News analysis: Measuring the Pres. Obama post-convention bounce

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 2:37 p.m.

    That's kind of funny that someone claimed President Obama has tied himself to the occupy movement. Clearly someone that isn't paying attention. Occupy has more or less disappeared. Tea party has a caucus in congress. The reason people will not repeat 2010? They have seen what the tea party members are really about.  

    I am excited to vote again for President Obama. I will not let my opinion be formed by the Republicans, the media, or the conservatives. I use my own intellect  and observations to come to conclusions. And I know that Barack Obama has done a masterful job steering the ship of state through these troubling times. Has he been perfect? No. Has he done things I disagree with? Yes. But I recognize, because I'm rational, that no man is perfect. And when you look at the torrential headwind in the form of an opposition party, the likes of which has never been seen in modern American politics, a Republican party, with only one stated goal: defeat this president at all costs, well, then you see the incredible job this man, this president, Barack Obama, has done. 

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 9:54 a.m.

    I've been saying it all, the Republicans nominated a lemon and they are trying to serve us lemonade. Mitt will go by the wayside and is next in the long line of Republican losers, Ford, Dole, McCain. The Republicans have a lot of sole searching to do after this election as the shifting demographics in this country show the Democrats getting stronger. If they don't change their stance on several issues they'll continue to be the Tea Party and nothing more.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 9:10 a.m.

    "I see Jon Huntsman as far and away the best of the GOP primary candidates."


    Huntsman devolved into a joke; back-stabbed his boss, cannot stay at a job, has Megan-McCainesque daughters and otherwise condescends to and embarrasses his own party. His primary appeal is his ability to allow the far left to feign bi-partisanship, while not actually doing it.

    A mule in pachyderm apparel

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 8:58 a.m.

    Poll; Carter over Reagan by 4 September 1980
    Carter over Reagan by 6 October 1908

    The media is desperately trying to pump Obama in order to discourage Republicans
    Obama will NOT likely win any swing state that he is not already polling over a 50% (and his highest in any is $49 in Nevada - and that is coming from left-wing Politico)

  • Paul in MD Montgomery Village, MD
    Sept. 11, 2012 8:47 a.m.

    I heard a statistician on the radio a few weeks ago talking about an interesting trend in elections where there is an incumbent. He said that in the election, an incumbent will typically lose a couple of percentage points (usually 1 - 3%) off of the poll numbers of likely voters taken a week or two before the election, and the challenger will get the rest. That has held true for most elections with an incumbent going back 40 - 50 years, according to this gentleman. Electoral college throws a kink in that, but even then the trend seemed to be pretty solid.

    By the way, I live in a SOLIDLY blue state near DC, and I'm not hearing nearly the level of pro-Obama buzz I did 4 years ago either.

    I'm also hearing that although Romney wants to repeal Obamacare, he also wants to put back into place some of the protections Obamacare gives people that most everyone agrees are good, without the bloat of a 3,000 page law. That doesn't sound very Tea Party to me.

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 4:12 a.m.

    Polls these days are skewed and over sampled to get the preferred objective....funny how the CNN poll shows bam ahead 52- 46 while it's own pol is stacked with 52% of likely voters to vote for Obama and 46% of likely voters to vote for Romney......52- -46 of course your going to get a favorable Obama poll using this measurement........CNN and Gallup are among the worst at predicting the actual outcome based alone on 2008 election results....of course a few were worse but who wants to shoot at being the best amongst the worst besides obamites!

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 10:32 p.m.


    But the Democrats problem is the same as it was in 2010. They lost 63 house seats because of the "Right Wing" of the GOP. That is NOT anecdotal. I only used my experience as an example. I qualified that it wasn't a scientific study. But you can't brush aside the Democrats losing the most house seats since the 1930s. What has changed in the past two years to make you think that people are gravitating toward the Democrats line of thinking?

    You have said Mitt Romney's problem is the Tea Party. But your argument is more applicable for Barack Obama. The Extreme Left Wing of the Democratic party has taken over. He has tied himself to the Occupy Wall Street people. I am certain that those people are FAR more extreme than any "Right Wing Extremist" in the Tea Party. I know the electorate sees it this way as well. How? Again, 63 seats in the house. Don't be surprised when it happens in 2012.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 10, 2012 10:18 p.m.

    Park City Aggie,

    You are right on, and yes I to believe that the republican party left me I didn't leave them. Poll after poll after poll show that 60% of the country is moderate. I could have voted for Governor Romney (who was a moderate). Not to sure I can vote for the tea party Mitt Romney.

  • ParkCityAggie Park City, Ut
    Sept. 10, 2012 9:30 p.m.

    I love the anecdotal "Oh I know people who voted for Obama 4 years ago and won't vote for him today." On the flip side, I know more than just a few Republicans who are giving me the old "I didn't leave the Republican party, they left me" line. In fact just tonight I was speaking with a guy who happens to be a very successful business man who said that he's decided to register as a Democrat because the Republican party has no room for moderates. And thus Romney's problem. Sure my story is also anecdotal, but it shows a bigger problem Romney has; most Americans are moderates and Romney is now the candidate for the Right-Wing party... and the party wont let him be the moderate he needs to be to get elected. And despite the name calling from the Right about Obama (being a socialist/marxist/communist/Muslim, etc) he has proven himself to be the moderate candidate, the voice of reason between the two extremes. That is why he will be re-elected. Feel free to disagree, just remember the Utah mindset is not the US mindset!

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Sept. 10, 2012 9:22 p.m.

    We keep forgetting that we are really holding a series of state elections, not a national election. That's why Bush became President in 2000 rather than Al Gore. The electoral math right now favors Obama. I don't think the "bounce" from either candidate has changed that, with the possible exception of North Carolina, although that seems to be based on one Democratic leading poll.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 9:03 p.m.


    This is the first time in 4 months that Obama, the incumbent President, has beaten the challenger in fund raising. Joe Biden is speaking to crowds of 700. Here in the reddest state in the Union, in 2008, there were plenty of people high on Obama. I'm just not seeing ANY excitement. I understand that isn't likely to be much here in Utah, but I'm telling you, what there was has completely disappeared. Unexcited bases don't vote. That hurts the Democrats. I already know the conservative base is fired up. This nonsense about Romney not getting the conservative vote is bogus. Again, there is no one thing about Obama that voters can really look at and say, "This is my guy. He's going to put us on the right path." At least in 2008 there was the vague 'Hope and Change.' There is nothing this time.

  • merich39 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 8:51 p.m.

    Something that is a real shame is that there was another Mormon and a Utahn in the primaries. There was a GOP candidate who, in my opinion, would be handily winning the swing states right now. If Jon Huntsman would have won the primaries, he would still be getting the solidly red states, as they would never vote Obama anyway. Obama would still be winning the solidly blue states. But in my opinion, Jon Huntsman would appeal to those moderate independent voters in the swing states in a way that Romney just can't. As an independent who voted for Ronald Reagan, I would have voted for Huntsman over Obama. I see Jon Huntsman as far and away the best of the GOP primary candidates. But the GOP is so beholden to the extreme right wing, they don't have the good sense to nominate the candidate who can actually win the election. A real shame.

  • BarkforSark PROVO, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 7:32 p.m.

    There are a couple reasons why nobody should take these polls too seriously. First of all, as we saw in the primaries, Perry, Cain, Gingrich and Santorum all took turns gaining solid leads over Romney in the polls, and all were dispatched rather handily -- mostly because of Romney's organizational advantage and debate performances. He clearly has an organizational advantage over Obama and with all three debates remaining, there's no reason to think he can't do the same again. Secondly, as favorable as the polls appear for Obama, he's only up 46-45 in the latest Rasmussen swing-state poll. Asking likely voters who they plan on voting for ultimately means very little if they're coming from states where Romney isn't going to win anyway.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Sept. 10, 2012 6:44 p.m.

    Today's CNN poll:

    Obama 52%
    Romney 46%

    Money donated to each candidate in August:

    Obama $114 million
    Romney $111 million

    And meanwhile, A1994 can't find anyone in the reddest state in America who says they're voting for Obama. Guess the president should just concede to Romney right now.

  • merich39 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 5:40 p.m.

    More important than the national poll numbers are the poll numbers for the swing states. Everyone knows the POTUS election is decided by the electoral college. When you look at the electoral college map, the numbers look pretty grim for Mitt. Mitt has to win most of the swing states and, so far, he's not having much success swinging those states into his column. Mitt is likely to get 90% of the vote in Utah. There are plenty of other red states where Mitt will get 60% or more of the vote. But most of those red states don't have very many electoral college votes. So Obama may get 52% of a swing state's popular vote and that will still result in Obama getting 100% of that state's electoral college votes.

    Two months to go and it's looking pretty promising for Obama. Mitt needed to come out of the conventions with a lot of momentum and that just did not happen. The electoral college map did not shift.

    And I could not be happier. Obama 2012!!!

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 5:06 p.m.

    Now that he has secured the nomination, it will be interesting to see more of the "real" Mitt Romney. He has already softened his stance on health care, saying there are parts that he likes and would not repeal. You never heard him say that during the primaries, and certainly not while addressing the convention. I am curious what other positions he will have a revelation on...

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 5:02 p.m.

    "The presidential race is not, and has not been, a virtual tie — Obama is, and has been, winning." wrote Steve Kornacki at Salon.

    Salon Magazine? This is a source?? I'm going to call shenanigans on this story right now. Four years ago I knew of several people who voted for Obama. This time around I can't find anyone I know who wants four more years of this. I know that isn't a very scientific study, but I got to believe people aren't lining up for this guy again. There isn't the same buzz. The rally numbers aren't there. There is nothing that a voter could look at and say, "Yes, we are on solid ground with Obama." The polls don't really matter until about 2 weeks before the election, and even then they have been wildly wrong. I am fairly confident that Romney will win this.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 4:30 p.m.

    I'm sure a bit of it will disappear in the next week or two but Obama should be back to the rather consistent 2 point lead he had pre-ryan pick. Maybe even a point higher. Nate Silver's model (which tries to account for convention bounces) has Obama at 80.7% odds of winning the election. Obviously there's still 7 weeks left but Romney has just not made much forward progress and what progress he made may have been wiped out in the past two weeks.