OR-SurveyUSA: Obama by only 4

[tpfkaw]

Rasmussen's tracker has Romney up by 7, and if we factor in a 3.9-point house effect as determined by Nate Silver (and I think Rassy has partially fixed their model since 2010), this result would still be consistent with Romney up by 3 nationally.

[tpfkaw]

Rasmussen's tracker has Romney up by 7, and if we factor in a 3.9-point house effect as determined by Nate Silver (and I think Rassy has partially fixed their model since 2010), this result would still be consistent with Romney up by 3 nationally.

Yes, but all other polls have Obama winning nationwide.

All other polls weren't conducted after Obama's gay marriage announcement (which, sadly, seems to have hurt substantially).

[tpfkaw]

Rasmussen's tracker has Romney up by 7, and if we factor in a 3.9-point house effect as determined by Nate Silver (and I think Rassy has partially fixed their model since 2010), this result would still be consistent with Romney up by 3 nationally.

Yes, but all other polls have Obama winning nationwide.

All other polls weren't conducted after Obama's gay marriage announcement (which, sadly, seems to have hurt substantially).

What evidence is there for this?

EDIT: Unless I'm much mistaken there's a Rasmussen tracker, which.... no, and a Dick Morris poll, which people should be banned for posting. Not exactly a wealth of evidence, wormy.

There's also the SurveyUSA poll showing very lukewarm support for SSM in urban areas (including only about 2/3rds in San Francisco).

[tpfkaw]

Oregon is one of the last states that would have a problem with Obama's shift on marriage equality.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=41&year=2004&f=0&off=60&elect=0

Granted, that was back in 2004, and it's even possible that a narrow majority now supports it in OR.  But it's also a safe bet to say that gay marriage is less popular than the Democratic Party in Oregon (ditto for every other state, probably), and therefore Obama's shift is going to be a net negative for him there.

[tpfkaw]

Oregon is one of the last states that would have a problem with Obama's shift on marriage equality.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=41&year=2004&f=0&off=60&elect=0

Granted, that was back in 2004, and it's even possible that a narrow majority now supports it in OR.  But it's also a safe bet to say that gay marriage is less popular than the Democratic Party in Oregon (ditto for every other state, probably), and therefore Obama's shift is going to be a net negative for him there.

2004 is a lifetime ago in politics, there have been a lot of big shifts since then. Bush didn't even win the state with that result on marriage equality and it likely wasn't the reason he even got close.

This.  In 2004, people nationally were against gay marriage 60-30.  Things have changed quite a bit since then.

All I'm saying is that gay marriage is less popular than the Democratic Party, and that therefore we'd expect supporting it to hurt Obama.  That's not really a very controversial statement; it was borne out by polling even before Obama's shift and even without subtracting the 6-10 points that gay marriage always overpolls by.

[tpfkaw]

Who would be so incredibly Democratic that they were going through all the motions of answering a poll but the very thought of the evil Republican primary made them hang up? I assume a left-Democrat would just answer 'no opinion' or something and continue.

Not to mention that the only people asked about the Republican primary are Republicans, they skip to the rest of the poll with Democrats.

But you don't understand the careful criteria that Mr. Peter Brower uses for his expert polling projections.  For example, 2-year-old uni polls showing Obama leading Romney 35%-33% in Tennessee are much more representative of popular opinion than a poll like this.