« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

My Final Election 2012 Predictions

Not Getting Off The Limb

It’s time to start making final predictions for the 2012 election. I’m also rounding up predictions from others who are out on the limb with me predicting a Romney victory. I still feel fairly confident about my bottom line: Romney will win. But until we see the actual voter turnout, it’s hard to project more than educated guesswork as to the size of that win.

The Electorate and the Popular Vote

The final week of polling has been even more of a mess than usual in a season in which the polls have made less and less sense both internally (their assumptions about turnout and the conflict between the toplines and Romney’s margins with independents) and externally (how the polls’ views of turnout conflict with every other item of evidence outside the polling). Josh Jordan notes the particularly unstable polling of independents in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.

But while some of the more garish double-digit margins are gone, the latest battery of national polls shows Romney’s standing vs Obama with independents most likely somewhere around a 7 point lead: CNN/ORC (+22, but with the smallest of sample sizes), Monmouth/SUSA (+16), Rasmussen (+9), WaPo/ABC (+7), NBC/WSJ (+7), Pew (+4), Gallup (-1).

What will turnout look like? First up, we have Rasmussen’s October 2012 Party ID survey; I’ve revised my chart to look at the historical track record since 2004 of his October survey:

That’s an R+6 electorate. Obama is clearly, in my view, doomed if the electorate is D+3 (the historical average for presidential elections since 1984) or less, and probably needs about D+6, maybe D+5 (the 2000 electorate) to win. We haven’t had an R+ electorate for a presidential election since probably the 1920s (2004 was even); we may not have had an R+6 electorate since Reconstruction ended. If Rasmussen’s survey is even half right, Democrats could be in for a very, very rough night across the board. Even as accurate as Rasmussen has been, I’m hesitant to go out all the way on that limb – but it’s hard to argue with his record on this front. The survey encompasses a huge sample, on the order of 15,000 interviews.

It may be tough to measure the final electorate, because exit polls won’t capture early voters, and in some states that’s a lot of people. (The Denver Post cites Colorado Secretary of State figures showing more than 62% of the state’s registered voters have voted already, with a turnout of R+2). My prediction for the national turnout is a conservative one: D+2, D 37/R 35/I 28. Assuming Romney wins Republicans 94-6, Obama carries Democrats 93-7, and Romney wins independents 53-47 – again, a conservative projection given the polls – that gives us Romney 50.3%, Obama 49.7%.

(If you run those same assumptions in the electorate from Rasmussen’s party ID survey, you get Romney 53.7%, Obama 46.2% – and it gets wider from there if the spread among independents gets into double digits. But I’m being conservative here, as I still expect the more likely outcome to be fairly close).

The Electoral College

I start with this map, with Romney up 235-190:

Obama is still running ads in North Carolina and still contesting Florida; Florida is usually close, but I see no real likelihood that it goes for Obama again.

Then, let’s take off the board the states where Romney is only going to win if it’s really breaking big for him – I’m actually now including Nevada and not Pennsylvania in that category, and to be cautious, Maine’s 2d Congressional District – and the states I’d almost written off in September where I now think Romney is in very solid shape (Virginia, Colorado and New Hampshire):

Romney 261, Obama 223. Iowa becomes irrelevant at this point – Romney wins one of the remaining three, or Obama wins all three, and it’s game over. But I don’t actually see Pennsylvania being the one to get Romney over the line if he loses Ohio and Wisconsin. Playing it safe, I end up with Romney taking just one of those four – Wisconsin – and a narrow electoral college win, 271-267:

If Romney wins, as I project, I strongly suspect that he will win at least one of the other three, maybe all three. But Wisconsin is my pick for the state that puts him over the hump.

The Senate

Here’s RCP’s current map of the Senate races, projecting each side picks up 3 seats, netting no change to the Democrats’ 53-47 advantage:

That’s a very disappointing outcome from where the GOP should have been, but probably not as bad as it has looked most of the past two months. I’m going to be absurdly bullish and say R+2 Senate seats because I can’t look across Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Virginia, Massachusetts, Indiana, and Missouri and see the Democrats going better than 5-for-7. There are different reasons in different races – Mourdock and Akin will have strong GOP turnout advantages at their backs, Scott Brown is just a tough campaigner, and Smith, Mandel, Thompson and Allen all have the swing state ground games behind them. Add in Montana and it will take a big set of Romney coattails for the Republicans to win half or more of those eight races – but 3 out of 8 hardly seems unreasonable if the presidential race is going well.

(It’s also impossible to be sure how the Maine Senate race will come out – three-way races are notoriously hard to poll – but I’ll nonetheless be surprised if Angus King doesn’t win and caucus with the Democrats. A 50 D/49 R Senate with Paul Ryan as the VP could put King in position to be a tremendous power broker.).

Like most people, I’m not even bothering with a House prediction, other than to reiterate a point Neil Stevens has made: if the electorate was really going to look like the D+7 Democratic wave of 2008, we’d be talking about a ton of Democratic House pickups (redistricting or no) and a threat of the return of Speaker Pelosi. But at this point, even the DCCC seems to have all but thrown in the towel; Nate Silver doesn’t even seem to be tracking odds for a Democratic House pickup. That suggests that down-ticket Democrats are looking at a much more realistic universe.

Around The Horn

Michael Barone has Romney 315, Obama 223. I’m always in good company agreeing with Barone.

Ben Domenech, who was predicting an Obama win until the past month, has Romney 278, Obama 260, with Wisconsin the deciding state.

Gerry Daly’s map has Romney 296, Obama 242.

Neil Stevens’ map has Romney 279, Obama 190 even with a bunch of states up in the air.

Josh Jordan walks through why he has Romney 295, Obama 243 and Romney by 50.5 to 48.5 in the popular vote.

Bob Krumm walks through 5 scenarios.

Jim Geraghty looks at when pollsters have been wrong.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • numbersdontlie

    lol @ delusion. The Princeton Electoral Consortium predicted the 2004 EVs for each candidate. Out of 538, they missed 1. In 2008, they missed 0. They correctly guessed 1066/1067 EVs. The Princeton Electoral Consortium has Obama up by more than a hundred EVs. If you think an organization that has missed one EV over 8 years is suddenly going to miss over 100… I got bad news, folks. Unless the software installed in Ohio really is sabotaging the vote, Obama wins in a landslide. Sorry.

  • Ender

    Get ready to cry, dimwit.

  • numbersdontlie

    What am I suppose to be crying about? The Princeton Electoral Consortium isn’t biased. They predicted a Republican victory in 2004… Why are you denying facts? Are you that obsessed with hating Obama?

  • Bill S

    Bye, James.

  • Ender

    You had a ton of new polling firms spring up into the limelight this year from PPP to Axelrod’s Grove Crap – all reporting numbers straight from the Obama administration. When you feed those puffed up numbers together with the D+8 “mainstream” polls into the machine, you get Princeton Consortium’s and your demigod Nate’s predictions. Garbage in garbage out.

  • separatewayz

    lol! Obama’s not going to win in a landslide. And he’s definitely not going to win Ohio. The early voting and absentee ballot voting numbers all look awful for him there. So far (through Sunday night), 557,177 Democrats voted (DOWN 154,911 from 2008). In contrast, 480,843 Republican voters voted (UP 108,345 from 2008) That’s a swing of 263,256 votes in 2012, when Obama’s margin in 2008 margin was 262,224.

    Taking state polls with 7% response rates and bad sampling (e.g., D+11: lol!!!), and then running them through an Excel program with a cheap Monte Carlo simulator, does not lead to good predictions (except this one: Nate Silver will do a major face-plant by Tuesday night). Garbage in, garbage out.

  • separatewayz

    Here are my predictions. (For the record: I predicted the GOP gaining 61 seats in the House, and 6 seats in the Senate in late February 2010 and posted as such)

    PRESIDENTIAL
    Romney = 51.04% (296 electoral votes)
    Obama = 47.88% (242 electoral votes)
    Other = 1.08%

    SENATE
    GOP = +2 (range: +1, +5)

    HOUSE
    GOP = +2 (range: -3, +12)

    GOVERNORSHIPS
    GOP = +1 (range: +1, +2)

  • chipbennett

    Should I bother to point out the logical fallacy employed here, or would I be wasting my time?

  • DONTREADONME

    yikes! If I were to see this analysis, I would say things do not look too good for Romney. If this is the best you see from the polls, then I guarantee you Obama will still be President. It is what it is, Dan I would say you are not too confident Romney will win. My prediction, is Obama wins, like your map except WI gies to Obama. Sorry guys, I would like to be wrong tomorrow night, but given all of the backpeddling on predictions over the last four days no landslide or victory for Romney

  • gunnyg2002

    Better wrap duct tape around your gourd Libnut because when Romney crushes your pencil-neck dork, your head is gonna explode.

  • gunnyg2002

    Romney bags 327 EVs.

    We retake the Senate, expand our grip on the House, and sweep the nation ala 2010.

    We all sleep GREAT Tuesday night.

  • DerKrieger

    I won’t predict a Romney win or concede an Obama win but if Obama wins it will be by a hair. There is no way it can possibly be anything but extremely close much less a landslide. That statement in itself discounts the credibility of the PEC.

  • DerKrieger

    I don’t share your pessimism. Look at what happened in WI this year. Walker won three all out assaults on his governance. Do you think the people that denied the Dems any wins will now relax and let WI go to Obama? Doesn’t make sense.

    People are seething at Obama and the social Democrats. Turnout, IMO, will surpass all estimates. Both anger and enthusiasm are on our side. I just can’t see a way for Obama to hang on.

  • DONTREADONME

    Dan sucked the wind out of my optimism. I have a feelinghat Romney will win, but I don’t want to give in to feeling. Plus right now none of the polls makes sense. Gallup had R up +6 in the begining of the week, now its tied??? Are Americans so stupid to re-elect Jimmy Carter ii with aworse track record than the i?

  • viskot

    I can understand why you would want this scenario to be true. But I do think that this is more wishful thinking then any thing else. Romney will loose and Obama will be elected. You can disregard polls however much it pleases you, and you can cherry pick the once that suit you to confirm the story you want to hear, but it will not change the reality. And the reality is that Romney isn’t ahead in the states where he needs to be ahead, and he doesn’t have enough alternatives.

    Now if you just look att this prediction made in this article and you will se what I mean. In order for Romney to win he has to carry both Wisconsin and New Hampshire. Obama is ahed in both those states according to the latest Rasmussen poll. Now the margin is very small so we might as well call them tossups, but that still menas that Obama is more likely to win. He just needs to win one of those states while Romney must win both. If those states are real tossups then that menas that Romney has 25 % chans on winning both states while Obama has 75 % chans of winning at least one state. And this is already assuming that Rasmussen are correct and other polls, polls that say that Obama is ahead in Wisconsin, are all wrong.

    Now if you add Florida and Virginia to the equation things look even more troubling for Romney. While he does lead in both those states according to Rasmussen that lead is rather small, about two points. This gives him somewhere around 80 % chance of winning one of those states (if we just goes by the margin of error of the latest state poll by Rasmusen in these states). Well that means that he has just 64 % chans of winning both states. Add that to the fact that he already had only 25 % chans of winning the rest of the states and you end up with a 16 % chans of Romney win. That is not favorable odds.

    Now of course Obama isn’t guaranteed to win both Ohio and Iowa, but then again he dosen’t need to take Iowa if he taks Wisconsin. And Virginia and New Hampshire would make up for the loss of Ohio, and so would Florida. And here is the main problem, there are in the end more paths to victory for Obama then there are for Romney.

  • congressworksforus

    Did your even read the whole piece? Especially the bit at the front where Dan talks about how he thinks the electorate will look (versus how the polls think it will look) ?

    Obviously not.

  • congressworksforus

    I don’t know if Romney wins 52%, but something just tells me Obama wins 47% …

  • streiff

    you have got to be ****ing me, a Swede is doing a cut and past of Nate Silver?
    https://twitter.com/viskot

    You need to find a different way to occupy your time. I understand Sweden has girls. Maybe you should find one.

  • earlgrey

    But I thought there was a poll out today with Romney up 1 in New Hampshire? Wi is tossup. I know this guy is a troll I am just trying to determine how good of bad of a troll he is.

  • jaykali

    I don’t see Romney losing Wisconsin and Ohio. Something weird could happen in Ohio but the Scott Walker thing + Paul Ryan has me very strongly believing that the Republican turnout will be at record levels and we will take home Wisconsin. I know it’s a blue state but that recall did actually happen and not only that it was basically a landslide for Walker. So if we can’t win that state after beating the unions on their own turf then it just wasn’t meant to be. I guarantee there will be many a headline discussing how wrong the polls were after tomorrow. I think Romney is going to win decisively. People have been seduced by the RCP averages which show Obama up but that is just bad data aggregated. I think the national polls are more accurate which show a closer race. So I am sticking to my guns that Romney will win with EVs to spare.

  • 1stRichard

    Election predictions, a missing factor

    The real problem will be all the lies and propaganda, most is from the left but there is some on the right as well. I am in W/Mass and accustomed to arguing moonbats and dummy (D)s’ but in the past four years I have seen a change. It is normal to correct some falsehoods but not to this extent. When asked who was the majority Party in congress when Obama took office the majority of leftists in these two groups will blame Republicans. When asked what was the cause of the financial recession we are in the majority of leftists in these two groups will blame Bush’s War and the Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy. It is normal to expect a small number that are this deranged but when it comes to the number I am seeing now, this is a larger problem that can not be ignored.

    Then comes the excuses and blame, it is an endless procession of annoying robots that keep repeating, “it’s all Bush’s fault.” Then when you think it could not get any more absurd a lefty argues the last time an American ambassador was murdered was in 1979, “when Ronald Reagan was president.” The divide becoming wider covering a much larger area and is growing much deeper. Common sense is dieing at an alarming rate and simple facts found in any encyclopedia are being destroyed as if someone is burning all the books.

    There is a festering wound in this nation, we have too many lost to the Marxist propaganda on the left that has become a reality for too many. I had seen some talks of riots recently and I would venture to say this might be valid. I am deep behind enemy lines, I see the mobs gathering growing more frenzied and hysterical, reasoning and rationalizing is be lost to mob rule. I don’t know what direction this is going or if it will fade away however I do know this is not good.

  • http://ridersonthestorm101.blogspot.com/ SE-779

    Presidency: Romney 370-168.
    Senate: GOP 56-44(+9).
    House: GOP 300-135(+58).

  • jaykali

    I don’t see PA. If we win that we have a mandate for sure. It’s a dirty tease that PA. Just don’t see it. I love me some WI bc we have ample evidence there as the WI recall was only this past summer. When it’s all said and done that will be seen as the first domino to fall that indicated Obama would lose.

  • jaykali

    Why do trolls get so many up votes. It’s the craziest thing. Trolls are everywhere.

  • jaykali

    I have all my hopes on Wisconsin, I really do. We aren’t f-ing losing Wisconsin. If O somehow can win that state after everything that’s happened I will have to just say screw it, it wasn’t meant to be.

  • gunnyg2002

    NATE! IS that you Nate? YAWN! You’re boring us.

  • moosedrops

    Romney/Ryan will win. Period.

  • gunnyg2002

    From what I have seen and heard, both in AK and in the Lower 48 on my travels, Romney is going to CRUSH The Butcher of Benghazi!

    The Butcher of Benghazi is in full flail mode, lying and spinning faster than Bill Clinton can chase interns.

  • treeofliberty

    What else can he say? I remember Pelosi swearing that the D’s would hold the House…even on Election Day 2010! I remember New Jersey Democrats expressing supreme confidence Corzine would defeat Christie…Ted Kennedy called John Kerry “President Elect” on Election Night 04 and so on.

    Only road to victory for Obama is a massive 2008-like D wave turnout. That’s it. Every anecdotal report, heck the hard facts we have from early voting data affirm that this is NOT 2008. As others have noted, it makes absolutely no sense that the electorate that voted for a +80 Dem House (in 08) would then vote for a +50 GOP House?!?!

    The fact that no one is talking about the Dems taking the House and only “holding” the Senate as a “victory” tells me even they are not expecting a Dem wave turnout election. If conservatives turn out like I expect they will, Romney wins.

  • http://www.bohnetlaw.com rightappeal

    If Romney wins either Ohio, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania he almost certainly wins the election. If he gets swept in those three, he almost certainly loses. Not sure how to rank those three.

    What really worries me though is that this is close. After the disastrous policies of the last four years, right now we should be speculating whether Romney gets to 500 electoral votes and whether the new GOP Senate majority will be filibuster-proof. That we are not even in that ballpark gives me grave concern over whether we will be able to make the reforms that so desperately need to be made.

  • treeofliberty

    well there’s always NH/IA/NV…honestly I’m a bit disappointed with Nevada. With the unemployment situation and the economy and big Mormon community you’d think this would be leaning Romney if not likely Romney. And can’t blame it on Sharron Angle either. Don’t understand what’s going on in that state to turn it blue given the disastrous economic policies by Obama/Reid.

    People blame the casinos but they were still around in 00 and 04 when Bush carried the state.

  • evilbloggerlady

    I hope this is true: One Day More…

  • evilbloggerlady

    I am happy with anything 268+ for Romney. Beyond that, everything else is is just delicious gravy and Schadenfreude.

  • LTtavernkeeper

    PA has elected governors, senators, and a slew of other Republican candidates recently. As pointed out on RS earlier, the coal issue is an undercurrent that’s going under-reported (along with Libya, Sandy, etc.). Many 08 Obama votes will be flipped. Romney takes PA before OH.

  • http://www.bohnetlaw.com rightappeal

    Yeah, that’s why I put “almost” certainly loses. Seems unlikely he’d get all three of those without one of the bigger states. Or I suppose Minnesota or Michigan could be decisive, but I don’t see Romney winning those if he can’t get at least one of OH/WI/PA. And “almost certainly win” accounts for the possibility that Romney wins one of those states but still loses by falling short in Virginia or Florida.

  • treeofliberty

    Yes I agree; I actually just out of curiosity explored that scenario on the election map for any plausible Romney victory outcomes outside of wining those 3 states.

    But as you said hard to see Romney carrying a state like Nevada while losing Ohio and Wisconsin.

  • NuMex Phil

    I know New Mexico is a small take, but we could also be in play. Recent internal polling has Wilson in a tie or ahead for the senate race, and several Super PACs have put in big bucks (for NM anyway) for Romney this last week. Most of the national pollsters walked away from NM a few weeks back based on a questionable local poll, but seem to fail to remember that we did shift decidedly to right of center in 2010 and elected an R Governor (remember Suzanna Martinez great speech at the convention?). Sleeper state of the race?

  • LTtavernkeeper

    ABC/WashPo poll over sampled Dems +6 and had Obama up by 3. Obama was +7 in 2008. Does anyone seriously believe GOP has only gained 1 pt on GOP compared to 2008? Even +3 Dem given early voting rates in OH the admits ration does not carry the vote.

  • LTtavernkeeper

    WI and PA make OH a luxury. I hope you are correct.

  • agooglyminotaur

    I’ve been complaining about this for a while. There are a lot of people who are quick to reject the polls when they favor Democrats, and then quick to embrace them when they favor Republicans. A lot of people have been talking like this isn’t a difficult day for Romney, but it will be. It will not be a Romney landslide; it will be close.

    But while I disagree with the person you responded to, who suffers from what Greenspan might term “Irrational Exuberance,” it’s important to point out that no blame lies with Dan McLaughlin. I think he’s been one of the most consistently mathematically rigorous pollsters on the right. I always like reading his analysis and I’ll be interested to see how it holds up tomorrow.

  • moosedrops

    LOOOOOTS of trolls here tonight, i.e., all the “vote down’s” on positive Romney news. This itself speaks volumes…

  • moosedrops

    You ROCK!

  • moosedrops

    Romney will win Ohio. Trust me.

  • agooglyminotaur

    As long as you’re buying the round! I hope the last-minute ad campaign did the trick, but the numbers are a little too close for comfort for my liking.

  • LTtavernkeeper

    Not all pollsters are oversampling. Rasmussen isn’t, or at least hasn’t consistently. I think the bigger point is to look at how independents are breaking. I’ve always been one to say that, first off, you don’t win elections for the most part by swaying indies – you win by mobilizing your base. I think that we (conservatives) have mobilized our base as much as possible. The gap that has closed with early voting shows just as much. Second, after energizing the base, then concentrate in independents (or ‘non-affiliated, as I think is a better description). Practically all polls have indies breaking Romney anywhere from 10 – 20 points. All we need is 5. Increased GOP turnout, and a +5 in independents (which, granted, is a flip of about 20 pts from 2008) wins the election no problem with any electoral map.

  • moosedrops

    The polls are lying. Trust me.

  • moosedrops

    I rest my case. Obviously a lot of Ovomit-lovers on here.

    Speaking of which, pardon me while I go vomit from the sickness of all these libtards!

  • agooglyminotaur

    Well, you’ve said that twice, but honestly I’m sticking with a slightly more complicated view of how polling is conducted. I see potential biases in both liberal and conservative failure. And I, like Dan in a recent article, refuse to buy in to the “everything is skewed Democratic” line, because I don’t see any statistical justification for it. Honestly, I hoping more for independent influence in the battleground states, and also the idea that historical state patterns of support hold true in such a polarizing election… for me, it will be a nail-biter.

  • jimmyg

    Why don’t the pollsters see what you are seeing? The pollsters, and I mean all of them, see a close election. (some of the pundits eg Barone, see it as a blowout but he does not make his living as a pollster)The consensus here seems to be a blowout for Gov Romney. It is hard to reconcile the two views of the either who the electorate will be or the projected election results.

  • agooglyminotaur

    By the way, I’m not the one who voted your comments down, and I envy your optimism. Seems like the liberal trolls are out in force tonight. Figures.

  • LTtavernkeeper

    The Democrats and pollsters are using the same polling model that told them the majority of Americans wanted nationalized healthcare ; )
    Facts are:
    1. Early voting percentages for Democrats (in battleground states) is down significantly compared to 2008.
    2. GOP always beats Dems at polls on election day. If McCain campaign can do it, ANYBODY can.
    3. Romney/Ryan have a strong rustbelt connection. Let’s not discount how this can help in OH, IA, and WI especially.
    4. There’s a path for Romney to the White House that doesn’t include OH. There is NO path for Obama that does not.
    5. America isn’t stupid, and elections can’t be stolen if they’re not close. Who can legitimately look around, standing in voting booth, and say “give me 4 more years of this . . .”.

  • republicanistan

    I have never seen so many lolbaggers in denial in one thread in my life.

  • moosedrops

    No worries! You have NO idea how stressed out I’ve been for months now. I had a BLAZING headache this weekend and, like you, wasn’t very hopeful.

    BUT, I’m at peace now. I’ve heard a LOT of positive news today, including Mitt on B.O.s chance of winning, “It’s possible, but not likely.” Talk about balls! Love that! And Peggy Noonan’s article on the WSJ saying she believes Romney will win. Her line from that article summed it all up well and put me at peace, “I suspect both Romney and Obama have a sense of what’s coming, and it’s
    part of why Romney looks so peaceful and Obama so roiled.” SO TRUE.

    If B.O. wins, it was from PURE voter fraud. This oddly gives me peace. I would obviously hate it though. I hope my contradiction makes sense.

  • moosedrops

    Beeeelch, er, I mean Baaaa-rack, is that you?

  • moosedrops

    Looooot of trolls. Hee hee hee.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Just believe in America and vote for Romney-Ryan!

  • exitsfunnel

    I actually don’t mind the upvoting / downvoting nearly as much as I’m bothered by the fact that I can’t seem to figure out how it orders the replies. When I’ve been away from a thread for a while and return I have no idea which comments I’ve already read and which I haven’t.

    I’m not one to complain, especially since I’m not a frequent poster, but the adoption of disqus really has made the site less usable / enjoyable.

  • agooglyminotaur

    I admire your spirit, but I don’t agree with your conclusions. There are a range of polls, all subject to their own biases, but I haven’t seen evidence to suggest Romney is ahead in the race by more than a slim margin. I worry that conservatives put just as much faith in dismissing them as Democrats put in accepting them as gospel, so I just honestly admit I don’t know how they’ll translate into votes come tomorrow. In any case, I don’t think “voter fraud” will be an issue, but I’ll still be baffled why half this country votes how they do.

  • moosedrops

    HAHAHAHA! I had to Google “schadenfreude”. Learned a new word today!

    AGREED!

  • moosedrops

    WOW, the libtards are OUT! Muhahahahahaha!

  • moosedrops

    I forgot to mention I went to the rifle range this weekend and it was QUITE the stress-reliever!

    Wow, you don’t think voter fraud will have much play this time around? Other than the libtards, you’re the first I’ve heard to say that. I hope you’re right! Yes, I’m baffled and saddened by those that vote for B.O. They’re voting away America by doing so!

  • agooglyminotaur

    It ain’t over til it’s over— 2010 was a huge year for Republican turnout, and this year hardly looks to match the enthusiasm for Obama in 2008. The energy could be there.

  • agooglyminotaur

    My nephew James has Down’s Syndrome, and he is a gift from God to this Earth. Watch your tongue.

  • agooglyminotaur

    I’ve been trying to figure it out too— seems to be some combination of popularity and time since it was posted. When looking for my own replies, I mainly just scroll looking for colored arrows.

  • commonsenseobserver

    R: 347
    0: 191

  • retrocon87

    Everyone knows the enthusiasm for Obama is nowhere near what is was in 2008, but he won in 2008 by 7 points… the question is whether the drop in enthusiasm is enough to kill a 7 point lead despite a billion dollars being spent to scare the hell out of everyone about Republicans… It’s definitely “not over till it’s over” but no Republican should have been spending the night before this election trying to militantly convince themselves that they still have a shot at winning because “every one of the 200 polls published in the last week is wrong”… Obama is a joke and this election shouldn’t have been close.

  • moosedrops

    ???

  • agooglyminotaur

    You’re right, it’s beyond belief that he’s even doing as well as he is. I didn’t in a million years expect this election to come down to the wire. And believe me, I’ve railed elsewhere about how Dems aren’t the only ones praising polls in their favor and dismissing those against them. But we’ll see how tomorrow goes; there are some strong indicators in Romney’s direction. Obama’s handling of the economy alone should, in historical context, lose him the election. If he wins anyway, well, we’ll cross that bridge when we get there.

  • moosedrops

    Well said!

  • commonsenseobserver

    On November 6, I look forward to saying…

    “Dawn take you all, and be stone to you!”

  • agooglyminotaur

    I’d be interested to see your assumptions for the Senate split… +2 seems to be my upper bound.

  • retrocon87

    It’s the Latinos… no matter who wins this thing, if the first thing Boehner does after a debt deal is anything other than immigration reform to kill this damn issue once and for all (or at least for the next 10 years until we somewhat predictably wind up in the same mess all over again) I won’t be pleased.

  • californiasquish

    As this seems to be the official prediction thread, I’m going to throw in with RealClearPolitics, but give Ohio to Romney for a final score of Obama 285/Romney 253.

    I recognize that this is an unpopular prediction to make, and I make it knowing I voted for the other guy. I’m having some friends over tomorrow night to watch the results, and I would very much like to be wrong.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Okay, be prepared for hours of BS whichever candidate wins. Especially from the less reputable outlets like the New York Times.

  • http://www.twitter.com/RWBuckeye Right-Wing Buckeye

    My official prediction:

    Romney 331
    Obama 207

  • treeofliberty

    Pained looks?!?!? Tears???!? Have you seen giddy Ann Coulter? Dick Morris? Krauthammer?

    By the way, the left is scared tonight…every conservative website has a small army of leftists trying to discourage Republican enthusiasm.

    Won’t work though.

  • clowngirl

    Pretty much EVERY poll has Romney way ahead with independents, and leading on the economy.

    I’ve been asking and have yet to hear of even one poll that has Obama ahead in Ohio outside the margin of error with a plausible turn out model.

    Just because you’re being negative doesn’t mean you’re more realistic.

  • clowngirl

    What’s interesting to me is that so many people “upped” his comment. Democrats must be getting really nervous to be trolling Redstate in such numbers.

  • clowngirl

    Excuse me, but why wouldn’t a D+11 poll be wrong?

    Weren’t ALL the polls wrong about Reagan? Or- more recently- weren’t they all pretty far off about Scott Walker?

  • treeofliberty

    Also you have to look inside many of the polls who bury the real numbers deep inside the top line (which is the one that gets the most attention)

    2 case in points
    (Well before I begin let me just note that an Obama MOE “lead” isn’t “OMG Romney will looose!!” Traditionally undecideds lead towards the challenger and the incumbent below 50% on election day is a loser. Now this is without changing/challenging ANY of the poll assumptions about D+7, D+8 or D+11 (!!!)

    Battleground/Politico poll had Obama +1. However, looking deeper into the poll one of the pollsters notes that “among those CERTAIN to vote, Romney leads by 5…it is quite possible barring a strong Democrat turnout that the race could turn into a DECISIVE Romney victory”

    So we went from “OBAMA LEADS ROMNEY (by 1) to a possible “decisive victory” for Romney. Either scenario is not good for the incumbent. The 1st indicates an extremely close election; the other would indicate Romney landslide.

    The recent CNN poll had Obama/Romney tied. Again, tied NOT good for the incumbent. However in that poll it was D+11…I don’t think I need to explain any more about that one.

    So keep in mind there is a lot more in these polls than just the top line, have to dig deeper to get the whole picture. Regardless, we will know what the actual numbers are in a matter of hours.

  • retrocon87

    no, they weren’t far off about Scott Walker.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/governor/wi/wisconsin_governor_recall_election_walker_vs_barrett-3056.html

  • retrocon87

    Krauthammer was pretty far from “giddy” and if Dick Morris is right and we wind up winning both Pennsylvania and Minnesota I’ll track you down and buy you a beer… maybe even two or three.

  • treeofliberty

    and every conservative site in big numbers….very nervous indeed!

  • clowngirl

    I’m expecting something more like a landslide. Maybe there hasn’t been an R+ anything sample since the 20s but there also hadn’t been a 600+ seat pick up in one election in something like 100 years until it happened 2 years ago.

    And according to Rasmussen, there are now a lot more Republicans than there were in 2010.

    And then you add in Romney’s HUGE (and pretty consistently huge) lead with independents.

    Then there’s the talk that evangelical turnout will be bigger than ever. (which absolutely makes sense)

    Ohio generally is a shade redder than the electorate at large — Obama won Ohio by around 4.5% in ’08 – won the nation by 7% -

    Late deciders break for the challenger…

    Apparently Obama has lost 13% of the people who originally voted for him…

    The Redskins lost. ;)

    Didn’t the pollsters project a nail biter for the Scott Walker recall race?

  • treeofliberty

    I said Coulter was giddy…Krauthammer is well..Krauthammer. he never seems happy! lol

    But I think we conservatives will be on Election Night!

  • clowngirl

    it’s not even just about turn out. there ARE more Republicans now. :)

    and there’s also a probability of landslide margins with independents in some states…

  • retrocon87

    hope you’re right

  • agooglyminotaur

    I agree. There’s every reason for Republican momentum to carry a big margin of the independent vote.

  • treeofliberty

    Lots of reasons I believe PA will go Romney.

    - You haven’t had the deluge of negative ads in PA that you had in Ohio.

    - Early voting MUCH less of a factor

    - Romney heavily outspending Obama in the final week

    - Reputable pollsters have the race a dead heat ( I believe dead heat = advantage Romney on Election Night; ESPECIALLY for a state without big early voting factor)

    - Auto bailout much less of a factor

    If Susquehanna accurately shows Obama at 47%, he will lose the race. And yes the state may get called before Ohio.

  • clowngirl

    Gallup is still showing a 1 point lead.

    Apparently the Hurricane Sandy photo ops helped a bit. (for reasons I probably will never really understand)

  • clowngirl

    I only see one poll out of all of them that was close to right. the others were off by 4 or 5 points.

    There’s one had him up 12 and brought the average up to close to accurate -

    I seem to remember hearing about more polls that said it’d be close at the time.

    But it’s really not worth looking up.

  • treeofliberty

    And remember that Gallup is a 7 day tracking poll…meaning they have numbers from LAST week at the height of Sandy/Kristie/Obama “great leader” mania (as you suggested likely puffed up East Coast/Blue state support that has mostly dissipated by now)

    THAT being said…Obama at 48% on election eve? If the Dems call that a good thing I’ll just sit back and enjoy the spectacle on MSNBC!

  • Pingback: Google

  • Pingback: Brigitte Drong

  • Pingback: Ronnie Winiecki

  • Pingback: Granville Chough

  • Pingback: Kurtis Rullo

  • Pingback: Refugio Latif

  • Pingback: Arthur Commander

  • Pingback: Wayne Hrobsky

  • Pingback: Otha Papich

  • Pingback: Jeremy Shotts

  • Pingback: Wm Walka

  • Pingback: cheap edu backlinks

  • Pingback: http://bildungsstreik.net/wiki/index.php?title=HawksWinston988

  • Pingback: Irwin Cucufate

  • Pingback: Linnie Cundy

  • Pingback: Vance Hurn

  • Pingback: Valene Resos

  • Pingback: Jone Weare

  • Pingback: Erick Kopps

  • Pingback: Tuan Autery

  • Pingback: Antoinette Atanacio

  • Pingback: Brenton Kowing

  • Pingback: Delta Mclafferty

  • Pingback: Narcisa Clayburn

  • Pingback: Mason Vititoe

  • Pingback: William Ruffins

  • Pingback: Susan Saumier

  • Pingback: Delaine Coteat

  • Pingback: Hubert Cechini

  • Pingback: Antonio Lishman

  • Pingback: Jonna Alegria

  • Pingback: Kareem Knopp