Ohio, the poll tracking thread

Much talk about Ohio. It appears that with 18 electoral votes, it is the pivotal state when it comes to the election.

We can all talk about how disgusted we are with polls. But this close to the election, even biased pollsters are under close scrutiny about their validity.

If Mitt Romney wins the election in Ohio, that state’s 18 electoral votes will probably clinch the election for him.

Trouble is, the latest CBS/New York Times poll shows that Barack Obama is leading there by 50% to 45%. Maybe it’s time for the Democrats to break out the champagne.

That’s what most people who watch CBS or read the Times might think. But the handful who would look at the fine print of the poll would see something shockingly different. The pollster — Quinnipiac University’s Polling Institute — didn’t publicize the raw results that they got when they actually called people in Ohio.

They tweaked them first.

And by tweaked them, I mean they pumped up the Democratic sample by 8%

Linky

I see it as pretty much tied. Maybe leaning closer to Romney. Others may have differing poll results.

Well, here's a place where we can crunch numbers and bicker over percentage points.

Hppy votng, folks!

hi beez

i have been looking at polls all day,
with both sides claiming victory early on,

i hope who ever wins does something to help your country,
who ever he is

good luck

xploder

the last time i have saw the poll numbers for Ohio
it was 49% Obama
46% Romney

now its 50% Obama
45% Romney



Nice
thank you Beezer

Originally posted by Ben81
the last time i have saw the polls number for Ohio
it was 49% Obama
46% Romney

now its 50% Obama
45% Romney

Nice

thanks you Beezer

for once we have a unbiased political thread

SNF

Could you source your poll results to see if they differ from any others?

I'm curious as to why they seem to be all over the place.

Originally posted by XPLodER
hi beez

i have been looking at polls all day,
with both sides claiming victory early on,

i hope who ever wins does something to help your country,
who ever he is

good luck

xploder

I hope so too. Thanks, mate.

reply to post by beezzer


Its in your op:

Trouble is, the latest CBS/New York Times poll shows that Barack Obama is leading there by 50% to 45%. Maybe it’s time for the Democrats to break out the champagne.

the first numbers i saw them earlier today on CNN (TV)
sorry didnt take a picture with my iphone for you guys lol
and please dontt tell me .. 'picture or it didnt happen"
or i will link my chupacabra poor bunny thread here

CNN has leaned in Obama's favor since the first presidential debate on their polls... FOX has leaned in Romney's favor. Democrats tend to watch CNN, Republicans tend to watch FOX... So take that for what it is worth.

All I can say with certainty is this: it is A damned close election!

Originally posted by Ben81
reply to post by beezzer

 

Its in your op:

Trouble is, the latest CBS/New York Times poll shows that Barack Obama is leading there by 50% to 45%. Maybe it’s time for the Democrats to break out the champagne.

the first numbers i saw them earlier today on CNN (TV)
sorry didnt take a picture with my iphone for you guys lol
and please dontt tell me .. 'picture or it didnt happen"
or i will link my chupacabra poor bunny thread here

Got it!

Seems like everyone is doing polls and I just wanted to keep them straight.

(please don't bring out the bunny-killer )

reply to post by beezzer


Crowd sizes gauge enthusiasm. I just don't see it for Obama. This weekend, Romney crowd sizes are anywhere from 15,000, 18,000 to 30,000. Obama from 2,000, 2,800, to 4,000. At one venue this weekend, Obama drew even smaller crowds than McCain from 2008.

Obama supporters, can you just give us one poll where Democrats are only oversampled by +3 and Obama's ahead?

Would it be too difficult to do just one stinkin poll with an even number of democrats and republicans? All I want is the truth, no results skewed in a particular direction.

I was listening to a talk show today where folks just call up randomly about whatever they like. This one lady from Ohio was really excited. She said that she did her own unofficial poll, and the results were nothing like the official ones. The reason she did this is that the polls were always leaning towards a particular candidate. But in no way seemed to represent the sentiments of the people in her town. Her results has the opposite candidate winning by a huge landslide! I will call this folklore and name no candidates since it was a call in show. But this seriously makes me wonder if we are being lied to.

reply to post by elouina


reply to post by alternateuniverse


Just once, I'd like to see a poll where they asked x people who they were voting for and then provided the answer.

It appears (at least to me) that ALL pollsters think we're all too stupid to interpret the numbers ourselves!

reply to post by elouina


We are always being lied to. Polls are done to publish the results to sway public opinion. Neither side will pay the money for a non-biased poll because it wouldn't fit an agenda.

The reality is, the candidates likely actually know by now (and historically by about 14 days before the election) how this is going to play out. They fight on till the end, but they know. Wish we did! lol

reply to post by beezzer


The Plain Dealer is saying that the Republicans have a slim lead concerning the mail-in ballots.

So, how it will all come out depends upon Tuesday. If the poorer districts don't turn out to vote, then Romney will win.

To paraphrase Scotty, "I like this race...It's exciting!"

I'm not sure it matters that Obama is ahead in Ohio, there's some shadiness going on with those machines.

The Columbus Free Press is reporting that the Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted allegedly ordered for “experimental software patches” to be installed on vote-counting machines in a number of Ohio counties.

According to the newspaper, voting rights activists are concerned that the software patches, which are usually used to update or change existing software, could potentially affect over 4 million registered voters, including those who live in Columbus and Cleveland.

Ohio law allows for the experimental use of voting equipment as long as it’s restricted to a limited number of precincts, and under the experimental label, equipment can legally be used without certification.

The Free Press revealed the contract between Husted’s office and the contracted vendor Election Systems and Solutions reads that the software has not been and does not need to be reviewed by any testing authority at the state or federal level.

source

Not to mention Tagg Romney's investment in HIG which owns HartCivic.

Hopefully it's nothing to worry about but I for one, will always be suspicious if Romney takes Ohio.

reply to post by Kali74


Regardless as to who takes Ohio, I can almost assure you there will be calls for a recount.

Though, I have a feeling that it'll be a very lopsided victory.

reply to post by beezzer


Then there's this from your own source:

There’s another way to measure Ohio. According to analyst Adrian Gray, as of last Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted in advance polls. That’s down 181,275 from the Obama wave four years ago. And 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early. That’s up 75,858 from the last presidential election.

That paragraph forgets to mention that Husted cut early voting hours for Democrat heavy counties but extended them for Republican heavy counties.

source

Even still the turnout favors dems. Honestly that article seems too much like a set up for Right Wingers to flip out if Obama takes Ohio. It's full of emotional provocation, justifications and an entitled sense to Ohio.