Our occasional correspondent Caol Islay writes:
Some of you might think I am just reading the tea leaves, but bear with me as you may find the following useful in determining what is happening in the Us Presidential election.
In 2008 John Mc Cain won the election of those people who voted on polling day. Obama won the election itself simply because he had such a commanding lead among those Americans who had pre-voted. In 2012 Obama campaign officials keep telling the press that they are doing so well among people who are pre-voting. That, in fact, is partially true and impressive given the campaign’s difficulties, until you look at the issue close up.
In 2008 and again this year the Democrats are using pre-voting to get their most dedicated supporters to the polls. Most parties in Canada do the same. That is fine as far as it goes, but with few exceptions it means you are taking people to the polls who would have voted for you anyway on election day. Romney’s campaign has a different strategy. They are targeting people who might not, or would not, be available to vote for them on election day. These votes are new votes in the sense they are not available to Romney on election day and add to his total support at the polls. They are treating their most loyal followers as people who will likely get themselves to the polls on election day, with a reminder phone call and late day push, if need be.
This explains the huge lead among Obama supporters who pre-voted in 2008 and again this year. Or so you might think. But that is not exactly what is happening in Ohio this year. In Ohio 220,000 fewer Democrats have pre-voted this year, and 30,000 more Republicans; for a net of 250,000. In ’08 Obama won Ohio by 260,000. But this does not mean Obama is ahead by 10,000 votes or anything like that. It means he is already 250,000 votes behind where he was at this time in 2008. We still have to count the Independents where Romney has a large lead, 17 % I think, and then we have to consider the vote on election day which the Republicans won even in the low water 2008 disappointment.
For these reasons I do not see how Obama can win Ohio I do not care how many polls are published to the contrary. These polls, by the way, are totally misleading as the samples are based on the 2008 election results which Obama won by 8 percent nationally. 5% in Ohio, 10% in Iowa. So the national polls have 8 % more Democrats, and the Ohio polls 5% more Democrats. Is it any wonder that Obama is leading in these kinds of polls. But ask yourself this, if Obama supporters are over sampled by 5 % in Ohio why do those same polls only show he is ahead by 1 %. Obvious answer, because he is losing support this year and cannot hold his vote. Unless there is a huge change in the next 9 days Obama loses Ohio, and the election.
I also picked up a bit more news. 73 % of evangelicals are supporting Romney, 21 % Obama. This despite the misgivings many evangelicals had about Romney’s Mormon faith. Romney has been able to persude them to support him on the basis that this election is about values, not theology. More pro-abortion attacks and losing your virginity ads will not help Obama’s cause.
Romney’s 73 % support among evangelicals in amazing given that George W. Bush, an evangelical himself, received 79% of their vote and no other Presidential candidate from either party has come close to that.
One final thought Romney will win Nevada based on the Mormon vote. The Mormons are 6% of the electorate in Nevada. I expect their support for Romney will be over 95 % and most important, they will show up; thereby making themselves 10 or 11 % of those who show up on polling day. That will probably be the difference.
Yet one more reason that I have been saying all along, even before the October 3 debate, that Romney will win this election because his supporters are more likely to show up at the polls.