "easily swayed". The second convention steals them away. A month later it didn't matter either way.
Click to expand...

We will all have to see about that. I think a lot of voters are going to remember what the speakers said. More important, the nation was introduced to some of the rising stars of the GOP, for example, Susana Martinez.

I've never heard what you've said about first and second conventions, but I don't think that "independent" necessarily means "undecided." A very clear choice is going to be presented to the voters, and I think the schtick that's worked before may not work again. What I mean is that this isn't about haves and have-nots; it's about works/not working.
 
radcen said:
This. The first convention gets the "easily swayed". The second convention steals them away. A month later it didn't matter either way.
Click to expand...

I disagree... There were many people who didn't really know much about Mitt Romney going into the convention, so many people came away from it either liking, or not liking the man... While everyone in the country knows exactly who Obama is, so the Democratic convention isn't likely to change many minds or sway many voters.
 
nota bene said:
We will all have to see about that. I think a lot of voters are going to remember what the speakers said. More important, the nation was introduced to some of the rising stars of the GOP, for example, Susana Martinez.

I've never heard what you've said about first and second conventions, but I don't think that "independent" necessarily means "undecided." A very clear choice is going to be presented to the voters, and I think the schtick that's worked before may not work again. What I mean is that this isn't about haves and have-nots; it's about works/not working.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Independent does not necessarily equate to undecided. There is, however, a smaller sub-segment that I was speaking of, and referred to them as "easily swayed", and I don't think they fall neatly into independent or undecided. The kind of person that seems to always hear one side and say, "You're right.", then hear the other side and say, "You're right, too.", then hear a third opinion and say, "You know, you're right.". I don't believe they are a large block, but those people do exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom