Obama up 7 in Ohio

Barack Obama continues to have the upper hand in Ohio, even if Mitt Romney puts one of the Buckeye State's leading politicians on his ticket.

Obama leads Romney 50-43. That 7 point margin is unchanged from late January when he was ahead by a 49-42 spread. Obama also led 50-41 when PPP polled the state in early November so this makes three polls in a row over the span of six months with him leading by 7-9 points. Obama certainly looks like the favorite in Ohio at this point.

Ohio voters don't love Obama. They're evenly split with 48% approving and 48% disapproving of him, although that is an improvement from the negative numbers he's posted during most of his time in office. Obama's lead in the state may be driven more by the fact that Ohioans just don't much care for Mitt Romney. 37% have a favorable opinion of him to 53% with a negative one. That includes a 33/59 spread with independents. Romney's performance in Ohio in the primary wasn't terribly impressive and his issues seem to be extending to the general election.

Rob Portman has received perhaps more attention as a potential running mate for Romney than anyone else over the last month but even with all of that publicity he remains a relatively obscure figure in the state. 36% of voters have no opinion on his job performance, the highest level of indifference we've found to any of the 87 sitting Senators we've polled on in their home states. Those who do have a take on Portman are closely divided with 31% approving of him to 33% who disapprove.

Portman would help Romney a little bit in Ohio. When you add him to the ticket Obama's lead over Romney drops from 50-43 to 49-44. He doesn't move any Democrats or independents in Romney's direction but he does help unify Republicans around their nominee, taking the spread with GOPers from 82/13 to 85/10.

We also tested Ohio's two other most prominent Republicans as potential running mates, even though both seem like incredible long shots to get the VP nod. If John Kasich was on the ticket the numbers would stay exactly at a 50-43 Obama lead and if John Boehner was Obama's lead would be 49-42 with the undecideds ticking up a notch.

Kasich and Boehner are both very unpopular. Kasich has a 38/49 approval spread (although it's worth noting that's up from 33/53 in February) and Boehner's is 34/50. I wouldn't underestimate the relevance of Kasich and Boehner's weakness in the state to Obama's current strength there. Ohio voted GOP in 2010 and it hasn't really liked the way that turned out- that will impact the willingness of voters to pick Republicans again this time around.

The GOP's struggles with women and young voters really show themselves in Ohio. Obama's up 55-36 with women and has a 62-30 advantage with those under 30. If you extend the definition of 'young' voters to those under 45 Obama still holds a massive advantage at 56-35. Romney's winning seniors 49-45 but he needs a much bigger lead than that to make up for his weakness with young people.

Ohio will get closer. Obama's winning 88% of the Democratic vote while Romney's at just 82% of the Republican vote, so Romney should have more space to grow over the next six months. But as it stands Obama's got a good amount of breathing room and looks to have a decent chance at replicating his 4 point Ohio victory margin from 2008.

Full results here

Comments

[DownriverDem]

No one in Wisconsin, Ohio or Michigan should even think of voting for Romney. He told us all to go to hell.

[Alle]

Another cooked PPP poll.....

Look at the high number of liberals to moderates....

Woman out polled men by 4%.

Democrats polled = 40% s/b closer to 32%

[Jay]

Something is amiss. I am not saying any of these PPP polls are wrong. However, one simply can't explain how Obama and Romney are running even in the national polls and a state like Ohio has a 7 point differential. I think the problem with both the Ohio and Iowa polls you have done do not allocate the Republican vote appropriately even at this stage of the election. It is the only way you can make any kind of correlation between the national polling and the individual state figures I see. Ohio, will go Republican if on election day the vote is roughly even nationally. I would be willing to be that today. Florida most certainly would go Republican as would North Carolina, Indiana and perhaps Iowa and Virginia. The votes in the latter two states would be very close. Please be more careful in allocating the Republican vote to more accurately reflect the current status of the state. I really do think it is a problem with your polling versus the other pollsters right now. Otherwise, you will be finding your polling changing drastically later in the campaign when other pollsters have already correctly calculated the voters at this stage of the campaign.

[Todd Dugdale]

The percentage of Republicans for Romney is exactly the same as it was in November 2011, though now Romney is the presumed nominee. This idea of a Republican rally to the nominee is looking as credible as the "PUMA" narrative from 2008.

The percentage of undecided Independent voters really hasn't changed since November, either. The gender gap has also been pretty stable, with Romney improving slightly with men while the gap with women is essentially unchanged. So much for "Rosen-gate".

White voters, another core Republican demographic, are still split. Romney can't seem to get a majority (or only a slim majority) of them in most swing states.

[George]

"Something is amiss. I am not saying any of these PPP polls are wrong. However, one simply can't explain how Obama and Romney are running even in the national polls and a state like Ohio has a 7 point differential."

Other pollsters also show that the national polls are very close but Obama leads in swing states. For instance, try Nevada. The right-leaning has Obama leading Romney by 8 among likely voters while in the national poll Romney leads Obama by 5. So, it is not a problem with PPP.

In 2000, Gallup upto the end showed Bush ahead by 7 over Gore nationally...while state level polls showed a much closer race. In the end, the state polls were more accurate than the national polls in 2000. The bottom line is state polls are more accurate while national polls are not. Why? Although the sample of Dems may be the same as in state polls, some polls may have more southern dems in their sample than others. If a national poll has more southern dems in the sample, Romney will lead Obama. Otherwise, Obama leads Romney or it is a tie.

"Ohio, will go Republican if on election day the vote is roughly even nationally."

There were exceptions, but likely.

"Florida most certainly would go Republican as would North Carolina, Indiana and perhaps Iowa and Virginia."

Based on the past yes. But, with the exception of Indiana and Iowa, there is an unseen guest in the room...that guest is called demography. Virginia demography is changing not because of Hispanics, but because liberal Marylanders are moving into the state. I live in VA...some of my new neighbors are Marylanders. PPP's Virginia poll result has been confirmed by another poll recently. So, I will not argue about the authenticity of the poll.

One final note: the descrepancy in the national vs state polls are wider for Rasmussen than PPP. At the national level PPP has Obama leading in the polls while Rasmussen has Obama trailing. However, at the state levels, Nevada, Wisconsin and even Ohio, Rasmussen had Obama lead in high single digits. Until Rasmussen aligns its state and national poll results I will have to take it with a grain of salt. In most countries national polls are the real thing. Not in the US.

So what would I do? I wll go into RCP poll averages for all polls at the state level...and allocate the electoral votes accordingly...and see who has the lead. At present, it is Obama. It could change in the next six months. I dont even look at the national polls. And one final note...Gallup average of swing state polls is nonsense and does not help anyone assess the situation state by state.

[Splitting Image]

I'm not sold on the idea that Romney will necessarily "solidify the party" behind him. I think that a chunk of the gender gap is made up of normally-Republican women crossing the floor because of the party's recent efforts to ban contraception and other things. I don't think it's safe to assume that they'll just shrug this fall and vote for someone who is openly planning to bar them from getting health care, and that seems to be what people are doing when they suggest that Romney will eventually consolidate the Republican vote behind him, no matter what he campaigns on.

I would also advise people not to value the results of a national poll over a series of state polls. The notion that you can get a better idea of how Iowa is likely to vote by guessing how many Iowans were polled in a national poll than by a poll focusing on the state itself is silly.

[Dustin Ingalls]

We have the sample at GOP +2, and in '08 it was GOP +8 according to exit polls. So you're complaining about what? Also, women always are a larger share of the electorate as men. Women +4 is identical to '08.

[Todd Dugdale]

Jay,
PPP doesn't weight for Party ID, so they probably won't "be more careful in allocating the Republican vote to more accurately reflect the current status of the state".

They weight for things like age, race, and gender.

How is someone supposed to determine the "accurate" percentage of a Party? Are we to assume that each election will have an identical electorate as the last one?

Also:
"one simply can't explain how Obama and Romney are running even in the national polls and a state like Ohio has a 7 point differential."
Sure one can. One simply has to over-sample red States in national polls, and over-sample rural areas in blue States. Then one weights Republicans to a 2010 turnout model in those national polls. There...explained.

[Obama 2012]

The scary thing for Romney/Republicans is that it's hard to see them winning the White House without winning both Ohio *and* Virginia. Right now they appear to be down in both by a significant margin.

[tbert]

Shorter Jay: "your survey results do not align with my preconceptions; obviously, your methodology is flawed".

If any of the folks who complain about "cooked" polls can provide evidence of bad survey or statistical methodology (or even just a pervasive bias in surveys vs electoral outcomes), by all means provide them.

Until then, enjoy your denialism.

[George]

Most national polls diverge from state polls. However, the Reuters-Ipsos has Obama ahead by 7 nationally. May be an outlier. However, I am waiting for the monthly polls from CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC to confirm or reject this.

[dj spellchecka]

@jay
other recent ohio polls
5/03/2012 Quinnipiac obama 44 romney 42 +2
4/23/2012 Purple Strategies obama 49 romney 44 +5
4/20/2012 Rasmussen obama 46 romney 42 +4
4/19/2012 Fox News obama 45 romney 39 +6

[Jay]

I appreciate all the fine remarks to my remarks. However, it isn't only Rasmussen showing Romney slightly ahead nationally, it's Gallup as well. The average of all the polls makes it dead even. There are some pollsters that correct samples for party ID. I see nothing wrong with that--By the way, someone might explain to me why in North Carolina yesterday, Obama (with a million Democrats voting) received 79% to 21% for No Preference. I would be interested as to the reasoning here.

[NRH]

Because North Carolina still has a fair share of Dixiecrats hanging around, plus some number of protest votes from people who felt their personal number-one issue had not been adequately addressed, plus a number of people who didn't care about an uncontested race where the incumbent has already mathematically long since passed the finish line and so didn't bother to mark that line? It's not terribly hard. He also had 0 votes in bright blue Connecticut because Connecticut doesn't hold a primary at all for an uncontested race.

[Terry Bowman]

Those of you who think that Romney has a chance in Ohio are suffering from amnesia of 2011. The Republicans and John Kasich in particular alienated a significant part of the workforce with his short-sighted SB-5. Ohio voters are pissed off and motivated to retake the state house and turn the state blue for good.