TX-Pres: Romney up 20

[krazen1211]

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/2012-elections/uttt-poll-runoff-prospects-loom-us-senate-races/


Romney: 55
Obama: 35



GOP Senate candidate up 21 as well.

[Tender Branson]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

[Tender Branson]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

What's even more significant about Romney's 20 pt lead is the fact that McCain only carried Texas by 11 points in 2008. D/R/I of sample is 31/33/28 (R+2). The D/R/I in Texas in '08 was 33/34/33 (R+1). The partisan sample seems fair, if not slightly overly favorable to Dems.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/documents/UT-TT-201205-Survey-Day1.pdf

That sample is of RV though. The release does not says what the LV sample is (probably much more Republican if the lead jumps from 8 to 20 points.

So, Obama does actually 3 points better than in 2008 with almost the same sample.

[krazen1211]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

What's even more significant about Romney's 20 pt lead is the fact that McCain only carried Texas by 11 points in 2008. D/R/I of sample is 31/33/28 (R+2). The D/R/I in Texas in '08 was 33/34/33 (R+1). The partisan sample seems fair, if not slightly overly favorable to Dems.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/documents/UT-TT-201205-Survey-Day1.pdf

That sample is of RV though. The release does not says what the LV sample is (probably much more Republican if the lead jumps from 8 to 20 points.

So, Obama does actually 3 points better than in 2008 with almost the same sample.

It's not almost the same sample. Obama lost by 11 in 2008 among actual (read: likely) voters, not registered voters. We don't know how much Obama lost in 2008 among registered voters.

But the poll was run by Yougov, which is of course a topnotch pollster.

[MaxQue]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

So? Internet polling is more and more reliable.

[Dereich]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

So? Internet polling is more and more reliable.

Indeed. Zogby internet polls are, after all, the golden standard to which all polling firms aspire.

[pbrower2a]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

So? Internet polling is more and more reliable.

Getting more reliable isn't good enough.

Internet polls have one severe fault: that they fail to find people not on the Internet. Today that would heavily be the old, legally-blind, and the poor. Furthermore they can effectively screen out people who might not fit the chosen pattern.-  I do not use them under any circumstances.

The most worthless ones are interactive polls -- those in which people volunteer to supply information. There is no control on people being polled multiple times or ineligible people (those under 18 on Election Day).

[MaxQue]

That's likely voters though, among registered voters it's only:

46-38 Romney

And, it's an Internet poll.

So? Internet polling is more and more reliable.

Getting more reliable isn't good enough.

Internet polls have one severe fault: that they fail to find people not on the Internet. Today that would heavily be the old, legally-blind, and the poor. Furthermore they can effectively screen out people who might not fit the chosen pattern.-  I do not use them under any circumstances.

The most worthless ones are interactive polls -- those in which people volunteer to supply information. There is no control on people being polled multiple times or ineligible people (those under 18 on Election Day).

Phone polls have one sever fault: that they fail to find people which have no phones.

[Kevin]

Romney is going to win Texas and he is going to win it big enough said!

[Alcon]

How the hell do you manage to have a poll with +8 among RV and +20 among LV?  How many people are they removing from their LV screen to over double a lead?  Does anyone else think this seems insane?

[mondale84]

Romney isn't winning Texas by 20.

[Tender Branson]

Likely voter polls are useless in the next 3 months.

Let's check back in for that after the conventions and focus on registered voter polls in the meantime.

[Eraserhead]

This thread is just scary. Moving on...

[krazen1211]

How the hell do you manage to have a poll with +8 among RV and +20 among LV?  How many people are they removing from their LV screen to over double a lead?  Does anyone else think this seems insane?

Not insane, no. Rather, the respondents to such poll indicated that they were not likely to vote.

Dozens of Republicans frequently win Texas by 20 of course.

[Fuzzybigfoot]

Posting internet polls=spam.

[BaldEagle1991]

Romney isn't winning Texas by 20.

That's true. Not when you have Hispanics and big metroplexes in there. It's as Republican much like how Michigan is Democratic.

[Alcon]

How the hell do you manage to have a poll with +8 among RV and +20 among LV?  How many people are they removing from their LV screen to over double a lead?  Does anyone else think this seems insane?

Not insane, no. Rather, the respondents to such poll indicated that they were not likely to vote.

Dozens of Republicans frequently win Texas by 20 of course.

Actually, that's not as strange as I originally thought.  I forget that I come from a state with unusually high turnout of registered voters.  Texas had 67% turnout among registered voters in 2004.  That could account for a 12-point swing, although still must mean both a hell of a lot of registered voters failing the screen, and a definite political tilt for them.