OR-SurveyUSA: Obama by only 4

[LiberalJunkie]

SurveyUsa is a solid pollster. They did a better job on Amendment 1 than PPP.

But to poll Washington state 10 points higher the same day for Obama is not realistic.

[DrScholl]

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

If Mitt Romney is losing states that are much more Republican in voting patterns, there is no way he keeps it close in Oregon. SurveyUSA is just wrong here.

[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.

[DrScholl]

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.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

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.

[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.

[Linus Van Pelt]

It is perhaps also relevant here that Portland aside, rural Oregon's economy is really in the crapper. Softwood lumber demand is dependent on new housing construction for obvious reasons, on top of the more long-term issues about the effect of IT on paper.

[pbrower2a]

The question on the Presidential primary follows a question on the Republican primary. Such is bad form., and I can't use this poll on my map.

[Vosem]

SurveyUSA is a Republican pollster. They fixed the 2003 "election" in Kentucky by putting out a press release saying their polls had already decided the "election."

This is more inane than that conspiracy theory in Venezuela that a plot to kill Chavez's brother was encoded in a crossword.

The question on the Presidential primary follows a question on the Republican primary. Such is bad form., and I can't use this poll on my map.

Why? I don't follow.

[pbrower2a]

SurveyUSA is a Republican pollster. They fixed the 2003 "election" in Kentucky by putting out a press release saying their polls had already decided the "election."

This is more inane than that conspiracy theory in Venezuela that a plot to kill Chavez's brother was encoded in a crossword.

The question on the Presidential primary follows a question on the Republican primary. Such is bad form, and I can't use this poll on my map.

Why? I don't follow.

What questions lead matter greatly. I can't imagine Democrats showing any interest in the Republican primaries in any state. This isn't quite as blatant as a push poll, but I can easily imagine a disproportionately higher number of Democrats hanging up. It is as if the poll had begun with a question on whom one supports for Governor in the Democratic primary. 

[Vosem]

SurveyUSA is a Republican pollster. They fixed the 2003 "election" in Kentucky by putting out a press release saying their polls had already decided the "election."

This is more inane than that conspiracy theory in Venezuela that a plot to kill Chavez's brother was encoded in a crossword.

The question on the Presidential primary follows a question on the Republican primary. Such is bad form, and I can't use this poll on my map.

Why? I don't follow.

What questions lead matter greatly. I can't imagine Democrats showing any interest in the Republican primaries in any state. This isn't quite as blatant as a push poll, but I can easily imagine a disproportionately higher number of Democrats hanging up. It is as if the poll had begun with a question on whom one supports for Governor in the Democratic primary. 

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.

[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.

[Mechaman]

They had me at 21% of Tea Partiers in Oregon being Democrats.

[Modernity has failed us]

lol butthurt left wingers lol

Obama will still comfortably win Oregon. It's not like Mitt actually has a shot.

[Vosem]

They had me at 21% of Tea Partiers in Oregon being Democrats.

SUSA's crosstabs have always been weird, but generally the result added up is very good.

[5280]

If Romney wins Oregon by a hair then he's won the election. That's all this guy has to say about it.

[Badger]

If Romney wins Oregon by a hair then he's won the election. That's all this guy has to say about it.

So, if a state that hasn't gone Republican in almost 30 years flips, that's a good sign Romney will win.

Keep up the stunning insights.

[pbrower2a]

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.

I haven't shown that poll for a very long time. Here is what I now show (I am averaging the PPP and Quinnipiac poll here):

under 4%  light [20% saturation]
4 - 9.99% medium [40% saturation]
10% dark [60% saturation]

Blue -- Romney leads in a current poll. Green -- McCain won in 2008 and no subsequent poll
Red -- Obama leads in a current poll.  Orange -- he won in 2008 and no subsequent poll.
White -- tie (there was no exact tie in 2008).

I am using 4% as the dividing line because that is the usual margin of error in a credible poll.

[Bacon King]

SUSA's 2008 poll linked above would actually pretty close to the final result if undecideds broke overwhelmingly for Obama. If that did happen in 2008, I wouldn't be surprised if it was also the case this time. No reason to assume this poll is inaccurate if OR undecideds do traditionally break for the Democrat, such as in states like New Jersey.

Edit- however, yeah, I agree it's pretty bad form to not lead with the Presidential question.

[krazen1211]

They had me at 21% of Tea Partiers in Oregon being Democrats.

SUSA's crosstabs have always been weird, but generally the result added up is very good.

SUSA is a superior pollster to PPP in Nate Silver's rankings. It's very funny to see the PPP fanboys dismiss them.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

The crosstabs seem a bit off. Adjust them slightly in favor of Obama and you'll have the likely result. Oregon will likely "trend" further towards Obama this year so this would be the result in a total tossup election, which is not what we're seeing at the moment.

[Badger]

They had me at 21% of Tea Partiers in Oregon being Democrats.

SUSA's crosstabs have always been weird, but generally the result added up is very good.

SUSA is a superior pollster to PPP in Nate Silver's rankings. It's very funny to see the PPP fanboys dismiss them.

So tell us how 21% of Oregon Democrats supposedly being tea party supporters makes you so trusting of SUSA here? Beyond simply liking the end result of course.

[krazen1211]

They had me at 21% of Tea Partiers in Oregon being Democrats.

SUSA's crosstabs have always been weird, but generally the result added up is very good.

SUSA is a superior pollster to PPP in Nate Silver's rankings. It's very funny to see the PPP fanboys dismiss them.

So tell us how 21% of Oregon Democrats supposedly being tea party supporters makes you so trusting of SUSA here? Beyond simply liking the end result of course.

It doesn't. Many polls have odd crosstabs but generally correct toplines. The Siena poll showing Obama +20 in New York has some odd crosstabs, but Obama +20 in New York is a perfectly valid and reasonable result.


If anything should make you trusting of SUSA it is their superior track record, as being 2nd behind Quinnipiac in average error.

[Badger]

They had me at 21% of Tea Partiers in Oregon being Democrats.

SUSA's crosstabs have always been weird, but generally the result added up is very good.

SUSA is a superior pollster to PPP in Nate Silver's rankings. It's very funny to see the PPP fanboys dismiss them.

So tell us how 21% of Oregon Democrats supposedly being tea party supporters makes you so trusting of SUSA here? Beyond simply liking the end result of course.

It doesn't. Many polls have odd crosstabs but generally correct toplines. The Siena poll showing Obama +20 in New York has some odd crosstabs, but Obama +20 in New York is a perfectly valid and reasonable result.


If anything should make you trusting of SUSA it is their superior track record, as being 2nd behind Quinnipiac in average error.

You can't necessarily judge a poll's accuraccy entirely byit's track record. Trying to his SUSA's supposedly strong record to defend the reliability of a poll claiming over a fifth of Oregon Democrats are tea party supporters is just plain wrong-headed. Sometimes even artists put out pieces of $%*t.

[5280]

Is it safe to say OR is a toss up state based on this poll?