Mitt Romney vs. Pres. Obama: Real Clear Politics 'poll of polls' shows candidates within 0.1 percent of each other

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:19 p.m.

    If you want to have some real fun with the RCP site--jump on over to the Electoral Map. I'll wait for you to come back...
    (Snidely smiling and humming to self.)
    Oh--hello! Back again so soon? Like what you saw?

  • SUNNY ALL DAY Saint George, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 2:47 p.m.

    The ryancare/romney campaign will receive at least a 30 point bump in all campaign approved polls, fact-checked by campaign approved fact-checkers.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 1:48 p.m.

    Tom in CA
    Vallejo, CA
    Obama = 332
    Romney = 206

    LDS Liberal - I hate to break the news to you, but you have reversed the names.


    I hate to break the news to you, but you have reversed what is real and what is not real.

    Those Elector College Votes I sighted were taken directly from the exact same source as this DN article.

    Which clearly published, that as of today;

    Obama = 332
    Romney = 206

    and 270 is needed to win, no matter what opinion poll Romney may or may not win.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Sept. 4, 2012 12:55 p.m.

    Sorry, Tom in CA Nate Silver to whom Roland referred has it almost exactly like that. One small correction Roland Nate now has it Obama 74.8% chance of victory and Romney around 25%.

    By the way conservatives 538 looks and accounts for all polls, trends, and individual events. As Roland said so far Mr. Silver and his 538 have been 99.9% correct.

  • Tom in CA Vallejo, CA
    Sept. 4, 2012 12:41 p.m.

    Obama = 332
    Romney = 206

    LDS Liberal - I hate to break the news to you, but you have reversed the names.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Sept. 4, 2012 12:06 p.m.

    patriot is free to not trust the polls, as they sometimes prove wrong. But what method did he use in coming up with his own (6%) number? No one else has come up with anything close to that. Perhaps patriot is the best forecaster of all time. Could we have it broken down state by state, please sir?

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 4, 2012 12:01 p.m.

    The problem is that Mr. Romney has turned so far to the right to get the support of the tea party that he will lose the support of the independent voters.

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:58 a.m.

    Exactly right Patriot, couldn't have been more right on! ....and where do you think all the media fact checkers are going to be this week? Dead silent! You won't hear a thing about "fact checking" from the media. They will be to busy running cover for the ANOINTED ONE, or they won't be able to do their job, because they have to many shivers running up their legs.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:49 a.m.

    Unfortunately its the electoral vote that counts and Obama continues to be significantly ahead in that.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:47 a.m.

    Patriot, you seem awfully worried for such confidence! And what are real polls? The ones that are in favor of your candidate?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:37 a.m.

    That is a ridiculous assumption. History only shows that undecideds are only more likely to vote for a challenger than an incumbant, not that they only do that. The best you can reasonably assume is that only some percentage of undecideds end up even voting (some will vote third party or not voting at all) and then maybe you can justify 2/3 going for Romney with 1/3 to Obama.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:16 a.m.

    I don't trust these polls. The majority over-sample democrat's. I honestly think the real polls would have Romney ahead by as much as 6 points. Also this DNC is going to be alot of hooha short of specifics. There is no way the libs are going to talk about the 16 trillion debt or the 23 million out of work or the fact that the summer months had next to zero growth nation wide. These are cold hard facts and there is no way these people want anything to do with facts. The DNC is going to be all HYPE and SPIN along with a heavy dose of Romney bashing. The question Americans should worried sick about is - what is the Dem's plan for 2013? We know what it is - more borrowing from China to gin up another "stimulus", more tax increases and NO cost cutting. There you go. I just saved you all 3 days of watching Eva Longoria and Sandra Fluke and the other "deep thinkers" and their emotional double talk.

  • Dadof5sons Montesano, WA
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:03 a.m.

    What these polls do not show is the undecided voter. historically since President Ike. the undecided voted for the challenger. So about 11 percent of America is undecided. Give that to Romney because of past tracking shows that is how they vote. give Mitt 54 to Obamas 45 percent. So when History repeats it self. it will be Romney by 11 percent over Obama.

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 11:02 a.m.

    @ Kayser

    For those of you who seem to believe the Democratic line that Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000, you seem to overlook the fact that a million absentee ballots in California were not counted, mostly from the military who supported Bush heavily in 2000, and that every count in Florida---every one---showed that Bush really won that state. I think the truth is that no one knows for sure who won the popular vote in 2000, but it wasn't a dead ringer for Gore, that's for sure. The California ballots weren't counted because the difference was larger than the number of uncounted ballots, so those demos who are crying for a popular vote maybe would have helped Bush unwittingly had such been the practice; be careful what you wish for as there are unforseen consequences.

    I don't think this race will be anything but close and that is a reflection on Obama, who as a sitting President should win hands down this cycle. He may actually lose come November.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 10:27 a.m.

    @Counter Intelligence
    "At this point in the election, Carter was still ahead of Reagan by 4 points
    It isn't going to get better for Obama"

    Your sample size of one person making a comeback doesn't mean much since I can just as easily say McCain was up by a point at this stage (post-GOP convention) but lost by almost half a dozen. Doesn't mean Obama will win, obviously it's still close and can go either way.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 10:13 a.m.

    As we all learned in 2000, the popular vote is meaningless. All survey's point to an electoral college lead for the president. Nate Silver, quoted in this article, gives President Obama a 65% chance of victory. In the previous election Silver called every state, but one, correctly. He missed Indiana.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Sept. 4, 2012 9:47 a.m.

    Romney says cutting defense spending will cost jobs but cutting government spending will create jobs.

    They believe in polls today, support a pro-life/pro choice, pro socialist medicare/ anti socialist, anti-760 billion saver/ 760 billion saver. Don't eat the dog - put it on top of the car...

    You have no idea what you believe do you?

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Sept. 4, 2012 9:31 a.m.

    Republicans believe in polls? I thought.... Well what about fact checkers and thier facts?

    Later? Not right now?

    As long as there are electronic voting machines and widespread voter suppression - you have a chance.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 4, 2012 9:30 a.m.

    "America will stay a 50/50 country, and the pendulum will keep swinging back and forth."

    The reason it swings is because collectively, we dont like the leadership of either party.

    The party in power typically gets voted OUT.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 9:26 a.m.

    At this point in the election, Carter was still ahead of Reagan by 4 points
    It isn't going to get better for Obama

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 9:00 a.m.

    Statistically no bounce from the convention. Romney had to spend all his efforts shoring up his base, who are uncomfortable about voting for him. They are voting against Obama, not for Romney.

    Romney's strategy to talk in general terms about election issues, while providing no detail, will fail with the swing voters. They're smarter than the base voters.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    Sept. 4, 2012 8:58 a.m.

    This is far from a no-brainer. 50 percent of America want one or the other candidate, yet the candidates use the word "Americans" as a blanket statement, as if all Americans want the same things. Nothing could be further from the truth. We need more than two parties to represent us; and until that happens, America will stay a 50/50 country, and the pendulum will keep swinging back and forth.

  • Tom in CA Vallejo, CA
    Sept. 4, 2012 8:43 a.m.

    2008 2012
    Unemployment 7.8% 8.3%
    Federal Debt $10 Trillion $16 Trillion
    Household Income $54K $50K
    Gasoline $1.85 $3.85
    Economy "Growing" At Snail's Pace

    Pretty clear picture isn't it??
    None of the above show ANY signs of relief - only getting worse.

    Baron Scarpia - nice try, but ..........

    This is a no brainer.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 8:35 a.m.

    Whatever --

    George W. Bush showed us all that polls don't matter, and votes don't matter...

    Obama = 332
    Romney = 206

    270 is all that is needed to win.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    Sept. 4, 2012 8:19 a.m.

    The general consensus is that Romney didn't get the needed bounce going forward and that the continued chatter over Eastwood's scene-stealing performance, just before Romney's big moment, has largely stolen the thunder of the convention. Even DN has yet another Eastwood story... personally, I think the Dems love it as it keeps interfering with Romney's narrative.

    If the Democrats can convince America that we're better off than we were four years ago -- Bin Laden is dead, we're pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan, military deaths are down due to drone technology, GM and Chrysler are alive and thriving, etc. -- then it will blunt the GOP's main line of offense.

    Unemployment is still high. Who's got the plan to create jobs? Romney/Ryan want to gut federal spending -- the implication? Higher unemployment for 2013, at least initially, as government layoffs result (as well as from businesses that do government work). Romney/Ryan will need to address growing ranks on welfare after cutting fed spending -- that will be interesting in light of proposed tax cuts on "job creators." (didn't Bush cut taxes -- where are all the new jobs from that?)