Question, do state polls lag behind the national polls or do national polls lag behind state?

[Drunken Irishman]

Let's say the race nationally is tightening a bit. If you look at the state polls, they almost all point to Obama expanding his lead. He's up in Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia and Florida ... while pretty much tied in North Carolina. Are they acting interdependently of the national polls or are the national polls ahead or behind the state numbers?

What I'm trying to ask, if it isn't clear, will the state polls narrow to match the national polls or will the national polls balloon to match the state polls? It's just hard for me to believe Obama is up in all those swing states, in some instances, by margins similar to '08, and only up one or two points nationally. In '08, he won the popular vote by 7 points. A five or six-point swing for Romney would have to incorporate a couple swing states, right? I'm not questioning the polls, mind you, just wondering if maybe the states will need time to catch up to the national polls or if the national polls will catch up to the state totals. If it's the latter, Obama could expand his lead. If it's the former, this race could tighten even more.

Just a question with the weird polling going on right now.

[woolldog]

1. Good question.

I have no idea.

I think this cycle there's a big disconnnect between swing states and the national polls because so much attention, time and money is being spent in the swing states and almost none in other states (except for the national cable ad buys).

[Thrill]

2. The national polls are showing

strong support in Red States for Mittens. You don't have to worry about that with individual state Polls. But don't wait for MSM to tell you that.

[pnwmom]

3. What could be going on is that Obama's campaign strategy is working.

He's been spending a lot of money in the swing states -- that he isn't spending elsewhere -- to inform the electorate, and maybe he's succeeding.

Swing state voters have heard a lot more about the 47%, for example, than the rest of the country has. Most people don't follow politics very much, but in the swing states, with all the ads and campaigning, it's harder not to.

[Amonester]

4. Maybe this GD OP could help (ProSense's reply is a must read):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021447769

Robme's lead in red states is increasing. So what, he will win there anyway.

[regnaD kciN]

5. I don't think it's an either/or...

Remember, when we talk about "state polls," we're really talking about a handful of battleground states. It's quite possible for the race to tighten nationally (because of Romney gaining even more of an edge in deep-red states, for example -- say, that about 10% of Oklahoma or Mississippi voters were initially turned-off by Romney's "47%" comment then, after thinking about it a bit, decided that it's more important getting the Kenyan Muslim Marxist out of the White House, despite their misgivings that Romney will wind up favoring billionaires over working-class people like them), even while Obama is building a larger lead in the states that will decide the election.

[Drunken Irishman]

6. All good replies. Thanks!

I wish these polls broke down support based on region.

[pnwmom]

7. This Mother Jones article helps answer your question

about the disparity between the results of polls in swing states vs. nationally. They suspect the same thing I do: that it's the result of Obama's effective campaign in the swing states. His message is getting across.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/10/poll-obama-ahead-romney-swing-states

These latest swing state polls suggest that Romney's path to 270 electoral college votes is slimmer than ever. Romney needs to win the bulk of the top nine swing states—Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa, New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado, Wisconsin, and Nevada—to have a shot at prevailing on November 6.

Obama's lead could be a result of his campaign's advertising and ground-game advantage in those key states. According to a recent Wesleyan Media Project analysis, Obama's campaign and his Democratic allies out-advertised Romney and various GOP groups by more than 2-to-1 between late August and early September, running 40,000 broadcast and cable ads compared to Romney and the GOP's 18,000. That disparity is evident in battleground states. Between April and early September, Democrats ran more ads in Las Vegas, Cleveland, Denver, Orlando, Reno, Norfolk, Tampa, and Richmond—all major media markets in swing states—according to Wesleyan.

And the Obama team is outpacing the Romney campaign in the ground game as well. In Ohio, for instance, the Obama campaign has 96 field offices and the Romney campaign has 36.