About those polls ...

Adam Zyglis via politicalcartoons.com

Hey, did you hear about the Bloomberg poll that had Obama up by 13 (Obama Leads in Poll as Voters View Romney as Out of Touch)? I'm sure you did, but only that it was an outlier:

' Obama's 13-point poll lead is disputed
' Poll showing Obama 13 points ahead raises eyebrows
' Outlier Polls Are No Substitute for News

Did you hear about the excellent discussion by J. Ann Selzer about that poll? It's really a good piece that covers some of the methodological questions brought up by folks around the internet'was it the right sample, was the sample too well educated, was it too young, was it biased by leading questions? The answers to all of those are no. For example, maybe a bit too educated, but in all subsamples of different education groups, there was an Obama lead.

As Mark Blumenthal notes, every once in a while, even a terrific pollster (Selzer falls in that category; she nails the Des Moines Register Iowa poll every time) can get a result that is simply outside of the expected range. It happens 1 out of 20 times.

And just in case you have forgotten, there were June polls in 2008 that showed Obama leading McCain by big numbers, also attacked as "outliers". Politicians hate polls that interfere with their fund-raising narrative, and they'll let the media know about it. Of course, pollsters love polls that "pick up the wave before everyone else" (also known as dumb luck), though that's a judgment for later. In any case, Obama was ahead by 6 points or so at this time in 2008, whereas now the averages (without Rasmussen, which uses flawed methods and is a consistent outlier poll) are closer to 4. Or, if you prefer you can go by Nate Silver's statistical simulations, which currently predict an Obama win. Either way, sounds about right (but in any and all cases, not predetermined'it won't happen without hard work by the activists and a bit of luck.)

Still, don't forget that the polls say the election will be decided by these folks:

'I don't believe in nothing they say,' says Carol Barber of Iceland, Ky., among the 27 percent of the electorate that hasn't determined whom to back or that doesn't have a strong preference about a candidate.

But what's missing from the discussion is the rest of the Bloomberg poll findings, which horse race stories often eclipse. Bloomberg:

The survey shows Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, has yet to repair the damage done to his image during the Republican primary. Thirty-nine percent of Americans view him favorably, about the same as when he announced his presidential candidacy last June, while 48 percent see him unfavorably -- a 17-percentage point jump during a nomination fight dominated by attacks ads. A majority of likely voters, 55 percent, view him as more out of touch with average Americans compared with 36 percent who say the president is more out of touch.

Taken together, the results suggest an unsettled political environment for both Obama and Romney five months from the November election, with voters choosing for now to stick with a president they say is flawed rather than backing a challenger they regard as undefined and disconnected.

Did you know Romney was unpopular? I'm not surprised. Everyone knows Romney is unpopular. Check out the latest Pew Research Center's polling on that in this graphic, or check TPM's polling average:
Everyone knows this election is about the economy. Everyone knows that's Romney's selling point.

Did you see the non-Gallup, non-Rasmussen poll showing Romney with a lead?

Crickets.

So why isn't Romney doing better? In a piece at pollster.com, political scientist David C. Wilson (a recent Netroots Nation panelist) asks that very question about yet another poll showing Obama with a small lead:

The headline from the most recent AP-Gfk Poll (June 2012), "Obama loses advantage over Romney as economic anxieties increase," doesn't tell the full story about what's NOT happening with public opinion. My read of the data shows that despite economic concerns the public has shown little movement in 2012, and Romney's message about the economy hasn't changed much at all. So, let me offer a few points about interpreting numbers from the poll; and, just to foreshadow my point, I'm asking, "where's the Romney effect?"...

My theory is that the negative framing of the economy around Obama is getting lost because 1) the U.S. economy has actually gotten better even if the global economy is still untenable, and 2) the Republicans haven't offered any unified theory (message) to the public that would lead to a belief they, or Romney, could do better. It's true that there are strong concerns about the economy, but the public understands that the issue is complex, and not entirely due to Obama.

In fact, that "outlier" poll agrees, and tells us what all the other polls tell us, whether the lead is 3 or 13.

Hey, but what about the huge career-ending gaffe that Obama made? To repeat a point I've made, the conventional wisdom has been unsurprisingly stupid, with reporters falling all over themselves about Obama saying the private sector was doing fine relative to the public sector (yes, those five contextual words at the end are important) while ignoring that a) the non-GOP voters don't like Romney and b) what Obama said is true. How do I know this? Polls, of course:

President Obama's 'Doing Fine' Gaffe Doesn't Register With Most Voters

Half of voters were unaware of President Barack Obama's political gaffe when he said in a press  conference that "the private sector is doing fine," according to a new poll released by YouGov.

Nine out of ten political reporters remain unaware that this was and is a non-story. Their reasoning? All that Republican money will make it an issue (hint: only the already convinced believe most political advertising. All that money is usually a scam for the TV consultants to rake in the cash. Were it otherwise, we'd be looking at Senators Carly Fiorino and Linda McMahon.) But their real reasoning is "everyone else said so (confirmed by our Republican sources), so it must be true". My advice to political reporters: look at the polls and adjust your opinion accordingly.

So, while the economy (GDP, not gas prices) is key, and while outlier polls are no substitute for news, the underlying fundamental of a Republican candidate that is disliked running against an incumbent President liked by most, but saddled with an improved but stalling economy, means that Romney has to do a lot more than avoid questions about immigration, his tax returns and Swiss bank accounts, and Bain Capital's actual record, along with his own as Governor of Massachusetts.

This remains a close race, but one in which Obama maintains a small lead. And while the economy is in tough shape, and more could have and should have been done by Washington, Romney has done nothing to convince the public he should be the next President. He's got to show he can do better, and, baby, the Ryan budget ain't it.

So say all the polls, including the "outlier."