Today’s WaPo/ABC national tracking poll shows Mitt Romney leading President Obama, 50 percent to 47 percent (a “statistically insignificant” margin as WaPo makes sure to note at the top of its story). Still, it’s the first time Romney hit the 50-percent mark in this poll, and a sign Romney’s momentum isn’t fading:
As Romney hits 50, the president stands at 47 percent, his lowest tally in Post-ABC polling since before the national party conventions. A three-point edge gives Romney his first apparent advantage in the national popular vote, but it is not one that is statistically significant with a conventional level of 95 percent confidence.
However, Romney does now boast a statistically — and substantively — important lead on the economy, which has long been the central issue of the race. When it comes to handling the nation’s struggling economy, 52 percent of likely voters say they trust Romney more, while 43 percent say they have more faith in the president.
More remarkable than Romney’s advantage on economy is his advantage with independents. It’s not even close:
These advantages with independents undergird a sizable, 19 percentage-point Romney lead over Obama on the horse race. Should that advantage stick, it would be the sharpest tilt among independents in a presidential election since Ronald Reagan’s 1984 landslide win. (Reagan won independent and other unaffiliated voters 63 to 36 percent, according to the exit poll). Obama won them by eight in 2008.
The poll’s party ID breakdown isn’t terrible: D/R/I is 34/30/32. In 2008, the numbers were 40/33/28. Considering the enthusiasm shift since then, you’d expect Republicans and Democrats to be more evenly split this time around, but plus-4 for Dems isn’t nearly as bad as some of the previous WaPo/ABC polls have been.
The pro-Romney tilt among independents explains the Obama campaign’s recent focus on motivating the base with “zingers” instead of pivoting to the center. A 19-point deficit with independents sounds insurmountable, but the overall race is still within the margin of error. Obama will need massive turnout from his base if that’s the case. As the Post reports, that would be the highest advantage since Ronald Reagan won independents by 27 points in his 49-state reelection sweep.
There is still one more October Surprise. n nMahmoud Abbas is said to be endorsing Romney. n nHe said, and I quote: n n " Obama is a lying, manipulative, thin skinned, unempathic coward who orders the death of others as easily as he breathes. I hate Obama even more than I hate myself."
A single poll showing 3% advantage for either candidate may be insignificant, but any student of statistics understands that the more polls showing the same advantage the more likely the advantage is real. Now we have Gallup, Rasmussen and WaPo/ABC and probably others as well. This is very encouraging.
Raphaelennis, you're absolutely correct. I have found the best way to try to make sense of polling data is to look at the trends, if any become apparent. That's the usefulness of Real Clear Politics. That is what depressed me before debate one. Now, we see very encouraging trends. Of course a three point lead is not money in the bank, but if it is sustained, repeated and enlarged, we may be very happy on November 7th. But let's not get too excited.
That fact that a poll by two leftwing organizations (Washington Post and ABC) means it's bad new for Obama.
Based on the sample size and assuming the accuracy of the turnout model, a result that is "not one that is statistically significant with a conventional level of 95 percent confidence" is nonetheless not "statistically insignificant". It implies that the probability that Romney is actually beating Obama in the population sampled in less than 95% but still greater than 50%. Probably significantly greater. "Insignificant" is spin, not statistics.
only 10 more days worth of polls. n nSo why are Intrade's odds have it Obama60%/Romney 38% – and that is better for Obama than the day before? n nWho's measuring the snark vote? n nTurnout.
HEADLINE: WASHINGTON POST'S CIRCULATION DECLINES NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
The ultimate wild card is the weather. What would a hurricane with massive power failures do to some of the projected-secure Obama states including NY, CT & MA? n nWeather is how Scott Brown won two years ago — Birkinstocks aren't so good in the snow, and the trendy lefties didn't go to the polls. By contrast, Republicans have boots. And chain saws — and will likely hack a way through the debris to the polls if need be. Team Obama will be waiting for the government to come help them get there. n nAnd never forget that the storm likely is coming ashore *somewhere* between DC and Boston, and that 500 mile stretch (and the left coast) is essential to Obama if he is to win.