Quinnipiac\/NY Times\/CBS poll<\/a> allegedly showing President Obama moving ahead in the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. \u00a0This poll should carry more weight, since it is a poll of likely voters, probably identified by whether or not they voted last time, and whether or not they voted in the primary. \u00a0But as is often the case with MSM polls, the internals belie the conclusions.<\/p>\nThe poll shows President Obama leading Governor Romney 50-44 in Ohio, 53-42 in Pennsylvania, and 51-45 in Florida.<\/p>\n
Obama actually won these states 51-47, 54-44, and 51-48, respectively. \u00a0That in itself should raise some suspicion. \u00a0I don’t know of any other significant polls that show Obama running ahead of where he did in 2008. \u00a0Nationally, he won by 7 points, and Rasmussen’s daily likely-voter poll has shown only occasional movement from a 47-44 Romney advantage. \u00a0I suppose it’s possible that concentrated saturation-bombing could move polls in individual states, but I’ve seen such tactical strategies in the past, and they almost always come from losing campaigns.<\/p>\n
The other odd number is how people claim to have voted in 2008. \u00a0These are, respectively, 53-38, 54-40, and 53-40, or +11, +4, and +10 vs. how those states actually went. \u00a0Even assuming people moved around, the numbers for Ohio and Florida are huge, and the number for Pennsylvania is still significant. \u00a0While people are more likely to remember themselves as having voted either for a winner, or for their current preference, even if they voted the other way, it’s hard to believe these are representative of the people likely to vote in this election.<\/p>\n
Lord knows, I’ve been wrong about polls before. \u00a0Tomorrow morning at Denver’s First Thursday Breakfast, pollster Floyd Ciruli – a Democrat, but you’d never know his party affiliation from his commentaries – will be speaking. \u00a0I’ll ask him about these conjectures then, and report what he has to say.
\n