The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Key:

GOP wins by 10% or more
GOP wins 5-9%
GOP wins up to 5%
tossup
Obama wins up to 5%
Obama wins 5-9%
Obama wins 10% or more

See? The system works. Even if I split the "not sure" 50/50 (which may be charitable for Obama), WV is on the line between "medium" and "hard". In the event of a tossup between such categories I use the 2008 vote to decide -- and it decides that Obama would lose by at least 10% in West Virginia. 

Now that I think of it, that criterion allows me to distinguish Nebraska as a likely win for the GOP nominee and Colorado as a likely win, however marginal, for Obama.

I fixed it, gave Colorado 10 electoral votes. 

With an approval rating that Obama has in CO, I would clearly make Colorado as tossup or even 5% for the GOP.  His popularity is not going to last forever in CO.  Another reason is people are already getting sick of the democrat governor that we have and his job approval.

Since when did Colorado have 10 EVs? If you mean in 2012, I'm not sure it will gain any then.

That is for 2012, Colorado should have 10 electroal votes by then or maybe 11, who knows for sure.

LOL. Colorado will likely remain at 9 EVs.
And even if it doesn't, your fix changes NONE of the other states? That's not correct. Your map now has 539 EVs.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Who and how did someone get 3%?!

I can understand twenty-somethings....but under 20% seems really hard to believe.

It has already been said that it was a typo...

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

             
deep red                 Obama 10% margin or greater 136
medium red           Obama, 5-9.9% margin   88
pale red                  Obama, margin under 5% 63
white                       too close to call (margin 1% or less) 0
yellow                     close, but Obama wins against any major Republican candidate  11
orange                    close, but Obama loses against any major Republican candidate 3
dark green             Obama wins against all but  Romney 21
dark yellow            Obama ties one candidate, but defeats everyone else  35
lime green              close, but Obama wins against someone other than Romney 69
pale blue                 Republican  under 5% 12
medium blue          Republican  5-9.9% margin 0
deep blue                Republican over 10%  18  
grey                          No polling yet  82

Fixed.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

             
deep red                 Obama 10% margin or greater 136
medium red           Obama, 5-9.9% margin   88
pale red                  Obama, margin under 5% 63
white                       too close to call (margin 1% or less) 0
yellow                     close, but Obama wins against any major Republican candidate  11
orange                    close, but Obama loses against any major Republican candidate 3
dark green             Obama wins against all but  Romney 21
dark yellow            Obama ties one candidate, but defeats everyone else  35
lime green              close, but Obama wins against someone other than Romney 69
pale blue                 Republican  under 5% 12
medium blue          Republican  5-9.9% margin 0
deep blue                Republican over 10%  18  
grey                          No polling yet  82

Fixed.

             
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater 122
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  113
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 83
white                        too close to call (margin 1% or less) 0
yellow                        close, but Obama wins against any major Republican candidate  11
orange                        close, but Obama loses against any major Republican candidate 3
Obama wins against all but  Romney 23
Obama ties one candidate, but defeats everyone else  35
close, but Obama wins against someone other than Romney 87
pale blue                  Republican  under 5% 12
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin 3
deep blue                 Republican over 10%  18 

*Ahem*

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Obama at 41%!!!

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

ARG? Seriously?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I drink my OJ and JJ every morning for breakfast.

Too much information, Politico.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Does Rasmussen still have a R+4 sample?

It really makes no difference, since we are looking at changes in the same poll across time.  Any bias will be in a "good" Obama sample verses a "bad" Obama sample. 

IIRC, their September sample is R+4 while their previous samples were reasonable.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

^^lol

Anyway, your election rules already say that Romney has lost, so I don't know why we even need this thread anymore.

The corollary to J. J.'s First Rule is:  Never trust just one poll.  Trust several and remember that the electorate changes its mind quickly.

I'm looking at trending.

Oh so the rule doesn't count if the candidate you support says he doesn't look at/trust the polls. Gotcha.

Well, by using the standard you used yesterday, Romney just won. 

J. J., your first rule of elections is that if a candidate and his campaign talk about not paying attention to the polls, then that candidate will lose.  The Romney campaign released a press release saying not to worry about the latest polls--not one poll, not two specific polls, all of the polls.  It then went on detail while polls are not accurate or useful or mean that an election is over.

If Obama had released as statement saying this, what would your response be?

Not just the campaign, Mitt Romney himself:

Related:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hey J. J.!

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

^^lol

Anyway, your election rules already say that Romney has lost, so I don't know why we even need this thread anymore.

The corollary to J. J.'s First Rule is:  Never trust just one poll.  Trust several and remember that the electorate changes its mind quickly.

I'm looking at trending.

Oh so the rule doesn't count if the candidate you support says he doesn't look at/trust the polls. Gotcha.

Well, by using the standard you used yesterday, Romney just won.  

J. J., your first rule of elections is that if a candidate and his campaign talk about not paying attention to the polls, then that candidate will lose.  The Romney campaign released a press release saying not to worry about the latest polls--not one poll, not two specific polls, all of the polls.  It then went on detail while polls are not accurate or useful or mean that an election is over.

If Obama had released as statement saying this, what would your response be?

Not just the campaign, Mitt Romney himself:

Related:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hey J. J.!

Well, first of all, Romney is looking at the polls.  Secondly, he is noting that they do change over time.  It doesn't violate the rule, at all.  Sorry if you can't understand that.  

He's not looking at the polls in Virginia and Ohio -- and whoever wins Virginia and Ohio wins the election.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

^^lol

Anyway, your election rules already say that Romney has lost, so I don't know why we even need this thread anymore.

The corollary to J. J.'s First Rule is:  Never trust just one poll.  Trust several and remember that the electorate changes its mind quickly.

I'm looking at trending.

Oh so the rule doesn't count if the candidate you support says he doesn't look at/trust the polls. Gotcha.

Well, by using the standard you used yesterday, Romney just won. 

J. J., your first rule of elections is that if a candidate and his campaign talk about not paying attention to the polls, then that candidate will lose.  The Romney campaign released a press release saying not to worry about the latest polls--not one poll, not two specific polls, all of the polls.  It then went on detail while polls are not accurate or useful or mean that an election is over.

If Obama had released as statement saying this, what would your response be?

Not just the campaign, Mitt Romney himself:

Related:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hey J. J.!

Well, first of all, Romney is looking at the polls.  Secondly, he is noting that they do change over time.  It doesn't violate the rule, at all.  Sorry if you can't understand that. 

He's not looking at the polls in Virginia and Ohio -- and whoever wins Virginia and Ohio wins the election.

Your statement is wrong on both levels.  First the polling in OH and VA is close; both are on my tossup list.  Second, I did come up with a few scenarios where Obama wins both, but loses the election.

Here is one:

It is not pretty, but it produces 270 EV's.

That's not just not a likely map, it's not a possible map.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Your statement is wrong on both levels.  First the polling in OH and VA is close; both are on my tossup list.  Second, I did come up with a few scenarios where Obama wins both, but loses the election.

Here is one:

It is not pretty, but it produces 270 EV's.

That's not just not a likely map, it's not a possible map.

Yeah, there's no way with the current polling that if Obama gets Ohio and Virginia that he doesn't also get at least one of the other swing states.

Today, Obama's lead increased in VA, according to the WP.  Romney pulled into the lead in CO, according to Rasmussen.

I could very easily see something along those lines happening.

Yes. The kind of voters that desert Romney in Virginia and Ohio are definitely going to stay with him in Colorado, Iowa, Florida, etc.

Note that I didn't put MI in the Romney column, but that remains a possibility. 

His numbers have improved, even within the same poll, there.

Which poll are you talking about, specifically?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Which poll are you talking about, specifically?

PPP.  In July, Obama had a 14 point lead; two weeks ago, it was down to 7.  Some of the lesser ones, newspapers, local pollsters, are putting it closer. Only EPIC has shown an increase off of a 3 point lead.

A 7-point lead doesn't make Michigan a "possibility" for Romney. And considering Michigan-only-pollsters' ludicrous bias, you can't count FMW's latest nonsense.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

The new Pew poll looks likely to push Obama over the 50% approval barrier at RCP.

It hasn't because they're hacks...

Or maybe it's because Pew is at best a mediocre pollster.