Obama doing well in Wisconsin and beyond

There might not be any state that better represents Barack Obama's improved fortunes in the opening months of 2012 than Wisconsin. When we polled there in late October Obama's approval was a 44/51 spread and he led Mitt Romney by only 3 points at 46-43, representing a much closer race than the state had in 2008. Now those numbers have shifted significantly, with Obama's approval basically flipping to 52/44. And he now leads Romney 53-39, a 14 point margin that matches what he won against John McCain there.

Obama's 14 point lead in Wisconsin matches a trend we're seeing in both our national and state polling across the country right now: Obama/Romney is starting to look more and more like Obama/McCain, or even something more friendly to the President. Here's the breakdown on all of our Obama/Romney polls from 2012 and how they compare to the 2008 results:

State	2012 Poll	2008 Result	Shift
Wisconsin	Obama +14	Obama +14	None
Washington	Obama +15	Obama +17	R+2
Arizona	Tie	McCain +8	D+8
Michigan	Obama +16	Obama +16	None
National	Obama +7	Obama +7	None
North Carolina	Obama +1	Tie	D+1
Missouri	Tie	Tie	None
Ohio	Obama +7	Obama +4	D+3
Minnesota	Obama +10	Obama +10	None
Texas	Romney +7	McCain +11	D+4

In 5 out of 10 places we've polled so far in 2012 Obama's standing matches his 2008 performance, in 4 of them it's better, and in only 1 is it worse. I fully expect Romney's numbers to see some improvement if/when he wins the nomination but for now things are shaping up pretty favorably for the President.

Part of Obama's increased lead over Romney in Wisconsin is due to his own approval numbers improving. But it's also because Romney's numbers are headed decidedly in the wrong direction. Only 25% of voters in the one time swing state now have a favorable opinion of him, to 61% with a negative one. Since October his net favorability has dropped by 18 points with Democrats, 16 points with Republicans, and 12 points with independents.

Romney is actually not the strongest Republican candidate for the general election in Wisconsin. That mantle goes to Rick Santorum who trails the President by only 6 points at 49-43. Obama's leads are larger against Ron Paul (53-37) and Newt Gingrich (55-37).

In addition to being the most electable candidate against Obama, Santorum also leads the Republican primary field in Wisconsin. He's at 43% to 27% for Romney, 10% for Gingrich, and 8% for Paul. I wouldn't consider these numbers to be too predictive of what will actually happen when Wisconsin votes though. Only 38% of voters say they're strongly committed to their current choice, while 62% say they could change their minds between now and the election. This poll was conducted before Romney's big wins in Arizona and Michigan on Tuesday and it's possible that momentum is already swinging back toward him in the state.

Full results here

Comments

[D K Carter]

These polls for general are as useful as toilet paper. I can't wait to see Romney's TV adverts on Obama. Think Romney PAC was tough on Newt & Santo?
Rock n Roll

[Alan Snipes]

Gallup's swing state polling is at odds with everyone else's polling. Of course, they are not capable of breaking it down on a state by state basis.
Based on yours and other polling in specific states, Obama would win today by about the margin he won in 2008.

[ryah]

LMAO @ D.K.Carter.
Romney & his super PAC will NOT outspend Obama 10 to 1.
Romney can t win a single state without outspending his competition at least 4 to 1... and that won t happen in the general election.

[Alex]

Interesting poll, but Obama is certainly not winning in Missouri, Arizona, and certainly Texas.
Someone should do an Indiana poll as well, one state that no matter what, will vote Republican this year.

[axt113]

Hey DK Carter, Obama has more money to spend than Santorum and Newt

Plus Romney is already running low on funds and he's facing third stringers, not a political superpower like Obama

[C.R.]

to DK carter and others: The idea that Romney's "super pac" is going to jump in and save the day for him against the president has no validity. We've never seen a super pac machinations play out in a general election. Further, Mitt can't control that message. So he runs the risk of having them saying things that would turn off the independent vote since the people running the pac are on the far right and can't seem to put together an argument that doesn't condemn the president as basically the antichrist. Romney makes his case never based on how great he is but how "bad" the president is. He and the Republican's believed that that would be enough because they hoped the economy would continue stagnating and he wouldn't have to put forth a positive forceful message on his behalf. People have made up their minds about the President. Anything Romney's pac throw at him, most people will know about and will take it with a grain of salt. He's not Gingrich who you could throw mud at and it would stick because he'd already dowsed himself in it years ago. If negative ads really worked to the degree that the bitter Republicans on this site and out in the world hope it would, then how do you explain the fact that despite Romney's mud slinging Santorum is still in the race having started with zero name i.d.? If Santorum can be competitive against Romney, do you really believe that Romney is a strong enough candidate to overwhelm the president? It will take an economic apocalypse for Romney to have the advantage. Obama 2012

[Tom Johnson]

Obama will win Arizona. You can write it down.

[pbrower2a]

This is before the formidable campaign apparatus of Barack Obama of 2008 comes out of mothballs, before the President's campaign has shown its strongest pitch, and before the negative ads come out. Expect a better-organized Democratic convention than the Republican counterpart, and expect the usual interest groups behind the Democratic Party to congeal quickly at the appointed time. Unions, feminist groups, gay rights groups, and ethnic minority interests know well who the good guys and bad guys are.

The Tea Party is massively unpopular as are Republicans in Congress. A poll that showed an approval rating of 41% for "your Congressional representative" makes running against Congress a viable option.

[Eric]

The Tea Party might be unpopular, but so is Occupy Wall Street, so the two cancel each other out, more or less

[Obama 2012]

Awesome news. I feel about as confident as you can be on March 2. It'll be a long year... but as long as the economy doesn't falter in a serious way I don't see Obama losing.

[Steve Soto]

People need to understand a few things about Gallup's polling this cycle before they take it for gospel. First, Gallup's sampling methodology assumes that 40% of the country is conservative, a very questionable assumption, and that 29% of the country has an annual income of $75K a year or more, which is definitely not the case in real America. Lastly, Gallup builds their samples around a March 2011 national demographic profile, and I'm not sure assumptions about the electorate a year ago are still valid today.

[Todd Dugdale]

Alex wrote:
"Obama is certainly not winning in Missouri, Arizona, and certainly Texas."

The point is that his numbers are *improved* over 2008, not that he is *winning* AZ and TX.

"Someone should do an Indiana poll as well"

IN and ND don't allow automated polling, which is what PPP does. Maybe "someone" should pay for a poll of those States from a live-interview pollster, instead of being smug and putting down the polling they are getting for free.

"one state that no matter what, will vote Republican this year."

Big deal. Romney won't win CA, either, no matter what. It's about getting 270 EV, Alex. It's not about winning every State. And, if you are so *sure* about IN, why would you even want it polled? You make no sense.