Latest Headlines
- FDOT Updates Status Of Century Highway 29 Construction Work
- Tate Grad, UWF Standout Darrien McDowell Selected In 2024 MLB Draft
- Suspect, 19, Indicted For Fatal Drive-By Shooting Of 70-Year-Old
- Blue Angels Select Officers for 2025 Show Season
- ECSO: McDavid Woman Claims Crockpot ‘Magically Makes Meth”, Charged With Child Neglect
- Driver’s License, Tag, Tax Collector Services This Week In Walnut Hill, Century
- Florida Gas Prices Hold Steady Over Last Week
- Register Now For Northview Chiefs Football Camp
- Wahoos Drop Back-and-Forth Road Finale
- Walnut Hill Man Was The Boss Of The Pensacola Beach Air Show. Here’s A Behind The Scenes Look.
Different Poll Shows Obama Leads
May 25, 2012
While the latest Quinnipiac University poll shows former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leading in Florida, a separate poll by NBC News and Marist shows President Barack Obama ahead in his bid for re-election.
According to the NBC-Marist survey, Obama would get 45 percent of the vote if the vote in Florida if the election were held today, while Romney would get 40 percent.
Obama and Vice President Joe Biden would lead a ticket of Romney and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio by a 48-44 margin, while the gap would close to 47-45 if Romney chose former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.
The poll also shows incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson beating Republican Congressman Connie Mack, the GOP frontrunner, by a 43-38 margin.
Democrats have complained that the Quinnipiac poll is too heavily weighted toward Republicans, but the Marist poll gives a strong edge to Democrats that might not materialize in November: 43 percent of those polled were Democrats, 35 percent were Republicans and 21 percent were independents.
The poll was taken of 1,078 registered voters May 17-20 and has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.
By The News Service of Florida
Comments
21 Responses to “Different Poll Shows Obama Leads”
REGARDING:
“Romney is a substandard candidate advanced by Washington insiders.”
More creative memory.
Romney was voted on by the members of the Republican Party state by state until such time as all the other candidates had self-destructed. The insiders didn’t want a Mormon to run against that Baptist, Obama, since those are less acceptable to mainstream Christians than most others. They didn’t want a rich man to run against the millionaire, Obama.
Yes, he spent much money but so did the others without getting support from the voters. Money doesn’t buy votes unless it goes directly into my pocket. It might buy consideration but consideration isn’t acceptance. The other candidates were considered and rejected by the primary voters.
Substandard? Possibly. But still the best the Republican Party has to offer, just as President Obama is the best the Democratic Party has to offer.
David not running
Obama would not cave in to pressure from Israli interest as former President Bush did, when former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz lied about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction. All those American lives lost in Iraq.
I see Romney as being part of the Daddy Bush Club, corporate raiders exporting jobs overseas.
I think it is safe to say, either way, there will be a turkey in the white house
It would come as no surprise if Obama was ahead…Romney is a substandard candidate advanced by Washington insiders.
REGARDING:
“President Bush lifted most of the regulations that prohibited big business from taking advantage of robbing the working class. Remember all of the scandals, Enron and so for the where working people lost their retirements. Mitt Romney will be another W.”
Creative memory.
Enron used fraudulent accounting practices throughout the 1990s and peaked in stock price in August 2000. Top officials knew it was a house of cards and were unloading their shares as quickly as possible. (This was all before the election of President George W. Bush.)
The bankruptcy took place on W’s watch but the underpinnings were well in place ere he was even NOMINATED to office. In fact, under his Administration laws were put in place to avoid such things in the future, the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 which supposedly nurtures an ethical culture, forces top management be transparent, holds employees responsible for their acts and protects whistle blowers who rat on the corrupt.
So if Romney would clean up after the previous president’s failures, that would be a good thing, right? Not that the president enacts legislation, but somehow everybody THINKS he does. (Congress be where it at.)
David for history, lest we forget
REGARDING:
“David you mentioned your assignment to Brazil, if I recall correctly Brazil has a Military Government. It appears to work well for the Brazilians. The politicians here had better start fixing things before some of our Senior Military officers begin to think hard about that part of their oath that says “all enemies foreign and domestic”.
Nope, I wasn’t assigned to Brazil, just passed through on my way to The People’s Republic of Angola (Republica Popular de Angola). Brazil had a military dictatorship at the time and super inflation. Nowadays it is democratic and in much better shape partly because they‘ve developed more of their vast resources.
All US military officers swear to uphold the Constitution of The United States. If any ever tried to seize control of the government, no matter how bad or apparently justified, they would become domestic enemies, guilty of treason and would have broken their solemn oath and unfit to serve the people.
Dictatorships are never good things. Sometimes they are better than worse things but should never be sought and should be avoided at great cost. It was interesting that the military dictators in Brazil came to realize that fact and returned power to the people.
David for self government
Please Forgive my typoes I see them.
All these polls really show is who answered their phones when an unknown number showed up on their caller ID while they were trying to relax after a hard day’s work, a hard day of looking for work, or a hard day of avoiding work, basically. The numbers are supposed to be indicative of the entire populace of the state, but a little over 1000 polled is hardly enough to truly be indicative of the millions living in the entire state of Florida.
I am not at all a Barack Obama supporter. I would like to ask some questions that I hipe will make everyone think and to comment on some of your post. Is Mitt Romney the answer? I do not think so, but will probably vote for him. Will Jeb Bush be a good V.P. nominee, I do not think he will do anything but damage Romney’s chances.
Our current economic mess has not been developed by President Obama. He inherited most of it. I will agree with you that he has done nothing to help it and may have contributed to it, but he did not make it. The problems we are having economically are caused by the greed of Wall street, and corporations. President Bush lifted most of the regulations that prohibited big business from taking advantage of robbing the working class. Remember all of the scandals, Enron and so for the where working people lost their retirements. Mitt Romney will be another W. and that is not what are country needs to fix this. We especially do not need another Bush in Washington, the first two were failures.
America does have a safey net, the Charinman and Joint Chiefs of Staff. In time of economic stability, the Generals and Admirals only worry about their pensions. You
take away the salary and retirement prospects for these senior officers and they will become very political, very quickly.
It is a scary thought, civil unrest on a nation wide scale, services interupted, transportation brought to a standstill. Former and standing US officials attempting
to flee the country.
David you mentioned your assignment to Brazil, if I recall correctly Brazil has a Military Government. It appears to work well for the Brazilians. The politicians here had better start fixing things before some of our Senior Military officers begin to think hard about that part of their oath that says “all enemies foriegn and domestic”.
“I believe that just as the phoenix, America must undergo an ordeal before she can emerge renewed and healthy.”
Yeah, well I’ve already been through an ordeal that last 4 years so keep your wishes to yourself.
REGARDING:
“ What happens when the government can print no more money?”
Government can always print more money. At some point faith in that money goes down and the value of all money of that nation is reduced. It is sometimes called a hidden tax because a reduction to half is like taxing everyone who held that money at fifty percent.
It will be interesting.
There are nations which do not print their own money; they just use US dollars as the official currency. Their value will also be damaged. Many international agreements for sales of goods are based on US dollars. It fouls up the agreements.
Some things like Social Security payments have automatic hedges which will double the payments if cost of living doubles. To make those payments will force government to print more money which might reduce the value of money even further, forcing the government to pay even more.
Things like this have happened before. It used to be every time I flew into Rio that the value of the Cruzeiro had dropped to half. People kept all they could in foreign currency and only converted when bills were due. That way they paid debts for half what they were actually owed. Those receiving payments were paid half of what they were actually owed. This really showed the imaginary nature of money. It stifles an economy and causes unemployment and hardship all around.
Finally they abandoned the currency and started all over.
It DOES make for interesting times. Economists know how interesting. Politicians know mostly how it affects voters in the short term.
David living in interesting times
At what point does the deficit spending stop? I took economics 101, but never learned about the dynamics of a true economic meltdown. What happens when the government can print no more money?
The law is dependant on two things, civil obedience and the force of law. I can only speculate what will happen, not when and if the government chooses to stop deficit
spending, but when deficit spending is simply no longer possible.
I feel these are questions voters need to be asking themselves in these exciting times.
I am so poor none of this matters to me. I Just hope we dont get some crazy power hungry person that gets us blown up/
REGARDING:
“- – - the Marist poll gives a strong edge to Democrats that might not materialize in November: 43 percent of those polled were Democrats, 35 percent were Republicans and 21 percent were independents.”
Done properly you would break the results out into sub groups.
From that you could say things like, “Democrats favored Obama by X percent. The percent of voters who are Democrats are, whatever, so we will multiply that number by X to get how many votes President Obama can expect from Democrats. Independents favored Obama by Y percent, so we’ll multiply that percentage by the number of independent voters to see how many votes he can expect. …” Count all the many Republican votes President Obama can expect too, and add them all up.
Do the same with any other candidates. Compare the totals.
David for proper math
and fair statistics
REGARDING:
“Our current president says ( The rich must pay their fair share) Why? ”
Because if it isn’t fair, it’s unfair.
Americans believe in fairness. We just disagree on what constitutes fair. Is it fair for somebody else to have something when some other person doesn’t have it? In general, the ones who don’t have it don’t think that is fair whereas the ones who DO have it or hope some day to have it think it consider it perfectly fair.
Is a floating rate of taxation fair when all use the same resources? If my part of the float is low, I tend to think YES, if my part is high, I tend to think NO.
And there’s the question of the rich. Who is rich? Some other poll asked people if they were rich and how much they would have to earn to become rich. Pretty much none of them considered themselves rich even when they were in income levels which others believed would make them rich.
There is the tale of someone interviewing some super-duper rich dude and asking how much money it took to be happy. In the tale, the gazillionaire responded, “Just a little bit more.”
At the other end, some people are satisfied with far less than would leave others crying about the injustice of it all. Guess which are happier.
David for a lot more
Seriously get real people.Read the article “The poll was taken of 1,078 registered voters May 17-20 “……1,078 people out of millions …and it took them 3 days to do that.Think about that.Polls mean nothing to me.Also the article says 45% of the people polled were democrat an just 35% republican.No wonder Obama won.And who has ever heard of the Marist poll???
You can not spend your way out of debt,FDR had plan and and put people to work. He did not give the money away or waste billions in so called (green energy)He did not explode the growth of the government. He also did not declare war on our current energy sources.And try to shove a healthcare bill down out throats that we do not want or can afford.Our current president says ( The rich must pay their fair share) Why? He will not manage the money he has now, so no until the deficit is cut, no more money for them. Let the markets work, and now thanks to the free markets, we have a private company launching their own rocket. Government does not create any thing, and will never have enough money.Business works best when government stays out of it.
well ,nobody polled me.Its amuses me that the whole country rrelys on polls that poll on average just 1,500 people out of the millions that live here.
If you look back at ALL the previous elections, from the Kennedy administration to the Bush administration,…..nearly a 50 year span, the UNDECIDED vote is what always determines the outcome of an election. According to the above article, there is a 15 point margin that is “undecided” based on the NBC-Marist poll of 1,078 registered voters. The average undecided voter tallies from state to state is about 9%…..no matter who is taking a poll. History tell us, based on the undecided voter, that a person who considers theirselves as “undecided” within a 1-2 week period prior to the election have an 80% chance of voting for the challenger…..not the incumbent. Obama has certainly not picked up any support, especially with the Moderate and Independent voter. Obama won Florida by less that a 3% margin in 2008 and won the independent vote by about the same percentage. The state of Wisconsin is now considered a “battleground” state….which was virtually unthinkable by the DMC. This really isn’t about my opinion, but is based on facts alone.
We need to look at our history to find answers. FDR had to spend money to get the economy going strong again.
Regardless if it is Obama or Romney in the captains chair, the Nation is slowly sinking under the weight of the national debt.
I believe that just as the phoenix, America must undergo an ordeal before she can emerge renewed and healthy.