Politico: Obama’s Performance Sinking Dem House Races – Warren (D-MA) Candidate – Fewer Ads In MA – Latest Warning Brown Might Turn Senate!

Final Polling before the election 1980 - note: polls were weighted for the 1976 election image GuardianUK

From Politico: headlines: “Obama's bad October hurts House Dems” suggests that the President is having a George W. Bush effect on his party’s incumbents – apparently there is a loss of confidence in Democrats in general by the public. It is entirely possible, as those casting votes (both early voting and through the election cycle) may choose not only to choose Presidential Candidate, Governor Mitt Romney, over Obama, but will also take a chance on voting against any Democrat on the ticket – similar to what happened in the 2006 and 2008 elections. If history repeats itself, and one takes a look at the 2010 election with a projection of more than less identifying themselves as either Republican or Independent leaning Republican, one can suggest that the 2012 general will look quite a bit like the house trumping of 2010 in a broader sense.

What of the polls? One has to take a strong look at any polling data at this point and basically throw the baby out with the bath water – for example, in 1981, after the landslide victory of Ronald Reagan over former President Jimmy Carter, the head of Gallup explained what had happened and why poll models showed a tight race up to the bitter end. It is suggested that the polling organizations had based their models on the last General election, which had shown an increase in those voting Democrat. That increase percentage was added to the 1980 polls, which gave several points to James Carter that simply did not exist. What was missing from the models, as it was explained by Gallup, the fact that the voter identification had taken a turn to the Republican Party in the two years prior to the 1980 General election. Thus rendering models basically useless. Understanding that models today, for the Presidency, as well as those House and Senate races, are using the 2008 statistics to project winners and losers in the 2012 General. All polls are weighted by a minimum of eight points or more in some cases.

Of course turnout will also have an effect, one cannot dispute simple math. Those identifying themselves as Republican or leaning Republican are significantly more enthusiastic about voting, and there are simply more of them. That said more individuals vote in a General election than a Mid-term, which, using the 2010 model would then skew the poll without compensating for population. The only way, at this point, would be to project using as current as possible voter identification models from each of the fifty states to get a more accurate projection. The fact that Gallup has gone to a “likely voter” model suggests that the polling firm is concerned about using the “weighted” method, as it has, along with the rest of the polling firms, been burnt before (1980 for example).

It is, however, more probable that the 2012 midterm election pattern will be more likely pattern to follow, in part, when one looks at the swing states, or any state to get at least an idea of what might be occurring on a national basis. Although one might find the media “hyping” a certain state, while others have automatically been dubbed “safe Democrat” or “safe Republican” one might want to take a look at what happened in that state during the period of 2009-2010.

Looking at Massachusetts for a moment, one finds that in 2009 special election, the polls and pundits, suggested that then candidate Martha Coakley would best Republican Scott Brown by up to 15 points. The fact that Brown won with 5 points (and the dead and missing voting), suggests that Massachusetts voters changed preference for that election. Going into the 2010 election, all house seats in Massachusetts with one exception saw Republican challengers, the general consensus from the Pundits, was an automatic “safe Democrat” with wide margins of wins projected at 75% of the vote. That was not the case how-ever, as those Democrats, many for the first time, were facing challengers who appeared to have a wind at their backs. In other words, they had to stay home, fight and use their war chests – which kept that extra cash in MA, while it was badly needed for Democrats elsewhere. The final results, although the Democrats held their seats, Massachusetts voters sent a message, as the spread was not a 75% margin, but a 2% to 10% margin.

Therefore it is not without some wonderment, that while Elizabeth Warren the Democrat now running against incumbent Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown, is polling a 5 points – looking at the marginals of some polls taken in the Bay State, the most interesting aspect is the geography – pollsters are using a sample of voters from very low population and very Democrat – Left Ideology, while the sample dismisses (10-25%) the larger populated and more right leaning Worcester County. This also artificially gives Warren a non-existent boost. The Warren Campaign has been running back to back advertisements up until last week, when those ads began to thin out a bit, while Brown’s hammering the airwaves. More over the latest ad is a “hoot” to say the least. In menacing terms, the ad suggests that should Scott Brown win in Massachusetts, he might vote with the Republican Party, and in addition, he might be the one who gives the Republicans a majority in the Senate!

Therefore, what Warren ad is saying, there is nothing essentially wrong with Scott Brown now, except he might be the Republican that takes the Senate away from the Democrats! It smacks of desperation.

The video clip of the ad appears below.

If a Democrat is having problems, regardless of inflated polls, in Massachusetts, where it is suggested that he state is hopeless for Republican’s, what one might suggest is that MA may not be automatically “Safe Democrat” for the General election. It was a state that was certainly a surprise in 1980 to both former President Carter, and President Elect Ronald Reagan.

To further add to the debate: Take Wisconsin’s, where the recent recall of Governor Scott Walker, was a blowout for the incumbent and a resounding defeat of his Democrat Challenger. It is why, at this point, the State of Wisconsin appears “up for grabs” even using the automatic 8 points for Democrats.

In Ohio, the same sample is used, as it is nationwide, therefore, the current tie in Ohio, complete with a new Republican State House and Republican Governor courtesy of the Mid-Terms, may not be an actual battleground – the actual battleground may be elsewhere, in states that are not even under consideration, and holding combined electoral votes to rival Ohio.

Of most interest is the Real Clear Politics electoral college map – take into account this is based on polling data, some overly generous toward the incumbent (specifically those university polls that over-sample low population, heavy Democrat areas, while under sampling, high population, more Republican areas, and then weight an additional 8 points on top. What one finds in the individual polls I that there has been a definitive shift in the voter preferences over that time, and even adding those polls into a combined poll method that Real Clear Politics uses, shows a growing trend towards candidate Mitt Romney. (See Map here at realclearpolticis.com - it is an interactive map, which shows the two candidates with states granted by virtue of having been heavily Democrat or Republican in 2008 – those states are automatically added (MA in the mix), then states considered solid in the polls for either candidate, those leaning towards a candidate and those listed as “toss ups”. (Using polling data, both weighted and over an extended period of time.)

Although a fan of historical data, one must consider in projections that it is best to consider historical trends as well. Understanding that there may be some explaining to do by pollsters on the Wed. following the 2012 elections.

Elizabeth Warren Ad re: Brown Vote may Give Republican's the Senate

Hurricane Sandy – Models offer Conflicting Views – Consensus Moving Towards New England and Intensified.

This morning’s models of Hurricane Sandy, now a category 2 hurricane, continue to show forecast models that vary, however, the consensus is that the storm is tracking towards New England – whether or not it will move over New York/New England or move offshore, and at what intensity if the question. Regardless of the “hype” that might surround forecasters, both national and local, it is worth paying attention to this particular storm over the next few days. The late October nor’easter which dumped a foot or more of snow on the Pioneer Valley last year is still fresh on one’s mind, and doing a little preparedness in advance might not hurt in this instance, no matter where in New England one might reside. In any instance, better safe than sorry:
Some tips:
Fill up your gas tank: in a power outage lasting several days, use of the car to charge cell phones, or warm up (in the event of a sudden drop in temperatures) helps. Stock up on batteries for flashlights, or invest in a slightly larger battery operated light generally found in sporting goods shops (or at your local supermarkets in the Northeast), a transistor radio doesn’t hurt. Stock up on extra food that does not require using a stove, include pet food to cover a few extra days. Get your favorite lawn ornaments in before a few days in advance. The worst thing that can happen is that you have a few extra supplies on in any event. Things that surprised this blogger when the power was lost last year for five days: one can’t get cash from an ATM, gas stations do run out of gas, it can take up to forty-five minutes to get a burger at a fast food restaurant, it’s a good idea to have ice on hand and a cooler to transfer some food from one’s refrigerator to prevent loss.

A few of the latest reports

Sandy much stronger than expected(Examiner.com)

NOAA.gov forecast and discussion on models(NOAA.gov)

Jim Cantore cuts vacation short reveals plans to cover Hurricane Sandy(Examiner)

Hurricane Sandy Heady for New England(Go Local Prov)

Hurricane Sandy "nightmare scenario" unfolding? Growing threat of "historic" East Coast hurricane”(Minnesota Public Radio)

Rachel Frank Fox CT

Let's Hope this Forecast for hurricane Sandy is wrong" - Discussion on comparisons to 1954 Hurricane Hazel(Wattsupwiththat.com)

Some of the above represent a bit more drama than one might consider necessary, but adage of better safe than sorry would apply – Here’s hoping that Sandy move’s offshore and tracks west rather than east.

Romney Campaign On the Move, Obama Campaign Shifts Focus in Final Two weeks – Reuters: White House Knew About Libya Attacks in Real Time

Mitt Romney - Presidential - Image: watchdog.org

In the final two weeks of the U.S. Presidential Campaign, the Romney Campaign has seen a positive shift in most battleground states, and is actively campaigning in Colorado (NBC News) (As well as taking the lead in the polls in CO), has not ”ceded Michigan” in the least (CBS News) and has increased the Campaign presence in Wisconsin(Green Bay Press Gazette). Overall Romney has taken the lead, or come into the “margin of error” in most polling nationwide. Politico has suggested that the Obama Campaign has ”shifted to an 11’th hour strategy”, having wasted months trying to paint Romney as something he clearly is not, underestimating Romney is debate performances and the numbers of viewers who had the chance to see Romney as capable and Presidential. In summary: it may be too late to recover. (Politico).

In viewing the Real Clear Politics Electoral college map, Romney stands at 206 projected electoral votes, with the President at 201, and 153 electoral college votes shown as toss-ups, (see map here). however, when looking at states considered a “lock” for each candidate, the President has a “lock” on 10 states that are considered automatically as “safe Democrat”, to Romney’s 13 states, in those that are leaning strongly towards Obama, the count is 5 for the President, and 8 for Mitt Romney. Those that “lean” towards Candidates: Obama 2, Romney, 3 States. Finally, there are the toss-ups; those include 10 states that are allegedly not leaning one way or the other at this time (two weeks before the election). The map is interesting in the fact that all polls for this contest, state by state, are included. Take Pennsylvania for example: Polls results are averaged from all sources, beginning with a public policy poll, taken in January of this year, prior to knowing which candidate might be the eventual Republican nominee - The average gives the nod to the President, with an advantage that is still within the margin of error. Also consider that the majority of polls continue to weigh the 2008 election model, (adding 8% more Democrats than normal based on the prior election) and there is a “built in skew” towards the incumbent.

Going back in to the 1980 election, where pollsters had the race tied between Carter and Ronald Reagan right up to the night of the election, startling everyone when Reagan won all but 4 states, the electoral college and popular vote by a landslide, the public and press looked for answers as to what had happened. The Polling specifically has Reagan losing to Carter in Pennsyvlaina (Reading Eagle, Nov. 2nd, 1980), however, in the end result, the polls were based on the voting trends of the previous general election, which gave Carter an advantage of more Democrats than were actually available – No one saw it coming.

If one were to take those states currently on the Real Clear Map and project based on the last several polls, allowing for an 8 percent weight (or extra) Democrat advantage, in the 153 Electoral College votes shown as “Toss Ups”, Romney wins Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Romney is within the Margin of Error in PA, and the list goes on. When one takes the states, generously giving the President the initial 10 states he shows a “solid Democrat, and includes those that are polling solid, there would be a Romney win that is nothing near “close” in reality. One might think that Gallup, having been burnt in the 1980 election along with all other pollsters, has a reason for showing two scenarios: one with registered voters showing a slim margin between the two contenders, and then a “likely voters” model, where Mitt Romney is currently showing a margin of 50 to 46. One might conclude based on these models that Romney is the inevitable President Elect.

To add more fuel to the fire, Reuters has reported that based on newly obtained emails, the White House (President Obama’s situation room), the State Department, etc.) were aware of what was happening in real time as American’s were murdered by Terrorists in Benghazi. There were zero mentions of a movie; however that is all the public heard for several days. Apparently having a major foreign policy problem this close to an election, was not “optimal” for the president (Reference to the Presidents’ remarks on a comedy show prior to the debates).

In conclusion, those who say that the race is close, should continue to do so, it will keep Romney on his game, and the President in a constant state of “catch-up” – this Bay Stater cannot help but feel pride in bringing g home the Presidency to Massachusetts, where the first shot was “heard round the world”, and history pervades every corner of the Commonwealth. It is not without some hope that Massachusetts will also lend a helping hand to the Governor, though every conventional model shows this simply will not happen, that would be the icing on the cake. (As was the case in both 1980 and 1984 – Massachusetts was immediately cast into the safe Democrat category and ignored, until the day after the election when it was found that Massachustts had voted for Ronald Reagan.)

The 2012 Final Presidential Debate – Obama Alert Aggressive – Romney Calm, Collected, Commanding – A Mix of Strategy Like no Other.

Mitt Rommney and Barack Obama, the final debate - image marketwatch

In watching the last of the 2012 Presidential Debates last evening – one might have thought, by the hype given to the final debate that it would move mountains for one candidate or another – there were no pivotal movements for either candidate. The President appeared to be the Hawk in this final debate, while Governor Mitt Romney appeared to be the man of peace, no t only through strength but through diplomacy. Although those who were looking for a smack down, drag-out final debate might have been disappointed, and it certainly appeared as those Obama was spoiling for a fight, Romney’s entire demeanor was one of steady hand, refusing to be drawn into a brawl, giving President Obama his due for what he had accomplished overall, and offering a slightly different version of what he might have done differently in some instances. Of particular interest was the difference in Romney approach to the turbulent Middle east and the education against radical Islam, while his view of the import of Pakistan, a country President Obama, in the 2008 debates, declared must be confronted, almost dismissively, was, perhaps, the approach that appealed the most; working with the former ally, but with conditional aid. In fact, Governor Romney is a stickler for conditional aid – one must do something to earn the aid, to ensure progress is being made – a carrot with a stick of one will, with an advantage for both the nation which is availing itself of aid from the U.S., and the U.S. taxpayer who’s faced with sending billions of dollars to foreign countries with little to show but continued strife and waste. Although one might be a partisan, either one way or another, it was clear the Romney was comfortable in the role as Commander in Chief, as well as in tackling the economy – the number one issue on most American’s minds. The debate, and both men’s performances, suggest it will do little to help the President at this stage of the game, and made Romney slightly more likeable in general and capable of handling the job.

The CNN-ORC Poll offered the President an 8 point win over Governor Romney, a smaller margin of victory than produced by the second, new more aggressive Obama seen in the second debate. On a whole the debate appeared a draw, giving Romney the same advantage when it came to trust in the position of Commander in Chief. The poll also suggests that it was weighed more towards Republicans than most polls, giving the Democrats 34 % to Republican’s 30%, or a poll, in truth more in line with voter registration than those polls taken over the course of this contest, which uses the 2008 electoral model – weighted 8 points more for Democrats, who came saw an increase in voter identification in 2008. This particular model also leaves one the impression that the race is extremely tight, as pundits suggest that the polls are tied nationally.

What was of interest was the CNN electoral college map, which gives Obama a hefty lead over Mitt Romney, again based on the prior election. One might want to take a closer look at the Real Clear Politics Model, a model that offers a combination of all polls taken, weighted as well, which now gives Mitt Romney the edge. To add to the confusion of those watching the polls, Gallup Polling, the most prestigious polling firm, (calling 18 of the last elections within the margin of error), has Romney with the edge at last count by 51 to 45 among likely voters. Although one might consider this a “close contest”, it may be worth noting that those pollsters, coming into the final two weeks, and using the 8 percentage point weight, will see the race as a draw, right to the end. Additionally to suggest that one state will make the difference in this contest, such as Ohio, one might want to consider that in times of deep economic upheaval, the challenger has won with slightly more of an advantage than the incumbent, confounding all traditional pollsters who had used a previous election model, including Gallup.

Best line in the debate goes to moderator Bob Schieffer who invoked his mother: “Go vote, it will make you feel big and strong”.

Mitt Romney 2012 – Ahead of the Final Debate - Newspapers begin Endorsements Turning on Obama –E tu? Politico? - Politico pens “Obama’s Contempt for Voters”

A copy of the Pittsburgh Post Review Romney Endorsement from: the right newz.com>

The Print Press has begun it’s endorsements for the 2012 Presidential race: 2012 Candidate Mitt Romney as picked up the following endorsements:

The Columbia Dispatch, (article from Cleveland Palin Dealer which endorsed Barack Obama

The Orlando Sentinel (CNN)

the Nashville Tennessean (Nashville Scene – Tennessean endorses Romney Freezes over Hell!)

The Houston Chronicle

the Reno Gazette Journal (CNN)

the Billings Gazette

from the Huntington, WV, Herald Dispatch: The following papers: Wheeling News-Register, The Intelligencer of Wheeling, The Journal of Martinsburg, the Weirton Daily Times and the Parkersburg News and Sentinel and The Inter-Mountain in Elkins.

(CNN – a list.) The Tampa Tribune , The Fort Worth, Texas, Star-Telegram, The Arizona Republic, and the Pittsburgh (Pennsylvania) Tribune-Review

The Colorado Springs Gazette

The Dallas Morning News

From (These may be subject to scrutiny) The Daily Kos Arizona Republic (Arizona), Casa Grande Dispatch (Arizona), Arkansas Times (Arkansas), North County Times (California), San Diego Union-Tribune (California),The Daily Sentinel (Colorado), The Pueblo Chieftain (Colorado), Longmont Times-Call (Colorado), Loveland Reporter-Herald (Colorado),Colorado Springs Gazette (Colorado), Cherokee Tribune (Georgia), Eagle Tribune (Massachusetts), Royal Oak Daily Tribune (Michigan), Kalamazoo Gazette (Michigan), Omaha World Herald (Nebraska), Newman Grove Reporter (Nebraska), Las Vegas Review-Journal (Nevada), The New York Observer (New York) , The Bismarck Tribune (North Dakota), The Buckeye Lake Beacon (North Dakota), Minot Daily News (North Dakota), Union-Leader (New Hampshire), The Lufkin Daily News (Texas), The Winchester Star (Virginia), Wheeling News-Register (West Virginia), The Intelligencer of Wheeling (West Virginia), Parkersburg News and Sentinel (West Virginia), Spokesman Review (Washington) Vancouver Columbian (Washington), Star-Tribune (Wyoming)

The above is as of 10/22/12.

A note: in several articles it was suggested that Romney has not picked up endorsements by any of the Bay State newspapers – this is possible as they have not yet endorsed a candidate. In the final hours of the 2008 campaign, the Springfield MA Republican endorsed John McCain in 2008, and other larger papers in the Bay State began their endorsements. Additionally, the editorial boards may understand the Bay State Electorate and its base demographic (the Unenrolled)outnumber both major parties in enrollment.

About newspaper endorsements in general, of course, they are a boost to the campaigns’ ego, and can generate a press release or two, however, should one follow the Gallup’s “trust in Institutions Polling”, newspapers and television news both rack up a startling 26 to 28% trust (with 100% being very trustworthy). Therefore, the endorsement generates both buzz for the candidate as well as for the paper itself – but may do little to change minds any more. (Of course, those papers who do endorse Romney may find a spike in subscribers)

Finally in an op-ed piece by Politico entitled :”Obama’s Contempt for Voters”, the article here at www.politoc.com suggests that Obama, and his campaign, believe the people are “idiots”, and generally will buy whatever they are selling. That may appear harsh, but coming from a “progressive” point of view, there is a divide between the “elite” and the “masses”, the “Progressive” school of thought is pervasive throughout the educational system as well and the unions, and has been since the 1970’s when the first teachers union was put in place in Philadelphia. There have been Progressive presidents’ from time to time, and in each case, the economy faltered and in the end, they were voted out of office. The idea that somehow, a United State of America, actually exists where there is a class systems in place that allows for the cream of the crop to be “elites” (those with a higher education and specific connections), to tell the “masses”, the rest of the population, how to live, and what to think – and that everything someone at the top (elite) tells the nation, will be bought: hook, line and sinker. The problem is, the philosophy or ideology, just doesn’t work for the country as a whole. This article not necessarily address the root of Obama’s ideology and how deeply imbedded that Progressive think is rooted in our educational system, from the top down, and has been for decades, as well as the unions – Progressive thought sounds as if one is moving forward, however, it is a step back into the dream of the former Soviet Empire, where the very rich were executed, and the thinkers (elites) led the nation – keeping the masses ignorant through state run media, and imprisoned or executed when those individuals spoke out. The downfall of the Soviet Union was, in simple terms, an economic implosion – it took Decades to dissolve – and that is where today’s Progressives, blot out that bit of inconvenient truth – Socialism, for the most part, simply does not work for the “masses”. If one has any doubts about the aforementioned, just ask a college professor or any lower grade high school or elementary school teacher about their view of Progressive thought and the class systems included in that ideology . It is seen by those Professors, as a duty imposed upon each and every student that will attain a four year degree, that they teach the “masses” by keeping things simple, and berating the Republican Party at every turn (although by that school of thought, may in the Republican Party are also “elites”), after all, it is also duty to take over more of the former “Democrat” party – and that is because, Progressive needed legitimacy, though a political party, and the Democrat Party was more closely aligned, already backed by unions. If one’s child cannot pass the SAT, there’s a good chance, that child received a different education – on that was more political in nature. (Thus the dummying down of America.)

Understanding that the aforementioned sounds like a conspiracy theory, one might ask their student or a student of a higher or lower education facility from the 1970’s or forward, if politics were ever mentioned in the classroom.