{"id":14328,"date":"2012-10-09T16:30:48","date_gmt":"2012-10-09T16:30:48","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2012-10-09T16:30:48","modified_gmt":"2012-10-09T16:30:48","slug":"polls_put_liberals_on_suicide_watch","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2012\/10\/09\/polls_put_liberals_on_suicide_watch\/","title":{"rendered":"Polls Put Liberals on Suicide Watch"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, if you live in a liberal city, I think you should avoid walking under tall buildings where liberals live. They\u2019re jumping out the windows today like crazy. If you happen to know where Andrew Sullivan lives, don\u2019t get anywhere near. I mean, it is really getting dangerous out there. There\u2019s a new Pew poll out that suddenly shows Romney is up by four percentage points over Obama. Rasmussen now says that Romney\u2019s two points ahead of Obama in 11 swing states. Now, for the record, Obama won those 11 swing states 53-46 back in 2008, and that was identical to his national margin, and he\u2019s down two in those swing states.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

I mean the polling data is all bad for Obama, no matter where you look. And the Pew poll is an amazing swing. It\u2019s a swing of 14 points in this category, eight points in that category, seven points in this, it\u2019s just amazing. Andrew Sullivan, who is well-known inside the glitterati of punditry. He\u2019s a well-known leftist activist, and he\u2019s concerned that Obama threw the election, just lost it in this debate. These polls are all over the place. Even in Pennsylvania, you know, there was a story that Romney\u2019s pulled out of Pennsylvania. But yesterday and today, two polls are out that show Pennsylvania in play. Romney down by two. That\u2019s the margin of error. And we think that Romney and the campaign that made the decision to pull out of Pennsylvania — well, they\u2019ve announced they\u2019re gonna do that, pull out of Pennsylvania, go to Ohio, reallocate the resources. It makes no sense, given the polling data. <\/p>\n

The only thing that makes sense is that the Romney camp decided to pull out of there before these polls came out in Pennsylvania. So, anyway, it is fascinating to me to watch these people who swear by these polls. For example, I\u2019m all hunky-dory, I\u2019m fine with it, I\u2019m not trying to throw cold water on it, but does anybody really believe — maybe I\u2019m wrong, I could be wrong about this. Is it really likely, is it really possible, for example, that women, after the debate, change their minds to the tune of 15 percent of \u2019em? Is that really how people make up their minds in a presidential election? Are people\u2019s opinions that fluid? Women or anybody? The only demographic Obama still has is blacks, 95 to three, in whatever poll you look at. <\/p>\n

But you know me, I\u2019ve always had an arm\u2019s-length with these polls because I think they\u2019re used to make news. But I\u2019ve also said that once you get into October and, as you get closer to the election, the pollsters all start getting concerned about accuracy and their legacy for the next round of elections and so forth. So they always tighten up and they always get closer to reality as you get closer to the election. I don\u2019t know anybody whose opinions are this fluid and volatile. I mean what is the old cliche, “Ah, debates don\u2019t matter.” How many of you have heard that in past presidential elections? “Yeah, they\u2019re interesting to watch, and they might affect a few swing voters. They really don\u2019t matter because people have their minds made up long ago.” Now, all of a sudden, that debate is the single — see, my point is if we\u2019ve got polling data now that shows Romney ahead wherever he\u2019s ahead, I think he\u2019s been ahead for months, or weeks. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think it happened overnight. I think we\u2019ve been misled for whatever reason. I\u2019m not even going to chalk it up to a conspiracy. And I\u2019m not trying to talk you out of believing this one or these polls. I mean they\u2019re all saying Romney is surging in most every demographic. You\u2019ve got the Pew poll showing Romney ahead by four, but within that poll, you have massive shifts in certain demographics. Rasmussen says again that Romney\u2019s up by two now in the 11 swing states that matter. And the two polls in Pennsylvania from yesterday both pretty much say the same thing, Romney down two, which is margin-of-error tied. That puts Pennsylvania in play. <\/p>\n

You have these guys out in Colorado, we talked about \u2019em yesterday, that have not been wrong since 1980, and they put together their projection based solely on economic data. They don\u2019t poll people, they don\u2019t go out and sample the opinion; they just look at the economic data. They haven\u2019t been wrong since 1980. They say Obama is gonna lose Pennsylvania. Romney\u2019s gonna win Pennsylvania. They\u2019ve got Romney at 330 electoral votes. And these guys haven\u2019t been wrong. See, we\u2019re watching an utter panic on the left because these polls are the Bible to them. It\u2019s their polls. It obviously makes sense. They own \u2019em. They run \u2019em. And they report them. I have to tell you, I watch this with utter amazed fascination. We\u2019ve got sound bites of the Drive-By Media in utter panic, and it is all centered around the debate, and they can\u2019t believe that it happened. <\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Really, folks, who out there, given what\u2019s going on, A, cares; B, believes that Mitt Romney wants to kill Big Bird?<\/a> It\u2019s one of these things that I know some of you think there are people that believe it, and there are. But it\u2019s not a majority of people.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Now, I was talking about how I have a tough time believing these seismic shifts. For example, in this Pew poll that has Andrew Sullivan on suicide watch, Obama and Romney are tied among women at 47%. Okay, cool. Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points among women, 56 to 38. That\u2019s likely female voters.<\/p>\n

And we are being asked to believe that the debate is what changed it all. Now, I\u2019m sorry. I don\u2019t believe that Obama ever had an 18-point lead in women. Those polls were oversampling Democrats out the wazoo. I don\u2019t know too many people whose opinions are that flexible and fluid and malleable, particularly in presidential elections.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Pew poll. Democrats. Suicide watch. Something about this poll, because I just want to be complete in reporting it to you. There is a plus-five Republican sample in this poll. It\u2019s one of the first polls that samples more Republicans. They don\u2019t list the sampling, though. You have to discover the sampling by dividing the number of respondents. So it\u2019s confusing.<\/p>\n

Everybody seems to be coming up with different numbers. But the consensus… (ahem) The “consensus,” as in the global warming consensus… The consensus among political scientists is that they oversampled Republicans by 5%. Now, the Pew people are saying (paraphrased), “Wait, wait, wait a minute! We\u2019re not oversampling anybody. This is just how people are identifying themselves in our sample,” which is a new one on me.<\/p>\n

They are saying that because of the debate and because of the increased momentum for Romney<\/a>, that more people are telling them that they are Republicans now than were admitting to it last week and the week before. I want to throw that in the mix, too, for you to consider. So the Pew people say, “It\u2019s not that we purposely went out and found 5% more Republicans. It\u2019s in our sample that 5% more people than previously said that they were Republicans.”<\/p>\n

The numbers are 403 Republicans and 396 Democrats, registered voters in the Pew poll. So there wasn\u2019t a whole lot of oversampling. For example, you ask, “Why would they, Rush? Why would they all of a sudden start oversampling Republicans if they\u2019re doing it on purpose?” Folks, that\u2019s not very hard to answer. I mean, take a look at this. This is maybe an indication. Voter registration ends today in Colorado, Florida, Michigan, New Mexico, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.<\/p>\n

And you can still register online before it\u2019s too late. In fact, we\u2019ve got a link<\/a>. We put a link at RushLimbaugh.com if you want to go to our home page. I\u2019ve got some big announcements about that, too. We\u2019re going all digital on the Limbaugh Letter<\/a>. Yep, all digital on nation\u2019s most widely read political newsletter. I\u2019ll have details on that coming up later. But we\u2019ve got this link.<\/p>\n

If you haven\u2019t registered and you want to register online, you can do it at RushLimbaugh.com. The link is there. Now, Republicans, I\u2019m hearing, have been registering online like there is no tomorrow. I\u2019m hearing in places like Ohio that the requests for absentee ballots by Republicans is dwarfing the requests by Democrats. All of this is anecdotal, but some of it could be documented.<\/p>\n

So why would the Pew poll have 5% more Republicans? Could it be that as we get closer to the election, they\u2019re throwing out the turnout sample from 2008 and 2004, and they\u2019re getting closer to what the 2010 turnout was? Or maybe they\u2019re projecting. Because they themselves are telling us that there\u2019s so much more enthusiasm on the Republican side. Remember, we had the sound bites yesterday from F. Chuck Todd at NBC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

He was clearly distressed over all of the Republican enthusiasm compared to Democrat enthusiasm. There\u2019s a huge enthusiasm gap. With the polls, I\u2019m not heralding this thing as though I all of a sudden believe it, because, folks, I think these polls are… (sigh) They\u2019re too subject to games. They\u2019re too capable of being doctored and messed around with. You look at some of these early polls that had Democrat samples of plus 11 and plus 10.<\/p>\n

Now, I know the cliche. “Wait a minute, Rush. You say people don\u2019t change their minds. Do you know women?” Yes, yes, yes. I know women change their minds on a dime. But I\u2019m telling you, something like this… I told you three months ago, two months ago, and one month ago: If the election were held on that day — three months ago, two months ago — it would be a landslide Romney. I still think that.<\/p>\n

I look at everything happening out there, and it all adds up to a Romney win, and I\u2019m not looking at one poll to tell me that. I\u2019m looking at other things. In no way can anybody say that the Obama campaign is doing anything positive. It isn\u2019t surging. There\u2019s nothing positive about it. There\u2019s nothing infectious about the Obama campaign. There\u2019s nothing inspiring or enthusiastic. You don\u2019t see a bunch of Obama posters or signs out there.<\/p>\n

The bloom is off the rose.<\/p>\n

The thrill is gone or what have you.<\/p>\n

We have a country in the tank! We have a country going down the tubes. We have a president who cannot cite one thing from his previous 3-1\/2 years and say, “You want more of this? Vote for me!” Just the opposite. Nobody wants any more of this. Well, 30 or 40% do, but I\u2019m speaking in a majority sense. All of the commonsense data that you can see by watching and reading and listening is pretty indicative to me.<\/p>\n

But it\u2019s risky. There\u2019s nothing scientific about that. The polls claim to be scientific, but I just have never bought into this. You know, you\u2019ve got an incumbent who\u2019s not at 50% in anything. You know what the statistics on that are? Defeat. No president under 50%, no incumbent wins when their approval is under 50; when his poll numbers are under 50, doesn\u2019t matter. This is Lord Obama. (interruption)<\/p>\n

Well, he may not care about the statistics, but in order for them to cheat and have a chance at the cheating working, the race has to be close. That\u2019s another burden we\u2019ve got. We\u2019ve gotta win and win big to keep the lawyers out of the aftermath. Our margin of victory has to be lawyer-proof, and I think it will be. I think it will be stunning. If these guys in Colorado are right — and they haven\u2019t been wrong.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

If they\u2019re right that Romney ends up with 330 electoral votes, they\u2019re not gonna go out and charge fraud. They might talk about fraud, but they can\u2019t do anything with it. That\u2019s just too big a margin of defeat to explain by fraud and cheating and so forth. There\u2019s another poll that just came out. This one is Public Policy Polling, this liberal bunch out of North Carolina.<\/p>\n

National poll: Romney 49, Obama 47.<\/p>\n

This, by the way, is a switch.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s a six-point net swing from last week to this week. It\u2019s the first time in this poll (Public Policy Polling) that Romney\u2019s had the lead. Now, if you want to go all conspiracy on me, you can sit there and say, “Rush, none of this is real. These people, they\u2019re purposely saying Romney\u2019s in the lead, trying to get us all excited and all jacked. And then next week, after the next debate, the bottom\u2019s gonna fall out.<\/p>\n

“They\u2019re gonna have Obama back at 52! He\u2019s gonna be winning every poll. And us voters, us Romney supporters, we\u2019re just gonna be so depressed that we\u2019re just gonna throw in the towel.” There are conspiracy people who believe that that\u2019s what\u2019s happening; that we\u2019re being set up with phony Romney-leading poll results. (interruption) If Obama loses the next debate? That\u2019s entirely likely! It\u2019s gonna be on foreign policy.<\/p>\n