« | Main | Obama still tops Romney by seven in Ohio »

May 08, 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


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


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%


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.


"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

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?

"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.


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.


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

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


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.


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.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

PPP POLLS BY YEAR: 2006-2017

We came to PPP after a public poll in the San Jose Mayoral race showed our opponent ahead by 8 points. They found our candidate (Sam Liccardo) ahead by 3 points and that allowed us to be able to push back with the press against the perception that our opponent was now a strong favorite in the race. Sam ended up winning by 2 points and is now the next Mayor of San Jose. PPP worked very fast and had a very accurate read on the electorate when we needed them
–Eric Jaye, Storefront Political Media.

For more information on hiring PPP for your polling needs click here

Among the Best Pollsters, Year after Year.

2014 :
Rated Most Accurate Pollster in Governor’s Races Nationally

2012 :
Correctly predicted the winner of every state in the Presidential race, and the winner of every major Senate race

2010 :
First pollster to predict Scott Brown’s upset win over Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race, only pollster to predict Christine O’Donnell’s upset victory over Mike Castle in the Delaware Republican Senate primary.

2008 :
Ranked by the Wall Street Journal as the 2nd most accurate swing state pollster in the Presidential election.

WSJ Graphic


Public Policy Polling
2912 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 201
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: 888.621.6988

Questions or Comments?
Email Us




Dean Debnam Dean Debnam
Public Policy Polling CEO

PPP is best known for putting out highly accurate polling on key political races across the country, but we also do affordable private research for candidates and organizations.  Why pay tens of thousands of dollars for a survey when one of the most reliable companies in the nation can do it for less?"

Learn more about working
with PPP for your next project >


Facebook Facebook
Twitter Twitter
RSS Feed RSS Reader