New polling shows Republicans will have a turnout edge.

If you're a poll junkie and rooting for Romney, you're going to love this article. Democrats had about a 7-8 point turnout advantage in 2008. Most current polls are skewed with similar turnout predictions—or something slightly narrower. But some new polling data is showing republicans with an actual turnout advantage this year. Yes, you heard right. Not just a lower margin, but an actual edge. Add to that the fact that Romney now has a bigger advantage among independents than Obama did over McCain, and we have quite a reversal shaping.

If you know anything about polls, then you'll realize this is a very big deal. Rasmussen nailed the turnout model in 2008 just about dead on. No one else did to my knowledge. Now both it and Gallup are showing a republican advantage by about 2 points. If this indeeds is what happens on election day, as the article points out, we could see Romney sweep Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, and possibly even some blue states such as Michigan or Minnesota.

Check out the article.

The Two Polls That Have Chicago Terrified

For all of the polls that are flying out almost hourly now, there are two common trends emerging: Mitt Romney is leading independents by healthy margins, and who holds the overall lead is entirely dependent on the party split within the sample. As of last night, Romney has a razor thin lead of eight tenths of a point nationally against an average Democratic partisan advantage of 4.4 points. In 2008, Barack Obama won the election by 7.2 points (52.9–45.7) and Democrats outnumbered Republicans by eight points. Compared to the average today, Obama has dropped eight points while only losing 2.6 points of the turnout advantage. That is due entirely to Romney’s strength with independent voters, and reason enough to sound the alarm in Chicago.

But of all the polls that have been released, there are two polls that will have Team Obama waking up in a cold sweat knowing that if these polls are even somewhat accurate they might be on the other end of a dramatic victory on Election Day: The party-affiliation polls from Gallup and Rasmussen.

Gallup released a demographic poll of likely voters from October 1 through October 24. The poll is of 9,424 likely voters — a large enough sample that the maximum margin of error is one point. What that means is unlike smaller national polls, this is a very comprehensive poll of the electorate that has much more reliability, especially in the subgroups, than any current national poll. The headline of the poll, “2012 U.S. Electorate Looks Like 2008,” would make Team Obama want to pick up the phone and reserve Grant Park for election-night festivities, but looking at the data inside may have them preferring to rent out a Lou Malnati’s so they could drown their sorrows in a deep-dish pizza as the results pour in.

In 2008 Gallup found the party breakdown of the electorate to be 39 percent Democrats, 29 percent Republicans, and 31 percent independents. That ten-point advantage grew to twelve points when independents were asked which party they typically leaned to, with 54 percent identifying as Democrats and 42 percent Republicans.

From that sample, Gallup has predicted Democratic turnout to be ten points higher than Republicans, and that independents would break to Obama. In 2008 Democrats did outperform Republicans by a slightly smaller margin, seven points, and independents did break to Obama by eight points. So while they might have overstated Democratic support slightly, they were able to see the underlying trend which was a huge jump from 2004, an election that was just about even.

In the current tracking poll, Gallup finds the ten-point advantage for Democrats has now turned into a one-point Republican advantage. The current party breakdown is now 35 percent Democrats, 36 percent Republicans, and 29 percent independents. And just in like 2008, that one-point advantage increases when independents are asked which party they typically lean to, with 49 percent identifying as Republicans and 46 percent Democrats. That number backs up the trends in other polling showing Romney leading among independents by large margins.

To get an idea of what this shift means, I plugged the Gallup 2008 and 2012 partisan numbers into the actual results from the 2008 election. Under Gallup’s breakdown, Obama would have won in 2008 by 9.8 points (he actually won by 7.2), and would eke out a victory against Romney in 2012 by eight tenths of a point.

But here’s why you can feel the panic emanating from Chicago: Romney is currently doing better with independents than Obama did in 2008. Obama won independents by eight, in 2008 while Romney is currently leading by 10.6 points on average. If the independent numbers are entered in to the 2008 results, Romney would have a victory of over four points. Even if Romney does not take any more crossover votes (Democrats who vote Republican and vice versa) than McCain got in 2008, he would still win by over four points on Election Day.

While Team Obama loudly declares that Gallup has to be an outlier, there is one other poll that has been tracking party affiliation every day as well, Rasmussen. Just like Gallup, Rasmussen runs a daily tracking poll with about 1,500 respondents included in the partisan affiliation breakdown. In 2008 Rasmussen found Democrats with a 7.1 percentage point advantage in turnout, which was a perfect prediction of the Democratic turnout margin on Election Day. In September of 2012, Rasmussen has Republicans now edging Democrats by 2.6 percent, with a split of 34 percent Democrats, 37 percent Republicans, and 29 percent independents. Keep in mind that September was a brutal month for Romney between enduring Obama’s post-DNC bounce, the 47 percent video, and the media reaction to his Egypt embassy statement, meaning October, given the debates, could be even stronger than September was for the GOP.

Regardless, taking the Rasmussen partisan breakdown of 2008 and 2012 numbers and plugging them into the actual results gives Obama a seven-point win in 2008 and Romney a half-point victory in 2012. Taking the same scenario as Gallup and moving the independent results to match the current polling average changes Romney’s half-point victory into a 5.7-point victory. (As with Gallup, I’m assuming the Republican and Democrat voting margins stay the same as 2008.)

If these polls are accurate and Romney captures a popular-vote win of four to six points, there is no chance he could lose the Electoral College. In fact, that type of victory would likely yield Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, and possibly even some blue states such as Michigan or Minnesota. Overall it would be almost like 2008 in reverse, with Romney taking states many thought would be impossible a month ago.

We will find out in just over a week which pollsters end up right, but anytime you have two surveys with such comprehensive data showing the same trend it is impossible to ignore. And if you had any question as to whether or not Team Obama sees that writing on the wall, you can just watch their recent campaign activity for confirmation. A campaign with a robust, revved-up base does not sharpen attacks on core base issues like abortion, focus interviews on the Daily Show and MTV, and hold rallies almost exclusively on college campuses. There’s just over a week to go and the real battle should be for the middle. Every minute that the Obama campaign can’t make a compelling argument to the middle is a minute lost to Romney and they know it, and it has them terrified.​

 

If the O.P. is correct, this will be a Romney landslide.

 

Exactly. Even the unskewed polling average isn't based on a republican turnout majority.

 

Hmm...

Luckily for this country, Obama is leading where it matters. (Ohio)

 

Keep reading the gallup link, they burried the lede. The electorate is the same demographically, they just aren't going to be identifying themselves the same way politically after the last 4 years.

2008: D/R/I 39/31/29

2012: D/R/I 37/39/24

If that's true, it's going to be a blood bath. See you at the polls.

Also, the article in the OP is a good read. But it came out hours ago heh.

 

You don't seem to get it. If the O.P. is correct, he loses Ohio too.

 

He didn't understand what he linked either. If that gallup assessment of the electorate is correct Romney is going to win 320+ electoral votes.

If the GOP has a turnout advantage of +2 and is winning independents by 10 points on average, it's going to be brutal. I don't think the GOP has had a turnout advantage in presidential election since the 1920s.

 

See that's just it. Gallup is an outlier. You can't simply cherry pick 1 poll. I mean of course you can just don't be surprised if it doesn't turn out like you thought. Look at all the polls, and find the average.

 

The problem with the polls is they are all more or less saying the same thing on how republicans/democrats/independents are going to vote. They are just making wildly divergent assumptions on who will turn out to vote.

The reality is not that Romney is up nationally and down in Ohio. The reality is that the two major polling outlets nationally have decided that the turnout is going to be decidedly more republican than in 2008 while the polls in Ohio are based on a D+7-9 advantage in turnout.

I'm not cherry picking 1 poll. I'm looking at the two major national polling outlets. I see that they are finding the same thing, that the turnout is not going to be D+8 this year but somewhere between D+1 and R+2. Then I'm using this information to weigh the results in the swing states.

I also think the election will be much closer than Gallup is predicting. If what they are saying is true, it's going to be a blood bath.

 

But Rasmussen is also corroborating the finding. And they were just about perfect in their turnout model in 08. I believe it was a little over +7 D. All the liberal network polls were predicting 10+, but Rasmussen nailed it along with the actual election result. They also are now seeing a +2 GOP turnout model, with the vast majority of independents going to Romney. Plus you have to understand, Romney can take Ohio without an R turnout advantage. D turnout is just a little bit weaker than in 08, he'll win the presidency.

 

The counter to these turnout predictions is in the way the Republicans have totally alienated Hispanic voters, which may a significant impact in a few of the swing states. One thing I believe we can all agree on, is that this will be a very close election. Good luck on election day.

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-latino-voters-turnout-20121001,0,4468116.story

 

Yes but many of the swing states have very few minorities and the democrats has completely alienated white voters. That's why WI is in play.

 

From your link:

 

No he is not

http://www.13wmaz.com/news/topstori...io-Poll-Romney-Obama-Tied-Among-Likely-Voters

 

Plus I don't think they're under estimating them at all. There's no evidence that the underestimated them in the past. If anything I think they are overestimated to be supporting democrats. Democrats have pushed their unemployment rates sky high.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/10/26/poll-obama-leads-in-ohio.html

 

It is. It will be just like 1984, when the Leftninny Doofi Talking Heads spent the day after the Reagan Landslide wondering "who voted for Reagan? I don't know anyone who did..", completely IGNORANT of just how out of touch they are with the views of MOST AMERICANS....

 

I've been saying since January that the economy would doom Obama. It's coming.

 

Lol many conservatives have been saying that since 2008.

 

Kick ass post, Calminian! Absolutely sterling news. This will make the liberals on the forum even more desperate to needle conservatives. Just everybody sit back and laugh at them. They deserve it!

 

Since Romney's kid owns voting machines in Ohio Romney should get at least 79% of the vote. Anything greater and people might think that it was rigged.

 

don't forget the university of Colorado model:

 

Right on cue.
You couldn't be more knee jerk.