Obama, Romney in even race two days before election: Reuters/Ipsos poll

Comments (44)
marinevet69 wrote:

Pollsters have been wrong before, 1936,1948,and 1980. I have a feeling they are wrong this time also. Judging from my travels in northeast Ohio, the number of lawn signs and bumper stickers appears to favor Romney by a large margin and the number of registered voters in heavily democratic Cuyahoga county(Cleveland and suburbs) is about 100,000 less than in 2008. Romney will win Ohio.

Nov 04, 2012 7:30am EST  --  Report as abuse
Joe0218 wrote:

Don’t bother to make comments for Romney here. This outfit is strictly pro-Obama.

Nov 04, 2012 10:47am EST  --  Report as abuse
User21 wrote:

We are ROMNEY country, this Obama President is was an error on a massive scale. History books will describe it this way.

Listen, i voted for Obama in ’08 but no way will I be tricked again. We need ROMNEY for a real recovery.

ROMNEY to win. He’s got my vote!

Nov 04, 2012 12:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bromeando wrote:

Voters beware…”The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
– Thomas Jefferson

Nov 04, 2012 1:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
FrankLooper wrote:

Someone can’t seem to do the electoral math. Obama wins strongly, when you look at what counts.

Nov 04, 2012 1:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
soulice wrote:

So have you seen where groups of people have already planned to riot is Obama loses? That is just great.

bromeando, you are right. Interesting thing is that Obama has most of Wall st. on his side, more of them supported him in 2008 than any other president. He has them now and has big auto, big health, big insurance, etc… Hope Thomas J isn’t right…

Nov 04, 2012 1:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SayHey wrote:

The fact is that President Obama came into office with a significant electoral win, his party in control of Congress, with substantial good will around the country. That mandate and good will were squandered and he became the most divisive President in recent memory. As the reliably Democrat-endorsing New York newspaper Newsday said today in endorsing Romney, that reason alone marks the administration as a failure. A president seeking re-election admitting he has less support than the first time just about says it all.

Nov 04, 2012 2:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Chazz wrote:

I wonder how Ambassador Stephens, Tyrone S. Woods, Glen A. Doherty and Sean Smith would have voted?

Maybe, they were able to signal their intentions to the unnamed people who watched them die in the White House situation room…?

One thing is for certain, when our lives end…and they WILL no matter how many “Lifestyle Lifts” we get…we’ll meet God face-to-face and answer for the decisions we made…and did NOT make during our lives. So, to the the real “liars” out there, live it up because the fantasy world that you live in now is as close to heaven as you’ll get…

SO when you pull the lever for our “Commander and Chief,” remember Mr. Stephens, Mr. Woods, Mr. Doherty and Mr. Smith. THEY gave their LIVES to a government that did NOT serve them for the service they gave US…..

Nov 04, 2012 2:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dkbaz wrote:

The two candidates should just merge and be done with it. They are both pro-business, pro-war, pro-rich, and they are as sincere as carnival side show barkers.

Nov 04, 2012 3:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
EXR wrote:

Before you make such a fateful decision as to vote for President Obama, it would serve you well to see the movie Atlas Shrugged Part 2…just to get an idea of what the future holds for America under the President’s rule………

Nov 04, 2012 3:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Bucky_2 wrote:

It’s not close… these kind of headlines just make for more traffic to their site, more click throughs and more ad revenue without offending anyone.

Nov 04, 2012 3:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jefflz wrote:

It is time for responsible journalists to give the American electorate a rational view of the election as it really stands. Romney has virtually no chance to win the electoral college vote, yet article after article appears stating that Romney and Obama are neck and neck in a tight horse race too close to call. These authors who are presumably politically savvy, know full well that without Ohio, Romney will lose, and he has not won in any recent polls in Ohio where he is behind by two to three points at least.. This is why he is flailing around in Pennsylvania and Iowa in the off chance that he can eke out a win there to replace the Ohio vote. Failure to inform the electorate of the reality on the ground is a journalistic disgrace that will lead to a bitter outcome and a much more difficult healing process in this highly divided nation.

Nov 04, 2012 3:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Chazz wrote:

WOW “jefflz”….I didn’t know you were so plugged in to how things are that you can just type out that “Romney has virtually no chance to win the electoral college vote.”

KUDOS to your own responsible journalism ethic of sharing or citing your irrefutable sources.

Carry on – I await your next “informative report” with baited breath……. Perhaps it’ll be a ‘story’ that reveals why almost ALL the mainstream media has irresponsibly ignored the story of our Ambassador and the three men who died with him in Benghazi….?

Nov 04, 2012 3:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dave35 wrote:

I was a big supporter of Obama in 2008, but I honestly can’t believe he has a chance of being re-elected. The last 4 years in the US have been a disaster. I don’t agree with all of his policies, but from what I have seen/read, Romney has a much better understanding of the financials and that is what is most important right now. If every president from now on spent like Obama, the country would be bankrupt by 2020.

Nov 04, 2012 3:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
FrankOtheMT wrote:

Oh the Liberals are gonna freak out when Obama loses! 3 more days!!!

Nov 04, 2012 3:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

soulice..you are the perfect example of what’s wrong with the voting public in this country. Your beliefs and comments are rarely based on the facts. Romney is beating Obama in Wall Street contributions big time. If you simply google the topic there are a plethora of articles on the subject. Only an MSN September 2012 article presents your point of view, with no basis in fact btw. The LA Times article posted 1 day ago breaks it down. Wall Street favors Romney.


Nov 04, 2012 3:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Dave35….Other than targeting companies for profit and hiding the spoils in the Cayman Islands, a 6th grader has a better handle on math than Romney. His numbers don’t work for his tax cut plan and increasing defense spending by $50B a year hardly seems like a good start for cutting spending and balancing the budget. Like most Republicans you continue to touted the “how much money Obama is spending” nonsense. Here’s an exercise for you, name every “new spending” bill Obama has signed into law and every executive order and how much each one has added to the debt. It isn’t even close to in the increase in the debt over the past 4 years. Then go read page 4 of Paul Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity” in the section titled “Statement of Constitutional and Legal Authority” which IS the House Republican’s budget for 2013. The President (No President) is responsible for the budget, appropriating or directing how tax dollars are spent. Congress is, Paul Ryan says so and lists the statues and Constitutional Articles to back the statement. People….do a little research rather than just regurgitating someone else’s lie.

Nov 04, 2012 4:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

If you want an honest analysis of spending over the past 4 years, read the article below by Fact Check. They have a solid reputation of being unbiased and non-partisan.


Nov 04, 2012 4:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

FrankOtheM..those on the far right making less than $1M a year are going to freak out over the next 4 years if Romney wins on Tuesday. This man clear speaks for the richest in this country. He signed the Grover Norquist pledge in 2008. Shouldn’t it be unconstitutional for an elected federal official or for someone running for President (an office that is supposed to represent all the people) to sign a pact with a special interest group. Particularly one almost exclusively funded by millionaires, billionaires and corporations?

Nov 04, 2012 4:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

jefflz..I think it’s even more important to look at the Michigan (were Romney was born), Massachusetts (were Romney was governor) and Wisconsin (where Paul Ryan is a sitting House Representative)..Romney/Ryan is losing in all 3. Romney is losing BIG TIME in Massachusetts. What better opinion of the candidates than their home state or the people they previously or currently represent.

Nov 04, 2012 5:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
renrenf wrote:

Most people can go to someplace. say good thing. Touch people.
Hug people and give out tax money. But only a few people can make the country stronger.

Nov 04, 2012 5:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xprophet wrote:

Obama has won this contest. I suppose if your job is to be an entertainer then you can argue that the election is a “toss up.” However, if your job is to print the news, then you know full well that Obama is greatly favored to win.

Nov 04, 2012 5:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
soulice wrote:

syz2055 – the latimes ?? really? hmmm. And Fact Check is not that unbiased anymore. Anyway, it seems you may be partially right. I had forgotten Obama’s threat to Wall St that backfired.
Surrounded by 13 of the nation’s biggest financial CEOs, Obama fired the first shot: “My administration is all that stands between you and the pitchforks.” Then lashed them as part of his “more taxes on the rich” play to OWS, and those in the middle class who think increasing taxes on the top 1% actually does anything but spit on a fire, et al.

Nov 04, 2012 6:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Wassup wrote:

Polls have no credibililty in general as their population of participants is too small to make a valid determination or a reasonable prediction. Samples like the one shown lack the geograpic, race, station in life or sex of the participants. Agendas may be reinforced by articles like this due to influence, timing and readership targets. For all we know the participants in this poll were trained cattle reacting to stimuli learned over time for the occasion. All we know is the number polled and that they were perhaps in the United States. A pure waste of time for intelligent readers.

Nov 04, 2012 7:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
soulice wrote:

and xyz2055 – no comment about the riot threat?

Nov 04, 2012 7:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gigimoderate wrote:

Reading the comments you can tell who watches FAUX NEWS. They are the ones still talking about Benghazi when the article is about Ohio and the swing states. Parroting takes a lot of effort.
Regarding the polls, statistics don’t lie. It remains to be seen whether or not the Republican efforts to suppress the votes will work out in their favor or not! They are betting it will.

Nov 04, 2012 8:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

soulice…post the link to the riot threat and I’ll comment. I used the LA times article…but there are a zillion others that say you are wrong. (but you already admitted that) which was the point of my first post. I give you credit for admitting you were wrong..but you’ve simply proved my point. People post comments here that they haven’t really vetted. Eliminating the Bush era tax breaks for those making more than $200,000 and the subsidies for Big Oil and your trying to sell that those people are supporting Obama? What exactly were you thinking? Your shot a Fact Check really shows your bias. The truth appears a little inconvenient for you at times.

Nov 04, 2012 8:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Gigimoderate..I’ll make just two pints about Benghazi. The President isn’t the one who reviews Embassy requests for ANYTHING. And as tragic as the situation was, Chris Stevens left the safety of the Embassy in Tripoli and traveled to Benghazi on 10 September 2012 for relatively routine business. If he had thought that there really was that much danger there…do you think he would have made the trip? And he was the one on the ground in Libya…he had a better perspective of what was going on than anyone…yet he made the trip.

Nov 04, 2012 8:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

America is doomed on November 7th no matter who wins. Republicans and Democrats have successfully pitted Americans against each other with the help of their respective media outlets. The political system is paralyzed, and the only thing that will fix it is abolishing the party system entirely, or the rise of a moderate third party, or several more. I prefer the Libertarians myself, social liberal, fiscal conservative. It is probably too late though, we have a depression coming up in the next two decades due to the government’s irresponsible spending.

Nov 04, 2012 9:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PPlainTTruth wrote:

A significant number of voters answer the polls with their brains, but vote with their hearts.

Why? They have to explain their choices over the phone to the pollsters, but in the booth, they can follow their hearts without having to explain why.

And in a tight race like this, this vote from this kind of voters is significant enough to determine the outcome.

Nov 04, 2012 9:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PPlainTTruth wrote:

Ambassador Stephens should definitely have voted Obama — he was appointed by Obama, and is a liberal at heart.

The others, I don’t know, but none of them will want to let any one Al Qaeda action alter our election results. That’s what all patriots will do. And to be in that line of job, they have to be real patriots.

Nov 04, 2012 9:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld …there’s a good deal of truth in what you say. Though I tend to blame Republican’s just a little more. Romney would be a disaster. He’s got pretty much the old Bush clan signed up should he take office. Can you say Plutocracy? As least Obama has the semblance of fighting for the average American. But Congress isn’t about to let that happen. Obama’s American Jobs Act would have made things better and it would have been funded (rare concept for politicians today). Our founding fathers would roll over in their graves if they could witness the two party system we have become. And the country is almost exactly evenly divided. With a small debt (think Clinton years)…gridlock is good. With a $16T debt…gridlock is bad….God help us.

Nov 04, 2012 9:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse

It’s heartbreaking and hard to believe how Reuters, once a respectable news agency, has chosen to become simply another Democratic blog. Whatever pretense of neutrality Reuters had has been abandoned long ago. I wonder what explanation Reuters/Ipsos is going to give when Romney wins by > 5%. I would like to hope that the pseudo-journalists running this outfit will soon lose their jobs, but I can’t because the mass of idiots ready to be exploited by unethical people such as Reuters make an inexhaustible resource. You will be able to keep cheating for decades more.

Nov 04, 2012 9:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld…Reagan carried California both times he ran for office. Of course neither the campaign against Carter or Mondale was even close. Carter got like 49 electoral votes and I believe Mondale got 18.

Nov 04, 2012 9:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

Enough of the lies, Democrats. Obama is in it for Wall Street, big business and big banks – that’s why so many from those institutions support him. How can you claim that Romney is only for the 1% when he was the one that modeled Obamacare and gave healthcare to ALL in Massachusetts. Sometimes the truth hurts and it’s time to move forward, without Obama. Do what’s right for the country this time.

Nov 04, 2012 9:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

bates148..are you and soulice related? See my posts and links above. If you think Wall Street, Big Business and the Banks are supporting Obama..you are delusional on a level like the world has never seen (soulice included). Romney is beating Obama in Wall Street contributions in the area of 9 to 1. Ever heard of repelling the Bush era tax breaks ONLY for those making $200,000 or more, repealing the Oil subsidies in the 2005 Energy Policy Act or Dodd-Frank? Have you been on a hunting trip for the past 4 years?

Nov 04, 2012 10:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Joe0218 wrote:

If you are one of the 27 million unemployed people in this country and you vote for Obama, you deserve to be unemployed for another 4more years.

Nov 04, 2012 10:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
NorthStarMan wrote:

We’ve had nearly 18 months of this nonsense, I can’t wait for it to finish. All campaigning and media speculation should be banned until 3 months before the elections. We’d all be alot better off

Nov 04, 2012 10:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Joe0218…that are zillions of jobs available in America. I have a 21 year old daughter (who is single and has a 1 year old) who takes care of herself without government assistance. She is going to school and works a full time job. I help her out on occasion, but she has been working since she was 14. She has never been without a good paying job. The latest jobs report shows that most new jobs are high paying jobs. Only 24% are entry level or restaurant jobs. I have been with the same corporation for 25 years. Perhaps you haven’t noticed but the malls are packed. I went to Denny’s with my 6 year old this morning and it was a 30 minute wait to get seated. Car sales are soaring. For most unemployed Americans today..if they don’t have a job….they aren’y really looking for one. There are some exceptions. But not as many as you think.

Nov 04, 2012 11:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

@xyz2055 Funny post, really. I promise you I’m not delusional. Pick up a copy of the Economist when you get a chance. Get informed.

Nov 05, 2012 12:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

bates148…I did read several articles in the Economist. They actually endorse Obama. But not because they think well of his policies, rather they dislike Romney even more. And I think thats a smart call on their part. Then again, they are a publication and will be unaffected by changes like Dodd-Frank. Check out this article, that claims that Wall Street has given 3 times more in campaign contributions to Romney than Obama this election cycle and lists the amounts. Kindly point me to an article that says that Wall Street have given more to Obama than Romney in this election cycle. While Buffet is a major Obama supporter…it’s hard to connect him with Wall Street…he is an animal of a totally different color. Obama has puny superPacs. The Koch Brothers and the like have created huge superPacs for Romney.


Nov 05, 2012 1:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

bates148..here’s another article on the subject…check out who the donors are and how much they have given to the superPacs…Adelson’s $20M alone, blows all the Forbes 400 donations given to Obama away.


Nov 05, 2012 1:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
supremacy wrote:

The race in 2008 was fairly close. Not as close as this one, but close. I know of dozens of people who voted for Obama but have switched to Romney because they felt that they were taken in and swindled for “change”. I can’t think of a single person that has switched their vote from McCain to Obama this cycle. I think Romney actually has a solid chance this time around. Might be wrong, but that’s just my experience.

Nov 05, 2012 10:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Obama is leading in Ohio because Obama is the better candidate. Get over it, republicans.

Nov 05, 2012 1:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.