Thursday Swing State Polls Analysis: FL, VA, WI, IA, NC, NV, CO, National

By Ashish Pabari On October 25, 2012 · 18 Comments

Obama scored one of his best swing state polling days in weeks today, probably his best since prior to the first debate. We continue to see signs of a post-debate Obama bounce, particularly in today’s state polls. The numbers are below, followed by my analysis.

* VIRGINIA: Obama 51%, Romney 46% — Obama +2% since 1 week ago (Public Policy)
* VIRGINIA: Romney 50%, Obama 48% — Obama +1% since 1 week ago (Rasmussen)
* WISCONSIN: Obama 51%, Romney 45% — Obama +4% since 2 weeks ago (Public Policy)
* IOWA: Obama 50%, Romney 48% — Obama +3% since 1 week ago (Public Policy)
* FLORIDA: Obama 47%, Romney 45% — Romney +1% since 1 week ago (Grove)
* FLORIDA: Romney 50%, Obama 49% — No change since 2 weeks ago (Gravis)
* NORTH CAROLINA: Obama 48%, Romney 48% — Obama +2% since 2 weeks ago (Public Policy)
* NEVADA: — Obama 50%, Romney 47% — Obama +1% since 1 month ago (NBC/WSJ)
* COLORADO: Obama 48%, Romney 48% — Romney +5% since 1 month ago (NBC/WSJ)
* COLORADO: Obama 51%, Romney 47% — Obama +1% since last week (Public Policy)
* COLORADO: Obama 46%, Romney 43% — No change since 1 week ago (Grove)
* COLORADO: Obama 48%, Romney 45% — No previous poll (OnSight)

* NATIONAL: Obama 50%, Romney 45% — Obama +1% since yesterday | Obama +3% since Wednesday (RAND)
* NATIONAL: Obama 47%, Romney 45% — Romney +1% since yesterday | No change since Wednesday (IBD/TIPP)
* NATIONAL: Obama 48%, Romney 47% — No change since yesterday | Obama +2% since Wednesday (Gallup RV)
* NATIONAL: Obama 49%, Romney 48% — Obama +1% since yesterday | Obama +3% since Wednesday(Public Policy)
* NATIONAL: Romney 47%, Obama 46% — No change since yesterday | Romney +2% since Wednesday (Reuters)
* NATIONAL: Romney 50%, Obama 47% — Romney +2% since yesterday | Romney +2% since Wednesday (ABC/Washington Post)
* NATIONAL: Romney 50%, Obama 47% — No change since yesterday | Obama +2% since Wednesday (Gallup LV)
* NATIONAL: Romney 50%, Obama 47% — Obama +1% since yesterday | Obama +1% since Wednesday (Rasmussen)

* OVERALL AVERAGE OBAMA TRACKING POLL BOUNCE SINCE DEBATE: +.875%

With two full days of post-debate surveys now in the daily trackers, Obama stands at an average .875% bounce so far. Most trackers use three days of samples, so tomorrow will drop out the final pre-debate day and add in a third post-debate day. Gallup uses a seven day sample, so its results are a lot harder to read. It’s also important to note that Obama has now regained the lead in the national poll average — his lead is 0.9%.

But it’s not the national polls that are worth talking about much today, it’s the state polls. We got a whopping 12 new swing state polls today and taken as a whole, they represent the best batch of state polls we’ve seen for Obama in weeks. Of the 11 polls where we can compare trends to previous polls, Obama gained in seven of them, Romney in two, and two were unchanged. Colorado, Florida, and Virginia, all of which looked to be leaning to Romney last week, now seem to be much murkier. Obama has actually taken the lead now in the polling averages of all three states (CO: O +1.9%; VA: O +0.6%; FL: O +0.9%). Even the North Carolina poll today showed movement back to Obama. I remain bearish on the prospects of Obama winning NC, but the early voting numbers there coupled with the fact that they have increased ad spending there, seems to indicate that the campaign still believes it has a chance to win it.

But beyond the apparent gains in CO, VA, and FL, the most important thing here is the continued strength of Obama’s firewall states — Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Iowa. The new Wisconsin, Iowa, and Nevada polls today all showed Obama adding to his leads, and yesterday’s TIME poll of Ohio showed him up 5% there. The polling averages have him up by 2.6% in Ohio, 1.2% in Iowa, 3.6% in Nevada, and 2.8% in Wisconsin.

When we look at the electoral college map, Obama is starting to form a solid base at 281 (that would involve him winning OH, WI, IA, and NV). Today’s positive polling puts Virginia, Florida, and Colorado into the toss-up categories, with North Carolina continuing to lean to Romney. The electoral math here becomes very difficult for Romney because he still has to find a way to break that Obama firewall — either turning Ohio or Wisconsin — if he has any real shot at getting to 270.

So while we remain in a virtual tie in the national race, Obama seems to be fortifying his positions in the key swing states and remains in a very advantageous position in the electoral college.

It’s pretty clear right now that the momentum in this election is with Obama. For the two weeks that followed the first debate, it was obvious that Romney had all the momentum. The polls showed it, the tone of the campaigns showed it, the media coverage showed it. Sure, Obama supporters tried their best to point to a daily tracking poll here or a state poll there that gave them hope that the momentum wasn’t with Romney, but it was. You could feel it. Right now, you get that same feeling. Sure, Romney supporters can point to the ABC/Washington Post daily tracker and ignore everything else, but the polling, along with the tones of the campaigns, the Mourdock situation, etc. all lend to a feeling that momentum is now back with Obama. Whichever side is pointing to one poll while ignoring 15 others is the side that doesn’t have the momentum.

18 Responses to Thursday Swing State Polls Analysis: FL, VA, WI, IA, NC, NV, CO, National

Grant says:

October 25, 2012 at 9:41 PM

I’m interested to see if this mini Obama bounce holds, or if it just fades away in a day or two, leaving us back to where we were at a few days ago — everywhere close. I agree though that the Ohio issue is a key one for Romney. I don’t see him winning without OH.

Reply
- willia451 says:
  
  October 26, 2012 at 5:51 AM
  
  Nice post Grant. I’m interested in the same thing. My gut tells me that it WILL hold. But……..I’ve been wrong before. I thought we would already be back to pre-debate #1 numbers by now. And…..I was wrong. Maybe its just going to take a little longer than I expected. We’ll see.
  
  I also agree with you about Ohio (along with, well…..everyone else). Romney can’t just let the current numbers coming out of Ohio stand. Without Ohio, his chances of winning this election are almost zero. I have no idea what he can do at this point. But, again. We’ll see.
  
  Reply
Nods says:

October 25, 2012 at 9:43 PM

GREAT numbers today. I particularly like the Colorado numbers and the Virginia ones. I was starting to think CO was a lost cause for Obama but clearly not. With Nevada more or less in the bag for Obama, all he needs is Ohio and Wisconsin OR Colorado (doesn’t even need both of them).

Reply
- Paul says:
  
  October 25, 2012 at 9:44 PM
  
  I think that’s a good point, if Nevada and Ohio are looking good for Obama, he doesn’t even need both Wisconsin and Colorado, just one. Or Virginia. He has so many paths to 270 and so much room for error it’s pretty amazing, especially compared to Romney who basically has to almost all the swing states.
  
  Reply
Mr. Ballistik says:

October 26, 2012 at 12:42 AM

I’m practically more interested in the aftermath at this point. If Romney loses, does this effect the polarity of the Republican party? Does he get labeled as someone who wasn’t conservative enough?

If he wins, does this somehow give pull to moderate Republicans like Jeb Bush, Bloomberg, etc?

Reply
- willia451 says:
  
  October 26, 2012 at 5:35 AM
  
  I have your answers I think:
  
  If Romney loses, does this effect the polarity of the Republican party?
  
  No. They have already purged almost all the moderates anyway. A Romney loss just means there will be one less moderate.
  
  If he wins, does this somehow give pull to moderate Republicans like Jeb Bush, Bloomberg, etc?
  
  Well, first, Bloomberg is officially an Independent. Not a Republican. But whatever. He also used to be a Democrat. So who knows? Obviously even HE does not know what he is. So your confusion is to be expected. And Jeb? Unfortunately for him, the Bush name is forever tainted by the 2007\2008 financial collapse. That’s how President Obama won in 2008. By labeling McCain as Bush III.
  
  No. If the Republicans are going to try to tack back to the center if Romney does win, probably going to have to home grow some NEW moderates. And with the extreme right wing of their party currently in control, good luck with that.
  
  Reply
coby says:

October 26, 2012 at 1:53 AM

yeah north carolina is a mirage, because even paul begallia and his super-pac pulled out and said yesterday Romney is going to win the state and we will focus elsewhere, and Obama has a problem though, as that big advantage he had with women last month is now gone and in ap/gfk poll it is tied at 48, so Romney has made up that gender gap

Reply
- willia451 says:
  
  October 26, 2012 at 5:17 AM
  
  http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/gender-gap-near-historic-highs/
  
  Really?
  
  Reply
Cbear says:

October 26, 2012 at 2:07 AM

In the past some of these polls have oversampled democrats. Romney also has a slightly bigger lead in the Gallup among likely voters as compared to registered ones.

I think the polls are what you make of them, but I don’t believe the President has turned the tide of this race.

Reply
- willia451 says:
  
  October 26, 2012 at 5:15 AM
  
  Which polls are oversampling Democrats? Can you please cite the source of your information?
  
  Reply
  - Cbear says:
    
    October 26, 2012 at 6:48 AM
    
    I’d be happy to point out which polls oversample democrats in a few of these polls listed.
    
    PPP Virginia- 38% Dem / 34% Rep
    PPP Iowa/Wisconsin – 37% Dem / 34% Rep
    Gravis Florida – 43% Dem / 35% Rep
    PPP N. Carolina – 44% Dem / 35% Rep
    NBC/ Marist Nevada – 39% Dem / 33% Rep
    PPP National – 41% Dem / 36% Rep
    ABC National – 34% Dem / 30% Rep
    
    There are a couple of others on the list that have Democrats by a 1% plus difference in the sampling. Those are more or less even.
    
    The fact that the President is barely ahead even in the polls that are democrat friendly is pretty significant.
    
    Reply
    - Cbear says:
      
      October 26, 2012 at 6:49 AM
      
      The info can be gathered on the various pages explaining their methods.
      
      Reply
    - willia451 says:
      
      October 26, 2012 at 1:58 PM
      
      Wow. I wonder why some of them do that? Seems unfair. You would think they would ask an equal number of each. Right?
      
      Now wait a minute, here. If there actually *ARE* more people that say they are Democrats than Republicans in a given polling location; say, like in a state. Or even in the country, wouldn’t you *WANT* to poll more Democrats than Republicans in that location? Then just fill up the rest with Independents?
      
      Wouldn’t doing that give you a more accurate result set?
      
      Hmmmm. I wonder.
      
      What do you think?
      
      Reply
    - Paul says:
      
      October 26, 2012 at 2:01 PM
      
      Cbear, it seems you have not researched much electoral science or how polling methodology works. I’m not going to explain a college course worth of material here, but I will explain you some basics.
      
      * There are more registered Democrats in America than Republicans. You can verify this easily by looking up states which reveal their party ID breakdown of registered voters.
      
      * There are especially more registered Democrats than Republicans in most swing states. The only swing states where the Democrat/Republican registration is close to similar is in Colorado and Florida. In all other swing states, Democrats have a 2-10% registration advantage. So showing more Democrats in a poll than Republicans is not “oversampling Democrats,” it’s showing an electorate that represents the reality of a state’s registered voters.
      
      * Just to give you a few examples:
      
      - In 2008, the OHIO party breakdown of the final vote was: 39% Democrats, 31% Republicans, and 30% Independents.
      
      - In 2008, the VIRGINIA party breakdown of the final vote was: 39% Democrats, 33% Republicans, and 27% Independents.
      
      - In 2008, the NEVADA party breakdown of the final vote was: 38% Democrats, 30% Republicans, and 32% Independents.
      
      The list goes on and on. You can verify this yourself if you want by simply looking at the final results of the 2008 race.
      
      Now you may be saying, well, 2008 was a favorable year for Democrats. That may be true. But all voter registration data this year shows that Democrats have registered more new voters than Republicans in the key swing states, and continue to hold sizable registration advantages in states like Ohio. You can say that you think a lot of these registered voters won’t turn out to vote, but to say a poll “oversampled Democrats” is a very silly, elementary view of things.
      
      * Polls do not “oversample” anybody. Any good pollster does not weight party ID, party ID is a fluid variable that is determined by the outcome of the poll, not by what the pollster decides ahead of time. The only pollsters that weight party ID (main one being Rasmussen) are considered low quality pollsters for that main reason (and others, such as they don’t poll cell phones). So the notion that a poll goes in with an agenda to “oversample” one group or another is really silly. Polling is a scientific methodology. If you’re really interested in learning how a poll comes to whatever party ID breakdown they end up getting, research polling methodology. It has nothing to do with the pollster, it has to do with what data their surveys find in the field.
      
      Reply
    - Nods says:
      
      October 26, 2012 at 2:06 PM
      
      LOL, Cbear with the most unintentionally funny post of the year. Dude, do you really think registered Democrats and Republicans are evenly split in every state? There are more registered Democrats than Republicans nationally and in most swing states. Google it.
      
      Reply
Harper says:

October 26, 2012 at 7:21 AM

I wonder how important a deceisive victory margin for Obama would be. A close election would certainly rile up the conservative spin doctors like Dick Morris and make Obama’s next term even harder.
All despite the fact that their own last president won by rather narrow margins, even losing the popular vote in the 2000 election.

Reply
- James says:
  
  October 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM
  
  You think a close victory would drive the right insane? What if Obama wins the electoral college, but loses the popular vote. Heads would explode.
  
  And I think that’s what’s going to happen. The right has been trying to come up with reasons to make Obama illegitimate for years, and this would be their most concrete reasoning to date.
  
  Should make for some funny YouTube videos juxtaposing what they say about Obama to what they said in 2000 about Bush when the same thing happened.
  
  Hopefully, if this happens to a republican we’ll finally have a serious conversation about doing away with the outdated and absurd electoral college.
  
  Reply
  - Anonymous says:
    
    October 27, 2012 at 2:19 PM
    
    “You think a close victory would drive the right insane? What if Obama wins the electoral college, but loses the popular vote. Heads would explode.”
    
    This. The GOP would be frothing at the mouth the day after the election. Every news channel would have some Republican bellowing about voter fraud, and it would probably go on for days, if not weeks.
    
    Reply