Pop goes another poll

"Mitt Romney has a slight edge over President Obama in the race for the White House in the latest CBS News/New York Times poll."

Thus does CBS moan in another of its statistical orgasms. It then whispers softly, though, that "Romney's slight advantage remains within the poll's margin of error"--which of course promptly erases any presumption of a Romney "edge."

Just as promptly comes CBS' flooding memory of those other, empty, meaningless, one-night statistical stands: Ah yes, there was Obama on top, in February and March; there was Romney in the saddle, in January; and also in January the two were melded, from time to time, in an equal, horizontal embrace.

All of which is titillating indeed; but, as mentioned, is utterly meaningless, unless one of them opens roughly an 8-10 point advantage and stays there--which is vastly unlikely to happen now that the whorrifying W. Years are slipping from the nation's memory and the electorate, consequently, has resettled into its roughly 45-45 partisan divide.

Oh, did I mention that presidential elections aren't decided by national popular vote? One can flush just about 44 upcoming, predetermined state returns and concentrate only on the remaining, decisive few. And there "the path" for Romney is, as the Washington Post reported earlier this month, rather "narrow."

(I noticed this morning that David Brooks is calling Obama the "ESPN Man." As silly as that sounds, in its socially scientifically-hipster-Brooksian way, it is also perhaps true in the sense that Obama, in view of last week's developments, has clearly decided to at least give Romney a sporting chance in some of those "bi-," swinging-states, like North Carolina.)

So the next time you experience another of these neck-and-neck national polls, just lie back and have a cigarette handy and try to keep in mind that even the worst of these things is about as good as it gets.

Comments

[Chris Andersen]

I guarantee you that sometime around mid-August there will be a couple of polls that show a significant lead by Romney, which the national news media will then hype beyond all reason into evidence that Obama's re-election chances are cratering.

Why do I say this? Because it happens ever election cycle.

[oldgulph]

Presidential elections don't have to be this way.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in more than 3/4ths of the states that now are just 'spectators' and ignored after the primaries.

When the bill is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes– enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538), all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC.

The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.

In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%,, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%. Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.

The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers in 21 states. The bill has been enacted by 9 jurisdictions possessing 132 electoral votes - 49% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.

NationalPopularVote.com
Follow National Popular Vote on Facebook via NationalPopularVoteInc