Just interested in the democratic argument against this article

[nhmagic]

http://www.redstate.com/2012/10/26/why-i-think-obama-is-toast/

Just wondering, what you guys think of this and how you dispute it?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Who makes up the 'independent' bloc in 2012 is VERY different to 2008... look beyond the right blogosphere and it's very clear, there was a drop in GOP self-ID, which correlates with a rise in Independent self ID... there are fewer self ID'ing as GOPers, and more GOP voters within the I's than in 2008.

Which is why the whole, "OMG D+6 junk poll" is rubbish, because there can actually be a D+6, 7, 8 electorate, it just so happens there's a bloc of GOP voters in the I column...

[7,052,770]

For the 1000th time, party ID is fluid, not static.  Comparisons from year to year aren't valid.

[Adam Griffin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Many independents = Tea Party. 'Independent' does not equal 'moderate' or 'swing voter'. You will also have a growing share of Republicans calling themselves 'independents' as their party continues to drive itself further to the right.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In many ways he is right, but we do not yet know what these variables will be. Obama can still win and lose traction among whites AND see falling minority turnout, but if either are large, then he will be in trouble. There is also the wind at his back in regards to four years of more whites falling off the voter rolls and more minorities and young people coming into the process.

I did LOL at this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You really can't talk about Party ID in any other context than what people tell you they are. Someone's "adjusted" result from an exit poll isn't any more accurate than the exit poll itself. I skimmed through many of the graphs, but it doesn't shock me to see a surge of Republicans in some states: if any of these graphs identified voters by primary preference (which can change party affiliation depending on state), then 2010 would have been where the action was at and it would have been common for many voters to flip into those primaries to vote.

[nhmagic]

Who makes up the 'independent' bloc in 2012 is VERY different to 2008... look beyond the right blogosphere and it's very clear, there was a drop in GOP self-ID, which correlates with a rise in Independent self ID... there are fewer self ID'ing as GOPers, and more GOP voters within the I's than in 2008.

Which is why the whole, "OMG D+6 junk poll" is rubbish, because there can actually be a D+6, 7, 8 electorate, it just so happens there's a bloc of GOP voters in the I column...

But isn't the point that you don't know that for sure Polnut?

[Likely Voter]

basically this is yet another post saying the same thing: Non-Rasmussen polls are skewed. It's a theory that I don't believe and most polling experts dismiss. We will know for sure on election day.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Polnut's right.  There are a lot of dirks/Orion0/5280/bawlexus-types in the new bloc of Independent voters.  The Tea Party can probably take some, if not most, of the credit for that for not officially affiliating itself with any one party.  Contrary to what your friends on RedState say, we're really better off analyzing the election polls on the margins overall, not just how the Independents vote as a single group.  If I were crazy enough, I'd say that the Democrats should concede the 'Independent' vote permanently solely because of this new tend, but that wouldn't look practical.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Well nothing is for certain in elections, but the clear signs are fewer GOPers in self-ID and at the same time an increase in Indies at a similar rate... this is evidenced across a lot of places who analyse this stuff... So there's a much stronger evidence base for this, than the skewed poll theory which is based on 'it doesn't look right' and 'Obama is awful and couldn't possibly do x'...

I'll trust objective analysis over Conservative fantasy.

[DemPGH]

A lot of good points here, but as I read that he's relying a lot on Gallup and Rasmussen. Gallup especially is projecting, I think, an electorate in 2012 that looks like 1986 or so. That's not going to be the case for no other reason than that Obama's ground game is really good. Next, what is an Independent? In Pennsylvania, for example, there is Pennsylvania and then there is "Pennsyltucky": The parts of the state that align with Bachmann and Akin and people like that make up "Pennsyltucky," and those people will often call themselves "independent" because they think the Republicans spend too much. But they are FAR right. And finally, the CNN poll of Ohio that is 50-46, as per CNN's write-up, has Indies breaking 49-44 for Obama.

[Torie]

How can we be sure that the polls that use demographic models as opposed to partisan ones are not skewed?  There are a lot of assumptions going on out there. They may prove errant.

[SirMuxALot]

... there are fewer self ID'ing as GOPers, and more GOP voters within the I's than in 2008.

I keep seeing this assertion made without anything to back it up.  This would show up to some degree in differences in state registration affiliation, when comparing 2008 to 2012.  I have yet to see any references that back this claim up.  The handful of state-level registration data I've seen is R registration is well up over 2008, and Ind is flat to slightly down.

In fact, Gallup's 2012 polling on this (done Oct 1-24) shows a distinctly opposite trend - R is up 7 points over 2008, and I is down 2 points over 2008.