Poll: Obama Leading Romney 49% To 46% Ahead Of Second Debate

[News_Editor]

Poll: Obama leading Romney 49% to 46% ahead of second debate < br />

2012-10-16 09:17:15 GMT+7 (ICT)

WASHINGTON, D.C. (BNO NEWS) -- A day before the second of three presidential debates ahead of the November election, an ABC News/Washington Post poll released Monday shows President Barack Obama leading Republican challenger Mitt Romney by three points – 49 percent to 46 percent.

Of the 1,063 registered voters and 923 likely voters interviewed for the ABC News/Washington Post poll, 93 percent said they are closely following the 2012 presidential race. The poll was was conducted by telephone between October 10 and 13, and the error margin is 3.5 points.

The race for the White House has been virtually tied for months, but Obama is under a massive amount of pressure from Democrats to step up his game after a lackluster performance during the first debate on October 3. Obama has been preparing at the Kingsmill Resort in Williamsburg, Virginia, since Saturday with the help of his top advisers.

Campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters during a briefing Monday that Obama is looking forward to answering questions from the American public during the second debate. "You should expect that he's going to be firm but respectful in correcting the record and the times we expect Mitt Romney will hide from and distort his own policies. He's energized and I expect he will also be making a passionate case," she said.

Meanwhile, Romney has been practicing at his home in Belmont, Massachusetts. According to a report from POLITICO, the candidate and his advisers are struggling with how to replicate his successful performance during the first debate - focusing on stagecraft and body language.

Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman, who is helping prep Romney for the second debate, told ABC's This Week Sunday "they've (the Obama campaign) spent hundreds of millions of dollars around the country, including a lot in Ohio, mischaracterizing Governor Romney's positions and misrepresenting him. And I think you'll see that again at the debate on Tuesday night."

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-10-16

[chiangmaikelly]

RCP Average 10/7 - 10/14 -- -- 47.4 47.3 Romney +0.1 Rasmussen Tracking 10/12 - 10/14 1500 LV 3.0 49 48 Romney +1 ABC News/Wash Post 10/10 - 10/13 923 LV 3.5 46 49 Obama +3 Gallup Tracking 10/8 - 10/14 2700 LV 2.0 49 47 Romney +2 IBD/TIPP Tracking 10/9 - 10/14 872 LV 3.5 47 47 Tie Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/7 - 10/11 1000 LV 3.1 48 49 Obama +1 Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 10/8 - 10/10 1360 LV 2.7 47 46 Romney +1 FOX News 10/7 - 10/9 1109 LV 3.0 46 45 Romney +1

Edited October 16, 2012 by chiangmaikelly

[Steely Dan]

The Dems and their media lackeys are doing their utmost to paint a misleading picture of the polls. In addition rightly fearing the deaths of U.S diplomats in Libya will stick to Obama I note that Hillary has taken a bullet for the Emperor.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-19958739

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says she takes responsibility for the failure in security at the US consulate in Benghazi, where the US ambassador to Libya was killed last month.

[keemapoot]

This one could be the big one. With Obama losing the first one, this may decide things in this close race:

Before this year, only two presidential debates changed the outcome.

In 1960, Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat John F. Kennedy were tied in the Gallup. The result of the election was uncertain.

Until the debate, that is. Nixon was sweaty, grim-faced and unappealing. Kennedy was young, handsome and cool. After the debate, JFK took the lead and went on to win the presidency.

The next time a presidential debate mattered — really mattered — was in 2000. In that race, Al Gore had been significantly ahead of George W. Bush in a series of public opinion polls. The presidential debates changed all that. In the first, Gore exaggerated his accomplishments and repeatedly showed impatience with the folksy, aw-shucks approach of Bush. In the spin room afterwards, GOP staff brilliantly characterized the Democrat’s performance: “He sighed and he lied.” Gore dropped. He dropped yet again when he appeared in a subsequent debate with makeup that was undeniably orange. And he again came across as pompous and phony. He lost.

http://www.nantonnew...-face-off-again

Watch it online live on Yahoo and many other places tomorrow morning Thai time.

[Jingthing]

Reading the OP, it appears to be a completely objective report of ONE recent credible poll. I see no fixing or bias from the so called "dems" in this news item. It's a close race and media has made that very clear; and that's for the best really as both sides will be motivated (at least in the contested states) to vote as if their one vote MATTERS.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

This one could be the big one. With Obama losing the first one, this may decide things in this close race:

Maybe. Because of the townhall format, it is unlikely that there will be a clear victor. I am wondering if it will all rest on debate 3 which is pretty much the same as the first debate, but concentrates on foreign policy. However, all eyes will be on this debate for sure.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Credo]

Oh great, the 'blame the media' group is out again. None are so blind as those who will not see.

[Jingthing]

The truth is that debates rarely decide elections and all probabilities are, ignoring all the predictable media hype, is that this election will be no different. Obama's position is very strong electorally speaking, and nothing Romney has tried has really gotten him much chance of winning Ohio, and if he can't win Ohio, his election is very, very unlikely. The sweet thing to look forward to for people like me who are horrified by the radical right wing agenda that Romney is representing (in today's republican party moderates basically don't exist), is the day after the election, Romney instantly fades into total obscurity and of no public interest whatsoever. An unemployed rich man.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Jingthing

[keemapoot]

This one could be the big one. With Obama losing the first one, this may decide things in this close race:

Maybe. Because of the townhall format, it is unlikely that there will be a clear victor. I am wondering if it will all rest on debate 3 which is pretty much the same as the first debate, but concentrates on foreign policy. However, all eyes will be on this debate for sure.

Agree, we might have to wait to see all 3, especially as this format favors folksy Clinton types, and neither candidate has that type of persona. It will be interesting to watch though, if Obama tries too hard to make up for debate 1, he could end up looking desperate. Romney probably just has to not make any mistakes, so in my view, Obama has the most work to do. Interesting when they went into debate 1, Obama was riding high. How tables turn.

[Jingthing]

What a bunch of artificial drama. Electorally speaking, Obama is not desperate and he is still on a trend to win.

Yes, I'll agree that IF Obama "loses" debate 2 and 3 in a decisive way, his strong position for reelection is threatened but I find it highly improbable that all three debates will turn out that way. My opinion is that two fairly even debates (where both sides claim victory and it's a spin fest for both sides) will be good enough for Obama to win Ohio and thus the election. I don't think he needs to hit anything out of the park now.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

The truth is that debates rarely decide elections

Sometimes they do and it is pretty obvious to most people that this is one of those times.

[koheesti]

Before the first debate, there was a lot of controversy over the sampling in these polls, because they weighted Democrats heavier than even their 2008 turnout. Then Romney won and the polls showed Romney leading. Was the sampling the same in the post debate polls (over-sampled Democrats?) I stopped hearing those complaints once Romney took the lead. Now out of nowhere somehow Obama is up by 3 points in the polls. Will the over-sampling controversy pop up again?

As for the Townhall debate, I expect to see Obama's eye's darting around the room, as his campaign will probably plant some "undecided voters" in there to hold up cue cards for him to read from.

Edited October 16, 2012 by koheesti

[Scott]

Off-topic and baiting posts removed.

[Ulysses G.]

I stopped hearing those complaints once Romney took the lead. Now out of nowhere somehow Obama is up by 3 points in the polls. Will the over-sampling controversy pop up again?

That is only one poll. As most polls have Romney slightly in the lead, I don't think so. However, if Romney wins, it will be interesting to see if the victory is greater than expected from past poll results.

[Jingthing]

Actually what has happened in the polls is that they are very volatile.

After debate 1 Romney had a bump, then their were good job numbers and the Biden debate where undecided voters DID think Biden won, so the initial Romney bump and momentum were degraded.

These swings will continue until election day. It will be close.

That all said, the OHIO polls have consistently been for Obama so contrary to popular belief, the pressure is still strongly on Romney to find some way to move Ohio. I think he can't.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Now, the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows Romney leading Obama 50%-46% among likely voters in the swing states. Men who are likely voters back him 52%-44%. The states are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/10/15/swing-states-poll-women-voters-romney-obama/1634791/

[koheesti]

Actually what has happened in the polls is that they are very volatile.

After debate 1 Romney had a bump, then their were good job numbers and the Biden debate where undecided voters DID think Biden won, so the initial Romney bump and momentum were degraded.

Undecided voters thought Biden won? I guess I need to get on the Obama/Biden campaign mailing list too.

Edited October 16, 2012 by koheesti

[Jingthing]

Actually what has happened in the polls is that they are very volatile.

After debate 1 Romney had a bump, then their were good job numbers and the Biden debate where undecided voters DID think Biden won, so the initial Romney bump and momentum were degraded.

Undecided voters thought Biden won? I guess I need to get on the Obama/Biden campaign mailing list too.

Actually, not.

http://www.cbsnews.c...ted-voters-say/

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/12/how-do-undecided-voters-feel-about-bidens-performance/

Edited October 16, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

There are lots of polls out there.

Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan won tonight’s debate with Vice President Joe Biden, according to a CNN/ORC International poll of 381 registered voters who watched the nationally televised event. http://www.bloomberg...n-cnn-poll.html

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/12/ryan-won-vice-presidential-debate-biden-succeeded-say-polls-and-pundits/

Edited October 16, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

Personally, I do not want to see any more whining about the moderator (in the debate, not this forum ), by either side. You're in the big leagues now boys, and sh*t happens. You need to be on top of your game like never before is what I say to both Romney & Obama.

“The stakes are just so high right now that people are looking for every reason to figure out why whatever happens to their candidate happens,” he said “Whether they think they did well, or usually if they think they didn’t do well or didn’t get a fair shake, right away they point — well the moderator was tougher on them with time, or didn’t give them equal time, or interrupted them.”

I think surprises can happen in this debate, especially with the ad hoc nature of the audience participation. I'm going to be watching closely which candidate can handle the heat.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2012/president/2012/10/15/debating-the-role-the-debate-moderator/JYHJTr4xEE0JiyYAYr4I3I/story.html

[Asiantravel]

Personally, I do not want to see any more whining about the moderator (in the debate, not this forum ), by either side. You're in the big leagues now boys, and sh*t happens. You need to be on top of your game like never before is what I say to both Romney & Obama.

“The stakes are just so high right now that people are looking for every reason to figure out why whatever happens to their candidate happens,” he said “Whether they think they did well, or usually if they think they didn’t do well or didn’t get a fair shake, right away they point — well the moderator was tougher on them with time, or didn’t give them equal time, or interrupted them.”

I think surprises can happen in this debate, especially with the ad hoc nature of the audience participation. I'm going to be watching closely which candidate can handle the heat.

http://www.boston.co...4I3I/story.html

But the moderator herself is allowed to say she didn't like Joe Biden's performance

http://www.theblaze....ce-was-too-big/

Edited October 16, 2012 by Asiantravel

[Ulysses G.]

I thought that Martha Raddatz was fair. I got the idea that she was just jumping in on particular topics that she was knowledgeable about, rather than purposely targeting Ryan. However, between Biden constantly interrupting and the moderator interrupting him as well, I can see how some people were uptight about it.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

The high stakes for this debate are palpable. Then again, maybe I just don't get out much anymore...

][/size]

In 30 years of reporting I can safely say I have never seen anything like this before.

The buzz is everywhere.

There are media trucks and cameras at every corner waiting to ask passing students yet another question. “I feel like a celebrity,” said one as she walked by an MTV crew filming student reactions to the media invasion.

There are 3,375 credentialed reporters for this debate and it’s a veritable alphabet soup of TV and radio networks with MTV, CBS, NPR, Fox, ABC, NBC and CNN among the most prominent. There is a huge contingent from overseas

Read more: http://www.irishcent...l#ixzz29Sjvon35

[geriatrickid]

How come no one ever uses common sense when discussing the poll results? Ok, so one candidate may have a "lead" in the total numbers, but does it really mean anything without an understanding of how the numbers break down?

Considering the fact that the US population does not directly elect the President and that it is the electoral college that does, what matters then is the state by state results. All that a candidate needs in any given state is a +1 majority to win the electoral college vote and that means that a candidate could win big in a few states, skewing the results, but lose the electoral college vote. For example, any gains in popular vote by the Democrats in Texas or Republicans in NY might bump up the popular vote, but have no impact on the probable electoral college result. I'd be more concerned about polling results in FL, CO, MI, OH, NM, NV and VA than the big numbers,

[Ulysses G.]

I'd be more concerned about polling results in FL, CO, MI, OH, NM, NV and VA than the big numbers,

Those are swing states and have already been mentioned a number of times.

Now, the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows Romney leading Obama 50%-46% among likely voters in the swing states. http://www.usatoday....-obama/1634791/

Edited October 16, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[koheesti]

Personally, I do not want to see any more whining about the moderator (in the debate, not this forum ), by either side. You're in the big leagues now boys, and sh*t happens. You need to be on top of your game like never before is what I say to both Romney & Obama.

“The stakes are just so high right now that people are looking for every reason to figure out why whatever happens to their candidate happens,” he said “Whether they think they did well, or usually if they think they didn’t do well or didn’t get a fair shake, right away they point — well the moderator was tougher on them with time, or didn’t give them equal time, or interrupted them.”

I think surprises can happen in this debate, especially with the ad hoc nature of the audience participation. I'm going to be watching closely which candidate can handle the heat.

http://www.boston.co...4I3I/story.html

Both the Obama and Romney campaigns have already shown concern about the moderator. Why don't people ever give moderators a break? They've got a tough job to do and when they are biased one way or the other, it gets them in even more trouble. I'm surprised anyone agrees to be a moderator in the first place...

Moderator Role Under Scrutiny — Before the Debate

In a rare example of political unity, both the Romney and Obama campaigns have expressed concern to the Commission on Presidential Debates about how the moderator of this Tuesday’s town hall has publicly described her role, TIME has learned.

While an early-October memorandum of understanding between the Obama and Romney campaigns suggests that CNN’s Candy Crowley would play a limited role in the Tuesday-night session, Crowley, who is not a party to that agreement, has done a series of interviews on her network in which she has suggested that she will assume a broader set of responsibilities. As Crowley put it last week, “Once the table is kind of set by the town-hall questioner, there is then time for me to say, ‘Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?’”

Read more:

http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/14/moderator-role-under-scrutiny-before-the-debate/#ixzz29SrXNjVv

[keemapoot]

How come no one ever uses common sense when discussing the poll results? Ok, so one candidate may have a "lead" in the total numbers, but does it really mean anything without an understanding of how the numbers break down?

Considering the fact that the US population does not directly elect the President and that it is the electoral college that does, what matters then is the state by state results. All that a candidate needs in any given state is a +1 majority to win the electoral college vote and that means that a candidate could win big in a few states, skewing the results, but lose the electoral college vote. For example, any gains in popular vote by the Democrats in Texas or Republicans in NY might bump up the popular vote, but have no impact on the probable electoral college result. I'd be more concerned about polling results in FL, CO, MI, OH, NM, NV and VA than the big numbers,

Here's an up to date snapshot of the electoral college situation. Obama hangs on to a slim lead.

As of this weekend, Obama holds a slim 201-181 lead in presumed Electoral College votes, with 156 votes in a dozen states considered up for grabs, according to RealClearPolitics.com, a nonpartisan polling-data and political-news organization based in Chicago.

Less than a week ago, Obama had a 251-181 electoral advantage in the RealClearPolitics.com totals. The numbers are based on the latest polls in each state.

As of late last week, 12 states were in the tossup column.

Those states, and their number of Electoral College votes: Colorado, 9; Florida, 29; Iowa, 6; Michigan, 16; Missouri, 10; Nevada, 6; New Hampshire, 4; North Carolina, 15; Ohio, 18; Pennsylvania, 20; Virginia, 13; and Wisconsin, 10.

Read more here: http://www.tri-cityh...l#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.tri-cityh...l#storylink=cpy

[nurofiend]

i really hope obama really brings his a-game

i'm genuinely worried about romney becoming president, i think he's the worst candidate america has had for decades.

i think he would be an absolute catastrophe tbh, he would make bush look like lincoln.

Edited October 16, 2012 by nurofiend

[notmyself]

However, between Biden constantly interrupting and the moderator interrupting him as well, I can see how some people were uptight about it.

It was supposed to be a debate was it not? What is the point of wasting time on something that has repeatedly and demonstrably shown to be untrue?

[koheesti]

There's some odd poll called something like "Gallup" that on Oct 15th has Romney at 50% to Obama 46%. The Biden-Ryan debate was on Oct 11th so I'm not sure what happened here. Obama should have gotten a bump from Biden's decisive and historic win, right?

Romney 50%, Obama 46% Among Likely Voters

Obama down sharply among men, college grads, and Southern voters vs. 2008

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158048/romney-obama-among-likely-voters.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines%20-%20Politics