-
U.S. News: Obama-Kelley Meeting
May 20, 2013 | 0 comments
-
The SPLC: Big Bucks, the FRC, and Jimmy Carter
May 7, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Mark Levin Talks to the NRA
May 7, 2013 | 0 comments
-
POLITICO: RUSH LIMBAUGH MAY PART WITH CUMULUS
May 5, 2013 | 13 comments
-
The Problematic Frank Luntz’s Stockholm Syndrome
April 25, 2013 | 11 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Just in.
The Susquehanna Poll (from the Susquehanna Polling and Research folks ) have just released their post-debate poll of Pennsylvania.
Bottom line: Romney is suddenly surging, with Obama leading by a mere two points — which is to say a “virtual dead heat.”
Concludes the poll: There is (my emphasis) “clear evidence the debates have helped solidify the Keystone State as a tossup election in November and one well within Romney’s reach.”
For those who love the weeds, here they are:
Barack Obama leads Mitt Romney in the Keystone State by 2 points (47%-45%), with 3% voting for Libertarian Candidate Gary Johnson. This close margin means the race continues to be a virtual dead heat within the survey’s +/-3.7% margin of error, particularly when compared with our last two surveys (Obama +2, on behalf of the Pittsburgh Tribune Review released 9/23, and Obama +1, on behalf of the Republican State Committee, released 9/18). Four percent of voters say they are still undecided in the current poll. When the undecided voters leaning towards a candidate are factored in (breaking 3:1 for Romney), the race narrows to a 1-point Obama lead (47-46). Plus, among those who say they have an “excellent” chance of voting (639 respondents out of 725 likely voters), Romney leads 47-46. These “excellent” voters combined with 86 respondents who say they have a “good” chance of voting make up the 725 likely voters sampled, while voters who said their chances of voting were “fair” or “poor” were disqualified from participation in the interview.
Perhaps the biggest movement in SP&R’s latest poll is the increase in Mitt Romney’s favorable image in Pennsylvania. In the current poll Romney now holds a 48% to 42% favorable to unfavorable rating (or +6 positive) — making this the first time in not only our polling but virtually any other publicly-released PA poll showing the GOP challenger with a largely positive image. For instance, prior to the current poll Romney’s average favorable image in numerous statewide polls conducted by our firm from June through September was 39%, while his average unfavorable rating was 43%. So the current poll represents a 9-point jump in his positive image to the point where Romney now enjoys an even better positive image than the incumbent President, who now has a 50% favorable to 47% unfavorable rating (or only +3 positive). Plus, 76% of voters said they watched the first televised debate, with a net 2% saying they switched their vote from Obama to Romney based on what they saw. This switch, plus the increase in favorable ratings for the GOP nominee is clear evidence the debates have helped solidify the Keystone State as a tossup election in November and one well within Romney’s reach.
mike 3/505| 10.8.12 @ 5:01PM
Entirely predictable...the debate was the first ime voters were able to see for themselves the difference in sheer competence, between President Obama and Governor Romney. They were able to see the difference between a Liberal Arts-Studies graduate with experience as a Community Organizer and Businessman with successfful experience in bothe the private and public sectors...a real executive, not a pretender.
mike 3/505| 10.8.12 @ 5:01PM
Edit Button Please.
RCV| 10.8.12 @ 5:29PM
I thought all the polls were cooked?
The latest Rasmussen poll suggests the glow from Mitt's debate win is fading fast. Romney was up by two in yesterday's Rasmussen poll, but today it's back down to a tie. Voters may be actually looking at the facts behind Romney's bouquet of lies that he presented so slickly during the debate.
Quartermaster| 10.8.12 @ 6:55PM
A "bounce" of 2 points is still within the margin of error and still a dead heat.
Mind detailing the "lies" he supposedly told?
RCV| 10.8.12 @ 7:42PM
He denied making the tax cut promises he's made all summer. And the claim that he could lower tax rates and not increase the deficit are plain falsehoods - especially given his promise of further increases in military spending. Patent lies.
mike 3/505| 10.8.12 @ 9:54PM
No he didn't.
CJW| 10.8.12 @ 10:21PM
If you lower the rates, cut expenses, but increase the military budget if necessary, and get rid of obamacare, that will spur the economy. With more people working there will be a rise in tax collected.
It happened under Reagan and GWB. You know it is not a lie. When you charge someone is lying because of his future economc projections, then you are desperate.
A lie is when Obama says he will cut the deficit but then increases it by 6 trillion. Now that is a lie of monumental proportions.
chescoliberty| 10.9.12 @ 8:21AM
Never met a lib who ever understood how economic growth works (also never met a lib accountant) - rates rates and tax revenues are often in an inverse relationship (Laffer Curve). It is tax revenues that need to grow. If you increase taxes on anybody, you will seize growth and end up with less revenues. Romney, of course, is dead on in his approach. Corp taxes rates must drop, capital gains taxes cannot take a hit - class warfare appeals to the ignorant masses but fails in practice whenever it is applied!
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 11:02AM
The Laffer curve! Even Reagan came to understand what malarkey it was according to his economic aides.
chescoliberty| 10.9.12 @ 12:19PM
Clearly you're a Keynesian academic with absolutely no actually business management experience. Amazing what enlightenment comes with actually having to make decisions based on real debits/credits, P & L's and tax returns.
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 11:46PM
Sorry. I served for years on the management committee of my international law firm, which employs several thousand people in three states and four countries.
CJW| 10.10.12 @ 7:17AM
What is the name of the firm.
PageOneDaily | 10.8.12 @ 5:46PM
I checked this poll: it is skewed 48% Democrat, 42% Republican, 10% Independent - obviously not based on reality. If you remove the skew, Romney is indeed surging ahead in Pennsylvania (and elsewhere) - much more than many people realize.
RCV| 10.8.12 @ 5:57PM
You're right it's skewered - in favor of Republicans. The last figures I saw showed that Democrats have a 51-37 % registration edge in Pennslvania.
darcy| 10.8.12 @ 6:18PM
What were the figures related to voter enthusiasm in PA? You, RCV, probably also have those numbers at your fingertips, n'cest pas? And what about the Independent voters of PA? Where do they stand in the upcoming election? The number of Democrats in PA who have had it with the jobless "recovery"? The number of Catholic Democrats in PA whose exercise of religion is in jeopardy over the "birth-control" mandate? Is that number factored into your equation? Registered Democrats who have had it with Obama and his statist-jobless agenda? Especially in western PA? Looks to me like your comment reflects a rather shallow understanding of the political landscape in PA.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 10.8.12 @ 6:45PM
I believe these are the same voters of whom Obama provided the description of ones bitterly clinging to their guns and religion, with an antipathy towards those not like them (and that was before he further trashed the economy).
RCV| 10.8.12 @ 7:40PM
No, Darcy, I was responding to the claim that the poll was skewered because it included too many registered Democrats. It clearly was not, and Democrats were underrepresented. As for your suppositions in how Democrats are feeling, those would be reflected in the poll results.
spike59| 10.9.12 @ 5:56AM
It clearly was not, and Democrats were underrepresented. As for your suppositions in how Democrats are feeling, those would be reflected in the poll results.
==========================
actually, it WAS; the fundamental error you are making is in assuming that there is no 'weighting' done with the responses to the polls...the model upon which ALL the pollsters base their predictions is the demographic of the 2008 electorate, which is extremely likely to be replicated-in the 18-25 yr old group, a key ObaMao demographic, turnout is expected to be down 15-25 percent...black turnout will likely be a bit lower as well, as black evangelical pastors have been advising their congregations to 'sit this one out' due to ObaMao's stances on gay marriage, abortion, and the contraception mandate on religious institutions...you also miss entirely the 'enthusiasm' factor. there are TWICE as many Americans who 'strongly' disapprove of ObaMao's performance as 'strongly' approve-these are the people who come out to vote-Republican registration nationwide has risen faster than Democrat registration, and ObaMao has completely lost the veterans and active-duty military, has lost his commanding lead among women, and is even slipping BADLY with the self-identified 'middle class'...his #'s in EVERY demographic are behind 2008...there's a wave coming
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 11:50PM
Here's a real measure of the "enthusiasm gap": in the last several months, Obama has raised more direct money for his campaign, from more donors, and has broken previous monthly fundraising records (his own). I have yet to meet a single Republican who was genuinely enthusiastic about Romney, as opposed to content with him as preferable to a Democrat.
Quartermaster| 10.8.12 @ 6:56PM
There is a goodly chunk of PA that is also coal country.
Bob K| 10.8.12 @ 6:10PM
There are 1 million more registered democrats in PA than republicans. Many of them, however, are of the Reagan Democrat persuasion.
The problem is that the current republican governor, Tom Corbett, is doing his best to piss off the republican electorate up in the northern tier counties where they are a big majority with the way he has been handling the problems caused by the development of the Marcellus Shale gas field. Roads are a mess, bridges need work, schools are overcrowded and there is a constant barrage in the media about water quality problems allegedly caused by this development.
The governor has forgotten that votes here are as important to the party as donations from the industry are. If these republicans stay home come November it will guarantee an Obama victory in PA.
darcy| 10.8.12 @ 6:23PM
I hope the voters of PA recognize that the wolf wears Republican clothing almost as often as he wears the cloak of the Democrat livery. Sniff the scoundrels out, turn them out, and show them you are wise to their fecklessness and inefficiencies and corruption, regardless of party affiliation.
Quartermaster| 10.8.12 @ 6:59PM
Sounds like normal boom conditions. Infrastructure spending normally follows, as in lags behind, the boom. Often by a lot. PA has been a liberal state and has sucked up a lot in normal moonbat programs making spending to ameliorate boom conditions difficult.
This is not an attempt to defend Corbett as I don't know the man. He may be a rascal that needs to be run out of Harrisburg on a rail (and old custom that could stand to be revived).
irish19| 10.9.12 @ 11:27AM
Don't forget the tar and feathers. Details matter.
CJW| 10.8.12 @ 10:56PM
The schools in Pa are funded mostly from local property taxes. The residents of those northern counties know that the schools are run by the local school district, not the state. The state cut its funding for all school districts last year as part of budget cuts after the disaster left by Fast Eddy Rendell.
The local roads are maintained by the counties and municipalites, unless it is a state road.
The Marcellus shale industry has produced 60,000 to 80,000 jobs, spurred the real estate markets, especially rentals and motels/hotels for the workers. The real estate market, restaurants, hotels/motels, car dealers, and others are doing well in the county I reside in thanks to the shale industry.
The municipalities and school districts are all receiving more taxes from the local income tax, and the real estate taxes transfer tax on the sale of property, and then the increase in the property tax due to the increased assessment from the sale.
I attended a seminar on the Marcellus shale industry. While there are issues on development and local control, the economic news is positive.
Those complaining about Corbett do not want any drilling, and want local control instead of state control over the legal issues and permits.
The problem is not Corbett, or the Marcellus shale industry but the 300,000 to 350,000 vote margin produced by Philadelphia by the blacks and Jews that vote over 90% for Dems.
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 12:07AM
It's the fault of those Joos and Darkies, is it?
CJW| 10.9.12 @ 7:08AM
No.
But that is the way your mind works, right?
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 11:03AM
"the blacks and Jews" was your reference, not mine. It's the usual groups people like you blame everything on.
CJW| 10.9.12 @ 2:46PM
I explained how the vote in Pa favors the Dems because of the voting patterns. That is a problem for Republicans. You do not challenge the voting patterns. Instead you choose to imply some we cannot describe voting patterns and you choose to use inflammatory words such as "Joos and Darkies." You sound like a typical lefty Dem race baiter trying to show your moral superioriy. I thought you were better than that.
CJW| 10.9.12 @ 2:48PM
should be "that" instead of "some" in third sentence.
chescoliberty| 10.8.12 @ 7:46PM
Absolutely true here on the ground. Chester County is traditional Republican territory, affluent by and large, and went by several points to Obama through major dem turnout. No way that will happen this time - Obama voters are defensive here. We're lucky, the county has fared much better than most of the rest of the state. Coal and fracking impact large rural portion; tea party is evident - economic and liberty issues are impt. Not an Obama sign to be seen on any property I have passed in this area. Ryan, Romney and Tagg Romney have all held rallies in the last 1 1/2 months. I believe dem registrations are down statewide. In-laws live in suburban Pgh - lots of conservative Dems there - registered dem, but have voted Rep. in the past in local and national races. Note that 2010 the state had essentially a Rep. sweep, and even Bob Casey's Senate seat is slipping away from him (aka Senator Zero.) Also note, Obama laying low, and Ed Rendell certainly quiet. Philly (home of the Black Panthers 2008 intimidation debacle) will use the machine to get their people out, but I do believe the patient, silent majority in the suburbs and rural regions will come out in large numbers. My favorite saying..."He who laughs last, laughs best." I hope to be laughing on Election Night.
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 12:11AM
You're delusional. Casey leads by 7 to 10 points in all the latest polls.
chescoliberty| 10.9.12 @ 8:32AM
Nope, sorry, don't think so - most recent October polls show him moving closer than that, including Quinnipiac. Ditto for internal polls at the State party level...Race competitiveness also upgraded on Smith's movement in national trackers. This will move with Romney - take note that the Susquehanna poll noted in this article shows Romney beating Obama...in PITTSBURGH (Allegheny County)!!! If Western PA goes Romney, do you think those voters will then choose to vote down one of their own for Senate? All things considered, I'm sticking by the last line of my initial comment.
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 11:08AM
That's just false. Go to RealClearPolitics.com and see all the recent polls for Pennsylvania. The latest has Casey up by 9 and there is no movement toward Smith. You can hope what you want to, but as Mr. Romney just said, "hope is not a policy."
chescoliberty| 10.9.12 @ 12:16PM
Geez...now which poll did I site? Quinnipiac. Go back and look at RCP, and look at that poll. Smith down 6, on a closing trend - look at poll history. Also, look at Quinnipiac's sample size of LV...between 2 and 3 times the size of the other polls. Further, look at Susquehanna's full report on the Romney/Obama polls which is the basis of this article.....Allegheny County polled Romney. Paint me a liar just as Obama employs as his latest tactic, but that only works on the uninformed.
CJW| 10.9.12 @ 3:16PM
Casey won in 2006 primarily because his father, Bob Casey, was one of the most popular governors in Pa, who had died after a heart transpant.
Casey Sr. was pro life and was barred by Bubba and Mrs. Bubba from speaking at the 92 Dem convention. Everyone thought Casey Jr. was strongly pro life like his father, but he is not, and is regaraded as an amiable lightweight.
He beat Santorum by 19 points. Santorum's pro life record did not matter against Casey, and Bush was unpopular in 2006.
This year the race is about the economy. It will be close, and if Obama continues to slide, we will have an upset.
RCV| 10.9.12 @ 11:56PM
He won in 2006 because more people preferred him than that simple-minded dolt Santorum. More people continue to prefer him to your guy, by almost 10 points. There may well be upsets on election night, but this is not likely to be one of them.
CJW| 10.10.12 @ 7:22AM
Santorum is no simple minded dolt. He won two Senate campaigns and beat a long time incumbent in his first race. You do not like his politics.
Casey jr. is regarded even by the Dems as a friendly simpleton. If his last name was not Casey he would not even be in politics, much less win.
pomdter| 10.9.12 @ 11:41AM
One key error in the poll is that they do not poll any dead people. A Penn. judge just ruled dead people can vote, too, and they are rarely covered in most polls. Given even the most staunch right winger will vote Democrat after they die, this is a bump for Obama.