Grab Your Magnifying Glass and Take a Look

It was a very solid polling day for Obama and I think I see little green shoots of a tiny Obama bounce coming off of the 3rd debate. The evidence is limited but it is in enough places that it seems real.

PPP's tracker put Obama ahead 49-48 and PPP's Tom Jensen pointed out:

Four polls came out looking at likely voters in Ohio today. Rasmussen had it tied at 48. The other three had Obama up by 2, 3, and 5 points respectively. The poll that had Obama up by 5 (Time) was conducted on the 22nd and 23rd, the night of the debate and the night after.

Two polls were released today looking at Virginia and both had Obama leading (though both are questionable for different reasons). Two polls were released today looking at Nevada and Obama was leading in both. One was Rasmussen and one was PPP. Obama is leading in Nevada folks.

Finally, the Gallup tracker lurched back towards Obama today. I discussed (and largely dismissed) this earlier. But, in the context of these other polls, it may be a sign of a little bit of movement.

Were there any counter indicators today? To put that another way, what were the worst numbers for Obama in any polls released today? There was a Rasmussen poll that had Obama down 2 in New Hampshire (though there was another poll that had Obama up by 3 there). ABC/WP didn't budge today and Romney leads by 1 nationally in their poll ... and that's about it. Those are the good numbers for Romney today.

Put all that together and mix until you see a "sticky" consistency and what do you get?

It is one day. And it isn't a big move towards Obama. It is very small actually. Most importantly, everything I describe above could VERY easily be statistical noise. We'll know more tomorrow. But it was about as good a day of polling as Obama has had since before the first debate.

Post-Debate Interviews Trickling In ... Nothing

We do not yet see any effect in post-debate interviews that are trickling into polls.

PPP's latest tracker includes one day (out of three) that are post-debate interviews. Obama and Romney were tied on that one day but the tracker ticked in Obama's favor as a recent strong day (Saturday) for Romney dropped out of the tracker.

Rasmussen's tracker also showed no change from yesterday as a full day of post-debate interviews rolled into their poll. Obama is still down by 4 there.

Rasmussen also released a new Ohio poll which is either good or bad news depending on what you believe about Rasmussen. They have Ohio tied at 48. If you take that poll at face value, it is not good news for Obama. If you believe Rasmussen has a Republican lean (Simon Jackman has some data on this out today), then Obama is right where we figured he is ... ahead by 2 or 3 points in Ohio.

Put all that together and you've got ... nothing. For those joining us late ...

Nevada, Wisconsin, Ohio ... Oh My

There's a lot of good articles floating around in the last couple of days about how close the national polls are and how President Obama has an advantage in the state level polling in swing states. A particularly good piece was posted on Huffington Post by Simon Jackman of Stanford outlining a statistical model of both the present national vote/EV split and the history of this split (statistically-speaking).

It got me to thinking about how to express Obama's advantage in the simplest terms, so here it is: Wisconsin, Nevada, and Ohio.

Now let me flesh that out a bit. Take a look at the map below. It shows what I believe to be the state of the race in the most general terms.

Every red state and blue state on the map is highly likely to go to Romney (red) or Obama (blue). Put another way, I don't think there is a single red or blue state on that map that any reasonable person would dispute.

Obama has 237 electoral votes effectively "in the bank" and Romney has 191. There are 9 "battleground" states totalling 110 electoral votes. I've ranked these 9 battleground states below in order of their probability of going for Obama according to Nate Silver's blog:

WI - 79.0%
NV - 73.1%
OH - 70.3%
IA - 65.9%
NH - 62.6%
CO - 52.9%
VA - 46.9%
FL - 32.6%
NC - 15.0%

Notice the three at the top of the list; Wisconsin, Nevada, and Ohio. By the way, Drew Linzer also estimates that Obama would win these three states today predicting the President would get 51.7%, 52.0%, and 51.1% respectively in Nevada, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

Now you can see why I've been saying since ... forever ... that Ohio is the whole ballgame. Let's assume Obama wins the three of those battlegrounds he's most likely to win; Wisconsin, Nevada, and Ohio. Here's the new map:

Obama is now at 271, 1 more than what he needs to win. It isn't just that he needs 3 states out of 9. It is that he needs the 3 states that he's most likely to win. Unless Romney can pick off at least one of these states, he can't win.

State-Level Polling

More evidence of trouble with that Gallup poll comes in the form of state-level polling that is WAY out of whack with Gallup's national numbers. This afternoon, NBC/WSJ/Marist released two state-level polls that are VERY bad for Romney. The President leads in Iowa by 8 and in Wisconsin by 6. Folks, there are two possibilities on these numbers:

1) They're wrong
2) Romney is in very deep trouble

It is entirely possible they're wrong. I would actually be surprised if Obama was ahead by 8 in Iowa right now. I do think he's ahead in both of these states but my guess would have been something more like 4-5 points in Wisconsin and perhaps a little less in Iowa.

If these polls are accurate, here's why Romney's in trouble:

1) States don't usually move by themselves. They reflect national trends a lot of the time. If Obama is ahead by 8 in Wisconsin, he's winning by something like 4-6 points in Ohio and he's winning in Virginia and so on.

2) If the Obama campaign knows they have leads like that in those states, they can move at least some of their resources from those states towards Florida and Ohio and Virginia, etc.

3) Obama's lead is the same in Iowa as it was a month ago. There has been no movement or whatever movement there has been has cancelled itself out. Obama was winning in September and this would mean he's winning now.

4) Early voting appears to be as big a disaster for Romney in Iowa and Wisconsin as it is in Ohio. 34% of likely voters in Iowa say they've already voted and Obama is winning among these voters 67-32. The poll reports that Romney is winning among likely voters planning to vote on Election Day but not by nearly enough. Similarly, 156% of likely voters in Wisconsin say they've already voted and Obama is winning there 64-35. But the race is about even there among those planning to vote on Election Day. So, Obama appears to be winning right now in these states and locking in large numbers of votes right now.

Anyway, coming back to that Gallup Poll, the situation is simple: The two sets of numbers (Gallup and NBC/WSJ) are not consistent or the result of statistical noise. Nate Silver agrees and advises that people "be careful" with the Gallup numbers.

There is something very different going on in the sampling and one of them (Gallup or NBC/WSJ) is just dead wrong. I don't think Gallup is right.

Sullivan Unhinged II

Holy moly has this guy gone off the deep end!

I really don't think his post is worthy of a rebuttal except for the fact that it is so widely read. For that reason, I sent him a lengthy email pointing out the various ways he's just dead wrong. I won't re-print the whole thing here but this is the most important, concluding part:

The President had a bad night and he’s taken a hit in the polls. But it just isn’t nearly what you’ve painted it to be in its effect. Go ahead and show me the path to 270 electoral votes that Mitt Romney has today. We’re now at 12 days since that first debate and the results are pretty cooked into the state polls. Show me Romney winning Ohio. Show me his path without Ohio. Is Romney winning Wisconsin? Sorry. Is Romney winning Nevada? Sorry. If he doesn't win those places, he doesn't win.

Obama is winning today. It’s closer than I wish it would be. The debate made it closer than it could have been. But it wouldn’t have been over without that debate performance. And Romney does not have “the momentum” or the mojo or, most importantly, the lead.

Romney's Swing State Problem

I'm going to sound like a broken record but here are the "swing-state" poll numbers released in the last 12 hours according to Taegan Goddard:

Colorado: Romney 48%, Obama 47% (CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac)
Florida: Obama 47%, Romney 46% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)
Michigan: Obama 49%, Romney 42% (Detroit News)
Michigan: Obama 46%, Romney 44% (Gravis)
Nevada: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Suffolk)
Ohio: Obama 51%, Romney 45% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)
Ohio: Obama 47%, Romney 46% (Pulse Opinion Research)
Pennsylvania: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Pulse Opinion Research)
Virginia: Romney 48%, Obama 47% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)
Virginia: Obama 51%, Romney 46% (CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac)
Virginia: Obama 48%, Romney 48% (Pulse Opinion Research)
Wisconsin: Obama 50%, Romney 47% (CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac)
Wisconsin: Obama 50%, Romney 46% (Pulse Opinion Research)

I put "swing-state" in air quotes because Michigan and Pennsylvania are not swing states but I won't get started on that rant again. These are just the states that Goddard lists.

Some of these pollsters are better than others and I won't bother with that discussion right now other than to say, look at where Obama is in polls that call cell-phones. For purposes of our discussion here, let's assume these polls are all equally valid.

Who is likely to win the election today if these polls are accurate? Mitt Romney is ahead in exactly 2 of these 13 polls and he's tied in one more. If we average the polls in states where there is more than one poll, Obama wins every state listed here except Colorado. Now, many of these states (like Florida) would be close. But guess what? Florida has always been close. And guess what else? Let's give Florida to Romney along with Colorado. Now who wins? The President.

Everyone is talking about how the first debate "wiped out" everything that happened between the convention and the debates when Obama built a bit of a cushion. I don't believe that's exactly correct but let's say it is. Now who wins? The President.

Yesterday, the President said, "What’s important is the fundamentals of what this race is about haven’t changed." He's absolutely right.

UPDATE: Greg Sargent snagged an interview with Geoff Garin, arguably the top Democratic pollster in the country and got Garin to outline why Obama is doing so much better in swing states like Ohio than he's doing nationally:

Geoff Garin, the pollster for the Obama-allied Priorities USA, tells me that his polling shows that views of Romney are more fixed in the battlegrounds than nationally. “In the swing states, voters are much more apt and able to quote back the main case against Romney,” he tells me.

Garin adds that his polling has tested voter reaction to various arguments against Romney, such as the idea that his economic policies would favor the wealthy or burden the middle class. He says voter agreement with those suggestions is “higher where the advertising has occurred,” and adds: “All the swing state advertising has had a measurable and lasting impact.”

Tonic for Democrats: Romney and Ohio

The new NBC/Marist/WSJ polls are out for Ohio, Florida, and Virginia. In Florida, Obama is up 1. In Virginia, Romney is up 1. But Ohio. Oh, Ohio.

Obama leads Romney by 6 in Ohio. That is just a terrible, terrible number for Romney. And there's actually quite a bit more good news below the top line for the President. First, Romney has gained 2 points since last week's NBC/Marist/WSJ poll. That's it ... at least in Ohio. The debate bounce is not getting worse. It just is what it is at this point. And if it is 2 points, that's not changing the fundamental trajectory of the campaign.

Second, 40 percent in the poll described themselves as Democrats and 29 described themselves as Republicans. Now lots of Republicans might cry foul and say there's no way there's an 11-point party ID edge for Obama in Ohio. But that argument doesn't work any more than the Democratic complaints about the national Pew poll worked a few days ago. As I said this morning, party ID is a fluid thing and is more a reflection of where the electorate is than pollster hijinks. But, in Ohio, there's something else interesting driving those numbers. 18 percent of respondents said they have already voted and 63 percent of these voters said they voted for Obama. This has been a big part of the Obama campaign's efforts in the state and this poll suggests it may be pulling the party ID of the electorate in their direction.

But wait, there's more bad news for Romney. Among those who have not yet voted but were identified as likely voters, Obama still leads by 2, 48-46.

Want more bad news for Romney? His favorable/unfavorable is still under water in Ohio (44/50).

I continue to believe that Romney is hitting his electoral ceiling in this post-debate period. And, if his electoral ceiling is a 6-point deficit in Ohio (not to mention a 1-point deficit in Florida), I don't see him winning.

I hope Biden does well Thursday night and changes the story. And I hope the President performs better in the next two debates and this thing goes back to where it was before the first debate. But I also think the President would win Ohio if the election were today. And I still don't see Romney's path to victory without Ohio.

Ohio

I've said it over and over and over, Mitt Romney just can't win without Ohio. And Ohio is getting worse and worse for him. Here's what Ohio looks like:



And this doesn't include today's Columbus Dispatch poll that has Obama ahead by 9. The last 3 polls have Obama ahead by 9, 10, and 8 respectively. Not to put too fine a point on it but Obama only needs to win Ohio by 1 ... vote.

Romney's situation is more dire than many believe. Yes, this week's debate can start turning things around for him. But that needs to be the start. He needs something bigger at this point in my view.

UPDATE: A PPP poll has Obama up by 4. Want to know how bad Romney's situation is? It is so bad that a credible poll showing Romney down by just 4 is "good news." I should say though there are some very funky things inside this poll. They have Obama doing better among men (leading 50-43) than among women (48-46). I can assure that's not right. Specifically, Obama is almost definitely doing better among women. It is also likely he's not doing that well among men. To put that another way, if Obama is really leading 50-43 among men in Ohio, Mitt Romney is done, done, done.

Movement?

A couple of days ago, Quinnipiac released polls in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania showing Obama with leads of 6, 6, and 11 points respectively among likely voters.

Yesterday, Pew Research Center released a national poll showing Obama with a whopping 10-point lead with Romney's unfavorables ticking up to 52%.

This morning, the monthly jobs report held moderately good news for Obama ... a gain of 163,000 jobs in July. We've said previously that averaging job gains of even 125,000 a month would probably be good enough for the President to get reelected.

Finally, Nate Silver's model has Obama's probability of winning ticking up a bit over 70% and that has not yet factored in the decent jobs report.

So, is there real movement in the race here or just statistical noise? Let's break down each piece of news here. The Quinnipiac polls are probably the most positive indicator in all this as they are a good pollster and the Ohio and Florida numbers are surprisingly strong for Obama (please don't get me started on Pennsylvania again). Quinnipiac has moved to a likely voter screen here though and, while that normally gives a slight bump to the Republicans, it could do almost anything depending on how they are screening likely voters. So, it is entirely possible there is no movement here at all and Obama's lead in Ohio and Florida in these polls is just a function of a bad likely voter screen. Similarly, it could be statistical noise though these polls had very large sample sizes (over 1,000 likely voters in each state).

The Pew poll shows a very large lead for Obama that is out of step with other polls. Pew has had a significant house effect towards Obama for some time now so the "lead" would need to be discounted some just for that reason alone. Nate Silver discussed this at length last night.

The jobs numbers are decent for Obama but not incredible. The new numbers basically stem the erosion of confidence in my view rather than boosting Obama. This is good news for Obama no doubt but it is not a "game-changer."

Taking all that together, I think it is fair to say it has been a good couple of days for Obama but "no movement" is a good day for him right now. He doesn't need the dynamic of the race to change. I am not sure we're seeing actual movement in any numbers here. We'll know more in a week or two but count me as one who believes the breaking news here is ... nothing, nothing is happening.

Nate Silver's Tricky Math Is Cool

Nate Silver's presidential race model is now out and the writeup is worth a full read. Lots and lots of really interesting and clever ways of looking at the race.

A couple of quick reactions on things that jump out at me:

1) Silver's model generates probabilities that look an awful lot like the things I've been saying here throughout the campaign. I think you can fairly summarize what I've been saying as "Obama is a modest favorite." Silver summarized his model's message this way:

The first look at the 2012 FiveThirtyEight presidential forecast has Barack Obama as a very slight favorite to win re-election. But his advantage equates to only a two-point lead in the national popular vote, and the edge could easily swing to Mitt Romney on the basis of further bad economic news.

Mr. Obama remains slightly ahead of Mr. Romney in most national polls, and he has had a somewhat clearer advantage in polling conducted at the state level. Mr. Obama would be about 80 percent likely to win an election held today, according to the model.

However, the outlook for the Nov. 6 election is much less certain, with Mr. Obama having winning odds of just over 60 percent. The forecast currently calls for Mr. Obama to win roughly 290 electoral votes, but outcomes ranging everywhere from about 160 to 390 electoral votes are plausible, given the long lead time until the election and the amount of news that could occur between now and then. Both polls and economic indicators are a pretty rough guide five months before an election.

So, I'd sum that up by saying that Silver's model is just a hair less bullish on Obama's prospects than I am.

2) If you read what I wrote yesterday about Wisconsin, you won't find much different in what Silver's model had to say today about Wisconsin.

although Republicans might be tempted to make a play for Wisconsin after winning the gubernatorial recall election there on Tuesday, the model suggests that it is over-hyped as a swing state. Mr. Obama has had a fairly consistent lead in the polls there, including in the exit poll among voters who turned out on Tuesday. Although Mr. Obama is unlikely to win Wisconsin by 14 points, as he did in 2008, all indications from the polls are that the state remains somewhat more favorable to him than the country as a whole

3) One of the more interesting things about Silver's model is that it estimates the likelihood that a state will be the "tipping point," the state that tips the election. If you've been reading here, you're familiar with this general idea and I was just pointing out the other day that Florida is highly unlikely to be the state that ultimately determines the winner of the election. How unlikely? Silver's model provides a number and it is 3.7%. I've been saying Ohio is the whole ballgame and Silver's model agrees ... at least it is the state that is most likely to be the tipping point at 31.0%. Virginia is next most likley at 24.3%. In other words, there is a greater than 50% chance Ohio or Virginia will determine the outcome in November.

Obama Leads in Florida

Maybe. PPP says he's got a small lead at least. One poll that is this close and is within the margin of error doesn't frankly tell us too much. But it is enough to generate a few thoughts on the subject of Florida ...

1) I'm going to say something sort of provocative and tell you that Florida sort of doesn't matter. Of course, if Obama wins Florida, Romney can't win. That's true. But it is also true that if Obama wins Florida, he's probably already won Ohio. And if Obama wins Ohio ... Romney can't win. So, while a win in Florida would guarantee an Obama victory, it would sort of be like hitting a grand slam in the top of the 9th when you're already ahead by 5. It's nice but you were very likely to win already anyway.

2) PPP also asked respondents how they would vote if either of Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio was added to the Romney ticket. Obama's lead was still 3 with Rubio on the ticket and it was 5 with Bush on the ticket. Now, I'm skeptical that a question like this really does a good job of simulating the impact of adding Bush or Rubio to the ticket. That said, I do think adding Bush would be utterly insane. That name is radioactive and Romney just couldn't do more to make Obama's case that electing Romney is like going back to the Bush policies that produced the current mess. Has anyone noticed the Obama campaign has changed their one-word slogan from "Change" in 2008 to "Forward" in 2012? If Obama's watchword is Forward and you add Bush to the Republican ticket, I think the Obama campaign would just gleefully issue a press release saying, "We have nothing to add your honor. The prosecution rests." As for Rubio, I do not think he would change the dynamic of the race much at all. I don't say that because of anything about him. I just don't think any running mate helps dramatically. They can only hurt (see Palin, Sarah and the preceding discussion of Bush, Jeb).

3) I tend to think quite highly of PPP as a polling organization. They rated quite well in Nate Silver's pollster ratings for one. We'll get an interesting test this evening. PPP had a poll out yesterday showing Walker up 50-47 in Wisconsin's recall. We Ask America had a poll out yesterday as well that had Walker up 52-44. Let's see what happens.

Romney Ahead in Ohio?

I doubt it but we don't really know. Rasmussen has a poll out of likely voters in Ohio showing Romney up 46-44. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 points on the poll plus Rasmussen typically has a bit of a Republican lean so it is hard to draw much of a conclusion from this one poll.

I still see Obama as modest favorite in Ohio. See the post below for the explanation.

Romney's Ohio Trouble Begins in Michigan

A new poll out from PPP today shows Obama ahead of Romney in Michigan by a whopping 14 points. One of the main reasons Obama is so far ahead is voter perceptions about the auto bailout and the auto industry. PPP's write-up says:

Obama's crushing Romney on what will doubtless be one of the biggest issues in the campaign in Michigan- 55% think that he's been better for the automotive industry in the state to only 31% who say Romney wins out on that front.

The President also leads in Ohio but by a far smaller margin. The latest poll in Ohio, from NBC/Marist, has Obama ahead there by 6. Perhaps more importantly, every public poll since late February has had Obama ahead by numbers ranging from 1 to 12.

Ohio has something important in common with Michigan. In both states, the automotive industry plays a major role. The Council of American States in Europe (a trade group lobbying on behalf of states) points out that:

Ohio is at the center of the motor vehicle industry. Nearly 80 percent of North American light vehicle production is in Ohio or within 500 miles (800 kilometers) of the state's borders. Ohio is the top automotive supplier in the U.S. and second in the nation for motor vehicle production, employing more than 120,000 people in the state.

The poll from Michigan is not terribly surprising and it certainly isn't a state that Romney has to win. But it is a very ominous sign for Romney in a state he DOES have to win - Ohio.

Not Much to Say - Obama Still Winning

A few people have asked me why I haven't been blogging much in the past few days. The main reason is that there isn't much to say ... and that's good news for the President.

There have been lots of polls out but they don't tell us very much that is new ... at least it isn't new if you've been reading here for the last couple of months. Here's a new poll. The President is winning in Maine. Here's one that shows Romney winning in Georgia. And here's one that shows Obama winning in Michigan. There are no surprises here.

Obama is winning right now. If you look at the pollster.com trend estimates by state, you see that Obama is leading by smaller or larger margins in all the "battleground" states. Here's a listing of Obama's lead (or deficit) in pollster.com's current trend estimates nationally and for all the states for which they have multiple polls:

National - 1.2
AZ - (0.5)
FL - 1.2
IA - 10.0
MI - 4.0
MO - (3.0)
MT - (9.0)
NV - 8.2
NH - 8.8
NC - 2.6
OH - 3.8
PA - 7.6
VA - 4.5
WI - 5.7

The only states Obama is losing in this group are states that Obama lost in 2008. But let's look at this from a more conservative angle. Sean Trende recently pointed out that most of these state polls are looking at registered voters rather than likely voters. There is very good reason for pollsters to do this because it is exceedingly difficult to get an accurate read this far out from the election on what the likely voter pool will be. But Trende correctly points out that likely voter pools are usually more favorable to Republicans than registered voter pools and that, on average, the shift from one to the other means about a 3-4-point shift in the Republican direction. So, let's take state polls above (the national polling does include more likely voter polls) and shift all of them 3.5 points in Romney's direction:

AZ - (4.0)
FL - (2.7)
IA - 6.5
MI - 0.5
MO - (6.5)
MT - (12.5)
NV - 4.7
NH - 5.3
NC - (0.9)
OH - 0.3
PA - 4.1
VA - 1.0
WI - 2.2

So who wins in this scenario? Obama. And he's still got a little bit of room to spare. "Really?" you say. Yes, really. In fact, he's at 303 electoral votes. "Well that Ohio result is so close it scares me. What if we give Ohio to Romney? Does Obama still win?" you say. Yes. Obama still wins. "Well, I've noticed Colorado isn't listed there" you say. "You're just cooking the books by giving Colorado to Obama!" Well, I would predict Obama wins Colorado right now (and I don't think it'd be that close) but okay, let's give Colorado to Romney. What happens now? Obama still wins ... with 276 electoral votes. You can play around with the math on this here but I'm telling you ... Romney's path to 270 is VERY narrow right now.

Recently, my aunt attended a lecture and the lecturer (a political scientist) said the election will come down to "FLOHPA," the key states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and whichever candidate wins 2 of the 3 will win. My aunt was quite alarmed because she thinks Obama is in trouble in Florida. But guess what? The old "FLOHPA is decisive" argument is not necessarily true. 1) I just showed you how Obama can lose Ohio and Florida AND lose Colorado and still win. 2) For the love of all that is holy, let's take Pennsylvania out of the "swing" state column (see my earlier rant on this). Obama is either winning Pennsylvania or he's losing VERY badly. But the election is NOT turning on Pennsylvania.

My broader point for today is this. Take the state polling into account and then shift everything 3.5 points in Romney's direction ... and Obama is still in the driver's seat. I'm not saying the election is over and I'm not saying Obama is running away with it. But Obama is winning right now and nothing happened this week (no, not even the gay marriage stuff) to change that.

Swing State Polls

I said the other day that Obama seems to be doing better in Ohio than he is doing nationally. Today, a few swing state polls seem to confirm that Obama is indeed doing quite well right now.

The Purple Poll shows Obama up by 5 in Ohio, up by 2 in Virginia, tied in Colorado, and down by 2 in Florida. If those are the actual results on Election Day, Romney loses the election for sure. A new Rocky Mountain Poll in Arizona has Obama up by 2 there. Arizona is not an absolute must-win state for Romney but it would be very bad if he lost there.

It is a long, long way to go. But early on, this race is resembling the 1996 race in one key respect. It "feels" stable to me. It doesn't seem like we're likely to see wild swings back and forth in the absence of some big external shock. Intrade has Obama as about a 60% bet to win. I think he's in a little bit better position than that.

What's the Matter with Romney in Ohio?

Mitt Romney's got an Ohio problem. When Romney edged Santorum in Ohio, many in the Republican establishment breathed a sigh of relief similar to when Romney edged Santorum in Michigan. It was an important step on the way to Romney locking down the nomination.

But Romney's weakness in Ohio and, frankly, in many of these industrial midwest states like Michigan and Wisconsin seems to be enduring. I have noticed over several weeks and months that Romney seems to be doing a little worse in Ohio than he's doing in his national numbers.

Today, Rasmussen released an Ohio poll showing Obama ahead of Romney 46-42. A week ago, Fox News had a poll showing Obama ahead of Romney 45-39. Let's look at some data. Here is Pollster.com's summary of the race in Ohio:



There have been 10 polls of Ohio with this particular trial heat in 2012 and only one (a Fox Poll in February) showed Romney winning Ohio. The other 9 polls have shown Obama leading by between 2 and 12 points.

Nationally, Pollster's aggregation shows Obama with a smaller lead:



So what's going on in Ohio? I think we can posit a few possibilities: Ohio's anti-union ballot proposition has galvanized union voters to some extent. Additionally, Ohio is home to a lot of parts suppliers for the auto industry and Romney's opposition to the auto bailout hurt him there as much as it did in Michigan. Finally, Ohio's Republicans are more downscale than Republicans in say, New York or California and these are voters more likely to support Santorum than Romney. These same voters won't support Obama and the vast majority of them will vote for Romney in the Fall. But it is not easy for Romney to bring them around and some small number of them staying home can mean big trouble for Romney.

Regardless of the cause of Romney's Ohio struggles, one thing is clear. Ohio is critical for Romney. Romney CANNOT win without Ohio. Obama can win without Ohio though he'd probably have to win Florida and some other states that are tossups and he's not likely to win Florida if he loses Ohio. So Ohio is important and if Romney is going to consistently be weaker in Ohio than his national average, it makes his margin for error in the campaign to come quite a bit slimmer.

Was Michigan a Crippling Blow for Santorum?

I think it really was but first, let me tell you all the reasons why you might think I'm wrong.

First, Romney's victory in Michigan was not a blowout and he had to employ some messy backroom dealings to win the most delegates. Furthermore, it is likely that Romney will lose badly in Georgia, the biggest Super Tuesday prize in terms of delegates. Indeed, when you look at the Super Tuesday map, there are a few other delegate-rich states where Romney will likely lose including Oklahoma and Tennessee. Finally, the latest polls seem to indicate Romney is still just a couple of points behind in Ohio. Romney will surely win more delegates in Ohio because of the ineptness of the Santorum campaign but a popular-vote loss in Ohio would really look bad. As for the delegates, I suppose one would rather win more delegates than not but (and I've argued quite a bit with Jon Keller about this) the delegate count is really irrelevant in just the same way that the Super Delegates really didn't matter in the end in 2008. There was simply no way the person "perceived to win" more states and more delegates was going to have the nomination taken away from him (or her) in 2008 because of elites in the party and it isn't going to happen in 2012 either.

In addition to all of that, there is the possibility that Gingrich will bow out of the race after Super Tuesday because he'll only win his "home" state of Georgia and won't be very competitive elsewhere. A little more than a month ago, John Sides and Lynn Vavreck posted some data to support their argument that Gingrich or Santorum dropping out would not help the other. In other words, they argue quite a bit of the "not Romney" vote would go to Romney rather than just coalescing behind the last "not Romney" standing. Nate Silver presented at least some data to contradict Sides and Vavreck.

So, that's a lot of reasons to think Romney has not quite locked down the nomination. But here's why the race for the nomination really is over.

1) The Narrative - The way Romney won Michigan was more important than the fact that he only won by 3 points. He was trailing in most polls (by a lot in some) until about a week before the primary. Because Michigan is one of Romney's "home" states, the race there became a key test of his campaign. So, expectations were set low (ie, "he may lose") and it was viewed as important (ie, "he has to win"). By winning, even by a little bit, Romney emerged with something a lot more important than delegates. He emerged with momentum and the sense that his campaign had exceeded expectations.

2) Organization - Ohio is not the only place the Santorum campaign's lack of organization has hurt them. Virginia votes on Super Tuesday and both Gingrich and Santorum failed to get on the ballot there. More generally, the Santorum campaign has been remarkably inept in its messaging. Santorum himself has a tendency to say things that are controversial. In some senses, this is what many of his supporters like about him. But it would help a lot to have a real campaign organization that would put the candidate's comments in context or put the right spin on them and it would help to have a campaign organization that can respond to Romney's criticism's of the candidate. These are all but absent.

3) Gingrich - Does Gingrich leave the race after Super Tuesday? My prediction is that he won't. Alabama and Mississippi vote one week later on March 13. I'm not a psychologist but Newt Gingrich's ego doesn't need much in the way of evidence to convince him America fundamentally needs him. His "big" win in Georgia might be enough and, if Santorum does even a little worse than expected on Tuesday, Gingrich will have even more reason to believe he is the alternative to Romney everyone has been waiting for. I know this is silly. But it is really how Gingrich thinks. He's silly.

4) Money - You may have heard that Mitt Romney is independently wealthy. Even with his fundraising troubles, Romney has the money to go on and the others simply don't. They can go on in the technical sense but they don't have much money and that gap is going to grow after Super Tuesday as fewer and fewer people believe there is a path to victory for Santorum or Gingrich. How bad is the money situation for Gingrich? To date, he's still raised less money than Rick Perry ... who quit the race for the second time before South Carolina and endorsed Gingrich. How bad is the money situation for Santorum? Even accounting for the $4.5M he's raised so far in the first quarter of 2012, he's still raised less money than Michele Bachmann and about the same amount as Jon Huntsman ... who quit the race after New Hampshire because nobody outside of New Hampshire supported him. The trickle of money Gingrich and Santorum were raising is going to dry up further after Tuesday.

I'm not saying Santorum (or Gingrich as I've stated above) will drop out after Tuesday. But the race is likely to be effectively over. And, when we look back, I think it will be the case that Michigan was where the race really ended. Before Michigan, Romney was in some trouble and there was a lot of discussion of whether someone else would jump in the race if Romney was defeated there. After Michigan, Romney has been viewed as back in the driver's seat and he followed up with a win in Washington where polls suggested he was losing just a week and a half ago. The worst-case scenario (losing Ohio by a small margin) on Tuesday still has Romney winning most of the states and the vast majority of delegates across all 10 states. There is simply not likely to be any more oxygen for Santorum or Gingrich.

Where Are We?

Nate Silver points out what you probably were already sensing:

Mr. Santorum’s bounce has already had considerably more staying power than those of some of his rivals. Newt Gingrich’s surge in the national polls, for instance, peaked just 24 or 48 hours after his victory in South Carolina, whereas Mr. Santorum’s has now persisted for more than a week.

Mitt Romney may really be in some trouble this time. His inability to connect just seems to be getting worse and worse.



Nationally, Romney appears to have lost his lead to Santorum:


Rick Santorum, the guy who lost his re-election bid in Pennsylvania by almost 20 points, is beating Mitt Romney.

The numbers at the state level are not good for Romney. He's losing in Michigan. He's losing really, really badly in Ohio, by 18 points according to Rasmussen. He's not only losing badly to Gingrich in Georgia but Santorum is about tied with him for second there so Gingrich + Santorum in Georgia is truly horrific for him. Romney is not up by much in Arizona. Rasmussen has a new poll out there that has him ahead by just 8 and PPP is polling the state now. My guess is they will show a smaller lead for Romney by the end of the weekend.

Meanwhile, various polls have Obama moving ahead of Romney in trial heats nationally. CNN has Obama over 50% and ahead by 5. Democracy Corps has Obama ahead by 4.


The question right now is simply whether things are just bad for Romney or bad for Romney with a chance of rain.

Santorum, Joe the Plumber, and Ned Flanders

No, not THE Joe the Plumber. I mean Joe, "a metaphorical" plumber.

We've seen a number of polls out of Michigan that have Santorum ahead of Romney (for now) by anywhere from 2 points to 15 points. This morning, a Quinnipiac poll has Santorum ahead of Romney in Ohio (a Super Tuesday state) by 7. One thing these states have in common is there are a lot of blue-collar men willing to vote in the Republican Primary who are increasingly unhappy with Romney and who are easy pickings for Santorum's message on reviving manufacturing. Nate Silver gets at this in his thoughtful article today suggesting that Santorum may not be all that less electable than Romney. Jonathan Chait makes a similar argument pointing out that

I don’t think it’s sunk in quite how poisoned Romney’s image has become among downscale voters. Coverage of Romney’s wealth, corporate history, and partially released tax situation coincided with, and almost certainly caused, a collapse in his support with white voters with income under $50,000.

Then there's geography. Look at the states Romney has won: New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, and Maine (sort of). Look at the states Santorum has won: Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Colorado. Put these on a map and you can see that Michigan and Ohio sure seem like Santorum country.

The bottom line is that Romney is winning "around the edges" and Santorum is winning in what Ned Flanders likes to call "the real America." We don't know yet if Santorum's surge will last. But one thing that suggests the Santorum surge can be more lasting than the previous surges is that Santorum's persona and message actually match the electorate he's winning over right now. Rick Perry was never a good match with voters in the midwest. Gingrich's appeal to evangelicals was always tempered by his, ya know, two mistresses and two divorces. Having never held office, Herman Cain was just not a credible national candidate. But Santorum lives the family story values voters talk about. He has the manufacturing message that voters in the Midwest like. He knows how to debate and he speaks the language of downscale voters. Mitt Romney does not.

I really think the only thing holding Santorum back right now is Gingrich. If Gingrich were to leave the race (not likely to happen soon), I think Romney would have a good chance of losing the nomination. As it is, Romney is going to have to muddy himself further by doing to Santorum what he did to Gingrich ... spend millions on negative ads tearing him down.

The Very Poor

I guess Romney's definitive statement that he's not concerned about the very poor was enough to bring Trump on board!

The Romney camp responded to the brouhaha about Romney's comments by saying that his comments need to be taken in context. Here's the more full clip.



It's actually not any better. First Read correctly points out that the problem with the gaffe (and this is when a gaffe is actually dangerous) is that it reinforces an existing narrative about Romney. It only matters because people already think Romney doesn't care about the poor. In Romney's defense, he does come back to say "There's no question. It's not good being poor." I can just imagine Romney's advisors popping antacids and tugging at their shirt collars watching that.

But there's another more subtle but long-term problem here. Look at the reasoning Romney uses. He literally says, "You can choose where to focus. You can focus on the rich. That's not my focus. You can focus on the very poor. That's not my focus. My focus is on middle income Americans ..." So, here's what happened ... and I really believe this: Romney was in a meeting with his advisors and they said to him, you've already got the support of the rich and there's no votes to be had in doing something for the poor. We're focusing on the middle class. Remember Mitt, you're focused on the middle class. So he goes out and does an interview and says, "You can choose where to focus."

Keep repeating that line. "You can choose where to focus." It is the essence of Mitt Romney. He is absolutely telling you, "I have no core. But my advisors say there are votes to be had in the middle class. So I'm going to focus there."

Just as a post-script, a new poll is out by PPP in Ohio. Obama 49, Romney 42. Obviously, a full lifetime to go in this race but ... Middle income. Middle America. Not digging Romney today.