NM: Public Policy Polling: Obama's lead down to 4-5 points

[King]

New Mexico is just flirting Romney isn't winning or really coming close.

[Alcon]

I think we're reading a bit too much into one (anomalous-seeming) poll just because it's new

[argentarius]

I'm very skeptical of this poll, like all PPP numbers. Rasmussen does this trick too, release republican leaning polls for a while and then they hit us with a few democratic polls. I'm keeping NM as safe Obama.

[Lief 🗽]

I think we're reading a bit too much into one (anomalous-seeming) poll just because it's new

The Atlas forum over-reacting to a single outlier poll? Nah, that would never happen.

[Minnesota Mike]

Follow the money. Neither campaign is advertising in New Mexico so they must not feel it is in play.

[Reds4]

I'm a Republican and even I would say there's no way New Mexico is this close right now... strange poll from PPP... They want us to believe New Mexico is closer than Colorado?

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

No way Romney is winning 21% of Dems.

Yeah, that's just bizarre. I don't buy it.

It matches well with a tightening seen in other states, including New Hampshire.

Don't compare Ohio to New Mexico.  This is an outlier and you know it.  Every other poll has shown Obama with a huge lead in NM and a gigantic lead among Hispanics.  All the sudden it's one of the closest in the country?  No... and I'd have the same reaction to a poll that showed Obama within 5 in Tennessee or Kentucky. 

Jesus christ can anyone actually provide any real insight on these boards or must we all only post what we want to be true?  

[tmthforu94]

Obama won New Mexico by 15 in 2008. Among the voters in this poll, he won by only 8. So he's really winning New Mexico by 11 or 12.

Do you not understand the concept of different turnout?

Do the math. 5 + 7 = 12.

The 2012 electorate will certainly be more favorable to the GOP than 2008, so it'd make sense that Obama's 2008 numbers are a bit lower.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Obama won New Mexico by 15 in 2008. Among the voters in this poll, he won by only 8. So he's really winning New Mexico by 11 or 12.

Do you not understand the concept of different turnout?

Do the math. 5 + 7 = 12.

The 2012 electorate will certainly be more favorable to the GOP than 2008, so it'd make sense that Obama's 2008 numbers are a bit lower.

Yeah, but I'm doubting a difference of seven points.

[pepper11]

I also can't believe that NM is a true swing state. I think Romney would be well past 300 if he won it.  But interestingly Paul Begala listed the big 4 plus Iowa and NM as the deciders. Maybe he misstoke and meant Nevada.

[MorningInAmerica]

I'm not speaking at all for the veracity of PPP's polls (I personally think they skew too Democratic), but I see nothing bizarre with the actual result in this one. Sure, Romney's taking too many Democrats, and Obama probably hasn't dropped as much with hispanics as crosstabs indicate, but most polls have pretty weird looking crosstabs somewhere. Bottom line is New Mexico was actually carried by Bush by 1 point in 2004, lost by Bush in 2000 by .06%, and won by Obama by 15 in 2008. What's so hard to believe about a 49-44% result in New Mexico given electoral history, putting aside PPP's crosstabs?

[Gustaf]

People still haven't understood why you can't analyze cross-tabs like that?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

People still haven't understood why you can't analyze cross-tabs like that?

It is like people have made sure to forget everything from past elections and polling experiences, isn't it?

You can consider them, but you can't take them for the gospel because the sub-sample is smaller and thus less accurate.